Creative Director
|
My opinion - I find your editorial judgment with respect to Wil Save deeply flawed and I find your two-faced pronouncements on the subject offensive.
Something to keep in mind: When someone continues to post insulting comments on message boards, please don't be surprised when those at the opposite end of the insulting threads react with some measure of anger or frustration. Put another way... if you can't handle being offended, maybe you shouldn't spend so much time and energy being offensive.
If Erik's pronouncements on that one thread were offensive, think about how offensive the dozens, if not hundreds of posts on the "Failed Wil Save" thread are to Wil. And by extension, Erik, myself, and everyone else here at Paizo, since the Wil Save column was our idea, not Wil's. Imagine Erik's single "offensive" post reworded and repeated hundreds of times, and you'll get an idea of what the "Failed Wil Save" thread's been like to read for us over the past several months.
And that's all I have to say about that, without treading further into "offensive" posts. Aside from: I hope we can just let this whole thing go and start to focus on the magazine's other 100 or so pages.
|
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I particularly like the change in tone when you are addressing different audiences; you didn't call the posters here "whiners" to their face but did so on EN World where pro-Wil Save sentiments were being expressed. How "politically astute," or not, as people don't just read the Paizo boards.
I will happily say it here. Many of the people who posted negative comments about Wil Save in the Wil Save thread, including Yamo and AESO, are whiners (at least within the context of their posted opinions on Wil Save). They whined about the column so much, in fact, that their whining was a major factor in Wil's decision to drop the column.
There is no way anyone can seriously look at that thread and proclaim that a huge part of what was going on there was anything but whining.
Yamo even agreed, a few posts above, that he whined. Those who whine are whiners.
Pretty much the end of the story, as far as I'm concerned.
My opinion - I find your editorial judgment with respect to Wil Save deeply flawed and I find your two-faced pronouncements on the subject offensive.
Clearly you find several elements of my editorial judgment, as well as the judgment of other members of our editorial art art teams, "deeply flawed." Your posts on the subject of the magazine and the magazine's staff's flaws seem to show up like clockwork about every couple of weeks.
That's fine. You're welcome to your opinon, and sometimes you're right.
Everyone is welcome to their opinons, and to share them. Throughout the whole "Failed Wil Save" fiasco, several well-intentioned people suggested that I just close down that thread, especially to protect the ego of one of my writers.
That's not the way I do business, and it's not going to happen. You're free to post whatever you want to these message boards, provided it's not vulgar or inflammatory. That's what they're here for.
But many, many of the posters in the 500+ post "Failed Wil Save" thread were whining, and people who whine are whiners.
--Erik Mona
Editor-in-Chief
Dragon & Dungeon
My opinion - I find your editorial judgment with respect to Wil Save deeply flawed and I find your two-faced pronouncements on the subject offensive.
My opinions:
Erik -- I find your editorial judgment with respect to Wil Save somewhat flawed and I find your two-faced pronouncements on the subject sweet!
I don't particularly care for Wil's column, and if it's replaced with a Map of Mystery then Dungeon gets a little better and more useful for me. As for being two-faced, I'm surprised by the brusqueness of some of your replies to potential customers on these boards, but those instances are often when someone harps endlessly about something you cannot or will not change. You seem to be polite up to a reasonable point, but when someone or something pushes you past that point you're not afraid to say what you feel needs to be said. I respect that. And "whiner" is a pretty tame label considering some of the things said about Wil in that other thread.
GVD -- I'm pretty sure Erik isn't saying that everyone who voiced an opinion that they didn't like Wil Save or would rather see something more game-related on that page is a "whiner." I think that's for those who voiced their opinion once, twice, a million times, replied to every post that said something positive about the column, returned every month to "critique" the latest lame Wil Save, etc. ad nauseum.
If you've been reasonable and polite in your criticisms of Wil and his column, you're not a whiner.
That having been said...your above post comes across as a little whiny ;)
I will happily say it here. Many of the people who posted negative comments about Wil Save in the Wil Save thread, including Yamo and AESO, are whiners (at least within the context of their posted opinions on Wil Save). They whined about the column so much, in fact, that their whining was a major factor in Wil's decision to drop the column.
You know, being called a whiner doesn't bother me. I saw my self as an outspoken critic. If you disagree I'm a whiner, If you agree I'm the guy who tells it as it is. Whatever. It isn't going to make me abandon these boards where I can freely shaire my thoughts on a truly great Magazine! Man, I'll tell you what. DUNGEON is the best magazine out there. I'll wait at my mailbox hoping that the postman brings it. Maybe I should have begun each post in that thread with "IMHO". I'll tell anyone that DUNGEON is great. I'll also state that I did not like Wil Save at all. I'm glad it is gone. Once Erik explained why it was in the magazine, I quit calling for it to be removed. But I still felt that I should comment on problems I saw. Some people agreed. Some did not. I'm glad Wil scaned the thread. I'm saddened that he was not able to play and comment on D&D. I think there are probably loads of other, more suitable places for future Wil Save articles, and if it had first appeared in DRAGON or another 'Gaming' magazine, I wouldn't have voiced any opposition. I'm not calling for a Wil Save revival, but I am surprised that Wil's skin is so thin that the thread I started scared him off.
ASEO out
And I promise this will be my last post on this thread.
While I understand that the criticism posted on these boards wasn't the main cause Wil quit his column I think it's sad that it had any kind of influence at all. Fair enough, people have the right to voice their opinion about a product they are paying for, but in my opinion much of the criticism expressed in the Failed Wil Save thread was more of a witch hunt staged by a select few rather than the general opinion of the subscribers.
In any case I think it's sad to see Wil's column go, since I as a 30-something gamer finding it harder and harder to make time for my hobby could relate to what he was writing. That's one of the reasons I'm subscribing to Dungeon (another is that it's a damn fine magazine), that I can't find time to write my own adventures. I sure hope no one decides to mount a campaign against that section of the magazine.
In any case, I hope you find someone else to write a nice closing column for the magazine. As someone else wrote in this thread, Wil Save was the only piece, other than Eric's editorial, that I consistently read in the magazine.
"Uninspired?" Hmmmm.
Yes, uninspired. There are a lot of people around here who seem to be completely bereft of original ideas, and without pregenerated adventures aren't capable of running a game. To me, premade adventures are a crutch -- a handy one at times, and valuable, but really only useful for when the DM doesn't have time to put his or her own ideas down on paper. If a DM can't create their own adventures -- let alone NPCs, monsters, spells, etc -- then they have no business being a DM.
I can't claim to know why most people buy Dungeon but it is advertised as a source for adventures - a DMs resource. That's fluff _and_ crunch.
Yep. Fluff _and_ crunch. As in both. As in, not completely crunch, which is what the magazine is close to.
I suspect that most people buy Dungeon for the adventures and secondarily for those elements they can "harvest" for their own campaigns - which includes fluff and crunch.
I would disagree here. Dungeon has a circulation of, what, 20,000? (I'm guessing here.) I'd be surprised if even half of the people who buy the magazines actually run the adventures in them. I know I've heard it a lot, especially from people who've only recently come back to the magazines after a hiatus... A lot of people (like me) buy the magazine to tear it all into its component pieces and use bits of it for inspiration and guidance for our own ideas. I'll probably never run an intact Dungeon adventure. Not because they're not cool, but because they'll never quite fit with my campaign world, and with the story arcs that I've got going. I'm certainly not alone in doing that. And there are people who buy the magazine strictly as entertainment -- they buy it to read through it and enjoy the adventures and other material, yet will never put any of it to use.
You speak of the Dungeon's "direction." I suggest that there is only one "direction" that matters to Paizo - sales. I further suggest that, given the magazine's historic and advertised orientation, there is only one "direction" that will impact sales - utility to DMs. Wil Save had no utility.
Wil Save had no utility to *you*. It had plenty of utility to me, and to a lot of other people. Should I say that Maps of Mystery are useless crap just because I don't like them or see the use for them?
And if you think this is wailing and gnashing my teeth, go read the anti-Wil Save threads. 12 pages of material 75% devoted to hating Wil Save, in often unflattering terms. When we reach 12 pages on this thread, then you can complain about people whining.
The argument used by the anti-Wil Save people all along was, "I'm just trying to provide my suggestions for ways to improve the magazine." Well, I'm doing the same thing. And what I'm saying is, the magazine was *improved* by Wil Save. I agree with Wil's decision not to continue writing it for now (hopefully he'll return someday) but I want something like it in its place.
To suggest that Wil Save pointed in a "direction" that should now be repeated is to court disaster, IMO.
Really? Because from what I remember, Erik said that the consensus on staff at Paizo was that Wil Save increased readership. Hardly "courting disaster", that. Especially considering that Wil Save was part of the "direction" that virtually everybody seems to approve of. They disliked that one component, but the rest of the magazine keeps being celebrated, so I'd have to say that the direction is just fine.
"There are a lot of people around here who seem to be completely bereft of original ideas, and without pregenerated adventures aren't capable of running a game."
This is just totally off-the-wall. How do you know anyone here well enough to come to this conclusion?
There are a lot of people around here who seem to be completely bereft of original ideas, and without pregenerated adventures aren't capable of running a game. To me, premade adventures are a crutch -- a handy one at times, and valuable, but really only useful for when the DM doesn't have time to put his or her own ideas down on paper. If a DM can't create their own adventures -- let alone NPCs, monsters, spells, etc -- then they have no business being a DM.
I've got news for you otter... just because you have the ability to write good adventures doesn't make you a good DM, neither does the fact that you can't write a good adventure make you a bad DM. I've played with DM's who made up their own worlds and wrote their adventures from scratch, but who where terrible DM's. On the other hand, some of the best times I've had roleplaying where with DM's using premade adventures.
|
One of the things I don't like about the internet is how it gives the "haters" a big voice. Someone can spend days/weeks/months crafting an adventure/novel/column out on the market for us to enjoy or not enjoy. But the "haters" only take a few seconds to type out "it suxxOr3d" on a message board and all their ilk pile on with "me, too." Before the internet, at least you had to talk someone into giving you a job before you reviewed something.
I really despise how it is currently cool in fan boy circles to get online and malign and tear down. I think the "haters" were partially responsible for the demise of the televison series Enterprise, which is a shame because it was a great offering. And, for crying out loud, it kept sci-fi on television. Ain't It Cool News is another example. Whenever the site owner likes a movie, he instantly gets accused (graphically and obscenely, sometimes) of being in the studio's back pocket. Anyone remember the old Everquest message boards? The internet has done great things for society, but there is bad along with the good. It makes the voice of the small-minded and mean-spirited as loud as the voice of reason. Contrary to some conventional wisdom, everyone IS NOT a critic.
I read Wil Save first every month. I also read Wil's blog. He writes well, and the column resonated with an employed, middle class college graduate parent who doesn't live in his mother's basement. Keep on complaining, haters. Maybe we'll get some of those wonderful Polyhedron columns back.
If "pregenerated adventures" are not what you want, you need to either a) look for a gaming periodical that better suits your needs or b) understand that you are an abberational purchaser.
I'm looking for something that'll make it easier for me to run a game, and provide some entertainment as well. I'd say I'm not unique in that respect -- in fact, like I've said, I really doubt that the majority of readers actually use the adventures intact. Many of us buy the magazine for the adventures, but without any intention of using them. I obviously don't have the numbers -- I'd bet even Paizo doesn't, actually -- but I'd guess that at least 50% of Dungeon readers buy the magazine primarily for inspiration, and if an adventure happens to be particularly well-suited to their campaign, they'll use it.
I view the adventures in Dungeon as the D&D equivalent of source code for a sample application. If I want to see how a particular function call works, I could look at the reference material, but that often doesn't explain what exactly is going on, or the best way to use it. On the other hand, if I find sample code that uses the function (or class, or whatever) I can see it in the context of a complete application, providing me with a more full understanding of what I'm trying to do and suitable ways to do it. Well, in the same way, the adventures in Dungeon provide me with excellent examples of ways to accomplish things. The raw material is already there in the source books, but seeing it put to use helps me to use it better in my own adventures.
I hardly think I'm unique in using Dungeon this way. Hell, how often do you think Keith Barker was able to use Dungeon adventures intact in his homebrew? ;-) It doesn't meant that people like me aren't buying the magazine for the adventures -- if anything, we're even *more* interested in the adventures than someone who's just planning to run one, rather than analyse and deconstruct it.
Jesse Decker, former editor of Dragon, once said to me, "Messageboards are where you go to be unhappy." That's true from the audiences/fans/critics' perspective, and also from the POV of a creator trying to get feedback. It's a craven environment. People mouth off relentlessly on gaming boards, sports boards, automotive boards; what have you. Anonymity is a powerful thing. As a fragile and controversial, yet narcissistic Dungeon contributor, I can't help checking the already negatively spun "Is Downer a Downer?" thread. To my fans I say, "Wow, thanks. A little positive feedback goes a long way." To the Downer haters I say, "#@$ you little #$%$$#@s. I'm not going anywhere regardless of what you think, so &^%$ it! Hahahahahahah, I'm getting paid to contribute to Dungeon, and you (mostly) are not. So again, &^%$ it!" I invite my critics to be as rude to me when they see me in con, as they often are on the boards. Frankly, I assume these punters are, like, 12 years old, so I could probably take 'em. Remember that I'm usually drunk, especially at cons.
My heart goes out to Wil, but you have to take the Boards with a grain of salt. You can't let the little buggers smell fear. Anyone worth their salt works in the industry already, or will soon, and is more sensative abound criticism. It's incredibly easy for me to blow off loud mouths. People are trying to be funny and get attention. Professionals are, well, more professional.
To the Downer haters I say, "#@$ you little #$%$$#@s. I'm not going anywhere regardless of what you think, so &^%$ it! Hahahahahahah, I'm getting paid to contribute to Dungeon, and you (mostly) are not. So again, &^%$ it!"
Are you allowed to say "&^%$ it!" on the boards? #$%&, I said &^%$! &^%$, I said - Ahhh, "&^%$ it....
And Kyle, Downer needs its own campaign setting source book. I love it.
GGG
"People mouth off relentlessly on gaming boards, sports boards, automotive boards; what have you. Anonymity is a powerful thing."
And a valuable one. You at least know that the feedback you get here is always honest. At a con, who's going to tell you if they think your comic is awful? Who wants to start a scene with a stranger in a public place? Maybe the stranger's crazy or just doesn't take criticism well and will rant and rave at the top of his lungs, try to pimp slap you, etc. No, instead, if somebody doesn't like your work, they'll probably just mutter "Oh, yeah. Downer. That's cool. That's cool."
The people that do love it won't be nearly as reserved, but they obviously doesn't represent a balanced, fully-representative sample.
The only bad criticism is the one that's never offered. The internet is good for that, I think. I'd rather at least know who dislikes my work and why, rather than have them keep their mouthes shut and keep me in the dark about what they really think for the sake of politeness.
To the Downer haters I say, "#@$ you little #$%$$#@s. I'm not going anywhere regardless of what you think, so &^%$ it! Hahahahahahah, I'm getting paid to contribute to Dungeon, and you (mostly) are not. So again, &^%$ it!"Are you allowed to say "&^%$ it!" on the boards? #$%&, I said &^%$! &^%$, I said - Ahhh, "&^%$ it....
GGG
5,000 posts!!!
A Milestone indeed, though unrelated to this particular thread. . . Great Green God has posted the 5,000th post on the Dungeon General Discussion messageboards. I think that the content above should be reprinted in the next issue of Dungeon to advertise the messageboards.
5,000 posts, baby!
^$%#-ing A! Let's see it again!!
To the Downer haters I say, "#@$ you little #$%$$#@s. I'm not going anywhere regardless of what you think, so &^%$ it! Hahahahahahah, I'm getting paid to contribute to Dungeon, and you (mostly) are not. So again, &^%$ it!"Are you allowed to say "&^%$ it!" on the boards? #$%&, I said &^%$! &^%$, I said - Ahhh, "&^%$ it....
GGG
LOL!!
A viciously vocal minority did not kill Wil Save.
A victorious vocal minority did.
To the Downer haters I say, "#@$ you little #$%$$#@s. I'm not going anywhere regardless of what you think, so &^%$ it! Hahahahahahah, I'm getting paid to contribute to Dungeon, and you (mostly) are not. So again, &^%$ it!"Are you allowed to say "&^%$ it!" on the boards? #$%&, I said &^%$! &^%$, I said - Ahhh, "&^%$ it....
GGG
5,000 posts!!!
A Milestone indeed, though unrelated to this particular thread. . . Great Green God has posted the 5,000th post on the Dungeon General Discussion messageboards. I think that the content above should be reprinted in the next issue of Dungeon to advertise the messageboards.
5,000 posts, baby!
^$%#-ing A! Let's see it again!!
To the Downer haters I say, "#@$ you little #$%$$#@s. I'm not going anywhere regardless of what you think, so &^%$ it! Hahahahahahah, I'm getting paid to contribute to Dungeon, and you (mostly) are not. So again, &^%$ it!"Are you allowed to say "&^%$ it!" on the boards? #$%&, I said &^%$! &^%$, I said - Ahhh, "&^%$ it....
GGG
LOL!!
Thanks Chris, I couldn't have done it without you. And I want to thank all the little people who posted basically the same thing over and over again like 500 times on that one thead. Without you guys this would not have been possible. Thanks.
Respectfully,
GGG
Uhhh, what did I win?
"People mouth off relentlessly on gaming boards, sports boards, automotive boards; what have you. Anonymity is a powerful thing."
And a valuable one. You at least know that the feedback you get here is always honest. At a con, who's going to tell you if they think your comic is awful? Who wants to start a scene with a stranger in a public place? Maybe the stranger's crazy or just doesn't take criticism well and will rant and rave at the top of his lungs, try to pimp slap you, etc. No, instead, if somebody doesn't like your work, they'll probably just mutter "Oh, yeah. Downer. That's cool. That's cool."
You know, I've always suspected I wasn't "normal" but I think you've just confirmed it, Yamo. :P
Were I to meet Kyle in person, and he asked, I'd tell him exactly what I think of Downer. That is, I don't get it; from my first issue, I was confused and now I'm to the point where I stop looking at it - those two pages might as well be an ad for as much as I look at them.
That doesn't mean I dislike Kyle, or even his work. I like a lot of the other art he has in the mag, and I think he's a fairly talented artist. Just this one thing that he does, I don't happen to like. That doesn't mean I need to be a rude, arrogant !@$#%&^$ if I meet him and express my opinions, though.
You're right, Yamo, that the anonymity of the 'net brings out a brutal honesty in a lot of people. As somebody who does some writing, I find that invaluable - if I post up something and ask for feedback, I don't want a bunch of people telling me how much it rocks, when really it blows. On the same hand, though, I don't need rude, arrogant !@$#%&^$'s taking shots at me personally, either. If you don't like my work that's cool - everybody has different tastes. If you can offer me suggestions to improve my work, that's really cool - I'm always looking to become better at what I do. If all you can do, though, is insult me and/or my family, well... I'll just skip right past your post.
!@#$#@%$%
I hate it when gamers turn ugly like this. It is ONE FRIGGING PAGE in the magazine! ONE!
My habits are to read Erik's editorial first, then flip back hit the comics (yaaay Downer) and read Wil Save.
Now that some stupid Map o' Mystery or whatever is going to show up instead, I lose out on some quality reading.
I think Wil brought a human touch to the magazine.
!#$#@%$#
Erik - how about Paizo puts out a quarterly or bi-monthly Polyhedron magazine - include Wil Save and the cool mini-games and SWd20 content we used to enjoy - and let the haters NOT buy it. If sales are great, put it out more frequently. If sales are bad, make it a Polyhedron annual or something.
Thanks,
Zeb
You know, its funny. I feel bad about posting to the "anti-Wil Save" thread, but I don't really know why. I didn't like it, and I only posted two or three times and then lost interest, especially when admititly many people veered way off the "its not related to D&D arguement" and went into making comments about Wil and his family structure, etc.
Annonymity is powerful, but it doesn't always equate to honesty. I have noticed that if a lot of people don't have a strong opinion one way or another, they still tend to bandwagon online, which is no more honest than saying "yeah, what he said" in real life. It does tend to make people feel more comfortable being vitreous and cruel, rather than taking the time to make sure that their arguements are well reasoned and even a little diplomatic. Not diplomatic in the sense of politically correct, but diplomatic in the sense that if you tell someone they are a moron right out of the box you will NEVER get them to understand your point of view.
I didn't (and still don't) like Downer, and I posted on the Downer thread about it, but I tried to explain why I didn't like it and the cool thing about that whole experience was that I ended up communicating with Kyle Hunter, having a good talk about what he doesn't like and what he does, and I have a lot of respect for him even though I don't like the comic strip. I like finding out things like that.
If there is one valid criticism that I think might come from this is that Wil did seem to have a harder time moderating such comments. He seemed to want to dismiss every critisism as a "We hate Wesley" think and assume that if someone wasn't a "Wesley hater" they must not be critisising him, and when it got to be too much it hit him very hard. I am sorry if his feelings got hurt in this matter, and I do think that some of the comments that related to his family went too far, but at the same time, some of the criticisms were valid and well reasoned, and he may have won some of us over if he had aknowlaged that.
I would have to agree with some of the sentiments of Mr. Mona here. Quite a lot of the venom in the "Failed Wil Save" thread were directed at Wil himself, not at his column, despite the fact that none of the posters had any right nor reason to have such opinions about the person, seeing as how they never met him.
Moreover, a good deal of the material that Wil's detractors have to say about his thread reflect a sad lack of ability to understand what resources Wil has to offer the game.
I, for one, always read the Wil Save column, and I thought that most of them were quite good and relevant. In fact, I think that his last column was one of the best so far, and may go down in history as one of the best human interest articles ever to appear in Dungeon magazine (and I own a fair bit, so I have quite a lot of material to compare to).
I will miss Wil Save. Given that the page is blank, I would say, "Pay Wil more money so that he can be persuaded to come back!"
Wil left us, people, and it's because of a bunch of vitiolic posts that were nothing but utterly shameful to behold. Honestly, that thread should be held up as a prime example of the worst in subscriber feedback for eons to come, as a reminder to everyone exactly what it is that makes finding decent writers for Dungeon so frigging difficult!!!!
There is not one writer to ever grace the magazine with as much talent as Wil does, and the feedback calls him worthless. Pearls before swine, I say, pearls before swine.
Rox, I have to say, I appreciate your opinion and all, but honestly, Wil was the best writer to ever grace Dungeon? Some of his articles were good, a lot had nothing to do with D&D, and yes I liked his last few better than the meandering ones in the middle, especially since I can relate to teaching step children and children how to play and when to find time to do so.
Wil is okay. I don't see the genius that some do, but thats great. Sometimes however, I wonder if the hyperbole in defence of Wil might not have spurred some of those who disliked him to mount an even greater offence against him. If someone mildly dislikes the column, but then reads a post that says they are a fool if they don't "get it" they may then end up taking offence and start to say that not only do they not "get it" but that anyone that did "get it" are the real fools and furthermore that Wil is a twit, etc.
I write the above as an example of how taking one extreem might contribute to an opposing viewpoint taking an even more extreem view in opposition. Everyone has their opinions, and its great that we get to express them. But once in a while I wonder if all of us don't look for offence and fights on purpose rather than honestly stating our opinions and and trying to debate and maybe even win over the other side.
Just something I'm mulling over, and I could be a twit myself . ..
Honestly? Yes, and I have a healthy store of Dungeon copies to peruse, as well as a healthy numbers of Dungeons I've read but don't own.
Yes, Wil Wheaton is probably one of the most talented, if not THE most talented writer ever to grace the pages of Dungeon magazine, and that includes the likes of people like Tracy Hickman (whose prose is mildly amusing, at most).
Frankly, I was quite surprised that Dungeon was able to snag such a talent in the rough, and I had high hopes that the mag would be able to hone him into a fine gem, indeed, but apparently, readers can't see very much past their own long noses to see what's right in front of their eyes.
There are people who would say that Gygax writes well. Hogwash. Any creative writing teacher would take him to task, and then some. In fact, his essays are badly idiomed, badly paced, and badly metered so much so that they're barely readable at all. It's a testament to the content of his writing that they're able to shine through such a horrible lack of finesse.
What about Monte Cook? He's a great designer, but he's a boring read. I fall asleep reading his columns. I guess he would make an OK history writer, as the quality of writers in that discipline go, but there ARE good history writers, and those accounts are the things that make historians of young boys.
Jesse Decker? Mike Mearls? Anyone? Many of the writers for Dungeon have gaming chops but the number of people who have actual writing skill, let alone natural talent, is understandably small, and Wil ranks the best among that very small pool, IMO.
Well, I guess we finally figured out the pseudonym Wil was using to surf the boards.
LOL . . .
|
Personally, I rather enjoyed 'Will Save' and will be sad to see it go. I don't have a family of my one as of yet, and Mr. Wheaton's article let me see a family man and a gamer being true to himself and his responsibilities. That said, I also found him to be amusing and insightful. Too late now, unfortuneately. However, do not get rid of Kyle Hunter! Downer is hilarious. I enjoy many things central to the magazine, but that doesn't mean that I want to lose the additional content.
Honestly? Yes, and I have a healthy store of Dungeon copies to peruse, as well as a healthy numbers of Dungeons I've read but don't own.
Yes, Wil Wheaton is probably one of the most talented, if not THE most talented writer ever to grace the pages of Dungeon magazine, and that includes the likes of people like Tracy Hickman (whose prose is mildly amusing, at most).
Frankly, I was quite surprised that Dungeon was able to snag such a talent in the rough, and I had high hopes that the mag would be able to hone him into a fine gem, indeed, but apparently, readers can't see very much past their own long noses to see what's right in front of their eyes.
There are people who would say that Gygax writes well. Hogwash. Any creative writing teacher would take him to task, and then some. In fact, his essays are badly idiomed, badly paced, and badly metered so much so that they're barely readable at all. It's a testament to the content of his writing that they're able to shine through such a horrible lack of finesse.
What about Monte Cook? He's a great designer, but he's a boring read. I fall asleep reading his columns. I guess he would make an OK history writer, as the quality of writers in that discipline go, but there ARE good history writers, and those accounts are the things that make historians of young boys.
Jesse Decker? Mike Mearls? Anyone? Many of the writers for Dungeon have gaming chops but the number of people who have actual writing skill, let alone natural talent, is understandably small, and Wil ranks the best among that very small pool, IMO.
In your list of why every writer in dungeon sucks you seem to have neglected to insult Erik...just in case you want to make sure your list was complete.
I'm really bad at writing flamey comments - this is why I've stayed away from the high-school b@$&#fest that was the "failed wil save" thread. I'd like to reiterate one of the earlier posts in saying that the thread is like an ugly cancerous growth on the friendly and interesting community Paizo have created here. The childish part of me hopes those amongst you who regularly spewed your vitriolic bullshit into the thread find its replacement even more distasteful. Oh well, at least I tried.
"Yes, Wil Wheaton is probably one of the most talented, if not THE most talented writer ever to grace the pages of Dungeon magazine..."
Hahahahahaha!
For Wil Save's replacement, I nominate a monthly comedy column by this guy.
There are people who would say that Gygax writes well. Hogwash. Any creative writing teacher would take him to task, and then some. In fact, his essays are badly idiomed, badly paced, and badly metered so much so that they're barely readable at all. It's a testament to the content of his writing that they're able to shine through such a horrible lack of finesse.
Whu...whaaaa??? Dextolen morphs into a large BBBW and hands her best friend her earrings and shoes. "OH NO YOU DI-ENT! You can like your little Willy all you want but dontchu blaspheme up in here!"
Morphs back into 30 something white guy and states that Gygax writing style was part of the mythos of D&D and he wouldn't have it any other way.
This is not a Downer thread, guys. I don't care if you play nice or not, but let's not start our battles here, okay?
"Whu...whaaaa??? Dextolen morphs into a large BBBW and hands her best friend her earrings and shoes. 'OH NO YOU DI-ENT! You can like your little Willy all you want but dontchu blaspheme up in here!'
Morphs back into 30 something white guy and states that Gygax writing style was part of the mythos of D&D and he wouldn't have it any other way."
This image makes me extremely glad that we don't have the virtual reality internet that William Gibson predicted back in the 80s.
|
I am truly impressed. Some folks know how to beat a dead dog into oblivion. It's over!! Some of you whined and cried and boo-hoo'd until you were blue in the face. The column is gone, find some thing else to rant about already. I've taught basic training privates who whine less than some of you. I think it's more than time to let it go...
Jesus f%&!ing christ. I have no problem with anyone "criticising" anything in Dungeon; I don't think anyone on the staff or on these boards would have a problem with that. in a way, that what these boards are for - Erik has repeatedly thrown stuff out to us and got our input, be it critical or not. *But* the Failed Wil Save thread got out of hand - the result, the loss of the column, isn't really the issue since it seems like Wil and Erik came to some agreement to let it go; the issue really is the intensity of the campaign against it - firstly, a bunch of people didn't like Wil Save, they expressed that, and that's fine - what we don't need on these boards (IMO of course) is 500 posts of:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Poster1:
Wil Save Sucks because (x)
-Poster 1
----------------------------------------------------------------
Poster 2:
Well you know, I kinda like it because of (y)
- Poster 2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Poster 1:
Nope, it sucks because of (paraphrase of x)
- Poster "Wil Wheaton is a cock" 1
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ad Almost Infinitum. Having a say in the magazine's direction is one thing, but abusing that is another. There would be serious trouble if someone started a "Die ASEO/GVD/Yamo Die" thread, and that's what Failed Wil Save became. So let's not act like spoiled little children to Kyle Hunter, please.
M
First, you are "not going anywhere" because Erik Mona is your friend and "protects" you from the rather loud and numerous calls for Downer to be terminated. He has said this very clearly on EN World. Thus, were is not for Mr. Mona's protecting you despite the very mixed public opinion, you would likely enjoy much less job security.Second, I find it ironic that you choose to use masked profanity and then talk about being "professional." Your diatribe is not professional and neither is your gloating from behind Mr. Mona's position as editor-in-chief.
You won't find me having posted any opinion on Downer but I fail to appreciate my first introduction to its author.
When I read Kyle's comment, I assumed he was using Downer's voice, rather than his own.
I thought it was pretty funny.
Me too - it was almost in character :-)
I don't know what a "downer voice" is, since I don't read the comic. But I definitely thought Kyle's proverbial tongue was firmly planted in his proverbial cheek. ;)
Erik Mona: Yeah, it was a little thick. I can get overly dramatic when I get wound up.
Jeremy MacDonald: I didn't say every writer in Dungeon sucks. YOU did. I said no one was as good as Wil, IMO. There's a difference there somewhere if you look really hard.
Yamo: I'd love to do the column, but I'm scared of the possible feedback.
Dextolen: Bad writing is "part" of the "feel" of computer language books, too, but that doesn't mean that such a teaching manual couldn't be written in an excellent and entertaining manner. New computer instruction manuals are written to be easy to read and understand as well as full of content. Good content is no excuse for bad writing.
This image makes me extremely glad that we don't have the virtual reality internet that William Gibson predicted back in the 80s.
LOL
Jeremy MacDonald: I didn't say every writer in Dungeon sucks. YOU did. I said no one was as good as Wil, IMO. There's a difference there somewhere if you look really hard.
No, you went beyond that and provided examples of why you felt Tracy Hickman, Gygax, Monte Cook, Jesse Decker and Mike Mearls where lousy writers. Thats not the same thing at all as saying they are not, in your opinion, as good as Wil.
There are lots of people saying they think Wil is a great writer - I have not bothered to respond to their posts, heck I think he had talent as well, it was never his skills as a writer I had issues with. It is however another thing completely to say all other writers are generally not up to snuff and provide examples.