Full Version: Why all the hate?
| QUOTE |
| house rule... |
I chooose those cases because the rules specifically state that a GM can apply appropriate situational modifiers to all of the tests (dodging, stealth, reaction) I mentioned. I'd say hauling an abnormally bulky load (like a full size sniper rifle) qualifies for such a mod. Good reason not to carry a Panther Cannon or HMG on most runs, too...
The GM also can disallow certain types of movment or apply consequnces when they are attempted; its pretty f-ing obvious you can't run in certain situations (say a jungle, or twisting corridor) when toting a 6 foot long gun- or at least, that something bad might happen if you do.
So those aren't house rules, just applications of published rules to cover a situation the rules don't explicitely address. Maybe some GM's wouldn't do it, but its well within the rules.
And this absolutely can work in the players FAVOR; a good GM would apply similar penalties to those omni-present PAC toting troll badguys when the players get clever and force him to fight in crowded quarters.
| QUOTE |
| If essence remains functionally the same and edge does not operate in the same manner as the other attributes it doesn't invalidate the claim of simplifying the game, it means the simplification of the system happens elsewhere. |
One wonders, at times, where the simplicity actually is. Attribute + skill +- modifiers vs. TN5 isn't really much simpler than skill vs. TN determined by modifiers. The hard part is the modifiers, and we can't tell whether those are simplified or not.
The removal of combat pool is a simplification--not one that I think is a good simplification--but some people claim that those who complain about the damage to tactics will be restored by another mechanism at which point it's probably more complicated not simpler. (I've always thought variable pools are a brilliant way to encourage tactical thinking without getting bogged down in piles of details that you have to remember--you still have to make decisions about where to go for it and where to be careful, but you don't need to remember what the modifiers are for different types of "going for it" and "being careful".) I expect that combat pool will have no replacement, and that the simplification will be in no longer having as much ability to think tactically.
FAQ5 suggested that they wanted to simplify and remove barnacles and bailing wire, but there isn't enough detail there show how things are simpler--and it's certainly more work to keep track of six skills than two. Likewise having lots of different traditions could be more complicated, unless they've made the distinctions between traditions even more uninteresting than the current ones are. Riggers and deckers being collapsed into hackers could be good for simplicity but it could worsen it if every hacker now has to be familiar with the equivalent of all the decking and all the rigging rules.
And so on.
The removal of combat pool is a simplification--not one that I think is a good simplification--but some people claim that those who complain about the damage to tactics will be restored by another mechanism at which point it's probably more complicated not simpler. (I've always thought variable pools are a brilliant way to encourage tactical thinking without getting bogged down in piles of details that you have to remember--you still have to make decisions about where to go for it and where to be careful, but you don't need to remember what the modifiers are for different types of "going for it" and "being careful".) I expect that combat pool will have no replacement, and that the simplification will be in no longer having as much ability to think tactically.
FAQ5 suggested that they wanted to simplify and remove barnacles and bailing wire, but there isn't enough detail there show how things are simpler--and it's certainly more work to keep track of six skills than two. Likewise having lots of different traditions could be more complicated, unless they've made the distinctions between traditions even more uninteresting than the current ones are. Riggers and deckers being collapsed into hackers could be good for simplicity but it could worsen it if every hacker now has to be familiar with the equivalent of all the decking and all the rigging rules.
And so on.
| QUOTE |
| I don't think we don't distrust the writers. Many of us old timers feel like we know many of the writers from posts, pm's and e-mails. I think clearly we don't trust the publishers at all. |
Who are these mysterious "publishers"? Isn't FanPro basically Rob Boyle?
I have to admit that I don't trust the writers, even the ones I (used to) know reasonably well. It's not that I mistrust their intentions--I'm quite confident they want to improve SR and intend to make SR4 better than SR3 as best they can. I mistrust their ability. Creating a new game system from scratch is hard. New game companies try to do this all the time, then flame out and disappear. Sometimes it's because their story sucks, but just as often it's because the game doesn't play well.
And most of the writers probably didn't choose to write SR4. They just have to cope with the situation as it stands. Hopefully they're motivated and eager to do a good job, but I am still not confident that they can, despite their best intentions.
I have also seen on many occasions the tendency of developers to lose track of what their customers' concerns are. (Happens with movie directors too.) The problem arises because developers probably don't play SR as much as we do--they're too busy working on SR products (and other things), which involves writing and editing and stuff, not actually playing the game. (Movie directors also often don't approach watching a movie with the same frame of mind that most of the audience does.)
The FAQs, plus posts of freelancers here (e.g. Patrick Goodman), give me no confidence that this pitfall has been avoided. If there is extensive feedback from playtesters, that would go a long way towards alleviating this concern--it's hard to fall into the traps of myopia or self-affirmation or sparing feelings when people are telling you, "Hey, these 45 things suck bigtime". Someone who is free to say what they really think from a somewhat outside perspective is really valuable, though. Otherwise, maybe no-one speaks up about that set of rules cause they don't want to hurt Jon's feelings, and everyone's hush-hush about the feeling there cause they know it's a pet idea of Rob's and they don't want to upset him, or nobody even looked at that table, because tables are boring, or nobody thought to take an attribute of 6 here and skill 6 there and thus didn't notice how unbalanced it was. Problem is, rules don't get better by themselves. Problems aren't fixed unless they're pointed out and worked on until they go away or are better.
So, that's why I can't trust the writers to do a good job on SR4. It's a hard job, there are big pitfalls, and I see little indication either that they're able to handle a job of that difficulty, or that they've taken pains to avoid the worst pitfalls.
If I forget for a moment that it is important to me personally that SR4 be fun to play, then rather than being irritated, I'd rather feel sorry for the developers. If they succeed beyond their wildest dreams, people will barely notice..."cool, SR is a bit more fun now!". And if they fail, they will probably feel responsible for the decline and fall of one of the best roleplaying games around. It's more responsibility than I'd want to take on.
I have to admit that I don't trust the writers, even the ones I (used to) know reasonably well. It's not that I mistrust their intentions--I'm quite confident they want to improve SR and intend to make SR4 better than SR3 as best they can. I mistrust their ability. Creating a new game system from scratch is hard. New game companies try to do this all the time, then flame out and disappear. Sometimes it's because their story sucks, but just as often it's because the game doesn't play well.
And most of the writers probably didn't choose to write SR4. They just have to cope with the situation as it stands. Hopefully they're motivated and eager to do a good job, but I am still not confident that they can, despite their best intentions.
I have also seen on many occasions the tendency of developers to lose track of what their customers' concerns are. (Happens with movie directors too.) The problem arises because developers probably don't play SR as much as we do--they're too busy working on SR products (and other things), which involves writing and editing and stuff, not actually playing the game. (Movie directors also often don't approach watching a movie with the same frame of mind that most of the audience does.)
The FAQs, plus posts of freelancers here (e.g. Patrick Goodman), give me no confidence that this pitfall has been avoided. If there is extensive feedback from playtesters, that would go a long way towards alleviating this concern--it's hard to fall into the traps of myopia or self-affirmation or sparing feelings when people are telling you, "Hey, these 45 things suck bigtime". Someone who is free to say what they really think from a somewhat outside perspective is really valuable, though. Otherwise, maybe no-one speaks up about that set of rules cause they don't want to hurt Jon's feelings, and everyone's hush-hush about the feeling there cause they know it's a pet idea of Rob's and they don't want to upset him, or nobody even looked at that table, because tables are boring, or nobody thought to take an attribute of 6 here and skill 6 there and thus didn't notice how unbalanced it was. Problem is, rules don't get better by themselves. Problems aren't fixed unless they're pointed out and worked on until they go away or are better.
So, that's why I can't trust the writers to do a good job on SR4. It's a hard job, there are big pitfalls, and I see little indication either that they're able to handle a job of that difficulty, or that they've taken pains to avoid the worst pitfalls.
If I forget for a moment that it is important to me personally that SR4 be fun to play, then rather than being irritated, I'd rather feel sorry for the developers. If they succeed beyond their wildest dreams, people will barely notice..."cool, SR is a bit more fun now!". And if they fail, they will probably feel responsible for the decline and fall of one of the best roleplaying games around. It's more responsibility than I'd want to take on.
| QUOTE |
| Who are these mysterious "publishers"? Isn't FanPro basically Rob Boyle? |
Full-time staff, FanPro is Rob Boyle and Randall Bills [the Classic BattleTech line developer]. FanPro GmbH staff are involved with most major decisions. Rett Kipp handles marketing and promotions [mostly dealing with retailers and distributors], and Studio 2 Publishing handles sales and distribution.
Freelancers -- several of which are ex-FASA staff -- handle writing, art, editing, and layout tasks.
Cool, thanks, Adam. Interesting info!
Most of the tension isn't caused just by disagreement, but by nervousness.
If someone you like is about to go in for a major surgery, you get a little concerned, don't you? The surgeon might be really good at his job (like these guys), but never have done a whole heart transplant before (much like the dev team's never created a brand new game from the ground up, but had to keep around a timeline/feel). You trust the surgeon for some stuff, you've been impressed with his work before -- but regardless, you're a little nervous when the bone saw comes out and he's hacking through your loved one's ribcage.
Right?
If someone you like is about to go in for a major surgery, you get a little concerned, don't you? The surgeon might be really good at his job (like these guys), but never have done a whole heart transplant before (much like the dev team's never created a brand new game from the ground up, but had to keep around a timeline/feel). You trust the surgeon for some stuff, you've been impressed with his work before -- but regardless, you're a little nervous when the bone saw comes out and he's hacking through your loved one's ribcage.
Right?
| QUOTE (Critias) |
| If someone you like is about to go in for a major surgery, you get a little concerned, don't you? The surgeon might be really good at his job (like these guys), but never have done a whole heart transplant before (much like the dev team's never created a brand new game from the ground up, but had to keep around a timeline/feel). You trust the surgeon for some stuff, you've been impressed with his work before -- but regardless, you're a little nervous when the bone saw comes out and he's hacking through your loved one's ribcage. Right? |
Finally, some sanity.
You come here for the sanity?
LOL
The only writers I know (and I use that word very loosely) are/were less involved in the rules development and more involved in the world building and metaplot.
R King-Nietsche (spelling?) for example.
Like others have said at greater length, they are raising the rules of a game we have been emotionally invested in (for over a decade in many cases), and building it back up from the ground. Risky. High potential for major disappointment, lots of nervous and angry posts ensue.
Anger = fear pointed outwards.
LOL
The only writers I know (and I use that word very loosely) are/were less involved in the rules development and more involved in the world building and metaplot.
R King-Nietsche (spelling?) for example.
Like others have said at greater length, they are raising the rules of a game we have been emotionally invested in (for over a decade in many cases), and building it back up from the ground. Risky. High potential for major disappointment, lots of nervous and angry posts ensue.
Anger = fear pointed outwards.
| QUOTE (Critias @ May 21 2005, 02:17 AM) |
| Most of the tension isn't caused just by disagreement, but by nervousness. If someone you like is about to go in for a major surgery, you get a little concerned, don't you? The surgeon might be really good at his job (like these guys), but never have done a whole heart transplant before (much like the dev team's never created a brand new game from the ground up, but had to keep around a timeline/feel). You trust the surgeon for some stuff, you've been impressed with his work before -- but regardless, you're a little nervous when the bone saw comes out and he's hacking through your loved one's ribcage. Right? |
This is very sound and my only problem with it, is not your logic, but a needed addition. Many of us are wondering if the operation is even necessary, and are not convinced that it isn't just turn over for the sake of turnover.
When I say we don't trust the publishers, here's more of what I mean. I'm a licenced financial advisor and if this was a stcok sale being advised by Fanpro, it would be seriously looked over by regulartory agencies as potential churning. That is recommending a sale not because it is in the best interest of the client (us) but to generate a commission for the agent (Fanpro or more probably the people holding their strings who want an excuse to rehash the basic magic/cyber/car/weapon books)
| QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0 @ May 21 2005, 12:03 AM) | ||
Speak for yourself. I can trust the number of people posting on DS on one hand, and there's not a freelancer or dev among them. Nor should there be. IMO. |
Yeah, Sinner never posts here and Piston's name doesn't appear in the writing credits of any of the books on my self. (and for those of you who missed it, there's sarcasm dripping from both those lines.)
One thing I'm wondering if it's pushing this is the august release date? They want Gen Con as the big display for the industry. but tied to that date, how much room do they have to stop/redo if they realize they are catching flak or alienating their fan base? Like the song says, "It takes a little time, to turn the titanic around."
It isn't like a delayed SB, to have volumes bound for GC they have to pretty much get it to the printers soon. There is no time for re-editing is there?
The RPG market as a whole is shrinking. There are two possible ways to deal with this. One is to try to entice non-RPGers to play. The goal there is to make the game fast-paced and easy to learn, in order to have some hope of competing with the fast-paced easy-to-learn video games and similar entertainment options. Of course, you can't beat them at their own game, but they also lower the level of what people are willing to tolerate, so to get them started you have to make some concessions. This increases the total market for RPGs.
The other way is to focus your product at existing gamers; other games will bring new customers into the fold, and you will steal them. Here, you have to offer something that the simple, flashy games cannot--depth of fictional world, strategic thinking, mechanics that have peculiar outcomes less frequently, a more realistic setting, etc.. Once people know what RPGs are and think they're fun, some will want more, and you target those people. This increases your game's fraction of the market for RPGs.
I consider SR3 to be the latter kind of game. It has a depth and realism that is often imperfect, but nonetheless has a more mature feel than, say, D&D or Magic: the Gathering. SR3 is well-positioned for this role; I can't offhand think of another game that provides a relatively mature setting that has SR's market share. Then again, I'm too busy to keep up with gaming trends, so hopefully someone can correct me.
From what the developers have said, it sounds to me like they're trying to shift to being the former kind of game. I think this is a mistake, partly because I likely won't want to play that kind of SR, and because the market is already pretty full there. Again, maybe someone can correct me. (Best of all would be information about the demographics of the players of each RPG!)
With other games taking the first route, SR does need to change even if it's going to take the second--as games move towards attracting new players, SR can come in behind them, becoming a bit more sophisticated, a bit more realistic, a bit more fun for the experienced, and steal more customers. So I don't think that the revision idea is necessarily a bad one. Did it need to happen now? I don't know. In terms of timing it seems as easily explained by a new company's desire to leave its mark as a pressing financial concern. But sooner or later, yeah, it had to happen. You have to come out with something new now and then to get coverage, to get sales, to increase your fanbase (whether from new gamers or by enticing existing gamers).
To do things this way, though--tear out the heart and soul of the game mechanics, replace it with mechanics that scream simplicity (but do not scream Shadowrun) and FAQs that read like, "Well, the old stuff is gone--good riddance!--but we haven't quite nailed down what is going in instead," and all within the timeframe of a rapidly-looming GenCon--well, it seems folly at best, and disaster at worst.
I'd say the TN for getting this right is about 11. I hope the devs have a pretty high skill and some good karma pool...er, wait. I mean, you need six successes, so I hope the devs have a pretty high linked attribute and lots of edge.
The other way is to focus your product at existing gamers; other games will bring new customers into the fold, and you will steal them. Here, you have to offer something that the simple, flashy games cannot--depth of fictional world, strategic thinking, mechanics that have peculiar outcomes less frequently, a more realistic setting, etc.. Once people know what RPGs are and think they're fun, some will want more, and you target those people. This increases your game's fraction of the market for RPGs.
I consider SR3 to be the latter kind of game. It has a depth and realism that is often imperfect, but nonetheless has a more mature feel than, say, D&D or Magic: the Gathering. SR3 is well-positioned for this role; I can't offhand think of another game that provides a relatively mature setting that has SR's market share. Then again, I'm too busy to keep up with gaming trends, so hopefully someone can correct me.
From what the developers have said, it sounds to me like they're trying to shift to being the former kind of game. I think this is a mistake, partly because I likely won't want to play that kind of SR, and because the market is already pretty full there. Again, maybe someone can correct me. (Best of all would be information about the demographics of the players of each RPG!)
With other games taking the first route, SR does need to change even if it's going to take the second--as games move towards attracting new players, SR can come in behind them, becoming a bit more sophisticated, a bit more realistic, a bit more fun for the experienced, and steal more customers. So I don't think that the revision idea is necessarily a bad one. Did it need to happen now? I don't know. In terms of timing it seems as easily explained by a new company's desire to leave its mark as a pressing financial concern. But sooner or later, yeah, it had to happen. You have to come out with something new now and then to get coverage, to get sales, to increase your fanbase (whether from new gamers or by enticing existing gamers).
To do things this way, though--tear out the heart and soul of the game mechanics, replace it with mechanics that scream simplicity (but do not scream Shadowrun) and FAQs that read like, "Well, the old stuff is gone--good riddance!--but we haven't quite nailed down what is going in instead," and all within the timeframe of a rapidly-looming GenCon--well, it seems folly at best, and disaster at worst.
I'd say the TN for getting this right is about 11. I hope the devs have a pretty high skill and some good karma pool...er, wait. I mean, you need six successes, so I hope the devs have a pretty high linked attribute and lots of edge.
Contrast and compare this with what FanPro is doing:
| QUOTE |
| Ars Magica 5th Edition Core Rulebook Line Developer David Chart worked on the new edition for the two years. It went through extensive playtesting over a year; this has easily been the most playtesting any edition of the game has received before publication. Playtest groups have included seasoned Ars Magica veterans as well as players who had no previous experience with the game. We are confident that the game appeals to both. Veteran Ars Magica players are clamoring to know what's new and different about 5th Edition. Here are some of the rules change highlights:
|
That is the kind of thing I'd like FanPro to be able to say. The difference to date is almost enough to make one weep.
They took the best of the old mechanics, applied them consistently across relevant portions of the game, fixed up flaws in the old mechanics, made poorly-integrated characters more integrated, enhanced the character creation system to be more flexible and handle the widest range of characters--and then tested the game extensively to make sure it all works.
Doesn't that sound exactly like what you'd hope would be done for SR4?
| QUOTE (Snow_Fox) | ||||
Yeah, Sinner never posts here and Piston's name doesn't appear in the writing credits of any of the books on my self. (and for those of you who missed it, there's sarcasm dripping from both those lines.) |
He didn't say no devs came here. He said he doesn't trust them.
| QUOTE |
| It isn't like a delayed SB, to have volumes bound for GC they have to pretty much get it to the printers soon. There is no time for re-editing is there? |
What most companies do for GenCon is have the printer air-ship just enough books to the show, while they ground ship the rest of the books to the warehouse.
Last year the company I worked for sent 5 books [four of them full-colour, two of them 350+ page hardbacks] to press just two weeks before GenCon, and had copies of all of them arrive the day before the show -- from China, no less. And that included the printer sending us proofs of the books, and us making some corrections.
I plan on doing the exact same thing with some other books [Not SR4 -- that one isn't on my layout/design plate] this year.
| QUOTE (Critias) | ||||||
He didn't say no devs came here. He said he doesn't trust them. |
Oh, great. I now officially need a translator.
qu'est que vous dite?
An English to typoed English translator.
Dollar a word, bay-bee.
| QUOTE (Snow_Fox) |
| qu'est que vous dite? |
"dites", n'est pas!?
Au secours! Nous avons besoin d'un francais ici!
" Qu'est-ce que vous dites ? "
and
" N'est-ce pas ? "
Still, not bad for non natives speaker. Unless you just took a cheap translator and let it do your mistake for you? My guess is Snow Fox did just that while Wounded Roinin deserves some kudos.
and
" N'est-ce pas ? "
Still, not bad for non natives speaker. Unless you just took a cheap translator and let it do your mistake for you?
My guess is Snow Fox did just that while Wounded Roinin deserves some kudos.
| QUOTE (Jrayjoker) |
| You come here for the sanity? LOL |
From the Casablanca movie:
Captain Renault: What in heaven's name brought you to Casablanca?
Rick: My health. I came to Casablanca for the waters.
Captain Renault: The waters? What waters? We're in the desert.
Rick: I was misinformed.
Jokes aside, Critias managed to state his worries without having to bash or flame anyone. Given the growing toxicity of Dumpshock's SR4 boards, I find that worthy of note.
| QUOTE (Jrayjoker) |
| The only writers I know (and I use that word very loosely) are/were less involved in the rules development and more involved in the world building and metaplot. R King-Nietsche (spelling?) for example. |
This is just a quick search, but I hope this helps:
| QUOTE (SR4 FAQ) |
| Q. Who is designing SR4? A. We have a team of people who have been working on Shadowrun for years: Rob Boyle, Elissa Carey, Brian Cross, Dan Grendel, Adam Jury, Steve Kenson, Christian Lonsing, David Lyons, Michelle Lyons and Jon Szeto. A few other freelancers will also be writing for the book. |
Rob Boyle (more here)
Elissa Carey (more here)
Brian Cross
Dan Grendel
Adam Jury (and don't forget about Adam's cool sister!
)Steve Kenson (more here)
Christian Lonsing (FanPro.de's Editor, though I couldn't find his German credits with a quick Google search)
David Lyons
Michelle Lyons (more here)
Jon Szeto
| QUOTE (Jrayjoker) |
| Like others have said at greater length, they are raising the rules of a game we have been emotionally invested in (for over a decade in many cases), and building it back up from the ground. Risky. High potential for major disappointment, lots of nervous and angry posts ensue. |
Understandable, though I'd suggest lowering the hatchet until there's more information to bite at. We're still three months away from SR4, and *I guess* that any substantial teaser will probably appear closer to the release date (this is valid for most RPG companies that I know of, by the way).
| QUOTE (Jrayjoker) |
| Anger = fear pointed outwards. |
What, afraid of the unknown?
| QUOTE (JongWK) |
| [QUOTE=Jrayjoker]... Given the growing toxicity of Dumpshock's SR4 boards, I find that worthy of note. ... |
Does that mean we'll be seeing toxic hearth spirits here soon?
Nay.
But the odds of delusional Pax loyalist Otaku have jumped 10 fold.
But the odds of delusional Pax loyalist Otaku have jumped 10 fold.
Jesus; they're missing like 8 billion of my credits.
| QUOTE (Ellery) | ||
Contrast and compare this with what FanPro is doing:
Doesn't that sound exactly like what you'd hope would be done for SR4? |
So exactly, in fact, that I might actually buy the book and, if SR4 tanks as badly as I'm beginning to expect it will, start playing that instead. I remember I loved what little of the game I did read about, but the spell creation guidelines were the main thing that put me off of the game. If those change, hell I'll switch no problem.
And that, in the end, is the problem with SR4's approach. That one blurb managed to get me interested in the new Ars Magika system more than five "FAQs" of SR4 did. It's actually not that hard to get me excited about something--I'm kind of a sucker that way--and the fact that the marketing for SR4, a product that I was really looking forward to already, can't hold my interest tells me at least that there's something wrong. And that's what I'm angry about.
| QUOTE (Charon) |
| " Qu'est-ce que vous dites ? " and " N'est-ce pas ? " Still, not bad for non natives speaker. Unless you just took a cheap translator and let it do your mistake for you? My guess is Snow Fox did just that while Wounded Roinin deserves some kudos. |
No, I havn't had to write French in years and was gonig from memory. speaking it is much easier.
| QUOTE (nick012000) |
| [QUOTE=JongWK,May 22 2005, 03:42 AM] [QUOTE=Jrayjoker]... Given the growing toxicity of Dumpshock's SR4 boards, I find that worthy of note. ... [/QUOTE] Does that mean we'll be seeing toxic hearth spirits here soon? |
Heh, rating 6 curdled milk spirit. Inherent power: toxic wave.
| QUOTE (JongWK) | ||
What, afraid of the unknown? |
in a word,
YES
| QUOTE (JongWK @ May 22 2005, 10:42 AM) |
| Given the growing toxicity of Dumpshock's SR4 boards, I find that worthy of note. |
the dumpshock forums have allways been toxic, its just that the SR4 section have filterd out all the other traffic from the general shadowrun section, making it more acidic and flamable...
as for the fear of the unknown, speaking of one that have to live with that kind of fear in everyday life i can only say that the worst think one can do is to give in to that fear. or did that make me sounds like yoda?
| QUOTE (JongWK) |
| Understandable, though I'd suggest lowering the hatchet until there's more information to bite at. |
You do realize at this point that, for example, my hatchet has been poised directly over the throat of SR4 because of the presentation, not the actual game.
You all seem to forget who were the most ardent supporters of Fanpro and SR4 when it was first announced, and for the first and most uncertain month. It was me, it was Critias and mfb and others (All of ther SLers, in fact) who were not ONLY not engaged in fearful handwringing and rampart speculation, but urged caution and rationality since we didn't know what's going on.
Nor are we still. That said, we have shown our displeasure at some of the enumerated changes mentioned in the FAQ (e.g., the elimination of CP) without engaging in any rampant and ill-conceived speculation of things based on information we don't know. For example, I've made posts suggesting things that I think might fit within this new system.
However, it is really starting to piss me off to see people paint me--and I will only speak for myself--and some others as if we're the deluded ones.
It really pisses me off to get attacked because I want one, ONE, example of why magic is so broken that Rob couldn't enumerate in three paragraphs. That's bullshit, and I have no qualms about calling it such.
Two months ago, the roles were reversed. But oh, how things have changed, and had some people here actually read any of what I've written since I changed my mind about SR4 from giddy anticipation (I was planning my trip to Gencon. That's unheard of for me who can't stand dealing with gamers face to face to make the trip to Gaming Mecca all because I was so exicted about SR4 I wanted to have the first copy, play their tourney with some gamers I know, and get the book signed by as many people as I could) to cautious hesitation, and it wasn't until two weeks ago that I gave up on SR4 because ...
The FAQs put me off. You want to know the truth? The FAQs put me off. Their tone, their presentation, their information (or in FAQ 5 the utter lack thereof) is just enough to make me realize that I made the mistake of trusting the devs when I should have known better. I don't want to have anything to do with the game because I don't want to have anything to do with the kind of people who write shit like FAQ 5. At this point, the rules have nothing to do with it. The sandlines are there, but I don't know if SR4 crosses any because there's no information.
| QUOTE (Eyeless Blond) |
| That one blurb managed to get me interested in the new Ars Magika system more than five "FAQs" of SR4 did. It's actually not that hard to get me excited about something--I'm kind of a sucker that way--and the fact that the marketing for SR4, a product that I was really looking forward to already, can't hold my interest tells me at least that there's something wrong. And that's what I'm angry about. |
I agree completely, and I don't even play any other games besides SR. That blurb looks more interesting than anything I've read about SR4 from the FAQ.
Quite frankly, that blurb is exactly what I want in a SR4 FAQ, and as they've had five shots to do it so far, I have no hope for the devs or their writing abilities. What professional writes that way? If I wrote something like those FAQs for a customer/client, I'd get shitcanned in a second. I've been dressed down publicly for less though, so maybe I'm just expecting too much from professional writers.
Fear is an emotional response that encourages people to avoid unwanted outcomes. You can't just say that a reaction is bad because it is based in fear--you have to understand the basis for the fear and see if it is sensible. I am afraid of jumping off of tall buildings onto concrete, and for good reason. Not all fears manifest for such good reasons, however.
I'm not afraid of anything. I'm especially not afraid of change. I'm indifferent to change (And I think I've said that umpteen times in the last two months).
I'm just trying to urge as forcefully as possible my intense desire that the devs make sure they know what they're doing before they put out this book.
One of those ways is to make sure that they can defend their own decisions within the context of the meager amounts of information we have. If they do, then great. No problem. However, there are possible problems in the mechanics, and like I said (over and over and over again) I would be amiss if I didn't point them out and say, "Look here! Here! There might be a hole!"
And if they already patched it, great. But if they didn't, how can I look at myself and think that maybe if I had said something, or backed-up someone else when they said something, then we wouldn't have a problem with X.
I'm also trying to make suggestions, but apparently that's lost on people. And that's why I gave up. I'm reduced to defending myself against baseless accusations and engaging in sematic arguments here. Eff that.
I'm just trying to urge as forcefully as possible my intense desire that the devs make sure they know what they're doing before they put out this book.
One of those ways is to make sure that they can defend their own decisions within the context of the meager amounts of information we have. If they do, then great. No problem. However, there are possible problems in the mechanics, and like I said (over and over and over again) I would be amiss if I didn't point them out and say, "Look here! Here! There might be a hole!"
And if they already patched it, great. But if they didn't, how can I look at myself and think that maybe if I had said something, or backed-up someone else when they said something, then we wouldn't have a problem with X.
I'm also trying to make suggestions, but apparently that's lost on people. And that's why I gave up. I'm reduced to defending myself against baseless accusations and engaging in sematic arguments here. Eff that.
yeah. when the news about SR4 came out, i was jumping up and down--lots of us were. since then, i've gotten a closer look at what's going to come out. i'm no longer excited.
| QUOTE (Snow_Fox) | ||
No, I havn't had to write French in years and was gonig from memory. speaking it is much easier. |
My apologies, then.
Sadly I have to agree with those (eye_lessblond, crimsondude2.0, etc.) that the current FAQs have completely turned me off. The FAQs we get basically say SR3 was a poor product and SR4 is a much better product without giving any evidence or examples as to why this is. Go look at the Legend of the Five Rings explenations on their website. They go into detail what they thought was wrong and how they are changing it. Its astounding and has perked my interest in L5R3 just for the rules (but still not the story line after the Scorpion Coup).
Then if you look at the details the German part of FanPro is giving out, how the new wireless matrix is working and the story updates, and compare it to how we're getting information, and it's aggravating that we're almost completely in the dark on the changes story wise as well if people hadn't translated the German stuff for us.
It's basically those two things that have turned me off to SR4. I was extremely excited at the idea of SR4 and am neutral to the changes (not enough information). However, the poor presentation that FanPro has given to us and the basic unwillingness of FanPro to reveal this great change that in their opinion they have created has basically led me to the conclusion that FanPro doesn't really care about explaining things to me the consumer and that I'm expected to just buy it because it is SR.
So I'm just going to pick up SoA, SoLA, and LA. Then after that FanPro won't get a single penny from me in either SR or BT.
Then if you look at the details the German part of FanPro is giving out, how the new wireless matrix is working and the story updates, and compare it to how we're getting information, and it's aggravating that we're almost completely in the dark on the changes story wise as well if people hadn't translated the German stuff for us.
It's basically those two things that have turned me off to SR4. I was extremely excited at the idea of SR4 and am neutral to the changes (not enough information). However, the poor presentation that FanPro has given to us and the basic unwillingness of FanPro to reveal this great change that in their opinion they have created has basically led me to the conclusion that FanPro doesn't really care about explaining things to me the consumer and that I'm expected to just buy it because it is SR.
So I'm just going to pick up SoA, SoLA, and LA. Then after that FanPro won't get a single penny from me in either SR or BT.
maybe we should ask why they are not putting out more information rather then just demanding more information. there is most likely a very good reason for keeping tight lip about this.
Why all the hate? Simple, because we care to much about the game to be treated like mushrooms about its future. Like the past few post have stated, we haven't been told anything usefull about what happening, some things we have been told seem to be contradictory (i.e Simpler system with more attributes).
I think frankly that the devel's have decided that SR's future lies in converting people from other systems by using rules similar to other systems rather than continueing to build on a loyal (and somewhat erroding) fan base.
I got my first book as a gift in '93, and can probably count on one hand the number of games I've played in IRL, but I've been a loyal customer and fan since then. When SR 3 came out, I resisted the change, I liked my firearms skill, spell locks and grounding. Each was easily transplantable from second edition to third. As time went on I converted and was glad for the change, partially because even in change I still had a good feel for the rules.
With the information thats been passed to us from the developers via the FAQs, I don't like the changes, it doesn't feel like the Shadowrun I grew up with. SR3 isn't perfect by anymeans but we love and accept it.
Here's how I see the FAQs and the coming of 4th edition: you're in a relationship were you care about the other person even with their faults. Now a parent or friend is telling you that you will be marrying someone you've never meet and the only details they give are that they are different from the one you're with now and that they're "nice".
(Sorry to anyone who actually reads my dreanged rantings)
I think frankly that the devel's have decided that SR's future lies in converting people from other systems by using rules similar to other systems rather than continueing to build on a loyal (and somewhat erroding) fan base.
I got my first book as a gift in '93, and can probably count on one hand the number of games I've played in IRL, but I've been a loyal customer and fan since then. When SR 3 came out, I resisted the change, I liked my firearms skill, spell locks and grounding. Each was easily transplantable from second edition to third. As time went on I converted and was glad for the change, partially because even in change I still had a good feel for the rules.
With the information thats been passed to us from the developers via the FAQs, I don't like the changes, it doesn't feel like the Shadowrun I grew up with. SR3 isn't perfect by anymeans but we love and accept it.
Here's how I see the FAQs and the coming of 4th edition: you're in a relationship were you care about the other person even with their faults. Now a parent or friend is telling you that you will be marrying someone you've never meet and the only details they give are that they are different from the one you're with now and that they're "nice".
(Sorry to anyone who actually reads my dreanged rantings)
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| maybe we should ask why they are not putting out more information rather then just demanding more information. there is most likely a very good reason for keeping tight lip about this. |
How about just better quality information?
I'm a pathetic addict to World of Warcraft, and one of the biggest criticisms about that game is the lack of communication between the developers and the customers. The amount of fear, distrust, and flaming this engenders is precisely equivilent to what I'm reading about on these boards.
Only you're all upset because of the things they have told you. I find this interesting.
Its clear that the FAQs are causing more confusion then they are clearing things up. Which is to say that the "frequently asked" questions that they are answering are not the ones that are being frequently asked on these boards.
There seem to be two big problems here. The first is an inherent distrust of the publishers, this is not being alleviated by the FAQs because they are coming across as poorly written and misdirecting. The second big problem is that the FAQs are being presented with no context, we have no way to frame the changes being made because we can't see the big picture.
Only you're all upset because of the things they have told you. I find this interesting.
Its clear that the FAQs are causing more confusion then they are clearing things up. Which is to say that the "frequently asked" questions that they are answering are not the ones that are being frequently asked on these boards.
There seem to be two big problems here. The first is an inherent distrust of the publishers, this is not being alleviated by the FAQs because they are coming across as poorly written and misdirecting. The second big problem is that the FAQs are being presented with no context, we have no way to frame the changes being made because we can't see the big picture.
| QUOTE (Crimsondude 2.0) | ||
How about just better quality information? |
well right now it seems they cant give better quality without giving more quantity...
heh, this kinda reminds me when a rant was posted over on talsorian about cyberpunk and learning from developing computer games for consoles. the number of people that went crasy both on "view from the edge" and talsorians bbs was, shall we say, interesting.
that game to is going thru a transisional period as the timeframe is pushed forward and the tech seems to be advancing. there to the level of info was low and was leading to a lot of doom and gloom. but then someone came back after having played a preview and from then on things seems to have become brighter.
i wonder how this forum will turn around come reports from gencon...
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| i wonder how this forum will turn around come reports from gencon... |
For many of us, the forum "turned around" as soon as they started the FAQs, telling us how much was being changed. The less we knew, the happier we were about it (I'm not kidding -- check out some of the earlier threads, and see how many of us have frantically leapt from one side of the fence to the other, the more we've heard). Unless the finished product is very sexy in ways they're just not at all letting on, don't expect the post-Gencon DS to be all rainbows, sunsets, holding hangs, and strawberry-smelling farts.
i dont expect it to be, im starting to know the kind of people thats on this forum to well for that. but i have a feel that maybe some of the worst fears will be put to rest. but then i have allways stated that i will wait for the finished product before i pass my verdict.
So have most of the rest of us. We're just not keeping very high hopes, what with each FAQ that comes along stomping all over them, and all.
| QUOTE (Hasagwan @ May 22 2005, 06:58 PM) |
| Sadly I have to agree with those (eye_lessblond, crimsondude2.0, etc.) that the current FAQs have completely turned me off. The FAQs we get basically say SR3 was a poor product and SR4 is a much better product without giving any evidence or examples as to why this is...I was extremely excited at the idea of SR4 and am neutral to the changes (not enough information).... |
I think that's a good point. They tell use SR3 is a bad product, but we don't think so, or we wouldn't be playing it. Since they got that basic point wrong, they so badly misjudged how we feel, that it is hard to believe they really understand what we want.
Of course I still hold that it's nothing but a money grab, "buy all those core books again kiddies."
| QUOTE |
| So I'm just going to pick up SoA, SoLA, and LA. Then after that FanPro won't get a single penny from me in either SR or BT. |
That might be a little extreme. I'll buy the info books- Targets and such, but will not convert over. My group again kicked this over tonight. That's 9 regulars who, allowing for the married couples have pretty much bought most of the SB's in the past, now all pretty much in agreement not to f/u with the new edition, meaning we won't bother with the new books on magic/guns/cyber/cars all of which Fanpro is probably counting on.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) | ||||
well right now it seems they cant give better quality without giving more quantity... |
How about we compromise on more well-written?
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| maybe we should ask why they are not putting out more information rather then just demanding more information. there is most likely a very good reason for keeping tight lip about this. |
No dice. If they've got a good reason to keep things quiet, they say that. There's no good reason for five FAQs worth of little-to-nothing.
~J
| QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ May 23 2005, 04:50 AM) |
| I think that's a good point. They tell use SR3 is a bad product, but we don't think so, or we wouldn't be playing it. |
err, have you seen some of the posts on this board? if we bundle them all up together the only thing not wrong with SR3 is the setting it seems (or maybe even that as some people realy dont like the "forced" metaplot).
only real thing is that none finds the system totaly bad, just parts of its bad.
and kagetenshi, i must say i have found the FAQ's informative, given that this is a company talking about a future product. compared to some press releases i have seen, this is downright talkative.
and can someone give me a date of release of the ars magica info and a date of release of the book they talk about in that info? normaly one will see better into the closer one gets the the release. but i want to see how close together the quoted faq and the actual release of the book was.
The Ars Magica 5 book's been out for a while. I think they wrote the description after version 5 was out. I would hope that FanPro could write something similar by now. If the information there is accurate, then 2-3 months before the product was finished, they'd have all the info they needed to make the announcement that I posted.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| we should ask why they are not putting out more information rather then just demanding more information. there is most likely a very good reason for keeping tight lip about this. |
I can think of three reasons why we're not getting such information.
- They don't know. They've committed to releasing a product at GenCon, but they're still scrambling to patch up core rules and can't go into specifics because they don't have specifics yet.
- They don't care. They're busy writing the books, and don't really care what their fans think since they'll probably buy the book anyway--and non-fans don't care about specifics--so it's not worth the bother of getting specifics right.
- They don't think we'll like it. They're making a lot of changes, and realize that it's going to be hard to swallow, so are throwing enough text at us to prepare us for the change but not so much as to put off most people completely--and then they just hope that when the whole package is available, we'll be able to appreciate it.
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) | ||
err, have you seen some of the posts on this board? if we bundle them all up together the only thing not wrong with SR3 is the setting it seems (or maybe even that as some people realy dont like the "forced" metaplot). only real thing is that none finds the system totaly bad, just parts of its bad. and kagetenshi, i must say i have found the FAQ's informative, given that this is a company talking about a future product. compared to some press releases i have seen, this is downright talkative. and can someone give me a date of release of the ars magica info and a date of release of the book they talk about in that info? normaly one will see better into the closer one gets the the release. but i want to see how close together the quoted faq and the actual release of the book was. |
I don't think anyone is arguing that what if they are right or wrong as none of us know why they are doing what they are. If you look at the FAQs you'll find that the make statements of opinions. They say that magic was broken and needed to be fixed. That's all they say about it being broken. They could have easily given examples of why they think that way. Right or wrong we could easily see their point of view which would probably cool the flames a bit. And since these parts had been decided a long time ago, there shouldn't be any problem saying what it is. Maybe I'm just too jaded from my time in the police force and the elections last year, but I don't like it when people state something as facts without backing it up with evidence.
And hobgoblin is right, others are talkative. Heck FanPro Germany has already spelled out what the Wireless Matrix Initiative is to their fans in some monthly news letter (RPG net had it). It does feel like we're being given the short end of the stick.
As for why they aren't Ellery gives some reasons but there are a few more.
4. They feel that what is wrong with SR (that it is crappy, that magic is flawed etc) is obvious and that we don't need more information.
5. The current market in the US is smaller than we all think and as such they aren't putting much effort into maintaining the current market when the future market is the primary goal and the German market is more robust.
There are lots of reasons, lots of them negative.
As for me being harsh about stopping after the SR3 stuff is done, I guess that could be the case. I'm just tired of getting the short end of the stick and I'm voting with my wallet. I've got 15 years worth of SR info, I think I'm in good shape.
hmm, if they wrote the quoted description after the book was out then im not surprised as then they had a finished product and the same list would be written up by fans anyways so why not just go out with it.
as for fanpro germany spelling it out about the wireless matrix. didnt that german text get quoted and machine translated here on the forum to or is there one i have missed? if its the one im thinking of then i must say it was not much more informative then the existing faq on that subject. in fact, it hazed the image more as i think there was some comments in there that didnt fit sr at all...
as for fanpro germany spelling it out about the wireless matrix. didnt that german text get quoted and machine translated here on the forum to or is there one i have missed? if its the one im thinking of then i must say it was not much more informative then the existing faq on that subject. in fact, it hazed the image more as i think there was some comments in there that didnt fit sr at all...
I was looking forward to going to Origins just because of SR. Now though since the announcement of SR4, I'm having reservations.
I hate D20 with a passion, but guess what i did? I just bought the 3.5 ph so i can pick up Iron Kingdoms at Origins.
Usually i go to Origins to pick up the latest SR release, and see what i've missed. Not this time. I'm going to skip that part and try to pick up the newest supplements on Ebay on the cheap.
I hate D20 with a passion, but guess what i did? I just bought the 3.5 ph so i can pick up Iron Kingdoms at Origins.
Usually i go to Origins to pick up the latest SR release, and see what i've missed. Not this time. I'm going to skip that part and try to pick up the newest supplements on Ebay on the cheap.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.