Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 4519664" data-attributes="member: 59506">Sorry about this being from 4 pages ago, but from the time I went to bed last night until I logged on today there have been 4 more pages. Wow. I think ENWorld may need another icon for hotter than hot. This thread seems to be smoking. Anyways, to the point. This just isn't accurate. WoTC did not intentionally move away from any group, they intentionally moved toward a new idea. As with any new idea or change, there will be people who don't agree and CHOOSE to stay away (myself included), but these people could have just as easily chosen to go in the new direction, as many have. However, WoTC did not intentionally choose a course to move away from me, or other like minded gamers. I and everyone else who have decided not to switch to D&D have CHOSEN not to switch. We could just as likely gone the other way, just as I'm sure there are plenty of 40 somethings with extensive 2E and 3E collections that did switch. I CHOSE not to this time. Everyone has there own likes and dislikes, but it's not just a matter of black and white (usually), but shades of gray. There are actually very few things I "Hate" in this world. There are however a massive amount of things I like to one degree or another. I'm sure there are some people who hate 4E, just as there are a lot of people who like 4E, but there are a lot of people who don't dislike or "Hate" 4E, they just prefer something else. That my friend, IS A CHOICE. WoTC did not intentionally set out to move away from anyone. They followed their research and feedback, and intentionally moved towards a different path. That isn't just semantics, it's intent. They did not intentionally set out to alienate anyone. What they did is intentionally make a product that their customer feedback told them the customers wanted, even though they knew some wouldn't like it. You can't please all of the people, all of the time. But, they did not set out to intentionally not please a specific group of people. That is absurd.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">4E designers moved towards a new design philosophy.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">4E designers changed the game to something new, that they hoped people would like (based on research). They did not change the game, intentionally, to something that people wouldn't like. I'm sure they hoped everyone would like it, even though they know thats not realistic.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I, and others, who haven't switched have chosen not to switch. We have not been betrayed, or shunned, or excluded. No matter how much people want to say this, it won't make it true.</li> </ul>I've been a very outspoken critic of WoTC products. When something is horrible in my opinion, I say it's horrible. When something is good in my opinion, I say it's good. When WoTC has ignored feedback from it's fan base, I've been very vocal about there not listening (i.e. Scales of War AP outline). When they have made dismissive statements, I haven't liked it and told them so, also quite vocally. But not once, not even for a milisecond, have I felt betrayed or shunned because of WoTC business decisions pertaining to the direction they wanted to take the game and their business. Now, I'm not saying others don't feel betrayed or excluded. That's their right and their opinion. But WoTC did not intentionally set out to do this to people. They intentionally made a new game that many people like and seems to be a success so far. Applying malicious intent to their actions is absurd, and says a lot more about those who feel this than it does about WoTC.  P.S.: Nowhere does the statement "WotC didn't decide you weren't in their target audience, you did." say that WoTC didn't change the game and didn't radically change some key elements. It's obvious they did. That statement has absolutely nothing to do with these points.</blockquote>

Verification