It’s actually one of the cleanest, most direct analogies I’ve ever used. Both are curated experiences with controlled visual, auditory, and interactive elements. The differences lie only in the physical/resource limitations each has for the kinds of experiences they can include.
Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Not only is this wrong, but it’s also nonsensical. It is nonsensical because these are massive elements of each experience and why accommodating preferences in one is far easier than the other. Its also wrong because most museum experiences with interaction absolutely have the option to skip parts of said interactions.
The other reason this is wrong, is that these are certainly not the only areas differences lie in, as museums aim to preserve history, and are therefore locked in content wise from that perspective, what with the physical artifacts and care for that. Games are not at all that.
The whole analogy is terrible.
Sunsofold@lemmings.world 3 days ago
Tell me you’ve never tried to code a complex interactive experience without telling me you’ve never tried to code a complex interactive experience. If you think it’s so easy to take every element of a highly complex, performance sensitive program and make it possible to pick and choose which ones you experience without breaking the whole experience or turning a 1 year project into a 10 year project, go ahead and try. Do you also ask movie directors to make their movies so that when you hit ‘skip scene’ because you don’t like the way the scene looks, it still makes a good movie?
That’s just your failure to understand there are more kinds of museum than a history museum. A history museum does have special work involved, but others don’t share that element. Perhaps you’ve heard of an art museum, sometimes also known as a gallery. They can contain all sorts of elements, audio, video, scent, touch, taste, human interaction, machine interaction, ludic interaction, whatever. The artifacts can be any age, with art from hundreds of years ago or being created in the moment via performance.
The analogy is a failure, to be sure, but only because I hadn’t considered the possibility you wouldn’t have that piece of common knowledge. Now that you do have that knowledge, though, if you can’t see the analogy, that’s on you.
Credibly_Human@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I actually have, and have worked on multi person teams doing such.
Its why this line of argument rings so hollow.
Even if I didn’t, I could obviously point to the many games that do have levels of granularity like this, and are completely successful at it.
See, this is what is called the most blatant strawman argument I have ever seen. It is so obviously so far removed from anything I’ve suggested its laughable on its face.
Yet another nonsensical analogy for obvious reasons. You wouldn’t need this obviously badly fitting analogies if your POV had merit.
What movies don’t let you skip past some scenes based on what you’d like? I very frequently speed up/skip parts in movies that move too slow, or even rewatch parts that I miss. Its most definitely an additive part of the experience.
All museums do what I am talking about. Your pedantry about it being more than history does not at all change the merit of the point made.
Except that the literal only thing you could point out that was wrong with my critcism of it, was pedantic and had no effect on the effectiveness of the point.
Being stubborn is a virtue to you I suppose.
Sunsofold@lemmings.world 2 days ago
Alright, I gave you the knowledge and you don’t want to integrate it, so it’s on you now. Have fun lying to yourself.