coregames
Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Veldor ...But what computers have and will continue to do is make any sort of complex or even moderately complex boardgame impractical. A computer can do that just far too better. The focus can be on more fun elements than adding up factors, calculating bonuses, testing line of site, etc. We all like some of those things primarily for nostalgic reasons. But no one else will ever like them. So non-computer games are forced, by current nature, to be very very simplistic highly social games. Most of those style can be played just as easily around a TV screen pretty much proven by games like Scene-It. So even some of those will move towards less boardgame like versions. Don't necessarily like it myself either but reality is reality. There are reasons we no longer use carbon paper, typewriters, or hell even file cabinets in many companies and homes. Some things computers really can do better. And gaming is one of them. Like it or not The point you are making seems to be fueled by your misconception that computers will eventually dominate every aspect of our lives, just by virtue of their utility. I don't believe this to be true. You mention typewriters and filing cabinets, but you fail to mention fine art and sketch books, or accoustic instruments and songbooks. Digital art is a great field, but it will never replace oil painting or sculpture. I realize the power of computers, and their utility in gaming. The synergy I refer to in my original statement includes the use of computers in utilitarian support of a wider variety of gaming than they are now. A good example of this is "traditional" tabletop roleplaying, where the game mechanics can afford to be more complex if needed, if a computer handles any crunching or complex sorting of information. Big complex games like WiF or EiA can be enhanced by computers, using boards and counters or miniatures to provide personal over-the-table physical interaction along with depth and detail enhanced via computer support. I realize there is no going back in the use of gaming technology. I just feel that overly computer-centric views such as yours sell gaming short by limiting it. Non-computer gaming is still huge; perhaps your extended family and friends are not as representative as you suppose. I realize that most people aren't going to play monster simulations. Still, my experience is that many people play such games as chess, go, checkers, chinese checkers, and/or monopoly fairly often, and that many others do play such games occasionally. Yahtzee and poker are not board games, but Scrabble is. Don't just take my word for it. From about.com in August '03: http://boardgames.about.com/b/a/017474.htm or more recently ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Toys/story?id=216254&page=2 or, also recently on indystar.com: http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/200202-6481-062.html These are just samples of news that consistently supports the trend of dramatic growth in board gaming, despite the perception that computers are taking over. Finally, after looking at Mnemonic I believe some of those games could really benefit from the synergy to which I refer. Just one man's opinion on that one though.
< Message edited by coregames -- 12/30/2004 8:29:51 AM >
|