D&D 4E Why is this board so down on 4E critics?

[TerraDave]

Ya, its how you do it. I have said critical things plenty of times. But its not the only thing I say.

As Rel has touched, one interesting dynamic is that a lot of the "old guard" here is actually pretty sceptical of 4ed. And there are some who want to like it, but just can't quite buy in to everything.

Even the EN himself has said he probably won't switch.

 

[Fifth Element]

I'm not the only who has this impression of ENWorld. I've heard enough people comment about it, that I think it's safe to say that it has the reputation of being rabidly, blatantly pro-4e with little tolerance for anti-4E posts. I have personally seen someone get suspended for a fairly mild anti-4E comment with no warning. It was a disgusting display of a moderator's abuse of power. So you can see how I formed this opinion of ENWorld.

Okay, I have personally seen a pro-4E poster banned for some pretty mild comments. I emailed the mod in question, since I thought it was an abuse of power. (And yet, I don't have the impression that the mods are anti-pro-4E).

So I guess our anecdotal evidence is at a draw. Do you have anything else? Other than other's peoples' impressions?

 

[S'mon]

Is it me? I hope it's me!

Sorry Rel, ain't you.

Edit: The mod I'm thinking of once locked a thread on game-world war & politics, because I posted re something the historian John Keegan once said about the difference between 'warrior' and 'non warrior' nations. Apparently this counted as 'politics'.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Okay, I have personally seen a pro-4E poster banned for some pretty mild comments. I emailed the mod in question, since I thought it was an abuse of power. (And yet, I don't have the impression that the mods are anti-pro-4E).

So I guess our anecdotal evidence is at a draw. Do you have anything else? Other than other's peoples' impressions?

We need a statistic that describes the pro-4E poster to ban ratio and the anti 4E-poster to bna ratio. Where's a statisitican when you need him! (By the way: What ever happened to hong? Playtesting 4E these days? Or creating Iron Heroes 2nd Edition to crush 4E?)

 

[Shazman]

I have yet to see any proof of this beyond the say-so of some Paizo posters. It may be true. I could even believe its true. I won't even knock WotC for it if it is because I could see the legitimate business reason for doing it. But I have yet to see any actual proof that this faux controversy is anything other than an internet hoax.

In one month over 1000 gamers will get to play 4e in a public forum. Do you honestly think there is some massive conspiracy to give us a crappy game? The future of D&D and the livelihood of all the designers and developers rides on them giving us a good quality product. It will be pretty hard to keep people subscribing to the DDI and to sell books every year if 4e sucks.

Look at it this way, if WotC/Hasbro really is a greedy corporation, then would they stand to make more money by trying to trick us all on June 6 by giving us a bad game that results in one time sales before everyone stops buying, or would they stand to make more money by giving us a game that everyone wants to play and thus results in continuous sales and subscriptions to DDI?

I heard enough from people who actually saw the e-mail or knew one or more people who had received the e-mail to give it some credibility with me. What really makes it believable, is that it is right in line with WotC's amateurish, hamhanded, inept, marketing of 4E. I don't think that WotC is conspiring to give us a crappy game. I do think that they are trying to make a game different enough from D&D that it won't really be D&D anymore. It seems that it will essentially be D&D minis with some elements of WOW and Exalted thrown in for good measure. This may be a good game for some people. In fact WotC is banking on the fact that it will appeal to enough younger gamers to offset the older crowd which will pass on 4E. It might be a fun game, but it won't deliver what many D&D fans are looking for in a game with the Dungeons and Dragons logo on it.

 

[DandD]

I heard enough from people who actually saw the e-mail or knew one or more people who had received the e-mail to give it some credibility with me.

You know, that's how bad rumors start on the internet...

 

[Jack99]

You know, that's how bad rumors start on the internet...

Fixed that for you mate...

Cheers

 

[DandD]

Please, don't "fix" the original message, no matter the intent. I consider this to be rude, I'm sorry.

 

[Remathilis]

Its not the negative opinion that bothers me, it is the non-sequitor that "X is a horrible idea and whoever invented/approves of X is horrible as well". This attitude comes out more and more for each new piece of info.

I don't see a wide dearth of opinion as well. Check out the magic-item article discussion: http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=217253. In the first 30 posts:

Number of positive-leaning posts: 11
Number of negative-leaning posts: 9
Number of neutral/no opinion given: 10 (included follow-up posts, questions, or speculation that doesn't offer a specific like/dislike, plus the OP)

Seems pretty even, IMHO.

However, Like all fan-related obsessions, everyone has a vocal viewpoint. Some are in the minority (and I firmly believe anti-4e opinion IS the minority) and tend to feel they are being "oppressed" or "silenced" or that there is some grand conspiracy against them. Every fandom has it: got to www.theforce.net and search "Han Shot First" or www.doctorwhoforums.com and search "The Doctor is half-human" for examples of opinions that really show a silencing of minority opinion.

 

[Fifth Element]

I do think that they are trying to make a game different enough from D&D that it won't really be D&D anymore.

This is the sort of post pro-4E people don't like. (Relatively neutral people like myself don't much like it either). The game called D&D has changed so much over its lifetime of over 30 years that there is no single definition of what D&D is. Compare 3E to OD&D. They could easily be called different games. Does this mean 3E is not D&D (since OD&D would then be the only game that could without a doubt be called D&D)?

So it's just a very elitist thing to say. "You may like 4E, just realize that it's not really D&D", as if that has some actual meaning. It's not the content. It's the attitude.