Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="justanobody" data-source="post: 4553372" data-attributes="member: 70778"> <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I have equal respect for Dave and Gary. Likewise for Wies, Hickman, Greenwood, Salavtore, Moore, etc.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">None of these and even combined, have authored more D&D material than the 30+ years worth of DMs out there that were NOT a part of the company making and selling D&D products. So if you are trying to say who wrote more, it was and will always be the community.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I give the material every bit of respect it deserves, and that just happens to carry back to it. Look at Uwe Boil and the flak he has got because people don't like his movies. You create garbage, and people will treat your creations like garbage, and probably question why you are still allowed to be creating the garbage. That is the way the world works. Consumers have every right to state they are displeased with the material and blame the one who wrote it. Just like anyone that doesn't like Harry Potter can attribute it to JKR and her bad writing skills. Just like LW was criticized for her bad management skills, etc. It is called accountability. Randy B. has made several forum posts on the WotC forums and even in Insider updates thingy, that takes responsibility for what the consumer sees as a screw up. From that there is now an Editorial Calendar for DDI. Randy noticed something went wrong and chose to fix it. Does that mean the consumers shouldn't criticize? Does that mean they should sugar-coat their criticisms? Does it mean every criticism will be answered like randy putting together the calendar? The answer to all those questions is No. Just because a critic gives you a bad review, doesn't mean they are showing disrpect, they are doing their job of giving something and someone for the efforts on that thing a critical review. Even giving a good review does not mean they respect the subject of the review. Mearls has been around here lately and criticized about a few things and some kitten scared him. Criticisms may dishearten the authors of D&D, but it shouldn't send them into depression if they are professionals. Mearls is still working on fixing things in his replacement in the position Andy Collins stepped down or switched with him for I am sure. So has anything changed in the relationship between critic and author? I don't think so, and authors shouldn't need to be pampered and should be able to handle a critical review because it comes with the job.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">I have no idea what your little music thing has to do with D&D as they are not even close to being able to discuss in this situation as critics of music are not allowed to rewrite the music and make it their own, like those who houserule D&D to fix problems with the game they find, or just adjust things for there own groups.</li> </ol>What I find is absurd is the need for sugar-coating a criticism because someone might just get upset that everyone does not hold their creation in the highest of praise.If I ever read my copy of Pathfinder I downloaded a while back and forgot about until I was cleaning up my flash-drive, and think it is a pile of crap, then I will state it is a pile of crap. Paizo will probably not care either way what a single person thinks, but when masses state there is problems, then they wull likely alter the design in order to get the masses to more agree with wanting to purchase the product and more likely to see future products as being something worth purchasing as well.There is the real crux of what a criticism is and does, be it light or heavy handed.Maybe the original, before "please" replaced "fool", would be a much better quote to end this post with, but I think the "please" version works quite well to deliver the point.</blockquote>

Verification