Dang Dis, I should have posted the link before I gave it to you. You beat me to the punch.
From what I see, the RPI thing is basically a simulateonist movement, that is committing the "* Mistaking the part for the whole, for all of role-playing: claiming that a particular sort of Simulationism is role-playing (and nothing else is)." mistake mentioned in the article. Let's take Delerak's listing of required features for an RPI mud, for example:
"1. Permdeath: This is not disputed, 99% of all RPI players/admins will agree to this."
Permdeath is a clearly simulationist feature. The dead don't come back in real life, thus they shouldn't in game. The neccessity of perm death for narrativist or gamist play is highly debatable. Simulation is the only one that really requires it.
"2. Description-based: Meaning there are no names displayed, you need a short description, main desription, and long description. Also characters need to be well-described as well as with a good background."
This is another simulationist feature. You don't recognize somebody unless you the player know what they look/act like. In a narrativist game, your character may recognize some people, despite you the player not recognizing them.
"3. Account based: RPI muds should use accounts to keep track of their playerbase, as well as their characters. Considering this, RPI muds should only allow 1 character active on players accounts at any given time. Accounts also allow the staff of the RPI to make notes and keep track of your characters you've played so that in the future perhaps you will be considered for a special role based on these notes."
This has nothing to do with being "role play intensive" whatsoever and only serves to highlight the ridiculousness of the label RPI.
"4. No levels: Since levels are an OOC concept, RPI's should not have them."
Another simulationist feature. Because levels don't appear in reality, they shouldn't appear in game. Levels are obviously fine from a gamist view, and can work from a narrativist view as well.
"5. Extensive, player controlled emote system - Players may create open-ended, custom emotes and have commands to help create these emotes. Stock emotes are not present."
This may seem narrativist at first glance, but it isn't. Open ended custom emotes are definitely narrativist. However, "stock" emotes contribute heavily to the theme of a game, and narrativism is all about theme. If you want to create a light hearted game, adding some funny stock emotes is a good idea. If you want a gritty game, adding some stock emotes for common swear words and cursing might help towards that goal.
"6. Slower Paced World: RPIs should have a slow pace to the game in order to allow for and promote extensive emotes and reactions between players. This should be accomplished by slow paced combat and crafting systems and promoted heavily by administrators."
This one is actually a narrativist feature, which is a nice change.
"7. Items are descripion based: No Swords of Ultimate Doom, or Spears of Destiny. Every item has a description much like players are forced to have."
Another simulationist feature, and I'd actually call it an anti-narrativist feature as well. Calling a weapon "The Spear of Destiny" is a very narrativist thing to do.
"8. Immersive code: Via scripting an RPI mud should but isn't necessarily required to have various things that immerse the experience of the player, such as coded echoes that happen at certain times of the day, the sun setting, the sun rising. Also room descriptions should have a day description as well as a night description."
Again, a simulationist feature.
"9. Mechanics Based World: Coded systems should be in place for most gameplay systems such as combat and crafting, and these systems are fully supported by code.
This will help differentiate it from more MUSH/MUX type games."
This is an effort to identify RPIs as a mud, which is pretty reasonable.
"10. Open PK - An RPI mud must have an open PK system that allows for PK at any time and any place."
This one is pretty gns neutral.
"11. No Global OOC channels: This is debateable"
This is another admin issue and isn't really about rp.
From the GNS perspective, this list of features is HIGHLY simulationist biased. Attaching the "role play intensive" label to this list of requirements is going to annoy the heck out of any serious rper that doesn't value simulation as highly as they do gamism or narrativism. The idea that this set of features is "role play intensive" is ridiculous. Simulation intensive is what it really is, and simulation is absolutely NOT the whole of rp.