Game design, like systems design, is fascinating to certain crowds. So is etymology. Sarcasm, like poop jokes, is certainly fascinating to certain people too I'm sure.
I
could lay off of the sarcasm, so I guess I will.
If you're going to refer to someone's argument as dumb, do so while learning how to quote, spell and use grammar.
I will, however, invoke my right to typos. I'm also not going to abridge anything or lay off of the metaphors/similes/analogies.
I'm sorry that you do not understand game design fundamentals properly, nor understand that my statement very much is an argument. If that argument doesn't appeal to you, this is something you need to learn to cope with, I cannot actually help you here.
The argument doesn't appeal to me, because of how shallow it is. Any game can be reduced to 'perform action X for result Y'. That doesn't make
Tetris equal to
Super Meat Boy. Even as you get down to genre level and the set of actions becomes smaller, the basic fact that you do things isn't a particularly strong case for comparing games. Both the
Professor Layton series and
Deadly Rooms of Death series are based around solving puzzles. However, both games differ significantly.
It is also incredibly dismissive to suggest that 'twitch games' are the only games with true difficulty. Different games call for different skills, and the margin of error for applying those skills is generally how difficulty is calibrated. Take someone who is an expert at
Spelunky, and drop them into
Nethack. Success is not likely, as both games are quite different. (Of course, rouge-likes are not perhaps the best example of this, as knowledge gained over many plays is often important.)
Calm yourself, friend. Your argument here could be made without wall of text.
While brevity is the heart of wit, I'm going to write however much I feel is needed to express my point. Blame years of questions contain "show your working".
"Excessive" in this context is subjective. Can you understand that?
Sure. Although there's probably some limit 90% of the population will consider 'excessive'.
I would like more subcrafting in my minecraft mods, please. Why? Because I like building factories. Because (in some rare cases) it adds an element of realism. Because I like to say "this job that used to take 20 minutes now takes a fraction of a second."
While sub-crafting does provide an incentive to automate, I don't think it provides the best path towards it. Due to the structure of Minecraft, once you can automate some process, repeating it isn't that hard. One thing Gregtech does right (IMO) is provided a range of processes to automate. Even if you have a general solution, the particular solution for each problem will be different. (More processes also means that you have more combinations to build with. Unless you use AE, which moves most engineering problems into channel management.)
Straw man argument. Nobody said tedium was good. What's being discussed is whether the term applies. You think it does, and I'll allow that it may be tedious for you.
On a second look, you're right. Sorry for misreading your argument. Many pro-Gregtech related arguments tend to veer towards the 'well go play creative then' attitude, but you're fairly reasonable about this.
I on the other hand understand that it doesn't, because a massive playerbase wouldn't do something they find boring and monotonous.
This seems more of a statistical problem. Groups of people doing things generally involves that kind of thing.
{sic}
Oh, good, sarcastic insults from a forum kid. Ok.
Sorry about that too. It's another offshoot frustration about Minecraft modding. Sometimes people give the impression that they only play Minecraft, and they often seem to be the ones in the 'make things take longer' set of people. But that's an argument for another day.
