I thought this was interesting in the light of Dragonlance's 30th anniversary, it's only a few months old:
QuoteThat was actually something that TSR – not TSR, Wizards of the Coast had approached me of maybe doing a reboot of DRAGONLANCE.
Abstruse: You know Tracy’s here. Tracy Hickman.
Jim Butcher: Tracy and Margaret are the reason I ended up not doing that. I’d gone to them and said, “I think this is a fantastic idea! I’ve got a lot of a whole bunch of really good ideas of how this would work out.” I’d already started building all these characters and re-read the first book and was trying to figure out how to do that a little bit different. And I said, “Tracy and Margaret are okay with this, right?” And I got all these weasely answers from the far end and I’m like “No, screw you guys. If this is something that’s not kosher with Tracy and Margaret, it’s not going to happen.” And then 4th Edition crashed and they had more problems than that. And they were expecting 4th Edition to go insane and it HAD gone insane already, they just didn’t realize it. But yeah, I was going to have a good time with that. I was going to base Raistlin on House.
Nordling: [Cackling] Perfect!
Jim Butcher: And starting from there. Raistlin was going to be just going to be the most snarky, brilliant character.
Abstruse: I’m just connecting the dots, it’s perfect.
Jim Butcher: Yeah exactly. Tanis was going to be more kind of a thoughtful general action hero guy. But I was going to change things where Tasslehoff hadn’t stolen Flint’s knife at the beginning, or Flint caught Tasslehoff trying to steal his knife because Tass didn’t make make his pickpocket roll. So a goblin was going to have wounded Tanis and they were going to have taken an extra fifteen minutes to bandage Tanis up before they rolled into town and that would’ve changed the entire scope of the Dragonlance War. I wanted to start with that little incident and go from there.
Abstruse: And kind of retcon out the Fifth Age?
Jim Butcher: Yeah, more or less. They said reboot and do whatever you want, so I said okay. Although also, I should’ve known there was an issue when they asked me if it could be 4th Edition compatible. Can you book be 4th Edition compatible? And I’m like “......it’s a book!” It’s a story. The 4th Edition is just a way to tell the story.
Abstruse: I know RA Salvatore has been doing this sort of...bitching without actually bitching, about having to write Drizzt in 4th.
Jim Butcher: [shaking his head] 4th Edition-compatible storytelling.
Abstruse: Well, it’s got to use those specific maneuvers and powers, and keep track of the dailies and...I actually really like 4th Edition for what it is.
Jim Butcher: Right.
Abstruse: It’s something completely different.
Jim Butcher: I think it’s a good game. It’s a neat game. It’s just not D&D.
Man I would have killed for a Jim Butcher Dragonlance, but at least WOTC is considering/has considered a reboot rather than yet another apocalypse.
From: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/63756
Quote from: Piestrio;709740I thought this was interesting in the light of Dragonlance's 30th anniversary, it's only a few months old:
Man I would have killed for a Jim Butcher Dragonlance, but at least WOTC is considering/has considered a reboot rather than yet another apocalypse.
From: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/63756
I got the flu, sick as a dog, but this made my morning.
Jim Butcher: I think it's a good game. It's a neat game. It's just not D&D.
The money quote right there.
My favorite is this.
QuoteI said, "Tracy and Margaret are okay with this, right?" And I got all these weasely answers from the far end and I'm like "No, screw you guys. If this is something that's not kosher with Tracy and Margaret, it's not going to happen."
I know H&W aren't the sole creators of Dragonlance, but I like the fact that as an author he respects their claim to it--I know DL was in-house and committee designed but those two are the authors of the core novels. I'd feel the same way if somebody decided to radically reboot the Realms and force Greenwood out, and I still pretty much ignore non-Gygax Greyhawk stuff.
In retrospect, wasn't it more like House was based on Raistlin?
JG
Quote from: JRT;709781My favorite is this.
I know H&W aren't the sole creators of Dragonlance, but I like the fact that as an author he respects their claim to it--I know DL was in-house and committee designed but those two are the authors of the core novels. I'd feel the same way if somebody decided to radically reboot the Realms and force Greenwood out, and I still pretty much ignore non-Gygax Greyhawk stuff.
I did the same with Albedo. I talked to Paul who was one of my customers at the time about using 1st or 2nd ed as the core and he wasnt keen on that so I was cool with that and started converting the whole thing to STAR. Then Sanguine came along saw my manuscript, ganked the deal and fucked up the whole thing up.
As for the reboot. Cant say it sounds very appealing. But eh, points for asking before leaping in.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;709777Jim Butcher: I think it’s a good game. It’s a neat game. It’s just not D&D.
The money quote right there.
The actual full interview is full of them. My favorite is:
"But yeah, I did the playtest for D&D 4th Edition, I wrote a two-word review. “New Coke” and sent it in to them. I hoped that would get through, but it didn’t seem to."
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;710089The actual full interview is full of them. My favorite is:
"But yeah, I did the playtest for D&D 4th Edition, I wrote a two-word review. "New Coke" and sent it in to them. I hoped that would get through, but it didn't seem to."
Says a lot, doesn't it?
But corporations have a major blind spot that way. They look at numbers and studies and let their MBAs break them down into deciding what to do. And when someone comes along and points out the Emperor has no clothes, they bury their heads in the data that says otherwise.
Quote from: JRT;709781... I still pretty much ignore non-Gygax Greyhawk stuff.
There is no non-Gygax Greyhawk stuff...
Quote from: artikid;710092There is no non-Gygax Greyhawk stuff...
3e Greyhawk stuff, for example, is non-Gygax.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;709777Jim Butcher: I think it's a good game. It's a neat game. It's just not D&D.
The money quote right there.
Yep. It's what most of us said when we bought and looked at 4e. Accurate statement.
Oh...damn. I knew I loved Jim Butcher's attitude. But the "New Coke" line. Gold. And it well encapsulates the issue with 4E. It's a fine game in it's own right. It might have made for a great D&D spin off line of mini-battles. But having the ability to hold up the full D&D brand. Ehhhhh.
Very, very interesting. Thanks for sharing this.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;7100973e Greyhawk stuff, for example, is non-Gygax.
I think he meant it in a sort of "There are no sequels to Highlander" way. :)
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;710089The actual full interview is full of them. My favorite is:
"But yeah, I did the playtest for D&D 4th Edition, I wrote a two-word review. "New Coke" and sent it in to them. I hoped that would get through, but it didn't seem to."
That's a really insightful comment that truly explains the writer's complaints... Oh no, wait, it's pithy grandstanding snark that doesn't actually explain anything or provide any constructive feedback.
"I tested it, I didn't like it, but I didn't want to do anything that might actually improve the end product".
He's a writer. Writing is kinda his job. I'm sure he could have provided something useful.
Quote from: Ladybird;710214That's a really insightful comment that truly explains the writer's complaints... Oh no, wait, it's pithy grandstanding snark that doesn't actually explain anything or provide any constructive feedback.
"I tested it, I didn't like it, but I didn't want to do anything that might actually improve the end product".
He's a writer. Writing is kinda his job. I'm sure he could have provided something useful.
When scrapping the end product and starting over is the only fix, how many words do you want to waste saying that?
Ha! Jim Butcher is an edition warrior. Who woulda thunk it?
Quote from: Ladybird;710214That's a really insightful comment that truly explains the writer's complaints... Oh no, wait, it's pithy grandstanding snark that doesn't actually explain anything or provide any constructive feedback.
"I tested it, I didn't like it, but I didn't want to do anything that might actually improve the end product".
He's a writer. Writing is kinda his job. I'm sure he could have provided something useful.
True, but on the other hand part of the job of a playtester is to not just provide constructive feedback, but also to provide honest feedback, not pull your punches. Given a choice between providing constructive feedback at the cost of misrepresenting your response and saying "Honestly, guys, I don't have much constructive to offer - I think this project is utterly wrong-headed and needs to be completely rethought", it's best to go for the latter.
Why, after all, rack your brains to cook up "constructive" suggests which at the end of the day will make an experience you despise and don't have any fun with drag itself up from "actively irritating" to "this bores me and I'm not really interested"? Unless you can actually envisage a version of the game you're presented with which you'd actually like, it's best to say "You know what? This whole project really isn't for me".
He could have gone into more detail about why he felt that way, though to be honest "New Coke" actually has fairly direct and clear connotations anyway so I don't think anyone reviewing his feedback would find it ambiguous or mysterious.
Quote from: Ladybird;710214That's a really insightful comment that truly explains the writer's complaints... Oh no, wait, it's pithy grandstanding snark that doesn't actually explain anything or provide any constructive feedback.
Actually, those two words provide a wealth of feedback. His feedback (those two words) proved
very accurate. They predicted the outcome based on the product he had in his hands at the time. The execs concerned decided to IGNORE his feedback.
Quote from: One Horse Town;710217Ha! Jim Butcher is an edition warrior. Who woulda thunk it?
I don't know if "warrior" is the right term to describe a person who reasonably concluded 4e was an interesting system that didn't maintain enough key continuity with its predecessors.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;710226I don't know if "warrior" is the right term to describe a person who reasonably concluded 4e was an interesting system that didn't maintain enough key continuity with its predecessors.
Stop ruining my fun with your so-called "facts" :D
Quote from: Ladybird;710214That's a really insightful comment that truly explains the writer's complaints... Oh no, wait, it's pithy grandstanding snark that doesn't actually explain anything or provide any constructive feedback.
"I tested it, I didn't like it, but I didn't want to do anything that might actually improve the end product".
He's a writer. Writing is kinda his job. I'm sure he could have provided something useful.
I agree the attacks on 4E can be reduced to "it sucks!!!!!!" But the new coke criticism is somewhat apt. He was basically saying the changes were enough to make this feel different from the prior editions and that people might not all be on board for that. New coke is something people instantly grok. Sure, comstructive feedback is always helpful, but if you feel the underlying premise is unwise it's equally okay to say so. And they are entirely free to ignore you if they think your wrong.
One thing I will say about Butcher, he supposedly landed the dresden files books by proving to a publisher that he understood his audience. If they specifically went to him looking for playtest feedback (and he didn't just sign up for the playtest like the rest of us) then I think coming from him, "new coke" has a bit more weight because they probably went to him thinking "here's a writer who has a feel for the community". With Salvatore its interesting as well because he wrote through the transitions from 1E, 2E, 3E and 4E, and the last one seems to have caused him the most difficulty as a writer (at least that is my take based on interviews i've read). Given that he was writing basically the same characters across all four editions, i think it does speak to how different fourth was fron its predecessors. Neither of them have called 4E a bad game, they just both seem to think it doesn't fit with 1e-3e so well.
Quote from: Arduin;710221Actually, those two words provide a wealth of feedback. His feedback (those two words) proved very accurate. They predicted the outcome based on the product he had in his hands at the time. The execs concerned decided to IGNORE his feedback.
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;710226I don't know if "warrior" is the right term to describe a person who reasonably concluded 4e was an interesting system that didn't maintain enough key continuity with its predecessors.
Exactly. "New Coke" summed it up well. It might be, in blind taste tests and focus groups a "superior" product (in fact, Diet Coke is still based on the New Coke formula, IIRC, and it does *very* well), but when people pop a Coke, they have certain expectations of what they'll get. And you ignore those expectations at your own peril.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;710258With Salvatore its interesting as well because he wrote through the transitions from 1E, 2E, 3E and 4E, and the last one seems to have caused him the most difficulty as a writer (at least that is my take based on interviews i've read).
I don't know about "as a writer", but the one interview I've heard with him about the versions as *game systems*, his stance generally seemed to be "I like 1e/2e, 3e is for munchkins, 4e is an okay game, but it's something totally different."
I'll see if I can dig it up. And yes, I do believe "munchkins" was the word he used. And I'll definitely acknowledge that this, and his opinions of the systems from a writer's perspective, may be pretty different and don't really contradict one another ("how I fit the game mechanics into the fiction" vs. "how does this actually play as a game" being the key axis here).
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;710089"But yeah, I did the playtest for D&D 4th Edition, I wrote a two-word review. "New Coke" and sent it in to them. I hoped that would get through, but it didn't seem to."
Ouch.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;710258I agree the attacks on 4E can be reduced to "it sucks!!!!!!" But the new coke criticism is somewhat apt. He was basically saying the changes were enough to make this feel different from the prior editions and that people might not all be on board for that. New coke is something people instantly grok. Sure, comstructive feedback is always helpful, but if you feel the underlying premise is unwise it's equally okay to say so. And they are entirely free to ignore you if they think your wrong.
One thing I will say about Butcher, he supposedly landed the dresden files books by proving to a publisher that he understood his audience. If they specifically went to him looking for playtest feedback (and he didn't just sign up for the playtest like the rest of us) then I think coming from him, "new coke" has a bit more weight because they probably went to him thinking "here's a writer who has a feel for the community". With Salvatore its interesting as well because he wrote through the transitions from 1E, 2E, 3E and 4E, and the last one seems to have caused him the most difficulty as a writer (at least that is my take based on interviews i've read). Given that he was writing basically the same characters across all four editions, i think it does speak to how different fourth was fron its predecessors. Neither of them have called 4E a bad game, they just both seem to think it doesn't fit with 1e-3e so well.
"New coke" is not just a critique, but a warning. "Go in this direction and follow this path at your peril" is a longer winded way of saying the same thing. But hubris has its own blind spots.
Quote from: Warthur;710219True, but on the other hand part of the job of a playtester is to not just provide constructive feedback, but also to provide honest feedback, not pull your punches. Given a choice between providing constructive feedback at the cost of misrepresenting your response and saying "Honestly, guys, I don't have much constructive to offer - I think this project is utterly wrong-headed and needs to be completely rethought", it's best to go for the latter.
There's a difference between "honest" and "useless". "New coke" is a
useless comment.
QuoteWhy, after all, rack your brains to cook up "constructive" suggests which at the end of the day will make an experience you despise and don't have any fun with drag itself up from "actively irritating" to "this bores me and I'm not really interested"?
Because that's the job that you signed up to do. Playtesting is not a happy fun land of playing your favourite game before everyone else, it's work.
I have playtested horrible things; we did
The One Ring. It was awful. It made one player hate her favourite series of books. But we sent our damn feedback because that was
our job, and our feedback was both comprehensive and honest.
When I met the author, then I got to tell him just how much I disliked his game.
All that said, if the playtest was so unstructured that "new coke" was a potential valid answer, and the playtesters weren't told the design goals and what to playtest for, Wizards gone done fucked up.
Quote from: Ladybird;710273There's a difference between "honest" and "useless". "New coke" is a useless comment.
It's only useless if you don't understand it. But that is true of any advice.
As it was, no amount of detailed feedback would have changed the outcome as the foundational principles of 4E were so flawed as to make it unfixable.
Quote from: Arduin;710288It's only useless if you don't understand it. But that is true of any advice.
As it was, no amount of detailed feedback would have changed the outcome as the foundational principles of 4E were so flawed as to make it unfixable.
Depends on what you're into. Evidently it's not
for us, we can all agree on
that, but there obviously was an audience there. In it's own right, it did well, just not well enough for WotC.
Quote from: Ladybird;710306Depends on what you're into.
Not at all. I'm talking BUSINESS not opinion. And, the "New Coke" observation was correct from that standpoint. Actually turned out worse. So, while YOU may have liked 4e (actually an neat system) for the BUSINESS it was a disaster. As predicted and ignored.
Quote from: Ladybird;710273There's a difference between "honest" and "useless". "New coke" is a useless comment.
Er, not even slightly. It draws and direct and apt comparison to a very well-understood disaster in branding which most people (including literally everyone in this thread except you) instantly grasps. "Fuck you" would be generic and useless: "New Coke" makes a concrete connection to a specific incident and says "this thing feels like it's going to wind up like that thing".
QuoteBecause that's the job that you signed up to do. Playtesting is not a happy fun land of playing your favourite game before everyone else, it's work.
I am fairly sure Jim Butcher didn't actually sign up to the 4E playtest as part of a 9-5 job. He's making ends meet just fine.
QuoteI have playtested horrible things; we did The One Ring. It was awful. It made one player hate her favourite series of books. But we sent our damn feedback because that was our job, and our feedback was both comprehensive and honest.
Again, you can give honest and fairly detailed feedback and at the same time be quite terse, and drawing the "New Coke" comparison is actually an artful way to do just that. Just as a picture paints a thousand words, citing a specific past incident makes an analogy which is, again, remarkably clear to everyone here except you.
I've avoided Butcher's novels (Despite having two friends who are rabid fans) because the descriptions of the plots sounded extremely vanilla and twee, like actual play reports from some teenager's World of Darkness campaign that they ran at Church Camp one summer.
However, he impressed me in that interview. The "New Coke" line was hysterical for it's mercilessly succinct accuracy, and the "Zombie Apocalypse Keep on the Borderlands" game sounded like a real hoot.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;710312I've avoided Butcher's novels (Despite having two friends who are rabid fans) because the descriptions of the plots sounded extremely vanilla and twee, like actual play reports from some teenager's World of Darkness campaign that they ran at Church Camp one summer.
I avoided the books for a long time because I was convinced that all urban fantasy was nothing more than romance novels with sexy vampires and witches.
(It's still more as less true for everything aside from Dresden so far as I can see)
I could understand how someone could not make the New-Coke connection.
It happened in 1985... 28 years ago? There is a whole generation out there that wasn't even born yet...
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;710322I could understand how someone could not make the New-Coke connection.
It happened in 1985... 28 years ago? There is a whole generation out there that wasn't even born yet...
I keep forgetting about the kids that are on these threads. BUT, even a 28 year old kid who was a business person would know that. It was the "Edsel" marketing debacle of that decade.
Quote from: Warthur;710311Er, not even slightly. It draws and direct and apt comparison to a very well-understood disaster in branding which most people (including literally everyone in this thread except you) instantly grasps. "Fuck you" would be generic and useless: "New Coke" makes a concrete connection to a specific incident and says "this thing feels like it's going to wind up like that thing".
It's not that I don't understand the reference he tried to make, it's just that it's stupid and isn't useful as feedback. No details of what exactly was wrong. No details of what worked. No details of which of WotC's design goals were met or failed, and how.
QuoteI am fairly sure Jim Butcher didn't actually sign up to the 4E playtest as part of a 9-5 job. He's making ends meet just fine.
Irrelevant. There might not have been any money changing hands, but he still volunteered to do a job. And if you volunteer to do a job, you should do it.
QuoteAgain, you can give honest and fairly detailed feedback and at the same time be quite terse,
Yes.
Quoteand drawing the "New Coke" comparison is actually an artful way to do just that. Just as a picture paints a thousand words, citing a specific past incident makes an analogy which is, again, remarkably clear to everyone here except you.
No.
But hey, the famous guy agreed with your opinion of a game! So keep on tying yourself in verbal knots to justify his insights.
Quote from: Ladybird;710334No.
Yes, you are just wholly ignorant of that debacle. Your responses PROVE that beyond ANY doubt.
Quote from: therealjcm;710314I avoided the books for a long time because I was convinced that all urban fantasy was nothing more than romance novels with sexy vampires and witches.
(It's still more as less true for everything aside from Dresden so far as I can see)
And werewolves. (Vampires and werewolves and witches, oh my!)
I'd love to see some UF out there that has NONE of those three, but I've not seen it yet.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;710344And werewolves. (Vampires and werewolves and witches, oh my!)
I'd love to see some UF out there that has NONE of those three, but I've not seen it yet.
There is some proto-UF, Imajica and American Gods, that don't have any of those things in the McSupernatural form of most UF.
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;710322I could understand how someone could not make the New-Coke connection.
It happened in 1985... 28 years ago? There is a whole generation out there that wasn't even born yet...
I'm sure every single MBA and brand manager in the world has heard of 'New Coke'. I learned about it in Marketing 101.
And for the argument about it being useless feedback, just stop. Anytime you hear 'New coke' in relation to something, it means that the powers that be think they know better than the consumers what they want. And they have every metric under the sun to back up their position. Except they are wrong. For whatever reason.
In WOTCs case, they listened to a vocal minority about what they wanted in a game and forgot that because of its market position as THE gateway RPG, D&D should be the most inclusive game under the sun. I think they at least understand this now. Can they deliver is the question though.
Quote from: therealjcm;710314I avoided the books for a long time because I was convinced that all urban fantasy was nothing more than romance novels with sexy vampires and witches.
(It's still more as less true for everything aside from Dresden so far as I can see)
(http://replygif.net/i/147.gif)
Quote from: Ladybird;710334It's not that I don't understand the reference he tried to make, it's just that it's stupid and isn't useful as feedback. No details of what exactly was wrong. No details of what worked. No details of which of WotC's design goals were met or failed, and how.
It would be pointless to provide such things if your major point of feedback is "your design goals are badly misconceived and you should scrap everything and rethink this whole project from the beginning." If you fundamentally disagree with the design goals then saying "here's how you can meet those goals better" is like saying "here's how you can jump off a cliff with more panache" - it might help the person receiving the feedback accomplish what they are trying to do, but it doesn't stop what they are trying to do being self-destructive.
But hey, the famous guy disagreed with your opinion of a game! So keep on tying yourself in verbal knots to pretend the comparison isn't appropriate.
Quote from: Ladybird;710334No.
But hey, the famous guy agreed with your opinion of a game! So keep on tying yourself in verbal knots to justify his insights.
I think that pointing out that the game is fine, but will probably piss off people that are expecting something more 'traditional' is pretty clear, good feedback.
I don't know that going into further detail in terms of "well, saving throws really don't mean what they used to" helps much. If anything, it dilutes the message.
And I say this as someone that likes 4e.
Quote from: jcfiala;710159I think he meant it in a sort of "There are no sequels to Highlander" way. :)
What do you mean? There are no sequels to Highlander.
Not. A. One.
Quote from: Daddy Warpig;710384What do you mean? There are no sequels to Highlander.
Not. A. One.
Someone once told me they saw one in a store, and pointed to a spot on the shelf where it supposedly was.
An empty spot on the shelf.
They were clearly hallucinating.
Quote from: robiswrong;710377And I say this as someone that likes 4e.
I also enjoyed 4e, and I too have to humbly concede the New Coke line is a flawless and pithy encapsulation.
Quote from: robiswrong;710391Someone once told me they saw one in a store, and pointed to a spot on the shelf where it supposedly was.
An empty spot on the shelf.
They were clearly hallucinating.
Some people of my acquaintance are also subject to this delusion. But of course they also believe in the Dune prequels and sequels hoax.
The "new coke" comment was interesting. It's both dismissive and snarky, and my immediate reaction had I read it as a developer would be to defensively dismiss it. However, the second reaction with a marketing hat on should have been to realise that it might be a representative reaction, and to take it seriously.
Still, I think that if Butcher had taken the time to write in more detail, with "new coke" as the punchline, it would have been more valuable feedback.
Yeah that's the problem. "New Coke" is both a pithy, snarky, throwaway line and a very detailed and accurate criticism depending on who wrote the comment and who read it.
If he thought that someone was going to read just "New Coke" and have an epiphany instead of tossing the paper in the trash, that's just silly.
He sure struck the bullseye though.
Quote from: CRKrueger;710415If he thought that someone was going to read just "New Coke" and have an epiphany instead of tossing the paper in the trash, that's just silly.
nah, he probably thought that it was a wake-up comment that was fairly obvious. makes sense to me, but certainly as can be seen here some folks are fairly clueless to its implications. maybe a US-centered comment? trying for benefit of the doubt, here. . . . :/
It hurts egos, sure. But good criticism before utter self-destruction needs to be ruthless. There is a reason to the saying "cruel to be kind," whether we like that truth or not.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;710312I've avoided Butcher's novels (Despite having two friends who are rabid fans) because the descriptions of the plots sounded extremely vanilla and twee, like actual play reports from some teenager's World of Darkness campaign that they ran at Church Camp one summer.
Well, I'm not one of your friends but I am a rabid Dresden fanboy and I can tell you that you're not wrong. You
are however,
missing out.
The plots and characters are formulaic. Intentionally.
Storm Front was written because his creative writing instructor told him that formulas worked and were still in use for a reason, so he sought out to write the biggest pile of clichés possible-- to prove to her how much that book would suck and that nobody would ever want to buy it.
He really showed her, eh?
Thing is, though, the execution is
brilliant. The fantasy wizard clichés and the noir detective clichés blend into interesting new textures and flavors, the characters show remarkable depth and growth as the series progresses, and the books are just incredible good
fun.
Quote from: FaerieGodfather;710430Well, I'm not one of your friends but I am a rabid Dresden fanboy and I can tell you that you're not wrong. You are however, missing out.
The plots and characters are formulaic. Intentionally. Storm Front was written because his creative writing instructor told him that formulas worked and were still in use for a reason, so he sought out to write the biggest pile of clichés possible-- to prove to her how much that book would suck and that nobody would ever want to buy it.
He really showed her, eh?
Thing is, though, the execution is brilliant. The fantasy wizard clichés and the noir detective clichés blend into interesting new textures and flavors, the characters show remarkable depth and growth as the series progresses, and the books are just incredible good fun.
Agreed. They are not high literature, but they are great and very difficult to put down. I am left a bit "eh?" with the amount that has been piled on the protagonist. To mix metaphors: when will we see the icing on the cake that breaks the camel`s back?
(back to thread now....)
Dune sequels? Non -Gygax Greyhawk stuff? Highlander sequels?
Oh my, I ended up amidst a bunch of delusional lunatics!
;-)
BTW, I think "New Coke" is a very clear feedback (no, it's not a US-only reference), they did not heed it because that's what they wanted IMHO (without the EPIC FAIL obviously).
Quote from: YourSwordisMine;710089The actual full interview is full of them. My favorite is:
"But yeah, I did the playtest for D&D 4th Edition, I wrote a two-word review. "New Coke" and sent it in to them. I hoped that would get through, but it didn't seem to."
This is why in my review for 4E for The Banning Place, I referred to that edition as New D&D and previous editions as D&D Classic.
JG
Quote from: James Gillen;710444This is why in my review for 4E for The Banning Place, I referred to that edition as New D&D and previous editions as D&D Classic.
JG
Whenever someone mentions New Coke I think of a GI Joe review someone showed me with an unmasked Cobra Commander clutching his smouldering face.
(http://www.stomptokyo.com/img-m5/gi-joe-the-movie-i.jpg)
"New Coke! It burns!"
(https://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/dreo_20071221a_4th.jpg)
"4th Edition D&D! It burns!! It burns!!!
Quote from: Omega;710503(https://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/dreo_20071221a_4th.jpg)
"4th Edition D&D! It burns!! It burns!!!
I do so love these elemental archons. I was never into zombies, orcs, goblins and other standard "horde" creatures, so these fit the bill nicely. Due to their prominent "military unit" theme it was pretty easy to scale them too.
I may not agree with Jim Butcher about rpgs, but man, I loved the Dresden file books. Easily one of my all time favorite series.
Quote from: CRKrueger;710415If he thought that someone was going to read just "New Coke" and have an epiphany instead of tossing the paper in the trash, that's just silly.
He knew whatever he wrote, at the point in time, would change nothing. As they had knowingly jumped the shark in their design and were NOT going to go back.
Quote from: Arduin;710642He knew whatever he wrote, at the point in time, would change nothing. As they had knowingly jumped the shark in their design and were NOT going to go back.
This. I'm sure he knew when he wrote it, that it would be little more than an "I told you so."
Quote from: Opaopajr;710426It hurts egos, sure. But good criticism before utter self-destruction needs to be ruthless. There is a reason to the saying "cruel to be kind," whether we like that truth or not.
Or indeed, whether one is intending to be kind or just cruel. :D
JG