New NESes, ideas, development, etc

[Lord_Iggy]

The God NES idea sounds interesting. I've always enjoyed such NESes, and we've run several in the past with varying degrees of success! Angst was the last person to run such an NES, and I'd recommend talking to him to get a sense of how such NESes can be run.

Disenfrancised, I think I like the sound of the 'Alpha Centauri' NES the most, and I'd definitely be interested to have a look at whatever ruleset you are developing. I like to think that I'm decent with spreadsheet programs.

"Enough of these silly niche ideas too specific to appeal to a broad group of NESers. What this forum needs is an NES where everything in the game is a Pokemans!"

... said mrrandomplayer, apparently.

In which NESing is turned into a video game.

LoE, if you're going to criticize certain people for being snarky and dismissive of prospective NESes, then it doesn't reflect very well on you to turn around and do the same thing to other NESers.

 

[awesome]

i ain't even mad.

 

[Lord of Elves]

LoE, if you're going to criticize certain people for being snarky and dismissive of prospective NESes, then it doesn't reflect very well on you to turn around and do the same thing to other NESers.

This is a fair point.

In my defense, I have clarified my position about mrrandomplayer's moderating an NES as being fundamentally supportive. I'm just not sure a Pokemon NES is what the forum "needs" or will attract many players/have decent chance of success in the long-term.

Similarly, I've already made my thoughts on Europa UniversNES clear.

 

[North King]

Having poked through the results of the Census I took a while back, where people stated what kind of NES they most wanted, my conclusion would have to be that the forum doesn't "need" anything. There are at least four different types of NES which got around a dozen "votes". What the forum "needs" (and believe you me, I'm going to keep putting things in "scare" quotes) is an NES that can NES reliably, over a long period of time.

In other words, like most things, the "cure" is something both utterly banal and utterly predictable.

 

[Symphony D.]

Similarly, I've already made my thoughts on Europa UniversNES clear.

Please do continue to fundamentally misunderstand what I was suggesting—decoupling the focus of the narrative from statistics by hiding those same statistics and forcing people to engage with the levers of policy as if they were real things rather than numbers to be thrown back and forth—as "gameification" on the basis of a throwaway remark about linking units with maps in a Paradox like fashion. Would it interest you to know that I don't play or even much like Paradox games?

I understand that it's mildly counter-intuitive that a automated regime of stats can 1. simplify player workload, 2. actually reduce player involvement with stats, and 3. actually refocus attention on narrative and that it takes a little bit of thought to understand how such a thing is possible, but I actually enjoy watching you crusade for PURITY OF STORY like so many of your fore-bearers. It's funnier in your case since you weren't even here in 2002, so it has this real zest of someone who genuinely believes in the mythic past and traditions of our fathers, as opposed to mere nostalgia.

 

[Thlayli]

Please do continue to fundamentally misunderstand what I was suggesting—decoupling the focus of the narrative from statistics by hiding those same statistics and forcing people to engage with the levers of policy as if they were real things rather than numbers to be thrown back and forth—as "gameification" on the basis of a throwaway remark about linking units with maps in a Paradox like fashion. Would it interest you to know that I don't play or even much like Paradox games?

I understand that it's mildly counter-intuitive that a automated regime of stats can 1. simplify player workload, 2. actually reduce player involvement with stats, and 3. actually refocus attention on narrative and that it takes a little bit of thought to understand how such a thing is possible, but I actually enjoy watching you crusade for PURITY OF STORY like so many of your fore-bearers. It's funnier in your case since you weren't even here in 2002, so it has this real zest of someone who genuinely believes in the mythic past and traditions of our fathers, as opposed to mere nostalgia.

One of the reasons I'm such an apologist for SysNES 1/2 despite being nominally associated with the 'Storyist' camp is that the NES had a fascinating and compelling backstory. I have to agree with Symph wholeheartedly on this one. Simply because an automated statistical system exists does not mean that the accompanying narrative lacks importance. And the absence of such a system does not guarantee that a fantastic narrative will come out of the woodwork.

Granted, I do feel like extremely intelligent players like Iggy were so caught up in the difficulty of certain aspects of the SysNES2 stats that they felt like they had no time to do stories or anything else. But that was the exception for that NES and not the rule.

And furthermore, there is always going to be a god in the machine. Disenfrancised can adjust the spreadsheets for a variety of factors depending on how the playtesting pans out, and furthermore he's been known for the utterly non-simulationist tactic of awarding random bonuses/maluses and story bonuses.

Do I think that story is paramount to statistical concerns for player enjoyment? Yes, because we associate positive sensory information with qualitative goals rather than actuarial targets. Do I think that simultationism is an acceptable route to reach such goals? Of course it can be.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Because people with different tastes and opinions aren't just wrong, they're deluded and ridiculous.

 

[North King]

"SPREADSHEETS ARE TAKING OVER THE FORUM! hey you're not allowed to use hyperbole, that's my thing"

 

[Lord of Elves]

I think I've been pretty clear that my position is that spreadsheets and simulation-based tools and/or doohickeys are an undesirable direction for NESing to move in, which isn't an extreme platform to stand on considering Symphony's habit of making grand statements regarding what is best for the forum and best for the players. If indeed his proposed system is desirable or functional or whatever else then that's great and wonderful and whatever else.

I am still disposed to prefer the established order of things, and resent the attitude that this is somehow a perversion and an unnatural belief that could only result from ignorance or stupidity. I have not taken the position that Symphony and others in favor of "simulationism" are just deluded and wrong.

 

[das]

Test of Concept


Hints:
-Works best in full screen
-Flags and symbols on map show things of interest, zoom on these things to read notes of interest.
-Click to zoom; click on flags/symbols to immediately zoom to them.
-Map can be dragged around while zoomed.
-If you get stuck and want to zoom out just hit left or right arrow key. On any finalized version that will immediately take you up a zoom level, on this test of concept you might have to hit the arrow key a couple of times to get back to where you want.
-You can also click through it like a normal slide show if you are one of those people who want to make sure they read everything.

Quite nice, if a bit clunky right now. Works better as a slideshow right now.

It seems to me that armies would be harder to handle in this way in more "crowded" areas, like Germany but also various equivalents in other time periods. Or at least it won't look good.

LoE, why aren't they desirable? It's not like they would force out all the other competition, especially considering the rational or irrational dislike that many feel for them. And Disenfrancised's current idea seems like it would alleviate the main gripe that I would have with it at least, i.e. that it's too much of a chore to figure out those things yourself. Mathematically complex rulesets work better if accommodated by programming. But not everyone has to use such complex rulesets in the first place (I have no intention of doing so). I think it's a perfectly worthwhile experiment.

 

[Symphony D.]

I think I've been pretty clear that my position is that spreadsheets and simulation-based tools and/or doohickeys are an undesirable direction for NESing to move in, which isn't an extreme platform to stand on considering Symphony's habit of making grand statements regarding what is best for the forum and best for the players.

All you've said, consistently, is "I DON'T LIKE IT," without any real counter-argument beyond "WE'VE ALWAYS DONE IT THIS WAY," and then you make every single effort you can to snipe at what you clearly consider the opposition. That's not disinterest.

I am still disposed to prefer the established order of things, and resent the attitude that this is somehow a perversion and an unnatural belief that could only result from ignorance or stupidity.

Espousing your preference does not mean putting down opposing views at every turn.

I have not taken the position that Symphony and others in favor of "simulationism" are just deluded and wrong.

No, you've just chosen to consistently use phrasing and hyperbole that's deliberately oversimplifying, dismissive, and denigrating, that's all. "Attitude? What attitude? I'm merely expressing my opinion!"

 

[North King]

In case anyone's under any delusions, by the way, spreadsheet work and other such math plays a key role in my NES, and aside from a little bit of complaining when I tweak the orders format, it doesn't seem to be impacting player enjoyment much, while significantly streamlining the back end, with the added bonus of making the NES roughly a thousand times more logical. This has all happened without changing the fundamental nature of the NES as a primarily story- and narrative-driven enterprise.

 

[Luckymoose]

In case anyone's under any delusions, by the way, spreadsheet work and other such math plays a key role in my NES, and aside from a little bit of complaining when I tweak the orders format, it doesn't seem to be impacting player enjoyment much, while significantly streamlining the back end, with the added bonus of making the NES roughly a thousand times more logical. This has all happened without changing the fundamental nature of the NES as a primarily story- and narrative-driven enterprise.

The day I have to use spreadsheets for EoE is the day EoE dies in my heart forever.

 

[North King]

That's kind of the point, though -- no one else has to use the data in any substantial way. It is an option, and it will continue to be an option, and the opportunities for using it will probably expand substantially the longer the NES continues, but it is not and probably never will be required. Players can send orders as any leader might -- they don't necessarily need to poke around the detail work; they can just deliver broad directives and I/their advisers will figure out how it works -- which is pretty much exactly what Symphony has been advocating in WWW, if not in here.

 

[Luckymoose]

I understand that. I mostly mean that I personally would never agree to use such things, and it is why I thought SysNES 1 and 2 were horrible. But then again, I hate doing orders at all, let alone complex ones.

 

[awesome]

I am still disposed to prefer the established order of things

the established order is that most of the games here are gamey. just saying.

 

[Lord of Elves]

the established order is that most of the games here are gamey. just saying.

Obviously, I disagree.

I should clarify that my objection with Symphony's proposal is not based in some kind of slavish adherence to tradition or belief that "early NESing" was somehow inherently superior. It definitely wasn't, early NESes were little better than IOTs and probably worse just because the median age of the participants seems like it was thirteen, and it shows in the writing. My objection is rooted in my fondness for the process (art?) of writing orders. I actually enjoy writing in detail what I intend to accomplish and how I intend to accomplish it. Maybe this puts me in the minority.

Nonetheless, I have an appreciation for the process of writing orders and having them interpreted by the moderator. I would like to think that in an ideal world of NESing, victory or defeat would come down to the beauty, eloquence and appropriateness of the player's ideas, wherein poorly-written and poorly thought-out orders would result in poor results, and vice versa. This is difficult when mods are inherently biased and not perfectly impartial but I accept this as an unfortunate reality of the process. I suspect that a significant degree of simulationist angst results from a feeling that prospective moderators are just not good enough and smart enough to tell players that their ideas and plans are not as ingenious as they appear to be.

I also think that the basic humility of accepting that even the most spectacular and elegant of plans can and sometimes will fail is and should continue to be part of the NESing "experience."

 

[North King]

Obviously, I disagree.

I should clarify that my objection with Symphony's proposal is not based in some kind of slavish adherence to tradition or belief that "early NESing" was somehow inherently superior. It definitely wasn't, early NESes were little better than IOTs and probably worse just because the median age of the participants seems like it was thirteen, and it shows in the writing. My objection is rooted in my fondness for the process (art?) of writing orders. I actually enjoy writing in detail what I intend to accomplish and how I intend to accomplish it. Maybe this puts me in the minority.

Nonetheless, I have an appreciation for the process of writing orders and having them interpreted by the moderator. I would like to think that in an ideal world of NESing, victory or defeat would come down to the beauty, eloquence and appropriateness of the player's ideas, wherein poorly-written and poorly thought-out orders would result in poor results, and vice versa. This is difficult when mods are inherently biased and not perfectly impartial but I accept this as an unfortunate reality of the process. I suspect that a significant degree of simulationist angst results from a feeling that prospective moderators are just not good enough and smart enough to tell players that their ideas and plans are not as ingenious as they appear to be.

I also think that the basic humility of accepting sometimes even the most spectacular and elegant of plans can and sometimes will fail is and should continue to be part of the NESing "experience."

First of all, I think it's pretty obvious who you're aiming this at.

Secondly, numbers and words are not mutually exclusive, and there's a WORLD of gray area in between. By saying a "trend towards spreadsheets" is intrinsically bad, you're taking up a position on one extreme. "Only words for me!" is fine for some NESes, but there's nothing wrong with math.

 

[Symphony D.]

Nonetheless, I have an appreciation for the process of writing orders and having them interpreted by the moderator.

So are you just willfully ignoring the fact that a moderator interacting with spreadsheets and players not interacting with spreadsheets would require orders and would require them to be interpreted by the moderator or do you just not understand that as a concept despite say, NK literally just admitting that's more or less how things work in EoE? Because this is the fourth or fifth time you've stated something to this effect as though this idea has never even once occurred to you even though it's a direct and necessary consequence of what I've been advocating.

Jesus Christ.

 

[Lord of Elves]

So are you just willfully ignoring the fact that a moderator interacting with spreadsheets and players not interacting with spreadsheets would require orders and would require them to be interpreted by the moderator or do you just not understand that as a concept? Because this is the fourth of fifth time you've stated something to this effect as though this idea has never even once occurred to you.

Please. Whenever people on this forum make a statement and then go back to elaborate further on what they've said -- often well in addition to what they actually said, or even in exclusion of what the original statement might have been -- they accuse other people of having poor reading comprehension. This "bro do u even read" nonsense needs to end except in cases where the person being addressed literally didn't read the post. I do not think this is the case.

What I have read from you has been that you prefer spreadsheets and a more video game-esque approach because it eliminates the vagaries of poorly explained or poorly articulated ideas in player orders, as well as poor effort on the part of the moderator to apply impartial or objective standards to player actions. All of this is basically a fancy way of getting at the idea that the very premise of sending orders is inefficient, prone to bias and a poor way of doing things. To be clear, I am discussing the ideal model you postulated in WWW.

Am I wrong? Integrating a system of policy options would essentially negate the process of writing orders, certainly as it's currently understood in most NESes. Perhaps you envision a mix of policy options with player textual input of some kind, I don't know. But what you have described previously flies -- in my experience -- against conventional wisdom in regards to orders and their role in NESing, which is pretty integral just at the moment.

I think Daftpanzer errs too hard on the side of "carebear"-esque neutrality, and it is often better to have disagreement and discontent aired publicly and with severe prejudice, but often on the whole this forum is really too fond of public takedowns and rudeness as a debating tactic. I am not personally offended by Symphony's position and I am not out to personally attack Symphony, period paragraph. There's no need to escalate the language further.