Qin vs Weapons of the Gods

Spike · July 27, 2007, 04:59:45 PM

Quote from: JamesVGive that rat a cigar!

As for the posing habits? When you're in the minority, you're gonna feel more obliged to defend your choice.

Who's posing? Where? Aw... damn, just a typo...

The weird thing is, many of them seemed to have voted for Qin in the end anyway.

But I think you are on to something. I only posted a comment because I felt in the minority due to all the pro-WoTG posts, despite Qin being on top in the polls.

Spike · July 27, 2007, 05:00:58 PM

Welcome, LeSquide. Hang your hat up and chat for a while. We don't bite...

.... much.

ghost rat · July 27, 2007, 05:13:52 PM

Quote from: LeSquideI think part of it is that Qin is in some respects the new(er) RPG.net darling, and that a lot of WotGs fans are really into the game, and have probably done some tinkering with it; that's the kind of thing that makes one want to defend it more.

True. The more you've invested of your time and resources into something, the more it becomes 'your baby.' And WotG needs some heavy investment.

QuoteAdd in the fact that the developer seems like a nice guy who often goes out of his way to answer questions about the game and has provided a lot of web freebies, and you have a fairly dedicated playerbase that likes to talk about the game.

Also true. Brad used to show up in literally every WotG thread on the board. It was kinda creepy actually.

LeSquide · July 27, 2007, 05:34:43 PM

Quote from: ghost ratTrue. The more you've invested of your time and resources into something, the more it becomes 'your baby.' And WotG needs some heavy investment.

Also true. Brad used to show up in literally every WotG thread on the board. It was kinda creepy actually.

I don't think that's nessesarily the case. I've had plenty of casual players who really liked the game, despite not being into futtering with it mechanically.

And I wouldn't call that creepy. He's passionate about the game he made. I wish other games had that kind of developer support.

Zachary The First · July 27, 2007, 11:12:48 PM

WoTG was a cool idea, and I really had hoped I'd like it more than I did, but it just didn't click for me. I wasn't fond of the writing, the system didn't come easily to me, and there were a boatload of irritating typos. Qin, from what I've seen of it, just seems a little more together and fluid. Qin's also the first system I thought I'd be comfortable running a Romance of the Three Kingdoms campaign in. Again, that's just how the games came off to me.

Silverlion · July 28, 2007, 12:12:44 AM

WOTG was for me, an eye aching experience. The design detracted from the writing and the system seemed to me like silly dice tricks for no reason--it didn't come of as doing anything really useful with its contrivance. Now it MIGHT, but the graphic design pushed me away so hard that it was hard to focus on reading it.

QIN on the other hand seems simple, straightforward, and is beautiful to me. (The mechanics aren't doing anything too non-traditional but does enough to flavor the game. )

signoftheserpent · July 28, 2007, 02:30:55 AM

Quote from: SpikeThis thread is commentary on tBP, so if it ain't your sort of bag, feel free to ignore it.

Over on that other site, they have a poll up comparing the two. Qin is ahead 62% to 33%, nearly double. Interestingly enough, most posters in the thread are strongly in favor of WOTG (though more than a few of them also cop to having voted for Qin in the end).

Interesting. If they seem to think Qin is the better game nearly 2-1, why do they feel the need to shout out how WoTG is the better game?

Is this circled wagons 'me too' mentality, trying to assure others 'I belong' as WoTG is strongly supported as an 'RPG.net Darling'? Is it solidarity for the writings of the Borg?

I love WotG as a prouct, but it is an unplayable gaming product as designed in almost every way. There is no way on earth i could or would want to spend the time teaching a group of players this game.

Qin wins out because it's readable, even though it lacks some of the mechanical charm of WotG.

Alnag · July 28, 2007, 04:08:38 AM

Quote from: ghost ratThat would be here.

Thank you for the link. I fulfilled my civic duty and voted.

(Also I didn't know, that tBP stands for rpg.net... otherwise, I would probably find it myself

; oh well, I am still new here)

LeSquide · July 28, 2007, 12:37:04 PM

Quote from: signoftheserpentI love WotG as a prouct, but it is an unplayable gaming product as designed in almost every way. There is no way on earth i could or would want to spend the time teaching a group of players this game.

Qin wins out because it's readable, even though it lacks some of the mechanical charm of WotG.

While I certainly can't argue with taste, "unplayable gaming product" is just plain wrong. There are plenty of people who've done plenty of gaming with Weapons, and not just people with the benefit of Eos Press's website, either.

ghost rat · July 28, 2007, 12:39:03 PM

Quote from: LeSquideAnd I wouldn't call that creepy. He's passionate about the game he made. I wish other games had that kind of developer support.

I want to agree with this, but I can't help but wish that he'd spent that time hunting forums instead on getting the Companion out the door. As is, I have a game in desperate need of revision and the only supplement (which by the way looks awesome, dammit!) is only available as a .pdf on a CD-ROM, which is, frankly, the worst of all possible worlds IMO, no book-type ease of use, and no .pdf-type immediate delivery.

If I get a choice between a game developer who wants to be My Big Internet Buddy and one who can get good product into my hands in a timely fashion, I'll choose the latter.

LeSquide · July 28, 2007, 12:42:36 PM

Quote from: ghost ratI want to agree with this, but I can't help but wish that he'd spent that time hunting forums instead on getting the Companion out the door. As is, I have a game in desperate need of revision and the only supplement (which by the way looks awesome, dammit!) is only available as a .pdf on a CD-ROM, which is, frankly, the worst of all possible worlds IMO, no book-type ease of use, and no .pdf-type immediate delivery.

If I get a choice between a game developer who wants to be My Big Internet Buddy and one who can get good product into my hands in a timely fashion, I'll choose the latter.

From what I understand, Brad's actually done everything he could to get the Companion available; it's a matter of problems over in China, with the printers and the business assets of the company owner. There's even a post over on the Eos board that mentions it. The book's been done, the physical copies just aren't over here. As for the .pdf matter...from several threads on the Eos forum, again, it looks like it's out of Brad's hands.