News:

Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.

Main Menu

The Beeg Horseshoe Theory

Started by Jared A. Sorensen, September 07, 2001, 07:40:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Marco

I think that what's going on here (to my understanding) is that in a 'Simultionist' game there are still gameist mechanics and narrative story elements of some sort so it isn't 'pure.'

If I get it right, Jared's saying it's all connected because you don't every "disconnect" from the other two. That's implicitly true for all of them (in a purely Gameist dungeon crawl there's stll a story albeit a poor one).

But that doesn't mean Simulationst players/GM's don't exsit. In a game where the GM/players are concerned with "what would happen" vs. "what did happen (according to the game rules)" or "what should happen" you've got simulationist play.

I chose GURPS over Hero because of simulationist reasons (firearms in Hero didn't do it for me). I chose Fantasy Hero over AD&D for gamist reasons (the complicated and intricate character creation really appealed to me).

So I say there's very few (or no) games where one leg of the triangle *doesn't* exist--but when you put the emphasis on being real you're in Simulationist territory.

-Marco
---------------------------------------------
JAGS (Just Another Gaming System)
a free, high-quality, universal system at:
http://www.jagsrpg.org
Just Released: JAGS Wonderland

ConfigSys.boy

Just an interesting caveat on the idea of the horseshoe as a metaphor for explaining the relationships of the Three.  If you're going to look at it from that perspective you might as well view it as a magnet where N and G are polar opposites (remembering of course that polar opposites are more similar than they are different, they just happen to have different polarity) and some sort of balance is to be found in the middle.  That would of course agree with the assertion that most game development to date has tried to live in some segment of that middle area seeking to acheive the all coveted 'balance.'

Wether or not thats really an accurate depiction is really another issue altogether, it just seemed to me that the horshoe magnet would be more concise and descriptive means of conveying the ideas you were getting at.

=)
-ConfigSys.boy!

"The authors themselves, I suspect, hardly know what they are doing to the [young reader], and he cannot know what is being done to him."
-C. S. Lewis

Ron Edwards

Hey,

I have avoided suggesting visual or shape-based explanations of GNS. In the past, I've generally responded to them with "Hm, sounds interesting," or "That's a way to look at it." In a lot of cases, I've said, "Cool! Nice thinking," simply to encourage further discussion. It struck me as a good sign that people were considering the issues.

Now, however, I've come to think that any support of them was a bad idea. The phrase "GNS Triangle" has taken on an official status that it never had, for instance.

For whatever it's worth, I think the visual approach to the argument is not fruitful at this time.

Best,
Ron

ConfigSys.boy

Not to open the can of worms, which Im certain this will do, or to cause any repition from you if this is articulated in a thread I've happened to not have haunted lately.... but I'd love to hear why.

-ConfigSys.boy!

"The authors themselves, I suspect, hardly know what they are doing to the [young reader], and he cannot know what is being done to him."
-C. S. Lewis

Ron Edwards

Hi CS boy,

I'm a big fan of visual modeling, and multivariate statistical consulting is one way I made some money during grad school. It's that expertise that makes me unwilling to dash off quick, three-d or spatial models, especially when the variables themselves are badly misunderstood.

Also, many people are concerned with NON-GNS variables (like "immersion") and cannot seem to avoid bringing them in; each visual model is interpreted by such a person as being about his or her favorite variable and not what the model really is.

If I were to do such a thing for GNS theory, it would involve eigenvectors and quite possibly corroborating models, like correspondence analysis. Freaky shit, basically.

I have taken to using a Venn diagram instead, or "boxes in boxes," just to keep people better aligned toward what is being discussed.

Best,
Ron

Wart

Quote
On 2001-09-07 18:42, Clinton R Nixon wrote:
Narrativism and pure Gamism are extremes of game design. They are not the norm, and just now being explored to any depth. They are taking certain parts of games (the story, the competition) and pushing them to extremes away from the center.

I disagree. The original edition of AD&D, if you read Gygax's introduction, had a Gamist philosophy behind it, and also disparaged Simulationism. (I think the introduction to the original DM Guide shows this most clearly.)

Knight

If I were to do such a thing for GNS theory, it would involve eigenvectors and quite possibly corroborating models, like correspondence analysis. Freaky shit, basically.


Well, I'm not sure how serious you are, but that sounds interesting to me.  

jburneko

Quote
If I were to do such a thing for GNS theory, it would involve eigenvectors and quite possibly corroborating models, like correspondence analysis. Freaky shit, basically.

Whoa, I'd like to second the motion to actually see this done.  If you need more concrete data put out the word, I for one am willing to start collecting data and I'm sure others would as well.

It's been so long since I took Linear Algebra, I've forgotten what an eigenvector represents and how to calculate it.

Jesse