View Single Post
Old 11-14-2010, 08:29 PM   #5
silvarilon
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 144
silvarilon is on a distinguished road
Re: YART (Yet Another RPI Thread)

I think that your argument makes sense, but isn't worth having.

It'll go like this:
RPI's have criteria XYZ
What about MUD A?
RPI's have MOST of the criteria XYZ
<comment from someone who runs a non-RPI mud>
You aren't included in this discussion, non-RPIer
Question about criteria X and whether it adds to more RP
Comment about how RPI doesn't mean "more intensive roleplay"
Other comments that show RPIers do feel that their muds have "more intensive roleplay" despite RPI not meaning that
Flame wars due to a lack of clarity, since every participant is talking about a subtly different thing. Some are talking about mud system design, others are talking about the RPI feature list, others are talking about "intensive roleplay muds", and so on.

At the end of the day, RPI is just a term. Like FPS. Or MUD. It might have a specific meaning, but right now it just means "Those muds that go under the banner of RPI"

I don't see any need to relax the criteria on an RPI mud, even though my mud is close to "qualifiying", but misses on a few points.

I don't see the need to discuss what adds to more "intensive" roleplay. The points my MUD doesn't qualify as RPI are all conscious decisions on my part, since I believe these changes actually *add* to the RP. But, hey, every mud SHOULD have a different flavor, and I don't believe my choices are any more valid than the standard RPI feature list. I understand why they prefer the choices they made.

And I don't see the need to include more muds under the term RPI - we've already got a term for roleplay muds. RPMUD. Or "roleplay mud" - pretty clear to me. I'm happy with my roleplay mud. I'm comfortable that I can attract players by running a really fun game, without needing to shoehorn it into another category.

I hate the fact that when I want to find music, the shops all have it under the wrong categories. I'm a music snob, I know the difference between acid jazz and free jazz. I know the difference between rock and pop and punk and grunge. And it bothers me that the music industry can't just put the CDs into the right category. But, of course, they can - they just choose not to. They know what categories the buyers are looking at, so they put the bands into those categories, regardless of the music. So I might have to look in R&B for my jazz music, because hip young people don't check out the jazz section (and, as long as you have a vocal track, that makes it R&B. Right?) - and pretty much everything is thrown into Pop.
All so that when the baggy-jean-wearing customers walk straight to the Pop section, they'll find the bands.

If you look at the genres that the Blink182 albums supposedly are part of, you'll find that they range from pop-punk to rock-alternative. Are their albums really so different that two of them should be in entirely different genres with no overlap? (Bearing in mind we're listing two genres for each album)

You can probably guess, I don't agree with that sentiment. It defeats the point of having genres. And, as such, while I might agree with much of what you have to say... I'm inclined to say: Just leave the RPI guys with their term. Let them define a sub-genre of mudding.
silvarilon is offline   Reply With Quote