Friday, July 23, 2010

Human as a Baseline of a Game System, Why not?

My position is to use Human as a Baseline for game systems. There is some philosophical problems when "human" is not considered the baseline. In this thread about Human as a Baseline for GURPS. One of the interesting problems is that what are you using for comparison. One particular problem I have when people fail to consider what science has revealed about being human is the tendency to portray characters are inhuman.

Isn't that wierd? How else can we differentiate a robot, alien or another sentient race without knowing how it differs from the human baseline? Heck how about understanding how people differ from one another. Much of the study and breakthroughs regarding animal and artificial intelligence is through looking closely at how we think as compared to other systems.

Although, such a claim and disclaimer for a system is pretty understandable. That means I can say my home-brew system and game design is the "first" system to use human and science as a baseline to draw game-able or playable systems of simulating the world, work and actions. I mean, if GURPS is not planting that flag, I would!

What can of worms am I opening? Discussion, Debate, and Arguments particularly ones backed up by reason and science and allowing for multiple interpretation of the rules. Isn't this the backbone of a Evolving Game System? Isn't this the flexibility that allows games to innovate as a medium, because of the freedom to take a part that works, that stands subjective interpretation of multiple gamers, and to become on of many ways to interpret and perceive the world?

Endless Debates are only endless when you can't pin people down to objective and mutually agreed foothold, an argument at a time. Resolving, handling and progressing from arguments built around logic and reason are very workable. Logic, Science and Reason is a language of its own, and when everyone is speaking it things progress very quickly.

Freethinking and Gaming really go together because gaming grew up to become a science of its own. Its thanks to philosophers, mathematicians, economists and their drive to understand how the world works and create a winning strategy for all people that gives gaming such profound purpose and pedigree.

My Open Role-playing Game System (which I'm calling my homebrew) is supposed to be a game system that applies as much real-world knowledge in a game-able medium in order to Fame useful and practical skills in a way that allows Flow effect.

Its about applying Framing and Reciprocating System that is designed to encouraged an optimized strategy and outlook towards learning.

Anyway, an open and transparent game system where anyone can take anything they want or what works for them and bring it to their table is not meant for those who plan to work with a business plan. Realistically, having only reason and open interpretation is no way to sell "official" material. It pretty much relies on common sense or a freethinking attitude and approach regarding situations.

I mean, its going to be practically like a wikipedia where it collects systems for combat, human damage simulation, action resolution, work and effort tracking, dogfighting, mass combat, etc. etc. etc. which keep getting newer and newer revisions only when there is enough political will towards a particular game aspect.

Realistically, you'd need a 10x the active RPG blogger participation to have something like that. basically that the equivalent of all the developing countries (that would be china and inda, and that is expected at 2040; this does not count the emerging markets like my own country) matching the developed countries in quality of life and internet access.
Post a Comment