A poster came in and started telling those of us who enjoyed the planar cosmology of previous editions that our fond memories were skewed. He stated that we could not have enjoyed the game back then nearly as much as we thought we did, as there were design issues in the game that made it all but unplayable.
The poster, who was admittedly much too young to have participated in the old editions to any real degree, kept insisting that, due to design flaws, there is no way anyone could have enjoyed the 1E/2E era of D&D and that our memories are faulty. I was admittedly shocked (which is an almost-impossible feat) at the presumptuous ego of this guy.
Who does he think he is to tell people what they did or did not enjoy? I've seen hundreds of irrational discussions on these boards, and that's fine. Rational minds do not always prevail, especially in regards to something as subjective as enjoyment of a game, but the last thing I need is some kid telling me that I really wasn't enjoying the game back in the 1E/2E days, and that my memories are skewed.
To top it off, someone just as arrogant and egocentric chimed in with his 2 cents worth, saying that we might have enjoyed the old editions, but that we "weren't playing D&D" because everyone house-ruled back then, and therefore it wasn't really D&D. As such, we were not enjoying D&D, but our own creations. I thought it was just a joke...until he answered resposes to this blatantly false statement. I suppose the fact that house-rules have been a part of D&D since the beginning (as they still are) is besides the point. I guess anyone who has ever house-ruled anything is no longer playing D&D.
This rant is simply boild down to a question...why do people insist on telling others what they do or do not enjoy? Who do they honestly think they are? Enjoyment is much too subjective a thing to debate with any amount of accuracy.
If I tell my friend, "I love Left 4 Dead", and he says, "No, that game's crap", then that is a difference of opinion, and nothing more.
However...
If that same friend told me, "There's no way you could enjoy that game. It's impossible to enjoy that game, because there are design flaws in it.", then we would have issues. On top of that, if that friend continued and said, "Any memories you have of that game are skewed. You didn't enjoy it as much as you think you did", then we would end up taking it outside (that's how we handle things in the deep south...we take it outside and beat the crap out of each other, then go have a beer).
It shows nothing more than an arrogant sense of self-worth to judge someone else's memories and to claim that they really didn't enjoy something...especially if the person claiming it is too young to have even played the game in question for any length of time. They have no idea what they're talking about.
It just chaps my butt a little bit...
I rarely feel like commenting in 4e General but this one got me motivated. Some of the stuff being said is amazing to see. The thing is, it also reminded me of my past a bit, too. No, not Planescape but back when I was 20 years old and knew everything, too. ;) Funny thing is, when I look back to those years and some of the things I thought and did, my glasses are anything but rose colored. I wonder if the same will hold true for those that posted their ideas about the memories of others. Odds are that it will.
A poster came in and started telling those of us who enjoyed the planar cosmology of previous editions that our fond memories were skewed. He stated that we could not have enjoyed the game back then nearly as much as we thought we did, as there were design issues in the game that made it all but unplayable.
The poster, who was admittedly much too young to have participated in the old editions to any real degree, kept insisting that, due to design flaws, there is no way anyone could have enjoyed the 1E/2E era of D&D and that our memories are faulty. I was admittedly shocked (which is an almost-impossible feat) at the presumptuous ego of this guy.
Well, regardless of our skewed/faulty memories & possible design flaws, I think we've got all the proof we need that plenty of people have infact enjoyed the previous editions.
Afterall, the games is still in production. Different from prevoius incarnations? Yes. But still here & being sold.....
And let's not forget the fact that D&D/AD&D1e is the cornerstone for an entire industry.
So let the whelp say whatever he likes.
I rarely feel like commenting in 4e General but this one got me motivated. Some of the stuff being said is amazing to see. The thing is, it also reminded me of my past a bit, too. No, not Planescape but back when I was 20 years old and knew everything, too. ;) Funny thing is, when I look back to those years and some of the things I thought and did, my glasses are anything but rose colored. I wonder if the same will hold true for those that posted their ideas about the memories of others. Odds are that it will.
Same with me, of course.
I've been in jail a few times (should have been more).
I've done pretty much every illicit drug out there (hence the "Hokus-Smokus" name...I got that back in the early '90s).
I was a thief, a junkie, and an all-around scumbag.
I thought I knew it all, when I actually knew nothing.
I've done a great many things most people would find reprehensible, and I have to live with that, but at least I finally realized it and grew up. I'm now a successful owner of two businesses, a veteran, a husband, a father of two, and a city council-member...and I still know next to nothing. The cool part of it? I'm okay with not knowing everything.
Same with me, of course.
I've been in jail a few times (should have been more).
I've done pretty much every illicit drug out there (hence the "Hokus-Smokus" name...I got that back in the early '90s).
I was a thief, a junkie, and an all-around scumbag.
I thought I knew it all, when I actually knew nothing.
I've done a great many things most people would find reprehensible, and I have to live with that, but at least I finally realized it and grew up. I'm now a successful owner of two businesses, a veteran, a husband, a father of two, and a city council-member...and I still know next to nothing. The cool part of it? I'm okay with not knowing everything.
It's amazing what a li'l time can do for a body, no? 'Course it's also amazing what a li'l time can do to a body ... :D
I had a similar stint during my 20s that's thankfully ended well enough. When I look back, I can only shake my head when I remember (what I can remember) about whoever that person was. There's a great saying that I feel communicates the difference between the thens and nows: You don't know what you don't know. Happily, I'm beginning to see what it is I don't know and that, of course, is actually allowing me to grow. It took some real time before any of that made sense. I'm just glad it finally did.
.... The cool part of it? I'm okay with not knowing everything.
"All I know is that I don't know nothin.., and that's fine!!!!" -Operation Ivy
When you get to that point your a man. Only a boy will presume to know it all.
Don't respond. Don't feed their egos. Don't give them the time of day. You're not obligated to talk to them, so why aggravate yourself?
I didn't care for the old cosmology. I found it too convoluted and crowded. Others didn't, and guess what? I'm okay with that. It doesn't affect my game one iota. Anyone who says I wasn't playing the old system right can take a flying leap for all I care.
Now, if someone asks how I could find it convoluted and crowded when they found it an absolute delight, I'd gladly engage in discussion. If they say I was doing it wrong or otherwise come on rudely, I just assume it's more squeaking from the peanut gallery and look to see if there are any intelligent posts I can respond to. I admit I'm flawed and get suckered in from time to time, but I'm only human.
In short, just pass them by. They aren't worth bothering with.
But that's not really the point of this thread that we're in. I get that. It's a complaining thread, and we all need them from time to time. Even when we're on opposite sides of the argument I think we can get together to share some mutual frustration. Hell yeah, isn't it awful when someone puts words in your mouth, when someone makes a presumption that you're wrong on the basis of no evidence, when someone wilfully misunderstands your position and then makes a personal attack on you?
Absolutely. That sucks. This is a thread I can really get behind, and in its general form rather than its specific I approve.
:-)
- I personally don't like 'X';
- 'X' is objectively bad/stupid/silly/evil; and
- 'X' should be banned by law.
It's not a problem confined to this forum, or even the internet as a whole, although the anonymity of the 'net probably makes people less inclined to just nod and smile for the sake of avoiding an argument. I don't even think it's something that's just started recently. It seems to just be human nature to assume the world shares our own personal bias.
I don't even think there's a solution, since the opposite (a sort of sophist relativism where everyone's opinion is granted equal value) is even worse. Maybe this is just something we're going to have to live with.
"It's for tomorrow night. You like red cabbage, Ralphie" - A Christmas story.
Mothers can be pushy sometimes, too.
This rant is simply boild down to a question...why do people insist on telling others what they do or do not enjoy? Who do they honestly think they are? Enjoyment is much too subjective a thing to debate with any amount of accuracy.
This is one reason why I tend to avoid the typical 'back-n-forth, back-n-forth' on the boards. At some point, people stop listening anyway, just talk past each other, and so on. That's not communication, that's babble, and I don't care for it, at all. Good day ;).
Communication is when a message is sent AND received (important part there, I believe). I don't mind sharing my opinion or an idea, and I enjoy hearing the same from others (otherwise I wouldn't be here); I'm really not interested in babbling all the day long though . . .
Especially if it amounts to someone insisting that I don't like (or can't believe for that matter) what I obviously do. If I like the Great Wheel cosmology, I like it, 'nuff said. I really don't care for it though (I prefer the newer World Axis cosmology). Anybody wanna debate it for a few dozen pages or so :P? Have fun, I'm out.
Originally Posted by Hocus-Smokust
This rant is simply boild down to a question...why do people insist on telling others what they do or do not enjoy? Who do they honestly think they are? Enjoyment is much too subjective a thing to debate with any amount of accuracy.
Yeah, but fans do it all the time. Take Star Trek and Star Wars. Any reason why I can't like both? Somehow there's always a feud as if one side can "win". What happens then? The other IP disappears forever?
I'm not going to mention I like both too though...
Hmm. Maybe we should add this to the list of banned topics ... :P
Yeah? Well, I don't like both. We Trekkies will not rest until Star Bores is erased from existance and Star Trek is rightly and universally hailed as the best franchise evah! You will be assimiliated, beatches. :P
Hmm. Maybe we should add this to the list of banned topics ... :P
What are you talking about? Star Wars RULES!!!! lol.... I mean, can you imagine in real life some guys running around in wool clothing and big glowing sticks? That'd be awesome.:D
The problem, IMO, is that the vast majority of people (at least in the UK and US, though I suspect it's no different elsewhere) really don't seem to see any difference at all between:
- I personally don't like 'X';
- 'X' is objectively bad/stupid/silly/evil; and
- 'X' should be banned by law.
From another poster, "No. [X] is an objectively bad book."
So, I've actually seen this type of statement.
From another poster, "No. [X] is an objectively bad book."
So, I've actually seen this type of statement.
Probably me again. But you can make this kind of statement, within certain parameters.
For example.
* The subject of the discussion is game design.
* Game design has recognised principles for creating, broadly speaking, better games.
* The rules within book [X] are grossly ignorant of those principles.
Ergo, [X] is an objectively bad book.
Or, more accurately, "In terms of game design, [X] is an objectively bad book due to its failure to come to grips with the basic principles of design."
It's a fair criticism that the standard isn't adequately defined, or that the standard is wrongly chosen, or that the book is not in fact bad by that standard.
But there's nothing wrong with saying that by reference to a defined standard a book is objectively bad. Which is to say that N people applying the same standard in a consistent manner will come to a consensus as to whether the book meets it.
Absolute opinions shouldn't be mistaken for fantacism or fundamentalism. The evils of strongly held positions that we feel in today's society come from positions that don't hold themselves subject to rational debate or proof, that inspire hatred or contempt of those holding opposed beliefs, or that utilise violence and oppression in their defence. To extend that danger into an opposition to strongly stated beliefs in general does disservice to the many times in history when we have been carried forward as a society by someone willing to unequivocally say, "I am right and you are wrong."
Probably me again. But you can make this kind of statement, within certain parameters.
No, it wasn't you. It is a novel and the statement was on the story line and writing style.
This rant is simply boild down to a question...why do people insist on telling others what they do or do not enjoy? Who do they honestly think they are? Enjoyment is much too subjective a thing to debate with any amount of accuracy.
I have to ask this question in return. Why has bad behavior become so popular in the gaming world? Why does it seem that the gaming world is mostly made up of unsupervised/undisciplined children and dysfunctional adults? Why has gaming become counter productive?
Here's some of the common characteristics found in many if not most gamers these days.
Pseudo-intellectual, egotistical, narcissistic, spoiled, hostile, intolerant,
disrespectful, belligerent, shallow, biased, licentious, destructive, anti-social,
puerile, offensive and abusive. I'll stop there but I could go on.
For example, I log onto gaming forums and they're filled with the above stereotypes. I log onto online games and I encounter the above stereotypes and its not uncommon at all. Its very common and its everywhere. It seems the only time people are not confrontational is when they are forced to be civil and even then it doesn't last long.
I blame anonymity, availability and encouragement. No one knowing who you really are and having to face no real consequences. The ease of finding new people to game with or chat with and others praising bad behavior. Mostly I blame possible bad/lazy parenting or mental disorders. (easy scapegoats)
So now that I'v said my piece, I come to my reply to the OP's questions.
This rant is simply boild down to a question...why do people insist on telling others what they do or do not enjoy? Who do they honestly think they are? Enjoyment is much too subjective a thing to debate with any amount of accuracy.
1. Why do people tell others what they do or do not enjoy? Because they can. Because they are looking to bait you. Because they themselves are frustrated with the very subject.
2. Who do they think they are? The very peak of humanities perfection made manifest in nerdform.
3. Enjoyment is too subjective to debate with accuracy. Only when announcing what others enjoy. I can, with 100% accuracy, debate what "I" enjoy without any doubt or mistakes. Beyond that, I would just be talking crap.
I hope I added to the discussion.;)
Psychologically, as I understand things, we tend to use ourselves as the basis for the defintion of normal, even when we rationally know we aren't all that normal, and probably don't feel that way emotionally. I tend to think that's largely why a lot of people around here tend to confuse "myself" and "most people".
While i'm sure a lot of people tend toward that thinking, i'd like to offer you a spark of hope. I, for one, do not. I find myself to be highly abnormal and tend, in most ways, to actively do things differently than other people would. I do not hold others to behave and think as i would, but i would sure love to see a bit more selfless concern for the wellbeing of others.
Hocus isn't complaining about people disagreeing with his (subjective) opinion. He's complaining about people declaring his subjective opinion to be objectively wrong and their own (equally subjective) opinion to be objectively correct.
If the argument were over something based on an objective reality, such as what you get when you add 2 + 2, or a dispute over what the rules of the game say in a particular situation, then it would make sense to say one side is 'right' and the other 'wrong' (indeed, it would be 'wishy-washy', as you put it, not to do so). But that's not the case here.
It was a miscommunication; Hocus was taking the argument as, "You're telling me I didn't have the fun I quite clearly remember having," whereas we were saying, "You're letting the fun you quite obviously had cloud your judgement of the as-written rules you were playing with."
I don't mind this kind of exchange - when people get as passionate as Hocus has gotten it's usually because they're really invested in the topic, which is something I can identify with, and it's a passion that will occasionally yield some very insightful posts. Although I do wish we'd kept that argument in a single thread rather than spilling over to talking out of school on the community business boards.
As I've said elsewhere, if you define a standard - such as "current thinking on games design" - and you hold something up to that standard - such as the 1E Manual of the Planes - and it doesn't on any level hold up, you can say that against that standard the 1E Manual of the Planes is "objectively bad". And the rebuttals are "you didn't adequately define the standard", "you chose the wrong standard" or "you judged it against the standard improperly" but the argument remains at the objective level.
[edit] 8/11/09
After reading up on the new planes, I really like them. I don't know if I like them MORE, but I do really enjoy the new cosmology of 4e. Just thought I'd throw that in here.
Although I do wish we'd kept that argument in a single thread rather than spilling over to talking out of school on the community business boards.
That argument is still right where it started, on the GD boards (so aptly named). This post is not about game design vs. the planes vs. who sets the standards. This post is about people who are pretentious enough to spout drivel about things they know nothing about, and, despite having their assertions shot down repeatedly, keep claiming "truths" with no basis and "opinions" as though they were facts. That kind of posting behavior is juvinille, offensive, disrupting, and serves to do nothing but drive the community further apart.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I've removed content from this thread...
While respecting your decision to remove content, I'd like to say for the record that if the removed content was (as I think I remember) something inflammatory directed at me, you didn't need to do it on my account. I can take the heat. :-)
But yes, let's have a more polite discussion, hey?
I'm not criticising ORC_Chaos at all, but I've completely lost the thread of what I was trying to say now, so it's best if I just bow out.
EDIT: I can't actually remember who it was I was responding to, since their post has entirely disappeared (presumably for the reasons I took issue with it in the first place).
I'm out. I can't keep track of a discussion when half of it gets removed like this. The butchered remnant of my last post now makes no sense at all, not because of anything I did that violated the CoC, but because I was responding to someone who apparently did.
Oh wow, I didn't see the rest of the edits. Yeah, it doesn't make much sense now.
Hey, if you want to start a new thread about valid debating techniques though, I'm up for that.
Hey, if you want to start a new thread about valid debating techniques though, I'm up for that.
I'm not sure we really disagree on that, though, so it would be quite a boring thread. At least barring 'miscommunications'.
Well, regardless of our skewed/faulty memories & possible design flaws, I think we've got all the proof we need that plenty of people have infact enjoyed the previous editions.
Afterall, the games is still in production. Different from prevoius incarnations? Yes. But still here & being sold.....
And let's not forget the fact that D&D/AD&D1e is the cornerstone for an entire industry.
So let the whelp say whatever he likes.
I agree with you, the existance of a 4th Edition is self evident proof that people indeed thoroughly enjoyed previous editions.
Hocus isn't complaining about people disagreeing with his (subjective) opinion. He's complaining about people declaring his subjective opinion to be objectively wrong and their own (equally subjective) opinion to be objectively correct.
Or, if I understood the situation correctly, he's complaining about people declaring his subjective opinion in fact isn't his subjective opinion and he's just remembering it wrong.
And given that several of them openly advertise the whole 4e Avenger thing, again not that shocking how the thread has gone increasingly off topic and hostile. At some point the mods should consider a blanket ban of self-proclaimed edition warriors.
Who's gonna tell me what I like? That's board-speak. In reality, I've made up our own mind.
Like it or not, edition fighting seems to be a staple of these boards (not sure about others). When they flare up, I try and ignore 'em. I've got my D&D, they've got theirs. Have fun ;).
In a thread on the GD forum, I was in a discussion about the new 4E planar cosmology. We were comparing the various planes from previous editions (all the way back to 1E) to the new offering an organization of the 4E planes. All was going well. We were having a good discussion...until...
A poster came in and started telling those of us who enjoyed the planar cosmology of previous editions that our fond memories were skewed. He stated that we could not have enjoyed the game back then nearly as much as we thought we did, as there were design issues in the game that made it all but unplayable.
The poster, who was admittedly much too young to have participated in the old editions to any real degree, kept insisting that, due to design flaws, there is no way anyone could have enjoyed the 1E/2E era of D&D and that our memories are faulty. I was admittedly shocked (which is an almost-impossible feat) at the presumptuous ego of this guy.
Who does he think he is to tell people what they did or did not enjoy? I've seen hundreds of irrational discussions on these boards, and that's fine. Rational minds do not always prevail, especially in regards to something as subjective as enjoyment of a game, but the last thing I need is some kid telling me that I really wasn't enjoying the game back in the 1E/2E days, and that my memories are skewed.
He probably fears buyers remorse or something, similar to Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft fanboys; they denounce the others because they don't want to regret their purchase or side. In the end, while it might be fun to play around with (as G4 did) or even participate in, it's rather child-like. It's basically:
Gandalf: My staff's better, because it's bigger!
Harry: Yeah, well I can hide mine!
Elminister: Oh yeah? Well at least if our magic doesn't work for some reason, we can still beat someone with ours!
Harry: I can still poke out their eyes!
Gandalf: Yeah, well I'm a demigod!
Harry: Seventeen year old girls worship me as a god!
Elminister: I scored with a god(ess)!
And that's basically it. Just tell the guy that although 4e might be cool, the previous editions layed the ground works for it. His claim makes as much sense as saying that just because Twilight Princess was awesome, that suddenly Ocarina of Time, Wind Waker, and Link to the Past were all lame. It just lacks any sense.
But really, he was probably just on the emotional ride of the edition wars.
To top it off, someone just as arrogant and egocentric chimed in with his 2 cents worth, saying that we might have enjoyed the old editions, but that we "weren't playing D&D" because everyone house-ruled back then, and therefore it wasn't really D&D. As such, we were not enjoying D&D, but our own creations. I thought it was just a joke...until he answered resposes to this blatantly false statement. I suppose the fact that house-rules have been a part of D&D since the beginning (as they still are) is besides the point. I guess anyone who has ever house-ruled anything is no longer playing D&D.
Inform him of the points in the multiple DM Guides of how the DM has the Last Word.
And then use it.
This rant is simply boild down to a question...why do people insist on telling others what they do or do not enjoy? Who do they honestly think they are? Enjoyment is much too subjective a thing to debate with any amount of accuracy.
Indeed--although I have often gone after subjects such as Twilight and Eragon to point out how utterly devoid of talent or skill either writer has, although I don't believe I have claimed someone is incapable of enjoying them. I have however, occasionally questioned their taste in literature in general.
...those poor young girls.:raincloud
Why is it so seemingly impossible to enjoy more than one edition at a time? I loved 1E/2E, did NOT like 3E/3.5, and thoroughly enjoy 4E. I suppose I'm in the minority, but surely there are other people who enjoy more than a single edition and can talk about different editions without hating on one or another of them. It doesn't make any sense to me...but then, a great many things make no sense to me.
I am with you hocus, i love me some 1E/2E and some 4E.. so i play them all as often as i can (which sadly isn't as often as i would like anymore)
I had some great 3rd ed games, but I also had some awful ones. For the most part each edition is probably better than the one before it. My main reason I don't like 4th ed as its very different than all the previous editions, not from any rel issues with 4th ed itself.
Different cosmology, different races, and to much change for this old grognard to handle (at the grand old age of 31 LOL). 4th ed/D&D is just a game at the end of the day.
Whatever edition you played in high school/college will probably be the best edition you ever played and will be to your dying day. You had all your young friends to play it with, you probably roped your girlfriend into playing it and/or had a crush on someone in the group. You had more than 2-6 weeks holiday a year and your players didn't have to work weekends or worry about jobs/careers/kids/wives/husbands. When I lived at hoime my mother would do baking for the group. Better than doing drugs or booze I suppose.