Well, yes and no. I get the most out of those meetups when new people show up, and unfortunately, lately, there just hasn’t been much of that, but I can write that off as being Summer and all.

Never give up. Never say die!

But yeah, I know what you mean, no biggie…

Cheers,
J.

Anyways, I’ve given up.

I enjoy most games I play, GM or GM’less, and I don’t go about pointing fingers; it’s the same as I used to say, not too long ago, that D&D was not “real rpg”, because it tended heavily on the “game” side; of course it’s a rpg, it’s as much rpg as MLwM or Exalted, only it’s played differently from others. No biggie.

he said that it was fun, but once again it wasn’t a real roleplaying game. [...] he ensured me that it wasn’t a value judgment

This one I particularly revile. Of course it is a value judgement, and in my mind, it happens to be a particularly insidious one.

why would I be interested in if a game holds up to someone else’s limited view on roleplaying or not?

This, on the other hand, is ultimately the right response, although there are some limitations attached. Namely, it gets hard to have real conversations about role-playing with these people, because you just can’t get through the unbased assumptions. As for conversations about game design, that’s just outright impossible.

Which is an interesting connundrum when you have these conversations in the bosom of, say, a monthly role-players meetup, wherein virtually all conversation is about gaming, in one form or another.

For instance:

Gamer 1: I like the way Game X does this or that;
Gamer 2: Yeah, I like Game Y’s approach, blah blah;
Me: Or, Game Z does this and that;
Gamers 1 & 2: <blank stare> wait, that makes no sense, what about the GM?
Me: Oh, Game Z is GMless;
Gamers 1 & 2: <blank stare again> that’s not a role-playing game;
Me: <my turn to do the blank stare> …

Sigh…

Cheers,
J.