For me it's just been amusing to watch all the lemmings on Youtube trip over themselves proclaiming the designer the Messiah of gaming and gushing over what's essentially just another set of house rules.  She's just done what most of us already do and cobble a bunch of other people's ideas together.  Good for her.  As for the presentation, whatever.  It's not an aesthetic that I find particularly interesting.  In fact it kind of evokes some of those annoying pseudo-edgy products from the 90s, as another poster here noted.

But hey, it's your money.  Do what you want with it.

Also, to build on the point Pundit made, I'm a book review editor for an academic journal.  We never pay for copies of the books we review.  Sometimes I contact the publisher for a review copy and sometimes they just send them to me because their books fit our scope.  Because these are academic books often with small print runs, they can cost over $100, but that's just how it works. 

When it comes to reviewers, however, I assign them and do not allow people to choose books to review, for either good or bad reasons.  And it's generally considered poor practice for people to review books in which they have either already assisted the author or reviewed it/endorsed it for the publisher or have a personal grudge against the author.  In fact, publishers often ask the author if there are people who should be avoided in the review process.  This doesn't mean such things never happen, but the standard is to assure reviews based solely on the book's merits, not personal factors.  Academia being what it is, biases do come in and there's definitely a prevailing Leftist slant in the field which tends to be reflected in industry awards decisions.

Quote from: Persimmon on March 06, 2023, 09:31:32 AM
For me it's just been amusing to watch all the lemmings on Youtube trip over themselves proclaiming the designer the Messiah of gaming and gushing over what's essentially just another set of house rules.  She's just done what most of us already do and cobble a bunch of other people's ideas together.  Good for her.  As for the presentation, whatever.  It's not an aesthetic that I find particularly interesting.  In fact it kind of evokes some of those annoying pseudo-edgy products from the 90s, as another poster here noted.

But hey, it's your money.  Do what you want with it.

Indeed. I agree with this completely.

Quote from: RPGPundit on March 06, 2023, 09:17:27 AM
There's a culture of how OSR designers interact with each other and promote their own and each other's work. What there is NOT is a "Community", which is a dogwhistle for a situation where people create an artificial hierarchy run not by the people most competent at design but by celebrity and influence, and demand that the hobby kowtow to them in the name of all kinds of groups including many that don't even play the game, much less design.

Yeah, this. There is not a "Community" like you said. The whole crap where there is the hierarchy.

One thing about paid book reviews, ect there are plenty of authors who do it. So it's a thing.... Whether or not you'll get a completely honest review is another and that's up to you to decide.

Personally, I'll never listen to just one review as I said earlier. And if it's paid there will be an obvious bias. I've no problem with authors and designers trying to help each other out the OSR does that too (which is a good thing).

That said, I backed Shadowdark on the merits of the game (from what I heard and read at the time).  And I'm still pretty stoked about my purchase the more hear about it.

But I think Ben is a bit mean for doing a 'pay' for review. That's not something that I'd ever do myself if I had a sizable youtube chan. If I was approached by an author and I thought the game was good then I'd be more than happy to bring it out in the open (because I'd be excited about it too). I've lost a bit of respect for questing beast.

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on March 06, 2023, 10:45:23 AM
One thing about paid book reviews, ect there are plenty of authors who do it. So it's a thing.... Whether or not you'll get a completely honest review is another and that's up to you to decide.

Indeed, and I'm mildly baffled by anyone caring if a product review is "honest" or not. When I watch a review, I'm in it for the product details, and only interested in the reviewer's own opinion as far as the specific reasons for that opinion are explained ... so that I can form my own opinion.

I couldn't care less if the reviewer lies about liking it themselves.

Quote from: Zalman on March 06, 2023, 11:20:18 AM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on March 06, 2023, 10:45:23 AM
One thing about paid book reviews, ect there are plenty of authors who do it. So it's a thing.... Whether or not you'll get a completely honest review is another and that's up to you to decide.

Indeed, and I'm mildly baffled by anyone caring if a product review is "honest" or not. When I watch a review, I'm in it for the product details, and only interested in the reviewer's own opinion as far as the specific reasons for that opinion are explained ... so that I can form my own opinion.

I couldn't care less if the reviewer lies about liking it themselves.

Exactly, content is king... I'll make my own mind up when I've been provided the info about the product. There are probably only one or two reviewers that I actually take seriously, mainly because they have the same taste as myself - So it's a pretty sure bet.

So people are crucifying a new OSR designer over an admitted paid review, while product placement and comarketing of D&D in Stranger Things is like "wow, D&D hits me the feels man."

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on March 06, 2023, 10:45:23 AM
One thing about paid book reviews, ect there are plenty of authors who do it. So it's a thing.... Whether or not you'll get a completely honest review is another and that's up to you to decide.

Personally, I'll never listen to just one review as I said earlier. And if it's paid there will be an obvious bias. I've no problem with authors and designers trying to help each other out the OSR does that too (which is a good thing).

That said, I backed Shadowdark on the merits of the game (from what I heard and read at the time).  And I'm still pretty stoked about my purchase the more hear about it.

But I think Ben is a bit mean for doing a 'pay' for review. That's not something that I'd ever do myself if I had a sizable youtube chan. If I was approached by an author and I thought the game was good then I'd be more than happy to bring it out in the open (because I'd be excited about it too). I've lost a bit of respect for questing beast.

What bothers me is that he is supposedly friends with Kelsey and he still made her pay. I mean i respect the grind but it seems a little mean.

Quote from: Slambo on March 06, 2023, 01:26:12 PM
What bothers me is that he is supposedly friends with Kelsey

Yeah, Ben seems like a bit of a wanker at this point. Personally, I'd be only too happy to help out a mate with getting a product off the ground.

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 06, 2023, 01:15:09 PM
So people are crucifying a new OSR designer over an admitted paid review, while product placement and comarketing of D&D in Stranger Things is like "wow, D&D hits me the feels man."

    The treatment of Shadowdark feels a little harsh and suspicious, but I don't think most of the people on this board are exactly fans of how WotC has been marketing D&D--or anything else they've done with it--for the past 15+ years.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 06, 2023, 01:57:49 PM
    The treatment of Shadowdark feels a little harsh and suspicious

I feel Pundit is one of those people, like Peter Tatchell & Julie Bindel (I read a lot of UnHerd), who are often asshats, but whose existence is necessary for the Cosmic Balance. In this case I feel that by any normal standards he was overly harsh & obnoxious to Arcane Library & Prof DM. BUT still, by doing what he did, he raised the issue of paid reviewing in the OSR. And I agree that it's not OK.

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 06, 2023, 01:15:09 PM
So people are crucifying a new OSR designer over an admitted paid review, while product placement and comarketing of D&D in Stranger Things is like "wow, D&D hits me the feels man."

If anybody is being crucified in this thread, it's QB. As for Kelsey, even Pundit who's a bona fide curmudgeon says her work is solid. There is nothing particularly new, but there is very little that is actually new in the OSR — most games simply remix what is already there and put a new spin on and old mechanic. There may be some people turning their noses at the aesthetics, but to be completely frank, most of the really edgy-looking stuff are third-party materials and settings for it (even though it's not officially out yet, there are already at least two campaign settings for it with splatbooks for the settings already).  The quickstart rules are kind of heavy on darkness and light mechanics, but the idea is that the darkness is beatable, if I understood the GM notes on design ethos.

On the other hand, if we're talking about edgy, there is always WFRP, and sometimes it looks like half this board like it better than their own first born, so there is definitely a market for edgy...

This is not about a paid review(s). The videos are Kickstarter marketing and should be read in that context. Anything on the face of a Kickstarter is marketing and never read it as a neutral, third party review.

If Questing Beast generally requires that creators pay him to do a review and does not disclose it in the review, then they may have an issue, but I am not sure that a promotional video for a Kickstarter falls into a "review" classification.

Pundit missed the mark, plain and simple. I generally find him to not miss the mark often at all even when I don't agree with the extreme he takes his opinion (albeit presented as a YouTube video where bland does not sell). However, this one was a swing and a miss.

Quote from: SHARK on March 05, 2023, 10:26:04 PM
...
As far as Kelsey's Shadowdark promotion and marketing goes--and the numerous glowing reviews--I don't think there is anything nefarious or corrupt going on. Questing Beast requires everyone to payfor reviews, as I understand.

Which makes them non-reviews.

He's doing infomercials.

Quote from: SHARK on March 05, 2023, 10:26:04 PM
Runehammer, another game designer and YouTube content creator--famous for ICRPG--is also an artist. Furthermore, he is also one of the artists involved with doing work for Shadowdark. THEN--all three of them are also personal friends with Kelsey of Shadowdark. I would think that anyone would want their friends to support their efforts and products. ...

It's fine so long as they say upfront that they are promoting the game for their friend.

But still Infomercial promotions, not reviews.

Quote from: SHARK on March 05, 2023, 10:26:04 PM
Professor Dungeon Master, of Dungeon Craft, has a long-standing policy of only reviewing games that he likes. Why? Because, as he has explained, he doesn't want to waste his time on products that he doesn't enjoy. He also doesn't get any satisfaction or enjoyment from being negative. So, there you go. That seems reasonable to me.

While I get why he may only want to do 'positive reviews', that also makes them infomercials by default, and not reviews.

His reviews of WHFRP 4e, and the Witcher RPG are two prime examples:

He gives both positive reviews while mentioning nothing negative about the games. But...

There are known issues with both game systems! They were readily apparent to me just reading through them. PDM glossing over such issues does no service to his audience that may then buy a game that they otherwise wouldn't, had they known of the games issues that a proper review would have drawn notice to.