thread: 2013-09-24 : What even IS the object of an rpg?
On 2013-09-25, Gordon wrote:
So, continuing the uncompromising: unclear object, problematic object, contradictory object = unclear/problematic/contradictory design? If so, I think I agree, although I'd add (as maybe Vincent would to? I'm not trying to say he would/wouldn't) that there are both difficulties and opportunities in unclear/problematic/contradictory. Many difficulties, both obvious and unexpected, and opportunities that may be tricky to develop, but are real and not-rare.
This creates a kind of "lying" about the object, and I'm not sure what to make of it (and am very interested in what Vincent makes of it). For example, in the Doomed Pilgrim, I (uncompromisingly) would say "The implementation of thematic elements can both reinforce and undermine the stated objects of Doom the Pilgrim/Pass Safely." For reinforce, undermine, and all the various shades of both that can happen, play may end up being either enjoyable or dissatisfying. Which is not to say we can't point play towards "better" options, but it's only pointing, not actual steering.
Or maybe not - maybe I'm missing a point, or jumping to a later stage (what "object of [the] game is a feature of the game?s design" means) prematurely. Because I just realized my claim may well be that, in this sense, many RPGs can't help but lie about their object. Huh.
This makes GcL go "The game has an object and the object is a lie"
Jeez, Zenish again - but I'm not sure my post says anything more than that.
