FastForwardGames & Reviews: The Confrontation
- Thread starter Cergorach
- Start date
Ghostwind
First Post
No one likes a bad review, be it publisher, writer, artist or anyone else involved in the rpg industry at a professional level. Criticism is to be expected, but how you handle the criticism is what determines the kind of person you are.
In the case of Fast Forward, Jim Ward's column brought up valid points but he allowed his emotions to interfere with the point he was making. The end result was an article that imparts a great deal of veiled venom rather than an objective assessment of how he views critical reviews.
The RPG industry is in a somewhat unique position in that it has to rely upon "amateur" (non-paid) individuals to write product reviews because there really isn't a financial support structure in place that will support a significant number of "professional" (paid) reviewers. Because of this, there is a dramatic difference in not only the style of reviews but also the quality. A badly written review that inaccurately portrays the subject of the book can be a devastating blow to sales. I believe this is one of the points that Jim Ward was trying to make.
However much publishers would like to see it, there will never be a uniform code of criteria that all reviewers would use to evaluate the products. Therefore you will always have reviews that are critical for no reason at all and reviews that are critical with the supporting arguments to back it up. The best thing a publisher can do is accept this fact and if they have an issue with a review, contact the reviewer privately to discuss the matter first. Many times, problems within a review can be corrected through this simple act.
Publishers should also be aware that consistently sub-par reviews by a diverse sampling of reviewers is an indicator that there is an inherent problem in product design and that is something that should be addressed in-house. Perhaps the problem lies in that the publisher is not able to effectively get across the message that his products are intentionally meant for epic level play and not the baseline campaign, or that he is consistently using a certain mathematic formula that results in improper game mechanics. Reviews are there for everyone to learn from, but the moment it is taken as a deeply personal slam or attack, the professionalism is bound to fly straight out the window.
In the case of Fast Forward, Jim Ward's column brought up valid points but he allowed his emotions to interfere with the point he was making. The end result was an article that imparts a great deal of veiled venom rather than an objective assessment of how he views critical reviews.
The RPG industry is in a somewhat unique position in that it has to rely upon "amateur" (non-paid) individuals to write product reviews because there really isn't a financial support structure in place that will support a significant number of "professional" (paid) reviewers. Because of this, there is a dramatic difference in not only the style of reviews but also the quality. A badly written review that inaccurately portrays the subject of the book can be a devastating blow to sales. I believe this is one of the points that Jim Ward was trying to make.
However much publishers would like to see it, there will never be a uniform code of criteria that all reviewers would use to evaluate the products. Therefore you will always have reviews that are critical for no reason at all and reviews that are critical with the supporting arguments to back it up. The best thing a publisher can do is accept this fact and if they have an issue with a review, contact the reviewer privately to discuss the matter first. Many times, problems within a review can be corrected through this simple act.
Publishers should also be aware that consistently sub-par reviews by a diverse sampling of reviewers is an indicator that there is an inherent problem in product design and that is something that should be addressed in-house. Perhaps the problem lies in that the publisher is not able to effectively get across the message that his products are intentionally meant for epic level play and not the baseline campaign, or that he is consistently using a certain mathematic formula that results in improper game mechanics. Reviews are there for everyone to learn from, but the moment it is taken as a deeply personal slam or attack, the professionalism is bound to fly straight out the window.
jgbrowning
Hero
Ghostwind said:
Unfortunately, this was my perception as well.
joe b.
Ralts Bloodthorne
First Post
Once again, I'll reiterate what I posted in the other thread.
Reviews are a tool. Some tools aren't worth the metal they are made of (and in reviews cases, the electricity made to create them) and if you look, you can tell which ones.
While nobody likes a bad review, they should still be taken into account. A bad review can show bad spots in your technique, flaws in your mechanics you were not aware of, and/or tell you market receptability for your next product.
To me, that's what Mr. Ward forgot, and while he did have valid points, his tone and manner came off as hostile and childish.
Blaming the critics for poor sales is like a craftsman blaming his tools.
"A poor craftsman blames his tools, boy, and when you work with your mind, you have no tools. Think on that."-My father
Reviews are a tool. Some tools aren't worth the metal they are made of (and in reviews cases, the electricity made to create them) and if you look, you can tell which ones.
While nobody likes a bad review, they should still be taken into account. A bad review can show bad spots in your technique, flaws in your mechanics you were not aware of, and/or tell you market receptability for your next product.
To me, that's what Mr. Ward forgot, and while he did have valid points, his tone and manner came off as hostile and childish.
Blaming the critics for poor sales is like a craftsman blaming his tools.
"A poor craftsman blames his tools, boy, and when you work with your mind, you have no tools. Think on that."-My father
PatrickLawinger
First Post
I was unimpressed by Mr. Ward's column and the "veiled venom" as some have put it.
I have seen numerous reviews panning FFE products that said exactly why the reviewer didn't like them, giving examples. I have also seen numerous reviews pointing out OGL/SRD problems. If Mr. Ward actually read reviews calmly without getting upset at not getting a 5/5 or 10/10 then maybe he could have solved some of the rules and legal problems people complained about. Then maybe, just maybe, they could have avoided shredding 4 books.
I find it suspect that he directs his venom at reviewers soon after having to shred books for SRD/IP/Copyright violations.
I have seen a number of well-written and possibly overly-kind (my opinion) reviews of FFE products. I would never rate the few products I have seen anything above 3, and I doubt that high. I have heard that some of their rules problems improved, but frankly, I don't forsee ever trying them out.
Patrick
I have seen numerous reviews panning FFE products that said exactly why the reviewer didn't like them, giving examples. I have also seen numerous reviews pointing out OGL/SRD problems. If Mr. Ward actually read reviews calmly without getting upset at not getting a 5/5 or 10/10 then maybe he could have solved some of the rules and legal problems people complained about. Then maybe, just maybe, they could have avoided shredding 4 books.
I find it suspect that he directs his venom at reviewers soon after having to shred books for SRD/IP/Copyright violations.
I have seen a number of well-written and possibly overly-kind (my opinion) reviews of FFE products. I would never rate the few products I have seen anything above 3, and I doubt that high. I have heard that some of their rules problems improved, but frankly, I don't forsee ever trying them out.
Patrick
Flyspeck23
First Post
Maybe I'm a little biased 'cause I´ve send Fast Forward Entertainment $2000... just kidding 
Granted: this article was... let's say: a little untimely, as PatrickLawinger pointed out.
But let's not forget: we're not talking about one of the big fishes in the pond (heck, there's only one big fish... sometimes the D20 industry reminds me of the NATO...).
That article probably isn't the end for them - but it seems to add up. Time will tell.
What I'm trying to say? Probably this: don't take that article personaly (or you're making the same mistake you're accusing Jim Ward of having made).
Granted: this article was... let's say: a little untimely, as PatrickLawinger pointed out.
But let's not forget: we're not talking about one of the big fishes in the pond (heck, there's only one big fish... sometimes the D20 industry reminds me of the NATO...).
That article probably isn't the end for them - but it seems to add up. Time will tell.
What I'm trying to say? Probably this: don't take that article personaly (or you're making the same mistake you're accusing Jim Ward of having made).
trancejeremy
Adventurer
This isn't exactly a first - a couple other d20 companies/writers have written columns criticizing reviews. But they were much more contructive and professional about it, and less vitriolic.
This one I had to stop reading, because it was angry-ing up my blood.
And like I said in the other thread. I think that any objective analysis of Fast Forwards' product reviews would show they are pretty accurate, with any error occuring on the generous side.
This one I had to stop reading, because it was angry-ing up my blood.
And like I said in the other thread. I think that any objective analysis of Fast Forwards' product reviews would show they are pretty accurate, with any error occuring on the generous side.
Similar Threads
