[UnderSeven]

The terms rp and rpi are truely becoming a gimmick. Look at almost any of the new mud posting and over half will claim being 'rp' or 'rp enforced' and some of the more ambious ones will even claim role play intensive.

Then there are those who play on muds like Armageddon and want their own term, so they don't have to sift through hundreds of muds claiming it to hook you only to be another hack and slash. Is it so wrong for muds to have some form of label for the more realistic rp experience driven games?

Then there are the non-arm rp muds (yes some exist) who see the people asking for their own term as elitists because they would seek to separate themselves from those muds. I won't name names, but based on the arguement on this thread, I think it's pretty plain whom I'm talking about.

My point? I think there should be a separate term because those 'rp elitists' will never come to accept muds that have certain features they feel don't fit. IT doesn't matter how much one tries to distort the terms, it ultimately comes down to what people are looking for.

I think this whole issue wouldn't be an issue if not for the term rp being the hip thing to tack onto any game. It's like they make the claim to draw people in, but in truth anyone looking for a certain kind of experience will or won't go a certain way reguardless of the claims once they enter the mud.

Perhaps another term wouldn't solve it. However arguing for the sake of justifying your own game or unjustifying someone else's game from a term is silly. There is defaintly a fair group of people looking for a certain kind of RPI mud, whom might benifit from using a term that would set them apart. But it would be up to them to coin it I think

Originally Posted by (UnderSeven @ April 17 2004,14:39) Then there are those who play on muds like Armageddon and want their own term, so they don't have to sift through hundreds of muds claiming it to hook you only to be another hack and slash.  Is it so wrong for muds to have some form of label for the more realistic rp experience driven games? Then there are the non-arm rp muds (yes some exist) who see the people asking for their own term as elitists because they would seek to separate themselves from those muds.  I won't name names, but based on the arguement on this thread, I think it's pretty plain whom I'm talking about.

I find it amusing that Armeggedon web pages explain that they are a MURPE.  And I distinctly remember playing on a game called Threshold that was called a MURPE and Armeggedon wasn't.   None of that matters.  You can call it what you want.  

I think that's the point.  "We own the term RPI and it means this, don't use it."

To which the only sane and rational response is...
*hahaha*  

Originally Posted by (UnderSeven @ April 17 2004,14:39) However arguing for the sake of justifying your own game or unjustifying someone else's game from a term is silly.

And it's doubly amusing that there has to be sides, battle lines, and hidden
secret agendas.  You'd think this was one of those tin foil hat sites.  Not
that there's anything wrong with tin foil, maybe sometimes with the folks who
wear it.  

I agree with Aristotle.  I disagree with KaVir.
Big deal.  Next time it might be the other way around. *shrug*

Oh yeah I have a hidden agenda too.  I want to fool all the Armeggedon
players into migrating to Harshlands, all the Harshland players into
migrating to Dartmud, all the Dartmud players into migrating to Threshold
and all the Threshold players into migrating to Armegeddon.  That's
step one of the master plan.  And then in the midst of the confusion I
release a game that has an 12-letter acronym associated with it that's
really fun to say, except in front of mom.  Finally I harvest all these
confused players, and feed the implementors of the aforementioned muds
to sharks.. err maybe crocodiles.  There are others involved too.  Maybe
Achaea, Aardwolf, Medievia, maybe both KaVir and Aristotle, maybe Wolfpaw
and Kyndig, maybe IMC2/ICEMAN/I3 networks are involved, there's plots
within plots and double agents, triple agents.  Watch the right hand, and
pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.  Maybe none of this is
true. Maybe Bill Gates is in on it with SCO and Linus Torvalds.  
Who knows... The truth is out there.  Where the smoking man?

Had enough babble?  Yeah, I agree me too.

[Jazuela]

Yui, you addressed the point nicely in your own post. If you believe that the game you play is primarily an intensive roleplay game, then of COURSE it fits the bill of RolePlayIntensive.

Now, Doom is also a graphics game. So I wouldn't look past that part of the game's description when looking for a new game, because while I DO insist on intensive roleplay, I also insist on text and not graphics.

Just like ASAP means "As Soon As Possible" - there is no law that determines what that means, other than "As Soon As Possible." It COULD mean - as soon as you're done mudsexing that chick because I know that's really important to you. It could mean - stop mudsexing and deal with this RIGHT NOW. It could mean - well as long as you handle it some time today, that'll be great. It could mean - okay - finish the mudsex, then get your coffee, and don't forget about the job interview tomorrow morning. When you get home from that, please deal with this situation.

RPI is just like that. It *IMPLIES* something but is not restricted to a narrow set of criteria. It is Roleplaying Intensive - which COULD also have graphics. and COULD also be pay-to-play, and COULD also allow resurrections, and COULD also involve a whole lot of hack-n-slash. Intensive is a subjective term, and up to the user to decide what is intensive to them.

As I mentioned in my previous post - someone who has never played ANY roleplaying game might find their first one intensive, even if it isn't to people who don't play it. People who have been playing Gemstone for years and have never tried other games would probably be quick to point this out to anyone who says otherwise.

My opinion stands - as it did the last time, and will in the future.
RPI means RolePlay Intensive. It might easily -imply- other things, but it only means that one thing, and anything that is Roleplay Intensive fits into the category whether anyone likes it or not.

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ April 17 2004,08:56) R.P.I. is an acronym. It is not a phrase, term, or word. It stands for Role Play Intensive, or Role Playing Intensive. Each word, when used independent of the other, carries its own definition. Combined, and used in the context of gaming, they refer to "A game that has intensive roleplay." ... If you want to add other stuff to that, have at it. You are not required to. And neither am I. ... R.P.I. Role Play Intensive. Not "Roleplay Intensive, plus you have to have permadeath." Not "Roleplay Intensive, plus no global channels." ... One more time - if someone wants to arbitrarily add other criteria to the term and announce that anyone who uses it incorrectly is wrong - then go out and buy yourself a freakin copyright on the term and license it. Till then, shaddup and let people define it however they see fit.

That has been my opinion all along. I am always happy to read other people who share the same view.

I was just curious as to why you were "nya"ing since I don't recall anyone saying you cannot/should not call Armageddon an RPI. I hope you didn't interpret my curiosity as an attack on your opinon or on you.

[Jazuela]

Nah Tyche, I thought it was kinda funny that you took the "Nya" seriously. I was "lowering myself" to childishness. My little way of expressing how silly and childish the arguement is.

So there. Nya nya nya nonnie nonnie boo-boo.

And all that sort of rot

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ April 17 2004,21:34) Nah Tyche, I thought it was kinda funny that you took the "Nya" seriously. I was "lowering myself" to childishness. My little way of expressing how silly and childish the arguement is. So there. Nya nya nya nonnie nonnie boo-boo. And all that sort of rot

*sob*

I'm Threshold, not Tyche.

*grins and winks*

[Jazuela]

Threshold, Tyche..hm.

Well let's see: Threshold - is some kind of authority figure of a text-based game.
Tyche - is some kind of authority figure of a text-based game.

Threshold - name begins with T, and has an H in it.
Tyche - name begins with T, and has an H in it.

Threshold - posts most often on certain threads.
Tyche - posts most often on the same threads.

Okay I've come to a conclusion, which is based on the evidence presented above:

Tyche = Threshold. Therefore, all games that either of them like are GTL games. Games T's Like.

We will now be removing all other acronyms from games the T's like, because they are all WRONG. All games that T's like will from now on be called GTL games.

I hope you are happy now, gentlemen!

<--goofy smile to show that this post should be read with the same humor with which it was written.

[Threshold]

Tyche, I'm afraid she's learned our secret.

This puts the conspiracy in grave danger.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ April 17 2004,22:07) Yui, you addressed the point nicely in your own post. If you believe that the game you play is primarily an intensive roleplay game, then of COURSE it fits the bill of RolePlayIntensive.

This is also the same point I covered a number of posts back.

If you agree that anything can be labelled as RPI (and by extention everything can also be labelled an RP mud), what is the value of having such a label? If every mud is allowed to label itself in any way it sees fit on its listing, then the mud listing becomes useless.

Moreover, as this is the roleplaying board, if every mud can be considered an RP mud then does that mean any sort of mud-related discussions are acceptable on this (the roleplaying) board? Would it be acceptable for me to start a discussion about playing the role of a warrior on a typical HnS mud, even though it would have nothing to do with what most people consider "roleplaying"?

[prof1515]

Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ April 17 2004,08:56) R.P.I. is an acronym. It is not a phrase, term, or word. It stands for Role Play Intensive, or Role Playing Intensive. Each word, when used independent of the other, carries its own definition. Combined, and used in the context of gaming, they refer to "A game that has intensive roleplay."

Originally Posted by (Yui Unifex @ April 17 2004,13:43) I find playing the role of the marine in Doom to be pretty intense.  Therefore Doom is an RPI, and you would have no qualms about labeling it as such.  If you would, then we need some sort of criteria other than the base definition of the acronym.

You're using the wrong definition of intensive.  Intensive doesn't only mean possession of intensity, it also can refer to the quality of something to strengthen something else, in this case RP.  Something completely mundane can be intensive even if its not intense.  Hence, the I in RPI lends a definition to the term.  Role-Playing Intensive would mean that role-playing is what the game is centered around and what it is designed to strengthen or facilitate.  Not PKing, not chatting, not socializing, not earning experience.  Role-playing, ie. assuming a persona and interacting with the (game) world as such.

You can bicker over the exact wording of the definition of what RPI stands for, but the term itself seems fairly staight-forward.  RPI games are those games designed around RP, something your DIKU-base or any other type is not.  Hence things like experience, levels, hp, and ooc channels capable of communicating anything other than a desire or availability to RP are absent from a RPI MUD.

As for Doom, it's not RPI.  You could call it KI, Killing-Intensive, because the game is designed around killing, not role-playing.  

Take care,

Jason

[Yui Unifex]

Originally Posted by (prof1515 @ April 18 2004,13:34) You're using the wrong definition of intensive.

The crux of the arguments floating around in this thread is that there is no wrong definition.  The term means anything we want it to be, so long as it makes sense within the context of the acronym.

Originally Posted by Role-Playing Intensive would mean that role-playing is what the game is centered around and what it is designed to strengthen or facilitate.  Not PKing, not chatting, not socializing, not earning experience.  Role-playing, ie. assuming a persona and interacting with the (game) world as such.

When I play Doom, I assume the persona of the marine and interact with the world as such.  Primarily by blasting monsters back to the netherworld.

Anyway, I am in agreement with KaVir.  The result of these arguments is that RPI, RPG, and any other categories such as 'Action' or 'Adventure' are essentially useless terms.  We could abandon them and think up new terms, but they would likely also be as ambiguous as these, leading to similar problems.  Can anyone think of an unambiguous, non-cumbersome term for the sorts of "role-playing" environments we're talking about?

[WarHound]

We could just blow it off and stop bitching.

RPI RPG MMORPG MURPE MOO Moo{like a cow} STFU

To me, they mean exactly the same thing as ' '.

A stupid acronym shoudn't decide wether or not you play a mud, and I doubt it will anyway. A mud could have an RPI monument erected to itself, and it still wouldn't change the content of their mud, the quality of their roleplayers, the ****tiness of their atmoshpere or lack thereof.

I have nothing useful to add.

Rock and roll.

Originally Posted by (Yui Unifex @ April 18 2004,14:11) The crux of the arguments floating around in this thread is that there is no wrong definition.  The term means anything we want it to be, so long as it makes sense within the context of the acronym.

Not really.  I mean I've seen those arguments and simply refused to entertain them.  Both you and KaVir are more perceptive than that.  Well I have some faith in that anyway.  You may have noticed that Aristotle responded angrily when KaVir suggested RPI either meant anything (or nothing) or met a partial list of criteria he listed.  What prompted my little humorous tirade was also the hint or suggestion of a literalist position or anything or nothing at all position.  i.e. PK just might mean killing off your users then.  heh.    

Originally Posted by (Yui Unifex @ April 18 2004,14:11) Anyway, I am in agreement with KaVir.  The result of these arguments is that RPI, RPG, and any other categories such as 'Action' or 'Adventure' are essentially useless terms.

It's how the argument is framed.  If Aristotle and myself don't agree with the list of criteria posted (as I think was outlined in the first 6 or so posts), then RPI just might as well mean nothing or anything.  A serious argument?  I don't think so.

I believe, and presume Aristotle does as well, like many mud acronyms the definition of RPI is a term describing an analog state.  There are mud games which are clearly in the RPI spectrum, mud games which are mostly in that spectrum, some on the edge of that spectrum, and games which are clearly outside of that spectrum.

Interestingly the same is true of MUD itself.
Is chess a MUD? Is IRC a MUD? Is Doom a MUD? Is Ultima Online a MUD? Is Mush a MUD?  Are the TMS forums a MUD? Is Armeggedon a MUD?  Is Baseball a MUD?  Is Diablo a MUD?  Are games with graphics MUDS?  Does a MUD have to have combat?  Are games without elves MUDs?

Quite likely you'll get some resounding no's, yes's, some maybe's, some WTH?!s, on answers to those questions.  Same is true of this RPI or roleplay intensive/immersive term.

It seems clear enough to me anyways that it's indeed a subset of RP or role-playing muds.
Knowing a mud is deep into that RPI spectrum is somewhat useful to me too.  I can then avoid it when I want to role-play.

[Geras]

Originally Posted by You can bicker over the exact wording of the definition of what RPI stands for, but the term itself seems fairly staight-forward. RPI games are those games designed around RP, something your DIKU-base or any other type is not.

I don't see what a codebase has to do with wether or not its RPI. I used to play on a DIKU base MUD that was 'centred around RP', thank you very much.

I do agree with the definition itself though - if the game is essentially defined by its roleplaying I feel its RPI, while if roleplaying is merely one facet of the MUD, maybe not.

The criteria originally listed by KaVir, in my opinion, are good indicators of if a MUD is RPI or not, but not a good definition.

Also a note about the no OOC channels requirement... even Armageddon, a MUD I think we can all agree is an RPI, has OOC channels in the form of forums and people talking to each other over MSN, AIM etc... so I don't really see how that could be the part of any definition.

[KaVir]

Originally Posted by (Tyche @ April 19 2004,03:36) Originally Posted by (Yui Unifex @ April 18 2004,14:11) The crux of the arguments floating around in this thread is that there is no wrong definition.  The term means anything we want it to be, so long as it makes sense within the context of the acronym. Not really.  I mean I've seen those arguments and simply refused to entertain them.

However those are the arguments being used to justify why "RPI" shouldn't have a specific meaning - eg:

Aristotle: "Unless something is managed by a standards body like ANSI or IEEE I do not think anyone can lay claim to what exactly defines RPI or any other game related acronym. Yes, people can share their opinions but nobody has the authority to outright declare what the precise and exact criterion are. Ultimately, the owner of a game has the right to label his/her game however he/she chooses."

Jazuela: "If you believe that the game you play is primarily an intensive roleplay game, then of COURSE it fits the bill of RolePlayIntensive."

Originally Posted by It's how the argument is framed. If Aristotle and myself don't agree with the list of criteria posted (as I think was outlined in the first 6 or so posts), then RPI just might as well mean nothing or anything. A serious argument? I don't think so.

The only arguments given for why those critiera shouldn't apply is because the literal meaning of RPI is Role-Playing Intensive, and because "the owner of a game has the right to label his/her game however he/she chooses." If you want to use those arguments, then they need to be applied consistantly if you want them to be taken seriously. If we should use the literal meaning of RPI, then the same logic dictates that we should also use the literal meaning of other acroynms - and if the owner of a mud can list his mud as an RPI purely on the basis that he feel it should be classified as such, then the same logic dictates that the owner of a mud can also list it as PK, RP, or whatever else takes his/her fancy. And if we do that, such labels become meaningless.

Originally Posted by I believe, and presume Aristotle does as well, like many mud acronyms the definition of RPI is a term describing an analog state. There are mud games which are clearly in the RPI spectrum, mud games which are mostly in that spectrum, some on the edge of that spectrum, and games which are clearly outside of that spectrum.

That's a better argument, the only problem is that "RPI" has been used for many years to refer to something which isn't so analog - something more analogous with a codebase.

The definition of "RP" is certainly analog, while the definition of "MOO" is not - would you agree with that?

However an "RPI" might not represent a derivative in the copyright sense like a "MOO" is, but it is still commonly used to refer to a group of muds which have all copied certain gameplay features from each other, which (aside from legal implications) is pretty much the same IMO.

Now obviously there is nothing stopping people from redefining RPI, but regardless of personal opinion it does currently have a specific meaning among a certain group of mudders, and trying to use it for something else is going to lead to confusion.

[Geras]

Originally Posted by The only arguments given for why those critiera shouldn't apply is because the literal meaning of RPI is Role-Playing Intensive, and because "the owner of a game has the right to label his/her game however he/she chooses."

Look up a post, I argued against the no OOC channels.

The one thing with Aristotle's arguments as he comes off as trying to justify why his MUD should be RPI even though it has OOC channels, no permdeath, you go OOC to kill mobs, etc. Not saying that's what you're trying to say Aristotle, just how it comes off to me.

Another criteria that I'm suprised wasn't mentioned here is colour - or lack thereof. During my brief stay on Armageddon I mentioned that the lack of colours hurt my eyes (as I am used to at least sensible colour) and I was told no serious RPI would have an ugly rainbow-splattered MUD, or something to that effect. Lack of colour is why I left Armageddon, but I was wondering, is this a generally accepted criteria?