Games
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
- Posts: 656
- Thank you received: 887
×
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)
Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.
A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
20 Mar 2019 09:16 #294106
by Vysetron
Replied by Vysetron on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
I'm not even going to entertain the rock paper scissors comparison. It's absurd at best and straight up disingenuous at worst. If your experience with interactive games genuinely comes down to throwing random results and you need heaps of extraneous mechanisms to make it feel worthwhile I feel sorry for you. Try playing with other people.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Colorcrayons
-
- Offline
- D8
-
- Wiz-Warrior
Less
More
- Posts: 1693
- Thank you received: 1703
20 Mar 2019 09:48 #294111
by Colorcrayons
I still recall sometime in the 80's as a kid watching them on WTTW in Chicago, and Ebert jokingly mocking Siskel for the rating he gave on the current movie being reviewed during that episode.
It basically boiled down to "So you'll rate this poorly, yet you believe that 'Saturday Night Fever' is the best movie ever made."
A short discussion about that ensues qualifying his rating, etc., revealing that Siskel loved that movie so much, that he actually bought the polyester disco outfit that Travolta wore in Saturday Night Fever.
For all the art he wanted to see in film, Siskel had the heart of an Ameritrasher, it seems.
Replied by Colorcrayons on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
JonathanVolk wrote: Anyway, not sure you can divide the Siskel/Ebert differences that cleanly. Ebert loved serious film too. Ebert watched broadly and with constant curiosity, which we might all take to heart. I still go back and watch the outtakes of them roasting each other—and Ebert was, hands down, the better roaster.
I still recall sometime in the 80's as a kid watching them on WTTW in Chicago, and Ebert jokingly mocking Siskel for the rating he gave on the current movie being reviewed during that episode.
It basically boiled down to "So you'll rate this poorly, yet you believe that 'Saturday Night Fever' is the best movie ever made."
A short discussion about that ensues qualifying his rating, etc., revealing that Siskel loved that movie so much, that he actually bought the polyester disco outfit that Travolta wore in Saturday Night Fever.
For all the art he wanted to see in film, Siskel had the heart of an Ameritrasher, it seems.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 Mar 2019 09:53 - 20 Mar 2019 11:55 #294112
by ubarose
I agree with your later statement. Your second paragraph is very well put. My original statement was in reference to Gloomhaven, which removes the human complexity. Fighting the AI just feels fiddly, procedural and generally uninteresting to me. Some people might think Gloomhaven is complicated due to the amount of rules and the fiddliness, but once you get the procedure down, it really isn't that complicated. Without a human opponent it just feels procedural to me.
ETA: So yeah, if you remove the human opponent you reduce the complexity of the game significantly. For example, I find Agricola, even though the player interaction is limited, a more complex game than Gloomhaven or Arkham Horror.
Replied by ubarose on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
PROJ wrote:
Then cut out the middleman and just play rock paper scissors, because that's what it sounds like you want. Rock paper scissors, however, is uninteresting because there are no mathematical obfuscations to make the interaction more than a basic guessing game with a bit of prediction, which is deeply unsatisfying for most people. Any other game, though, is just differing degrees of rock paper scissors obfuscated by math on top of it, which dilutes the purity of player interaction. The only difference is degrees.ubarose wrote: @PROJ
I think perhaps my statement was a bit ambiguous. It isn’t the in game interaction that is necessarily complex, but the human interaction above the table, so to speak, that is complex and is interesting to me. The actual action of throwing paper isn’t the interesting part. It’s can I predict that you will throw paper, or manipulate you, misdirect you, or negotiate, or bluff, or lure, or strong arm you into throwing paper? And can you do the same to me?
It's amazing how other people in response have completely missed the point in my original post. I pretty clearly stated that the interaction from games with less overt interactive mechanics is deeper, richer, and more intricate, if you bother to spend the time to study them beyond a surface level. You are no longer bluffing with rock vs. paper, you're bluffing with your entire valuation model of an intractably difficult system vs. mine. I did not say "math is better than humans" or some other nonsense.
I agree with your later statement. Your second paragraph is very well put. My original statement was in reference to Gloomhaven, which removes the human complexity. Fighting the AI just feels fiddly, procedural and generally uninteresting to me. Some people might think Gloomhaven is complicated due to the amount of rules and the fiddliness, but once you get the procedure down, it really isn't that complicated. Without a human opponent it just feels procedural to me.
ETA: So yeah, if you remove the human opponent you reduce the complexity of the game significantly. For example, I find Agricola, even though the player interaction is limited, a more complex game than Gloomhaven or Arkham Horror.
Last edit: 20 Mar 2019 11:55 by ubarose.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- JonathanVolk
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- D4
-
- Chaotically Lawful
20 Mar 2019 10:04 #294114
by JonathanVolk
Replied by JonathanVolk on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
Well, Siskel wasn’t wrong. Saturday Night Fever is great.
Ebert had messier, wilder tastes, maybe—which led him to the sublime trash of Beyond the Valley of the Dolls. I miss them both, and I think that the critic as celebrity, which they didn’t invent but certainly became the most famous examples of, wouldn’t be possible in 2019.
Ebert had messier, wilder tastes, maybe—which led him to the sublime trash of Beyond the Valley of the Dolls. I miss them both, and I think that the critic as celebrity, which they didn’t invent but certainly became the most famous examples of, wouldn’t be possible in 2019.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 Mar 2019 13:24 - 20 Mar 2019 13:25 #294133
by ubarose
Replied by ubarose on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
One of our members who is too lazy to logon and post in this discussion made a good point in a Facebook discussion on this article:
People are more likely to play shorter, easier to learn games when they are uncertain as to whether they will like it, but people won't do the same with a more "prohibitive" game. Jonathan himself points out that he hasn't played Gloomhaven because he already kinda knows he won't like it. This could account in part for BGG's "complexity bias."
If the design is prohibitive (and in this case it has a lot of rules, it has a huge set-up time, it is expensive, and a legacy game so it has to be purchased new) then only the people that want to play that game will go through the trouble to experience it and rate it.
People are more likely to play shorter, easier to learn games when they are uncertain as to whether they will like it, but people won't do the same with a more "prohibitive" game. Jonathan himself points out that he hasn't played Gloomhaven because he already kinda knows he won't like it. This could account in part for BGG's "complexity bias."
Last edit: 20 Mar 2019 13:25 by ubarose.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Sagrilarus
-
- Offline
- D20
-
- Pull the Goalie
Less
More
- Posts: 8739
- Thank you received: 7353
20 Mar 2019 14:17 #294138
by Sagrilarus
More than that, there's an Emperor's New Clothes effect, where you're subconsciously adverse to not liking something that you dropped a C-note on. You don't care to admit that you spent so much on so little, even to yourself.
Replied by Sagrilarus on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
ubarose wrote: One of our members who is too lazy to logon and post in this discussion made a good point in a Facebook discussion on this article:
If the design is prohibitive (and in this case it has a lot of rules, it has a huge set-up time, it is expensive, and a legacy game so it has to be purchased new) then only the people that want to play that game will go through the trouble to experience it and rate it.
People are more likely to play shorter, easier to learn games when they are uncertain as to whether they will like it, but people won't do the same with a more "prohibitive" game. Jonathan himself points out that he hasn't played Gloomhaven because he already kinda knows he won't like it. This could account in part for BGG's "complexity bias."
More than that, there's an Emperor's New Clothes effect, where you're subconsciously adverse to not liking something that you dropped a C-note on. You don't care to admit that you spent so much on so little, even to yourself.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 Mar 2019 16:06 #294141
by mads b.
Replied by mads b. on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
One of the reasons Gloomhaven is so popular is because it's fucking impressive. The scope of the game is enourmous, the differenct classes play very differently, and the more I play the game, the more I see of the monsters, the more they differ.
But of course it makes a difference that you just don't aquire the game if you don't like that kind of games. So the people who actually play it and rate it are the players who'll most likely enjoy it. Is it the best game evar? No, I don't think so. But it is an impressive feat and I think part of the high rating is because of that.
But of course it makes a difference that you just don't aquire the game if you don't like that kind of games. So the people who actually play it and rate it are the players who'll most likely enjoy it. Is it the best game evar? No, I don't think so. But it is an impressive feat and I think part of the high rating is because of that.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 Mar 2019 20:12 #294148
by DarthJoJo
Replied by DarthJoJo on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
I’m sorry. Did something come after “Thomas Mann is boring.”? It all just kind of faded into a grey noise of “durrrrrrrrrr” after that.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- GorillaGrody
-
- Offline
- D6
-
- Will kvetch for free
Less
More
- Posts: 439
- Thank you received: 742
20 Mar 2019 20:19 #294149
by GorillaGrody
I’ll give you Death in Venice, but man, Buddenbrooks. Oof. No.
Replied by GorillaGrody on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
DarthJoJo wrote: I’m sorry. Did something come after “Thomas Mann is boring.”? It all just kind of faded into a grey noise of “durrrrrrrrrr” after that.
I’ll give you Death in Venice, but man, Buddenbrooks. Oof. No.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- JonathanVolk
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- D4
-
- Chaotically Lawful
20 Mar 2019 20:23 #294150
by JonathanVolk
Replied by JonathanVolk on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
OMG The Magic Mountain is a top 5 novel!!
The following user(s) said Thank You: DarthJoJo
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 Mar 2019 23:37 #294160
by DarthJoJo
I think you mean “Buddenbrooks. Oof. Yes.” Easy mistake to make. The keys are quite close together.
Replied by DarthJoJo on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
GorillaGrody wrote:
DarthJoJo wrote: I’m sorry. Did something come after “Thomas Mann is boring.”? It all just kind of faded into a grey noise of “durrrrrrrrrr” after that.
I’ll give you Death in Venice, but man, Buddenbrooks. Oof. No.
I think you mean “Buddenbrooks. Oof. Yes.” Easy mistake to make. The keys are quite close together.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- JonathanVolk
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- D4
-
- Chaotically Lawful
21 Mar 2019 09:31 #294169
by JonathanVolk
Replied by JonathanVolk on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
About that Mann line: I spent an embarrassing amount of time reading negative GoodReads reviews of The Magic Mountain, largely because I love to punish myself with opinions that go against mine. Obviously, a thousand page plotless comedy about people dying of tuberculosis isn’t for everyone, but I’m curious to read why people who hate it stick with it; after all, hate-watching, that pastime of the Bachelor/reality TV/post-writer era, is so much more passively easy than hate-reading or, in our case, hate-playing.
I visit National Review daily in a similar spirit, since it’s, like, “the best” writing American conservatism has got. Also, incidentally, it’s where Armond White now reviews movies, whose critical contrarianism has long been a fascination—he loves Michael Bay, which is kinda outrageous, though I will hand it to him that Bay is one of the few remaining auteurs we have in the era of the Supehero Industrial Complex.
I visit National Review daily in a similar spirit, since it’s, like, “the best” writing American conservatism has got. Also, incidentally, it’s where Armond White now reviews movies, whose critical contrarianism has long been a fascination—he loves Michael Bay, which is kinda outrageous, though I will hand it to him that Bay is one of the few remaining auteurs we have in the era of the Supehero Industrial Complex.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- hotseatgames
-
- Away
- D12
-
Less
More
- Posts: 7177
- Thank you received: 6295
21 Mar 2019 09:54 #294170
by hotseatgames
Replied by hotseatgames on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
Michael Bay is my go-to guy to give me good explosions. I can count on him.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- GorillaGrody
-
- Offline
- D6
-
- Will kvetch for free
Less
More
- Posts: 439
- Thank you received: 742
21 Mar 2019 10:40 #294176
by GorillaGrody
Replied by GorillaGrody on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
In as much as Bay is a former art-school student who has a weird, cerebral approach to surface-level cinematic technique and an obsession with not totally convincing political platforms, I've often called Michael Bay the Jean-Luc Godard that America deserves.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 Mar 2019 17:59 #294212
by n815e
Replied by n815e on topic A Seat at the Table: Serious Games
When I want a truly refreshing review of a movie, I watch The Onion Film Standard.
I still haven’t found the board game equivalent of that.
I still haven’t found the board game equivalent of that.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: Gary Sax
Time to create page: 0.166 seconds