sylvie's Tests of Skill & related Bluesky conversation

[droqen]

sylvie's bluesky post (aka bleetskeet)
(contains link to sylvie's longer doc, "Tests of Skill")

[droqen]

[AB]

[droqen]

kinopio thoughtspace: https://kinopio.club/sylvies-tests-of-skill-Iswz8tROyVaKrreWSlQf2

[droqen]

1. Texture
[ A. (sylvie's claims, paraphrased)
Knytt lacks texture because there's no 'tests of skill'
Seiklus has texture because there ARE 'tests of skill' (patience, knowledge)
In Sylvie Lime and Funeral Song.., tests of skill mark certain areas as more dangerous or less dangerous (they add texture)
  B. (my response)
This is a positive outcome of adding tests of skill, but not a 'living' reason to add them in the first place. Without a solid reason-to-exist, I would label this as BAD -- but I didn't mean bad like don't notice and appreciate this, I meant bad like... it's a bad load-bearing pillar. The texturedness of test-laden space is beautiful, but does not provide the need to introduce tests of skill into the language of a work.
]

2. I fill platformer worlds with tests of skill almost reflexively
I simply agree with this point. Once you have controls and are designing levels, I understand the impulse to design levels that are interesting to navigate, and a major part of that interestingness we may call 'challenge'. Unlike 'texture' above, this is something that unfolds from the material itself. I would label this as GOOD!

3. Exploring a world requires knowledge, time, and effort.
[ A. (sylvie, quoted)
"Exploring a world requires knowledge, time, and effort. . . . To see something new, rather than mere patience, or the application of knowldge, you need to demonstrate . . ."
  B. (my response -- or, in this case, open question)
Sylvie's claim at the end of her article is missing something for me. Exploring a world... Is she saying that in order for an experience to feel like "exploring a world" that some tests of skill must be introduced? Or is it the other way around, where once a world has been built, there is no way to allow a player to explore it without the player's knowledge, time, and effort?
]

[droqen]

i'm very satisfied with sylvie's answer to my ever deeper question hole.

i asked, why create game-worlds for players to exist within?

sylvie wrote:

i don't really know how to answer because i like game worlds so much that it's like you're asking me "why create strawberry ice cream?" except it's something even better than ice cream that contains fragments of a human soul

i could theorize more but i feel that on some level it's simply true that existing is nice, whether it's in the real world or in a game-world. i'd like to remember this thought and this feeling.

strawberry ice cream.