Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
OSR Gripes
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Eric V" data-source="post: 7634373" data-attributes="member: 6779717"><p>It's clear why some might want to go back to a previous version, based on preferences, nostalgia (not a bad thing!), or really, a bunch of reasons.</p><p></p><p>What's not clear to me is how people think games designed in the 70s are <em>designed better</em> than modern ones. I can understand preferring them, but, as [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] points out above, one would have to acknowledge the issues.</p><p></p><p>Like anything else involving design, things get better as time passes, whether it's tech, social issues, education techniques, sports, whatever...and that makes sense, because designers today have access to everything that's come before. They have seen what works, what gets in the way, what is worth keeping, what isn't...</p><p></p><p>There are social and other forces that get in the way, sure (weird that we can't get off fossil fuels by now), but the design is still superior.</p><p></p><p>None of that means anything for preferences of course: some miss their NES and find modern games too complex to be worth the effort; some prefer desks in rows and rote learning, etc. We should be able to acknowledge that we sometimes prefer the not-best-designed-thing, though.</p><p></p><p>Example: The NBA today has extremely efficient teams that have employed a lot of analytics to arrive at the conclusion that the shots worth taking are 3s and layups, and that's it. Like any innovation, lots of other teams followed suit, and it has resulted in a very different-looking game than the one I grew up watching. Do I prefer the new game or the old one? Not sure...there's aspects of the old way that I miss, for sure, but...I could never argue that the old game was more efficient in terms of basketball. Offensive schemes are designed better today, and a lot of it is access to greater information and data from the past.</p><p></p><p>So, if someone says "As a wizard player, I loved 3.5" I can understand. They might dislike 5e for addressing that imbalance (sorta like how hitting someone used to be considered "good defense" back in 1992 and in the current league you can't do that, and they miss all the hard fouls, even though it takes more skill to defend someone <em>without</em> hitting them), but they'd have to acknowledge that the game is better balanced. The design is better, but it no longer fits the preference.</p><p></p><p>To say that the <em>design</em> is better from games back in the 70s, though...I don't see how that's possible, not with how design works in almost literally everything else.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Eric V, post: 7634373, member: 6779717"] It's clear why some might want to go back to a previous version, based on preferences, nostalgia (not a bad thing!), or really, a bunch of reasons. What's not clear to me is how people think games designed in the 70s are [I]designed better[/I] than modern ones. I can understand preferring them, but, as [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] points out above, one would have to acknowledge the issues. Like anything else involving design, things get better as time passes, whether it's tech, social issues, education techniques, sports, whatever...and that makes sense, because designers today have access to everything that's come before. They have seen what works, what gets in the way, what is worth keeping, what isn't... There are social and other forces that get in the way, sure (weird that we can't get off fossil fuels by now), but the design is still superior. None of that means anything for preferences of course: some miss their NES and find modern games too complex to be worth the effort; some prefer desks in rows and rote learning, etc. We should be able to acknowledge that we sometimes prefer the not-best-designed-thing, though. Example: The NBA today has extremely efficient teams that have employed a lot of analytics to arrive at the conclusion that the shots worth taking are 3s and layups, and that's it. Like any innovation, lots of other teams followed suit, and it has resulted in a very different-looking game than the one I grew up watching. Do I prefer the new game or the old one? Not sure...there's aspects of the old way that I miss, for sure, but...I could never argue that the old game was more efficient in terms of basketball. Offensive schemes are designed better today, and a lot of it is access to greater information and data from the past. So, if someone says "As a wizard player, I loved 3.5" I can understand. They might dislike 5e for addressing that imbalance (sorta like how hitting someone used to be considered "good defense" back in 1992 and in the current league you can't do that, and they miss all the hard fouls, even though it takes more skill to defend someone [I]without[/I] hitting them), but they'd have to acknowledge that the game is better balanced. The design is better, but it no longer fits the preference. To say that the [I]design[/I] is better from games back in the 70s, though...I don't see how that's possible, not with how design works in almost literally everything else. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
OSR Gripes
Top