Author: Matty (---.45.238)
Date: 07-24-2001 16:22
You seem to confuse the word "real" with "superior." Surely there are arguments to the effect that CRPGs are inferior to pen & paper RPGs, and vice versa; however, the point that you seem to be initially attempting to counter is that CRPGs are NOT ROLEPLAYING AT ALL. In such an argument, superiority and quality of experience have no relevance whatsoever, unless you can directly relate them to the classification of "roleplaying game." If you say that CRPGs and RPGs are equally enjoyable, that's nice. If I was feeling especially light-hearted, I might make the argument that chess is also equally enjoyable -- but that does not make chess an RPG. I'm sure you realize this, but please try and separate your classification of this particular type of computer gaming from your opinions and assertions relating to its worthiness. Throwing the flamers a bogus argument will only encourage them.
Also, I'd like to see how you justify your assertion that the debate on the classification of CRPGs "reeks or elitism and short sightedness." You provide examples of arguments that seem to exhibit both qualities, but make no attempt to show that they are either representative or even relevant to the debate itself. Your specific examples:
Argument 1: This may indeed be an example of what you're trying to argue against, but you seem to ignore the actual content of it, interpreting it simply as "RPGs are superior" all over again. Instead, I would suggest looking at what role exactly group interaction has in the concept of roleplaying, if any at all.
Argument 2: I would argue -- and indeed have -- that this has nothing to do with the debate at all, and by attacking it here, you are making a straw man. You could make many complaints against this type of statement, but none of the ones you do make are connected to the debate itself.
You make some interesting points, but I am confused as to what, exactly, you are talking about. Perhaps by better specifying your arguments you could avoid some of the more non-constructive criticisms directed at your column.
|
|
