Are people still mad about . . .

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Is there a reason you won't take what we're saying at face value?

I am taking what you say at face value. I understand that you and others were offended. I just don't think that those who you felt offended by intended to offend you. And PCat provided a statement that supports that position.

In retrospect, the one thing I did say that isn't fair and is ascribing motives to others that I cannot support is:

People did seem to hunt for things to be offended by just because they didn't like the direction the game was going.

I sincerely apologize.

 

[DaveyJones]

yeah, i'm not gonna go back and dig into old threads, but i specifically remember being told to go play my "old" game and leave the new game to new people.

at the time it was very ing

but they had lost me long before 4e was released.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, that may be your take on it, but it's not mine. You and Hussar seem to be doing the very same thing that Dannyalcatraz is talking about, discounting other people's emotional reactions to the situation. Or maybe it's worse because you're ascribing other motives or sentiments despite what we've been saying. Is there a reason you won't take what we're saying at face value?

And I don't see anybody here saying that focusing on a new segment is the same as insulting the old segment. Merely focusing on the new direction probably would have been perceived as less insulting.

I'm not discounting anything. I am, however, very much of the mind that there were more than a few people who were massively over reacting to anything and everything that was being said. It was to the point where the developers at WOTC could say the at water was cold and wet and someone would jump up and down shouting, "How dare you claim that the water in my taps is both cold and wet! I'll have you know that I work very hard to make sure that the water coming from MY taps is both warm and as dry as a bone. It actually klunks as it hits the bottom of the sink. These guys are idiots who obviously have completely lost touch with anything remotely resembling how water has been for the past several years!"

Am I saying anyone in this thread did that? Not in the least. But, there was some pretty huge over reacting going on.

As far as Gamer Zero goes, well, he was the Community Manager over at the WOTC boards. There was all sorts of poopie going on over there, that I'm not privy too. Was he canned over this ad? Nope, not at all. But, pointing to this particular video as an example of the face WOTC was putting on things may not be all that fair either.

 

[Piratecat]

Thing is, one person's definition of "overreaction" is another person's totally justified emotional response. I wouldn't be too quick to cast aspersions, please.

 

[Aeolius]

It was to the point where the developers at WOTC could say the at water was cold and wet and someone would jump up and down shouting...

Actually it was the lack of water, specifically watery creatures, that was on my list against 4e.

 

[Dannager]

Thing is, one person's definition of "overreaction" is another person's totally justified emotional response. I wouldn't be too quick to cast aspersions, please.

The normative line gets drawn somewhere. If we made allowances for every individual's own take on the sorts of behaviors that are acceptable online, we'd have...well, we'd have 4chan.

 

[Harlekin]

Thing is, one person's definition of "overreaction" is another person's totally justified emotional response. I wouldn't be too quick to cast aspersions, please.

The main problem may be that people state their emotional reaction as facts to give them more weight, even though they know that their perception is not shared by everyone on the board.

If you look at the first two pages of the board, several posts express their emotional reaction to the designer diaries as a factual statement about 4th editions marketing. And then this "factual statement" gets repeated over and over as if it was truth, when in fact it is just an emotional response.

Later, others express their emotional response as a fact and say that the articles were using some hyperbole to be entertaining, but did insult and obviously not intend to insult. Thus they implicitly (or explicitly) say that the first reaction was an "overreaction".

So the solution may be to refrain from using the rhetorical device of phrasing your opinion like facts. If you talk about your emotions (especially about edition war topics), you can say "I felt insulted by the ad campaign." Then it is much easier to recognize your emotions, because then we are not debating facts anymore.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

So the solution may be to refrain from using the rhetorical device of phrasing your opinion like facts.

Alternately, those who need it can retake the primary school unit we all had in which we were explicitly taught to distinguish fact from opinion.

 

[renau1g]

I also used to be frustrate about edition wars, but I guess those days are over

Havard

Ha...oh this made me laugh. If the many pages of this thread are evidence of anything it's that people are still fighting over editions, "mine's better, no your's is just Magic Cards with dice, yeah well you're a grognard, blah, blah, blah."

Why don't we try this? Everyone likes their own damn edition that they play. Nobody is forcing you to play 1, 2, 3, 4e or the inevitable 5e. If you have fun playing the deadly, more freeform first edition released, have fun, if you prefer the tactical, balanced 4e, cool, if you prefer the plethora of OGL options 3.xe is the way to go.

Oh, here's an interesting link from IGN. Although it discusses video games and console wars, it totally reminded me of the "edition wars"

State of the Console (Flame) War - PC feature - at IGN

 

[Chrono22]

You seem to think of WotC as this singular entity mashing its way through grognards like Godzilla.

Well, it is a corporation (a subsidiary). That makes it a legal entity. But actually no, I don't think that. Please don't try to straw-man me.

WotC is a group of actual people. Some of them touted the Gametable while others took that away. Some of them may have wanted the GSL to be as open as the OGL, others shut it down. Some of them may have understood pdf piracy while the Hasbro lawyers forced them to shut it down. What you see as large numbers may be acceptable losses to them to gain new players. The matter of whether their market research was wrong is a matter of opinion, not a fact as you try to state it.

No losses are acceptable losses. Not when you are trying to make sales and a profit~ anyone that tells you otherwise doesn't know what he's talking about. Including actions that lose you a large chunk of your current income base over the long term is a risky strategy with little chance of return. The person in charge of their brand strategy was a fool.

Of course 4E was in production before they revealed it, this is not mutually exclusive of the developers incorporating player feedback. You choose to view their actions as a slap in your face, while it is instead the decisions of a group of people that just happened to not go in a direction you like. I'm sorry that you feel that way, but as PCat posted the people at WotC meant no direct offense to you personally.

As I said earlier, I'm not emotionally invested in 4e. I'm just annoyed by the crappy GSL and pulling PDFs. Both were stupid things that damaged WotC customers' goodwill and D&D's brand image. The less exposure D&D has, the less it grows. 3ps' expanded the pie beyond whatever tiny proportions WotC might have lost. And WotC's excuses for pulling PDFs were a smack in the face. They were abject lies.
I have a low tolerance for b******* and deliberate stupidity. WotCs' actions regarding PDFs and the GSL smack of both.