What's really at stake in the Edition Wars

[Mistwell]

I would be more likely to try 4e now as a result of posts, so I guess I would have to say Yes. I have no desire to DM it, though.



I think, right now, they are probably influencing what WotC will do in the future, yes. At the very least, 5e will probably have better marketing than 4e because of the longterm effects that the 4e marketing had.

Do you think that WotC would care more, had the protests died down in a week? I don't think WotC that foolish.......but YMMV!



RC

OK, fair enough.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Let me be very specific then, because I didn't mean to ask about current beliefs. Do you think the edition wars, right now, convince anyone to switch from 3e to 4e, or from 4e to 3e?

Absolutely not.

Do you think, right now, they are convincing WOTC to change anything?

Convincing? Only time will tell...10 (?) years from now when they announce the pending release of 5Ed.

I hope, though, that it is reminding/convincing them of some basic marketing principles about how important it is to play up your new products while not badmouthing the old, and that ditching marketing methods that were effective can get you in trouble. That marketing is all about perceptions.

And that regardless of the amount of market research you do, your interpretation of your data may matter just as much as (if not more than) the raw data itself.

I'm one of the most vocal but precise users of the New Coke example. Coke had tons of data, but where they failed in interpretation was that while New Coke beat the pants off of Pepsi and the original formula Coke in tests, Coke drinkers didn't want a replacement for Coke.

Coke learned its lesson, and currently has a whole host of beverages in its line, including its original recipe and, according to some 2006 data, New Coke (now called Coke II).

The lesson of New Coke is that your marketing research is only as good as the questions you ask. They asked whether it tasted better, they didn't ask if people would buy it instead of their preferred drink. Yes, its a logical assumption, but its an assumption that didn't bear out in the market.

As good a game as 4Ed is- and I make no claims that it isn't, because I'd be lying- there is a significant portion of the market that didn't want 3.X to go away. They were not ready for a replacement of the game they preferred, but a refinement would have been quite acceptable.

I could easily envision a 4Ed RPG without any D&D linkages- different races, spells, etc.- that would have sold like gangbusters. Perhaps it would have been linked to some kind of hot IP out there, or the designers could have come up with something unique. Heck, I might have bought more than just the first Core 3 books in that alternative reality.

 

[Hussar]

Somehow, I am totally not shocked that some people would see using vague, mostly incomprehesible terms as a good thing. It simply keeps the arguement alive no?

After all, why discuss the actual issue when you can simply hide behind, "Well, you're just not understanding what I'm saying" over and over again, page after page. Instead of actually trying to communicate, it's easier to obfuscate.

It's not about shutting down someone. It's about people actually taking responsiblity for what they say. If someone uses a vague term, which they KNOW has multiple meanings, like "videogamey" then they should not expect people to understand their point. I can say 4e is blarfnarg too, but that doesn't mean I'm communicating.

This is totally not about controlling what other people say or free speech. Those that want to continue obfuscating issues want to frame it that way and I really have no idea why. What is the point of using terminology that you KNOW will not be understood? What value does it have? What does it actually add to the conversation?

Instead, we have umpteen threads and posts of, "Did you mean this?" "No." "Did you mean this?" "No." "Did you mean this?" "No." "Well, what DO you mean." "Oh, you're just misrepresenting my point!"

Over and over and over again.

So, BryonD, I'll put it to you directly, what benefit is gained by using vague phrases with highly charged connotations?

 

[billd91]

So, BryonD, I'll put it to you directly, what benefit is gained by using vague phrases with highly charged connotations?

It's a conversation starter. "Nice weather we're having here."

The fault lies with someone treating a vague statement like it's highly charged. It should be the starting point to request clarification and generate discussion.

 

[Hussar]

It's a conversation starter. "Nice weather we're having here."

The fault lies with someone treating a vague statement like it's highly charged. It should be the starting point to request clarification and generate discussion.

Oh come on. Really? After ten years of people telling me that 3e is nothing but D&D Diablo, you're going to say that there is no baggage associated with something like "videogamey"? That's it's a completely neutral term lacking in any negative connotations at all?

And you wonder why people get testy? It's a bit of a stretch to think that at this point in time, anyone who is not a completely new poster would have no idea that certain terms are pretty much hot button edition war flags.

Whether its videogamey, anime-y, dungeonpunk, nostalgia glasses, or whatever.

It was a starting point maybe ten years ago. Now? Now it's just trolling.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Oh come on. Really? After ten years of people telling me that 3e is nothing but D&D Diablo, you're going to say that there is no baggage associated with something like "videogamey"? That's it's a completely neutral term lacking in any negative connotations at all?
<snip>
It was a starting point maybe ten years ago. Now? Now it's just trolling.

I wouldn't call it trolling. I'd call it shorthand, yes, with a negative connotation, but still understandable.

As mentioned in the "What does Videogamey mean to you?" thread, its probably either something they feel is handled better in video games OR something they don't like in the video game(s) it reminds them of.

As the reader of a post containing the term, you then have the option of accepting this assertion at face value (see paragraph immediately above) or you may ask them to clarify... Realizing, of course, that if you do ask for clarification, you're just going to wind up going down into a warren of oft-repeated and rehashed discussions.

 

[Ourph]

It's a conversation starter. "Nice weather we're having here."

Whatever, man. As far as I'm concerned the weather is totally blarfnarg.

 

[FireLance]

Whatever, man. As far as I'm concerned the weather is totally blarfnarg.

I dunno. The weather I'm getting seems to be quite videogamey. I was playing a video game the other day, and it was sunny in the game, too.

 

[Hussar]

I wouldn't call it trolling. I'd call it shorthand, yes, with a negative connotation, but still understandable.
/snip

"Shorthand with negative connotation". Exactly how is this different from trolling? When you use a vague term that you KNOW is negative, but does not actually state what you are being negative about, how is that different from trolling?

And, as I mentioned in the other thread, what does it mean if I agree with you? If you say X is videogamey and I say, "Yup, you're right", what have we actually said? How could you possibly know that I'm interpreting your point correctly? I could be agreeing to something completely different than your meaning and, unless you start asking me what I'm agreeing with, you'd never know.

Instead of using "shorthand with negative connotation", why not just speak plainly?

 

[billd91]

It was a starting point maybe ten years ago. Now? Now it's just trolling.

What people discussed 10 years ago, given 4e is a new edition, isn't very relevant. There are new aspects of the game worth discussing. Frankly, 4e does have elements that I find videogamey but you wouldn't know what they were if you shut your communication off before I elaborated on them.

If you find the topic so onerous, you're free to not bother getting involved in the discussion. Getting involved is always your choice. It's not like an edition war comes and storms your beaches. Participation is always voluntary. And if participating, you can either volunteer to improve it or drag it down. The direction you want to put on it is up to you.