Upset about another edition!

[billd91]

As I said before, the criticism WotC expressed for D&D and the "criticism" that fans have towards the "videogamey-ness" of 4E are not even comparable. The first was rational and fair, the latter was not. The former is fine and requires no apology, the latter is not fine and was just plain rude, and an apology might be nice.

I have a somewhat opposite view of some of this. First and foremost, I thought WotC should have known better what sort of reaction they'd get from the criticism and how it was phrased. I remember my impression on first encountering the statement about faerie rings. I was looking over the 4e preview materials in Waldenbooks because I hadn't looked around for much about 4e before that point. I was still optimistic about what it would be like. And that statement was a real forehead slapping "What are they thinking?" moment for me. It was so irrational to kick the sleeping dog of the fanbase.

If anybody knows anything about any fan community they should know that rationalism isn't part of it, at least not in the attachment fans have to the objects of their affection. We aren't Packers fans because it's rational to be Packers fans. There aren't that many people who calculate the cost of fandom and decide that it's more rational to be a Cubs fan to be a White Sox fan. We are fans because we have an emotional attachment to them. We aren't D&D fans because it's rational to play D&D. We are D&D fans because we've invested emotional connections to D&D. Sometimes, it's a particular view of D&D as well. You kick that emotion, you get an emotional response. Ideally, it should at least be polite, true. I can't excuse a lot of behavior on either side of the political divide here (and it's still going on it you peruse some of the other threads in this forum). But I can at least predict it and I'm not even in the gaming industry. That's why I don't see it as "fine". It was amateur stuff from a professional company. I expect better.

 

[Dannager]

I have a somewhat opposite view of some of this. First and foremost, I thought WotC should have known better what sort of reaction they'd get from the criticism and how it was phrased.

Yes. They absolutely should have. This was WotC's mistake. This was their marketing blunder. They should have known what the D&D fanbase was and wasn't capable of reacting well to. They didn't, and they suffered for it.

That's why I don't see it as "fine". It was amateur stuff from a professional company. I expect better.

For your sake, or what?

 

[billd91]

Yes. They absolutely should have. This was WotC's mistake. This was their marketing blunder. They should have known what the D&D fanbase was and wasn't capable of reacting well to. They didn't, and they suffered for it.

I prefer to not say that with such disdain for the D&D community. It can be a fantastic community. But like every mass community, it's a mob. It's a collection of mobs. Individuals run the spectrum in just about every conceivable way between emotional and emotionless, between fully invested and disinterested, between wild and staid, between impulsive and rigid, between optimistic and pessimistic. And not a man jack of us is any better than a single other one of us.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

The thing is, my issue with that complaint is not that I don't think 4E is like a videogame (well, I don't, but still...), but that people use "videogamey" as an insulting pejorative, as if videogames are inherently a bad thing. It is not criticism, but rather crude insult that belittles a secondary target and tends to not be based on rational analysis. Many people who made that argument in the past have been completely incapable of articulating any reason why 4E has such a "feel", and are generally ignorant of videogames as a whole.

It is also rather annoying in regards to the fact that I flat out like videogames and like the influence of videogames upon fantasy and D&D. I think D&D would benefit from taking more ideas and inspiration from videogames. Seeing people who don't even play videogames insult the hobby as being "inferior" is not fun.

Not all criticism is equal.

As I said before, the criticism WotC expressed for D&D and the "criticism" that fans have towards the "videogamey-ness" of 4E are not even comparable. The first was rational and fair, the latter was not. The former is fine and requires no apology, the latter is not fine and was just plain rude, and an apology might be nice.

I don't want an apology for 4E. I want a game better than 4E. An apology from a game company is nothing more than a reactionary effort. Good game design requires progressive effort. Apologizing for understandable decisions (not necessarily good ones, but understandable ones) only makes things worse in the long run, because it gives an excessive amount of momentum to reactionary forces.

As I think that I have said - the game itself likely does not need apologizing for.

The offensive marketing offensive, yes, an apology is a good place to start.

I do not think that I have ever called 4e 'videogamey'. Gamist, yes, compared it to boardgames, certainly.

But video game and tabletop RPGs are very different things.

The closest that I can come up with in videogame terms is Final Fantasy Tactics - which was a game that I enjoyed. (Actually, I enjoyed it much more than 4e, but then I also enjoyed it more than any other Final Fantasy game....)

But that was turn based strategy/tactics, not a first person shooter or real time CRPG. You could, excluding graphics, recreate FFT as a boardgame.

The Auld Grump

 

[Grandpa]

Thanksgiving at the DeAndy's

Why do they want to unite us? When they bring us all together, all we do is fight.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Because over and over WotC, often in the voice of Mr. Wyatt, did say 'this is not fun'.

We heard what they were actually saying, reading what they actually wrote. Those words were not interpretations, it was what they put in print.

Trying to say 'that isn't what they meant' is flying in the face of their own books. Over and over again they repeated that the game we were playing was 'not fun'.

Do you have quotes? Or links to quotes?

As far as I know:

"D&D is a game about slaying horrible monsters, not a game about traipsing off through fairy rings and interacting with the little people."

If you disagree with this fundamental assessment of what D&D is, why would you buy this product?

An encounter with two guards at the city gate isn’t fun. Tell the players they get through the gate without much trouble and move on to the fun. Niggling details of food supplies and encumbrance usually aren’t fun, so don’t sweat them, and let the players get to the adventure and on to the fun. Long treks through endless corridors in the ancient dwarven stronghold beneath the mountains aren’t fun. Move the PCs quickly from encounter to encounter, and on to the fun!

Explicitly not fun. If you disagree with this, why would you buy this product?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azcn84IIDVg&feature=related

That's the video where people with criticisms are depicted as a troll (the race) at a keyboard, and pooped on by a dragon.

"Of course, these planes don't hold a candle to 2E's hilarious Plane of Vacuum, which is truly the antithesis of fun.)" - Chris Perkins

[and]

And from the D&D Podcast #16

"Guardinals - Bullet in the Head." - Mike Mearls
"What's a guardinal???" - Dave Noonan
"They're outsiders from the plane of neutral good!" - James Wyatt
"There's a plane of neutral good? Which one was that again?" - Dave Noonan
"...Bytopia? Maybe?" - James Wyatt (giving the wrong answer, which apparently none of the other guys knew was wrong)
"I'm probably going to offend a bunch of Planescape fans, but Bytopia sounds like a place where you'd go to buy a gimmicky hamburger..."
*insert laughter and jokes cracked about the plane*

Again, we have "this isn't fun" or making fun of material that people had fun with. If the designers are presenting a product, labeling things I like "not fun" explicitly (or making fun of other things), I don't know what my motivation to buy their product is. They've explicitly made statements that show they we're not in agreement on what Fun (for me, as a customer) is, and then want me to buy their product?

No, saying "the next game will be even more fun than the last" is a good statement. For people that enjoyed the game, it's a Good Thing (it's even better!). For people that didn't enjoy the game, it's a Good Thing (they're improving it!).

However, saying "this thing that we've provided isn't fun" is a Bad Thing to people that enjoyed the game. Not only are they stating that your style of fun is not going to be catered to, but that they made a mistake by providing you that type of fun to begin with, because it was a design mistake originally.

Like I said, presentation is key. Presenting the new edition of the game as an improvement is one thing; presenting the new edition as better while saying "these things aren't fun" about an aspect of a past edition are going to understandably alienate those people, if they had fun with that aspect. Again, presentation is key. As always, play what you like

 

[malkav666]

By the way, malkav666, calling someone unreasonable in a +XP comment is really not okay in my book. It's not cool in an actual post, and sliding it into a pat-on-the-back is a notch down.

Well its a good thing I don't particularly care about whats cool in your book. The exp was for trying to have a conversation and doing it concisely, succinctly, and IMO very reasonably in an environment that seemed to me to be very hostile.

If you will note I did not make another post. The topic had devolved to a point that it looked kind of like a circus, nor did I specifically name you or any other poster as specifically unreasonable as that would attack someone personally as opposed to the tone of the conversation. I don't really do back and forth that often where another poster or groups of posters and I quote each others posts in a dissected fashion repeatedly. Because at that point it doesn't even really seem like a debate so much as an assault or some sort of e-peen shouting match.

The exp was given by me to the grump for continued attempts to portray his own opinion in a thread that had changed tone in such a way that it had posters telling him his opinion based on his personal feelings and experiences was wrong. When another person talks to me about how I feel about something and then tells me my feelings are essentially incorrect I think that is unreasonable. Because feelings related directly to ones own perspective that can't really be wrong or right. You could tell me I was wrong about that too if you like, it won't matter to me.

I wasn't even going to reply to your post as I thought it was rude. But in the end I can see that it is possible I offended you, and that quite simply was not my intent. If you are offended then I sincerely apologize. I thought the exp system was put there to give users a way to moderate and encourage one another. I thought the grumps posting deserved the exp. for continued attempts at civility. Wasn't trying to call names. So if you need a hug or some support I am here for ya bro.

love,

malkav

 

[FireLance]

Why do they want to unite us? When they bring us all together, all we do is fight.

But what kind of fighting? Fighting as Sport, or Fighting as War?

 

[Umbran]

Maybe a wood chipper would be better than the Sound....

The Auld Grump, don't want to poison the fish....

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Please allow me to make something perfectly clear: Wishing harm on another human being is cheap, rude, and unacceptable behavior. This is about as uncivil as it gets, and we will not tolerate it.

The first words of defense will be, "But I didn't *really* mean it, I was only joking!" We don't care. It is still a shabby way to talk of a real person.

This shouldn't need further explanation. If it does, please take it to e-mail or PM with the moderator or admin of your choice. Thank you.