Taking a Break

[ProfessorCirno]

Couple of points. Ok, maybe the example wasn't textbook perfect. But, it has all the talking points. Someone found a point of comparison between video games and D&D (take your pick of edition) and then tries to make the astounding leap that D&D=Video Game du jour.

That's the point I was talking about. Whether he likes or dislikes the point is irrelevant to what I'm talking about. It's that leap at the end.

This isn't something inherint to just one argument. I see fantastic leaps of conclusions on these forums all the time, to the point where you'd think everyone was under some permanent +20 to jump buff.

That was lame of me

Ok, now I'm being accused of censorship. Wow.

Are people really that attached to using vague language that any attempt to make your point clearly becomes censorship?

The problem is, it's not vague language to everyone. You're saying "I think it's vague language. Ergo, it should be banned." Yes, that is censorship - you want specific things banned for no other reason then you don't like it.

And, no one answered my question. If you use language that you know is inflamatory - be it stating that Edition X isn't D&D or whatever - REGARDLESS OF YOUR PERSONAL FEELINGS ON THE ISSUE, trolling? Isn't that trolling by definition?

The problem is that it is inflammatory for stupid reasons. Saying you dislike 4e is inflammatory. Saying you dislike 3e can be inflammatory. Just because you know someone will (perhaps violently) disagree with you doesn't mean you stop talking. If anything, that makes it all the more important to say it.

I have zero problems with people not liking something. Heck, I understand that. My problem is when people couch their criticisms in buzz words that have a million different definitions. "It's not D&D" is a good one. What the heck does that really mean? "It's videogamey" is another good one. Does that mean that the game runs extremely smoothly and well and rarely has any play problems? Somehow I don't think so, yet, that would be a good definition of video-gamey.

And yet, you don't seem to grasp that they aren't freaking buzz words that people only use to put the game down. If it's a buzz word, it's because countless numbers of people have all felt the same freaking way and the explanation grew popular. Again, what you are asking for IS censorship - you don't like something, and you want it banned.

How is "Say what you mean" censorship? Isn't that the opposite of censorship? That's all I'm asking here. Say what you want to say, but don't use hot button terminology that's been beaten to death for the last eight years. All you do is Godwin the thread.

They are trying to say what they mean. They think 4e feels like a video game to them. And if you ask why, get this - it's a perfectly understandable response to say "I dunno, it just does." God knows nobody demands these kinds of explanations when someone says something POSITIVE of 4e.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Should I be sad or glad at the huge level of irony inherent in a raging argument like the one that this thread has become due to someone declaring an honest opinion?

I'd say it's a perfect show of why he's leaving.

 

[Cold Beer]

What he said.

Yeah, what he said. Don't sweat it, there's bigger and better things to worry about...

 

[LostSoul]

They are trying to say what they mean. They think 4e feels like a video game to them. And if you ask why, get this - it's a perfectly understandable response to say "I dunno, it just does."

It is understandable. It's not good for conversation.

Someone calls their experience "videogame-y". Does this mean that they didn't get as immersive an experience as they were looking for, or that they felt that 4e is not a roleplaying game? Both are logical conclusions of the "videogame-y" label.

God knows nobody demands these kinds of explanations when someone says something POSITIVE of 4e.

People should ask.

 

[Hussar]

They are trying to say what they mean. They think 4e feels like a video game to them. And if you ask why, get this - it's a perfectly understandable response to say "I dunno, it just does." God knows nobody demands these kinds of explanations when someone says something POSITIVE of 4e.

Because, when someone says something positive about 4e, they generally do so in concrete terms that leave little room for misinterpretation.

"I like the simplisity of monsters in 4e" is a pretty common one for example. You cannot misinterpret that. You can certainly disagree and people do. People want to use the 3e model where monsters and PC's follow the same rules. And that's perfectly fine and we can discuss the merits of both systems. But, you cannot really misunderstand what the person is saying.

"I think 4e is videogamey" is so broad and vague that its mostly meaningless and only serves to provoke. In the thread I quoted, the thread title is 4e=Diablo 2. He's basing his idea that a single point of comparison makes 4e a pnp verson of Diablo 2. I'd call that overly broad and vague. You don't and that's fine. I see it as symtomatic of the same sort of thing that has been going on for years.

See, I do have a problem when someone says, "I dunno, it just does." Because, how can you respond to that? How can you have any sort of discourse when the person you're trying to talk to doesn't even know what they mean?

I think 4e is weeblesclup. What's weeblesclup? I dunno, it just is.

How is that communication. You bring up the buggaboo of censorship and banning. I'm certainly not saying that the moderators should be involved in this, so, please stop putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that all posters should take a moment, before posting and try to formulate their thoughts into language which is as unambiguous as possible. You will never have perfect meaning. That's impossible. But, there are definitely degrees of ambiguity.

Using any of the "...y" terms is ambiguous. And then everybody scrambles around trying to figure out what exactly that means. I'll give the guy I linked to credit. At least he did take the time to point out exactly what he meant. And then took this giant leap afterwards. But, my point is, why do it in the first place?

This is hardly new to 4e either. This is a drum I've been banging LONG before 4e was released. RavenCrowking can certainly attest to that. Say what you mean. If the only way you can say something is to hot button, then maybe it's time to reevaluate what you're trying to say.

Unless of course, your entire point is passive agressive trolling.

 

[Hussar]

An additional thought.

Can you think of a single catchphrase, like videogamey that has a positive context? I can't. The only reason to use these terms is to express negative feelings without having to justify your arguement. These terms are not neutral. Not at all. Every one of them is negative. But, they are also broad enough that they can mean just about anything to anyone.

That's the reason you never hear anyone being questioned about the positive reviews of 4e, or 3e either. The catchphrases are never used in that context. You never say, Oh, 3e is videogamey and expect everyone to think that's a positive thing.

Can you think of a single positive catchphrase?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

An additional thought.

Can you think of a single catchphrase, like videogamey that has a positive context? I can't. The only reason to use these terms is to express negative feelings without having to justify your arguement. These terms are not neutral. Not at all. Every one of them is negative. But, they are also broad enough that they can mean just about anything to anyone.

That's the reason you never hear anyone being questioned about the positive reviews of 4e, or 3e either. The catchphrases are never used in that context. You never say, Oh, 3e is videogamey and expect everyone to think that's a positive thing.

Can you think of a single positive catchphrase?

No. And that is sad, because there are a lot of good and innovative video games and using video games only as a kind of "insult" or negative is unfair to them.

But, Hussar, didn't you want to focus more on the "real role-playing-related stuff" instead of the meta-discussions and hot-button-discussions, to save your own sanity and enjoyment of the game and this board?

 

[mach1.9pants]

This thread is a real scrob-woobler.

Your search - scrob-woobler - did not match any documents.

 

[rounser]

hardly a fair comparison.

It's not whether it's fair or not, it's facing the reality of things as they are.

Even when you have the equivalent of someone spending a full time job on PnP material (i.e. published megamodules) they still don't come anywhere near the scope of what people have come to expect from a CRPG, and are likely to be railroads to boot. They're restricted by a much smaller market, and a page count.

That's the reality of things, and that's the point I'm making.

 

[Raven Crowking]

To be fair, RC, it would have been a lot easier if, instead of saying "4e feels videogame-y", you would have said, "4e adds a barrier to immersion".

I very much doubt it.

RC