Optional Realities & Project Redshift
-
#1: You may be right that the bridging is basically @Jeshin's thing/remark, and I might only be interpreting the text on the site about having "more in common than what separates us" in light of his comments on that and that all text-based RPGs are involved.
#2: Yes, quite possibly what's been written reads differently to people who are involved with RPI-like games and people who aren't.
So, to explain how it reads to me, here's that blurb:
"Optional Realities is a community and design blog for text-based, online Roleplaying Games with a focus on character and story-driven games that include permanent character death as a feature. While many call this genre of game an RPI (Roleplaying-Intensive Game), Optional Realities is dedicated to all games of this nature, whether they be MUDs, or MOOS, or MUXs, or MUSHes, or RPIs, or any of the other sub-genres that we've divided ourselves into over the years."
Okay. The way it's written, "this nature" refers to two separate though potentially overlapping types of games: "text-based, online Roleplaying Games with a focus on character" and "story-driven games that include permanent character death as a feature". Neither of these descriptions covers the idea of automation in any way.
ALL the games in question -- RPI-style, low-automation non-consent, consent -- are "text-based, online Roleplaying Games with a focus on character" and most are "story-driven games that include permanent character death as a feature". The ones that are not are still story-driven, just lacking "permanent character death as a feature".
The text then says that many call that sort of game -- text-based, online, character-focused, story-driven, includes possibility of permanent death -- an RPI. That's fine. But as it then goes on to say, RPIs are only one example of that type, so that doesn't suggest that a reader ought to assume you only mean games which closely resemble actual RPIs.
"This nature", as described in the apparent mission statement, is not RPI codebase and specifically says it isn't, but it doesn't mention the qualifications that narrow down "this nature" to where it doesn't cover low-automation MU*s. Because of that, when you say they don't qualify, you may mean that they don't fit what you consider the requirements for the RPI-like genre, but what you're actually saying is that they don't fit the requirements that have been stated: that they are not character- and story-driven text-based online rpgs (with permanent character deaths).
So, ways to make it more clear. First, I'm not certain if you really mean to have two types there -- if you only mean the sentence to be one joint type, "text-based, story-driven online role-playing games which focus on character and include the potential for permanent character death" might be closer. I would add 'highly-automated' in there, personally, if I wanted to narrow things down to RPI-like games, since otherwise it still includes the type most popular here (...which apparently need a name). There might be a better term, and it still leaves the question of "well, what's 'highly'?" but you already have that problem anyway, and so far I can't think of a better term for what the true divider seems to be. You also might define this type as "RPI-like" or "RPI-style" or something similar to that, because it's much shorter to write, seems likely (to me) to give the right sort of impression of your meaning to people involved with games of that type, and seems less likely to leave people involved with other types feeling alienated.
Obviously this doesn't cover any remarks made or impressions given in posts early in this thread, but for the outside view of the mission statement itself, there's my thoughts.
-
@crayon : No sarcasm, you're doing well now. This is what we've been looking for since the beginning of this whole thread: a willingness to listen to other people and engage them with a clear understanding of both your position and theirs.
In the spirit of your newfound ability to engage in actual conversation, I take back the nasty things I said about you.
-
Thank you, @Ninjakitten!
And as @WTFE has said, this is what we were trying to get out of you. @crayon. Welcome to the party.
-
This is something I was told way back when I was first getting into WORA and I think it applies to MSB as well.
We're a pool of sharks. We'll bite anyone, including each other, especially if we smell blood. But there are no real favorites - everyone gets bruised around here at one time or other, so as long as people have a relatively thick skin they're fine.
The caveat: What this community dislikes above all things (and detects it at a pretty decent rate) is a fake. Just be upfront, don't ever lie and don't feed us jargon. When it comes to gaming (online but also otherwise) many people here have considerable experience, we don't need things beautified since it often comes out as patronizing instead. Just tell it like it is.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
@Arkandel said:
We're a pool of sharks.
Shit! I knew I was doing something wrong. I thought we were a pool of hippos.
-
-
That was the joke.
-
"Excuse the hell out of you. He's a bag of dicks. I'm a carefully curated box of cocks." -- to @GirlCalledBlu upon being misrepresented.
-
-
@Miss-Demeanor said:
@Coin said:
@WTFE said:
That was the joke.
Shut up. Your mom. FACE.
YOUR MOM'S FACE
Yes, it's really pretty. I have a beautiful mum, thank you.
"Excuse the hell out of you. He's a bag of dicks. I'm a carefully curated box of cocks." -- to @GirlCalledBlu upon being misrepresented.
-
@Coin said:
@Miss-Demeanor said:
@Coin said:
@WTFE said:
That was the joke.
Shut up. Your mom. FACE.
YOUR MOM'S FACE
Yes, it's really pretty. I have a beautiful mum, thank you.
You're welcome.
-
@crayon said:
My own first forays into the consumption of hard liquor were more pain than flavor. Miserable experiences with dirt-cheap tequila and other unsavory selections in a culture that is so repressed where it comes to teenagers drinking had unfavorably colored my perceptions. Forced to drink surreptitiously and at significant legal risk the flavor half of the intertwined flavor and pain promised by drinks like your fruit brandy was denied to me until many years later, unfortunately, by a combination of fiscal and legal concerns.
Stubborn and persistent, however, I was very committed to making the most out of very little, which is how I came to discover one gem, in particular. Topping out at an idyllic 8.0% ABV, Olde English High Gravity 800 offered a cost-to-alcohol efficiency I wasn't likely to find anywhere else. A 'malt liquor' by definition, and at that a silly definition I suspect exists mostly for legal reasons, OE was effectively beer. And not beer beer, but the worst of the cheap piss-flavored swill that is so abundantly common in this particular country. In 2010, in fact, the 3.2% ABV version of this particular brew was decried as "the Worst Beer in the World" by a major beer rating website.
This beverage was a travesty in a big glass bottle. Forty ounces of carbonated piss to swig through, with high enough alcohol content that the combination of condensation and glass would usually ensure that you dropped it long before you finished it. Thankfully, I discovered that wrapping the big ugly bastard in a paper bag would not only conceal the shameful contents, but provide a surface with significantly more friction for the owner to grip onto. Still, though, the taste was unpleasant at best, and the malt liquor had a particular knack for inducing especially nasty hangovers.
Enter the Sunny D. Though glorified by the Beastie Boys' 1986 hit "Brass Monkey" that peaked at 48 on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 for 1987, hardly anybody is familiar with what comprises an actual 'brass monkey', and in fact many cocktails lay claim to the name, with the only shared thread being the inclusion of orange juice to give the beverage its iconic 'brass' coloring, a coloring that I found to be particularly beautiful with my tasteless friend Olde English, once one-third of him had been drank and replaced with an equally classless orange "juice": Sunny Delight.
The addition of the orange "juice", or more aptly orange "drink", significantly altered the flavor of the beverage. Combined with the crisp and carbonated feel of the piss-flavored malt liquor, it created a silky texture while masking the worst of the metallic and musky taste. The fruity addition added a certain zestiness to the beverage, which helped with staying alert, but also compensated for the deleterious effects of the low-quality alcohol by offering a good amount of hydration and vitamin C.
The combined cost of both beverages came out to roughly $3, and I found that I could drink one to four of the forty ounce drinks in an evening and range from a jovial buzz to stumbling and stuttering. With the large number of cocktails competing over claim to the title of true 'brass monkey', and in light of its taste, concept, and cost, I eventually came to accept a more preferred name for the drink: the hobo mimosa.
Oooooh my god! I remember buying "Old E" in college for like $2. It was a cheap, easy way to get drunk. You had to have it in a brown paper bag! That's the only way to drink it. You had to get the cheap strong stuff....Georgi also comes to mind.
I don't remember it tasting bad, even though it probably does. But I was 19 and free....and that liquor store down the street from my school sold to minors.
-
@Sunny said:
@Jaunt said:
I liked a lot of what you had to say. I think it's important to note that there is constructive feedback and feedback that is not constructive. Blahblah blah blah blah blah.
You're still completely missing the point. Try reading for comprehension rather than reading to support preexisting biases. Nobody actually called you a racist, they used a racial analogy for what you're doing in the hopes that making it so completely clear that you would HAVE to understand the point. Oops.
If you don't want to be called stupid/an idiot, don't act it. People here aren't going to pull punches because your little feefees could get hurt. The nice thing about this place is that there's no need for me to treat you like a child; the assumption is that you're a grownup, and that when you act like an asshole, you understand that somebody calling you out on it isn't name calling to name call, they're just drawing attention to your behavior.
You're an idiot because you're not reading for comprehension, missing (purposefully or not) everyone else's point, and continuing to make a spectacle of yourself.
NONE of the things that have been flung your way are about your site catering to a specific niche.
AGAIN. None of your reception or the problem people have with you is that OR has a limited scope. None. Nothing. Zilch. Zero. So to blame your reception here on that is a complete cop out.
One more time.
Your reception here has nothing to do with OR being focused on a niche.
Idiot.
What a ridiculous sum of self-contradictions.
"We aren't calling you racist (obviously), we're using racism as a metaphor to show you how wrong you are in being more exclusive on your site than we want you to be. Also, we don't care how exclusive you are on your site, even though I just said that we did and that's why we used retarded analogies."
"Hey asshole, your offensive language towards me makes you look like an asshole, you fucking asshole."
The douchebaggery here began before I joined the thread. It began before Crayon joined the thread. You need only to read the first few pages of this ridiculously long thread to see the beginnings of shitposting aimed at Jeshin, who has been nothing but nice to folks posting here. Your acting like a bitch certainly predates anything I've posted.
The idea that someone on this thread could hurt my feelings is a little ticklish to me. Does it seem like my feelings are hurt? Or does it seem like every one of my responses is just a mirror of the tone used against me?
The idea that offering constructive feedback is the equivalent to "pulling punches" is even more ticklish to me.
I could continue to engage you in shit-flinging to amuse myself, since you continue to refuse a change in tactics (perhaps you're just doing it for your own amusement too), but your entertainment value to me is offering only diminishing returns at this point.
@ThugHeaven said:
Sometimes you just gotta take the L.
I feel like you've been one of the most thoughtful posters over the last several pages, and I generally agree with most of what you have to say. However, I'm not here looking for a win. I'm here ironically. Now, if someone actually cools their engines and tries to talk to me like a rational human being about OR, I'll be happy to do so. I've done so several times in this thread.
Other than that, WTFE has the right of it: I'm here to counter-troll trolls, until it's not worth it to me anymore. If folks here lack the self-awareness to critically read the patterns in my posting and the tone of other posters, or just don't care (because of silly 'us' vs 'them' internet bias), that's on them.
@TNP said:
@Jaunt said:
But, non-constructive feedback is calling us racists, elitists, bigots, idiots, and whatever else just because our site caters to a specific niche. It's inane. I've been happy to explain our position, and politely so, when I'm not approached with vitriol.
Funny how not a single person has done that. Any insults you've received - over the top or not - has not been because of your site but because of how you portray yourselves here. Your site has prompted debate. Your site's posters have prompted flame wars.
It's an important distinction and one you obviously fail to grasp.
How shocking.
If you were to go back and blindly read this thread from beginning to now, without bias, you will most certainly see that the aggression towards Jeshin and OR began before myself or Crayon joined in and "offended people". You will also see some of those insults tied directly to OR's inclusion policies. I've nothing against you, but you're incorrect on this point.
@Derp said:
@Jaunt said:
We've received both levels of criticism on this thread. The former will be responded to kindly and thoughtfully. The later will be responded to with the same level of ironic vitriol that it deserves.
No, it's not. The fact that you think this is precisely the reason I hope that the far more reasonable @Jeshin cuts you the hell off from posting here. You're making him, and his site, look absolutely terrible.
Do you not understand what the difference is, here? The difference is that you came here. If someone from this site were to go to yours and behave as you've behaved here, we would absolutely respond to them here just as we've responded to you. We didn't go to your site and demand that you change. YOU came HERE to advertise your site, then refused (all three of you) to participate in any sort of actual discussion (meaning give-and-take on ideas, not simple acknowledgement of their existence), which is precisely what this forum is for.
If you don't understand -that-, then you are even more deluded than I thought you were. I didn't have a horse in this race, at all, until you came along starting in with your bullshit. Get a clue -- this is our community, that is theirs, and if you want to advertise -here-, you need to engage the players here on what they want to see and discuss. And yes, DISCUSS. Compromise if necessary.
If you're unwilling to do that, then I have to agree with the others -- go the hell away and stop making Jeshin look bad, because right now you are here in an official capacity for your site, and you're acting like a miserable twat.
No, you wouldn't be, actually. We would actually attempt to moderate the discussion to create some sort of meaningful dialogue. We're also very accepting of other sites and communities on OR, even if they don't match up with our core demographic and content. You assume how we would react, but you assume incorrectly.
As far as discussion goes, I've answered every question and feedback posed to me about OR since I've come here. Those posed to me reasonably have received reasonable replies. Those posed with vitriol have received replies too, just in a mirroring tone.
It seems to be a bit of "can dish it out, but can't take it" syndrome to me.
I'm happy to discuss OR, though, without getting personal. What do you want to talk about?
ETA:
Conversation moved too quickly for me. I'm glad that Crayon was able to effectively clarify some things for a few folks.
Like we've said, "Yeah, the language on the site isn't as clear as it should be. We agree with you. We're going to change it. We're not trying to represent all MUDs/MUSHes, but rather a specific genre that's lacked a central hub. Even games (or Kickstarters, or Communities)outside of that genre are welcome to advertise on our forum --- just like here."
I get the idea that this site is a "pool of sharks and everyone gets bitten". I don't think it makes for the most productive conversations, but it can certainly be entertaining.
-
@Jaunt said:
I get the idea that this site is a "pool of sharks and everyone gets bitten". I don't think it makes for the most productive conversations, but it can certainly be entertaining.
Indeed. You don't really need a thick skin so much as to need to understand that biting is fun and getting bitten funny, even when it happens to you.
Actually, it leads to tonnes of productive conversations. OR appears to have this thing going in where it's partners/privileged advertisers write these articles, and that's one reason they're privileged, but I read those and think, "What a trite and redundant way to address this issue," and "You're linking that to MUSB? Go home and teach your grandma to suck eggs." The reason for that is some discussion on this board or one of its previous iterations has covered the topic far more completely and intelligently and probably but maybe not with a rich blue sauce of vitriol.
"... you'll find the story doesn’t end how you think, and the most important characters aren’t who you expect.” - Penny 40 to Derek, The Magicians S04E07 ‘The Side Effect’
-
@jaunt 'Yo dawg, I totally came here to participate in civil discussion. Oh did I say civil discussion, dawg I meant i'm here to troll.'
-
-
Well that's kind of why I was saying it might be good to step back. I've played some of those games you have on there and I'm looking forward to a couple that are coming out like lab mud, project redshift and Darksun. Sindome I couldn't wrap my head around, it seems a little too much like HellMoo the scifi game and The Burning Post, which I think does something very unique, but seems to be a little incomplete and still trying to find itself.
There are things I think are worth discussing here, certain ideas I think MUDs and mushes can borrow from each other that would only make both of them better.
The thing is, where the thread was yesterday, it kinda seemed like it was beyond repair. It seems a little more light hearted today, which is a good. sign.
-
And folks here are welcome to submit articles to us, too. They don't need to be an admin from one of OR's core games to do so. We've had several folks submit articles from outside of our own community. Nobody's asked about that, though. Instead, maybe they've just assumed it's a certain way, when it's not.
But, yeah. Obviously most folks on OR (and here) are not professional writers. The quality is going to vary. We also don't pay people who submit articles, charge our users, or put any advertisements on our page.
@ThugHeaven said:
Well that's kind of why I was saying it might be good to step back. I've played some of those games you have on there and I'm looking forward to a couple that are coming out like lab mud, project redshift and Darksun. Sindome I couldn't wrap my head around, it seems a little too much like HellMoo the scifi game and The Burning Post, which I think does something very unique, but seems to be a little incomplete and still trying to find itself.
There are things I think are worth discussing here, certain ideas I think MUDs and mushes can borrow from each other that would only make both of them better.
The thing is, where the thread was yesterday, it kinda seemed like it was beyond repair. It seems a little more light hearted today, which is a good. sign.
Yeah, it's getting there. Sometimes the best way to burn out a fire is to make it burn brighter and consume faster. Maybe. I don't know. I'd be a terrible park ranger.
-
-
