1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

But NPE in the context of X-wing has a clearly understood, different meaning: frustrating or boring an opponent because of your actions and components within the boundaries of the game design. And more specifically, one of the most common if not the main or only cause of NPEs is the removal of agency from your opponent. Smell, temper, attitude or cheating are outside of the game itself and sure as heck have nothing to do with what is meant by NPE.

I disagree - to a point.

Most everything you said Gold Sqdn pointed out are indeed Negative Play Experiences. Most of my own NPEs are based on human interactions, not the list they brought. The ones I'm not sure of are simply because I don't have context but assume Gold Sqdn meant what I think they meant.

Now, a list in the X-Wing game containing components that make the game unenjoyable are certainly NPEs, just not the only one.

3 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

I disagree - to a point.

Most everything you said Gold Sqdn pointed out are indeed Negative Play Experiences. Most of my own NPEs are based on human interactions, not the list they brought. The ones I'm not sure of are simply because I don't have context but assume Gold Sqdn meant what I think they meant.

Now, a list in the X-Wing game containing components that make the game unenjoyable are certainly NPEs, just not the only one.

Interesting. I believe that NPE in the context of Xwing is pretty much exclusively used for game design/balance discussions.

As @viedit said, the other kind are negative playER experiences. Of course those are negative experience of play - the same words - but not NPEs.

Even if you are right, which is very well possible, the timing is very odd. The current discussion at large is about NPEs with respect to game design/balance. Why talk about player behavior now and implicitly claim a context that is not there?

10 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

I disagree - to a point.

Most everything you said Gold Sqdn pointed out are indeed Negative Play Experiences. Most of my own NPEs are based on human interactions, not the list they brought. The ones I'm not sure of are simply because I don't have context but assume Gold Sqdn meant what I think they meant.

Now, a list in the X-Wing game containing components that make the game unenjoyable are certainly NPEs, just not the only one.

While all true, end of 1.0 was a miserable play experience, while all the players were great.

They're separate and distinct issues.

7 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

While all true, end of 1.0 was a miserable play experience, while all the players were great.

They're separate and distinct issues.

To be fair, most NPEs are separate and distinct issues.

And I totally agree about 1.0

12 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

The current discussion at large is about NPEs with respect to game design/balance. Why talk about player behavior now and implicitly claim a context that is not there?

And this seems to be the key question. You're not wrong that most complaints of NPEs are list/game based. I'm not at all sure what brought up the conversation from Gold Sqdn. I could guess, but that hardly seems fair and would likely be incorrect anyway.

2 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

And this seems to be the key question. You're not wrong that most complaints of NPEs are list/game based. I'm not at all sure what brought up the conversation from Gold Sqdn. I could guess, but that hardly seems fair and would likely be incorrect anyway.

It's just definitions. It's useful to delineate between unfun game mechanics and things outside the game that ruin fun, even though both have the same outcome. Doesn't make either less legitimate, just (sounds like) somebody missed a memo on the definition of "negative play experience" being used on the forums.

If I ask for a pie recipe, you're not wrong to suggest a mincemeat pie, it's just not what I meant and we had different assumptions about what the other was referring to.

language is quite hard turns out, kudos to whoever thought of it first it's a real winning idea

But I want to have an endless self-indulgent exploration of semantics instead of having a good faith discussion of the subject you brought up! /s

41 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Most everything you said Gold Sqdn pointed out are indeed Negative Play Experiences. Most of my own NPEs are based on human interactions, not the list they brought.

You had bad games, or bad opponents, and unenjoyable games because of those. An unenjoable game is not the definition of an X-Wing NPE. In X-Wing, an NPE is baked into the design components of a list: TripUps is an NPE.

The first time I even heard NPE, it was in a private forum discussion with the developers of X-Wing. They know what an NPE is. I haven't listened to Gold Squadron's take on it yet, so I'm hesitant to rush to condemn it, but on the other hand I trust GreenDragoon's take, so ...

It starts at 22:10. The episode is called 'Negative Experiences', so not NPE.

22:48 Dion says 'negative interactions at a table', again not NPE

I am quite sure I have heard NPE. I will update if I come across it, but I might have messed up here

edit: Negative play experience is mentioned several times after 36:19

1 minute ago, Jeff Wilder said:

You had bad games, or bad opponents, and unenjoyable games because of those. An unenjoable game is not the definition of an X-Wing NPE. In X-Wing, an NPE is baked into the design components of a list: TripUps is an NPE.

The first time I even heard NPE, it was in a private forum discussion with the developers of X-Wing. They know what an NPE is. I haven't listened to Gold Squadron's take on it yet, so I'm hesitant to rush to condemn it, but on the other hand I trust GreenDragoon's take, so ...

While I'll disagree on the definition and where to restrict the boundaries, it's a pointless conversation in the grand scheme of things and a silly argument to be having.

I'm admittedly more curious about the 'why' than the 'what' in this case.

36:19 is Negative Play Experience mentioned and defined as 'playing a game that is supposed to be fun but is no longer fun'

lesson learned, anyway

36 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

But I want to have an endless self-indulgent exploration of semantics instead of having a good faith discussion of the subject you brought up! /s

The reason I'm bothered is that much of the negative sides of xwing discussions are due to misunderstandings. Genuinely different views are interesting, but it is not interesting to argue semantics - as you point out.

But for that that we should not change the meanings of words. Somewhen down the line we will see an unnecessary argument about the meaning of NPE because one of the largest podcasts used it with a new meaning. We already see the misunderstand of NPE for 'OP', which is also rather frustrating

13 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

The reason I'm bothered is that much of the negative sides of xwing discussions are due to misunderstandings. Genuinely different views are interesting, but it is not interesting to argue semantics - as you point out.

But for that that we should not change the meanings of words. Somewhen down the line we will see an unnecessary argument about the meaning of NPE because one of the largest podcasts used it with a new meaning. We already see the misunderstand of NPE for 'OP', which is also rather frustrating

It's usually both easier and more useful to just give up on the word and use a new one instead, than to try and crusade to protect its meaning.

37 minutes ago, svelok said:

It's usually both easier and more useful to just give up on the word and use a new one instead, than to try and crusade to protect its meaning.

I don't disagree, but I reserve the right to call out and resent the misuse of an established and useful concept.

23 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I don't disagree, but I reserve the right to call out and resent the misuse of an established and useful concept.

Right! It literally chaps my *****!

3 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

The recent goldsquadronpodcast episode is... interesting. Has anyone listened to it yet?

Gsp is useful because they take whatever the mynocks said and talk about it at the level of the general community.

Mynocks are good because they take whatever the krayts said and try to say it more politely.

Krayts are awful because they (typically) say the right thing but in such an antagonistic manner that no one listens.

186th is great because instead of hot takes they release a nuanced discussion, it just comes out a month after everyone else is done talking about it.

45 minutes ago, svelok said:

It's usually both easier and more useful to just give up on the word and use a new one instead, than to try and crusade to protect its meaning.

I propose BDE. Bad Design Experience. To focus on the fact that it's the design issues causing the bad experience. Also so I can say "Fat Han had BDE all over him"

17 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Right! It literally chaps my *****!

Angry reacts when?

49 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I don't disagree, but I reserve the right to call out and resent the misuse of an established and useful concept.

Like when someone means "This raises the question..." but they say or write "This begs the question..." which is an entirely different established and useful category of fallacy.

I know someone somewhere decided that since enough people were doing this it became legit, but...no. Don't, please.

23 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Gsp is useful because they take whatever the mynocks said and talk about it at the level of the general community.

Mynocks are good because they take whatever the krayts said and try to say it more politely.

Krayts are awful because they (typically) say the right thing but in such an antagonistic manner that no one listens.

186th is great because instead of hot takes they release a nuanced discussion, it just comes out a month after everyone else is done talking about it.

OCX is great because they drink and shoot the **** while talking about XWing.

9 minutes ago, RStan said:

OCX is great because they drink and shoot the **** while talking about XWing.

OCX is great at reminding me of all the times I had to babysit drunk people in college.

3 minutes ago, Clutterbuck said:

Like when someone means "This raises the question..." but they say or write "This begs the question..." which is an entirely different established and useful category of fallacy.

I know someone somewhere decided that since enough people were doing this it became legit, but...no. Don't, please.

Yeah. Linguistic drift is gonna happen, and I ain't got no problem with it. But when something conveys legitimately useful information, and that useful information is lost because people are too lazy to figure out actual meaning, it really bugs me. And, ironically, it's often because the speaker is trying to appear educated. Yous is a perfect example: People have heard educated people use "begs the question." They've misunderstood the meaning, but because they want to appear educated and feel smart, they mimic the words. Drives me batshit.

I personally despair over the erosion of proper use of "bring" and "take." The right choice of word there can convey an immense amount of geographic and even temporal information. With one word. And there's no way to otherwise convey that lost information when people use "bring" as the default, except by significantly increasing the verbiage.

It also annoys me when people justify their ignorant use of language by pointing to the dictionary. But that's not entirely their fault, at least; we're improperly trained during elementary school that the dictionary tells us the "correct" meaning of words, when actually what it does is simply tell us how people are using words ... including when enough dumb people are using them incorrectly.

1 hour ago, jagsba said:

I propose BDE. Bad Design Experience. To focus on the fact that it's the design issues causing the bad experience. Also so I can say "Fat Han had BDE all over him"

I have nothing better. These are all very specific on negatively affecting agency

LEC: Linear(izing) Effect Combination

ADC: Agency Decreasing Combination

ARC: Agency Removing Combination

SAD: Strong Agency Decreaser/Destroyer

BAD: Build of Agency Decrease

NAE: Negative Agency Experience

say it like 'nay' 😂

6 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I have nothing better [than BDE].

Just in case you don't know, BDE has a current (probably ephemeral) meaning in the States: "Big D!ck Energy." It's offered as the, ah, explanation for how a goofball like Pete Davidson has hooked up with both Ariana Grande and Kate Beckinsale in short succession.

1 minute ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Just in case you don't know, BDE has a current (probably ephemeral) meaning in the States: "Big D!ck Energy." It's offered as the, ah, explanation for how a goofball like Pete Davidson has hooked up with both Ariana Grande and Kate Beckinsale in short succession.

Thanks, I did not know. That is pretty funny and means that yes, I don't have anything better!