Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 5413578" data-attributes="member: 61155">I find this sort of post bizarre alongside your comments about Essentials. Essentials seems to have specific elements aimed at drawing back in players of earlier editions - complaining about WotC making that sort of gesture, and then turning around and ranting about how they hate their customer base, especially older fans, just seems like nonsense to me.  Look, WotC can't cater to everyone. And even trying to cover as many audiences as they can means they will still alienate plenty of people.  Many fans will still want their products. Many others won't. That isn't a result of WotC specifically choosing one group to favor over others, and certainly has nothing to do with WotC being sick of its fanbase.  And, similarly, I don't think we actually 'need' them. Many people are quite happy continuing to play older editions. Or play the current edition with just the core rulebooks. They don't need constant updates and products to enjoy the game they already have.  Now, many of us do like those updates and new products - I'm one of them. But this talk about gamers needing the company and the company needing the gamers... ...it's a good sentiment, but I'm not sure how much truth there is to it. I certainly don't think there is anything resembling truth amongst the rest of the post. It just reads as a series of rants about the company, the gaming community, 'today's kids'... not really a pleasant series of statements, no matter how much you may have intended it as humor.  Again, I appreciate the sentiment: "We're all in this together!" But building that hypothesis on a pile of angry stereotypes and assumptions? Just doesn't quiet work for me.  Look, here's where I just fundamentally disagree with your perspective. Do you really think that, at any point, the designers at WotC have sat down and said, "Ok, let's not make this the best possible RPG we can? What can we do that will hurt our game?" No, of course not - as far as they are concerned, they are producing the best game they can. Hence why they do keep making changes and adjustments to fix problems, adding elements to appeal to different crowds, etc. Efforts they put towards stuff like DDI and miniatures are because they feel those elements are of use to players of the game.  Now, will everyone want those products? Will their vision of the 'best RPG evar' match that held by every gamer in existence? Of course not - everyone has different tastes. And some experiments and changes they make will be considered great successes, others will be seen as foolish choices, and the vast majority will have both those it appeals to and those it displeases. That's pretty much inevitable.  And, yes, I'm sure there are elements behind the scene encouraging products that will sell more stuff, sure. But this idea that they hate the people playing the game, that they are intentionally producing subpar product... ...I think part of the problem is this. I think there is, for you, a perfect version of the game that you'd like to see. And I get the sense you feel that your perfect version will be one that will also be perfect for every other player. And that's just not true. No matter how awesome your vision is, other players have other tastes. You mention a grand vision of a modular D&D system, and I can see potential there - but also know people who would turn away from such a system, not wanting to deal with making choices over what elements to include. Or I could see it falling into ruin as WotC tries to support too many different styles, and each product becomes useful only for a niche of a niche. Your system may work for you - but it won't work for everyone.  In the end, WotC is trying to appeal to as many people as they can. New gamers, old gamers, existing gamers... and yeah, they've certainly made their share of misteps along the way. And I'm sure there are plenty of issues passed down by legal and upper management that haven't helped - the PDF fiascor, piracy concerns, etc.  But I think it's silly to assume that at any point they have intentionally tried to drive away any specific group, to 'fire' any existing players. Or that they have put in crappy stuff just to appeal to the 'shiny video game crowd' - anything they put in the rules or changes made to the story, I'm confident they did because they genuinely felt it was a good addition to the game.  Now, they may well have been wrong.  But in the end, it is easy to declare, "Hey, stop making bad choices, and start making ones that everyone will like." Actually doing that, though? That's not an easy task. It may not even be a possible one.</blockquote>

Verification