I totally understand the sentiment of wanting to spit at WotC staff's feet. I'm one of those people who now truly hates Hasbro/WotC for what they did, but I'll at least explain why.
I've been a longtime and loyal member of the RPGA, and Living Greyhawk campaign. For years, our organization has kept in close cooperation with the WotC people, and to be fair I don't think any single one of them is a bad person. HOWEVER, I and many other members of the organization truly believe that we were lied to, manipulated, and outright cheated by WotC. For years, we've always asked the direction of both the publishing plans, mechanics changes, and expansion plans that WotC had in the works. One of these most important points was the release of a new edition. 3.5 was not sprung upon us in surprise, and in fact, we were consulted on a great of how 3.0 should transition into 3.5. We had asked with great interest and curiosity whether or not a Fourth Edition would be released, and how it would impact all of our active campaigns. Even up until 2 months before the released news of 4th Edition, we were being told flat to our faces by WotC senior staff "There are no plans for a Fourth Edition D&D".
I would have liked to believed that they were being kept in the dark or were ignorant such a monumental falsehood, but the fact is that you do not develop a brand new game line like for D&D without much planning and forethought, hiring new artists, writers, and beginning your expected layouts and page counts. The RPGA has a smaller publishing effort in-house, and we know how much work it entails on even small projects, we can well imagine the effort needed for a new edition of D&D. The WotC design staff has now as much admitted that they've been working on 4th Edition for well over a year. The fact that WotC biggest and most loyal D&D customer base, the RPGA, was deliberately lied to and reassured that there would be no new edition even as they were developing one, is a very sore point in many member's throats.
Beyond that is the fact that the Living Greyhawk campaign is the most popular and successful of all the game world setting RPGA campaigns that is produced. On no less than two occassions, WotC tried to push Forgotten Realms campaigns as well as Eberron campaigns, into the same kind of spotlight and numbers that LG had. Each time the new campaigns did not perform to the same level, and subsequently dwindled. We are not talking about small efforts here either, as the vast majority of campaign cards and printed member benefits released by WotC were directed at the other settings. The fact that the membership voted on repeated occassions with their playing preferences, what games they registered for, and what they played consistently showed the power and attraction of the Greyhawk campaign setting. RPGA dollars account for a huge percentage of WotC's sales. We spoke with not only our voices, but our time and money.
Imagine our surprise and shock when not only were we told by WotC at their big stage announcement (I think it was at Dragon Con? Or was it Indy Con? I get them all confused in names) that Fourth Edition was going to be released (a scant 2 months after we had been assured there was not even plans for a 4th Ed), but that under direction from WotC and Hasbro, Living Greyhawk would end at the close of the year and a new Forgotten Realms Campaign setting would replace it. I honestly don't think the WotC staff expected the jeers, boos, and catcalls they got onstage. It was a definite ugly moment.
Why did people react this way? I cannot speak for anyone else but me and my immediate circle of gaming friends. Because as customers, loyal patrons, and fans who put a lot of investiture into a game we love, we dislike being jerked around. We dislike being lied to. We dislike being treated like resources and walking dollar signs, as opposed to actual people who help make up a hobby and make publishing games profitable. We dislike having our choices taken away from us and being told what we have to support, like it or not.
I maintain hope that Paizo can continue to support 3.5 products, but I'll understand if they must support the monster that is 4th Ed. However, no one I play with, and definitely no one from the RPGA who has the bitter taste of betrayal left in their mouths from WotC will be buying the new game system. There's a huge rift left in the wake of this news, and many members are walking away from the hobby and club they have spent years playing with. I hope that explains some of the question of why people have such bitter feelings about what WotC has been doing.
|
I think you have misread my post.
First I thought I took great care in not using words like "everyone". I didn't bother to connect the person in the game store to the people complaining about the new edition. It confuses me that you think I was saying that everyone who was complaining was do so because of some angst.
Here's the problem with your presentation then, so you are clear on my critique. The title of this thread is, "Why I can't take most of the complaints seriously." This is generalization. You could have called the thread, "Bad behavior and something that hurts the community". You could have said, "Why spitting won't help us talk." You chose to broadly stereotype and imply that most people complained because they felt slighted. This might not have been your intention, but it was my read. Thank you for clarifying.
Do I think some of the responses to WotC have been fueled by the person feeling like WotC was finding flaw with 3.5 (and that commentary felt like an attack to them)? Yes, but I would never say all of them are.
Once again I wasn't talking about all complaints about 4th edition.
The people who seem to find no redeemable aspect of the new edition as well as those that make verbal attacks on WotC and employees are the people that I find less credible..
This I respect.
I don't mind people who complain, and I listen to their arguments. But if all they do is find fault with everything WotC does I feel they undercut their own credibility. Not being able to find one thing, anywhere that you like seems to me that the person is just not trying.
I don't mind people who complain, and I listen to their arguments. But if all they do is find fault with everything WotC does I feel they undercut their own credibility. Not being able to find one thing, anywhere that you like seems to me that the person is just not trying.
I would like to also note that I even though these things I don't like don't apply to 4th edition supporters that doesn't mean I have full support of them either. There are just different things they have to say to make me stop paying attention to them.
Fair enough. I, quite frankly, am worried about the future of the game. I think the player base is in jeopardy. Your point that many people take this as a personal rejection is a good one and one that I agree with. It's one I have made myself.
If anything, I think your sense of moral outrage helped you overstate your case.
But, moral outrage is good!
In the end I am going to cite Rodney King. "Can't we all just get along."
Thanks for your measured response.
Oh, and Capt. Picard is so much better than Capt. Kirk.
QFT. Picard has his own maneuver. Does Kirk have his own maneuver? Who's my maneuver? Who's my maneuver? Who's my maneuver? YOU ARE!!!!
*imitates Picard maneuver by adjusting shirt*
Note to self: ask DM about a tactical feat that uses the Picard Maneuver.
|
|
However, no one I play with, and definitely no one from the RPGA who has the bitter taste of betrayal left in their mouths from WotC will be buying the new game system. There's a huge rift left in the wake of this news, and many members are walking away from the hobby and club they have spent years playing with. I hope that explains some of the question of why people have such bitter feelings about what WotC has been doing.
As someone who has been involved in the RPGA, and who has run an MMRPG, this sentiment has been one that I confront on a regular basis. Many, many players are angry. Holding together the gaming community will be difficult. This person is sincerely and honestly hurt and feels betrayed. The process of communication around 4th ed. has been mishandled and I am afraid that it hampers both efforts to market the product and also to retain the player base.
It saddens me to see players like this leave the mainstream game and edition.
However, as you sow, so shall you reap. I understand this reaction, even if I do not share it.
Even up until 2 months before the released news of 4th Edition, we were being told flat to our faces by WotC senior staff "There are no plans for a Fourth Edition D&D".
Ouch! If I were told such (in hindsight) BS to my face, I would be angry as well. Now I can understand some of the angry folks better.
Stefan
|
Note to self: ask DM about a tactical feat that uses the Picard Maneuver.
It's probably something a 4e Rogue or Fighter can do already... some kind of blink/mirror image/dimension door combo that ends up with the bad guy swinging where the character used to be as it teleports to the opposite side of the opponent. It'll be called "Super Dragon Switch" or something else that involves the word Dragon.
It'll be sick, and kewl, and it may even r0xx0rz, though we can't be sure of it's level of hellagoodness yet.
Stephen
Developer Dude
Just wanted to say, Thank you.
Thank you for posting your thoughts in an intelligent and honest manner. I can respect that. I have concerns about 4E but I have no personal feelings against any WotC employee. After all I don't know you or your co-workers. I know a lot of words have been slung about by the different side "supporters" so I just wanted to thank you and the rest of the intelligent people here that have posted in an intelligent and honest manner both in the past and in the future.
And I would love to play a game with anyone down at WotC. People are people, and people that love games are special.
-Rayn
Man is Valentines day making me sappy or something? Sheesh, you would think I was Mr. Sensitive here.
|
|
Stephen
Developer Dude
Just wanted to say, Thank you.
Thank you for posting your thoughts in an intelligent and honest manner. I can respect that. I have concerns about 4E but I have no personal feelings against any WotC employee. After all I don't know you or your co-workers. I know a lot of words have been slung about by the different side "supporters" so I just wanted to thank you and the rest of the intelligent people here that have posted in an intelligent and honest manner both in the past and in the future.
And I would love to play a game with anyone down at WotC. People are people, and people that love games are special.
-Rayn
** spoiler omitted **
Well Said!
It's probably something a 4e Rogue or Fighter can do already... some kind of blink/mirror image/dimension door combo that ends up with the bad guy swinging where the character used to be as it teleports to the opposite side of the opponent.
Er - Warlock's "Flee The Scene" invocation, perhaps? From Complete Arcane? :D
So...mr. SRM, I hope you are still lurking on these boards (not in a bad way either ;) Because, while you are here, I have a question for YOU. I apologize for a partial thread jack in advance, but after having a somewhat well reasoned - if heart felt - non derogatory rant deleted from the wizards, er. gleemax boards...then the next one, and the one after it, I feel I finally have someone's ear.
how exactly does the WotC management plan to overcome the fragmentation of it's fan base? Please don't give me any of that "Love of 4E will conquer all" claptrap. So far IMO the majority of what has been released and leaked out reeks. I mean no insult to any of you pro 4E'ers, so take it in stride.
how exactly does the WotC management plan to overcome the fragmentation of it's fan base? Please don't give me any of that "Love of 4E will conquer all" claptrap. So far IMO the majority of what has been released and leaked out reeks. I mean no insult to any of you pro 4E'ers, so take it in stride.
Hey, play nice. While I'm not going to presume to speak for anyone at WotC, I think Stephen will probably answer that he is a developer and not on the marketting team. His job is to make the game fun, not to unite the base.
Just want to prepare you for that possible (probable) answer.
You're right, my apologies to all. My Rancor is my own and need not be ejected upon anyone not deserving of it.
I fully anticipate that response. Having worked as a Product designer in a busy R&D department myself, I am familiar with being snowed by management. However, I always knew WHY they did it - whether I agreed or not.
Seriously, is WotC doing so well it can afford to just cast off a sizeable portion of it's fanbase?
I have seen a bunch of folks posting that they can't wait for 4E.
I have seen a LOT of folks totally against it on either principle or taste.
I have seen a few undecided's.
I fear for the future of my hobby, regardless of which corporate "entity" owns the IP.
I spoke to Roy, the caveman, and he said "4e DMG good but me hated PHB like infected Sabertooth bite." Then he spoke a limerick:
There once was a caveman named Roy
Who befriended a longhaired young boy
The boy thought it fair
To be pulled by his hair
But the club up his arse was no joy
Neolithic blarney, sez me. What were we talking about?
Funny thing is, most folks are really nice face to face. It's the anonymity aspect that causes people to act like this. I'd be willing to bet that a large number (if not all) of the more vitriolic critics would be polite if SRM or I spoke to them at GenCon. In fact, that's OVERWHELMINGLY the most common experience I have at GenCon. This past year I had one guy make some snide comments, but dozens of other highly critical folks were at the very least polite and listened to what we were saying without turning into a snarling lunatic.
Funny thing is, most folks are really nice face to face.
Simple explaination, you guys are nice people. Even the most bitter critic would be hardpressed to be mean to someone that genuinely wants to hear what they're saying and pays attenction to them. And you guys do do that, from what we've seen. I don't know of anyone that got into role play writing/publishing/etc for any reason other then they wanted to do for a living what they love to do in their spare time and because they felt they could do it better then what they've seen.
Its easy to be mean to a cold, faceless corporation that makes decisions that appear to the customer as arbitrary and profits driven. But when you have someone paying attenction to what you're saying and asking, "This is coming. What would you like to see in it?" they're now a person interested in your wants/desires and not driven by profits.
|
Funny thing is, most folks are really nice face to face. It's the anonymity aspect that causes people to act like this. I'd be willing to bet that a large number (if not all) of the more vitriolic critics would be polite if SRM or I spoke to them at GenCon. In fact, that's OVERWHELMINGLY the most common experience I have at GenCon. This past year I had one guy make some snide comments, but dozens of other highly critical folks were at the very least polite and listened to what we were saying without turning into a snarling lunatic.
That goes both ways, though. I see your point, but from the other side, it's harder to dismiss somebody outright face-to-face, or ignore them. I think you have to realize that that can also help intensify the confrontational nature of things.
There's also kind of a ready "Jerry Springer audience" of hecklers that intensifies the wrath. They think they're going to bat for their boys or whatever.You kinda gotta shout to be heard; a polite voice of dissent gets shouted down by fanbois, or attacked until he bites back, then the thread he's on gets squashed. That can lead to intensification.
That goes both ways, though. I see your point, but from the other side, it's harder to dismiss somebody outright face-to-face, or ignore them. I think you have to realize that that can also help intensify the confrontational nature of things.
There's also kind of a ready "Jerry Springer audience" of hecklers that intensifies the wrath. They think they're going to bat for their boys or whatever.
You kinda gotta shout to be heard; a polite voice of dissent gets shouted down by fanbois, or attacked until he bites back, then the thread he's on gets squashed. That can lead to intensification.
I have to agree with this. Wholeheartedly infact. Paizo's forums have, more or less become a haven of "anti-4eer's" because there were already plenty of less then dissatisfied customers after the cancelling of dungeon and dragon. And when WotC/ENWorld forums began shutting down posts of descent, even if they were simply expressing concern and not attacking, people got fed up with it and left (myself included).
It's really easy to get angry about that and have that anger turn towards the "faceless corporation" and the product that brought all that about: 4E. In truth, the single best counter for that is ... guys like you to come here and ... well ... talk with us.
good point on the two way street, I guess us faceless masses of gamers are just being ignored by the big, bad corporate entity?
|
|
Funny thing is, most folks are really nice face to face. It's the anonymity aspect that causes people to act like this. I'd be willing to bet that a large number (if not all) of the more vitriolic critics would be polite if SRM or I spoke to them at GenCon. In fact, that's OVERWHELMINGLY the most common experience I have at GenCon. This past year I had one guy make some snide comments, but dozens of other highly critical folks were at the very least polite and listened to what we were saying without turning into a snarling lunatic.
So, does the internet generate candor? Have people's reactions been screened by social convention in other situations? Is this response purer?
My mother used to say, "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." This is hard wired into our society when it comes to face to face communication. I would not expect you to report anything else when you report what has been said directly to you.
Social convention does not allow folks to walk up and say, "This is bad. You are bad. Your work is bad." It will not happen. When it does happen we called it pathology.
There'a a reason survey data is usually anonomous and why focus groups are handled through third parties. Authentic opinion is only generated when the identity of those surveyed is concealed.
Granted, the internet does lend itself to more colorful commentary, but you will find more candor here than when someone first meets you.
That is human.
Authentic opinion is only generated when the identity of those surveyed is concealed.
To me, the internet's anonymity doesn't increase authentic opinion: it just increases the vitriol with which that opinion is stated. The internet makes the choice of "Say my opinion while also being a jerk about it" easy because of anonymity.
One can always state what one believes in in any medium. However, whether or not one should state one's opinion on a matter and the manner in which the statement is made is a separate thing. IMO, the "should speak" decision is made easier due anonymity and that ease seems to heavily weight for those with the least social graces to speak the most on the internet.
In other words, "monkeys flinging poo" is more likely the correct analogy to human interaction on the internet than it would be to face-to-face interaction. Although, goodness knows, enough poo is flung face-to-face to make one despair for the human condition sometimes.
joe b.
True Dat Brudda! More honest words may very well not exist. Which is why many folks feel WotC took the "in-house" approach to their marketing surveys. But that is another matter altogether.
Seems to me, the last time someone went all Chaotic Neutral at a convention (That I saw anyways) security ejected him and banned him from the event.
That said, can you REALLY have a good conversation with any random fans (or anti-fans) during a 5min meet and greet during a busy convention? Probably not.
Besides, You WotC peeps were gods to a lot of us...until you turned to the dark side. much as luke couldn't bring himself to kill vader, our (at least my) feelings are complex on this issue. The easiest summation would be: I love you for what you've done, but hate you for what you are doing.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I have to agree with this. Wholeheartedly infact. Paizo's forums have, more or less become a haven of "anti-4eer's" because there were already plenty of less then dissatisfied customers after the cancelling of dungeon and dragon. And when WotC/ENWorld forums began shutting down posts of descent, even if they were simply expressing concern and not attacking, people got fed up with it and left (myself included).
I must say that Paizo seems to have mellowed out in the past month or so. I think the audience here still skews anti-4e, but the level of rabidly reactionary posts has declined substantially. There are some exceptions *cough* Balabanto *cough*, but generally there's a lot more intelligent discussion going on than before.
...waits for rabid ranter to pounce....
|
|
Authentic opinion is only generated when the identity of those surveyed is concealed.To me, the internet's anonymity doesn't increase authentic opinion: it just increases the vitriol with which that opinion is stated. The internet makes the choice of "Say my opinion while also being a jerk about it" easy because of anonymity.
This is true. When I said the data has more color, that is what I was speaking to.
My core point however, was about one of the principles of data collection. We survey blind for a reason. People say what they honestly believe when they are insulated from consequence. That is a core principle of generating market research. The closer the data is to the subject, the more biased the information.
So, the monkey poo has to be scraped off the surface of the commentary to find the authentic opinion beneath. Did I actually just write that?
More to the point in specific, however. Just because many people do not present their unfiltered opnion to you directly, does not mean that their opinion is positive, or that the weight of the marketplace favors you.
Does this make better sense to you?
Does this make better sense to you?
It made plenty of sense before. I realize now that you were speaking more about the information contained in a complaint rather than about the behavior contained in a complaint. I was talking more about what I see as the unnecessary tone of the information delivery system.
That said, however, I am highly suspect of anything I have to scrape monkey poo off of. :) I just have a sneaking suspicion that, after time, the poo delivery becomes the real opinion and the information is just an excuse for the behavior.
joe b.
occupational hazard I suppose, though being the flinger can be a lot better than being the flingee ;)
Your point stands though, poor behavior does tend to dilute and overshadow the message.
I must say that Paizo seems to have mellowed out in the past month or so. I think the audience here still skews anti-4e, but the level of rabidly reactionary posts has declined substantially. There are some exceptions *cough* Balabanto *cough*, but generally there's a lot more intelligent discussion going on than before.
I credit that to Lisa's sticky. (Props for Lisa.)
Here's the problem with your presentation then, so you are clear on my critique. The title of this thread is, "Why I can't take most of the complaints seriously." This is generalization. You could have called the thread, "Bad behavior and something that hurts the community". You could have said, "Why spitting won't help us talk." You chose to broadly stereotype and imply that most people complained because they felt slighted. This might not have been your intention, but it was my read. Thank you for clarifying.
Ah. I wasn't trying to say that I felt their arguments were wrong or that I knew the reasons for everyone complaining. I was just trying to relate a problem that I had with many of the posts. Part of me just starts ignoring people once they say something, that I categorize as, crazy. If someone makes a comment that makes me question their judgement it is not limited to that post. It takes a while for me for forget that odd comment so that I really read and consider what they are saying rather than just skipping over the people who make illogical comments.
While your post suggestions would have been good topics the point I was trying to make was that many of the posters are making a good number of "sane" posts then they say something that makes me wonder how they got to that conclusion. I just want people to know that making crazy comments has a negative impact on my perception of their other complaints. It would help them with me if they didn't make them.
The reason I mention the person who spit was not to connect people who don't like 4th edition with him. It was to provide setting for my wandering mind. Hearing him caused me to think about this topic more. It didn't make a direct connection to anyone on the forums. I want to make this very clear. Here is a more detailed list of what I remember my thought process to be.
- Heard person talk about spitting on WotC employees at game store.
- Categorized him as a jerk and ignored everything else he said.
- Thought about what causes me to ignore people.
- Recalled how I reacted to when I talked with people who preferred 2nd edition.
- I realized I ignored people who decided to say nothing good about 3rd edition and claim WotC destroyed D&D.
- I realized I ignored people who said nothing good about any edition or made various claims about WotC.
- Thought about how many of these comments it takes for me to ignore someone.
- Came to the conclusion that the reason I ignored many of the anti-4e or pro-4e comments on the boards is that I remembered some comment the poster made that I felt was crazy.
In my mind it wasn't about bad behavior or the comment about spitting. It was just because I thought I should tell people that some of their other comments are having a negative impact on their reasonable complaints.
I have to agree with this. Wholeheartedly infact. Paizo's forums have, more or less become a haven of "anti-4eer's" because there were already plenty of less then dissatisfied customers after the cancelling of dungeon and dragon. And when WotC/ENWorld forums began shutting down posts of descent, even if they were simply expressing concern and not attacking, people got fed up with it and left (myself included).
I know I haven't been paying that much attention, but I don't remember a point recently where WotC was shutting down the non-aggressive threads.
This post:
Funny thing is, most folks are really nice face to face. It's the anonymity aspect that causes people to act like this. I'd be willing to bet that a large number (if not all) of the more vitriolic critics would be polite if SRM or I spoke to them at GenCon. In fact, that's OVERWHELMINGLY the most common experience I have at GenCon. This past year I had one guy make some snide comments, but dozens of other highly critical folks were at the very least polite and listened to what we were saying without turning into a snarling lunatic.
And this one:
I must say that Paizo seems to have mellowed out in the past month or so.
Can pretty much be answered together.
While I don't want to take away from Lisa Stevens sticky in this forum, I thing the real reason for the mellowing was representation by WotC. Rodney and Steven just being here is calming people down
It takes away the feeling of being ignored.
Everyone who is riled up about the changes, now know that people connected to those changes are reading them.
Now, maybe Rodney is right, and that realization is triggering better social behavior... But I agree with Heathansson that it is more that they don't have to "shout" to get heard.
But if it will make you feel better Rodney, I'll make it a point to find you and do some serious snarling in your face. I'd be willing to bet I could get you to want to go back to the internet afterwards. ;-)
I know I haven't been paying that much attention, but I don't remember a point recently where WotC was shutting down the non-aggressive threads.
Guy in my gaming group use to post on Gleemax until he got tired of having his posts shut down/deleted. But he stopped posting there like 2-3 months ago. I use to be an ENWorld poster. The final straw for me was when my humor thread about the TV show "The Grognard" was shut down because the title was "Scott Rouse says 'You're Fired' To D&D Players". It was clearly marked as humor and I make sure several times before posting it that there was nothing offensive in the text. But because the title was about "D&D Customers getting 'fired'" they decided to shut it down.
Now I only goto ENWorld to find out if the latest Order of the Stick has been posted.
I can understand the desire to keep the board civil, but there was also a thread started where the OP said something to the effect of, "You Anti-4E people, get off these boards. We don't want you here." People were shouted down simply because they were asking questions about the 4E, not even attacking. And that thread wasn't shut down.
|
|
I dislike that the old-school community was made fun of by calling us grognards...and the fact that they seem to have distanced themselves from the older gamers as a whole, and focusing on the teen crowd.
I dislike the fast-talk about removing the "1" save fail factor, while then allowing the DM to critical an spell...so you just took a life or death roll away from the player and put it in the DMs hand...along this line, I dislike the removal of "unbalanced" spells. No more finger of death...I wonder how the Beholder feels about that...
I dislike the removal of gnomes and half-orcs from the core books, and how is a teifling a core RACE??? Is it merely to give those teens an evil character to play? What happens when some teenage kid that plays D&D kills someone? His favorite character happened to be a Teifling Warlock...I'm not looking forward to another D&D witch-hunt, thank you very much.
There are a few aspects I do like. I like the Fighter weapon changes, very nice. I like points of light. Points of light work in Eberron even, travel aside from lightning rails and airships would be very dangerous.
I mourn the loss of my old friends Dungeon and Dragon...
The person who said they'd spit on the D&D employee, totally out of line, I let my money speak for me. I'm sure if one of those employees had been standing behind him, he would have slunk out of store. People have big mouths when they're full of sh....err....bravado
Why I Can't Take Most of the Complaints About Complaints Seriously
Here's the problem: we know ahead of time that people with a vested interest and signed agreements with WotC have been putting up messages designed to sway the internet community over to 4th edition. We also know that these people were given scripts by WotC marketing and that they posted for quite some time without ever acknowledging that this was the case. The credibility of people who post on message boards and say good things about the new edition or bad things about people saying bad things about the new edition is extremely low.
The pro-4th edition crowd has been caught Swift Boating, and thus word of mouth from that corner is simply worthless. Sadly, I am unable to lead the same weight to internet arguments that are pro-4th edition as I am to arguments that are anti-4th edition.
Including the original post. The fact that similar posts have already been exposed as paid advertisements means that my credulity has been strained to the snapping point. The OP may be sincere, but I have no reason to rationally treat him as such. I have no reason to believe that he is not part of WotC's internet marketing campaign, so I have to treat him as if he is - and in this case that means treating this entire thread as an extremely cynical and downright offensive attack on people who don't like what they are hearing about 4th edition.
---
The fact is that the credibility of pro-4th edition word of mouth is dead. And will continue to be dead until people actually have real copies that they can start reading us spoilers from. If the OP is sincere then that's a shame. But then, this is the natural result of wolf crying.
-Frank
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
How about the Arcanis folks that have been kicked out of RPGA ?Oh I've felt that bitterness too.
I'm not a big Arcanis player myself, but many of my gaming group are.They were far from happy with the deal Arcanis got.
-J
not to threadjack (again) but can you elaborate on the Arcanis thing for me? I've looked at Arcanis a couple of times, since they seem to give psionics some love.
|
|
And ya know, ain't nobody that's not into D&D is even going to care. It's like watching two Star Trek fans getting all pist off at each other arguing over who was better, CPT. Kirk or CPT. Picard. (well for me, because I'm not really into Star Trek)
So we're going on beating up on the only people that can tell the difference between D&D3.x and 4.x.
What's a 'Star Track?' Is this some new TV show, like that weird crap 'Lost?'
|
|
Does this make better sense to you?
It made plenty of sense before. I realize now that you were speaking more about the information contained in a complaint rather than about the behavior contained in a complaint. I was talking more about what I see as the unnecessary tone of the information delivery system.
That said, however, I am highly suspect of anything I have to scrape monkey poo off of. :) I just have a sneaking suspicion that, after time, the poo delivery becomes the real opinion and the information is just an excuse for the behavior.
joe b.
I agree with that, in that negativity replicates and eventually becomes noise. However, all data has content, even if it has hiss and squealin its transmission. A percentage of the market is violently angry over this entire issue.
Do you dispute that odds are that face to face communciation comes in a more congenial form? Do you dispute that anonymity of communication produces more candor?
|
|
not to threadjack (again) but can you elaborate on the Arcanis thing for me? I've looked at Arcanis a couple of times, since they seem to give psionics some love.
RPGA living campaigns that are not sponsored by Wizards live or die based on participation. If folks are not ordering and playing mods then Wizards puts fewer mods in their online ordering and tracking system. If the activity drops too low they can it.
Living Kalamar nearly died when the participation rate dropped too low. I can't speak for Arcanis but I would guess it too suffered from a lack of participation.
This kinda gets back to the OP. At DragonCon a few years back Kalamar players were complaining about the mod release rate and how it had slowed to a trickle. Then the RPGA staff pointed out that they had hard data on the number of downloaded mods and the number of reported games and those numbers drove the release rate. That was when we realized that no matter how much we loved LKoK there were not enough of us to keep it going.
Fortunately it saw an increase in play so they kept it going for a while.
LG is a different story - ending that campaign is a business decision that is not based on participation.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Oh, and Capt. Picard is so much better than Capt. Kirk.QFT. Picard has his own maneuver. Does Kirk have his own maneuver? Who's my maneuver? Who's my maneuver? Who's my maneuver? YOU ARE!!!!
*imitates Picard maneuver by adjusting shirt*
Note to self: ask DM about a tactical feat that uses the Picard Maneuver.
Kirk doesn't need a maneuver. He's defeated the Kobayashi Maru. Sure, he cheated to do it, but it clearly demonstrates his belief that there is no such thing as a no-win situation. Plus, he gets all the chicks.
He's just plain cooler.
|
|
In my mind it wasn't about bad behavior or the comment about spitting. It was just because I thought I should tell people that some of their other comments are having a negative impact on their reasonable complaints.
::Thumbs Up:: Got it. Ultimately I agree.
The medium becomes the message and the transmission of information is deformed.
|
|
Living Kalamar nearly died when the participation rate dropped too low. I can't speak for Arcanis but I would guess it too suffered from a lack of participation.
LG is a different story - ending that campaign is a business decision that is not based on participation.
Arcanis performs on par or outperforms LG at Origins every year.
The Arcanis staff is very clear that they were driven out because they were competing IP. They were brought in as a last wave of systems before the RPGA was shifted from a player driven organization to marketing function.
Disclaimer: Tne above is hearsay, but how I understand this from credible sources.
Arcanis performs on par or outperforms LG at Origins every year.The Arcanis staff is very clear that they were driven out because they were competing IP. They were brought in as a last wave of systems before the RPGA was shifted from a player driven organization to marketing function.
Disclaimer: Tne above is hearsay, but how I understand this from credible sources.
I found it's very much a matter of geographical opportunities. In the California/ South-Western state events, there is virtually no Arcanis presence whatsoever. The same goes for Kalamar. I am sure that at the Big Three Cons, the participation skyrockets because of lack of opportunities for people at the local, state, and regional level. However, speaking as an RPGA organizer and longtime player, the major draw for both old and new players was Living Greyhawk, followed very far behind in recent years by Xen Drik and Green Regent.
I will note though, that the point made about RPGA being slowly taken over the last few years by WotC as a marketing tool is somewhat true. They were very subtle about being nonsupporting of any non-WotC campaigns.
Hearing him caused me to think about this topic more.
Nothing like a person going totally nuts beside you to calm you down.
"My god did I come across like THAT?!?"
Do you dispute that odds are that face to face communciation comes in a more congenial form? Do you dispute that anonymity of communication produces more candor?
I don't dispute either because I think your assessment is correct. Real anonymity produces candor as you say, which is the reason behind it on all types of studies, but the internet message board is, IMO, a quasi-anonymity where in people are socially influenced to display opinions without many of the the social influences to restrain the method of the display that face-to-face interaction creates, hence the need for "rules of posting" because once on a message board, people seem to forget they're still talking to other people and can't seem to to follow the "rule of talking" that they already use in day-to-day life.
IMO, there's an odd group mentality coupled with anonymity on the internet. I guess it would be like having a anonymous study where the respondents would interact with each other while forming opinions. I don't believe something like that provides the quality of information as does a real anonymous study where the respondents are unaware of other's opinions and are therefore unable to either influence or be influenced by them. It would however, provide information on how anonymity influences group consensus making and group creation of acceptable social behavior, I suppose. Imagine a movie about a sensitive topic critiqued by a group of people via a chat room compared with a face-to-face critiqued. I suspect we'd arrive at name-calling time much faster online than when the conversation was face-to-face.
Either way, it's a bit off the subject. I was just trying to comment that the vitriol, or color as you say, makes me question the worth of accepting the information at face value. Not that there isn't valid concerns behind it, but that the delivery of the vitriol is also part of the message, and in some cases, may actually be more important than the valid concern prompting the message to begin with. It's this uncertainty of which information (opinion, or color) is the more important that leads me to support the idea of being less colorful when talking about opinions online as it limits information noise and reduces the guessing about which information is the more important. Someone reading a complaint that isn't snarky, insulting, belittling, hyperbolic, or crude knows that they're reading a real complaint, and not just reading an emotional outburst triggered by, and layered over, a real complaint.
Also, I should say that I wasn't talking about any posters in particular, here or elsewhere, just people in general on internet message boards
joe b.