I like science fiction. I also like fantasy. In general, I enjoy taking the rules and turning them upside down. I love epics that recreate history and I enjoy new worlds where they play a balance between fiction and science using science and the general aspects of the unknown. I have times when I have to suspend my knowledge to accept older fantasy. Such is the case with "In Conquest Born" where they have a fertility problem. These days you'd just use surrogate and do DNA tests to make sure that people are pure of blood, but the book was written in the late eighties and there are allowances that must be made.
When I first logged into Eve I logged into a new world. I'd need to learn about it. What and where things were. Who people defined themselves as. A part of my mind was automatically assigned to the task of learning the game and learning the game was not just about technical things such as how to move my ship and firing guns. Learning the game was learning names and spaces. It is mispronouncing system names like I'm paid to do so. Now, I can discuss things with such comprehensive ease that I have to back up and make sure that I write them out in a way that someone not as familiar with the information could maintain a basic understanding.
But for some reason, "making sense" is the fall back argument for many, many things in Eve. From the first round of tiericide to suggestions on removing racial fuel types and general homogenization. It doesn't "make sense" is used. And, when I hear that I just stare. Not much makes sense. My avatar is an overly attractive immortal that submerged in a organic fluid that supports her metabolic functions as she interfaces with a spaceship as large as a city to run off and shot pirates in a place far from the birth of her origin species in space and time.
It is also used as a catch all for design decisions and game play that feels cumbersome and sub optimal. Yes, there are four racial fuel types. How does it not make sense? If I go to the gas station I have four fuel types of choose from. Does it not make sense because it involves having to make choices and move more things? Would a single type make things easier? Sure, but does it make it more sensible?
It's a thinner line then it seems. It is one of those wandering paths that leads wherever you take it. At the end of the day the game doesn't make sense. For some, spending their evening playing a game doesn't make sense. And it can expand out into infinity... but really we're rolling it back up into how ti relates to Eve.
To go back to the fuel example. An Amarr tower takes Amarr fuel blocks. That is understandable. If you tell someone unfamiliar with the mechanic they may not know what an Amarr but the relationship is easy to make. Now, An Amarr jump capable ship requires helium isotopes. That isn't directly intuitive but all Amarr jump capable ships require helium isotopes. Okay, there is a pattern that one can follow, learn, and understand. I don't need to know why. I don't need to understand what about jump technology means that they need isotopes. Nor would changing them from isotopes to gasoline cause jump fuel to 'make more sense'. In fact, we'd argue about gasoline vs petrol.
Of course, most things become understandable after a while. Missile names for instance are known by missile users. They are still a mystery to me. I understand the damage types through the colors. But, if I were to decide to use missiles I'd understand what missile did what without them needing them be toned down to thermal heavy missile. That's where I feel we sometimes get tied up in the argument of what does and does not make sense. Do we base things off of common, current vernacular of our day to day lives or do we use pattern recognition and consistency? How much does a fictional world come into play?
Maybe, I am to much the dreamer willing to sink into what is and work with it. I love the fictional aspects of the game. I didn't think that was odd but of late I've started to wonder if it is. Perhaps, fictional tastes have deviated and I've not caught up. It may just be that I'm still caught in my father's stacks of paperback novels from the 50s and 60s.