So i've been debating throwing this up here, and i've decided that its significant enough of an issue to post on it.
From what I understand of the community's role in relation to Eclipse Phase content, is that we are tasked to build and exchange gameplay opportunities and create a platform by which interesting games can be played. This is directly opposed to filling the role of historians, defining elements of realism and creating nuances which limit the gameplay experience rather than expand upon it. The latter is the function that i see the community fulfilling, and this is in no small part a response to the childhood thread active of a few weeks past.
When posting on the forums or blogging about content, you are creating content for other people to use and enjoy. Keep that in mind, and ask yourself if you're filling in gaps with content which would normally be filled in via gameplay, or if you're opening the player to new opportunities for self-definition.
In particular, with the Childhood thread, discussion opened up to make society less restrictive of children and teens while maintaining classic definitions of schooling and parenthood. While this may appeal to a realistic, historian aspect of EP, it makes for lousy, uninteresting gameplay and saps the novelty of the setting.
I think i'm going to get some serious flack from this, like any outsider might when slapping a community on the wrist. I bring this up because I think its important. I feel that this is a mistake that is common amongst the gamer and geek archetypes. If you think i'm wrong about the role of community or what the community is doing, then argue the opposition and i'll keep an open mind.
Thanks Guys.
Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.
Creating Gameplay Opportunity vs 'Realism'
Wed, 2011-12-28 10:44
#1
scnd
Creating Gameplay Opportunity vs 'Realism'
Wed, 2011-12-28 12:22
#2
Tyrnis
Re: Creating Gameplay Opportunity vs 'Realism'
I don't see realism and the creation of gameplay opportunity as mutually exclusive functions, personally. Part of the fun of a game (for me) is working within the established setting and rules and expanding on that setting in ways that are consistent with the material that's presented. Novelty not grounded in some level of realism can break suspension of disbelief, making for a less fun gaming experience.
Wed, 2011-12-28 12:27
#3
Herbo
Re: Creating Gameplay Opportunity vs 'Realism'
How are threads in these forums restricting game play? When I read something around here that I don't personally want to include in my Eclipse Phase stories...I just move on with business as usual. None of the heavy posters from these forums have kicked in my front door and forcably uploaded me to a VR prison (yet). The only way to do it wrong is to try and do it "right." So if you are looking for rightness from a community of extremely varried tastes and opinions...that's a long wait for a train that won't come.
Maybe I'm missing the point of your OP scnd, and I'm not trying to lambaste you or get all defensive because that's certainly not constructive. I guess I just don't see how discussion of aspects of the Eclipse Phase setting from the "opinions" of the community impinge upon any one group's potential enjoyment. Some people will lean toward extrapolations of current science/sociology to define "realistic" science fiction. Others will go deliberately aberant in their sci-fi tastes just to maintain a sense of mystery and "its the future let's not worry about nutrinos." And other people may take more of a "this is a game, I'm not worried about where babies come from" view. All game group styles should be welcome around here.
If you don't like what you see in a thread...my advice would be to ignore the bad bits and take what you like. If someone is deliberately attacking every post you make or "griefing" you somehow then that is more of an issue to take up with the admins. Again, sorry if I mistook your original point.
Wed, 2011-12-28 17:21
#4
Decivre
Re: Creating Gameplay Opportunity vs 'Realism'
I can see some use for creating parts of the setting as well. Eclipse Phase was designed rather open-ended for a setting, so there is plenty of room for new hypercorps, habitats, simulspaces, exoplanets and microfactions that don't necessarily have to step on the toes of the canon.
People tend to draw from their own culture... it's a simple fact of life that's unavoidable. Every work of fiction tends toward a degree of anachronism, because our own society is the only one we really have to use as a template. As such, fictional societies that are flung into the future or alien to our own still have tendencies toward the one we have now. It is that dramatically different life that makes Eclipse Phase so exotic, but it's understandable that when people conceive of things for this new world, they will inject concepts from their own.
That said, going with my original statement that Eclipse Phase has a lot of room for player-conceived setting material, the setting is vast enough for concepts both new and old to exist. I can believe that even centuries from now, in a populated Solar system, there will be backwards groups that will still raise their kids the current way today. I mean think about it, the Amish still raise their kids like it's the 18th century.
We actually had an interesting fight over this at our table at one point. One of my players was a genderless character who had a genderless spouse. Another player literally couldn't conceive of two people who had no need for sexual attraction being in a romantic relationship, and this was despite the fact that asexuality is already a topic discussed today. Once you have a worldview, it's pretty hard to rock it.
I disagree that it's a bad thing, but I'm not angry for you addressing it. One of the nice things that a community can provide a dev group is a soundbox from which they can hear feedback on the things they put into the world. Much of the errata has come from what players have had to say about the game, and down the line you might even see some setting material coming from player feedback as well. Shutting out the community opportunity to help flesh out the setting is a bad idea, if only because an insular game development often makes for bad games.
The question is whether it's actually realistic. Read some old science fiction from the 19th century, and you'll find that their renditions of the "modern day" look very much like the Victorian era. Watch the Jetsons sometime for how the people of the 70s imagined the world in 2001. There's a difference between realism and anachronism.
—
Transhumans will one day be the Luddites of the posthuman age.
[url=http://bit.ly/2p3wk7c]Help me get my gaming fix, if you want.[/url]
Wed, 2011-12-28 23:57
#5
Cyber-Dave
Re: Creating Gameplay Opportunity vs 'Realism'
I question some of the underlying assumptions of the original post.
Why is this the communities role? More importantly, even if we accept that it is, why should we assume that that is our only role?
Why should we accept that such an opposition exists? The binary you have created seems to be false. It seems to me that historical detail, realism, and nuances can be used to create game-play opportunities by providing background for a story-line that a GM might be writing (understood as a platform for a gaming opportunity). I also see no reason why I should accept that the limitation you are claiming is imposed on game-play experience is actually imposed. Nobody is forced to use the material that anybody on this forum invents. It is there as an optional resource that someone can choose to make use of.
I think your premise is flawed...