More from GEnie
Replies:
- #3124 Re: (3119) More from GEnie by Shannon D. Appel
More from GEnie...I'll send my response to the last here to the TML, too,
when it gets written. If you have comments, I'll send them back that way.
Rob
************
Topic 3 Thu Jun 01, 1989
J.FUGATE at 18:48 MDT
Sub: MegaTraveller - General Discussions
This topic is to be a catch-all topic for any discussion that doesn't fit in
any other topic.
************
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 397 Sun Nov 17, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff] at 02:27 EST
Let me first say that, despite my e-mail address, I was NOT speaking as
a DGP representative when I made my comment. I have very little to do
with the MT side of DGP.
Having said that...
Don't you think that y'all are being a little pessimistic here? You
really don't know all of the particulars as to what these changes
will entail. You Do know that there will be a new system (the T2K/
DC/CAD system) and if you don't like the game system than I could
understand your complaints. You also know A LITTLE about what the
new setting will be but probably not enough to make definite judgements
about it.
Personally, I'm anxious to see what is done with the new game. I never
much liked the old system myself and found it difficult to relate to.
Everything is spread out over so many different supplements it was
nearly impossible to have somebody pick it up and play it without
somebody else around who had been doing it since day one.
Given the time you all have spent on this game I guess I can see
that more change can be a very frightening thing and maybe you feel
like you're being abandoned by GDW. I think that maybe you should
look at the alternative though. Let's say that there wasn't going to
be any changes... how long do you think the game would last? Or maybe
you think that you have better ideas of how it could be changed...
well, it's not your game.
I wasn't trying to flame you guys or anything by saying that I thought
that you were whining but I would think that you would be more positive
about it. Things could be worse. Look at me, I'm still hoping that there
is a future for 2300AD...
I've said enough. I'll go away now.
- Jay
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 398 Sun Nov 17, 1991
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W.] at 12:49 EST
One of the things we want VERY much is customer input, which we are seeking
through several sources...one of those sources is GEnie. If anyone has
concerns about what we are doing, or suggestions, or questions, complaints,
comments , suggestions, or whatever, we want to hear them.
Let me point out one thing that seems to be generating some mis-
understanding here: we will not be changing over to the Twilight: 2000
background history, just a variant of the rule mechanics. We want to re-
instill the original excitement the game engendered, cleaning up rules
problems and smoothing out hastles.
If we change nothing, and let things go along as they are, one of the
longest running RPGs will slowly go down the drain, and we will not allow that
to happen.
The upcoming RTC (time to be announced) will explain what plans are, and I
would appreciate it if people would wait until they find out what we plan on
doing before commenting...reacting to rumors or speculations won't do anybody
any good.
Loren Wiseman
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 399 Sun Nov 17, 1991
B.BORICH [LA TERRORIST] at 12:53 EST
<3 revisions in 15 years> Is actually about par for the course, at least
for those RPG's that survived that long :). Although I would say the second
revision was incomplete, in more ways than one.
<2 revisions in 5 years> Offhand I can't think of an RPG that hasn't been
revised in five years, though I will say that traveller has done it in reverse
compared to most. By this I mean that most RPG's go into their 2nd edition
within the first five years, the third by fifteen years. This is by all the
examples I can think of. (this covers GDW, FASA, TSR, Chaosium, Columbia
Games, FGU, the possible exception is WEG who I'm not familiar with all that
much).
<Revision> Most people have wanted parts of MT revised in the first place,
the only possible complaint might be seeing parts other than those wanted
revised. And the fact that it's coming about 1-2 years earlier than expected.
<Columbia games never having a major revision> That's a matter of opinion,
I've lost track of their revisions, but I've seen parts of it revised three
times, not even including new information in later versions of an edition that
wasn't in the first edition. In my opinion they were worse than a lot of other
companies till they settled down somewhat.
<T2000/DC> I like the character generation system used by these games
(well at least DC with which I'm slightly more familiar), my only possible
complaint would be retaining some of the flavor of the current system. I also
like aspects of the combat system.
Am I taking GDW's part in this, well maybe, I think some of the changes
might be in the right direction, I think other parts are in the wrong
direction, will I buy the product, I don't know. Will I buy Star Vikings,
almost definitely not. Do I like the new future, almost definitely not, but
part of that's because I have severe doubts about GDW carrying it out well,
and whether such a future is 'realistic' in terms of the Traveller universe. I
think the background should be seperated from the rules in this case with
three possibilities (no rebellion, rebellion, post rebellion).
All I've seen is people complain about the state of affairs (me included,
so I don't want to hear about it). All I can say is that if your unwilling or
unable to put some effort in, you'se get what you pay for. It's easy to
complain, it's harder to provide constructive alternatives, if GDW doesn't get
constructive alternatives they have to do what they think is best. And I
definitely agree with them that the rules need an overhaul (just thinking on
how long HIWG's Starship group has taken to get the rules figured out
correctly for one, and I'm still awaiting an errata free version of the MT
rules).
So if you guys want to complain, suggest alternatives to GDW so they can
get it right. And I haven't seen one person who hasn't wanted parts of MT
revised because of problems.
As for editing problems, well MT probably had more than it's fair share of
problems, but than I've seen very few 1st editions without editing problems or
something missing. Hopefully GDW takes more time proofreading this time.
Usually the problem is a company trying to rush out the product by GenCon or
Origins (or Christmas). In this respect gaming companies and computer software
companies have a lot in common.
This doesn't mean I'm not going to b___h and complain along with the rest
of you guys, it does mean I will try to offer constructive criticism to GDW,
and hopefully they will have a more active presence telling what they have in
mind, so that others can stick there two cents in (unless of course they get
turned off by the hatemail).
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 400 Sun Nov 17, 1991
M.MIKESH at 16:21 EST
I dislike the idea of a third revision of Traveller, yet I
welcome it if it helps assure stronger support.
I'm one of those people who would rather see Traveller go back to
its space black covers and classic rules system. I loved the idea of
a largely static frontier backdrop, a canvass upon a which a referee
could devise his own campaign as inspired by his favorite SF books and
films. The game had a lot of charm.
But I also want new products with which to support my campaign.
I'd prefer additional volumes in the same vein as THE TRAVELLER
ADVENTURE. Those days are over. So, my choice is to dig in my heels
and buy nothing, or buy what GDW gives us and like it. I opt for the
later.
Am I some whimp who won't put up a fight? No. Its just that
after several meetings with Marc and contact with Loren and other
staffers, I think I see GDW's side in this. If you open Frank
Chadwick's office door, you are not going to see him gleefully
counting stacks of coins. The folks at Game Designer's Workshop
didn't start as visionary businessmen with hopes of making their
fortune. Rather, they have a passion for games, as a lot of us do.
And therein lies the problem.
I believe Loren. GDW does pay close attention to comments, and
cares very much about fan opinion. I know feedback letters and
convention discussions have influenced their actions on many
occasions. But they are also in this for their own enjoyment,
something I didn't appreciate until reading remarks from Joe Fugate
(TS20). Since they're not in it for the (non-existant) bags of money,
then they're in it for the fun. And we have to allow for it.
In short, we should respect their desires if we expect them to
remain receptive to our's.
MIKE
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 401 Sun Nov 17, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff] at 16:49 EST
I'm glad to see that my initial post has provided a springboard for open
discussion. It's surprising how much of this has already been talked about on
other systems or through e-mail but not here. If Joe or Rob have plans for the
RTC night, I'll be there myself because I am very interested in what will be
said by all who attend.
- - Jay
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 402 Sun Nov 17, 1991
C.FAGO1 [Carl Fago] at 21:26 EST
Mike,
With regard to being us respecting their desires...
One note I would interject is that it is _my_ money that I am spending. I
expect the most from any product I buy and am disappointed (in various
degrees) when the product fails to live up to my expectation (based on hear-
say, price, and review).
So if a business expects _my_ dollar, I don't see that _I_ should have to
compromise. And any business that expects this is going to fail. Harsh
reality of the business world.
*-=Carl=-*
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 403 Sun Nov 17, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean] at 22:26 EST
Right you are, Carl. Part of the problem, as I see it, is that there are too
many people who have already had a bad experience with Traveller in one form
or another. These people will not be likely to buy the revision, and will
also provide negative word of mouth advertising to those who might be
considering the game. I know that it's already a problem at my local store,
where people decide not to buy the system when they ask me about modules: I
can't recommend things like Fighting Ships or COACC in good conscience, and
have no incentive to do so in any other way since I'm not one of the store's
owners or employees.
Even now, some of the best products, like the World Builder's Handbook, are
unavailable, which is also a problem. "What do I need to start?" "Well,
you'll want the World Builder's Handbook, but it's out of print, a couple of
simple starting adventures, but there aren't any, and the rules. Oh yeah,
with the rules, make sure you've got all seventeen pages of the errata sheets,
because you can't play the game without them. The Ref's Screen is helpful, but
it isn't available any more, and you should avoid the Fighting Ships and 101
Vehicles books because most of the stuff breaks the rules." I exaggerate
somewhat for effect, but a speech like that is not likely to cause a new
prospect to drop the thrity dollars he's clutching, except maybe on the Star
Wars rpg.
So, the new revision is going to have to work hard to overcome a backlog of
resentment. What are the odds, I wonder, against needing/wanting tons of
Original Traveller stuff to play T3? As it is now, I regularly use the
original Aliens modules, Mayday, and sections of the rules like Trade and
Commerce.
Call me a whiner if you like, but I see these sorts of things as a real
problem.
Rob Dean
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 404 Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff] at 00:41 EST
Rob,
So what would you want if it were all up to you? No, really. You don't sound
too happy with the current game as it stands so do you think that GDW should
just call it quits and just be happy things lasted this long?
The reason I used the term "whining" is because there has been almost NO
positive responses to the announced game. Most people are saying why they
AREN'T going to buy it. Have any of you taken a good look at 2nd Ed. Twilight
2000 or Dark Conspiracy? They may not be your roleplaying cup of tea, but they
are a remarkable improvement over Megatraveller and even 2300AD. The system
works very well and has alot of playtesting behind it now. It seems like
Megatraveller has been one long attempt to fill the gaps and correct the
mistakes. Don't you think it will be nice to wipe the slate clean and start
again and maybe, just maybe, get it closer to right on the first try? The more
I think about it, the more excited I get!
Well, I hope that I haven't grated on anybody here to bad with my playing
"devil's advocate."
Jay
------------
Category 11, Topic 3
Message 405 Mon Nov 18, 1991
J.FUGATE at 04:13 EST
As the person mostly responsible for the MegaTraveller revision and the
revised craft design system, perhaps I can shed some light on things?
I am painfully aware of the mess I made of certain parts of the MegaTraveller
system, and in my own opinion, several of the rules sections do not work out
very well in practice. My biggest problem was I knew the game well, and wrote
the revision for a gamer who was a familiar with the game as me. BIG mistake.
I have talked with Marc over the last two years that a revision of the
Traveller rules/background is in order -- partly to clean up the mess I made
of the MT revision. GDW introduced a lot of typos in MT, besides the mistakes
I made -- but I've also seen their typo problem improve remarkably over the
last 2-3 years. The latest release of the Twilight:2000 rules is of excellent
quality -- you have to really look to find ANY typos.
Speaking as a business person for a moment, GDW's move to revise the game
rules makes all kinds of sense. The revision will quite likely bring in NEW
gamers -- something Traveller desperately needs if it is going to survive.
GDW is also watching the gaming market, and trying to get in the new, younger
gamer. Us old-timers don't necessarily go in for the darker, more violent,
less structured environments that the young gamers go in for. But if GDW wants
Traveller to continue to live on, it will have to appeal to the new gamer.
Still, many loyal fans of the game currently exist. Speaking for myself, the
new direction with the background oriented toward the younger gamer does not
appeal to me (one reason DGP is going into hold mode on Traveller publishing).
GDW is clever, though, and I would expect them (hi Loren and Chuck) to
include a slant on the background to also intrigue us old-timers too. Seems
kind of dumb to alienate your current audience just to appeal to the new
crowd.
Just what that slant will be isn't yet clear, but I KNOW they are getting the
message. Perhaps some of you clever GEnie gamers could come up with a slant
that pleases all the gamers, old and new alike? I'd like to see the discussion
take that direction myself. I always prefer constructive discussions...
- --Joe Fugate, DGP
P.S. I do believe that AI has the right mix for the old and new gamer alike.
But then, I'm not exactly unbiased.
------------
************
Topic 29 Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff] at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List
You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
1 new messages.
************
------------
Category 11, Topic 29
Message 1 Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff] at 00:47 EST
Okay, I did it. I started a new topic in hopes of promoting more positive
discussion of the upcoming Traveller revision.
This topic is specifically for putting down ideas about what you would like
to see in the new Traveller. Mayeb even things you DON'T want to see as long
as you stay positive about it. You can use this area to help collect your
thoughts about this in preparation for the upcoming RTC.
I would prefer not to see any explanations about "why I'm not buying the new
game."
'nuff said. Use it or don't :)
Jay
------------