NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 5105879" data-attributes="member: 5143">Because it helps to know what someone is talking about to be able to discuss it with them."I don't like something because it is bad" does not allow any discussion.  Of course people don't like bad things.  How do you discuss it except to agree?  Bad things are bad."I don't like this game because its rules are hard to understand" makes sense.  Maybe someone can help you overcome your understanding of the rules and you may eventually grow to like the game.If the definition of videogamey is that it is a game with too simplistic rules, then when someone shows up and says "I don't like 4e, it's too videogamey" then someone can reply with "I used to dislike it for that reason as well, but I found that the more you play the game, the more depth you discover in the rules.  It seems simplistic at first, but if you play it for a while, you'll see it isn't.  Give it a chance, I did...and now I have a lot of fun playing it."It gives me a general category of dislikes.  It lets me know that their problem may consist of:Dislike of cartoonish depictions of charactersDislike of simplified game mechanicsDislike of complicated game mechanicsDislike of "artificial" or "unrealistic" game mechanicsDislike of limited choicesDislike of mechanics which remove DM fiatDislike of laptops and computers used at the game tableDislike of the disconnect between fluff and crunchDislike of standardization and similar structure between classesDislike of the removal of powerful non-combat solutions to problemsDislike of the format of powers(i.e. being listed in mechanical ways)Dislike of the lack of fluff in the gameDislike of the skill challenge system(reducing roleplaying to a die roll like a video game)Dislike of the videogame like ability to PCs to heal from any amount of damageDislike of the books encouraging buying and selling magic itemsDislike of "wishlists" for magic itemsDislike of the ability to turn magic items into residuum and back into magic itemsDislike of player entitlement(magic items being in the PHB)Dislike of transparent rulesDislike of non-standardization(monsters having different rules than PCs)Dislike of mathDislike of balanceDislike of marking mechanicsAnd the source of their dislike could be any of those things.  I could be multiple of those things.  It could be all of those things(although, unlikely as some of them are contradictory).All it tells me for sure is that there's something about 4e they don't like.  And that they've played video games before.  And that they've found something in common between the two that they didn't like about video games or felt should never have been brought over from the video games.It narrows it down, but not by much.  If at all.  Since nearly every rule in 4e could be related to some video game at some time.Not only that, but each person who uses the term videogamey uses it to mean various subsets of that list.  It's about as useful as answering "One that hurts when you get hit with it" to the question "What weapon is he using?"  Technically it rules out the padded foam weapons.No, it's to find out the real reason they don't like 4e.  To have a discussion with them about it.But that statement is true of every game in existence: all video games, all board games, all role playing games, all sports, all drinking games...and so on.  They all have things in common with video games and are therefore "videogamey".  But I'm guessing you like some of them and dislike others.  So it's not the "videogamey"ness that you have a problem with, it's something more specific.That being the case, let's discuss the more specific thing rather than the completely unrelated fact that 4e has similarities to video games.Because a conversation that consists of "Blue is my least favorite color because it colorful." isn't a conversation.No, it also makes me angry for showing up and calling my game names and by proxy me for playing them.  As soon as I see the word "videogamey" it starts to raise my blood pressure because of the number of times I've seen the word mean "game for stupid people" or "dumbed down game" or "game meant for powergamers and not roleplayers".  All of which are insulting to me personally.And I know you are going to say "I can't help if a word bothers you".  No offense, but that argument is kind of silly.  I mean, I could say "You are a complete moron" and then when you get angry simply say "I can't help it if what I said bothered you."  You know that word bothers people, you've been told that.  Continuing to use it and hiding behind "I can't help how you react" is kind of disingenuous.It's not quite the same.  I have "solutions" to the game being too grindy.  There are things you can modify about the system to speed up combat.  Also, there are questions I'd like to ask.  Are they following the rules correctly, maybe they are missing something.  If they are doing everything correctly and they are still getting grinding, maybe there's a problem with the rules that I haven't found and I should identify it now before I do encounter it so that I can be ready with a solution.  Maybe their playstyle is incompatible with the 4e combat rules and I can at least understand why they don't like the game.If someone thinks the game is too simplified I can stress the complications in parts of the rules that are not readily apparent.  I can let them know that I thought it was too simplified as well but the feeling went away as I played more.  At the very least it lets me understand why they don't like the game.Videogamey just let's me know they've identified a relationship between 4e and video games...and that it's likely a bad relationship.That's right.  Is there any need to critique it, though?  It's been out for ages.  There's been about a million critiques.  I can tell you the number of threads I've started entitled "Why 3e sucks"...0.  Because I don't feel the need to critique it.  There are things I like about it and things I don't.  If there is a thread discussing the merits and disadvantages of a particular part of the rules, I'll show up and say how that particular rule worked in my game in the past and try to help people work around the problem.But I haven't yet entered a thread about how magic items work in 3.5e and posted "I don't like 3.5e" or "Best solution: switch to 4e" or "3.5e is too videogamey for me".I also think Rifts has some of the worst mechanics in a RPG.  But I also have not started any threads about how bad it is.  Nor do I seek out threads about Rifts and critique it.There's simply no need.  My opinion just isn't that important and I don't feel the need to piss people off.I admit the second one is worse.  But the first one is still pretty bad.  If it was the first post in a thread, it doesn't provide any useful information and is fairly apparently a dare to get people to disagree with you:  "I don't like your game for a variety of reasons I don't want to go into detail about.  What do you have to say about THAT?"If it's a post part way though a discussion it still is kind of a dare to people to disagree with you, but it also provides no useful information to the discussion.  How are Healing Surges like a video game in a bad way that means we can take something useful from your comment and apply it to our games and game systems in the future.  How can we make them non-videogamey healing surges?Sure there is.  I much prefer "unrealistic" where appropriate.  Which covers about 90% of the times when "videogamey" would be used.  "Unintuitive" works well.  And both of those provide more useful information than "videogamey".That's assuming there's even a reason to show up on message boards and tell people who like a game about how much you DON'T like it in the first place.</blockquote>

Verification