Gente Che Gioca > Gioco Concreto
Serpente di Cenere: chi me lo spiega?
Jiituomas:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Moreno Roncucci[/cite][p]There are LARPS that I have played before where you can't "change your character" in that way.[/p][p]I don't know if they are really unknown in Finland and you didn't know they existed, or if you are only trying to "attack the messenger to drown the message", but in that case you really shouldn't assume that every gaming culture is the same as your own.[/p]
--- Termina citazione ---
During these 15 years I have seen plenty of larps where people can't change their minds, but never one where things were so but it was not explicitly told to the players. That is, again, very different from you not grapsing the freedoms inherent in this particular design.
I have quite extensively discussed the Italian playing culture(s) with many people, thank you, although the fact is that my games were already being run in Italy by others well before I got that far. But the feedback data still applies, because, guess what, the message you are shouting seems to be mostly just your own. It also differs in tone, if not basic premise, from that said by the few others in Italy who stated that they found it "not good". As I have said multiple times on this thread, many many people also in Italy have liked the scenario a lot. You did not. And you are very well known for hating most games that do not meet your pre-expectations. So what is the most likely explanation?
That this type of game structure is not simply suitable for people like you, and never will, even as others may love it. This is not a question of design quality, then, but of a clash between playing style (or play preferences) and the nature of the game in question. Had fewer people liked Serpente, in italy and all over the world, I might agree there is a problem at my end, but this is not so.
Moreno Roncucci:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]During these 15 years I have seen plenty of larps where people can't change their minds, but never one where things were sobut it was not explicitly told to the players.
--- Termina citazione ---
Really?
Did you really have seen, in every game that gave a the character an objective (as you did in Serpente di Cenere), "you have to follow this objective, you can't change you mind"?
See, it's thing like these that made me use the word "disingenuous" a few post before...
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]That is, again, very different from you not grapsing the freedoms inherent in this particular design.
--- Termina citazione ---
Ah, yes, it was my fault for not "grasping the freedoms inherent in your design". The freedom of "not knowing the rules". It's wasn't you that wasn't able to convey them in the game text. It's me. I was not worthy...
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]As I have said multiple times on this thread, many many people also in Italy have liked the scenario a lot. You did not. And you are very well known for hating most games that do not meet yourpre-expectations. So what is the most likely explanation?
--- Termina citazione ---
That you routinely discard data that is not in accordance with your preconceptions, and you assign credibility only to people who tell you what you want to hear? It's not uncommon for theologians....
But seeing that anything I could say to you is obviously "tainted" by my "well know" habit of lying about my game experiences to attack the games I hate, I am going to stop marring the pristine reputation of your game designs with my post in this thread. Good luck with your studies about "real" data from LARPers. God knows the culture need some unbiased critical thinking...
Moreno Roncucci:
Ah, sorry, I forgot to point to this...
First:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]And since Serpente is alarp, not a theatre piece,any player who is incapable of understanding that they can change their character's mind during playwill very likely be utterly unable to grasp the point of the game
--- Termina citazione ---
Then:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]During these 15 years I have seen plenty of larps where people can't change their minds
--- Termina citazione ---
Please, make up your mind: if the defining difference between Larps and "theatre pieces" is that fact that you can change your character's mind during play, so much that any player, in any LaRP, that is not "damaged" like me can always say that he can change his character mind by the simple fact that he is in a larp...
... how it's possible that you could see "plenty of Larps" where people can't change your mind?
I see a direct contradiction in what you say in defense on your game from a post to the other. (by the way, if you think that these Larp exist, too, it mean that you, too, are in your opinion someone "to whom changing a viewpoint is very alien in the first place in his real life, too."?) I could define this behavior in many ways, from "grasping at straws" to "ad hominem attacks", but probably is simply my evident mindless hate for your design that blind me and don't allow me to see how your contradictions are really a way to give me the benefit of two different and opposed truths...
Jiituomas:
Indeed there is no point in continuing this further, as you refuse to see any other point of view besides your own as even remotely valid, Moreno, and twist refusals to accept that into supposed ad hominems against you..
1. As I said above, your opinions and critique have been noted as a valid minority opinion, and I have at no point suggested you lie. I simply do not, as so many other people have contradicted your comments over these years, accept that your viewpoint is anything more than just your own, or that of a very small minority demographic. This is not data manipulation, but basic statistical analysis. "One Moreno does not a crowd make, but his opinion, too will be noted as a valid point of view."
2. I have at no time claimed that you have lied. However, I do think that you enter many games with the expectation of seeing them fail, and thus - at least for you - they do. And furthermore, you have very clear pre-expectations on what is a "good game", and that it differs in many cases a lot from that of others.
3. To add text for a more defined instruction on how to play would be to remove some freedom of choice. So no, ultra-explicit-clarity-requiring people like you were not worth making the game less good for the great majority.
4. In the games where no changing of opinion was included, it was always, always clearly said to be so. Thus no contradiction.
Until now, I have really valued your criticisms of the games we have been discussing, because they have shown that there really is a set of players whose preferences differ a lot from the rest, and that they get easily ignored.
But at the point where you claim that since I do not consider you the majority opinion of what is good and proper in a game, I must be forging my research data, you go well over the line. And that offends the game designer, the university theologian and the professional scientist in me, to the point where I will have to simply disregard your commentary as inherently supremacist to the level of potential non-credibility.
(Should anyone besides Moreno have more to talk about on the scenario, please do. I will be happy to continue any reasonable discussion on it.)
Mauro:
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]All of my convention games work on the premise that people should not change anything from the character background, but they are free to fill in the blanks and add more. I personally always emphasize this before play, and it's written down in most of them
--- Termina citazione ---
Maybe the problem could be that, when Moreno played the game, this was not explained.
--- Citazione ---[cite]Autore: Jiituomas[/cite]To add text for a more defined instruction on how to play would be to remove some freedom of choice
--- Termina citazione ---
But why don't state at least that change of opinion are permitted? You implies that by not saying it, and in lives where this is not permitted you state clearly this; so, why stating clearly "You can" should reduce freedom? If there exist LARPs in which people can't change characters' mind and this is not stated, I think obviously there could be confusion about this topic; you already say "Can't" in games where that is not allowed, which problem would create to say also "Can" in ones where it's allowed? As far as you said in previous quote, you already say it in most of you game; so, why don't say it in all of them?
Navigazione
[0] Indice dei post
Vai alla versione completa