Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Parhelion · 09-09-2010, 08:04 PM

Um. If you are going to bother quoting and responding to my posts, please do so without blowing my content out of context, over-generalizing a concept, and then essentially calling me stubborn. Threshold, I think you're letting you're success as an admin go to your head here, because your response REEKS of "I'm right because I say so."

My use of the word "chat client" included browsers, or any other medium specifically OFF the game.

Your second paragraph flat out ignores my original argument and just restates your original position. Sounds kinda stubborn to me.

Let us agree to disagree. Your position is that games must have an in-game chat channel to have a positive effect, and mine is that they are not necessary and often are not wanted in games that specifically target the kind of audience that this thread was originally made to talk about ("elitist" RPIers). Your games do not attract this particular type of player, and from what I understand, it was never meant to.

Case in point, your logic works fine when you are seeking to appeal to a mass of players who like chat channels. It does not work fine when you try to apply it to a sub-genre that doesn't welcome OOC chatter.

Yes. Stubborn. That's what you call the opposing party in a debate when they continue to disagree with you over what is essentially a topic about personal preferences.

This is an over-generalization.

Yes, the internet is one giant bubbly chat client. Nobody is contesting that here -- and if you read into my posts, you'd see that I actually made a point to say that people are going to use off-game channels regardless.

Saying that an administrator is wrong to say they don't have chat channels simply because their game is on the internet and the internet has messaging capabilities is... well, you know, asinine. This isn't even a valid argument, because "the internet" and a game are not even on the same page.

Again, I (and so far, nobody in this thread) is saying that players do not and would not use internet chat clients like AIM or Facebook to talk off-game. However, you will never be able to exert ANY sort of control over that chatter -- regardless of whether or not your game has a channel or not. If somebody is going to say something they shouldn't say in the game, they're going to use an external channel or ask their friend to use one. The only thing you do by allowing in-game chat is creating the illusion of safety. Until you can publish some real, factual, hard numbers within the scope of this problem by a third party that takes into consideration game type and audience type, I'm not going to be convinced otherwise.

"Subjective"? The entire notion that having a channel is either good or bad for any one particular game is subjective.

I think Jazuela's entire statement was lost on you. It was not to be taken literally, but was an exaggeration to draw the differences between the immersion levels of some "dudes" bull-****tin' around a board and someone who actually has an imagination and has put themselves right into their stories. They are not "looking down" into a village swarmed by goblins, they ARE a goblin.

Again, I suspect Jaz's point was lost on you. :/

You're right. The positions we're all taking is subjective, especially when you try to apply them univerally across all MUDs with roleplaying. However, this thread was started to discuss "veterans of roleplay intensive MUDs." Last time I checked, that meant RPIs. So the scope of this topic has been narrowed.

Let's be honest: this thread was an attempt to troll something Prof1212 or whatever he calls himself around here said in another thread.

This thread is about RPIs. RPIs have a strict set of guidelines that they use to define which games are technically RPIs and which games are not. We're talking about RPI players here -- so, it should be reasonable to conclude that RPI players are going to talk about features that they think are "best" within this context.

People who play RPIs and think they're "best" do so because the level of immersion they personally can experience is close to nil on other games. They don't consider the kind of roleplaying that was described earlier by Jezuela as "reaching into the fridge for a beer while the kobold swarm is descending" really roleplaying. It's more like just... playing.

So the responses you get from RPI players are dependant on what they actually consider roleplaying to be.

09-09-2010, 08:04 PM	#52
Parhelion Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Name: Sarah Location: Tempe, AZ Home MUD: Ethos Posts: 71	Re: Veterans of Roleplay Intensive MUDs Um. If you are going to bother quoting and responding to my posts, please do so without blowing my content out of context, over-generalizing a concept, and then essentially calling me stubborn. Threshold, I think you're letting you're success as an admin go to your head here, because your response REEKS of "I'm right because I say so." My use of the word "chat client" included browsers, or any other medium specifically OFF the game. Your second paragraph flat out ignores my original argument and just restates your original position. Sounds kinda stubborn to me. Let us agree to disagree. Your position is that games must have an in-game chat channel to have a positive effect, and mine is that they are not necessary and often are not wanted in games that specifically target the kind of audience that this thread was originally made to talk about ("elitist" RPIers). Your games do not attract this particular type of player, and from what I understand, it was never meant to. Case in point, your logic works fine when you are seeking to appeal to a mass of players who like chat channels. It does not work fine when you try to apply it to a sub-genre that doesn't welcome OOC chatter. Yes. Stubborn. That's what you call the opposing party in a debate when they continue to disagree with you over what is essentially a topic about personal preferences. This is an over-generalization. Yes, the internet is one giant bubbly chat client. Nobody is contesting that here -- and if you read into my posts, you'd see that I actually made a point to say that people are going to use off-game channels regardless. Saying that an administrator is wrong to say they don't have chat channels simply because their game is on the internet and the internet has messaging capabilities is... well, you know, asinine. This isn't even a valid argument, because "the internet" and a game are not even on the same page. Again, I (and so far, nobody in this thread) is saying that players do not and would not use internet chat clients like AIM or Facebook to talk off-game. However, you will never be able to exert ANY sort of control over that chatter -- regardless of whether or not your game has a channel or not. If somebody is going to say something they shouldn't say in the game, they're going to use an external channel or ask their friend to use one. The only thing you do by allowing in-game chat is creating the illusion of safety. Until you can publish some real, factual, hard numbers within the scope of this problem by a third party that takes into consideration game type and audience type, I'm not going to be convinced otherwise. "Subjective"? The entire notion that having a channel is either good or bad for any one particular game is subjective. I think Jazuela's entire statement was lost on you. It was not to be taken literally, but was an exaggeration to draw the differences between the immersion levels of some "dudes" bull-****tin' around a board and someone who actually has an imagination and has put themselves right into their stories. They are not "looking down" into a village swarmed by goblins, they ARE a goblin. Again, I suspect Jaz's point was lost on you. :/ You're right. The positions we're all taking is subjective, especially when you try to apply them univerally across all MUDs with roleplaying. However, this thread was started to discuss "veterans of roleplay intensive MUDs." Last time I checked, that meant RPIs. So the scope of this topic has been narrowed. Let's be honest: this thread was an attempt to troll something Prof1212 or whatever he calls himself around here said in another thread. This thread is about RPIs. RPIs have a strict set of guidelines that they use to define which games are technically RPIs and which games are not. We're talking about RPI players here -- so, it should be reasonable to conclude that RPI players are going to talk about features that they think are "best" within this context. People who play RPIs and think they're "best" do so because the level of immersion they personally can experience is close to nil on other games. They don't consider the kind of roleplaying that was described earlier by Jezuela as "reaching into the fridge for a beer while the kobold swarm is descending" really roleplaying. It's more like just... playing. So the responses you get from RPI players are dependant on what they actually consider roleplaying to be.