Quote from: kryyst;346173However I do fully agree with you in that if this had been a positive review overall there'd have been no backlash.

Well, no backlash from the people who like the game. Those who have already decided they hate WFRP3 would dismiss a positive three paragraph review by someone who hasn't played the game as so much fluff.

That's why I keep coming back to this place; I can't avert my eyes from eruptions of nerd rage.

Quote from: Haffrung;346195So do you agree with Pundit that it was a serious review?

Yes, it clearly was. There was nothing wrong with that review, it did exactly what it set out to do, i.e. evaluate a product in three paragraphs.

QuoteMy sense is that Pundit hates the very idea of WFRP3 so much that he considers any negative review to be serious, and any positive review to be fluff.

Its possible, although to be honest, it is not an issue I really care about.

QuoteThose of us who aren't as emotionally biased on the matter may have different ideas of what constitutes a serious review.

You do not seem particularly emotional unbiased, you just seem biased in an opposite direction to the Pundit.

Quote from: jadrax;346199You do not seem particularly emotional unbiased, you just seem biased in an opposite direction to the Pundit.

Let's see. I like WFRP1 and WFRP2. WFRP3 doesn't sound like a game I would like to  play. I don't intend to buy it.

On the other hand, I don't think FFG are a bunch of villains who are out to destroy my fun. And I also think that regardless of how I feel about WFRP3, it could very well be a successful game from FFG's point of view. They have a strong track record of selling big-box fantasy games, and frankly, they don't need a whole bunch of WFRP 1E & 2& fans to come aboard for 3E to be successful.

I think that last point is something that a lot of geeks have a tough time reconciling: sometimes there's no viable market for the games they enjoy, and conversely, a company may be smart to make games they personally don't like.

But no, the company must be stupid. Or malignant. So the angry geek wants them to fail.

Funny thing is, I only see that attitude with RPGers. Not wargamers. Not euro boardgamers. Only RPGers routinely express resentment and malice towards game publishers. Why? That question is probably worth its own thread.

Quote from: jadrax;346158A BIG, empty box.

Apparently, the excuse is that they made all this empty space so that people could put future supplement material in there.

RPGpundit

Quote from: Haffrung;346162You call a review from someone who apparently hasn't played the game a real review?

Note that here I am not commenting on the specific review in question, but yes, a review does not require that you play the game. It requires that you thoroughly read the text of the game, and consider its mechanics, setting, and the value and possible errors of the same.
Generally speaking, actual play gains very little insight when it comes to review-value, and can often confuse the issues because it brings in the factors of GM competence, GM interpretation, the player group's coherence and quality, etc etc. all things that have FUCK ALL to do with the game-as-written.

RPGPundit

Quote from: kryyst;346173I think the question isn't so much a case of if he's played it.  But more to the point if he even read the rules.  Reading the review it seems more a case of cracked the box flipped a few pages and made comment.

Ah, now this is a different point altogether. Yes, the review was quite scarce. Its not the sort of attention I'd have given to a review, for example.

QuoteHowever I do fully agree with you in that if this had been a positive review overall there'd have been no backlash.

Of course.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Haffrung;346195So do you agree with Pundit that it was a serious review?

My sense is that Pundit hates the very idea of WFRP3 so much that he considers any negative review to be serious, and any positive review to be fluff. Those of us who aren't as emotionally biased on the matter may have different ideas of what constitutes a serious review.

Look again, Peppy. I never said it was a serious review.  What I did say is that I would give it a serious review, and that a serious review does not seem to be what FFG wants.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;346239Look again, Peppy. I never said it was a serious review.  What I did say is that I would give it a serious review, and that a serious review does not seem to be what FFG wants.

RPGPundit

You just want $100 of free gear...

Quote from: jadrax;346199You do not seem particularly emotional unbiased, you just seem biased in an opposite direction to the Pundit.

Psst.. he's not biased FOR WFRP3e, he's biased AGAINST me.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Haffrung;346212Funny thing is, I only see that attitude with RPGers. Not wargamers. Not euro boardgamers. Only RPGers routinely express resentment and malice towards game publishers. Why? That question is probably worth its own thread.

Well then, for fuck's sake start it!

RPGPundit

Here's a rather lengthy and seemingly thorough review from Strike-to-stun

http://www.strike-to-stun.net/wfrp/2009/12/warhammer-fantasy-roleplay-3rd-edition-review

Quote from: Haffrung;346212Funny thing is, I only see that attitude with RPGers. Not wargamers. Not euro boardgamers. Only RPGers routinely express resentment and malice towards game publishers. Why? That question is probably worth its own thread.

Then you live in a fucking fantasy world.

Quote from: RPGPundit;346245Psst.. he's not biased FOR WFRP3e, he's biased AGAINST me.

RPGPundit

That is precisely what I meant, apparently I was unclear.

Quote from: Haffrung;346212They have a strong track record of selling big-box fantasy games, and frankly, they don't need a whole bunch of WFRP 1E & 2& fans to come aboard for 3E to be successful.

They have a strong track record of failing to sell Roleplaying Games.

QuoteI think that last point is something that a lot of geeks have a tough time reconciling: sometimes there's no viable market for the games they enjoy, and conversely, a company may be smart to make games they personally don't like.

This fucking lie again. WFRP had sales that for a role-playing game, where outstanding. pretty much the second best Fantasy Role-play game according the the sales figures I have seen. (That was pre Pathfinder, so I would estimate that it would now be considered the third best). Two companies apart from FFG that I know of were organising to put in a bid when BI closed its doors, that was not people chasing a game with no viable market.

Quote from: Haffrung;346212But no, the company must be stupid. Or malignant. So the angry geek wants them to fail.

False surmise of the facts. FFG bought WFRP and screwed it over to ell their new game. That is not stupid, or malignant per say. It is however 100% opposed to many peoples own goals.

QuoteFunny thing is, I only see that attitude with RPGers. Not wargamers. Not euro boardgamers. Only RPGers routinely express resentment and malice towards game publishers. Why? That question is probably worth its own thread.

Apparently you fail at surfing the internet. Go look at threads on Warhammer Fantasy Battle to pick the obvious contender then report back.

The whole thing about how 2e was selling poorly is a myth as far as I'm concerned. I haven't seen anything to back that myth up.