Sixth Edition, Release Announcement Options

[bannockburn]

the fact that you can't please everyone doesn't mean you shouldn't try to do a good job, it means you should understand that even if you do a good job not everyone will be happy.

Exactly. If it seems like I was disagreeing with that:
I merely meant that people tend to disregard criticism that's either not constructive ("I don't like the color blue, why is it in this book?") or expressed in a rude, disrespectful, or outright hostile & insulting manner ("Like all weak, spineless, craven [...]").
Neither subjective likes or dislikes nor ad hominem attacks will make a person reconsider their stance of having done a good job, and unfortunately, there's a lot of either, which makes it difficult on a limited time budget to even go look for constructive criticism that helps doing a better job. I know that I wouldn't go to that length, so I can at least relate to the reasons why Hardy doesn't think it's worth his time.

Doesn't make it easier to accept it, of course, nor does it make the product better. And I don't think at this point that it will recover to an acceptable standard.

[Jaid]

Exactly. If it seems like I was disagreeing with that:
I merely meant that people tend to disregard criticism that's either not constructive ("I don't like the color blue, why is it in this book?") or expressed in a rude, disrespectful, or outright hostile & insulting manner ("Like all weak, spineless, craven [...]").
Neither subjective likes or dislikes nor ad hominem attacks will make a person reconsider their stance of having done a good job, and unfortunately, there's a lot of either, which makes it difficult on a limited time budget to even go look for constructive criticism that helps doing a better job. I know that I wouldn't go to that length, so I can at least relate to the reasons why Hardy doesn't think it's worth his time.

Doesn't make it easier to accept it, of course, nor does it make the product better. And I don't think at this point that it will recover to an acceptable standard.

i can see why that isn't enjoyable. but i consider it to be a key point that this is his job, not just a jobby.

like, sure i didn't *like* mopping up in a grocery store after someone spills oil or eggs on the floor. i've got other things i'm trying to get done, my boss isn't going to expect me to have less of them done because i had to take the time to clean up a particularly frustrating mess, and it's interrupting me in the middle of whatever i'm doing which might have actually included time-sensitive things like putting in the dairy order for the weekend. but i did it *anyways*, because it's my freaking job, and i agreed to do the whole job, not just whatever parts happen to appeal to me at any given moment.

so yeah, i can understand that hardy might not enjoy reviewing the criticism to find the legitimate problems. but he's the line developer. it is his job, and if he doesn't like that, he should either suck it up and do it anyways, or make room for someone that will.

and i have even LESS sympathy for him because i know he's got unpaid volunteers who've been busting their butts trying to do his job for him, and he *still* hasn't got his stuff in order. because let's be clear, every time it comes up the errata team have been busy assuring people that there is more to come, that they've submitted things and are waiting for it to get updated, and it just never seems to make it into the book. and we've been hearing these sorts of things from them for years. since halfway through SR5, at a minimum.

and all of those people who volunteer their time and effort? well, because hardy doesn't feel like doing his job of sifting through feedback to find legitimate criticism or addressing the community, guess who gets ripped into when they speak up in those various shadowrun communities? no, it's not the full time employee whose job it is to do these things, it's the unpaid volunteers who catch the brunt of it.

not liking some aspect of his job is not a valid excuse to not do his job.

[binarywraith]

Being openly dismissive of the community around your niche game when there is a major competitor on the horizon with a big money push behind it is also about a dumb a business stance as I can think of.

[bannockburn]

not liking some aspect of his job is not a valid excuse to not do his job.

But it's the excuse he uses (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Or maybe he's doing (or trying to do) it but is just really bad at it.

You're not wrong, of course, but his and your understanding of his job may differ.

Being openly dismissive of the community around your niche game when there is a major competitor on the horizon with a big money push behind it is also about a dumb a business stance as I can think of.

Might be a chicken and egg issue, though. I remember when Jason and others used to post here (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[hermit]

I remember when they stopped to set up their own forum where nothing but cheers are allowed, when 5E came around and was roundly criticized, because they couldn't take what back then still was fairly constructive criticism. It's not like these issues are new. Jason didn't want to learn (or wasn't able to learn) for the past what, 10 years? So why should he now? On the countrary, under his direction, Shadowrun publishing has been a race to the ever deeper bottoms, employing less and less capable authors, pushing everyone capable who clung on away (Goodman, Zimmerman).

[Nstol_wisper]

How many people see the problem the same way?
Hair of the dog, Scales of the Snake...... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dead.gif)

[Koekepan]

How many people see the problem the same way?
Hair of the dog, Scales of the Snake...... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dead.gif)

More of us think of it in these terms than you might think.

I'm not the only one to complain about inconsistencies in metaplot, in supposed technologies, in the ridiculously transparent attempts to wipe the slate and handwave new technological contexts into existence ...

I don't know that I was the first to propose that the owners of Shadowrun should employ an economist and an anthropologist (at least!) to get some sense around a milieu, but I've certainly done so, loudly, publically, several times.

We've had huge long discussions trying to make sense of the crazy logic of wireless VR, decking and all the rest of it.

Yup, it's a big ol' mess and whoever's at the helm is doing a fine job of addressing none of the concerns.

[KCKitsune]

oh, they *have* playtesters. mostly they're people who wrote the rules and their groups, so you can bet it's a whole lot of everyone agreeing that the stuff they wrote is top notch, and in addition to not having proper playtesters i doubt they have enough of them, but they do have them.

These are the ABSOLUTELY last people you want playtesting your game! You want the flaming asshole "That Guy" TRYING to break your game to make it rock solid. Games Workshop is doing a better job that what they've done in the past, but even they're still burying their head in the sand about Codex creep. Shadowrun has... gone in the other direction.

We've had huge long discussions trying to make sense of the crazy logic of wireless VR, decking and all the rest of it.

You can do wireless decking, but I've always said that the response of wireless VR should be 2/3 to 1/2 of what a wired connection can give you. Hell we see it to where you can get 10 Gbit ethernet, but 4G can get you 1.5 Gbit. Yes I know 5G can get much faster, but the range sucks massive balls compared to 4G.

[Jaid]

These are the ABSOLUTELY last people you want playtesting your game! You want the flaming asshole "That Guy" TRYING to break your game to make it rock solid. Games Workshop is doing a better job that what they've done in the past, but even they're still burying their head in the sand about Codex creep. Shadowrun has... gone in the other direction.

oh, i know.

but the implication was made that they don't have playtesters, which is not true. they have playtesters. perhaps not the best ones, but they do have them.

not that it matters, considering they've just gotten a large free (to them) playtest in the form of people playing the game and stating their opinions, and they're too busy ignoring that feedback too. although, the quality of your playtesters isn't particularly relevant if you're just going to ignore everything they tell you anyways, so imo based on the perspective that the management are useless complaining about the quality of their playtesters is really the wrong place to put any complaints.

they could have the greatest playtesters in existence for all we know. when your opinion is that anyone who disagrees with you is not worth listening to because they're only part of the community, you'll have the same end result no matter who you have doing your playtesting.

(and at the very least, even bad playtesters will find *some* things).

[hermit]

Interestingly, that method of "testing" is surprisingly exactly how the FAA works, so maybe it's more of a wider mentality issue.

[Nstol_wisper]

So, Everyone who believes Shadowrun 6e is an unplayable jumble....Please stand up so everyone can see you. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

[Stahlseele]

*stands up*

[Koekepan]

Honestly, I haven't played it so I don't know for a fact.

That said, given what I've seen reported here about metaplot as well as mechanics?

Maybe it's technically playable, but I'll stand up for it being an obvious mess. The worst parts appear not to have been fixed, and the best parts appear to have been broken.

Stahlseele, I know that we haven't always agreed, but I'm standing with you on this.

[Moirdryd]

*stands up, jumps up and down, drop kicks Sixth World*

[Jaid]

literally impossible to play? well, i wouldn't go that far. after all, you can make anything playable if you're sufficiently determined to pretend that everything is fine. i mean, one of the reviews i've seen for spawn of fashan consisted of someone who forced themselves to go through a playtest after all, and if you can force your way through a playtest of that, you can play ANYTHING.

worst edition of shadowrun i've seen in my life? absolutely.
should've been in (proper) playtesting for at least another 6 months? absolutely.
some of the worst editing i've seen in *any* role playing game? (including small companies with only 1-2 employees). yeah, i'd say so. (seriously, look at the errata. i'm not sure i've even seen *palladium* release something that poorly edited, and they're famous for crap editing).

and i will go one step further and say that i have no desire to play it. if you offered me a chance to play it for free, i would decline. i'd rather spend my time on something else. so at least in that sense, i feel comfortable in saying that for me at least, yes it is an unplayable mess, because as i've pointed out above, the only real criteria for whether something is playable or not is how much you're willing to do to force it to work, and i certainly don't have enough willingness to force SR6 to work.

so i'll stand up for that as well.

[bannockburn]

But guys, it's not unplayable if you do all the work yourself and houserule it back to 4E (or 3, depending on preferences).

[Kesendeja]

I'll stand. I came in on Shadowrun 2nd ed. and played every edition since. In all that time I've never seen such a poorly put together product. I love the setting but the system has got to go. I think I'm just going to play 5th with some house rules to fix things. I may check back in for info on the meta-plot, providing it isn't just a rehash like the previous three, but I won't be throwing any money at the system.

[KCKitsune]

oh, i know.

but the implication was made that they don't have playtesters, which is not true. they have playtesters. perhaps not the best ones, but they do have them.

If it's a bunch of people from Catalyst, then that is worse than useless. They'll just sit around the table and say "No George, I do believe your drek doesn't stink. What about mine?"
"No Mike, your drek doesn't stink either."

not that it matters, considering they've just gotten a large free (to them) playtest in the form of people playing the game and stating their opinions, and they're too busy ignoring that feedback too. although, the quality of your playtesters isn't particularly relevant if you're just going to ignore everything they tell you anyways, so imo based on the perspective that the management are useless complaining about the quality of their playtesters is really the wrong place to put any complaints.

they could have the greatest playtesters in existence for all we know. when your opinion is that anyone who disagrees with you is not worth listening to because they're only part of the community, you'll have the same end result no matter who you have doing your playtesting.

(and at the very least, even bad playtesters will find *some* things).

Well, then if I ever get to play again, then I'll recommend to the GM to stick with 4th edition and find house rules to fix the broken things.

[Iduno]

But it's the excuse he uses (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Or maybe he's doing (or trying to do) it but is just really bad at it.

You're not wrong, of course, but his and your understanding of his job may differ.


Might be a chicken and egg issue, though. I remember when Jason and others used to post here (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Yeah, I think we're still waiting on some of the errata promised from when he posted here. But that was for 4th edition.

[Nstol_wisper]

I liked Edge and the Karma from previous editions but always thought they were not useable enough. Too hard to replenish in normal by the book situations.
Edge in 6e at least is something that can used and replenished easily and outside of a classic Run environment. Now, it is true some Archtypes have little to do when not shooting at or being shot at so maybe the new system encourages characters to have a more complex skill set, and maybe have some relevant skill(s) that add to the characters experience in other than life or death run situations.

[Sendaz]

While Edge has its place in helping provide a cinematic feel to a game, I think the pendulum has maybe swung a bit too far the other way, becoming a necessity rather than a welcome bonus.

[hermit]

How can Edge in 6 be replentished outside classic run environments? By beating up random people? And quite on the countrary, with how Edge gain is tied to conflict situations, non-combat characters are now less, not more, viable. Really, with you, every day is opposite day, it seems.

[Lionesque]

*stands up*
Not because I've seen 6e in action, but because after the 5e clusterfrag, I see no reason to give CGL the benefit of the doubt.

[Nstol_wisper]

True. Edge is more necessary. But it has evolved to where that way.... You can not have it in your build at all and trust superior dice pools, less applicable skills and be very focused to get you through or buy edge and pick your fights, encrease your odds in more scenarios.
The new system builds on that.
I am a person who never liked too many variables to dice pools when so many dice are involved. It slows the game down too much. They could have just went for more simulation and added more variables and more skills.
But going back to the first point...How do you expand on a system that way and not just make it applicable to a narrow set of situations? Which leaves all other skill options for characters and the characters themselves secondary processes. I guess you can also have environment variables for Matrix situations (hardware types, software types, condition, quality, network quality), or social situations (mood, mental attributes, whatever, man, woman) just to give some examples but that will slow things down even more.

[Koekepan]

Maybe what we need is for the people who think that 6e is the best edition yet to stand up.

Keep your seat, Nstol_wisper, we're already counting you on this one.