Quote from: Molotov. . . no amount of posturing by either of us is liable to change our preferences.  However, it's highly likely that continued trying will infuriate one or both of us.

A thousand times yes. I have pretty much reached this point with three or four fans of a certain system that seem to follow me around the internet, lurking in the shadows until I post aof my disappointment with said system, and then sweeping into save my damnable, chocolate-loving, soul by proving their personal tastes superior to my own through the undeniable evidence of anecdotal experience! :rolleyes:

Quote from: Caesar SlaadAs bad as that was, the more recent spate of "Wushu for everything" was twice as annoying.

At least with Savage Worlds, I could see some credibility in the claim.

Or Exalted, which is even less useful for anything other than it's base than D&D is, yet was constantly recommended for absolutely everything, despite every last part of the system being totally married to the setting.  

That one was so over hyped that it even became a cliche gag among the Exalted fanboys.

Quote from: J ArcaneOr Exalted, which is even less useful for anything other than it's base than D&D is, yet was constantly recommended for absolutely everything, despite every last part of the system being totally married to the setting.  

That one was so over hyped that it even became a cliche gag among the Exalted fanboys.

Actually, I could see using it as a D&D clone per the Heroic Mortal rules (i.e., using only those rules and pretty much ignoring the fact that Exalted of any sort exist). Outside of that, though, yeah -- I'm not seeing that it has a great deal of utility. Did people actually claim that it would be 'good' for things other than the default setting or generic fantasy?

Quote from: jdrakehActually, I could see using it as a D&D clone per the Heroic Mortal rules (i.e., using only those rules and pretty much ignoring the fact that Exalted of any sort exist). Outside of that, though, yeah -- I'm not seeing that it has a great deal of utility. Did people actually claim that it would be 'good' for things other than the default setting or generic fantasy?

Yes.  It was, rather inexplicably, even a common suggestion for modern settings, to the extent that one of the fans on RPGnet even started trying to write an "Exalted Modern", which IIRC never got finished mainly because it amounts to rewriting the entire game.

Quote from: J ArcaneYes.  It was, rather inexplicably, even a common suggestion for modern settings, to the extent that one of the fans on RPGnet even started trying to write an "Exalted Modern", which IIRC never got finished mainly because it amounts to rewriting the entire game.

Wow. I guess Ferry's Firefox script saved me lots of pain (he developed a FireFox script that blocked Exalted threads at RPGnet in the viewer's browser).

Quote from: jdrakehI always think of Dread: The Second Book of Pandemonium when pressed for an example of this. It had a very cool premise (i.e., society's scum offered a chance at redemption by fighting demons), though no mechanics or even advice that supported it past rules for combat (which could have been supplanted from any other system, given their completely generic nature).

And sometimes people actually like the games.  I ran Dread: The First Book of Pandemonium for my group, and it was very popular.  The mechanics, while simple, fit the tone of the game.  The fiction pieces and writing style actually provided a lot of information and hints on how to run the game.  In particular the  demons presented are different than those I've seen in any other game, and are also very evocative of the style of the game.  Very good game, and I'm looking forward to the revised second edition coming out fairly soon.

I enjoyed Fudge, it worked well for a fantasy campaign I ran, but there were a few problems.  It was interesting to see those addressed in Fate, but it was a bit overly complex.  I checked out the SRD for SotC, and found a simpler system that still addressed the problems I had with Fudge.

Sometimes...people just like the games and enjoy talking about them with others.  A relatively small number of people can give a game a larger presence than it actually has if they start enough threads talking about it.  I don't think it's anything particular to RPGnet...just to forums with a large enough population.  I seriously doubt anyone would buy a game and "push" it just because one reviewer slammed it.

I try going to publisher forums with questions, but the only one I've ever received helpful answers from was PEG.  It's usually just faster to post any questions on RPGnet.  Even sometimes with Savage Worlds, I got faster answers from RPGnet.  If I don't, then I'll go to the effort of hunting down publisher forums or mailing lists.

Quote from: Tom BAnd sometimes people actually like the games.

That's true, too -- but in this case, my point was that Dread didn't live up to the hype (I never said that it was a horrible game, but hey, I'll take my strawmen where I can get them). It didn't deliver mechanical support for the basic premise and the thing that would supposedly cause paradigm shifts in the world view of consumers was, really, laughable (I guess I'm just not getting the edgy genius in saying that Jesus was an ET). The profanity for the profanity's sake was also a bit much.

QuoteVery good game, and I'm looking forward to the revised second edition coming out fairly soon.

I've been told (by the author) that the second edition specifically fixes both of the problems I mention, so I can only assume that I'm not some lone nut who thought that they did a lot to detract from the game. I mean, if these weren't issues, then fixing/retconning them would make zero sense from a production standpoint. So. . . here's the new hype. . . Jesus isn't an ET and the game will apparently contain some support for redeeming oneself (as a character) during actual play.

QuoteSometimes...people just like the games and enjoy talking about them with others.

If nearly all of the Dread hype hadn't come from friends of the author and card-carrying indie-press backers, I'd have been a little more convinced in that case. The fact that all of the hype went away shortly after the game's release was also very suspicious. I really think (and have had it confirmed by at least two participants) that this was a case of viral marketing done right (or well anyhow).

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!Guilty, both counts.  And don't forget your, uh, uh, your Traveller and that crazy "Critical Encounters" game you kids play in the garage.  You and your friends are gonna hafta start bringing your own Mountain Dews, Jeffrey.

Ha!  Until this post I had not even considered Traveller as a local darling candidate, simply because I consider its excellence an Objective Truth.  Well, not really.  Maybe a little.

By the way, I finally bought my own copy of MSPE this morning.

I find it very interesting that there are folks who talk and hype games they don't even play. There was a thread on tBP some time back where folks talked about how they buy books to read and not really to play. I doubt very much the discussions on certain games are based on actual play experiences. Maybe some gamers know a lot about systems and can get away with dissing certain systems just by reading them. Me I can't even critique a system even though I have used it.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: C.W.RichesonSays the guy who then goes on to criticize a game he has never played

Yeah, so? I didn't say there was anything wrong with discussing or criticizing a game you didn't play. I simply think that plays a part in the so-called darling effect.

Quote from: C.W.RichesonI've run SotC for four different groups and I've never had that problem.

Good. I'm glad you've had a postive experience with the game. I'd love to be able to apply a lot of the cool stuff in SotC at the game table but it'd be more trouble than it's worth . . . read on to find out why.

Quote from: C.W.RichesonHow Aspects require cooperation and compromise is beyond me, seeing as how they're player and GM defined and there's incentive to make them neither super specific nor super broad.

Obviously you're blessed with very cooperative groups. My one playing group is arguementative. Keeping them focused and moving forward is diffcult. My other group likes absolutes.

 

Quote from: C.W.RichesonI think you're engaging in an awful lot of guesswork that has little basis in reality.

You're speaking for yourself here.

Quote from: JohnnyWannabeObviously you're blessed with very cooperative groups. My one playing group is arguementative. Keeping them focused and moving forward is diffcult. My other group likes absolutes.

I feel for you, man.  

My groups are both cooperative and flexible.  Some of them crave a little more structure in systems, so for one SotC has been a stretch.

I can see why SotC wouldn't implement well for your groups.

I also have the luxury of being in a high-gamer population area (the SF Bay is a gaming nexus, frankly.  Or hell-mouth .... depending on how you interpret these things.     ).  I made it a point years ago not to game with argumentative players for very long.  I can be friends with them, but it just doesn't work out so well for gaming.

Not a slam on you or your groups.

Quote from: pigames.netThat doesn't explain why it is discussed at length after purchase at rpg.net when it could just as easily be discussed at the appropriate publisher's message board, where the question can be directly answered with the appropriate authority. That suggests to me that most post-purchase questions are shilling.

Actually, they ask the questions on RPG.net because: 1) they know the neighborhood, so to speak, 2) they may have already asked on the official forum and found the response (or the forum in general) lacking, 3) RPG.net may have a much larger member base than the official (or any other) forum.

Quote from: mearls(FWIW, I think that a game that becomes a darling has significantly less chance of becoming a sustainable, commercial venture. RPG.net, and to a lesser extent EN World, are so far down the long tail that appealing to their audiences is economic suicide.)

So are you saying that it burns out over time once the hype dies down? If so, doesn't this happen to all games unless they are somehow revitalized? Can you explain this further?

Quote from: pigames.netSo are you saying that it burns out over time once the hype dies down? If so, doesn't this happen to all games unless they are somehow revitalized? Can you explain this further?

I think he means that a game specifically designed to appeal to an online audience (or built upon the expectations and desires of such an audience) is doomed to longterm commercial failure because the portion of gamers that haunt internet forums is very, very, tiny compared to those who. . er. . don't.

Quote from: MolotovMy groups are both cooperative and flexible.  Some of them crave a little more structure in systems, so for one SotC has been a stretch.

That would be me.  SOTC doesn't really do much for me as a system, and Molotov and I have talked about this a lot.  However, I'm having a good time with the campaign itself, so it's no big deal.