Criticism of the ENnies at RPG.net

[Wolfspider]

Just as I didn't want to run a basically non-moderated forum neither do I really want to participate in one. But I'll stand on the sidelines and read what's going on now and then. In any case I have great respect for the site -- it's about the only non-D&D or D20 site I visit with any regularity.

I feel the same way. I visit RPG.net almost as much as ENWorld, and I enjoy the articles and reviews, but recently I decided never to participate in another discussion there. I just don't do well there.

Of course, I have a hard time resisting the tempation to post there, so I'll probably end up back in the fray sooner or later....

 

[trancejeremy]

I dunno. Some of RPG Net can be useful, but I've always thought it attracted snobbish gamers.

 

[Corporate Dog]

The irony is that you've nicely summed up the difference between ENBoards and RPG.net right there, Corporate Dog.

I never suggested the sites WEREN'T different... I suggested that their differences didn't make one better than the other. Go back, read my post, and you'll see me ADMIT that rpg.net is adversarial in nature.

On the contrary, the point I was making is that the sites are SO different, they're not in anything even remotely resembling competition, so it's pretty ridiculous to try and fabricate one.

Regards,
Corporate Dog

PS: Out of curiosity, do you think ENWorld would continue to be so harmonious if it covered a wider spectrum of RPG products? Conflict isn't always a bad thing you know... good things CAN and often DO come out of it.

 

[Corinth]

I noticed that myself as I was perusing the reviews. I like reading their product reviews, but man is that site taken up by a lot of noise and thrashing about.

Yep, which is why the place is popular.

 

[EricNoah]

Conflict isn't always a bad thing you know... good things CAN and often DO come out of it.

Ahh! Have you been talking to my therapist again??

In any case, there is one and only one reason the scope of my site was as narrow as it was: it was what I liked and was interested in. I can only assume Russ feels the same way. I never ran a site about "all rpgs" because I'm not interested in "all RPGs". Doesn't mean one shouldn't exist, nor that people shouldn't go there. As to "would things be as harmonious" -- they would be more harmonious than at RPG.net simply because the moderation styles differ so much. You would HAVE to be able to get along with others or you'd be asked to leave. Which brings me back to why I like focus -- it does by its nature attract like-minded folk.

 

[Kichwas]

So here's what I posted there:

Last year the Ennies definately were a joke.

A pile of obscure products lumped in with a few well known. It was pretty clear that what got voted was what people had seen.


This year I don't know. I'll consider it a joke unless I know every judge has fully read EVERY nominated product.

The reviews at ENWorld are definately 'clic'ish. But so are the reviews here.

You can't really put much stock in reviews untill you've seen a pattern emerge from the given reviewer and it matches your own tastes.

Hopefully the process used this year for the Ennies is different enough from last year that fair and legitimate results will ensue. But I haven't bothered to follow it at all this year to find out.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Well, I plan on fully reading everything that gets nominated. I wouldn't have volunteered for it if I was going to do it half-arsed. It's a responsibility I take seriously.

 

[EricNoah]

Hopefully the process used this year for the Ennies is different enough from last year that fair and legitimate results will ensue. But I haven't bothered to follow it at all this year to find out.

Well I wouldn't get your hopes up -- we're doing it pretty much exactly the way we did it last year. Our community elected judges, the judges will read every nominated product and pick five for each category, then the fans will vote. The idea of the ENnies is for the fans to pick the "best of the best" -- which means that in our case it really is as good to be nominated as it is to win.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

What may be important is that perhaps everything that could have been nominated last year wasn't. So that may be why no-brainer products (those that would have been obvious shoo-ins) didn't win anything.

 

[Corporate Dog]

In any case, there is one and only one reason the scope of my site was as narrow as it was: it was what I liked and was interested in.

And just to clarify my position, I wasn't suggesting that ENWorld's narrow(er) scope was a bad thing either. It's a good thing, actually.

As to "would things be as harmonious" -- they would be more harmonious than at RPG.net simply because the moderation styles differ so much. You would HAVE to be able to get along with others or you'd be asked to leave.

A fair enough argument.

Regards,
Corporate Dog