Irreconcilable differences(Forked Thread: When did I stop being WotC's...)

[Treebore]

Yep, I think 4E is helping people realize simpler can be better. So hopefully in another 5 to 10 years everyone will go back to playing Chainmail. Or at least get back to the OD&D Rules Cyclopedia by then.

 

[TwinBahamut]

1. The D&D brand: If things were simply about prefering one system to the other, there wouldn't be an edition war.

I'm sorry, but this statement is completely false, in my experience.

Look at things like the Mac vs. PC debate or the videogame console wars. These things fall pretty clearly into the realm of "simply preferring one system to the other", but people can get extremely riled up about them, often for no logical or sensical reason. I have seen people take something like "Devil may Cry 4 will now be on both the PS3 and XBox 360, instead of just the PS3" as a personal betrayal and insult to all PS3 fans. This kind of stuff makes no sense whatsoever, but people still do it.

 

[aurance]

Yep, I think 4E is helping people realize simpler can be better. So hopefully in another 5 to 10 years everyone will go back to playing Chainmail. Or at least get back to the OD&D Rules Cyclopedia by then.

I heard 6th Edition is going to be Tic-Tac-Toe with a "Fighter Face" instead of "X" and an "Orc Face" instead of "O."

 

[Tewligan]

Did 3rd have the requirement to sign up for online services to play?

Oh, come on - I'm not a 4e fan at all, but that's a pretty damn stupid thing to say. You aren't required to sign up for anything, and you know it.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Oh, come on - I'm not a 4e fan at all, but that's a pretty damn stupid thing to say. You aren't required to sign up for anything, and you know it.

At least not any more then I was forced to subscribe to Dragon or Dungeon for 3E. Maybe that's creating the impression it is somehow mandated, because many people believed these magazines were crucial to the D&D experience? Of course, if subscription to them was seen "mandated", why would the DDI subscription be worse?

 

[jdsivyer]

I wish someone (other than myself) would go back and dig through some usenet archives from circa September 2000 to see what kinds of gnashing of teeth and hand wringing was going on with folks with the release of 3rd edition.

Personally, I recall lots of folks being really excited about the new edition. Certainly not everyone was on board with the artwork, and the style, but everyone I knew pretty much collectively move towards it. Today - I don't know anyone in real life playing 4th edition. And if you believe the online polls, fully half the people outright hate the system. 3rd edition wasn't anywhere near those numbers.

I tend to agree. I've been there with the release of each edition, from 1st to 4th, and although there was criticism when 3e came out, it was of a different sort. Most of it was aimed at the artwork and style; sure there were those who favoured 2e (fair enough), but eventually many of those gravitated towards 3e. Now, I'm only going on my experience with my my gaming group and the gaming clubs I frequented, but it was a relatively quick time for people to embrace 3e. There were some quibbles, etc., but overall it was enjoyed.

However, I don't recall such a large degree of anomosity towards 3e as there has been toward 4e.

So why is that?

 

[CharlesRyan]

The D&D Brand and roleplaying separating will be the next big step. Its sad but it was fated to eventually happen when Hasbro got the rights.

What makes you say this? Are there other product categories that make more money for the D&D brand than RPGs? Is there a consumer segment that has greater brand loyalty toward D&D than roleplayers? Does Hasbro have a history of divorcing brands from their core categories?

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I tend to agree. I've been there with the release of each edition, from 1st to 4th, and although there was criticism when 3e came out, it was of a different sort. Most of it was aimed at the artwork and style; sure there were those who favoured 2e (fair enough), but eventually many of those gravitated towards 3e. Now, I'm only going on my experience with my my gaming group and the gaming clubs I frequented, but it was a relatively quick time for people to embrace 3e. There were some quibbles, etc., but overall it was enjoyed.

However, I don't recall such a large degree of anomosity towards 3e as there has been toward 4e.

So why is that?

I think this is one of the big problems, but when 3e came out, the two big praises were (to paraphrase) "This is the next evolution of D&D" and "This saved D&D for us!"

Namely, 3e was in most ways close enough to 2e to be converted and to see the trail connecting the two editions, and when 3e came out 2e had been drowning itself in a pool of vomit. It's OWN vomit, at that. Gross.

With 4e, on the other hand, what I really see a lot of is "I hated 3e, but this is like a totally different game!" A lot of people don't want it to be a different game though, and that's where a lot of the ire comes from. The other problem was that 3e was standing up and doing just fine; heck, not long before 4e was announced, Wizards was saying that 4e wasn't even planned because 3e was doing fine and dandy.

Again, I'm not trying to state 4e is bad or good; I'm simply trying to show the differences between the 2e-3e switch and the 3e-4e switch. I think the major point is the first though - there WAS a really old poll that was revived before 4e was announced regarding 3e, and most of the people stated "3e is simply the next and best evolution of dungeons and dragons. It's what I liked about 2e without what I disliked." Whereas, again, with 4e I see a lot of "Man I hated DMing 3e/something about 3e/bad thing in general possibly not related to 3e, I'm so glad Wizards decided to do something different with 4e." It's that different bit that has hackles raised. 2e took 1e and expanded it. 3e took 2e and GREATLY expanded it, which was in fact the complaint some people have with 3e - that it was really bloated. But 4e just seemed to give 3e the cold shoulder and started it's own thing. Some people like it, some don't, but it's very much going to start fights.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I remember it well, too. I mentioned in the thread this was forked from that one of the prominent RPG bloggers posted a link to a collected archive (from Planet and other sources, iirc) of 3e trashing posts from the time of its release. It was refreshing to have my memories confirmed and allowed me to accept that the mindless hate is the same mindless hate as then, likely even from a few of the same people, only shifting their love/hate editions up a notch (from 2/3 to 3/4).

I was excited about 3e, played it, loved it. It had its time, times change, things grow, and we move on. Such is life.

What I really don't get, then or now, is the depth of the nerd rage. Months after release, the same group of posters can't leave it alone, and I don't mean in specific edition war threads like this or the one this was forked from. But in just about every thread concerning 4e gameplay, the same people are still attacking the game and its players. No matter the topic, a 4e player asking the community for help on some aspect of play, or how to houserule something they want, or a new monster, whatever, someone has to go on the edition attack in those threads. I don't see "4e fanbois" jumping up in every d20 thread yelling "4e rulez. abandon your crap system and come to the light!" Not saying it doesn't happen, and I don't read a lot of the d20 threads as I've moved on, but those I do, I don't see this.

I guess I'm just left wondering, mostly in awe, how long it takes nerd rage to abate. For some, it won't, ever. There are still people who consider anythign post TSR to be complete blasphemy and nothing Wizards could ever do would get these players back. That's just the way I guess. Still, it's a curiousity.

I do find it very interesting to see how peopel - myself very much included - tend to see threads and posts on these forums in completely opposing light. I've yet to see a single thread where Pathfinder is even mentioned where it isn't in some way attacked, snubbed, or looked down on, and I've seen numerous occasions where even the slightest criticism of 4e is responded to with RABIES. OH GOD RABIES.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

With 4e, on the other hand, what I really see a lot of is "I hated 3e, but this is like a totally different game!" A lot of people don't want it to be a different game though, and that's where a lot of the ire comes from. The other problem was that 3e was standing up and doing just fine; heck, not long before 4e was announced, Wizards was saying that 4e wasn't even planned because 3e was doing fine and dandy.

Really? Where? I see more people saying that they prefer 3.x, not that they hated it and also hate 4E. Well, I suppose these people do exist, but they are not common on these boards.