Spun off from this thread: http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?show...t=0&start=0

A letter writing campaign is a nice idea, but the fact is, companies only listen to the bottom line. Only by refusing to buy War! can we send a message that CGL will be sure to hear. And let's face it, War! ireportedly a slipshod product, not worth our money. Here in this thread, I want to discuss other ways of sending a message, as well as getting t!e word out about boycotiting War!

*hands another o*

Also, I think apart from raising awareness with a letter campaigh, the best thing to do is vote with your money, based on the reviews you read, and based on the impression the book gives off when you test read it. Check it with scrutiny. Think about it, whether you really want what's being offered there. If you only want the gear, or some of it, think about the rest, and consider your options.

And no matter whether you buy it, or not, write a review of your impressions.

I don't think a boycott call will do much good, it will reinforce the wagon fort mentality of CGL's. However, if you're disappointed by the book - and odds are you will be - don't take it quietly. Make sure it is noticed. Because then, maybe, the line will be getting more attention again, or - even better - a new publisher.

I like WAR. But it's cool to share opinions

I'm already not-buying it (I also not-bought SR4A, 6WA, CorpGuid, Vice....), therefore I need a way to inform the creator (aka CGL) that I am not-buying the book for a specific reason and the only method I have to do that is to sit right down and write myself a letter as American Public Media's "Marketplace" puts it.*

*When they go to read / answer comments from listeners they play a bit of "theme music" which includes a guy saying in like 1800s slang, "I'm gonna to sit right down / And right myself a letta.~" It's kind of catchy.

Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting that you don't give fan feedback. By all means, write a letter if you feel it's right. But only weak sales will tell them that you mean it. You've got to hit them on the bottom line to make your voice heard.

...OT, but, howdy. Been a while.

I don't see where the letter writers were saying "don't vote with your wallet, only write letters".





-k

I'm curious
What exactly do you like about it?

And all those people who buy first and realize they bought a piece of shit? Their only recourse is a letter too. It's not like you can return a PDF download.

Sure, they can tell other people too, which they'll do anyway, but without letters the company won't know what's wrong. There's dozens (hundreds!) of factors in the "bottom line."

I also like it. I like the setting, I like the shadowtalk through the book (the vast majority of it, actually), I like the feel and scope of the many-tiered war that's enveloped Bogota.

I don't like the editing mishaps - many typographical errors were in the PDF I received, I don't like how most ships have Ballast Tanks II (regardless of what they do IRL, what they do from a game-mechanics view is radically different), and I don't like how useless the Sangre del Diablo/Drago trees are. Those problems, however, are easily fixable: remove Ballast Tanks from everything but the submarine; edit the book properly (hell, I offer my services for free if they would listen - and let me read their things pre-production ); and removing Exotic Weapon Sap, adding Counterspelling, and adding the Compulsion and/or Suggestion Power to the trees fixes them good.

The rest of the gear I have little/no issue over and the revision of things such as Scatter Rules and Suppressive Zones is amazing. It's simply that some of the details are fuzzy or broken.

As per the OP, this thread is not about discussing the content of War! (there are other threads for doing so), but for finding a way to send CGL a message and/ or getting a boycott of the book started.

Part of the reason you are getting the books you're getting, is people already voted with their dollars (so yes, Cain has a point there) Mostly your dollars basically said," if fluff wasn't mixed with new toys", the book didn't sell the numbers the company liked. Thus, the concept that was introduced with the "core books" was dropped in favor of the current style. So note, you (the fans) have already spoke, and the company listened.

Just remember, just cause you're voting (or abstaining) with your dollars, doesn't mean that the message you send will be the right one.

Personally, I was always surprised at the move away from Fluff + Crunch books to separate Fluff books and Crunch books.

Historically, Crunch books have ALWAYS outsold Fluff books, often by a wide margin.

From a strictly business point of view, you'd really always want some crunch in a fluff book if you wanted the effort of putting the book out at all to be worth it.



-k

If I'm going to vote I want to make sure what the box I'm checking says.

Voting "money" means that the company interprets it however they want to and not how I meant.

some of my favorite books:
Black Rigger Hand Book, Shadowrun Companion, Field of Fire. 2 crunch books and 1 fluff book with some delicious crunch.

So, the question is how to get the word out. I'm on two RPG forums, RPG.net and the official Shadowrun Forum. Does anyone know of more? And better ways to get the word out?

Go to your FLGS and tell the manager "Don't buy War! for me. And if you do buy some, don't buy too many. It sucks and probably won't sell well.". But buy him some other books (or dice, or anything) because he has to stay in business.

Write reviews on relevant sites.

I do that. I live in a small-ish town, there's only so many places that sell RPG books, and I'm one of the largest consumers.


I do that too. I have several reviews on RPG.net. Do you know of others?

If you want to be taken seriously, don't overdo it and always stay calm and polite.
Looking like a disappointed customer is a thing, looking like a ravid angry fanboy with too much time on his hands who hates Catalyst/Jason Hardy/whoever with passion and seems to have its/his destruction at top priority in his agenda is another.

That's why a lot of people with valid criticism aren't taken seriously anymore.

Amazon and others who carry the dead tree book when it hits the market
I wrote a review on battleshop, where I bought the turd.
Paizo.com also has a rpg review space.

Hmm, hermit, if the second review on BC is truly you, you certainly got the ranting and raving part down.

And I'm DPing to clarify that it wasn't entirely a dig at you, hermit. I in fact apologize for the tone that the PM I sent you a couple weeks ago took, that was over the line and I shouldn't have sent that.

What the post mean was that I just find the review a bit.. over the top. Like Blade says, going overboard on a negative review makes it tough to read objectively. And then of course calling out developers by name specifically is also making it look like you've got an agenda rather than just not liking the product itself. I realize that you sort-of do have an agenda, that the devs have let things go downhill, but is that the sort of thing that belongs in a product review?

Maybe not. But maybe you judge any bad review in some way faulty. Sure, it's not a petition for parliament and it doesn't try to be nice, polite and friendly. Because I don't see a point being polite and friendly about a company basically ripping me off and selling me something I'd be embarassed to turn in as a class assignment.

There'Re all kinds of things wrong about this bok. Not only the fact it takes bad taste to new and amazing levels (I agree, that is biased, maybe for someone else, killing dead Jews again for loot and fun is a nice plot idea), but there're also so many technical things wrong about it. with some more distance I might word it slightly less aggravated, but from the content? No, I'm not going to take anything back there.

Also, if the Line Dev screws up so bad, because coordinating submissions into something that fits, plot oversight, weaving plots that make sense, and taking care editing happens, is his job, I don't see why I should sugarcoat anything for him.

To begin with, no, I don't find bad reviews inherently faulty. Just because I'm trying to be a bit more pragmatic about this specific situation does not mean I'm trying to go "everything is great!"

Yes, you've brought up some good opinions and content, but I'm not saying that your content was bad, just the way you presented it. It was like you were trying to beat someone over the head with the book instead of just saying they shouldn't buy it. In a way, the tactfulness of a review generally isn't supposed to preserve the publisher's feelings, but to actually sell the point you're trying to make to potential customers. Doing things like literally naming the devs instead of just talking about them generally in the last paragraph is one thing, because honestly it sounds like you're trying to be personal, saying that they are bad people, instead of just critiquing the job they're doing.

You're not even listening to the point that Blade made. Hell, I didn't even make it, I only pointed out that the review you posted in your own words was a lot less likely to be taken seriously than the first one you posted from someone else. It honestly looks like you've got an axe to grind with the whole company rather than just the product itself, and that's what a review is supposed to be about, the product.

And how many reviews have you written?

You don't have to have written ANY reviews to understand that, if the reader gets the feelings that the reviewer is biased with an axe to grind beyond the actual product, they're likely to take the review less seriously. It therefore weakens the impact of your efforts.

Keep the review focused on the product itself, and use neutral, factual language that avoids emotional snares.



-k

If you're serious about bringing the poor quality of CGL's SR products to light, send Topps a formal and professional business letter.

Topps Incorporated
One Whitehall Street
New York, NY 10004
USA

I would especially encourage non-American players to spend the coin to have a letter sent across the ocean. Businesses do tend to pay a bit more attention to correspondence that comes in an international envelope.

But why can't I just send an email?

Well, you could, but seeing as how email is so easy to send, that makes it very easy to ignore. Paper and ink show you actually care enough to do more than simply complain and that you're serious.

But I don't know how to write!

Here I'll give you a sample:

------------

Dear Sir or Madam.

I'm writing to you as a customer and as a player of Shadowrun, one of the properties Topps has licensed to Catalyst Game Labs. For many years I have been very pleased with the game.

However for the past ten months the quality of Shadowrun Fourth Edition products released to the public has dropped significantly and in many different areas. Books have been filled with a staggering number of grammatical errors, printing mistakes, and rules that do not work or utilize faulty math. The quality and creativity of the writing has fallen short of earlier works and there have been instances of disregard for the established in-game fictional canon.

To resolve the problem I would encourage Topps to take an active approach in encouraging its license holders to avoid the mistakes and errors I've mentioned. I would like to continue to be a customer of Topps and the third party companies that produce its products. In an industry as small as pen-and-paper and board gaming it's very important that the product produced be of the highest caliber possible.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
*your real name*

------------

Also, and very importantly, don't drop names of CGL employees/writers that you dislike for whatever reason. It makes you sound like you have a personal axe to grind or a kook. Like I said, keep it a professional letter.

As a former Amnesty International member, I can assure you that letter writing campaigns are easy to ignore. Hitting the bottom line, however, is a clearer message. By all means, write letters if it makes you feel better; but if you want to send a message about a shoddy product, don't buy it.

Correction:
Topps does not have an email address. Not joking. They don't list one on their site.
(Also: I paid $5.60 to send my letter to them, Return Receipt Requested)

Uh, dude, basic Persuasive Writing. That's what, Writing 102?

If you're implying I haven't written a review for War then yes, I've said I'm waiting till the print version comes out. I don't buy PDFs.

I'm implying that writing anything for public review is difficult. If all you've got is high school writing experience, you have no idea what goes into even a fan-submitted review.

Appeal to accomplishment fallacy. Try again.

One can appreciate the structure of a process without having been through said process.

This idea isn't new. In fact, it's very old.

If someone suspects you of an ulterior motive, they will question anything you have to say. And more often than not, they'll take your writing as the rantings of someone that hated the company before he even touched the book, and as such may dismiss your points entirely. Even if you HAD good points.

I'm not saying writing reviews is easy. But it IS possible to write one without resorting to sniping at the company or denigrating the authors.

Focus on the actual text of the book. That by itself should be enough.




-k

'

You're right, writing anything that the public will read is difficult, and I wasn't saying that it was. But the process I was quoting actually comes from college level Writing 102, not high school. Not to fall back on "expertise", just saying that some of the stuff I was saying was coming straight out of how to do persuasive writing, which is what a fan review actually is. You're persuading people to your viewpoint that X product is good/bad by listing out the reasons and the logic for your opinion.

Oh, so you want to play the logical fallacy game? Well, first, you got it wrong. I included a smiley to show that I'm joking. Second, I didn't use your lack of reviews to challenge your points. I used it to illustrate the point that writing reviews is hard work, not something that can be hacked out.


People tend to question anything you say that doesn't fit with their preconceived notions. But telling everyone that War! is full of typos and just isn't very good might help form those notions.

As for focusing on the text of the book, it's clear that you've never written anything of significance. People respond to emotions, not logic. An emotionally-charged review will garner more attention than a "Just the Facts" piece of cardboard.


It was high school for me, a cross between debate club and English. But once again, you don't persuade people by logic. You sway hearts and minds.

Ah, pandering to the lowest common denominator.

I think I see the disconnect here.

You are advocating Sensationalism.

The problem is, there are some things sensationalism is not.

Respectable, and professional.

And again, NOBODY said that writing reviews wasn't hard. Get off that point, will you? Nobody but you is arguing it.

It's just that there are more effective ways of doing it than others.

The problem with sensationalistic writing is that you run the strong risk of alienating your reader. If the reader gets the feeling you are merely posting the review because you have beef against something or someone else, that the review isn't really just about the product at hand, they are more likely to just skip over the rest of your writing and go to the next entry. Because at that point, when they realize the bias, they stop trusting you.

Even in sensationalistic writing there is such a thing as pushing it too far.

And "never written anything of significance"? Really? Are we falling back to Appeal to Accomplishment again? Also, attacking the debater instead of attacking the subject? You're right in that I haven't written any reviews. My persuasive writing tends to be for work, where my paycheck hinges on it. But how does that matter? I mean, I could engage in Appeal to Authority, trot out my past job titles and accomplishments, but that isn't really relevant. It doesn't make anything I'm writing here more or less true or affect it's impact.



-k

Actually, No... All an emotionally charged review garners from me is to just "Ignore it and turn the page" and move on to the next review... I do not need, or want, the reviewers "Emotions" at all; what I want are facts... Facts weigh much more heavily with me than emotions do (which hold little to no weight with me)...

A good example of an emotional bad review of war is frank trollmans on rpg.net. We all have a bias, but there is a difference between a clear logical reason you like or dislike a product and one where it sounds like you have a chip on he shoulder. Same reason I dislike fanboy reviews. I am trying to make an informed purchasing decision and I need a review that tells me the good and bad of the product.

Anyone who's lurked around the internet, where shadowrun is discussed, for a couple of years knows that Frank Trollman has an axe to grind against CGL...

My point was a negative would have more weight if the bias had not been so blatant. I am sure I was not alone in that I dismissed the review after the second or third paragraph. If people don't read your the majority of review then you wasted your time writing it.

And no one takes him seriously. Like at all. Ever.

As a person? Well, no. Maybe not.

But listening to what he's saying, sifting through the crap to find the occasional diamond of a comment that has some merit? Yes. I can tell you he's being "taken seriously," just like any other fan with a complaint.

Since you want to play the Logical Fallacy game, I'm calling an Ad Hominem on you.

Straw Man

Red Herring.


Actually, I liked Frank's review. I bet that if I removed his name from it, you'd find it persuasive.


I think Draco was being slightly sarcastic. A lot of people do listen to what Frank has to say, mainly because he's so bloody good at writing and fixing rules. His attitude is a turn off, but he gets attention, that's for sure.

For what it's worth, I meant to toss a winky-smiley next to my own first line. My bad.

And yeah, I know. I just wanted to reply, at least in part, to some of the "All complaints are ignored because they just assume it's Frank Trollman and we all know no one at CGL ever listens to him at all!" stuff that's been floating around for the last several weeks.

This is kind of my point. Everyone is both "agreeing with Frank" and at the same time "not listening to him because he's got an axe to grind." The two are not mutually exclusive. Frank is very vocal about his point of view and sometimes he's right, but people tend to go, "don't listen to him, it's just Frank."

At least get the definitions right.



Incorrect. Ad Hominem requires that I counter your arguments by bringing up some negative quality you personally possess. As I only responded to arguments you made, your usage is invalid. I have made no comments on you as a person.



Again, incorrect. Straw Man requires I use a similar but unrelated argument as one of my points. You are advocating Sensationalism. Look it up. It is exactly the tactic you espouse, using emotion and hyperbole in an attempt to sway opinion.



Again, incorrect. A Red Herring would be an attempt to divert the discussion AWAY from your arguments. You kept saying "writing anything for public review is difficult" and the like, despite nobody actually having said it was easy. I was addressing direct statements by you. No diversion present.



I wouldn't. He's so clearly biased I can't trust his statements.



His attitude means many folks get about one paragraph in before skipping the rest.

That's not the optimal result of persuasive writing.

You are trying to convince a prospective buyer not to make a purchase. Overblown emotion laden hyperbole is too aggressive and is likely to simply cause the reader to ignore your arguments entirely.

It is possible to write a scathing review of War! based purely on the book's actual faults without resorting to sensationalistic tactics.



-k

If you're going to use logical fallacies, get them right. Here, I'll link to the definitions for you.


Wrong, by claiming I'm pandering, you make it about me and not my argument. Ad Hominem

I am not advocating sensationalism. You are using it as a false example of my argument. Because it's a distorted view of my actual position, Straw Man.


You're trying to divert the issue. You seem to want to discuss it more than I do. Red Herring.


Another Ad Hominem.


Another Straw Man.


Then do so.

Five logical fallacies in six lines. Not good.

Please can you two stop this bickering or switch it to private messages?

I don't think any one of you is going to win the Internet over that !

Cain, KarmaInferno: how old are you exactly? If you're not 12, stop it.

I don't deem a review good because I agree with it or because I like reviewer. I deem a review good because I understand the reviewer's viewpoints and can gain enough information to make an informed purchasing decision. Frank had a problem of letting his bias actually cause him to misquote and misinterpret some aspects of war. That caused his review to lose all credibility.

I used to like Roger ebert for movie reviews, but now his bias gets in the way of his reviews. I don't trust his reviews for that reason. I try to find a reviewer with similar tastes as my own and wait for the review to give concrete examples of good and bad. All bad, condescending attitudes, and misrepresentation are no better than an all good review with no negatives.