Review of 4E on Aint It Cool News

[Mouseferatu]

If you're going to quote me, at least try to read what I said.

Yes, I said we weren't primarily playtesters. But I also said that we offered playtest feedback. Using that to say that we somehow didn't count as playtesters at all is disingenuous at best, deliberately dishonest at worst.

Same with your comment about bias. So, what, people who like something shouldn't be allowed to review it? Reviews are only acceptable if they come from people who have both something positive and negative to say? Horsecrap. If a reviewer likes something unabashedly, then he should review it unabashedly. Just like if a reviewer hates something 100%, that's how he should write about it.

And finally, I had nothing to do with the core rules. I've worked on other 4E stuff, but I had nothing to do with the core. And while he didn't mention me by name, in his first review, he did very specifically say that he had a freelancer in his group. So implying that he was somehow trying to hide something is also disingenuous.

 

[Alikar]

Sorry to disappoint. I actually had a higher regard for you before reading that review. I was actually so horrified and disgusted that I almost quit half way through. I would not recommend you pointing to that again as something to make people like you. Well at least I know not to read anymore of your stuff.

I agree. I'm never going to "Ain't it cool news" again until I know this man is fired. What a horrible horrible thing to write. I'm absolutely disgusted.

 

[Klaus]

Why sir, I believe you are understating things just a tad.

Maybe you should point him to my BRATZ review. Everyone likes me after they've read my BRATZ review.

Nice review! I like you better already!

But it has a downside: it assumes the reader has some sense of humor.

Cheers!

 

[Qualidar]

Massawyrm,

1) I just wanted to say it's cool to see you here. AICN and ENWorld were my first 2 board communities, and they are both still the first ones I open up to every morning. Neat to see a connection between them.

2) As you're new: there's an ignore function of someone's being too much of a jackass to you. Don't feel you have to put up with it.

 

[Qualidar]

I agree. I'm never going to "Ain't it cool news" again until I know this man is fired. What a horrible horrible thing to write. I'm absolutely disgusted.

Alikar, two questions:

1) Are you serious??

2) How many times have you gone to Ain't it Cool before?

 

[Brown Jenkin]

If you're going to quote me, at least try to read what I said.

Yes, I said we weren't primarily playtesters. But I also said that we offered playtest feedback. Using that to say that we somehow didn't count as playtesters at all is disingenuous at best, deliberately dishonest at worst.

In my first post I refered to it as Rules Familiarity Playing not Playtesting. You yourself agreed you wern't doing full playtesting. Sure you provided feedback, but that wasn't your primary objective in playing.

Same with your comment about bias. So, what, people who like something shouldn't be allowed to review it? Reviews are only acceptable if they come from people who have both something positive and negative to say? Horsecrap. If a reviewer likes something unabashedly, then he should review it unabashedly. Just like if a reviewer hates something 100%, that's how he should write about it.

He said he wrote it because he was tired of people bashing it. The motivation is part of the bias. It was not being done as a review, it was being done to defend something he loves. A reviewer can also do a positive review, but if he wants it to be taken more seriously he needs to do it in a manner that isn't fawning all over it. Same goes for negative reviews, and that Bratz review shows that he also has a nagative review style that could use some reigning in as well.

And finally, I had nothing to do with the core rules. I've worked on other 4E stuff, but I had nothing to do with the core. And while he didn't mention me by name, in his first review, he did very specifically say that he had a freelancer in his group. So implying that he was somehow trying to hide something is also disingenuous.

I repect that you are supporting your friend. I will however respectfully dissagree with your opinion on the need for proper disclosure at all times.

I will grant that mentioned it in the first review and that I am mistaken there, although the WotC restrictions even if oral in nature should have been mentioned there. The second review though did need another disclamer just like EVERY MSNBC article that involves any GE subsidiary mentions that MSNBC is also a subsidiary of GE.

I never however mentioned that you worked on the core books. You do however write 4E suplements and therefore are financially impacted by the success or failure of 4E.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Nice review! I like you better already!

But it has a downside: it assumes the reader has some sense of humor.

Cheers!

I have a sense of humor. The issue of fathers molesting thier daughters is not funny however.

 

[Jack99]

Why sir, I believe you are understating things just a tad.

Maybe you should point him to my BRATZ review. Everyone likes me after they've read my BRATZ review.

I am in tears. From laughing that is. Awesome review.

Re 4e: Glad to see that the people who actually have the rules are extremely positive about it.

Cheers

 

[PrecociousApprentice]

I am a father. I feel basically the same as massawyrm about bratz. The way that he goes overboard on the other end is a function of satire. He isn't a proponent of mollestation or bratz. That is the satire part. This style of literature requires a sense of irony and humor. I could go on if it helps.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I am a father. I feel basically the same as massawyrm about bratz. The way that he goes overboard on the other end is a function of satire. He isn't a proponent of mollestation or bratz. That is the satire part. This style of literature requires a sense of irony and humor. I could go on if it helps.

I understand satire but there are still some subjects that are offensive even if being used as part of satire. I got his point and I agree that Bratz are not good role models for children, and it could have been good except that he did stray into offensive subjects. Some people may not find it offensive but I do.