 More news of Origins, yeah..I saw the good stuff |
  |
 Aug 6 2005, 07:36 AM
Post
#376
|
|
|
Grumpy Old Ork Decker  Group: Admin Posts: 3,794 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orwell, Ohio Member No.: 50  |
*sigh* I'm not gonna debate you Ellery. Not my thing, I'm not that good at it, there's no real point to it, and besides, I don't wanna take time out from you and Synner banging heads :)
Nothing I can say will change your mind, and I'm terrible at debating anyways. And you're right, I probably should have sent that as a private post to Synner. <shrug> Maybe I thought it would wake the two of you up to the fact that you're really just circling each other and not really accomplishing much. But Synner says he's enjoying it, and you appear to be too, so have fun. Me, I find debating to be a frustratingly pointless endeavor, mostly because I suck at it. I'm too much of a "Ok, you're entitled to your opinions as long as you leave me alone" type of guy. WHen someone says "I believe X", I believe them and let them believe X, even if I believe Y. I'll tell them what believe, and then be done with it. If they want to know more, they'll ask, but I'm not going to try and persuade them differently. I've tried answering some of your more direct questions, but I can't. Not without this turning into a debate. Because it all goes back to beliefs. You believe your opinion about the developers and freelancers methods and reasonings are correct. I've stated, and others have stated in the past, that you are wrong. Since you don't want to believe that, that's fine. Because for what you want out of the game, you may just be right. But the game is going a different direction than that. And debating Synner until you're both Blue in the face isn;t going to change that. Calling me on my shortcomings (And hey, I have a lot of them. And debating and arguing online is one of them) won't change that. I've done my part. I've told you what I can, and I've told you my opnions. Give it a fair shake, you might be pleasently suprised. You might not. <shrug> I've said it before... Nothing will stop you from playing SR3 if you're really unhappy. It's not the best solution, but honestly? You're a smart kid, you should know this. There's nothing we could do that would make everyone on this forum, let alone every gamer out there, happy. If we made the perfect game for you, there'd be someone else here posting in your position. Maybe Synner, since you two are opposed in viewpoints and both have too much time on your hands. And by the way, I don;t actually have a low opinoin of you. I don't know you well enough to have any real opinions. <shrug> Have fun. :) Bull |
 |
 
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 09:05 AM
Post
#377
|
|||||||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Let me see if I can break it down so you understand what my problem (besides the unlabelled speculation) is in the first place. Your initial post, I had issue with had several components:
You later elaborated on the reason Force 6 spells are important and focused on that. I replied several times your maths are correct, though I pointed that you are stretching your logic and assuming they wouldn't be if the whole system was significantly skewed (one you would be unaware of) and/or if the system possesses some ideosyncracy that mimmicks the 5-6 differential (one which, again, you would not aware of). That's where my interest in the maths ends because that's not the part of your argument I have issue with. I do not intend to counter it, as far as I'm concerned your observations (despite speculative) are correct (for the Nth time) but that's where it ends (unfortunately its where you seem to be stuck)... Or it would if your logic had stopped there. All your remaining considerations and conclusions (regarding the "penalty to starting magicians takign cyber", the "potential cheaper costs of partial magic ability" and the proliferation of "more mages with a bit of cyber") building on that single bit of maths are "wild speculation" as far as I'm concerned given the numerous unknowns about the Magic system and the cyber/Essence-Magic relation. That's the reason I have no intention of debating the maths. They are of tangential interest. Furthermore my comments as to how the system might do the rest would have been along the lines of the two scenarios you have already suggested and working more up just for the fun of debating them is useless when the rules are a couple of weeks from being released and the system becoming apparent. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 09:06 AM
Post
#378
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 316 Joined: 18-April 05 From: France Member No.: 7,343 |
Just a question Bull ...
"Shrug" doesn't sound like a bull at all, are u kinda Troll or something ? |
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 10:34 AM
Post
#379
|
|||||||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Or, maybe, not without it turning into an NDA violation. Because most of the "anti-SR4" crowd's direct questions that people keep dodging but insisting we'll be happy with are issues/questions that can only be answered by holding the book in our hands. Or, at least, that's what everyone was saying for months and months. "You're wrong, it won't be like that, you'll see. But it's a secret, I can't tell you."
Actually, no one's stated that she's (or any of us) are "wrong." You've stated your belief that we are wrong. You haven't been stating a fact, any more (or less) than we have. You've stated an opinion. Some of us believe certain things are going to be missing from SR4 (and that we believe certain things may, in fact, be missing from the SR4 developers) -- you've stated that you disagree. That doesn't mean ours is a false belief, it means it's a belief that disagrees with yours.
Ding-ding-ding. Gold star. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the first and only post I've seen from anyone -- tangentially involved in the creation process for SR4 or just rabidly defending what they can't see -- that has admitted we might just know what we're talking about when we've said things we like are missing from SR4. Because we have been fed information about it, and unless the FAQs were lying outright, we are able to form opinions about what SR4 will and won't be, and we can know what we want from a game, and by extension we can know, pre-release, that we're gonna be unhappy with it. Good job, Bull. For someone who claims to be no good at internet debating, you've fucking figured something out that no one else managed to, for months. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 12:15 PM
Post
#380
|
|
|
Karma Police Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,358 Joined: 22-July 04 From: Gothenburg, SE Member No.: 6,505 |
Critias. I said about a month ago that I believe you may be loosing out on things you appreciate while I may be gaining a system to my tastes. You then proceeded by telling me I was stupid for wanting a simpler system. ;)
Anyway. I have realized this from the beginning. Everything that has been annonced has been reeling the game in a direction that has me cheering and most others swearing. And the reasons are fairly plain. Shadowrun had rules that were very specificly enjoyable for a certain kind of math-wiz individual (or put another word there instead of "math-wiz" if you like, a certain kind of gamer anyways). Simply put, this was your kind of game. Anything taking the game away from that fringe is going to make it less of your kind of game. And from square one, there has been no question about that that is what´s happening. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 01:20 PM
Post
#381
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
Actually, I think what Bull said has been pretty clear from the beginning. What has been less clear, at least to me, is why the debate keeps going around anyway. It's not like it's making any progress. And this isn't nuclear disarmament, folks, it's SR4. I entered into the speculation/discussion around here early on in my playtesting of SR4 because it was a constructive exercise. I know some people like Bull might think I'm nuts for that (and he could be right!), but I do think I got a few good points and different perspectives from the crowd that enhanced my ability to playtest. But the book is done now. What you post here, now, will not make you like or dislike the finished product, I imagine. The finished product will make you like or dislike it. And hey, that's all good. Some people will like it, some will not (hopefully more of the former), and we'll all be okay the next day regardless. I've seen an odd approach here on these boards that seems to get the developers, writers, and even playtesters on the defensive. Some people seem to want us to defend our work, as if we've been writing a thesis. That's just not really how it works in any creative industry. Forgive my honesty, but I don't write for you. Never have, really. I think the community is great and I sure do appreciate positive feedback from the fans when I get it, but I write for me. If I feel I wrote something well, I'm satisfied when I send in the final draft, and I mainly wait for the day it is on the shelves for a sense of closure. Any good public feedback is just icing. And bad public feedback doesn't make me regret anything if I felt satisfied when I handed it in. I think you're going to find that trying to make the developers defend the work just isn't going to go too well, because that's not our thing. We created and we put out the creation and you like it or you don't. And we're fine with that. We keep creating anyway. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 02:11 PM
Post
#382
|
|||||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Woot! Way to reenforce you position of holding the Jr. Highschool, pseudo intellectual moral high-ground! It fits in well with your delusions that you are some sort of avatar of reasoning. That if only those that don't agree with you could provide some logical argument. Sadly it would seem at times you wouldn't notice and recognize a logical argument if it kicked you in the ass with a steel-toed cowboy boot. This post of yours also has the added bonus that you manage to sidestep, once again, the embarrasing task of trying to explain why your post questioning Fanpro's intentions of not making large changes to setting wasn't narrow visioned, over-the-top, reactionary, moaning drivel. Because, well that is what it was.
Hey, if you have better things to do by all means go do them instead of posting here. Oh if only your steadfastness in avoiding responding could be extended to everyone else here, along with a curtailing of your long running whining about SR4. But that just isn't going to happen, is it? You don't really have anything better to do. Whether you actually play SR4 or not, i expect that years from now you'll still be posting your numerology-esque comparisons of the variable TN to fixed TN. The only hope is that the frequency of the ramblings will drop off. So why is it that you are still posting here? This is my working list of possible reasons why: 1) you are a natural born whiner, to bitch and complain is what gives you a sense purpose, you enjoy being the persecuted so much that you try to find crucifixes to climb up on and nail yourself to 2) you are so hopelessly spiteful that that your anger at Fanpro for nolonger producing SR3 rules that you not buying SR4 isn't enough, you feel you must work to slay the Evil Fanpro and its SR4 spawn 3) you are just so much wind; like your claims to the beacon of reasoned thinking, in the end your verbal shaking of an angry fist at the sky is nothing more than cheap, empty words As a rough guess i'd put it at %50 #1, %15 #2, %25 #3. I'm leaving the other 10% for something that i'm having trouble putting in words. I feel it there but can't quite put it to words. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 02:17 PM
Post
#383
|
|||
|
Grumpy Old Ork Decker Group: Admin Posts: 3,794 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Orwell, Ohio Member No.: 50 |
Ork, actually :] Bull |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 02:19 PM
Post
#384
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Validating Posts: 1,618 Joined: 29-January 03 From: Montevideo, Uruguay. Member No.: 3,992 |
@ Blakkie:
:noflame: |
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 02:23 PM
Post
#385
|
|||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Hey, i'm just warming up! :) I've been away for a while, been really busy at work. Just catching up on old posts, and i noticed that winner from Ellery. It seemed on topic for where this thread has currently drifted, so i figured i'd respond. *shrug* |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 02:24 PM
Post
#386
|
|||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
That's funny. I thought the entire point wasn't to express yourself creatively at the expense of your fanbase, but rather to create a product that people enjoyed so much they were willing to spend money on it. Huh. My mistake. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 03:04 PM
Post
#387
|
|||||
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,718 Joined: 14-September 02 Member No.: 3,263 |
Speaking of mistakes i didn't notice in his post where he said the point was "to express yourself creatively at the expense of your fanbase"? It looked more like he was saying "i put out work that i have pride in and enjoy myself". Editors and marketers are there to form it into a salable product, or outright cull it if they don't believe their customers will enjoy it. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 03:33 PM
Post
#388
|
|||
|
Harlequin Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 331 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 861 |
The problem is that a lot of people seem to decide if they should buy the game based on the speculative "conclusion" of members on this board. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:01 PM
Post
#389
|
|||||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
That's fine. Happens all the time. Other people will pick up the book or flip through the book or look at a friend's copy and decide on their own one way or the other. Whatever works for them. I don't really spend too much time worrying about it. Good musicians don't change their songs based on what the preliminary opinions are. A novelist doesn't rewrite his ending because some people aren't big fans of the way he did it. They'll usually ask a small group of trusted people to look over their stuff and they'll take the feedback under consideration and it may shape the way they work, but in the end they have a certain creative vision to express and that's what they will express. That's why people do this sort of work, as opposed to making something utilitarian, where all that matters is the end use. I want to write, I don't want to make hammers. Even if it would be a damn good hammer.
That's okay, it's forgiven. I don't do anything at the expense of the fanbase. To go back to my earlier analogy, a musican doesn't set out saying, "I'm going to make this next record to piss off all my fans!" and a novelist doesn't say, "I'm writing this next book just so all my existing fans will hate it." Nah, we write what speaks to us. And we hope we do a good enough job translating that vision that other people become interested and pick it up. It just happens in this field that when you're doing something creative, not everyone will be a fan. C'est la vie. Dan Brown wrote the best-selling novel in history when he wrote The DaVinci Code, but I'd say that the Catholic Church...not such great fans. Ron Moore is getting lots of praise for creating an extremely deep and interesting remake of "Battlestar Galactica", but he's still got old fans screaming at him that Starbuck is a man. That's the way it goes. But the creative people who put everyone elses' voice above their inner voice, they never create anything worthwhile in this field. But they might make a good hammer. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:04 PM
Post
#390
|
|||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Or a good RPG. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:06 PM
Post
#391
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
If you think so, write it.
But I know I've got no interest in that, myself. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:07 PM
Post
#392
|
|||||
|
Harlequin Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 331 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 861 |
I don't worry about it. I just find it unnecessary and stupid. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:15 PM
Post
#393
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6-August 05 Member No.: 7,540 |
[Hey Bull, long time no see...] I'm still waiting on part 2 of the audio from the 'what's up' seminar. Part 1 was fascinating, but focused on the product line. Part 2 was supposed to cover details of the new mechanics. The post on the SR site with Part 1 has dropped off the bottom at this point. Is Part 2 expected (or is it up somewhere and I missed it)? Buck (Mike Buckalew) buckalew@gmail.com http://homepage.mac.com/mikebuckalew/Menu1.html |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:17 PM
Post
#394
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,595 |
I honestly hope not. After all, wether I personally like or dislike the forthcoming product, everyone should decide that for himself by picking it up with their FLGS or by skimming through it from a friend.
Just because someone else, who just happens to speculate or draw conclusions out of the meagre (Hey, FanBoys almost always have too less intel, like in the game -.-) information pool us has available, bashes the game or whines without having the actual rules in his greedy, greasy hands, I certainly will not care much. Such person can be right (and in some instances will certainly) but that wont change the most important fact: You can only decide for yourself after evaluating the real deal. And, lads, do that. Now carry on with the discussion which I have lost track, ahm, around 7 pages or so earlier. Regards Daniel Hoot Darn Momma, are ye lads fast, tought I was directly after L.D oO This post has been edited by Steadfast: Aug 6 2005, 04:21 PM |
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:23 PM
Post
#395
|
|||
|
Freelance Elf Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 7,324 Joined: 30-September 04 From: Texas Member No.: 6,714 |
Pretty prose about listening to your inner voice and letting out your creativity is all well and good, but the simple fact remains that for a product to sell people have to like it. You say negative feedback doesn't bother you -- but remember, one method of "negative feedback" is to not buy something. I'm pretty sure that's a particular form of feedback Rob Boyle would be unhappy about, no matter how much your magical wondernymph muse-fairy was dancing merrily in enchanted glens and lush forests, singing to you in the meantime. You're not creating a masterpiece work of art, here. Publishing a new edition of an RPG isn't exactly the great american novel. Not many people are going to frame the cover art of SR4. DE, you know me -- I like background and fluff and creativity and stories as much as the next guy (more than most, christ). But that's not necessarily what designing a game, much less refining one and putting out a new edition, is all about. Your stuff has to appeal to the masses or it goes the way of the dodo. And I'm the absolute last person who wants that to happen to SR. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 04:52 PM
Post
#396
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 289 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,625 |
The only real issue I have concerning new SR4 rules is with Deckers and Riggers becoming Hackers, does this mean Bull become "The Best Orc Hacker You Never Met!"?
Just doesn't have the same ring to it. |
|
|
|
|
Aug 6 2005, 05:11 PM
Post
#397
|
|||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
I let Rob worry about that. It's his job, after all. I just write. I imagine if Rob or whomever thought what I write didn't have value on the market, they wouldn't buy it from me. ;) And yeah, to cover the development costs, it does have to appeal to people. But no one here speaks for the masses, don't forget that. The sales numbers will speak for the masses. Yeah, it could fail. That's the chance in any risky change. But someone owns Shadowrun (really owns it, not fans like you and I) and they decided to make that call. They have the right to make that call. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Aug 6 2005, 05:23 PM
Post
#398
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
Well, that's rather unfortunate. I find interactions where people merely share beliefs--without going into details of the reasons for their beliefs, and without distinguishing between things that are merely a matter of belief and those that are a matter of fact--to be quite unrewarding.
I'll try for the Nth time to explain that it is because of the math that those things that I don't know almost certainly don't matter enough to change the conclusions that I have stated relatively less tentatively. They mathematically don't matter enough. But I'll wait for SR4 to come out to demonstrate why.
I think this is an oversimplification if applied to more creative types than just yourself--I can't really tell why you, personally, do things. In any case, when you write for yourself, don't you have an internal feedback process where you rewrite things that didn't turn out well and do a bit of homework to make sure what you write matches up with other facts or precedents (e.g. SR rules, the position of the Himalayas, etc.)?
Also, once one gets deeper into the development process, the "pure (starving) artist" form of self-expression without regard to the world isn't a good way to become non-starving. Out of those forms of self-expression that you enjoy, it's better to produce those that other people enjoy too, because you can then sell what you create. Those who go too far in this direction generally end up "selling out", which is a problem because the creative work loses its creativity in favor of formualic following of that which is thought to be popular. Of course, you can never please everyone, but generally it's more profitable to please more people rather than fewer. Furthermore, creating a working RPG is not only about artistic expression any more than building a car is about artistic expression. There are many elements of style and artistry in a car, but the thing has to run, too. An auto industry would not do well if it ignored feedback regarding their car not running because it hampered their artistic expression. Shadowrun 4 is not, however much one might prefer it to be so, simply an artistic expression of a vision of a technological and magical future. It's also a set of mechanics that form an engine for playing the SR4 game, and creating gaming mechanics is as much like engineering as song-writing. You need a working hammer to play a game, too. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 06:01 PM
Post
#399
|
|||||||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
Hehe, as much as I do sometimes like a good discussion, a lot of the points around here were only really interesting the first couple of times they were mentioned. After that, it got pretty repetitive.
I'm sure it is an oversimplification. But, really, this forum is dealing with a lot of oversimplifications. If everyone here were only talking about personal experience, the whole discussion about SR4 and "the masses" would be pretty moot. We're projecting. And I do have an internal feedback process, yah. Absolutely. It still doesn't change why I write. I even bounce ideas off of people and show some people early drafts of my writing for feedback. Still doesn't change why I write. I do listen to some feedback and I do make sometimes make some changes based on it. But if what I'm writing becomes more for them than for me, I think they should write it. That doesn't mean that I don't hope that other people enjoy it when it's done, I hope they do. I'm wholly unconcerned about the starving artist vs. selling out distinction. There's no money in RPG writing. No one is doing it for the quick cash. I do it as a side thing because the process is personally rewarding in its own way. So critics have little impact, because if I'm not doing this for my own personal enjoyment, there's zero reason for me to be doing it.
Even deciding which mechanics to use in a game is a creative decision. There's a lot of leeway as to what can work and there's flavor in different ways of doing it. You're not locked into doing it a certain, specific way because that's the only way that functions. There's a bunch of different hammers. And it's not a purely functional decision; the mechanics that one person thinks work great for them might not be what another person think works well for their game. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Aug 6 2005, 07:05 PM
Post
#400
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 778 Joined: 6-April 05 Member No.: 7,298 |
I'm not saying that internal feedback changes why you write, but it may change what you write--if it doesn't , why bother with feedback? Likewise, to a lesser extent, can't considerations involving what people like and are interested in impact what you write?
Granted. I'm pretty stubborn (though even I will recognize the pointlessness of something eventually).
Agreed in part, but I think it is a common mistake to not recognize how much the hammer impacts the game, and that some hammers are just worse than others. For example, AD&D and d20 D&D have very similar mechanics in many ways (especially if we ignore feats), but the d20 way works better (for the most part) because it's laid out to function more smoothly--the design of the hammer makes it easier to use even though the flavor is basically identical. However, both AD&D and d20 D&D are hopelessly broken when dealing with opponents of widely disparate power and number (kobolds or hobgoblins vs. level 18 characters); the mechanic is not designed to be able to accommodate that kind of contrast gracefully. So I agree that there is leeway, but if the game is to enable a wide range of scenarios (as opposed to merely working decently for the stereotypical scenario), the leeway is a lot narrower than one might intuitively suppose.
If the full impact of the mechanics is something that the designers fully intend as part of the flavor, and announce it as such, that's fine. "I'm building a game where you can only play gang members between the ages of 17 and 25--nothing else will work right--because my creative expression is focused on young adult gangers and nothing else matters," is perfectly honest, although the product would be of dubious market value. What irritates me more is when people pretend that the mechanics will work in situations where they do not. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th November 2024 - 08:06 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.