THEORY: Philosophy of NESing

[Sheep]

Hopefully the coming months will evince a reversal of that 'rare' bit.

The main problem is that when you give two people control over the game sometimes they will argue.

 

[Birdjaguar]

EXAMPLES:
Although a list of examples will never be able to conform to the Platonic ideal of the categories listed, some idea of what resides in each category can be gained. It is to be noted that several of these examples also reside relatively close to the Centrist category as well.
ARCADER
- Weakly Demonstrated: AFSNES I - The New Dawn, ITNES I - An Epoch of Change
- Strongly Demonstrated: Alternate Timeline Building Experiment, v1.0, Zpnesiii
BOARDGAMER
- Weakly Demonstrated: A Brave New World
- Strongly Demonstrated: BirdNES: 1500 AD: A New World
SIMULATIONIST
- Weakly Demonstrated: DisNES3 - Sins of our Fathers
- Strongly Demonstrated: None Extant
STORYIST
- Weakly Demonstrated: PureNES: Years of Excelsior, PureNES: Epoch of Glory
- Strongly Demonstrated: SteamNES

I guess that my 30 years of board gaming shows through. My feeling is that good rules give players lots freedom to act appropriately within the "world of the game", but restricted from acting too far outside of that world.

 

[Symphony D.]

My feeling is that good rules give players lots freedom to act appropriately within the "world of the game", but restricted from acting too far outside of that world.

The reason I categorized it as Boardgame is because from what's been revealed of the rules, they aren't based around reflecting reality or even a general approximation of reality. They're designed to build a cohesive system--much in the way Civilization or Victoria might. Although the end product looks sort of like reality, it doesn't model it accurately at all on close inspection.

I could be wrong, since only you have the core files, but that's how I see it.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The reason I categorized it as Boardgame is because from what's been revealed of the rules, they aren't based around reflecting reality or even a general approximation of reality. They're designed to build a cohesive system--much in the way Civilization or Victoria might. Although the end product looks sort of like reality, it doesn't model it accurately at all on close inspection.

I could be wrong, since only you have the core files, but that's how I see it.

The rules of BirdNES 1 were very much like a boardgame so agree with that characterization of them. I tried to capture the 'flavor' of the era in a playable form. My other remark was about rules in general. Your assessment model is interesting and worthy of thought and discussion.

 

[North King]

Add to this 'On a rare basis'

How many times has it been legitimately tried? The one I know of didn't have many problems between the moderators.

The main problem is that when you give two people control over the game sometimes they will argue.

And then they can settle on the dispute and move on. It works if you have co-mods who are friends.

 

[Symphony D.]

Retroactive deletion.

 

[Thlayli]

'Narrativist' sounds slightly more appealing than 'Storyist,' at least.

I was having a discussion on MSN a while back where we decided on 'Sandboxer' as a more appropriate term than 'Arcader,' because an arcade game implies a very low amount of player freedom, while Arcaders presumably desire a large amount.

 

[jalapeno_dude]

So hey, who likes reinventing the wheel? I know I sure do.

I think this is sufficiently different that it's not just reinventing the wheel. The player freedom vs. game detail axes, or something like them, don't seem to appear in any of these models.

 

[Symphony D.]

Retroactive deletion.