M$ User, Drag and Drop Product

[Crothian]

In the comment section for my MM2 review someone used these two phrases that I'm unfamiliar with. Can anyone help explain them?

The Review is here if you'd like to read the whole comment:

http://www.enworld.org/d20reviews.asp?sub=yes&where=active&reviewer=Crothian&product=MMII

 

[Nightfall]

I have no idea what he's talking about either Crothy. I think the "drag and drop" is just referring to using monsters that you, drag and drop. But no t 100% sure about that. the M$, no idea.

 

[EricNoah]

M$ probably means Microsoft. He's implying user stupidity or a user in need of hand-holding to accomplish simple tasks. Not a very nice comment!

 

[Nightfall]

Which just means that he's a silly person if you ask me just because Crothy DIDN'T like MM2.

 

[Drawmack]

M$ is a computer geek pun M$ = MS = MIcrosoft

Drag and Drop is a type of program. For example winzip uses drag and drop technology so if I drag a file onto winzip it will zip it up into an archive for me.

 

[Crothian]

Which just means that he's a silly person if you ask me just because Crothy DIDN'T like MM2.

That much was obvious. I expected to take a little flak for giving a low rating to a more populiar book.

CC2 and Monsternomicon raised the bar on monsters books. I really hope people realize this.

 

[EricNoah]

Right, Crothian says "MM2 doesn't provide info on how to use the creatures," this Timba guy says "maybe you need too much hand-holding."

 

[Khan the Warlord]

If the back of the MM2 says that it provides details on how to incorporate creatures like those offered inside into your campaign, then yes, it should get a low mark for failing to deliver what was promised.

However, if the advertising text and the contents of the book match perfectly, then the book should be graded as such, and not on what someone would have preferred, IMHO. For instance, Bad Axe Games says on the back of HoHF: D: "... the definitive sourcebook for dwarven characters of every kind", and I graded it on that comment; it is a sourcebook for dwarven warrior-types, not all kinds.

Seeing as how I don't have a copy of the MM2 yet, I'm at a loss unless someone reprints what the promo text says on it.

 

[Crothian]

If the back of the MM2 says that it provides details on how to incorporate creatures like those offered inside into your campaign, then yes, it should get a low mark for that.

However, if the advertising text and the contents of the book match perfectly, then the book should be graded as such, and not on what someone would have preferred, IMHO. For instance, Bad Axe Games says on the back of HoHF: D: "... the definitive sourcebook for dwarven characters of every kind", and I graded it on that comment; it is a sourcebook for dwarven warrior-types, not all kinds.

Seeing as how I don't have a copy of the MM2 yet, I'm at a loss unless someone reprints what the promo text says on it.

I wasn't going off the promo text or anything like that. THis little detail wasn't a big point in the review. With all the d20 books out there sometimes one needs to do a little compare and contrast. Other monster books have been doing this and I like it. MM2 does not.

 

[Nightfall]

I side with Crothy on this. Mainly BECAUSE there's been MORE monster books that have come out of HIGHER quality than the FIRST MM. While I don't have MM2, I have seen others that have been much more THOUGHT OUT and also takes into consideration MORE than just how cool it might look. I will agree with Khan on one salient point, that IF MM2 HAD something like that on the back, THEN yes it would CERTAINLY deserve a low rating for that. But I think it deserves an average rating MAINLY because some of the monsters in there didn't quite cut the of being good IMHO.