Pathfinder 1E Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo, commenting about ENWorld

[ProfessorCirno]

I think that Celtavian brought it on himself a little bit, with the melodramatic tone of his post. From the title of the post to him telling people not to argue with him, that's just flamebait plain and simple. If you want to reduce edition war threads, you've got to put a stop to flamebait as well as flamers.

The problem is, "flamebait" is now defined as "Saying anything bad about 4e." Furthemore, he never said "I'm right, don't argue with me." What he said was "This is my opinion, I played the game, you really aren't going to change it. I've had a lot of experience in D&D, and yes, I've had a lot of experience with 4e. This is how I, personally, feel. You can't force be to change my feelings on this."

Cue dozens trying to do just that, in some of the most insulting ways imaginable.

As for EN World having a big part to play with 4e, I'll throw this out - before 4e officially came out, if you looked up 4e info, EN World was always the first place that popped up. Even when Wizards was throwing out their tidbits and design philosophies, it wasn't wizards and that tidbit you'd find, it was EN World linking to it. Claiming it had nothing to do with the edition launch is laughably and purposefully ignorant.

 

[Kzach]

I'd have to say, that's a pretty unfair criticism of Morrus and ENW in general.

I started perusing these boards again when 4e was announced and from what I saw, there was a pretty concerted effort not to be biased either way and the best the mods could do was hold on to the bucking horse for dear life until things settled down (and I'd still say the colt from Old Regret hasn't quite been tamed yet).

It should also be pointed out that it's in Lisa's vested interest to sustain the anti-4e sentiment and divisiveness between the fan-base.

 

[xechnao]

I am still not sure how important these internet wars actually are for the success of any edition - but particularly something as large as D&D (in the context of Roleplaying Games, of course).

There were some info on the internet traffic EnWorld managed to gather before 4e launched. I remember it was big.

And let's face it - EN World started as a D&D news site.

You have a point. But as Wizards changes editions, Enworld could have changed too.

But I think the problem is really that some people just don't want to accept that the discussion is always on current topics.And the current topic is the new edition of D&D.

Well there is a problem with this logic here. I could say that people make topics and topics are not made by themselves. So who is to decide the currency of a topic if not the amount of coverage people give it.

And how does she suppose could Morrus change the higher 4E focus? Artificially limiting the number of threads created for 4E? Increased hostility against 4E? How do you manipulate your board members so that they discuss "evenly" on topics?

Perhaps her argument might be by not organizing so blatantly the site as the "Speaker" of 4e?

 

[Najo]

I want to chime in on this myself.

I agree with the posters who are saying ENworld is staying balanced and its the threads of the community that is focusing on 4e. Our community creates that content, not morrus or the mods. To state otherwise is silly.

Second, ENWorld is a D&D news site, plus it covers everything done by the offshoots (i.e. d20 OGL based games). Truth is, 4e is the big D&D news, 3.x does not have much news and the other sideline stuff is minimal in the amount of news that releases. ENworld is going to naturally follow what occurs in the d20 (3.x or 4.0) realm and right now the majority is 4e. Again, if you think otherwise, you need to check the industry around you. 4e is the big thing (whether you love or hate it) right now.

As for moderators and Morrus, they have not crammed 4e down our throats. Most of them have said they either like or dislike 4e, but none of them are hopping into threads and pressing their opinions on us. Also, they stopped people starting edition wars threads and gave 3.x and 4.0 equal forum space.

That is not sticking your flag in 4.0 camp.

ENWorld, Morrus and his crew are doing a fine job, and for Lisa to say otherwise is not fair. Of course, its has nothing to do with the finanical gain her company experiences by fanning those flames...

Finally, the decline in 3.x pdf sales is because a) PDFs already are low sellers b) 4.0 is here and 3.x future is uncertain as it is no longer supported by WOTC. Pretty simple cause and effect there.

Morrus and crew, keep rocking! You guys are doing great.

 

[Griego]

The problem is, "flamebait" is now defined as "Saying anything bad about 4e." Furthemore, he never said "I'm right, don't argue with me." What he said was "This is my opinion, I played the game, you really aren't going to change it. I've had a lot of experience in D&D, and yes, I've had a lot of experience with 4e. This is how I, personally, feel. You can't force be to change my feelings on this."

Cue dozens trying to do just that, in some of the most insulting ways imaginable.

As for EN World having a big part to play with 4e, I'll throw this out - before 4e officially came out, if you looked up 4e info, EN World was always the first place that popped up. Even when Wizards was throwing out their tidbits and design philosophies, it wasn't wizards and that tidbit you'd find, it was EN World linking to it. Claiming it had nothing to do with the edition launch is laughably and purposefully ignorant.

Again, as was pointed out several times in the thread, posting criticism in such a manner, on a discussion forum, and then basically telling people not to respond unless they agree, is ludicrous.

 

[greyscale1]

I think Eosin has a good point about the lack of 'general discussion' in the general discussion boards. Lately there have been a lot of "do you think this random complaint is valid" type polls, mini edition wars, and half-hearted discussions about posts and articles elsewhere. I think that this is mostly still a result of 3.5->4.0 shock, and will clear up to more interesting fare soon.


As for EnWorld being pro or anti anything: My perception is that Enworld is pretty friendly (nowadays) to all editions. I'm a 4e man myself, and I feel like there is plenty of good discussion here about 4e. However, I dont think I've seen anyone really being shunned, insulted, cajoled or any other such and such a thing due to their edition affiliation. As opposed to the giant in the playground forums which I used to frequent much more often than Enworld. These days, any post over there so much as hinting as having to do with 4e is torn down in that passive aggressive whiny internet manner (and very often by posters whom at one time I might have respected )

 

[Foundry of Decay]

I'm genuinely confused by the statement, actually.

Please note that I'm not actually attacking its validity because I'm honestly trying to work out what it means.

Does she mean that after 4e was announced that they were disappointed that there was no more 3e (or at least, waning) coverage? Or that there was some statement made that there wouldn't be news on any more 3e systems.

I admit that I hadn't been around ENWorld until probably.. I'd wager a month or so after 4e was announced.

I would think, though, that if 4e was announced it would be normal for the premier D&D site to cover the new editions tidbits rather than simply stop reporting altogether since outside of third party publishers there wasn't any official news coming out of Wizards about 3e since it was effectively discontinued in being printed/supported after the 4e announcement.

But again, I'm sort of out of the loop on this one. I'm not even going to go into if the site is pro or anti anything. Judging by what I see on the front page its pretty neutral.. I'm seeing stuff from all over the spectrum there.

 

[Maggan]

My recollection of the event is that the drop off in sales that Morrus posted about ocurred pretty much as soon as 4e was announced. And well before EN World pitched any tents apart from "there's a new D&D coming, we'll report on that!"

And isn't EN World supposed to report heavily on a new D&D?

/M

 

[Spatula]

I'm genuinely confused by the statement, actually.

Please note that I'm not actually attacking its validity because I'm honestly trying to work out what it means.

Looks pretty meaningless to me.

"If Morrus could have kept things on a more neutral ground, providing an environment where pro-3e and pro-4e folks could have felt equally loved,"

The 4e stuff was in its own forum. The older forums were all 3e related, system independant, or devoted to other games. The mods didn't take sides in the edition war threads, and only stepped in to try and enforce the board civility rules. At one point I recall a number of posters in the 4e forum wanting to find a new home where they could talk about how awesome the not-yet-released edition was without having to listen to those pesky people disagreeing with them. And yet Morrus was somehow taking sides? Lisa Stevens is full of crap here.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Again, as was pointed out several times in the thread, posting criticism in such a manner, on a discussion forum, and then basically telling people not to respond unless they agree, is ludicrous.

Posting a calm, reasonable critique of a game, and stating that one's position on said game cannot be moved by means of argument, does not given anyone the divine right to *attack* the *person* (not the game, or another game, or whatever) and get away with it.

Except that, on these forums it does, apparently.

Lisa Stevens definitely has the right of it, sadly.