D&D 5E 5e and the Cheesecake Factory: Explaining Good Enough

[Manbearcat]

Could you imagine a film critic who went about film criticism simply in terms of its rankings or popularity? "We know that Citizen Kane is the best movie or otherwise it would not be number one on AFI Greatest Movies of All Time list." but without actually engaging the various film processes (e.g., acting, directing, cinematography, editing, pacing, etc.) that went into the making of the film or how it was a watershed moment?

And there is the other side of that which further complicates things.

How many movie buffs and even actors who have never_actually_seen Citizen Kane will reflexively say it’s the best of all time merely for fear of social status loss if they either (a) admit their ignorance or (b) dispute the cultural orthodoxy!

It may well be the greatest film of all time, but they certainly aren’t possessed of the means to bulwark its status (yet they certainly do!)!

Audiophiles do the same thing.

How many “the best” artists are relegated to the dustbin of history because they merely didn’t get “their push?”

 

[clearstream]

Could you imagine a film critic who went about film criticism simply in terms of its rankings or popularity? "We know that Citizen Kane is the best movie or otherwise it would not be number one on AFI Greatest Movies of All Time list." but without actually engaging the various film processes (e.g., acting, directing, cinematography, editing, pacing, etc.) that went into the making of the film or how it was a watershed moment?

The OP perhaps unintentionally played into this, through framing in terms of popularity and "favourite". Citizen Kane may be a great movie, without being a favourite. I agree that quality of an artifact in a technical sense is different from popularity, and both may be different from enduring contribution.

I was thinking - it would be interesting to get ratings on each system component, and the game as a whole, by experts in the field. Although then again, the view of the critic, and the view of the professional, can differ. And professional and acclaimed are too, different things.

 

[tetrasodium]

I'm not Jack, but it seems the point was that it was involved with lots and lots of feedback and surveys

wotc surveys are frequently so comically bad that saying "they border on push polls with wording that can give you a result showing whatever you want it to show regardless of the results" is almost an understatement.

 

[pemerton]

you sound like an art snob

And you sound like someone with no interest in discriminating on the basis of quality.

But in any event, @Ovinomancer's point is that popular things are not necessarily high quality.

More people have seen the film Avengers: Age of Ultron than the film My Life Without Me. The latter is undoubtedly the better film.

 

[TheSword]

This reflects the debate we’ve had elsewhere around film critic reviews not matching popular reviews.

Ironically the critical reviews of 5e are pretty damn good as well. It tends just to be forum posters who say it’s just okay enough, or popular for other reasons than the system. In fact when you read the reviews (not Amazon but bloggers and commentators) they praise the game. They acknowledge it’s weaknesses but they certainly aren’t claiming it’s not a good game.

The top and best (not popular) lists for RPGs also have D&D at or near the top by bloggers inevitable rank it top or near the top. These also aren’t Amazon reviews.

When popularity, financial performance, the market shifting in its direction (3pp), Amazon reviews, and commentator reviews all point to something being good... for 7 years... then it’s a brave soul who says. It’s not a good system, it’s just lucky/well timed/riding the crest of a wave.

Anyway, I’ve come to the conclusion we’re just repeating points. Minds will NEVER be changed on the subject as any attempt to use actual data points rather than anecdotal option is dismissed out of hand. Just as I will never convince Roger Ebert a film he doesn’t like is good, the same applies here.

At least nobody is debating the dictionary definition of popular yet

 

[Oofta]

And there is the other side of that which further complicates things.

How many movie buffs and even actors who have never_actually_seen Citizen Kane will reflexively say it’s the best of all time merely for fear of social status loss if they either (a) admit their ignorance or (b) dispute the cultural orthodoxy!

It may well be the greatest film of all time, but they certainly aren’t possessed of the means to bulwark its status (yet they certainly do!)!

Audiophiles do the same thing.

How many “the best” artists are relegated to the dustbin of history because they merely didn’t get “their push?”

But then there are people who will say that a band was awesome before they "sold out" and went lamestream. Nothing changed about the band, just their impression of the band.

The best movie ever made for me? Well, if you had asked me when I was 10, it would have been some 50s monster movie like "It Came From Beneath the Sea" or "Them!". Now? I'm not even sure I could tell you.

And you sound like someone with no interest in discriminating on the basis of quality.

But in any event, @Ovinomancer's point is that popular things are not necessarily high quality.

More people have seen the film Avengers: Age of Ultron than the film My Life Without Me. The latter is undoubtedly the better film.

For you, maybe. I used to rent all the Oscar winners and for me most of them were yawn-inducing boredom so bad that I didn't bother finishing them. But go ahead and tell me that I'm wrong and that your personal opinion is somehow superior.

"Quality" is personal preference dressed up as an objective standard.

 

[Manbearcat]

This reflects the debate we’ve had elsewhere around film critic reviews not matching popular reviews.

Ironically the critical reviews of 5e are pretty damn good as well. It tends just to be forum posters who say it’s just okay enough, or popular for other reasons than the system. In fact when you read the reviews (not Amazon but bloggers and commentators) they praise the game. They acknowledge it’s weaknesses but they certainly aren’t claiming it’s not a good game.

The top and best (not popular) lists for RPGs also have D&D at or near the top by bloggers inevitable rank it top or near the top. These also aren’t Amazon reviews.

When popularity, financial performance, the market shifting in its direction (3pp), Amazon reviews, and commentator reviews all point to something being good... for 7 years... then it’s a brave soul who says. It’s not a good system, it’s just lucky/well timed/riding the crest of a wave.

Anyway, I’ve come to the conclusion we’re just repeating points. Minds will NEVER be changed on the subject as any attempt to use actual data points rather than anecdotal option is dismissed out of hand. Just as I will never convince Roger Ebert a film he doesn’t like is good, the same applies here.

At least nobody is debating the dictionary definition of popular yet

I’m not sure anyone you’re conversing with would say that 5e wasn’t an extremely successful execution of intentful design, courting who they were trying to court, and a marketing coup.

Successful execution of intentful design (“doing what it says on the tin”) is one of the most legitimate/best metrics for evaluation of a product. By that standard, 5e is absolutely a great game (even though Ive only run about 100 hours worth of gameplay and I didn’t enjoy it). I think you’re participating in the other thread where I broke down a positive 5e review where I said the same (citing it’s execution of design goals).

Almost everyone you’re conversing with holds that opinion. You’re not engaging with the kind of edition warring we saw from 08-14.

 

[pemerton]

"Quality" is personal preference dressed up as an objective standard.

That would make it hard to explain how someone might have as their favourite a film that isn't the best.

I really enjoy Con Air and the second Austin Powers movie. As movies, I think they're clearly not as good as (say) Melancholia. But I enjoy them more.

I've often discussed a related point with @Campbell. I have a strong tendency towards sentimentality in my GMing. I don't think that contributes to the quality of my RPGing - but it doesn't mean I find it easy to make the hard calls that might improve my games.

I'm not entirely sure what @Ovinomancer has in mind as the measure of quality in RPGing. In fact I suspect he thinks it is multi-faceted and perhaps relative to play goals. But I don't think he is just talking about his preferences.

 

[Campbell]

In my personal estimation Fifth Edition is pretty damn good game. I just do not think it's popularity is an indication that it is a better game than games that are less popular. Right now we have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to well designed games within the mainstream or "traditional" side of the hobby. D&D Fifth Edition, Pathfinder Second Edition, Vampire the Masquerade Fifth Edition, Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition, Edge of the Empire, Star Trek Adventures, and Scion Second Edition are all extraordinarily well executed designs. I do not see a meaningful reason to elevate one above the others.

Historically within our own community there have been some pretty damn poor designs that were pretty damn popular at one time. Anything designed by Palladium, the original version of Vampire, AD&D Second Edition (particularly later day 2e), and most version of Shadowrun are all games that I am confident in calling out for extraordinarily weak game design.

 

[Ovinomancer]

So you deem it not "high quality" because ... huh? I'm not trying to be dismissive but you sound like an art snob. Those stupid plebs who enjoy the game just don't know what quality really is.

Nope, I'm saying that the number of 5 star reviews on Amazon is not sufficient or necessary to the condition to determine if the rules/system of 5e is of "high quality." I indicates that it is not of low quality, but there's insufficient information to make any other determination.

I've eaten at some very high end restaurants that were pretty "meh" for me. Maybe they were haute cuisine but I would have preferred pizza from my favorite restaurant. Does that mean either was higher "quality"? For me, for my personal taste preference, the pizza was higher quality. For me.

You, the pizza rated higher in your preference. These things are often confused, especially since neither has a fully objective scale.

Which is the problem with all of this. Quality, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. IMHO D&D is high quality for me because it does what I need and I enjoy it. You saying it's not is bordering on insulting whether you mean it that way or not.

So is it high quality? Who are you asking? There is no objective standard of quality for TTRPGs beyond basic clarity and cohesiveness.

I believe 5e to be of high quality. I also believe that Amazon reviews don't prove this.