Sequels to Successes

[The Little Raven]

And, yes, there have been successful sequels, and that is what 4e would hope to be. But Empire didn't tell you A New Hope sucked. It didn't change Luke into a three-armed creature from the fourth moon of Splodistan because "We thought the third arm gave him some more interesting combat scenes." It didn't remove Chewbacca citing how few lines he had anyway ("He's just redundant with Han!"). It didn't make the thing take place on Earth, Year 3040, because they thought it would be better for the audience to relate to it.

This sequel analogy is flawed.

4e is like the re-imagining of the old BSG. It takes the old tropes and concepts and reworks them in a new way to give a new spin on an old thing.

And can we get off this "they're saying 3e sucks" nonsense? They're saying 3e sucks as much as 3e's developers said 2e sucks and as much as 2e's developers said 1e sucks and as much as Gygax said OD&D sucked.

I mean, Pathfinder is the one, after all, still brewing up Coke Classic: same classes, same races, same rules, now with HFC instead of sugar and a new can.

Have you actually read the Pathfinder rules? They are very much not just "same Coke, different can." They're making some solid changes to the system, which is good, because just regurgitating 3e all over again would have been a huge mistake on their part.

 

[Malacoda]

Sure, but what you're missing is that the people who are perfectly happy with 3e being "good enough" don't have your problem. In fact, given 3e's success, those with problems may very well be in a distinct minority (assuming those people who had problems but "didn't know it until 4e told them about it" isn't a very big slice of the pie).

I am not missing that. My point wasn't about how my problems are endemic. My point was, your characterization of the new elements in 4e was poor. Now, perhaps you were stating these "in character," so to speak, which is fine, and if so then my point is moot. But I wanted to clarify that 4e fans have some major changes to be excitied about. And, those same changes may turn some people off. But either way, there are some major changes involved in the move to 4e.

 

[hong]

Right. With a message that focuses less on "We fixed problems!" and more on "You can do this new hotness!", you can get those second people on board. With a message that focuses on "We fixed problems!", a lot of the people who don't really have problems (meaning, those who like 3e "good enough.") can be put off.

So... this is another "I don't hate 4E, I hate 4E's marketing" thread?

 

[Carnivorous_Bean]

Right. With a message that focuses less on "We fixed problems!" and more on "You can do this new hotness!", you can get those second people on board. With a message that focuses on "We fixed problems!", a lot of the people who don't really have problems (meaning, those who like 3e "good enough.") can be put off.

But those people won't buy 4th edition no matter what it is. If 3rd edition is already perfect in their eyes, they're all set, forever. With the amount of supplementary material, there's surely enough out there to keep playing 3rd for about 10 human lifetimes, even if that's all you do, 16 hours a day.

So why aim any marketing, or any features of 4th edition, for that matter, at the people who aren't going to buy it unless it's literally precisely the same as 3rd edition?

You keep talking about turning off people who think the grapple rules are fine. Okay, so what are they supposed to do -- "80% of our fan base think the grapple rules stink. 20% think they're fine. But to be all nice-nice pussyfooting cringing lickspittles for every conceivable point of view, we're publishing 300 different sets of grappling rules so that nobody is offended."

They have two choices. Keep printing 3rd edition the way it is, forever, or print 4th edition. If they choose the latter, they've got to change whatever their feedback is telling them is unpopular with enough of their customers to make the new edition attractive.

Therefore, failing to change something because a few people who aren't going to buy the new edition no matter what anyway don't like it, would be a moronic move on their part.

I really don't see what you're arguing for here. You've already got 3rd edition. If it's as absolutely perfect and wonderful as you claim -- or at least ten times better than 4th edition - -then why don't you just go play it?