You know I’ve just realised that all the actual gameplay accounts from other gamers I’ve seen – they never talk about the outcome of play? Like, an actual result? Except perhaps in saying whether they ran a ‘proper’ game (whatever they mean by proper).
I think I’ve gotten into the happenings alot, but it’s because in a gamist sense, they were pretty unsatifactory to the outcome – okay, we talk alot, we roll some dice and pretty much when the GM wants us to pass, we do (or he has us roll again until we do) and when he doesn’t, we don’t. So if we ‘win’ it’s just up to him deciding that. Pretty unsatisfying outcome.
So I thought other people talked just of the goings on of play for similar reasons of some sort of disatisfaction.
But now I think perhaps that’s all they focus on – goings on, and goings on, and goings on, and goings on. Oh these days it has to be ‘the awesome’ and ‘the fun’, rather than games that have goings on that drag on for eternity, but it’s still ‘awesome’ goings on that drag on for eternity.
I think nar can have a result, though each person at the table might come to their own seperate conclusion on the moral quandries presented, they come to a conclusion/a result/an end….like books do. And gamism is more fundimental – win or lose.
It’s perhaps simulationsim that has no result to talk about. Oh, you can ‘stuff up playing the game properly’, but that’s not a result of play, that’s a failure to play at all.
And I see alot of people just talking about the goings on, more goings on, and so forth, ad nauseum…
Mind you, as I said, I’ve often spoken about the goings on, so perhaps I appear the same? But it was always with the eye towards an end result more satisfying that ‘mother may I win?’