Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5618064" data-attributes="member: 6668292">I think a big problem is people saying &quot;I dislike Y edition because of these reasons&quot; and then people defending the &quot;attacked&quot; edition. I can defend any edition until I'm blue in the face, but if the guy I'm talking to will still feel that way at the end of the conversation, than it's not going to change anything.I can say I dislike a certain game because it reminds me of X, or I feel Y when I'm playing it, or I don't think it's Z based on my time playing it. Other people can disagree with me all day, but it won't negate my experiences.For example, some people dislike 3e because of the &quot;wizards &gt; fighters&quot; thing, and others never run across it, or if they do, it doesn't ruin their fun. Other people, however, can say that they dislike 4e because it &quot;feels like a board game&quot; or something similar, and others don't feel that way at all, since it doesn't remind them of a board game in the slightest.However, try to convince either one of them that their experiences are wrong and you'll hit a brick wall. They aren't going to say, &quot;you know what? You're right, that's not how I feel at all!&quot; It just won't happen.People have preferences. If someone states their reasoning (I feel this way; I think the game is this; it's like that to me; etc.), and people defend it (your preferred edition has the same problems; I don't feel that way at all when I play it; I don't see how you can think that, as I've never experienced it; etc.), nobody gets any closer to convincing anyone of anything.The case against any edition? It's got stuff people don't like, based on their preferences. Your mileage may have varied.As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5618064, member: 6668292"] I think a big problem is people saying "I dislike Y edition because of these reasons" and then people defending the "attacked" edition. I can defend any edition until I'm blue in the face, but if the guy I'm talking to will still feel that way at the end of the conversation, than it's not going to change anything. I can say I dislike a certain game because it reminds me of [I]X[/I], or I feel [I]Y[/I] when I'm playing it, or I don't think it's [I]Z[/I] based on my time playing it. Other people can disagree with me all day, but it won't negate my experiences. For example, some people dislike 3e because of the "wizards > fighters" thing, and others never run across it, or if they do, it doesn't ruin their fun. Other people, however, can say that they dislike 4e because it "feels like a board game" or something similar, and others don't feel that way at all, since it doesn't remind them of a board game in the slightest. However, try to convince either one of them that their experiences are wrong and you'll hit a brick wall. They aren't going to say, "you know what? You're right, that's not how I feel at all!" It just won't happen. People have preferences. If someone states their reasoning (I feel this way; I think the game is this; it's like that to me; etc.), and people defend it (your preferred edition has the same problems; I don't feel that way at all when I play it; I don't see how you can think that, as I've never experienced it; etc.), nobody gets any closer to convincing anyone of anything. The case against any edition? It's got stuff people don't like, based on their preferences. Your mileage may have varied. As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]

Verification