Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5916554" data-attributes="member: 22424">I disagree. I think that nostalgia has a significant role to play. Certainly, speaking for myself, I know it makes no logical sense that I should want to play the latest edition of a game called &quot;Dungeons &amp; Dragons&quot; just because of the name... and yet I do.Of course, I don't consider that nostalgia is particularly a bad thing, either.In my experience, the 2nd and 3rd seasons are almost universally the best, while the 4th almost invariably represents a massive drop in quality.The thing is, with the 1st season, the writers are working in the dark to a large extent - they don't know what the audience will like, what characters will become favourites, and what just doesn't work. So, they have to throw a bunch of stuff out there, and hope it sticks.With the 2nd season, they get to refine their concept in light of feedback - doing more of what works, dropping what doesn't. And the result is a generally tighter show, and the better for it. This often continues into the 3rd season, which is often very good indeed.But then comes the 4th season, at which point the writers have used up all of their really good ideas. So, they either continue in a rut (which starts to look tired), or they promote their not-so-good ideas (which reduces the quality). Or, in a lot of cases, they try to &quot;change the game&quot; - Buffy goes on to university, or the Fringe team find themselves in an alternate timeline, or whatever. The problem is that rebooting the series like this is risky. Sometimes it works, but more often it just splits the fan base.Shows that make it to a fifth season generally fix up some of the mistakes of the 4th season, but they very rarely make it back to the same heights of the earlier seasons. And beyond that, they start to get increasingly tired, as the original premise is all but worn out, but they can't make any truly radical changes.Any parallels between &quot;fourth season syndrome&quot; and 4th Edition are, I'm sure, entirely coincidental...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5916554, member: 22424"] I disagree. I think that nostalgia has a significant role to play. Certainly, speaking for myself, I know it makes no logical sense that I should want to play the latest edition of a game called "Dungeons & Dragons" just because of the name... and yet I do. Of course, I don't consider that nostalgia is particularly a bad thing, either. In my experience, the 2nd and 3rd seasons are almost universally the best, while the 4th almost invariably represents a massive drop in quality. The thing is, with the 1st season, the writers are working in the dark to a large extent - they don't know what the audience will like, what characters will become favourites, and what just doesn't work. So, they have to throw a bunch of stuff out there, and hope it sticks. With the 2nd season, they get to refine their concept in light of feedback - doing more of what works, dropping what doesn't. And the result is a generally tighter show, and the better for it. This often continues into the 3rd season, which is often very good indeed. But then comes the 4th season, at which point the writers have used up all of their really good ideas. So, they either continue in a rut (which starts to look tired), or they promote their not-so-good ideas (which reduces the quality). Or, in a lot of cases, they try to "change the game" - Buffy goes on to university, or the Fringe team find themselves in an alternate timeline, or whatever. The problem is that rebooting the series like this is risky. Sometimes it works, but more often it just splits the fan base. Shows that make it to a fifth season generally fix up some of the mistakes of the 4th season, but they very rarely make it back to the same heights of the earlier seasons. And beyond that, they start to get increasingly tired, as the original premise is all but worn out, but they can't make any truly radical changes. Any parallels between "fourth season syndrome" and 4th Edition are, I'm sure, entirely coincidental... [/QUOTE]

Verification