The problem charlse as I explained with just saying "beauty is in the eye
of the beholder" is that then you have no grounds for cryticism or comment
at all sinse ultimately everyone can just say "well I like this" or "I
don't like that"
Suppose for example I were to claime that Jim's reaction test game is the
best game in the universe, and david greenwood had utterly wasted his time
with shades of doom. Well, if everything is relative, you cannot argue with
me. No sighting of the good features of shades of doom, it's atmosphere,
it's challenge, it's requirement for exploration will make it a better game
than Jim's rection test sinse it's all relative, indeed if everything is
relative then sighting of good features of shades of doom simply translates
to "what I like"
Still worse, when designing a game someone cannot attempt to "look at what
is good" or "Decide on good features of a design" sinse again everything
just comes down to relative opinion.
This is not an idle threat either. I remember some years ago a developer had
created a game which he was expecting money for, which lacked many features
of a decent game. he! claimed the game was awsome and that he liked it,
other people disagreed, and thus the game never improved at all and now I'm
willing to bet has been utterly forgotten about.
This is the problem with relativism in any field where things are designed.
It is an attractive position, sinse it does take into account the fact as
you said that different people like different things, and also it allows a
validity of opinion to everyone. The problem however is total relativism is
ultimately unhelpful, and by making everyone's opinion equally valid, you
also make everyone's opinion equally invalid.
Of course, a complete absolutism, saying "this is good irrispective of what
you think" isn't going to be helpful either. This is why i personally lean
towards a medium position, that though there are! characteristics which make
a good game, or peace of music, or peace of literature, how these
characteristics are applied, and indeed to what extent certain
chracteristics matter is an individuualistic matter.
For example, I do not like sports games. Sports have little interest to me,
particularly sports like American football and baseball that I am less than
familiar with the rules of.
yet, I look at Jim kitchin's baseball game, at the neetd to develop reflexes
in the swinging of the bat, to assign player actions strategically, the use
of sounds for advertisements and the ability to customize the teams, and I
can say these characteristics make it a well designed game, just one in a
genre and of a style that does not interest me.
these! are the sorts of discussions that are interesting, discussing with
others what makes a good game and how well those characteristics are
applied, a discussion we would not be able to have if indeed everything was
entirely relative, sinse ultimately we'd all then just be saying "I like
this" or "I don't like that" which pretty much ends most discussion dead.
Beware the Grue!
Dark.
---
Gamers mailing list __ [email protected]
If you want to leave the list, send E-mail to [email protected].
You can make changes or update your subscription via the web, at
http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org.
All messages are archived and can be searched and read at
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected].
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the management of the list,
please send E-mail to [email protected].
