A Petition to Merge NES-IOT

[Luckymoose]

Comments like this should shed some light as to why. I became turned off at comments like these and felt no desire to even participate since all I ever received was vitriol on my choices of species creation in the NES in question.

When the mod said no humans exist and you try to make anime humans, well, you're kind of setting yourself up for comments against it. You're just used to IOTs accepting whatever you want, whereas NESes have absolutely no obligation to do that.

 

[Symphony D.]

Streamlining is an excellent reason to do something. CFC is moderated by a limited number of people with limited time. I shouldn't have to expand this point any further.

This:

I just don't think that it's much of an inconvenicne to have two internet tabs open, compared to one internet tab.

All reports go to a shared queue as far as I'm aware, in the same fashion as Infractions are centralized in the control panel. From the perspective of authority, they aren't even two separate places. From the perspective of users, they're literally two clicks away. I guess we should merge all the forums together since they all feature words! Streamline everything!

Because there's an extra administrative "cost" incurred by having multiple forums. In addition to being unwieldy, spreading mods thin across several forums is not utilizing their time properly.

This argument is ridiculous and it's absurd you keep returning to it. It was apparently regarded as unnecessary to keep Bird on the IOT mod staff. This isn't MegaCity One with a thin blue line of Judges holding the criminal scum at bay. There is no administrative cost to this division.

I mean, CNES had a large playerbase and more updates than the average (over twice the average number of updates for all NESes that have ever existed).

The average modern lifespan is double that of the average of all the people who have ever lived! Statistics are really cool when all context is removed from them!!1

 

[North King]

The specific incidents took place in games years ago and it'd take a dig on my part, but the posts by Luckymoose and spryllino in this thread are ready evidence.

If spryllio's posts are somehow objectionable, the this debate has really gone off the deep end. He's been pretty sensible as far as I can tell.

I don't dispute that NES and IOT lend themselves to different standards of verbosity, but I take issue with the charge that IOTers are somehow genetically incapable of adapting to either standard.

I am not arguing this, for the record. I am arguing that the fact that there are different standards means it is silly to merge things.

False equivalence. Mad World & SilliNES 2 is a more accurate comparison.

See, someone posted about it in the same breath as storyNESes earlier. I, myself, was confused, but I'm not exactly familiar with specific IOTs -- the main place I've seen major differences is in the few rulesets I've seen ported over (which gives lie to one of Crezth's main points), and in threads such as these, where there is pretty clearly a gulf of understanding (in scope) over what constitutes a narratively driven game.

It was a bad example, I'd be happy to use a better one if someone can point me to an appropriate long-running IOT (>500 posts).

 

[SouthernKing]

It was a bad example, I'd be happy to use a better one if someone can point me to an appropriate long-running IOT (>500 posts).

The original Iron and Blood is probably the best example of a long running, relatively narratively driven IOT, although do keep in mind this was two years ago (it was a different time, and >75% of its participants are no longer IOTers), and it also had rather complex gameplay mechanics.

 

[North King]

Forgive me, then, for being hesitant to use it as a data point.

 

[NinjaCow64]

North King, are you looking for something to compare CI with? NRIOT is probably a good example, similar time period and is fairly a "typical" (not meant in a derogatory sense this was one of my favorite IOTs) IOT. Might be interesting to compare maybe.

 

[spryllino]

Such language is more provocative than we need.

The specific incidents took place in games years ago and it'd take a dig on my part, but the posts by Luckymoose and spryllino in this thread are ready evidence. I don't dispute that NES and IOT lend themselves to different standards of verbosity, but I take issue with the charge that IOTers are somehow genetically incapable of adapting to either standard.

If spryllio's posts are somehow objectionable, the this debate has really gone off the deep end. He's been pretty sensible as far as I can tell.

I thought I was being fairly sensible too, and I don't really like the suggestion that I was making it out to be something genetic. "Incapability" simply means that one can't do something, and does not inherently mean "genetically" or "necessarily" or "inherently". I merely said what is pretty much a truism: if IOTers can't see that there's a right way to NES - which Double A specifically denied, which was the point I was replying to - then IOTers can't NES in the right way.

That can be applied to almost any parallel situation: if I didn't know that there was a right way to play the organ, then I manifestly couldn't ever have learnt to play the organ. If I didn't know that there was a right way to grate cheese, then I couldn't grate cheese, because I'd end up rubbing it against the handle of the grater as often as not.

If I have been misunderstood there, I regret it.

 

[Double A]

Valk is the most recent story-driven game. It ended early this year.

That can be applied to almost any parallel situation: if I didn't know that there was a right way to play the organ, then I manifestly couldn't ever have learnt to play the organ. If I didn't know that there was a right way to grate cheese, then I couldn't grate cheese, because I'd end up rubbing it against the handle of the grater as often as not.

Those are mechanical tasks, and RPing is a tad more complex and interpretable.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I thought I was being fairly sensible too, and I don't really like the suggestion that I was making it out to be something genetic. "Incapability" simply means that one can't do something, and does not inherently mean "genetically" or "necessarily" or "inherently". I merely said what is pretty much a truism: if IOTers can't see that there's a right way to NES - which Double A specifically denied, which was the point I was replying to - then IOTers can't NES in the right way.

That can be applied to almost any parallel situation: if I didn't know that there was a right way to play the organ, then I manifestly couldn't ever have learnt to play the organ. If I didn't know that there was a right way to grate cheese, then I couldn't grate cheese, because I'd end up rubbing it against the handle of the grater as often as not.

If I have been misunderstood there, I regret it.

Not a problem; I just didn't want things to get out of hand. After all, talking together is always the best first step.

 

[sophie]

and RPing is a tad more complex and interpretable.

Are you saying that playing the organ is not?

 

[Double A]

Are you saying that playing the organ is not?

Hm.

Well, considering the only instrument I've ever played successfully is the jaw harp, I have no idea. I was referring to basic organry I guess? But still, it's a mechanical task, you aren't actually creating something. He did say playing, not composing, after all.

 

[spryllino]

Alright, are you suggesting that if I were composing for the organ, then I wouldn't have firstly to accept that there are principles behind how to do it, and secondly have to apply them? Or do you think that literally anything goes there, too?

Or what about advanced organ-playing, involving detailed interpretation of musical convention, as opposed to basic organ playing? Don't you think organists need principles to apply in order to interpret the music they are playing rightly?

EDIT: But, ultimately, the main proof that there are principles to NESing is that NESers generally accept various principles. That is, we try to act IC, to send coherent orders, to follow the rules, adhere to various conventions and practices that we have already seen discussed in this thread, and various other things. If you don't accept that these principles even exist, and if you don't try to follow them, you're just not playing the same game as everyone else... and you're almost bound to make a horrific mess and annoy everyone.

 

[Double A]

Alright, are you suggesting that if I were composing for the organ, then I wouldn't have firstly to accept that there are principles behind how to do it, and secondly have to apply them? Or do you think that literally anything goes there, too?

Or what about advanced organ-playing, involving detailed interpretation of musical convention, as opposed to basic organ playing? Don't you think organists need principles to apply in order to interpret the music they are playing rightly?

EDIT: But, ultimately, the main proof that there are principles to NESing is that NESers generally accept various principles. That is, we try to act IC, to send coherent orders, to follow the rules, adhere to various conventions and practices that we have already seen discussed in this thread, and various other things. If you don't accept that these principles even exist, and if you don't try to follow them, you're just not playing the same game as everyone else... and you're almost bound to make a horrific mess and annoy everyone.

Theoretically anything goes. Music is art, since when did art have rules?

 

[Terrance888]

Have you seen the latest exhibition of The Blank Canvas?

 

[ChiefDesigner]

Theoretically anything goes. Music is art, since when did art have rules?

...seriously

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterpoint
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_perspective
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonnet

I can go on for about twelve pages.

 

[Double A]

...seriously

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterpoint
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_perspective
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonnet

I can go on for about twelve pages.

Okay, I know that there are rules created for music, but music itself doesn't have rules. Hell, some cultures don't even value the same musical attributes we do.

 

[Luckymoose]

Okay, I know that there are rules created for music, but music itself doesn't have rules. Hell, some cultures don't even value the same musical attributes we do.

Our culture values specific music. Is this where you wanted to go with this?

 

[Double A]

Our culture values specific music. Is this where you wanted to go with this?

Where I wanted to go is that anyone has the potential of defying the norms and doing cool music things.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

Theoretically anything goes. Music is art, since when did art have rules?

Then musique concrète is the thing for you!


Link to video.

 

[spryllino]

You can only defy the norms if you acknowledge that they exist. You can only defy the norms usefully if you defy them selectively and with good judgement (and musique concrète is perhaps an example of this); if you just defy them all the time, or just randomly without really knowing what they are, you get white noise (that's christos).

That brings us back to the main point: you cannot NES well, or even NES in an original fashion, or indeed NES in a cool way, unless you understand the conventions. This goes heavily against what you were originally trying to say, which was basically that no-one ought to have to pay any attention to them in a "freeform game".