I took his argument to be a more detailed and skillfully take on the "CoG stories are not games and should not be sold as such… especially with his continually reliance on the consumer’s PoV.
But for the sake of your argument, I’d like to address a particular segment of his:
*bold is my bolding.
Crusader Kings (2) is both one of my favorite games and one that I am more familiar with then others both from the engine being a direct descendant/relation of the one my own failed game project developed. I’m going to break this quote down in light of working with a version of Paradox’s engine and working with Choicescript.
Let me make clear up front - each engine has its limitations. One of the major limitations of the Clausewitz engine is the limitation of the amount of text allowed in decisions and narratives. I personally have spent hours rewording things to fit in the allocated space allowed both in modding such and in working the failed game.
This in turn is a strength of the Choicescript engine. In one decision I can have 100, 1,000, or even 10,000 words.
In Crusader Kings 2, this is mitigated by including simple graphics and animations. Yet, if what is provided does not match the gamer’s imagination, there is often conflict within the Crusader King 2 consumer community. An example of such a controversy are the character portraits. Crusader Kings 2 has a rich library of ethnic, cultural, religious and “other” modifiers such as injuries or sickness that change the portrait shown shown representing a character.
This is important with the discussion at hand because Wraith_Magus specifically states a limitation is the character/mc descriptions in CS as an issue. If we objectively look at the Crusader Kings 2 experience (through the consumer’s eyes) we see segments, some more populated then others) that object to the characterization of the characters via portraits. From Norse portraits looking like potato headed toys, to the skin color of Greeks vs Persians vs Turks, there is almost a continuous discussion of that limitation of the engine not to portray the character as imagined.
In CS, the characterization is limited by the author/developer of the game, but because it is text-based and not as specific in its presentation, we can get away with more before the suspension of disbelief is broken.
In either case, the limitation is either emphasized by the inexperience or low ability of the developer. This is something that is constant in both engines and not something that differentiates them.
This is why I don’t accept the validity of using imagination as a beat-down stick as Wraith_Magus has.
Edit: Thanks for the spelling help @Spire … I can never remember spelling that name even though I’ve worked with that engine for years.