Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 8451570" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I don't disagree with what you're saying; I generally try not to put down anyone's preferred game or playstyle. But at the same time, being critical about something may require some negativity from time to time. If I see what I think is a flaw about a game or a process, and I explain my thinking, I don't think it should be seen as anything other than a stated preference along the lines of &quot;I don't like lima beans because they don't taste good.&quot; There may be others.....bewilderingly.....who actually like the way lima beans taste. My preference is not an attack on theirs.If I level a criticism at a game that you enjoy that you don't think is accurate, then you should state your case on why you disagree. That's what analysis and critique involve.So if I were to say something like &quot;I find sandbox play to still be largely GM driven; it's just a railroad where the stops can happen in any order&quot; that's a critique of sandbox play. Is it true? That's up to each person as I think the answer is largely subjective. But I can make statements in support of that critique, or against it.We tend to be overly touchy regarding our preferences about games (myself included), but we don't really need to be. Honestly, I think everyone not taking such great offense at the use of a word or phrase that may have negative connotations would be a huge help. Ultimately, if we just change the words we're using, we're not really changing what we're trying to say. So I think being clear is important, and people just not getting worked up is the bigger deal. Though I realize that can be difficult on things we're al passionate about, I think it's something we should all be striving for.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 8451570, member: 6785785"] I don't disagree with what you're saying; I generally try not to put down anyone's preferred game or playstyle. But at the same time, being critical about something may require some negativity from time to time. If I see what I think is a flaw about a game or a process, and I explain my thinking, I don't think it should be seen as anything other than a stated preference along the lines of "I don't like lima beans because they don't taste good." There may be others.....bewilderingly.....who actually like the way lima beans taste. My preference is not an attack on theirs. If I level a criticism at a game that you enjoy that you don't think is accurate, then you should state your case on why you disagree. That's what analysis and critique involve. So if I were to say something like "I find sandbox play to still be largely GM driven; it's just a railroad where the stops can happen in any order" that's a critique of sandbox play. Is it true? That's up to each person as I think the answer is largely subjective. But I can make statements in support of that critique, or against it. We tend to be overly touchy regarding our preferences about games (myself included), but we don't really need to be. Honestly, I think everyone not taking such great offense at the use of a word or phrase that may have negative connotations would be a huge help. Ultimately, if we just change the words we're using, we're not really changing what we're trying to say. So I think being clear is important, and people just not getting worked up is the bigger deal. Though I realize that can be difficult on things we're al passionate about, I think it's something we should all be striving for. [/QUOTE]

Verification