What's really at stake in the Edition Wars

[BryonD]

Disinformation is a weapon don't you agree.

Yep. And both sides need to be called on it.
But if calling those out and then trying to paint real complaints with that broad brush becomes the main dispute, then progress is hopeless.


Call it out AND engage the ideas. Focusing on the worst offenders is an easy out, but it makes no progress, makes their claims more visible, and ultimately in no better. If you want credit, then start engaging the informative side.

 

[Merkuri]

The game is not likable because it is too videogamey.
The game would be better if it was not so videogamey.
How is "too videogamey" emotional? It is a qualitative assessment.

"Too videogamey" is too broad a statement to be constructive, in my opinion. What is "videogamey"? I've played a lot of video games in my time, and they vary greatly. (Note, I'm not looking for an actual answer here, I'm just pointing out that "videogamey" may mean different things to different people.)

Now, if you said, "I don't like the way hit points are tracked, it feels too much like a video game. If it wasn't as easy to heal in combat I'd like it better," that's more specific and is more qualified to count as "constructive criticism".

So, yes, I do think that "too videogamey" is like saying, "that character in your book is not likable". Tell me why and what I can do to fix it if you want to be constructive.

 

[ggroy]

"Too videogamey" is too broad a statement to be constructive, in my opinion. What is "videogamey"? I've played a lot of video games in my time, and they vary greatly. (Note, I'm not looking for an actual answer here, I'm just pointing out that "videogamey" may mean different things to different people.)

Now, if you said, "I don't like the way hit points are tracked, it feels too much like a video game. If it wasn't as easy to heal in combat I'd like it better," that's more specific and is more qualified to count as "constructive criticism".

So, yes, I do think that "too videogamey" is like saying, "that character in your book is not likable". Tell me why and what I can do to fix it if you want to be constructive.

Good point.

Back in the day, a possible definition for "too videogamey" would be a game which resembled Atari's "Adventure",

Atari Arcade | Adventure

with characteristics like:

- the player can only hold one object at any one time
- the player can only die from being eaten by a dragon
- a bat keeps on stealing/exchanging objects
- too much like "capture the flag"
- the game can be "reset" with everything in its previous place, but with the dragons coming back to life

 

[Barastrondo]

But even with all that, if one guy out there has nothing better to say than "it is too videogamey", then that guy speaking serves WotC better than the other guy who wants him silenced.

If he has nothing better to say than that — if he cannot, or will not explain his feelings beyond that statement — then no, he doesn't serve WotC any better. He's about equal.

But it's not really about serving WotC: it's about serving your own feelings, and making them known in a sufficiently constructive fashion that somebody else will be able to maybe act on your opinion. It's ultimately in a person's own best interest to say what he or she does or doesn't like as clearly as possible. Otherwise, the company that should be listening to the consumer is stuck doing the equivalent of reading tea leaves to interpret what they're saying, and when that happens, odds are greater they'll get it wrong.

 

[NN]

The Edition wars are simply a matter of taste.

The different editions of D&D support different styles of play unequally.

 

[outsider]

Disinformation is a weapon don't you agree.

Exactly.

 

[MrGrenadine]

As a compassionate human being I definitely care to see people able to continue being gainfully employed and "pay their mortgages." As a vested member of the economy I definitely care to see people able to continue being gainfully employed and "pay their mortgages." And from the multitude of well-wishers involved in the "WotC layoff" threads I surmise that your assertion in incorrect in regards to "most everyone else."

I was away from the boards for a few days, so apologies for not responding earlier, but I wanted to clarify things a bit: I absolutely want people to live satisfying and productive lives, and I would never wish for anyone to fail.

However, whether or not people who create games pay their mortgages by being paid to make games, or by running their own businesses, or selling vacuum cleaners door-to-door...that makes no difference to me. I want them to succeed in a general sense, but why would I care HOW they succeed.

Now, someone who knows a game designer personally, or is a huge fan of a particular designer, may have a vested interest in having that designer get paid for creating games, but that's not how I feel.

It takes a lot of thought and planning for me to figure out how I'm going to pay my mortgage, and I assume that everyone else can do the same for his or herself.

And to be clear--I never ever even hinted at wanting to see anything or anyone fail.

 

[Umbran]

If you want to say that it is not "quality" constructive criticism, then I can accept that.

Well, I'm more drawing a distinction between "feedback that potentially contains information if I dig through it" and "constructive feedback". Constructive feedback is specifically and intentionally laid out to be of use. It takes effort to produce it.

This thread isn't about whether or not 4E is videogamey. This thread is about the edition wars. To me it seems entirely reasonable to reference the term and not be required to repeat the full debate every reason one might think 4E is videogamey.

On the other hand, if your comment doesn't contain any new information that hasn't been part of the aforementioned prior discussions, why are you making it? You claim exactly what it means has been clearly hashed out in the past - why refer to it yet again? When clearly no change to the structure of the system as a whole is in the immediate offing, how is it constructive to repeat the thing like a mantra for over a year? If anyone who is in a position to act upon it hasn't heard it by now, yet one more iteration isn't going to get it into their heads.

There is a point where "more of the same statement" is not constructive, and feedback has to step up a notch in order to be of use.

And, of course, there's the simple question whether this is the proper forum for giving feedback. I'm pretty sure it isn't.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

This thread isn't about whether or not 4E is videogamey.

My housemate -- an MMO addict; she plays Aion and CoX for hours a day -- loves 4E because, and this is a quote ...

... "It's just like an MMO!"

I just like telling that story, because it cracks me up. I (not an MMO player) agree with her and don't like 4E. My other housemate (MMO player but not quite as addicted) agrees with her and is relatively neutral on 4E, and she loves it.

Because it's videogamey. In her humble opinion, of course.

 

[catastrophic]

Yep. And both sides need to be called on it.

I've never seen the pro-4e side of the debate use disinformation, and i'm pretty sure you're using it by claiming that they do. The equivalancy fallacy is not a legitimate or constructive tactic, it simply obscures the real issues.