It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
You're describing a single-player videogame or choose-your-own adventure book basically. Talking about those under the umbrella (tree) of "role playing games" alongside D&D is pointless.
You're the one who brought them up; I was disputing your assertion that noncollaborative implies linear (or predetermined).
You could make an argument that Choose-Your-Own-Adventure is a collaboration between the author and the reader.
I've seen this thread so many times in the last fifteen years...
2) Nerds on the internet arguing about semantics.
outside of certain fields of science in anything it's impossible to create a list of terms and their definitions that everyone knows and agrees with. When I talked about this thread with my friend he mentioned that terms are just tools. ...I can use it anywhere, but it's not useful if people don't understand it.
Intelligent people having a serious discussion will define their terms and agree upon a mutual lexicon before (and sometimes during) debate.
Intelligent people having a serious discussion will define their terms and agree upon a mutual lexicon before (and sometimes during) debate.And that's what happens or should happen when people talk about role playing games.
Trust me, the silent majority of the audience hates that guy with that shitty question too.
If someone is unwilling to do so, and insists even at this level on pedantry, it's usually not worth discussing the topic with them in the first place.
Also I'm now calling my GMing strategy the Strakh. Or maybe something like "Strakhful Game Mastery" or something.
Intelligent people having a serious discussion will define their terms and agree upon a mutual lexicon before (and sometimes during) debate.And that's what happens or should happen when people talk about role playing games.In my experience, a small number of people ... derail the entire conversation into minutia.
Someone else was personally offended that the panelists disagreed with his position that:1. He only liked the story and cutscenes of Final Fantasy 7, but not the game part itself.2. He would rather the "game" parts be removed or minimized so he can just see the story.3. It WOULDN'T BE THE SAME if Final Fantasy 7 had just been a movie: IT HAS TO BE A GAME!4. A movie where the action is interrupted by unrelated minigames would be TERRIBLE and NOT A GAME.He wanted mutually exclusive things and not only didn't see that this was the case, but was visibly angry at the discussion going on about how much gameplay does or does not tie into narrative.Many years ago, at ConnectiCon, Scott and I lectured on "German" style board games. Dude in the audience FLIPPED THE FUCK OUT that were dared to call them "German," because American games are JUST AS GOOD! He wouldn't let that point go, and proceeded to be an annoying heckler wanting to talk about something completely different from what we were ostensibly lecturing on.Gamers in general suck at talking about games.