The medium becomes the message and the transmission of information is deformed.
Short. Sweet. Exactly what I was trying to say. Heh. :)
And I'm supposed to be a writer! LOL
joe b.
|
There have been a number of studies that show online vs. face to face cause people to be, well, meaner. There's a sliding scale actually:
Anonymous Post
Named Post
Group E-mail
Direct E-mail
Group Concall
Direct Call
Group Meeting
Face 2 Face Meeting
People get meaner as you move up this list whether directly or via passive agressive behavior. It's just a product of human nature.
There's also less visual and verbal cues to work from which people don't realize help tremendously with communication.
I work out of my house and our company puts us through specific training on this. "If you can't look them in the eye later, don't say it to begin with."
-Pete
I don't really think that 4.0 is not D&D. I just think that WotC should be satisfied with 3.5. Honestly, they only do this because they run out of ideas for 3.5, and still want more money!
Plus, [Kirk] gets all the chicks.
Yea and all the alien STDs as well. Do you think those pauses in his speech are for dramatic purposes or because because something he picked up on a Ragara III makes him unable to speak a single sentence without ... taking a pause?
Picard was alot more discriminating, at least after he got a fake heart.
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Plus, [Kirk] gets all the chicks.Yea and all the alien STDs as well. Do you think those pauses in his speech are for dramatic purposes or because because something he picked up on a Ragara III makes him unable to speak a single sentence without ... taking a pause?
Picard was alot more discriminating, at least after he got a fake heart.
The final mission of Captain James T. Kirk actually addresses this issue. Unfortunately, it will never be chronicled in movie, novel, or TV form due to its adult content. Here is a piece from the Captain's Log:
"Heart...failing. Crotch...on fire. Must find...Klingon cutie. Klingons...have STD that...cures...my current STD..."
|
|
I don't really think that 4.0 is not D&D. I just think that WotC should be satisfied with 3.5. Honestly, they only do this because they run out of ideas for 3.5, and still want more money!
Hello Mr. Cleaver (I always wanted to say that!)
"I just think that WotC should be satisfied with 3.5". - If they could, they would I bet! Wouldn't that be easier?? Obviously, their sales didn't show that to be a valid ongoing business case. It's always easier to cut off R&D and keep selling your old product if sales keep at the same level. Hardly any business has that luxury.
"Honestly, they only do this because they run out of ideas for 3.5". YES! That is one great reason to have a fresh start for a product line. Otherwise you're just producing derivative add-ons that sell fewer and fewer units.
"and still want more money!" - It's a business, Mr. Cleaver. Even Kobold's understand making a profit and paying all the little Kobolds their share. And of course they have to give a cut to the Ogre Warlords in Pawtucket.
Pete
That was when the customer said something like, When I see them I just want to walk up to them and spit on them for what they are doing to D&D.
Wow. Completely unacceptable.
That is the difference with not liking the new game and being a dick.
It's also completely moronic for one simple reason:
The game isn't out yet.
If someone played it a few times, and THEN wanted to go spit on WotC employees for what they did to it, that would still be rude but understandable.
...
It wouldn't be understandable just rude and nasty. You would earn a face full of nuckles for that kind of crap.
It wouldn't be understandable just rude and nasty. You would earn a face full of nuckles for that kind of crap.
If someone played it a few times, and THEN wanted to go spit on WotC employees for what they did to it, that would still be rude but understandable.
...
Or at least it should.
|
Or at least it should.It wouldn't be understandable just rude and nasty. You would earn a face full of nuckles for that kind of crap.
If someone played it a few times, and THEN wanted to go spit on WotC employees for what they did to it, that would still be rude but understandable.
...
Not to mention you could be arrested for assault and battery - for the spitting part ... and the punching part.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
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
That was when the customer said something like, When I see them I just want to walk up to them and spit on them for what they are doing to D&D.
If I had been privy to this conversation, I would have killed the customer. There is no excuse for such an excessive and literal response.
Plus, [Kirk] gets all the chicks.Yea and all the alien STDs as well.
Ahhh . . . . so that's how he got the Mad Cow . . . ;)
|
That was when the customer said something like, When I see them I just want to walk up to them and spit on them for what they are doing to D&D.If I had been privy to this conversation, I would have killed the customer. There is no excuse for such an excessive and literal response.
I'd've had to go over there and at least b$#*+-slap somebody; let them know they ain't all that bad.
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.
Beyond general "nicety", I can see some other reasons for this...
4.0 had just been announced, at that point it really was true that we didn't know anything about it. It could be that there was stunned acceptance before any animosity set in.
It was kind of hard to get into that room 'you' (the generic WotC 'you') held the Q&As in. That gave me the impression that 'you' didn't actually want to talk about it. Plus all the "we can't give that information out yet" "answers". I doubt I was the only person getting the vibe that 'you' didn't want any hard questions.
Not that I'm vitriolic in my F2F dealings, but I can be pretty blunt (so I've been told). ; )
...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 was actually considering buying a subscription to ENWorld before that thread...
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?
Apparently yes. And it was good enough that I just had to repeat it.
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.
With all due respect...
You're making the assumption that fragmentation will occur. Previous history disagrees with you. 4e will likely either retain 90%+ of the D&D audience or will lose all of it. In other words, it'll follow the path of either 3.5e or Champions: Fusion. Both 3e and Champions were popular systems (one far more than the other, yes), both would probably have enjoyed continued success without a new edition and both saw pretty significant resistance to that edition.
3.5e, despite suffering a significant online backlash, proved to be wildly popular. The previous edition (3e) essentially ceased to exist. YOu can argue that the changes in 3.5e were fairly minor, but that argument works in two directions- yes, those playing 3.5e were just playing a rebalanced 3e, but the population as a whole saw a need to update all their core rulebooks for such a minor revamp. For such a minor revision, 3.5e did a spectacular job of utterly obliterating the use of the 3e rulebooks- you simply never see them around anymore, despite many protests, predictions and promises to the contrary by online 3e hardliners.
Champions didn't have such a huge backlash in advance of publication, but boy did it have one afterwards- the champions audience simply rejected the new rules. Not only did Fusion not gain any traction with existing customers, it did a heck of a job of marginalizing the Champions population in general- barely a whimper was heard for years afterwards. I think the HERO system in general is still suffering some of the backlash of Fusion. And it's easy to see why- the rules just stunk. They flew in the face of Champions philosophy and tradition. How any publisher could manage to so misread its target audience still astounds me today.
So what do these two wildly diverging results predict about 4e? Well, I think they predict that 4e will live or die on its quality. If it's better than 3.5e- even only marginally better- then 3.5e will die as surely as 3e did. Sure, right now you hear all sorts of complaints about investment, timing, what-have-you. But come release, these complaints will drift away if 4e is a better system than 3.5e
If 4e is not as good as 3.5e, however.... if it's full of exploitable holes, or it contains uncomfortable abstractions that make players cringe, or proves clunky or inelegant, then there'll be hell to pay. Fans will abandon it by the boatload, and 3.5e will have been dealt a serious- not mortal- blow. WotC's market share and raw sales will plunge like an anchor.
So, sorry, I don't see a serious fragmentation coming. Either practically everyone will switch, or no one will. I don't see an in-between.
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 haven't been on ENWorld really so I trust people when they say how bad it is there, but the locking going on in the WotC forums hasn't seemed to be that bad to me. Most of the locked threads seem to be just because the arguements were getting too hostile. Of course I only started going back to those forums a few months ago so our experiences may be different.
You're making the assumption that fragmentation will occur. Previous history disagrees with you.
I'll start by saying that maybe the tri-state area I live in is just unique.
But if it isn't, then you haven't really paid attention to the previous edition changes.
From my "armpit of the US," I can say that the number of hold-outs roughly doubles each edition change. And that means roughly 16x the number of people who didn't switch from 1st Edition won't switch to 4th. And that value doesn't include the previous holdouts.
Now, I haven't a clue how many new players each edition gains... Or loses throughout it's career, so your 10% mark may still hold true.
You're making the assumption that fragmentation will occur. Previous history disagrees with you.I'll start by saying that maybe the tri-state area I live in is just unique.
But if it isn't, then you haven't really paid attention to the previous edition changes.
From my "armpit of the US," I can say that the number of hold-outs roughly doubles each edition change. And that means roughly 16x the number of people who didn't switch from 1st Edition won't switch to 4th. And that value doesn't include the previous holdouts.
Now, I haven't a clue how many new players each edition gains... Or loses throughout it's career, so your 10% mark may still hold true.
To compare, Dis, where I like each edition has been followed by the death of pretty much every other game. Never any books for older editions, never any cards on the local recruiting boards looking for anything but 3.5.
I don't really infer anything from that (nor from your example), but in general I do agree with Pugs point. I doubt there will be any real sort of "fragmentation". If 4E sucks, it'll bomb. Otherwise, the vast majority will switch over. The % that come online to b+%+# and whine (or praise and worship!) is very small compared to the numbers out there who just buy a book every now and then and game with their friends (at least, IMO!)
Just wanted to say, Thank youStephen
Developer Dude
You're very welcome.
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.
Well, Donovan, you have me at a disadvantage. You want to know how WotC plans to overcome fragmentation, and then tell me that the best answer I can give is claptrap and don't use it.
Don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly understand why you are skeptical. So far you don't like what you reading. To be absolutely honest, you might stick with 3e...2e...1e...OD&D or whatever you are playing right now. The release of a new edition always creates a situation where this might be the case, but we are in the business of advancing the game in fun and interesting ways. That's our job, and we are going to continue to do it. Personally I think 4e is hella fun (that's right...I said hella) and I think people are really going to enjoy playing it…a lot. But then I love D&D, and have throughout its long history. It's been my favorite game for the past 25 years and I don't see that changing any time soon.
Though I did get my copy of Dark Heresy yesterday, and I am looking forward to playing that. But I am also a big 40K fan.
Stephen
Developer Dude
"Meteorological arguments are irrelevant when it comes to pretending to be an elf."
-Hong
To be absolutely honest, you might stick with 3e...2e...1e...OD&D or whatever you are playing right now.
Stephen
I just want to say thank you for acknowledging some people may perfer a different version. The marketting so far has been describing how 4E is "better" then all previous versions. Better is subjective. Faster play is meaurable, easier mechanics is measurable, fun (while still having a subjective component) can have a method behind it from various person's similarities. Better is completely by personal taste.
To be honest, I can take your company's marketting seriously now. By saying better, I feel like the company is saying that they are telling me my tastes. And frankly, thank has been one of the larger sticking points or me to ever consider the game D&D.
To be absolutely honest, you might stick with 3e...2e...1e...OD&D or whatever you are playing right now.Stephen
I just want to say thank you for acknowledging some people may perfer a different version. The marketting so far has been describing how 4E is "better" then all previous versions. Better is subjective. Faster play is meaurable, easier mechanics is measurable, fun (while still having a subjective component) can have a method behind it from various person's similarities. Better is completely by personal taste.
To be honest, I can take your company's marketting seriously now. By saying better, I feel like the company is saying that they are telling me my tastes. And frankly, thank has been one of the larger sticking points or me to ever consider the game D&D.
Well, what can I say...I'm a reasonable guy! :-)
Keep in mind, just like any marketing, when we say the 4e game is better, we are saying we think it's better. We also think a lot of people with agree with us. We certainly designed to be "better". Personally I think we succeeded...but I'm biased, I'll admit.
You are absolutely right; your own personal tastes decide which is better —a s does ours. Never, ever read our marketing (or any other marketing for that matter) as us telling you what you should think and feel. What we are telling you is what we think and feel, and that we sincerly hope you agree once you play it.
Keep that in perspective, and you should be able to take our marketing seriously from now on. ;-)
Stephen
Developer Dude
Never, ever read our marketing (or any other marketing for that matter) as us telling you what you should think and feel.
I agree, but D&D is .... I don't know ... different somehow. Its much more personal then say hot dogs at a grocery store. (or even a lifesize poster of Picard. ... ummm ... wait ... no. no I don't have one of those. seriously. Don't look at me like that. I don't. ;) )
A few weeks ago I was in game store and overheard a customer talking with an employee about Wizards of the Coast and 4th edition. One of them mentioned that they had seen several WotC employees at the store recently. That was when the customer said something like, When I see them I just want to walk up to them and spit on them for what they are doing to D&D.
<snip>
All the more reason why WotC shouldn't have switched editions in the first place.
They should've stayed with 3.5E as long as possible. Give me the game and someone like me can easily get 3.5E to stretch out a good 20 years. That's probably because, unlike WotC, I won't be destroying the core of D&D, I'll truly be listening to the people that have kept D&D going for so many years (and not the young, ADD, WoW players giving me feedback), and I wouldn't really give a damn about "super-profits". Enough to break even or a little profit is more than enough. I'd make the game for the sake of the game, not money.
What that guy did wasn't right. I agree. Those WotC employees had nothing to do with all the decisions. Those remarks should've been directed at people like Scott Rouse and the rest of his 4E crew (for me, specifically the FR designers destroying FR right as we speak). The hobby shop I go to love making cutting remarks about WotC every chance we get and, boy, we've said what we would do to the 4E designers if they ever walked through those doors...
There was a better way to patch up D&D and still make money. WotC decided to not go that route, like the typical American business people that they are, and took the easy route. What they fail to realize (or do realize, but simply don't care) is that this process is going to repeat itself all over again. The 4e-lovers will gripe about 4.5E, then about 5E being released when 2013 rolls around, and the 5E-pros will continue to blindly follow WotC's supreme leadership and nag at the 4E players for repeating past events. Meanwhile, I'll be playing 3.5E still, laughing at the 4E players for being so naive, and mocking the 5E all the same.
Maybe, just maybe, by 6th Edition everyone will finally get sick of D&D itself and WotC will sell the game to someone who can really get things back to normal again.
With all due respect...<snip>
Actually, there will be. There're people still playing 1E and 2E now, even 3.0E and refuse to switch. Others have just quit D&D entirely and are fed up with WotC, especially at this point. The release of 4E will fragment things further. There will be people sticking with 1E, 2E, 3.0E, and 3.5E. Come 4.5E (which will definitely happen, I'll stake my life on it), it'll fragment even further and, wow, I'd hate to see the fragmentation caused by 5E.
Heck, it's going to be hard enough for 1e-3e folks to communicate with 4e. As provided by my example below:
(4e player) "The Abyss? What's that? Law&Chaos? I thought it was only Good&Evil and Gray? Elves really lived that long? What's a Wish spell? Fireball used to do what? Forgotten Realms was...bigger than this? Really?"
(Veteran D&D Player's reaction) "Just...wow..."
I found something that really excenuates my point. Link
MC: Classic Traveller was, in the best way, a product of its time, but that was 30 years ago. The challenge in creating the new Traveller was to retain all the good stuff from CT while incorporating all the best stuff from the last three decades of roleplaying. I think Gareth (Hanrahan, the writer) has succeeded admirably, ...
That said, we at Mongoose are well aware that there will be CT players who see no reason to change the game system they love. That's fine. I believe that MGT (my favourite of the many abbreviations for Mongoose Traveller) has enough in common with CT to make the transition easy and enough improvements to make it desirable. Other people might disagree. All we can do is make the best game we can and if it's good enough people will play it instead of other games - and that includes other versions of Traveller.
This is Chris from Mongoose (Don't know his last name off hand and not really in the mood to dig it up) talking about their traveller game coming up. IMO, this really is the way to market a product. He flat out admits the original game is dated, and they are making updates to it. But then he go on to say that some people will not like it, simply on the grounds they screwed with the game they love. They know that, they admit to it and are essentially saying, "We hope you like our take on the game." And that has been their attitude on it since the announcement of the game.
Now I admit, I never played a single Traveller game in my life (save a few sessions of the Open Playtest). But their marketting campaign of how, "We understand you may not like it, we hope you enjoy it anyways," has won me over enough that I preordered the first two books. By contrast, I've played 1E and 3.5 and I have not yet ordered/purchased any 4E books and I don't have any intention of doing so until I try the game.
Wizard's marketting has successfully communicated one thing to every fan paying attenction, the game is changing. Some things some people like, some tings some people hate. That's true with anything. Just about all the playtest reports we've seen says the game is fun. As I said before, I have no reason to believe the game won't be fun. But there is a glaring ommission from all of the playtest reports. None have said that they felt that this is the way D&D was meant to be played. None have said that they felt that this is the fulfillment of Gygax's Dream, if only he had a team of developers/writers working on it full time as well as 30 years of playtesters. Heck no one's even saying that it is pressing their nostalgia button. The game is changing; not admitting to it publickly means you have a pink elephant standing right behind you. But to start off the announcement with "The game will remain the same," left a bad taste in alot of people's mouths. It felt like we were lied to or felt like Wizard's believes we'd swallow anything we're told, hook, line and sinker.
I'm not pointing fingers at you Stephen, nor am I holding you accountable for the actions of your company. I just hope that you can understand, at the very least, my feelings on this.
...Give me the game and someone like me can easily get 3.5E to stretch out a good 20 years. ...
What that guy did wasn't right. I agree. Those WotC employees had nothing to do with all the decisions. Those remarks should've been directed at people like Scott Rouse and the rest of his 4E crew (for me, specifically the FR designers destroying FR right as we speak). The hobby shop I go to love making cutting remarks about WotC every chance we get and, boy, we've said what we would do to the 4E designers if they ever walked through those doors...
I'm really really happy that no one in is good mind will ever give DnD game design into your hand... or even listen to any of your input about anything related to DnD...
For you, this is bad to spit in the face of some WoT employees but you got no problem doing worse to the games developpers... WoW... I am totaly amaze... Do you intend to break the legs of Scott Rouse or maybe burn is house...?
All the more reason why WotC shouldn't have switched editions in the first place.
They should've stayed with 3.5E as long as possible. Give me the game and someone like me can easily get 3.5E to stretch out a good 20 years. That's probably because, unlike WotC, I won't be destroying the core of D&D, I'll truly be listening to the people that have kept D&D going for so many years (and not the young, ADD, WoW players giving me feedback), and I wouldn't really give a damn about "super-profits". Enough to break even or a little profit is more than enough. I'd make the game for the sake of the game, not money.
What that guy did wasn't right. I agree. Those WotC employees had nothing to do with all the decisions. Those remarks should've been directed at people like Scott Rouse and the rest of his 4E crew (for me, specifically the FR designers destroying FR right as we speak). The hobby shop I go to love making cutting remarks about WotC every chance we get and, boy, we've said what we would do to the 4E designers if they ever walked through those doors...
There was a better way to patch up D&D and still make money. WotC decided to not go that route, like the typical American business people that they are, and took the easy route. What they fail to realize (or do realize, but simply don't care) is that this process is going to repeat itself all over again. The 4e-lovers will gripe about 4.5E, then about 5E being released when 2013 rolls around, and the 5E-pros will continue to blindly follow WotC's supreme leadership and nag at the 4E players for repeating past events. Meanwhile, I'll be playing 3.5E still, laughing...
I would like to note that, as I discussed in the original post, I really stopped thoughtfully considering your arguments very early on into your post. It doesn't matter if you were right or not, I just really didn't want to think about the overly antagonisitic statements and those compose nearly all of your post.
After the first sentence I was already thinking, "Oh no", because, in my mind, you were supporting that person in spitting on game designers for designing a game.
I tried to ignore that thought as I went into the next paragraph and I thought about the things were saying on how long an edition should last. Then you said WotC was destroying the core of D&D while saying that you could do this so much better. Then you quickly followed up by insulting anyone who likes 4th edition. Insulting people who like a game you don't like pretty much destroyed any credibility with me. I read on to see if, even after this, you made some awesome point that I should pay attention to.
Then a paragraph saying that those threats should be directed toward only some of the WotC employees. [sarcasm]So much better[/sarcasm].
More discussion on how long the delay between editions should be and what it will be based on the current release date. Might actually pay attention to it more if not for the comments at the beginning. Then more insults for the supporters of 4th edition.
It doesn't matter which edition the poster is supporting 3.5, 4th, 3rd, and 2nd. If the post is filled with this much venom I am more likely to support the other position out of spite than to listen to what you say.
The 4e-lovers will gripe about 4.5E, then about 5E being released when 2013 rolls around, and the 5E-pros will continue to blindly follow WotC's supreme leadership and nag at the 4E players for repeating past events. Meanwhile, I'll be playing 3.5E still, laughing at the 4E players for being so naive, and mocking the 5E all the same.
Why should someone who is buying into 4e care about an eventual revision ? They're (hopefully) buying 4e because they like the game, not because they're some sort of sheeple. If they like 5e they'll also buy that game. It's not really that complicated. People should buy and play games that they like and companies should create the games they want to create.
|
|
He flat out admits the original game is dated, and they are making updates to it. But then he go on to say that some people will not like it, simply on the grounds they screwed with the game they love. They know that, they admit to it and are essentially saying, "We hope you like our take on the game." And that has been their attitude on it since the announcement of the game.
I was trying to put my finger on just why the whole 4E thing just never bothered me at all. Folks here seemed to see some radical shift that just did not feel radical to me. This post sparked an AHA moment.
I played Traveller starting with the original edition. I had two games that I played as a kid D&D (3 books in a white box) and Traveller (3 books in a black box).
Every new edition of Traveller was a huge mechanical change to the game. Almost every edition also brought huge changes to the game universe. When MegaTraveller shattered the Imperium I thought that was cool. All other editions did stuff to the universe that I did not like all that much. In recent years I went back to Classic Traveller and found it to be fun but definitely dated.
D&D has been kinda stuck in the 70s until 3E came along. Then it felt stuck in the 80s. Other RPG systems came along with awesome mechanics for armor, magic, skills, advantages and disadvantages. 3E was taking D&D one step closer to becoming a modern role playing.
So that is the AHA - the pace of change in D&D is slower than in the rest of the RPG industry. Since I did not play D&D for nearly 20 years I had become accustomed to radical shifts in editions - both the fluff and crunch variety. My friends and I looked at 3E and agreed that it was getting there - maybe it would be a modern RPG in an edition or two.
Our expectation was that games change. The expectation of some of the folks here is that games do not change.
It's all a matter of perspective.
This is true... The "down side" of freedom of expression... :DIt wouldn't be understandable just rude and nasty. You would earn a face full of nuckles for that kind of crap.That was when the customer said something like, When I see them I just want to walk up to them and spit on them for what they are doing to D&D.
Wow. Completely unacceptable.
That is the difference with not liking the new game and being a dick.
It's also completely moronic for one simple reason:
The game isn't out yet.
If someone played it a few times, and THEN wanted to go spit on WotC employees for what they did to it, that would still be rude but understandable.
...
Spitting on some one isn't freedom of expression. It's assault! By all means beatch, grip, yell, scream, pout in a corner, but don't spit on someone and pretend it's freedom of expression. In fact the best way a person can express there dislike, nay hatred for WotC and what there are "Doing" to DnD 4e, is not to purchase the product. Continue to play DnD as who always have.
|
|
I'd make the game for the sake of the game, not money.
And then you'd be fired.
Those remarks should've been directed at people like Scott Rouse and the rest of his 4E crew (for me, specifically the FR designers destroying FR right as we speak). The hobby shop I go to love making cutting remarks about WotC every chance we get and, boy, we've said what we would do to the 4E designers if they ever walked through those doors...
And then you'd be arrested for assualt.
like the typical American business people that they are, and took the easy route.
Wait a second! Are you saying you don't want DnD made by Americuns, for Americuns?! Because this "no profit" sounds like communism to me, buddy!
follow WotC's supreme leadership
Kim Jong-Il?
and nag at the 4E players for repeating past events. Meanwhile, I'll be playing 3.5E still, laughing...
Unemployed, in the labor camp, under arrest for assault.
Actually, it varies by culture. In American culture, it's disrepectful and, given fear of blood-borne diseases, likely to trigger assault charges. In some cultures, it's a deadly insult. In others it's actually complimentary.
Spitting on some one isn't freedom of expression. It's assault! By all means beatch, grip, yell, scream, pout in a corner, but don't spit on someone and pretend it's freedom of expression.
I would diffinitly get in trouble in a culure where spitting on someone is a compliment. In my culture you can get arrested for assault for spitting on someone. Spit on me, you better run fast, because I'll assault you with my fists. Since we are talking about WotC in America, where spitting on someone is an assault (not just an insult), I would still offer better alternatives to expressing ones discontent with WotC, than spitting on them.
In others it's actually complimentary.
I've never heard this before. Does anyone have examples?
Greg
[They should've stayed with 3.5E as long as possible. Give me the game and someone like me can easily get 3.5E to stretch out a good 20 years.
I was playing 1st edition AD&D, 20 years ago. I'm sure there are poeple still playing 1st editionn AD&D. I hope to be playing DnD 8.0 in 20 years. But if your still playing 3rd edition and those Grognard hold outs from 1st AD&D are still arround and playing, I hope we are all still haveing fun playing Dungeons and Dragons.
In others it's actually complimentary.I've never heard this before. Does anyone have examples?
Greg
I think Greek mothers spit on there babies' faces for good luck. I'm guessing here,on something I may or may not have seen on TV.
I hardly come on the boards these days because of the behavior the OP is pointing out. I can never digest any criticism that includes subjective words like "sucks", "crap", and "bastards destroyed my game".
WotC hasn't destroyed 3rd Ed. They're just gonna stop updating the material. It's still gonna be around.
And as for 4th Ed., I'll take what I understand is a reasonable course of action: I'll *try* it before forming an opinion. If I like it, I'll switch over. If not, I'll stick to 3rd ed, and I'll be able to play it as long as I like, because last time I checked, the 3rd ed. books are not going to spontaneously combust come June.
|
|
No - but if 4th edition "succeeds", good luck finding any new high-quality 3rd edition support. You can play what you have till the cows come home. You can go back to rolling your own, or hope that the conversion process isn't as bad as advertised, but you can't expect to walk into your FLGS and pick up something new, slick, and ready-to-run for your 3rd edition game. That's why non-converters feel threatened.
The terms of the GSL will refute or vindicate those who believe WOTC is out to kill their game.
Our expectation was that games change. The expectation of some of the folks here is that games do not change.
I disagree, slightly. I agree with everything you said, but the above. I expect the game to change and I should hope that everyone else has the expectation as well. (I mean, how is a game suppose to sell when it is the exact same game.) But I also recognize that some people will not like the changes. It happens. No biggie, you can't win them all.
But saying he game is "better," IMO, sounds like they regard their opinion above all others. Whether or not it is true, it sounds arrogant. By publickly recognizing that some will not like the changes they made and inviting those that are not thrilled about the game to give it a try before making a final judgement sounds like the humble stewards of the game that Wizards says that they are.
... But saying he game is "better," IMO, sounds like they regard their opinion above all others. Whether or not it is true, it sounds arrogant. By publickly recognizing that some will not like the changes they made and inviting those that are not thrilled about the game to give it a try before making a final judgement sounds like the humble stewards of the game that Wizards says that they are.
I'm afraid this just leaves me scratching my head in confusion. If that's how you feel, that's fine but I just don't get it. All marketing is like this. Not just for DnD, not just for RPGs, for everything!
Products always claim to be faster, cheaper, and (most importantly) better than any competitors (including predessors). It just doesn't come across as arrogant at all to me.
As for the Traveller example, thats slightly different, since past edition switches had caused such a ruckus (even though I've never played, the furor was loud enough for me to hear it in my little it of Traveller free space!) I definitely read that more as "please at least try our new version before burning our house down!"
Maybe WoTC should try that approach when they eventually shift to 5E ...
Products always claim to be faster, cheaper, and (most importantly) better than any competitors (including predessors). It just doesn't come across as arrogant at all to me.
IMO, Wizards doesn't own Dungeons and Dragons. They own the IP, but I own my game. From it I can create world never envisioned by the creators. When I play Exalted, I play the one shared, assumed setting of creation. WW owns the game. When Yoplait says that their product tastes better then Dannon, I give it a try and decide for myself. But then again, they own their take on the product; they don't own yogurt.
Wizards owns the IP to D&D; they don't OWN D&D, AFAIAC. They own their take on D&D, and they can certainly make their take on D&D better, but they can never make my imagination, my railroady DM, or my memories of my game "better."
Subtle distinction, but one that I hold true, none the less.
IMO, Wizards doesn't own Dungeons and Dragons. They own the IP, but I own my game. From it I can create world never envisioned by the creators. When I play Exalted, I play the one shared, assumed setting of creation. WW owns the game. When Yoplait says that their product tastes better then Dannon, I give it a try and decide for myself. But then again, they own their take on the product; they don't own yogurt.
Wizards owns the IP to D&D; they don't OWN D&D, AFAIAC. They own their take on D&D, and they can certainly make their take on D&D better, but they can never make my imagination, my railroady DM, or my memories of my game "better."
Subtle distinction, but one that I hold true, none the less.
Ah, now I begin to see where our ideas on this matter diverge. Most of what you consider DnD lies outside of what I attribute to that title.
When I hear Wizards say they're making DnD better, I don't flash to the game worlds or characters I've made, or to adventures I've run/played in. I think of the game itself, the engine that runs all of the fantasy I enjoy. And when they tell me the engine now runs better, with 50% less harmful emissions!, well it makes me excited! :) I mean, I like the engine I have now, but it does clunk around every now and then. (Sorry if the anology there is clunkier than the metaphorical engine!)
By any chance (and at a risk of diverging wildly off-topic) do you decry the changes in fluff? I find myself curious if there is a relationship between an attachment to the generic fluff supplied and a more all inclusive view of the DnD implied in the marketing.
IMO, Wizards doesn't own Dungeons and Dragons. They own the IP, but I own my game. From it I can create world never envisioned by the creators. When I play Exalted, I play the one shared, assumed setting of creation. WW owns the game. When Yoplait says that their product tastes better then Dannon, I give it a try and decide for myself. But then again, they own their take on the product; they don't own yogurt.
Wizards owns the IP to D&D; they don't OWN D&D, AFAIAC. They own their take on D&D, and they can certainly make their take on D&D better, but they can never make my imagination, my railroady DM, or my memories of my game "better."
Subtle distinction, but one that I hold true, none the less.
This is getting really personal around here... What Edition of DnD do you own as your own game? I'm curious... :-)
Seriously, I really don't see the distinction you make regarding Exalted vs DnD... Both are ruleset to create your own game with your friends... White Wolf own Exalted and WoC own DnD... (the only difference is that the Exalted compaign sourcebook is include with the rules where FG, Eberron or Greyhawk, etc are not with DnD)... But I agree that nether own the concept of RPG or what you can do with the product they sales...I understand that a lot of people are upset by the fluf remove/introduce from/into 4E but I don't see how DnD will no longer be DnD as I have alway see the campaing world as distinct from the core rule. And this make me believe that a lot of people are frustrated because they assume that DnD = Greyhawk setting... Am I wrong?
EDIT: it's seem that David Marks came to the same conclusion at the same time... :-)