Hi all,
I've only recently found out that there will be a new version of Shadowrun coming out. I've spent part of the morning reading threads here about whether this is a good idea or a bad idea, mostly from a mechanics point of view.
I think SR4 is a necessary change in order for Shadowrun to survive.
Gamers are always on the lookout for something new. There are always old stand-bys that we love, but don't really play anymore. Shadowrun is becoming one of those. It's probably an active game for most of the people on this board, but not for the gaming community in general.
Recently I convinced my wife to give it a try and she liked it. We went out to buy a copy of SR3 for her own, but none of the game shops we tried had a copy. According to the staff, it's not in demand anymore. Anyone who wanted to play a game originally published in 1998 already had a copy and there wasn't anything exciting coming out to bring in any more customers. We eventually got her a copy, but it got me thinking.
There are two reasons why companies publish new editions of games.
1. To correct errors/design flaws in previous editions.
2. To generate interest and acquire new customers.
SR3 is about as good as it's going to get for the current set of rules. Sure, there are things that could use some fixing, but by and large, these are minor changes. Once you have the main book and any of the specialist books that you need (MitS, Matrix, etc), you don't need anything else. This is fantastic for gamers, but this is terrible for a gaming company.
The potential audience that liked the game already bought all that they need. They will typically buy less and less of the supplements that come out subsequently. Those that didn't like the original game will pass on any future supplements. This leads to a shrinking market and eventually an out of business company.
Most major problems with the system have been addressed and a re-write of the existing rules likely won't convince anyone that didn't like the last version to pick up the new one. In order to try and grab some attention for the game, there has to be some major changes to shake the gaming community up and get some new customers to try Shadowrun.
In order for Shadowrun to survive, it has to change.
SR3 is a fantastic game, but it's time has passed. I'm glad that the developers aren't willing to let Shadowrun as a whole go quietly. They're taking a chance, and I'm behind them. I have some doubts about the new game. That said, I will be buying a copy of SR4 as soon as it becomes available. I have enjoyed Shadowrun so much over the years, that I think the developers deserve their shot. If SR4 is fantastic, I'll keep up with the new game. If I don't like it, I still have all the old SR3 books I need.
"There ain't no more opportunity here, and everything's been done."
_Tweeter and the Monkey Man_, Traveling Wilburys
Chris
(Apologies if this appears twice. I think my first was eaten.)
Full Version: Change or Die
Hi cgordon.
The thing is, most people here agree with you. SR3 *does* need change. In addition to the reasons you stated, let me add a third:
3. To Eliminate more than half a decade of rules and flavor bloat.
Over the past decade the rules and flavor bloat in SR3 has grown enormous. This isn't really a bad thing, nor is it limited to Shadowrun; the more books you write for a system, the more inevitably it grows larger and larger, until it's near impossible to get a new person "up to speed" in a reasonable amount of time. Every so often the system needs to be reset, just so the number of sourcebooks you have to read to get up to speed remains manageable.
Very few people here deny that change is necessary. Many people, though, are apprehensive about these specific changes, for one specific reason:
SR4 is not a new edition of Shadowrun. It is, in fact, the first edition of a completely new game, that just happens to have some of the same flavor.
Other, wiser voices than mine (like Ellery's; search this subforum for her posts) can explain it better, but the gist of it is that the changes are *so* extensive here that they've basically thrown out the old system and replaced it anew. This isn't necessarily bad either; in fact it could be brilliant. The people that have actually played it, however, tell us that the rules aren't really that good unless you're the type of person who ignores the rules most of the time, which is not encouraging.
Combine this with the proven facts that:
The thing is, most people here agree with you. SR3 *does* need change. In addition to the reasons you stated, let me add a third:
3. To Eliminate more than half a decade of rules and flavor bloat.
Over the past decade the rules and flavor bloat in SR3 has grown enormous. This isn't really a bad thing, nor is it limited to Shadowrun; the more books you write for a system, the more inevitably it grows larger and larger, until it's near impossible to get a new person "up to speed" in a reasonable amount of time. Every so often the system needs to be reset, just so the number of sourcebooks you have to read to get up to speed remains manageable.
Very few people here deny that change is necessary. Many people, though, are apprehensive about these specific changes, for one specific reason:
SR4 is not a new edition of Shadowrun. It is, in fact, the first edition of a completely new game, that just happens to have some of the same flavor.
Other, wiser voices than mine (like Ellery's; search this subforum for her posts) can explain it better, but the gist of it is that the changes are *so* extensive here that they've basically thrown out the old system and replaced it anew. This isn't necessarily bad either; in fact it could be brilliant. The people that have actually played it, however, tell us that the rules aren't really that good unless you're the type of person who ignores the rules most of the time, which is not encouraging.
Combine this with the proven facts that:
- Fanpro has serious issues with designing internally consistent rulesets, or even following their own rules (take a look at the SR3 FAQ for examples)
- The core book is being horribly rushed; many core rules appear to be still under debate, a mere two months before the publishing due date.
- What little advertising there has been (the "SR4 FAQs") is so haphazardly put together and so strongly emphasizes the weakest part of Fanpro's business (rules over flavor) that it seems like the company no longer cares about its current fans enough to want them to buy the product.
Excellent posts.
I personally am excited about a new version of Shadowrun. I think most fears about the new version come from the unknown. We fear what we don't understand.
I personally am excited about a new version of Shadowrun. I think most fears about the new version come from the unknown. We fear what we don't understand.
| QUOTE |
| The people that have actually played it, however, tell us that the rules aren't really that good unless you're the type of person who ignores the rules most of the time, which is not encouraging. |
Well, sounds like they know their audience. I know no SR group who actually plays out all the rules. It's just too time intensive, and most GMs and players I know have no time to learn the books like some rules lawyers here know them.
Seems SR4 won't change that. Damn, a wasted opportunity. But I don't believe the rules will be worse. Different, yes. But not worse. Even mfb said that.
And since they fixed the rules for tech characters, now I maybe can actually play my Rigger by the rules, instead of by a number of house rules that tend to fluctuate from GM to GM.
Looks like I need to amend some of my long-ass whine above.
First off, "The people that have actually played it" should be changed to "Some of the people who have actually played it." There are other playtesters that disagree with that statement, and it's only fair to point that out.
Next, the three "proven facts". Only the first is really proven, and none of them are actually facts.
In particular I'm told that a lot more of the new core rules are set in stone than I thought were; thanks Synner for pointing that out.
So corrections and apologies all.
First off, "The people that have actually played it" should be changed to "Some of the people who have actually played it." There are other playtesters that disagree with that statement, and it's only fair to point that out.
Next, the three "proven facts". Only the first is really proven, and none of them are actually facts.
In particular I'm told that a lot more of the new core rules are set in stone than I thought were; thanks Synner for pointing that out. So corrections and apologies all.
| QUOTE (Eyeless Blond @ Jun 26 2005, 05:01 PM) |
| So corrections and apologies all. |
Please take this apologitic attitude of yours and push off. It doesn't really have much of a place around here.
P.S. I think it was said at one point that the initial work for SR4 started over a year ago?
how big a part of the fanpro sr team are old hats from fasa?
most of the core material for sr3 is from fasa, not fanpro iirc.
so putting the blame squarely on fanpro in point 1 may not be 100% accurate
most of the core material for sr3 is from fasa, not fanpro iirc.
so putting the blame squarely on fanpro in point 1 may not be 100% accurate
| QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
| how big a part of the fanpro sr team are old hats from fasa? most of the core material for sr3 is from fasa, not fanpro iirc. so putting the blame squarely on fanpro in point 1 may not be 100% accurate |
The FAQ are entirely FanPro, actually written by the people designing the new edition. They have re-written rules, re-interpreted rules, and made judgement calls that have become part of SR3, either integrated by erratta or on the lesser basis of an FAQ answer.
All this would support your claim of inheritance from FASA, except some of the new rules are not consistent with other new rules, which is what I believe Eyeless was pointing out.
Where does he get that from, though? I'd appreciate a link.
Tracking from FAQs and other rules comentary to try gauge ability to construct consist rules by a company is questionable. WotC rules articles are flat out bizzaro at times, but the 3e/3.5e rules are actually quite good. Sometimes FAQs don't go through the same level of editorial that the products do. Now if they were actual errata.....
P.S. Yes, this is main WotC guys doing the rules commentary.
P.S. Yes, this is main WotC guys doing the rules commentary.
Äh guys,
FanPro(Germany) actually has a quite good track-record with game rules as seen with their home system DSA. It was FASA that had the issues. So if the german FanPro crew is involved, we actually might get a consistend and working rules system for the first time in SR history.
Birdy
FanPro(Germany) actually has a quite good track-record with game rules as seen with their home system DSA. It was FASA that had the issues. So if the german FanPro crew is involved, we actually might get a consistend and working rules system for the first time in SR history.
Birdy
I agree, that this is so far a good thing. All I really want out of the new system is:
A) To be able to actually include the decker in my party and it not be a major pain in the but for the rest of the party.
B) have rigging rules that make sense and are fun to use.
C) have Physads that skill kick butt.
D) Magic that is fast and easy to explain, yet somewhat eloquent.
A) To be able to actually include the decker in my party and it not be a major pain in the but for the rest of the party.
B) have rigging rules that make sense and are fun to use.
C) have Physads that skill kick butt.
D) Magic that is fast and easy to explain, yet somewhat eloquent.
| QUOTE (cgordon_13 @ Jun 26 2005, 10:33 AM) |
| In order for Shadowrun to survive, it has to change. |
Yeah, gotta agree with that. Only the very largest RPG store in Montreal still has a decent SR selection. My LGS doesn't even have the core book anymore and only has a few book that I wager have been there for over a year.
SR is dying. At this point, a revised edition that just tweak the existing rule certainly wouldn't change that trend. SR4 might not do it either, but it has a better shot. Not only could it bring some gamers of the new generation into the fold, It has a hope of bringing back some of the old timer. Like me, for example. Hey, just because I post here and recently started a new SR campaign doesn't mean I have contributed a single penny to Fanpro's treasury. I have a very extensive SR library but nothing I own is less than 4 or 5 years old. And I don't really intend to buy anything else either unless I get into SR4. SR4 is Fanpro's shot at getting me back as a paying customer.
Change or die?? I knew it! We CAN'T just keep playing 3rd edition. The gaming police are coming, the gaming police are coming!
In general, I'm with Fionn, but my views have already been stated again and again. All hail SR3R!
In general, I'm with Fionn, but my views have already been stated again and again. All hail SR3R!
| QUOTE (nezumi @ Jun 27 2005, 10:42 AM) |
| Change or die?? I knew it! We CAN'T just keep playing 3rd edition. The gaming police are coming, the gaming police are coming! |
Oh please. A game can be declared dead even if you still play it and the game police leaves you alone. When no new book are coming out and all the other books are out of print, that RPG is dead, no matter how many hardcore fans still play. That can easily become shadowrun in 5 years at the rate things are going. That's what "change or die" meant and you knew it (or should have, anyway).
By that standard every single RPG in existance is dead except for WW and aDnD proper, because all the gaming stores in my area carry those and only those, period.
| QUOTE (Birdy) |
| Äh guys, FanPro(Germany) actually has a quite good track-record with game rules as seen with their home system DSA. It was FASA that had the issues. So if the german FanPro crew is involved, we actually might get a consistend and working rules system for the first time in SR history. Birdy |
Yes, but FanPro Germany also has major issues in re story and plot. (Hi, Germany SB!)
So do we sacrifice story to get rules?
| QUOTE (BitBasher) |
| By that standard every single RPG in existance is dead except for WW and aDnD proper, because all the gaming stores in my area carry those and only those, period. |
Man, you need to move to a new area.
However at retail i've seen SR slowly dropping down the food chain into the same neighborhood as things like Lejendary Adventure. Dead? Nah. But has it been shipped off to an old folks nursing home, a crooked one like you see on 60 Minutes? It would seem so.
| QUOTE (BitBasher @ Jun 27 2005, 11:04 AM) |
| By that standard every single RPG in existance is dead except for WW and aDnD proper, because all the gaming stores in my area carry those and only those, period. |
What's with people today? In RL or online, everyone seem hellbent on misinterpreting my words.
I wrote : "When no new books are coming out and all the other books are out of print, that RPG is dead".
And you reply with that? "By that standard", what your gaming store hold or do not hold in stock is irrelevant. My grocery store doesn't have Heineken, that doesn't mean that this beer isn't still selling. But if Heineken went out of production, then holding a two year personal reserve in my cave wouldn't matter, that beer would be dead.
| QUOTE (Charon) |
| When no new books are coming out and all the other books are out of print. |
BTW there are still new SR3 books coming out right now. But they seem like they'd be a fairly logical conclusion to the product line since most of the six world has now been covered.
| QUOTE (blakkie @ Jun 27 2005, 11:20 AM) | ||
BTW there are still new SR3 books coming out right now. But they seem like they'd be a fairly logical conclusion to the product line since most of the six world has now been covered. |
I KNOW!
I wrote that SR is currently dying, not that it's dead. It needs revitalization, which SR4 might or might not be.
| QUOTE (Penta) | ||
Yes, but FanPro Germany also has major issues in re story and plot. (Hi, Germany SB!) So do we sacrifice story to get rules? |
The original german SB is oooold. About the same quality as similar US products. If one looks at the new german SB (DidS2) and the follow ups, they mostly came down from what they have been smoking and tried to fix the stuff they did.
As for the rest: Yes, drop storyline for rules for a while! Without a solid rules system all the background is useless. The SR system as it stands is lousy! Sure, one can drop the system. But if I do so, then I already have more background than I'll ever need and no more reason to buy SR books.
Hopefully the SR-4 rules will be re-balanced when it comes to MagicUsers vs. Real Humans, will drop stuff like 6==7 and a clumsy, complex system with lots of computation yet not enough detail and depth. There are a lot of better systems out there (GURPS, Fusion, some D20-variants, Silouette, heck even ole Twilight 2.2) and SR badly needs to evolve.
10-20 pages of rules for combat, movement, maintenance and vehicles, another 10-15 for magic and interaction each, maybe 5-10 for decking and security networks each. Including! examples. Spell lists, gear lists and chargen come extra.
Has been done, can be done. I hope SR will do it.
And they should remember the old FASA maxim:
If in doubt, just copy Cyberpunk 2020!
Birdy
Warning, trolling to amuse myself.....
But SR3 isn't dead yet, how can you say that? I hate you all! Boo hoo hoo.
OK done trolling for my own amusement...
But SR3 isn't dead yet, how can you say that? I hate you all! Boo hoo hoo.
OK done trolling for my own amusement...
| QUOTE (Charon) |
| I wrote that SR is currently dying, not that it's dead. It needs revitalization, which SR4 might or might not be. |
Yes, many here agree.
| QUOTE |
| If one looks at the new german SB (DidS2) and the follow ups, they mostly came down from what they have been smoking and tried to fix the stuff they did. |
Yes, exactly. They have been trying. They haven't succeeded. But then again, that's like trying to make Medusa a supermodel by giving her makeover after makeover. It's just flat out impossible to fix this brokenness. Well, maybe if they ditch all of the old garbage, we get something usable. This includes, but isn't limited to, ditching Berlin's l33t@n@rch15t5, burning Pomorya and Schwarzwald, killing the Westphalian theocracy and returning Saxony to a honest dictatorship instead of buffoons in puffy clothes dueling with rapiers. They haven't quite done that yet. On the countrary, they even made the l33t @n@rch15t5 a national power. How very FUCKING l33t.
Anyway, I think that, after three consecutive "fluffy" sourcebooks, more rules are in order. Adn I agree with Birdy here, FanPro Germany has a decent record with DSA's rules system, which is sound and solid. I'm not going to go into the game's 3rd edition story line, which has raped the world so badly I stopped playing it. But we have the current team fo authors for preventing that. It'll be too European for some, but at least, it won't be S/G l33t uber elf garbage.
However ... wasn't it the American FanPro chapter who were developing the rules?
I guess for me the real worth of this "new edition" (i agree that it is in fact a new game) will be whether or not they succed in integrateing all the different aspects of the game (decking/rigging/magic/combat) into one fluid system.
I'm sure there will be other things that I like or dislike, but many of us could say the same for the current edition.
I just think that if they acheive fluid game play the advantages will probably out weigh the minor details that piss me off.
I'm sure there will be other things that I like or dislike, but many of us could say the same for the current edition.
I just think that if they acheive fluid game play the advantages will probably out weigh the minor details that piss me off.
| QUOTE (Charon) | ||
Oh please. A game can be declared dead even if you still play it and the game police leaves you alone. |
I'm sorry, I thought they were talking about killing ME. *is afraid*
Surprisingly enough, Shadowrun wasn't in danger of dying before SR4 was released. FanPro had set a very agressive release schedule, and Shadowrun is one of the top lines in the USA. IIRC, it's also the second most popular RPG in Germany, after DSA. According to my FLGS, the newer Shadowrun products tend to move at a decent clip.
Rather or not that'll be true in five years is another question. But right now, there isn't a *critical* need for a new edition. There's some need, but I wouldn't say it's an absolute emergency.
Rather or not that'll be true in five years is another question. But right now, there isn't a *critical* need for a new edition. There's some need, but I wouldn't say it's an absolute emergency.
| QUOTE (Cain @ Jun 27 2005, 08:51 PM) |
| Rather or not that'll be true in five years is another question. But right now, there isn't a *critical* need for a new edition. There's some need, but I wouldn't say it's an absolute emergency. |
So you should wait till your kitchen has a grease fire before you bother picking up a fire extingisher for it? If you wait till sales are really slotting out then where is the cash and income to help you through the transition?
Wow, more anologies.
So should you pick up the fire extinuguisher and stand and wait for the fire? A fire that may never come? Or just have one in the kitchen, ready to go.
There's definetly a fine line, We've been told fairly frequently that the SR line is doing fine for years. Now all of a sudden it is suffering.
So should you pick up the fire extinuguisher and stand and wait for the fire? A fire that may never come? Or just have one in the kitchen, ready to go.
There's definetly a fine line, We've been told fairly frequently that the SR line is doing fine for years. Now all of a sudden it is suffering.
By the same token, you should fix what isn't broken, since it might break ten years down the road?
The bottom line is, changing Shadowrun *now* is an overreaction. Especially since they're trying to cram everything into the time between now and GenCon. They've taken, what, a year to do everything in? Heck, IIRC D&D 3.0 spent over a year just in playtesting before it was ready for release. They'd be better off spending the intervening time readying a new edition, instead of rushing one to market.
The bottom line is, changing Shadowrun *now* is an overreaction. Especially since they're trying to cram everything into the time between now and GenCon. They've taken, what, a year to do everything in? Heck, IIRC D&D 3.0 spent over a year just in playtesting before it was ready for release. They'd be better off spending the intervening time readying a new edition, instead of rushing one to market.
| QUOTE (Eldritch @ Jun 28 2005, 11:57 AM) |
| Wow, more anologies. So should you pick up the fire extinuguisher and stand and wait for the fire? A fire that may never come? Or just have one in the kitchen, ready to go. |
Have one sitting on the counter. Generally if there is going to be a cooking fire you are usually around for it anyway. But the analogy was intended to help in illustration, not proof. Perhaps a better analogy is in order, i didn't intend for it to go that deep.
| QUOTE |
| There's definetly a fine line, We've been told fairly frequently that the SR line is doing fine for years. Now all of a sudden it is suffering. |
The important part is "for years". It is apparently seen as moving into the matured, backside of it's lifecycle. If it isn't renewed now (bring in new players) it is expected to hit a serious crunch in a few years. New (young) players take some time to develop into larger purchasers and to bring friends and aquaitances into the game. So the idea that you just one day launch the product and -whoop- there the market is fully formed does not generally jive with the reality of things.
So could they have put this off longer? *shrug* Perhaps. Would there have been more or less resources (money) to put into the product if you waited? Unlikely more, possibily less. They seem to be running low on SR3 products that are highly anticipated, such as the "Shadows of" series. The world is mostly filled out. So by doing it now they have a bit better shot of putting enough effort into SR4 to have it a well formed product.
| QUOTE (Cain @ Jun 28 2005, 12:01 PM) |
| By the same token, you should fix what isn't broken, since it might break ten years down the road? |
The expectation is less than 10 years, and a turn around takes more than just months.
| QUOTE |
| The bottom line is, changing Shadowrun *now* is an overreaction. Especially since they're trying to cram everything into the time between now and GenCon. They've taken, what, a year to do everything in? Heck, IIRC D&D 3.0 spent over a year just in playtesting before it was ready for release. They'd be better off spending the intervening time readying a new edition, instead of rushing one to market. |
My understanding is that the D&D -maintenace- team is a bigger budget than SR's full out development team. That maintenance team is scaled way down from the development team.
The D&D brand and the financial backers are just that much bigger. SR just isn't that big. Likely never will be. D&D managed to survive years of being ridden into the dirt, with a major revision overdue. Could Fanpro do that with SR which isn't such a market dominator? *shrug* Even if they could why would they?
All the more reason to spread out the development budget over a longer period of time. You end up spending the same amount, only not all at once. You also buy yourself more time to perfect your product.
In a normal market, you'd risk losing market share to similar products; but Shadowrun is pretty unique. Besides which, as Microsoft has shown, a late-to-market approach can be very successful.
In a normal market, you'd risk losing market share to similar products; but Shadowrun is pretty unique. Besides which, as Microsoft has shown, a late-to-market approach can be very successful.
| QUOTE (Cain @ Jun 28 2005, 12:47 PM) |
| All the more reason to spread out the development budget over a longer period of time. You end up spending the same amount, only not all at once. You also buy yourself more time to perfect your product. |
Couple issues with that. By spreading it out you can actually effectively pay more for the same amount work because you are carrying the investment for a longer period of time. Second i'm not sure where the idea of extra time to perfect comes from. Either you are putting in the effort to 'perfect' the system, or not.
What can happen if you just give yourself a long term goal with no solid deadlines, only the goal of 'perfection', is project bloat. A project will tend to languish without strongly defined milestones. It basically loses it's way, which will means effort (resources) lost.
| QUOTE |
| In a normal market, you'd risk losing market share to similar products; but Shadowrun is pretty unique. Besides which, as Microsoft has shown, a late-to-market approach can be very successful. |
I'm not sure exactly what you are refering to here. If you are talking about Microsoft's tendancy to let others pioneer then either buy them or co-opt the pioneer's hard earned technology, i guess apparently they might already by switching to a fixed TN? *shrug* In any event you can only wait so long for other competitors to do your work for you.
Who is out that is going to do that for them if they put SR4 off for a another year or two?
uhhh...actually the present value of a project is less if you spread the investment out over several years instead of paying all of it up front...this is the very simple (and hopefully easy to understand principle) that money now is worth more than money later
if it were cheaper to spend all the money now then pharmaceutical companies would pay all their R&D money (several billions of dollars each year) NOW instead of spreading it out over several years. Developing a new RPG is exactly the same. It is cheaper in CURRENT terms to spread development over several years than to lump it all into this year. Unless the project goes into OVERRUN, where you are spending more to develop the project than you originally budgeted, you spend LESS by spreading the R&D investment out over a longer period. And, any scientist will tell you this, taking more time to test a product is better than taking less time.
blakkie you obviously lack a lot of business know-how
if it were cheaper to spend all the money now then pharmaceutical companies would pay all their R&D money (several billions of dollars each year) NOW instead of spreading it out over several years. Developing a new RPG is exactly the same. It is cheaper in CURRENT terms to spread development over several years than to lump it all into this year. Unless the project goes into OVERRUN, where you are spending more to develop the project than you originally budgeted, you spend LESS by spreading the R&D investment out over a longer period. And, any scientist will tell you this, taking more time to test a product is better than taking less time.
blakkie you obviously lack a lot of business know-how
| QUOTE |
| Couple issues with that. By spreading it out you can actually effectively pay more for the same amount work because you are carrying the investment for a longer period of time. |
Actually, you could end up paying less. Instead of the cash being spent immediately, and depending on retail sales to earn a profit; a company can instead save the unspent amount in an interest-bearing account. It depends on how the project was financed in the first place, actually. Banks and lenders tend to prefer longer-term loans to short-term ones. Just compare the interest rate on a 30-year mortgage to the APR on your credit cards, you'll see what I mean.
| QUOTE |
| Second i'm not sure where the idea of extra time to perfect comes from. Either you are putting in the effort to 'perfect' the system, or not. |
There's a reason why pilots have to log a certain number of hours before they're given their license. They can put in all the effort they like, but it takes time to make a seasoned pilot. Generally speaking, the longer you have to accomplish something in, the more time you have to perfect the product-- and the less likely it is to have hidden flaws.
| QUOTE |
| What can happen if you just give yourself a long term goal with no solid deadlines, only the goal of 'perfection', is project bloat. A project will tend to languish without strongly defined milestones. It basically loses it's way, which will means effort (resources) lost. |
That doesn't happen quite so much in pure research. Also, some vaugely-defined projects are doing just fine-- Cure AIDS, cure cancer, develop hybrid cars, etc.
| QUOTE |
| I'm not sure exactly what you are refering to here. If you are talking about Microsoft's tendancy to let others pioneer then either buy them or co-opt the pioneer's hard earned technology, i guess apparently they might already by switching to a fixed TN? *shrug* In any event you can only wait so long for other competitors to do your work for you. Who is out that is going to do that for them if they put SR4 off for a another year or two? |
Microsoft's strategy has been to see how the market reacts to new and innovative products, then produce a related product once markets have been established. If the product tanks, Microsoft won't lose very much; if it becomes a hot-ticket item, they stand to gain a respectable amount. They stand the risk of losing market share to their competitiors, however, by letting the competition get established first.
At any event, you're kinda right that Fanpro is effectively stealing the nWoD system by switching to a fixed TN. But the problem is that the RPG market isn't subdivided by systems. (D20 does have quite a bit of the market covered, though.) Since Shadowrun can't take on D20, and would die by becoming it, the only real approach would be to keep its innovative edge.
Could it have something to do with a certain Afro-American gentleman who finally found the time to finish a certain project? And the fact that they are already playtesting said project? :=)
http://www.talsorian.com/
Wouldn't have been the first time a company rushed a so-so product to market to kill a better one. And since I always considered FanPro(Germany) to be the MicroSoft of RPG's....
Birdy
http://www.talsorian.com/
Wouldn't have been the first time a company rushed a so-so product to market to kill a better one. And since I always considered FanPro(Germany) to be the MicroSoft of RPG's....
Birdy
Sorry, I hadn't time to read the whole topic, but I would just like to react on some things I read when just taking a look at the topic. Sorry if what I say here has already been written.
| QUOTE ("Eyeless Blond") |
| The people that have actually played it, however, tell us that the rules aren't really that good unless you're the type of person who ignores the rules most of the time, which is not encouraging. |
Overstatement.
It's not "The people that have actually played it", but "Some people that have actually played it", one may even add "and that were not convinced" or "and that disliked it". There are over 30 playtest groups AFAIK for SR4, I'm quite confident the vast majority of them didn't make their opinion known on this forum. Including me.
I have moreover the feeling that you are over-emphasize/twist a post that a fellow playtester wrote in another topic, here.
| QUOTE ("Eyeless Blond") |
| Combine this with the proven facts that: [LIST] [*]Fanpro has serious issues with designing internally consistent rulesets, or even following their own rules (take a look at the SR3 FAQ for examples) |
The fact that Fanpro provided some FREE material whose quality is questionable doesn't prove anything about something that is done with a real budget/allocated-dedicated time. From what I understood, SR3 FAQ is more of a "bonus", overhead activity, that doesn't follow the same process than a product development. Moreover, I think that Rob Boyle "subcontracted" the last updates, becasue he had other, higher priority, tasks to handle.
| QUOTE ("Eyeless Blond") |
| [*]The core book is being horribly rushed; many core rules appear to be still under debate, a mere two months before the publishing due date. |
Indeed the development cycle for this product is quite short, but you have to know that the project is quite older than it appears. granted, the playtest was still intensive quite close to the release date. But in small edition companies like Fanpro, deadlines are always some kind of a challenge.
| QUOTE ("Eyeless Blond") |
| [*]What little advertising there has been (the "SR4 FAQs") is so haphazardly put together and so strongly emphasizes the weakest part of Fanpro's business (rules over flavor) that it seems like the company no longer cares about its current fans enough to want them to buy the product. |
I think the opposite: Fanpo cared so much about its fan base that it tried to address their main concern, which was, according to the discussions on this forum from the day of the SR4 announcement, mainly rules. I agree that the added value of the SR4 FAQ is questionable, but I myself prefer that the effort is in priority to the various product development/release management. (poor SR4 FAQ is better that a poor SR4 BBB, to make it short)
Maybe Rob Boyle underestimated the workload of keeping fans informed of the development, and finally made the choice of focusing on the development.
I think Eyeless Blond's first quote summed it up very very well.
Cain, if you've read anything I've written on htis you'll know I'm very close to your views. If there is a need to fix/replace the game in the future to "save" it, then it is best to do it before we reach the crisis point. The problem is the growing perception that the developers are rushing this and not really listneing to complaints of their core base or testers. This generates the feeling that we are being abandoned.
There is an agressive schedule for release in the next 2 months but I htink this is an attmept to build up capital from us, the SR3 fans, to carry the company while they wait for the rabid fans of D&D to put odwn their swords, shell out $25-$30 each, and pick up firearms.
Yes SR3 has gotten cumbersome with rules and has gottne away from, its gritty early feeling. That having been said, I do not see that there is a need for the whole sale slaughter of the rules that we are seeing. It is not fixing rules bloat, it is creating a new set. SR4 is not a correction. It is as new game dressed up in the clothes of the old which has been completely leveled.
Cain, if you've read anything I've written on htis you'll know I'm very close to your views. If there is a need to fix/replace the game in the future to "save" it, then it is best to do it before we reach the crisis point. The problem is the growing perception that the developers are rushing this and not really listneing to complaints of their core base or testers. This generates the feeling that we are being abandoned.
There is an agressive schedule for release in the next 2 months but I htink this is an attmept to build up capital from us, the SR3 fans, to carry the company while they wait for the rabid fans of D&D to put odwn their swords, shell out $25-$30 each, and pick up firearms.
Yes SR3 has gotten cumbersome with rules and has gottne away from, its gritty early feeling. That having been said, I do not see that there is a need for the whole sale slaughter of the rules that we are seeing. It is not fixing rules bloat, it is creating a new set. SR4 is not a correction. It is as new game dressed up in the clothes of the old which has been completely leveled.
And it is a lot of the same people who created the rules bloat and allowed the game to get away from its gritty feeling that are responsible for the "new and improved" rules.
Like an episode of Star Trek- let's beam the rescue team down to the exact same place that the last group disappeared mysteriously.
As long as Kirk is with them, it will all work out just fine, then.
I didn't see Kirk listed on the development team.
Hopefully Kirk isn't in the development team or else SR4 will see the emergence of the double axehandle as THE dominant attack of the game 
and the women will all be wearing scanty costumes.
You mean they haven't been in the art for SR so far?
Sorry to bump this thread back on topic but here goes...
I've been out of role-playing for about 5 years now. Recently I joined a group of regular Tuesday night players who only seem to play D&D or their own home-brew variations of D&D. The other night I suggested that when there is a spot in the rotation of campaigns that I wanted to start a SR one. To a man they didn't know anythiing about SR (other than the name) and admitted it.
Many of these guys I play with got together through a local RPG discussion forum. This discussion group which is not game specific has nearly 300 members. If you do a search for Shadowrun you will end up with 3 posts that mention it. One is by me since I mentioned to them how much I like it. The other 2 mention it only in comparing it to some other game. There are over 14000 posts on this forum and none of them talk about SR in a substantive way.
So this says to me, Shadowrun needs an infusion of new ideas and new blood and so I am all for the idea of SR4. But, this new version has got me scared. And mad. I don't like the idea that all my old SBs (unless they have background info) will be obsolete. I think they (Fanpro) have already gone to far.
I suppose that if in the end this does breathe new life back into SR I will be happy but I don't think I'll be along for the ride. I'll stick to SR3 thanks.
Gee, I hope that doesn't mean I'm gonna die.
I've been out of role-playing for about 5 years now. Recently I joined a group of regular Tuesday night players who only seem to play D&D or their own home-brew variations of D&D. The other night I suggested that when there is a spot in the rotation of campaigns that I wanted to start a SR one. To a man they didn't know anythiing about SR (other than the name) and admitted it.
Many of these guys I play with got together through a local RPG discussion forum. This discussion group which is not game specific has nearly 300 members. If you do a search for Shadowrun you will end up with 3 posts that mention it. One is by me since I mentioned to them how much I like it. The other 2 mention it only in comparing it to some other game. There are over 14000 posts on this forum and none of them talk about SR in a substantive way.
So this says to me, Shadowrun needs an infusion of new ideas and new blood and so I am all for the idea of SR4. But, this new version has got me scared. And mad. I don't like the idea that all my old SBs (unless they have background info) will be obsolete. I think they (Fanpro) have already gone to far.
I suppose that if in the end this does breathe new life back into SR I will be happy but I don't think I'll be along for the ride. I'll stick to SR3 thanks.
Gee, I hope that doesn't mean I'm gonna die.
| QUOTE (ambidextrous @ Jul 3 2005, 10:40 PM) |
| I suppose that if in the end this does breathe new life back into SR I will be happy but I don't think I'll be along for the ride. I'll stick to SR3 thanks. Gee, I hope that doesn't mean I'm gonna die. |
Nah, the Fanpro Edition Police don't normally kill. Dead players will never buy the new product. Kneecapped players on the otherhand can be reeducated at Camp Big Stick before reintroduction to society as productive SR4 consumers.
You like Koolaid, right?
That CP V3 thing really IS too big a coincidence.
I'll give SR4 the same treatment I gave nWoD- I'll have a good flick through, if it seems OK I'll bite the bullet and buy it, and this pattern will continue.
Did I mention nWoD core hasn't had any partners so far?
I'll give SR4 the same treatment I gave nWoD- I'll have a good flick through, if it seems OK I'll bite the bullet and buy it, and this pattern will continue.
Did I mention nWoD core hasn't had any partners so far?
Each edition will require you to buy more books. That can hardly be a surprise.
Its also the only method a gaming company has, to ensure a steady revenue. If you look at WoTC, you will notice that all their lines produce one or more new products pr. year. Some of which, exclude older material when new versions launch.
They also supplement their earnings with fiction, written by associated writers and then marketed.
Games Workshop has the same deal. Buy figures, paint figures, buy new rules, buy new figures, paint new figures etc.
If we are lucky, then SR4 will be sturdy enough, that a single SOTA:<year> will be the only rules expansion pr. year, with supplementary stuff being mostly adventures and fiction that can be regarded as optional.
I'm not exactly worried about this. Its just the way things are. If I like, then I buy. And if I still like, I keep buying. Divided out, in hours spent having fun with SR, any pen-paper-RPG is cheaper than watching DVD movies or going to the theather.
MMORPG's even become more expensive over time, at 11$ pr. month on average. - Heh, though here you can Really rack up alot of hours even on your own.
Its also the only method a gaming company has, to ensure a steady revenue. If you look at WoTC, you will notice that all their lines produce one or more new products pr. year. Some of which, exclude older material when new versions launch.
They also supplement their earnings with fiction, written by associated writers and then marketed.
Games Workshop has the same deal. Buy figures, paint figures, buy new rules, buy new figures, paint new figures etc.
If we are lucky, then SR4 will be sturdy enough, that a single SOTA:<year> will be the only rules expansion pr. year, with supplementary stuff being mostly adventures and fiction that can be regarded as optional.
I'm not exactly worried about this. Its just the way things are. If I like, then I buy. And if I still like, I keep buying. Divided out, in hours spent having fun with SR, any pen-paper-RPG is cheaper than watching DVD movies or going to the theather.
MMORPG's even become more expensive over time, at 11$ pr. month on average. - Heh, though here you can Really rack up alot of hours even on your own.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.