>Minecraft's goals are paper thin, Finding the Ender Dragon, killing him, and getting the ending is thin? How many RPGs have you played in your life? >sims they're altogether non-existent. Depends which Sim. E.g. Roller Coaster Tycoon, SimTower, Simcity, some have goals, some don't. Key importance are rules and fun. >It's up to the player to impose their own goals and restrictions to turn them into games. You just regurgitated "fun" is relative, which it is. The issue is you don't have to follow rules to have fun, like watching a visual `novel` on a TV. It maybe an interactive experience, but there's no rules about a novel or TV broadcast, they are just "fun" to experience. >Meaningless subjective term that could describe practically anything someone likes. Ergo responding to your shit thread.
>The issue is you don't have to follow rules to have fun Exactly, which is why "I had fun" is a totally useless way to describe a game. Are you actually disagreeing with me on something? Why does this topic make you so grumpy anon?
>>7aeda9ddb4e78db00fdc I'm grumpy because your newfaggotry is showing. Instead of this discussing philosophical questions about what defines "games" we should already be in the punch line of knocked up who's the joke. What other games do you like than discussing philosophy?
Is there a game where you get to be the commander of a military base when someone put LSD in everyone's breakfast? I guess the object of the game would be to manage the chaos and anything can happen up to say, nuclear apocalypse?
Or maybe some sort of multiplayer format? You could assume a variety of roles in the game..?
Basically The Men Who Stare At Goats the videogame. Does this exist?