Are people still mad about . . .

[Hussar]

If a statement doesn't apply to you or anyone you know, how is it rude and dismissive to you?

"If you are playing wearing purple beaver tails pinned to your ears, you are not having as much fun as you could be" is about as dismissive as this particular statement.

If I make a disparaging statement that applies to no one, how can anyone take offence?

"People with purple beaver tails pinned to their ears are silly"!

 

[ProfessorCirno]

If a statement doesn't apply to you or anyone you know, how is it rude and dismissive to you?

"If you are playing wearing purple beaver tails pinned to your ears, you are not having as much fun as you could be" is about as dismissive as this particular statement.

If I make a disparaging statement that applies to no one, how can anyone take offence?

"People with purple beaver tails pinned to their ears are silly"!

Strawman. That's a completely different argument that has no basis in the rules - or, for that matter, in reality.

If in 5e they stated "If your game has a lot of combat, it's not as much fun as D&D SHOULD be," I guran-freaking-tee that a lot of people would be upset. What if they said the same thing about skill challenges?

These are all in-game mechanics. And these are all judgmental statements about other peoples' games.

We even had a full discussion here on how profession could be used to influence and enjoy the game further.

Popularity and insulting are not on the same line.

Once again, I'm glad you weren't insulted. Other people were. Get over yourself. You're feelings are not the "one true feelings that everyone should feel."

 

[Hussar]

I note that nobody seems willing to take this excellent post into account. Nitpicking individual items ignores the true big picture.

But, is there really a big picture? That's my question. Is there a "big picture" or simply a group of people who were already emotionally invested in creating one? Is it a case that WOTC made all these comments and insulted large swaths of players, or that a group of gamers who had already mostly decided that they were not going to like the new edition, agitating and reinforcing their own memes to the point where the "big picture" comes into being?

To me, I think it's the latter. I think that people were actively trying to be insulted, and that every possible comment that could be spun into something negative was jumped on and expanded to the point where it became "truth".

IMHO, there is no "big picture" beyond what some people have painted for themselves.

 

[SkidAce]

I normally stay out of these, but...

In your example above, at least in my case and the people I know, for what its worth, we think it's the prior. We were excited for 4th, and in fact we still play it. But the comments they made (re: all the above) felt like they were judging our play and it wasn't meeting standards. We did feel insulted and we were not looking for it.

I still think it was pretty poor statements to make and disparaging to boot. We didn't look for it, it jumped out at us.

Nonetheless we pressed on and enjoy the game. Despite poor judgement in marketing or their stated intentions.

Your viewpoint about "no big picture" is what you see and understand from your paradigm. It's not what others saw. Our seeing it and your not are both valid.

 

[BryonD]

But, is there really a big picture?

Yes, there is.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

In your example above, at least in my case and the people I know, for what its worth, we think it's the prior. We were excited for 4th, and in fact we still play it. But the comments they made (re: all the above) felt like they were judging our play and it wasn't meeting standards. We did feel insulted and we were not looking for it.
.

See same way here, I was not super excited about 4e but they kept saying Saga like, and I so did like SAGA and though it be a great next step. The insulting comments turned me off, but it was the system that made me decide It was not for me. It was the comments that made me decide wotc needed PR people

Seems like some people think anyone that was insulted had to be trying to twist and wrap it into an insult, and thats simply not true.

 

[Hussar]

Well, obviously, I have to take your word for it. Fair enough.

Like I said, I'm one of the "some people" that HID is talking about. I looked at the same Dev blogs and whatnot that you guys did and saw pretty much nothing that was worth getting insulted about. To me, I still think that there was a very vocal group of people that were looking to get insulted and took every and all opportunities to spin anything they could to make it look like WOTC was teh evil corporation.

But, I do realize that we're not going to agree on this. All I can do is continue to ask, "How is this insulting?" Yes, I understand that you feel insulted by X. In order that you are not insulted again, can you explain how X offends you? And, time after time, I find that the answer is "Well, it's obvious isn't it? They hating on my game style!"

 

[Vartan]

Ouch.

I mean, ouch. As the OP. Ouch.

EDG: I apologize for my last post because it (implicitly) made you out to be a bad guy or troll. While I'm not crazy about the topic of this thread I think you've carried yourself well: my rant wasn't against you but against the general air of discussion that has dominated this post. I'm frustrated by what I perceive to be as a hostile vibe on this board: I've lurked here for some time, and it seems like some of our best ENWorlders only speak up when there's a flame-worthy debate. That's not your fault, and I apologize for singling out the thread's title as a point of contention. My sense of rhetoric got the better of my common sense (which, ironically, I think can be said of some of the responses I've read here to WotC's pre-4E marketing).

From everything I've seen you're a class act. These threads take on a life of their own: I didn't mean to point you out as a culprit or cause of the "bad behavior" I see in this thread, but my post definitely made it look like I did. Mea culpa. Seriously.

So far as the discussion here is concerned I think I've said more than my piece. I've been an RPG consumer for long enough to have seen plenty of editorials, statements and web postings that might make me angry at a given game designer or company. I choose to not be angry or hold grudges. If WotC sent out a press release to declare that "Our games aren't for anyone over the age of 30" then I would look at the statement cock-eyed...and then proceed to playing whatever WotC game I want.

Grognard, Old School-er, Pathfinder, 4E deveotee...we all have more in common with each other than we do with at least 90% of the population. There's plenty of room for rational debate about the merits of this or that game system, publisher or style, but what does it say about our community when divisive arguments draw so much attention?

Now I've said more than more than my piece

Respect to all ENWorlders.

Peace and gaming,

- Eric (a/k/a Vartan)

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

But, I do realize that we're not going to agree on this. All I can do is continue to ask, "How is this insulting?" Yes, I understand that you feel insulted by X. In order that you are not insulted again, can you explain how X offends you? And, time after time, I find that the answer is "Well, it's obvious isn't it? They hating on my game style!"

Some one who has 1: never seen your game run, 2: has no info on your game and 3: has never even meet you. Telling you your playing wrong is a bit insulting yes.


If they had said something like "We have taken the feedback from 8 years of game play and it seems that in most games profession and craft skills are often not used or handwaved. " Then I am guessing many people that were insulted would not have been

The "your game is not as fun as it should be" is like me stating "People with red hair are bad public speakers" with the same amount of data they had about my game As I do about the ability of red heads to speak in public

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But, is there really a big picture? That's my question. Is there a "big picture" or simply a group of people who were already emotionally invested in creating one? Is it a case that WOTC made all these comments and insulted large swaths of players, or that a group of gamers who had already mostly decided that they were not going to like the new edition, agitating and reinforcing their own memes to the point where the "big picture" comes into being?

To me, I think it's the latter. I think that people were actively trying to be insulted, and that every possible comment that could be spun into something negative was jumped on and expanded to the point where it became "truth".

IMHO, there is no "big picture" beyond what some people have painted for themselves.

No, there really is a big picture. As I've stated numerous times in the past, I was stoked about 4Ed enough to pre-order it a couple of days after my game store was allowed to take my money- effectively buying it sight unseen.

It wasn't until I heard the press releases that I got ticked.

And I'm not alone in this.

Yes, there were people who were opposed to 4Ed's release from the get-go. But most of the ones I heard who objected immediately did so on the grounds that it was "too soon", a "blatant cash grab" and so forth.

They didn't feel insulted, they felt they were being milked as a herd of cash cows.

And when you place that into the larger context of unpopular moves that preceded the 4Ed rollout- the ending of the print editions of Dragon and Dungeon; WotC's decisions against renewing several of the various licenses they had out there, etc.- BOTH groups of the dissatisfied really felt that WotC didn't have them in mind with the 4Ed release.