Bottom post of the previous page:
Or it least it feels that way sometimes, right?It feels like the new features and balances are all so bad in comparison to the vibe we had back in the day.
It feels like all the sprites are worse, we say they have lost souls.
It feels like policy is more convoluted and unreasonable than it used to.
It feels like the maps are worse.
It feels like the community is divided.
It feels like there is less roleplay.
It feels like there is more rulebreaking.
But yet here we are, each step along the way a seeming improvement from how the game was 1, 3, 5, 10, 20 odd years ago.
Its probably nostalgia right? When you first started playing the game you felt so much new wonder and enjoyment, and you project that wonder and enjoyment to the community, policy, and code of that time.
But why is it so dominating? Should we not be able to recognize genuine improvements?
But then I start to think, do pure improvements even exist?
Runechat comes to mind as a feature that is overwhelmingly supported by players, and why wouldn't you? It makes it easy to see exactly who is talking around you, it lets you keep your eyes on the screen instead of the text in the log, what's not to like?
But there is always an argument to make that something was lost. The focus on the chat window for communication gave the game a very unique feel, like an AOL messenger. It was like the chat was the brain of your character and you could see into all of their deepest perceptions. You might argue that the actual letters themselves detract from the games artstyle, which is an entirely subjective thing.
Now does this mean we should through out runechat? No, not by my opinion, the benefits are staggering to the flow of the game and ease of communication. But does that make these criticism against it invalid? I don't think so either.
Perhaps there is a layer here that is deeper than nostalgia, we all came here because this game attracted us, and it attracted us in the state it was when we came here. And when the game changes, it can feel like "its lost the plot," or "its going away from what space station 13 should be"
But the truth is, we were attracted to this game for different reasons, and we all have different opinions on what it should be. No one is "correct" really about what direction this game should go in, and we are all scrabbling among each other to push our message for what ss13 should be, which is probably based on whatever reason we got attracted to the game in the first place, which is also based on what the server was like when we started playing.
If someone was very conflict adverse user who thinks that no one should ever have to die or get round removed if they don't want to, because their version of ss13 doesn't contain being at risk of being unable to play, there's not much you can do to convince them. It doesn't matter how many times you say "the game is punishing by design," or "the weight of death adds to the fear and paranoia," or "this is a storytelling game and sometimes you are the victim in the story," those will never be convincing arguments to them. And you should also note that liking punishing game design, fear and paranoia, and telling a dramatic story are all also matters of opinion.
It's pure opinion, this isn't an ethical debate, its not an argument over the meaning of statistics, it is only about what we personally value in ss13.
How the hell are we supposed to agree on anything
