Gone Fishing…

I know these two guys. I used to work with them had an experience that reminded me of them the other day. It’s about fishing. These two guys both liked fishing, and they’d talk about it at work all the time. For the sake of argument, let’s call these two guys “Rob” and “Grady.” The important thing is that both of them enjoyed fishing or – at least – talking about fishing. To be fair, I never went fishing with them so I’m not able to say with complete certainty whether either of them ever actually made it to water… I’ll just assume they do.

Rob was the kind of guy who was always bringing in catalogs of the newest, greatest fishing stuff. He’d go on and on about new lures and special kinds of reels, new materials, basically, he was really into the “stuff” of fishing. He constantly argued about the value of all the fantastic devices and fish-finders, and things with Grady… He’d go on and on about how his way was awesome and how all the stuff made him a better fisherman. And he was always looking for a new place to fish – a new spot.

Grady on the other hand was more of a traditionalist. Grady liked his old boat, and the same old lake, and the same old rod, and basically, just a chance to get away from it all and sit in peace for a restful while, drink a beer, commune with nature.

I don’t think the comparison needs much more exploration (or explanation) because I’m sure it’s pretty clear how this links to gaming. I’m not saying if Rob or Grady has the right of it – just that it’s sure nice to know that we gamer-types are not alone in this kind of division of desires in our preferred style of approaching our pastime. And all of the long, drawn-out conversations between Rob and Grady were at least grudgingly respectful – and despite my occasional outbursts concerning the state of gaming forums – we can often say the same between gamers. Heck, most of us probably fall somewhere in the middle.

The part that got to me though? I’m not actually sure either of these two actually enjoy fishing… I mean, when they talk about fishing, neither one of them actually ever discussed actually catching fish. And I suppose if you are concentrating on the very “dictionary” definition of “fishing” (“to catch or attempt to catch a fish” – dictionary.com) then claiming that either one of them actually cared much about fishing becomes a more difficult point to prove.

And I suppose that’s what is really on my mind. What is it we are doing when we talk about our pastime? What is “the act of gaming” and how would we give a “dictionary” definition of it? Can we, should we, does it matter?

More important – to me – is the idea of what does it take to make a game? What do we really need to “game.” I have a huge library of gaming stuff. And those gaming supplies range from well-loved to barely touched. My wife has her own gaming library which is slowing growing , and we both trend toward different games even though we do have some areas of overlap. But what’s in a game?

It’s on my mind because I had decided, last year, to work on my own game – to create a diceless game to play with my friends which would give me the joy and freedom I get with Amber while not carrying the connotations of Amber in terms of setting, etc. But the longer I worked on it – and I had some ideas I was happy with – the more I kept finding myself asking the question, “does my game need this?” I kept coming back to that idea… how much “stuff” does the game need to remain consistently, mechanically interesting while also not surrendering the freeform enjoyment so prevalent in the style I want to achieve?

And I ultimately shelved my idea because I didn’t find an answer I was happy with. Now that I’ve walked away for a bit though, I find myself really wanting to finish what I started. But I still find myself asking…

What’s in a game?

About these ads

4 responses

  1. It took me a long time to come to the realization that a role playing game does not have to be state of the art in order to hold peoples’ attention. (Crunchy stuff tends to go unplayed or else to merely serve the back drop.) Another thing: role playing games don’t have to be universal or do all things well: it’s okay if it arbitrarily focuses on just one or two things while glossing over other games’ bread and butter.

  2. I think you answered your question without realizing it…
    If each fisherman in the story is communing/interfacing with nature in their own way (one with fancy gadgets with nature as an adversary, the other without and nature as the partner) then the analogy probably hods sway.

    Seek to understand how your system helps players commune and interface with “the game” and you’re on the right path.

    Personally I’m of the “teach a man to game rather than give the man a game” camp, but as your analogy demonstrates, to each their own.

  3. Thanks for the insight guys. Seriously – listening to your comments and thinking about something else that’s come up lately – I think I asked the wrong question.

    I do tend to prefer games that are “more universal” as opposed to “less universal” but that is just a preference.

    Kevin: I think you hit on the important point (and Jeffro too, in a way) that it really was the wrong question…

    Thanks again!

  4. [...] my last post was all about a fishing analogy… and as it turns out I feel as if I was definitely asking the wrong question. In that post I [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 227 other followers

%d bloggers like this: