Sode #23: The 7 Things we hate about the Game-o-sphere (Meta 06)

[Darth Krzysztof]

I've now finished the episode and I for one will be grateful when you guys get back to cursing instead of the "pumpkin" thing. Part of what I love about listening to the podcasts is that it really does remind me of sitting around talking with you guys in person and the "pumpkin" thing was so cutesy and false that it really detracted for me personally.

At first, I was sure that "pumpkin" was the secret code being transmitted conspiciously. (That's doing something suspicious in a conspicuous way, btw.)

[Kai]

At first, I was sure that "pumpkin" was the secret code being transmitted conspiciously. (That's doing something suspicious in a conspicuous way, btw.)

I thought so too.

[Josh]

I like to listen to Ed Greenwood speak.   He is like listening to Sarah Palin or Bill O'Rielly.  Sooner or later he say something so stupid is hilarious.

He also has a "credible" voice, that's why people think he is smart.

My take on the Harpers was that they were an attempt to take the idea of factions from Rifts and Planescape and put them in the realms. But they wound up being the only thing in D&D more annoying than Kender.

Like kender, the only problem with the Harpers is the people who play/run them. "O NOES! Kender! They're going to steal all my shit and ruin my game!" Right.

And no, the Harpers don't owe anything to Rifts and Planescape factions. They've been around longer than that.

Cheers,
Cam

The Harpers and Kender (or all of Dragonlance for that matter) are simplistic in their construction.  I hesitate to call it juvenile because I expect more from juveniles. 

Yes, people who are jerks will act like jerks.  Yes, people who are not jerks will not be jerks.  AND Harpers are a stupid idea. 

Not exclusive ideas.

[Talen Lee]

Yeah, Juveniles are creatively destructive.

[otherdoc]

 
I have to say, of course, the episode was freaking hysterical, as always.  I loved the commercial and could not stop laughing uncontrollably because of it (this may have caused a permanent injury, but if so, it was well worth it -- particularly if it lets me claim disability one day -- but I digress).

And now, here are my reactions to the Master Hate List...

(Jim rolls up his sleeves, dons his riot gear and locks his face-shield into position.)

1. Douchebaggery - I think we can all agree that talking out of the wrong orifice is an unpleasant thing to bear witness to.  For such a thing to spark debate is, to me, a good thing.  I agree that people should give a voice to their disagreements (okay, I just read that sentence again and I feel the irony creeping up on me but I'm going to leave it in anyway).  However, I am curious about something, since I am only just now getting into the whole bulletin board thing: do you usually call them douchebags right off the bat or do you go ahead and have the debate with them first before deciding whether or not they fall into that category?  It's all well and good to try to shock someone into paying attention to you if it's truly necessary but I would think that if you started name-calling right out of the gate then it seems to me that folks would be a lot less open to hearing your argument.  Or do the climates of most boards leave you no choice in the matter of grabbing peoples' attention but to lead with a fist and a megaphone?

2. Ed Greenwood - I really haven't read a lot about Forgotten Realms or Mr. Greenwood, but there are some basic things that I did recognize that were mentioned (the Harpers, Elminster, etc.), and I think that may be a symptom of how all-pervading FR has become.  In some conventions' game rooms you can't throw a rock without hitting someone who's playing in that setting (and then running cackling from the room before security arrives).  That said, I can see what you're talking about with respect to the attitude of Story-above-System that may have been brought along with it.  Now, I will say that I do not think that overzealous adherence to the rules by players or GMs should get in the way of the players and GM having a good time (because one would think having a good time is the point of playing a game of any kind in the first place), but at the same time I agree that there does have to be consistency and that any changes made need to be clear and reflect that consistency.  I think of that as a much better approach than just brushing the rules aside when it's convenient.  A magical land filled with exciting locales and fantastical creatures tends not to be so impressive to the players if they're getting bitchslapped from one end of it to the other.  Heck, even diceless RPGs have rules.  As a side note I should also mention that a friend of mine recently commented that the setup of Faerun violates basic laws of human nature by having wildly contrasting civilizations living next to each other without any but the most basic interaction between them (which I'm guessing mostly consists of adventurers traveling from zone to zone while the rest of the inhabitants stay put, like in an MMORPG).  Like I said, I don't have a huge degree of familiarity with the setting, but if Ed Greenwood is truly guilty of forcing his narrative to that extent then as a bearded gentleman it is my duty to also vote that he should be Disbearded.
I also liked the idea that elderly, all-knowing fantasy wizards can be defined by their degrees of separation from Gandalf.  But if that's true then does that mean Gandalf is in turn a knockoff of Merlin?  Is Merlin really a cheap copy of Hermes Trismegistus?  (Gah!  Must stop!!  Infinity!!!  The pain!!!!  The pain!!!!!)  But in any case, you could so easily create an X-degrees-of-Gandalf game out of this...

3. Video “Gamers” - I, too, have been frustrated whenever I try to look for something to do with role-playing games when searching the web and get inundated with ads for MMORPGs and flight simulators until I end up having to type in things like "D&D" to get something even close to the kinds of results I'm looking for (and even THEN, I have to filter through the D&D Online crowd!  Er, such as they are...).  And then, of course, in public people think I'm either talking about video games or casinos -- I do really wish, by the way, that the PR people for casinos hadn't decided that they needed to push the term "gaming" because people have started being afraid to call themselves "gamblers" as though it means that they have a "problem."  Damn it, I want my descriptor back!

4. World of Darkness - I have to say that I have enjoyed both running and playing games in both the old and new World of Darkness.  However, I can see your point because in each case the REASON I've enjoyed it has had nothing to do with the system.  It's been because of the setting -- and in truth, I should more precisely say our own ADAPTATIONS of the setting.  Like most GMs, I usually drop things out that I don't like and add things that I do.  Now, one thing that I tend to be guilty of is being a continuity freak (which means that their metaplot caused the acquisition of WoD books to become a terrifying addiction for me that filled my bookshelves to the groaning point -- that is, until Deadlands came along and helped shift my focus a bit; to this day, I sometimes jokingly refer to Deadlands as the game that cured me of the World of Darkness) and I will usually find ways of incorporating things that are in the books, but I will also usually have to adapt what's presented so that it makes more sense in the context of the game at hand.  Incidentally, when I get the opportunity I am thinking about trying out your suggestion to use the Burning Wheel for the World of Darkness (though I realize your suggestion was to use it for Vampire specifically, I'm more curious to see how it will do with Changeling -- one day when the stars are right and I've had the time to read through all of the Burning Wheel and everyone's schedules line up -- so, probably some time after the next millennium hits).

5. Gaming Reviews - I have to say that I agree with pretty much everything you said about reviews -- while it might help me a little to see how much person A or person B liked something, it doesn't really tell me anything about the game itself.  I think the best thing to do here would be to continue leading by example - I very much like the fact that your reviews break down the elements of a game into categories and that you discuss each category seperately.

6. Fear the Boot - Okay, here we go.  First off, I have to say I do enjoy listening to Fear the Boot.  I think that while there is a lot they get wrong and there are a lot of things they say that I don't agree with, there is also a lot that they get right and there are a lot of things they say that I do agree with.  I don't know that they're necessarily quite as full of themselves as you're suggesting.  The impression I get from listening to them is just that they enjoy talking about their hobby and they have a good time doing it in a podcast format.  And to tell the truth, that's why I like listening to them.  True, most of what they say and do is based on opinion, but I'd still like to hear it - just because someone hasn't crossed every "t" and dotted every "i" doesn't mean they should be silent.  It just means that the correct information should also be out there and available as well.  And, as I see it, guys, that's why you're here.  You and Fear the Boot balance each other out on the Cosmic Podcast Wheel (and one day, your two podcasts will fight in the eternal arena and the world will be consumed in the fires of Ragnarok!  Or something like that...)
As a side note, I should probably also mention that the first gaming podcast I started listening to (that wasn't run by WotC) was Brilliant Gameologists -- I was curious about other podcasts as well and I found out about Fear the Boot through your web site, specifically the entry on the spoof contest, where you refer to it as "one of our favorite podcasts."  I had gotten up to the present with your podcast and was wanting to start listening to a second podcast and figured that since you guys liked it enough to enter its spoof contest, I'd check it out.  Now, I didn't actually LISTEN to the spoof until I got up to the episodes of FtB in which they were announcing the contest because I figured it'd be helpful to have the full context so I could get all the jokes (again, I'm a continuity freak, what can I say?), but when I did I realized that you might not have liked the show quite as much as I'd imagined.  And of course, to be perfectly frank, not long after I started listening to them it became pretty clear that you and FtB tend towards espousing very different gaming philosophies.  I don't really think that's a bad thing, though, because if only one philosophy were ever given a voice then that'd be a bit too totalitarian for my taste (though I do sympathize with Zeke's disappointment at not having been able to open his Christmas presents under the Kremlin). 

7. Brilliant.  I cannot think of a better way for you to have ended the show.  Absolutely hysterical.  I loved it.

Holy crap, this was a long post.  I think I'm going to go and rest now.

-- Jim

[Chris_fromtheBX]

 I hate a couple of things that weren't mentioned in the podcast but are my personal observations:

1) First I hate the guys who walk into the FLGS  perpetuating the stereotype of unwashed cat-piss man who banished himself from the village of soap years ago. And then the guy walks up to talk to you and shoot the breeze about the book you have picked up in the store hoping to get you to join his game. When what you are hoping is to get him a Irish Spring on a rope or shove a bar of dove in his " pumpkin".

2) Next. On the douche bag front, I hate the GM that yells at and is a tyrannical overbearing jerk with his players. I have encountered this up close and personal and walked away from it. To him you simply aren't playing right unless its his way of doing so. Everything must be done to appease and cater to such a person. Because he has an extraordinary temper.Players walk on eggshells around him while he calls them idiots for not housekeeping their characters or coming in late due to family reasons.  The GM  in question never wants to hang out and socialize with his players unless its at his place so inviting him out is a waste of time  and his simply miserable most of time when gaming doesn't take place.

 And when games are canceled the guy throws a raging fit let alone when the absences result in players not remembering what was done last game. But then the reason the person is tolerated..the only reason... is that he has a gift of storytelling. A fantastic gift but overshadowed by the sad fact that he has alienated at least three iterations of groups, or jettisoned them only to start another and not repair the friendships. If he considered them friends at all in hindsight and not ingredients as part of the "fix" he needs.


3) Players who expect to be entertained  but have no consideration of the prep time or work it takes to put a game together and act likes jerks when games don't go off to their expectations. They actually pull out magazines in the middle of play or comic books while you are running a sessions. Or rudely interject when not given screen time/ face time to talk about said book or comic to another player while running the session.

[arioch]

Just wanted to add a quick comment about Sode#23. It was brilliant. Particularly I was impressed at your commitment to speaking openly and honestly about what is shit about Gaming. While I also listen to Fear the Boot and enjoy the banter, I do wonder at some of the hypocritical pomposity I hear.

Thanks for the balls-to-wall commentary. Really looking forward to the return of the swearing. While I agree in principle with at least one of the previous posters that swearing is not funny in and of itself, it is funny when its in an unexpected context (it makes your show irreverent) and sometimes it IS funny and adds punch.

Keep up the Brilliance!

[Highmoon]

Though just for full disclosure, we of course try to make the promo stuff for the episode worse than it actually is.

After having listened to the episode, I don't think it was; the episode was much worse.

I don't have an opinion on your hate of FTB; that's your opinion and it's as valid as any, not to mention that given my association with the show I'm hardly unbiased.

My personal issue with the episode is on why you had to go there in the first place. You have passionate thoughts on the show? Awesome, send them to the show, engage in a dialogue. And mind you, it's not that you did not have valid points that could have served to open up great conversations, it's the way you chose to deliver them.

What you did there? IMO, not cool. In almost three years of gaming podcasting this is the first time I see this kind of hate between shows/podcasters, and it's just lamentable.

[Josh]

Though just for full disclosure, we of course try to make the promo stuff for the episode worse than it actually is.

After having listened to the episode, I don't think it was; the episode was much worse.

I don't have an opinion on your hate of FTB; that's your opinion and it's as valid as any, not to mention that given my association with the show I'm hardly unbiased.

My personal issue with the episode is on why you had to go there in the first place. You have passionate thoughts on the show? Awesome, send them to the show, engage in a dialogue. And mind you, it's not that you did not have valid points that could have served to open up great conversations, it's the way you chose to deliver them.

What you did there? IMO, not cool. In almost three years of gaming podcasting this is the first time I see this kind of hate between shows/podcasters, and it's just lamentable.

Open, honest, objective, criticism between adults.  And it replaces passive aggressiveness and backstabbing.  Is that lamentable?

As for talking to the show about criticism, if they were that interested in self improvement we would not, could not, have a problem.  We receive worse criticism all the time.

Most people have taken us to task for going too easy on FtB, you're the only person who has actually tried to understand the issue who thinks differently.  And that is called the bell curve. 

ps- As much as people might like to believe, this is not a matter of opinion. 

[Highmoon]

Open, honest, objective, criticism between adults.  And it replaces passive aggressiveness and backstabbing.  Is that lamentable?

Give me a break, Josh. "Open, honest, objective, criticism between adults" would have been an email between all of you and all the FTB hosts with all the same points expressed without the morning-drive-show hate-travaganza. How is you calling them out on your show, a show called "things we hate," where they are going to learn the reasons after you have expressed them without a chance for a rebuttal that doesn't appear as falling into childish you-dissed-me-now-I-dissed-you crap not passive aggressive and (to be frank a bit backstabby)?

Again, I've no problem with you expressing whatever you want to express in the manner you want to express it. Just don't yell and say you're whispering.

As for talking to the show about criticism, if they were that interested in self improvement we would not, could not, have a problem.  We receive worse criticism all the time.

Here's a question: we were all together at Gen Con. I seriously doubt this is a bug that crawled up your proverbial butt in the time since GC and the ep. Did you think to bring up the issues with them face-to-face then?

Most people have taken us to task for going too easy on FtB, you're the only person who has actually tried to understand the issue who thinks differently.  And that is called the bell curve.

As I said, I can hardly be perceived as unbiased in this matter. I like FTB and that is no secret. I like the individuals who have been/make a part of FTB and that is no secret. I've been the first one to take them to task when they have needed the criticism, and they can all confirm that, past and present hosts alike. I honestly don't care what your opinions of the show are because TO ME they are irrelevant. I take issue with the way you decided to broadcast them, and the sudden pee stain in the otherwise affable pool that gaming podcasting has been to this point.

I also don't have a problem breaking a bell curve. I personally like more the liner progression of a d20.  ;-)

ps- As much as people might like to believe, this is not a matter of opinion.

I think it is, but I'd like to know how it is not.

[Meg]

Open, honest, objective, criticism between adults.  And it replaces passive aggressiveness and backstabbing.  Is that lamentable?

Give me a break, Josh. "Open, honest, objective, criticism between adults" would have been an email between all of you and all the FTB hosts with all the same points expressed without the morning-drive-show hate-travaganza. How is you calling them out on your show, a show called "things we hate," where they are going to learn the reasons after you have expressed them without a chance for a rebuttal that doesn't appear as falling into childish you-dissed-me-now-I-dissed-you crap not passive aggressive and (to be frank a bit backstabby)?

Again, I've no problem with you expressing whatever you want to express in the manner you want to express it. Just don't yell and say you're whispering.

As for talking to the show about criticism, if they were that interested in self improvement we would not, could not, have a problem.  We receive worse criticism all the time.

Here's a question: we were all together at Gen Con. I seriously doubt this is a bug that crawled up your proverbial butt in the time since GC and the ep. Did you think to bring up the issues with them face-to-face then?

...

 I take issue with the way you decided to broadcast them, and the sudden pee stain in the otherwise affable pool that gaming podcasting has been to this point.

Ok, here's where I get confused. 

Yes, we named FtB as one of the myriad of things we hate in the Game-o-sphere. 

But to call it "lamentable" and a pee stain in the pool of gaming podcasting, to me, is just melodramatic.

How is it "much worse" to podcast and say "We hate what Fear the Boot stands for.  We have no problem with them as people, and in fact, are really just using them as an example of a tendency we hate in gaming podcasting in general and are using them as the example because they are a big name and popular" and throw in a few compliments along the way than twittering/ posting "We hate Fear the Boot"?  I see the latter as worse because it is an irrational statement with no backing.  The former gives qualifications and doesn't make it personal.

Also-- I don't know how anyone could take any of it too seriously after we poked fun at several podcasts (all who thought it was hilarious and complimented us), made it known our "opinions" don't mesh well with the norms with our hatred of Ed Greenwood and World of Darkness, and then saved the biggest "hate" for last-- ourselves. 

I'm all for well thought out opinions, feedback, and suggestions.  Other podcasts have talked about us on their show and we've loved it and got into great banter because of it (I was told to put on my "big boy pants" on This Modern Death).  And I DO separate the product of a podcast with the people behind the mics.  Critiquing the product isn't personal.  And as an example of this- even though we obviously don't see eye to eye on this Daniel, I value your feedback, I appreciate it and I still think you are the nicest guy in the podcasting realm. 

Everyone doesn't have to agree.  That's not one of the rules.  I've made great friends over debating and arguing and value that very much.  A podcast is an internet media and by putting it out on a feed, you've got to separate yourself from the product.  I think I actually learned that early on from the guys at Fear the Boot. 

[Zeke]

The thing I regret is that I incorrectly guessed Dan's age. It made it seem as though I was being flippant when I said I did not hate him personally. I really have only met him twice but both times he seemed decent.

I feel that we did give reasons for our displeasure with FTB, ( and as Meg pointed out,  FTB was really a stand in for a wider trend in the gaming podosphere) and that many of those reasons are valid.

[jcm]

The ftb criticism may have actually been useful to them (if they are aware of it), they just put out their first enjoyable (to me) episode in a long time. They went back to what was good about the show, high energy bs and banter. For the first time since Luke left, they actually sounded like they were enjoying themselves behind the mics.

[Highmoon]

Meg, from where I was sitting, it sounded like there were some personal zingers amidst the we're-using-you-as-a-stand-in-for-a-trend-in-podcasting statements. It could be just me, which is why my feedback is all about me (egoist bastard that I am).

If there is a trend in current gaming podcasting that irks you, and FTB serves as an example, be bold and name other names as well. Say, "FTB does this, but they are not alone, as X, Y and Z are also guilty of such asshattery." Make it about the issue and various of its perpetrators, but don't single one out then seek absolution by saying they are only an example, cause it doesn't come across as such.

I must also confess that I am a certifiable Drama Queen, so perfect call on the melodrama in that one sentence.
Still, understand that, while there have certainly been scuffles behind the scenes in a number of podcasts and among a number of podcasters in the past 3 years, they have all been behind the scenes. Your episode is, to my knowledge, the first time this gets done in public, and personally I did not like that. It's entirely hypocritical in the sense that I have never gotten annoyed at people lobbying hate at other things in the hobby, like Rifts, Palladium, Kevin Siembieda (wait, there's a pattern there), D&D, WoD, GW, Ron Edwards, the Forge, Drizzt, etc., so you know, take it all with a big dose of salt.

[Talen Lee]

Say, "FTB does this, but they are not alone, as X, Y and Z are also guilty of such asshattery."

So X, Y, and Z can baww about it in the forums too?

Look, I was in a similar situation like this before, taking pot-shots at big names in the same community, and let me tell you, for the most part, they don't give a shit. They're on the pedestal, so there's going to be some tomato-flinging, but do you think they really care? I'm sure the FtB people don't go to bed at nights now sobbing because someone said something bad about them on the internet. Especially when it was qualified and reasoned criticism.

If TBG had called you, personally, a gigantic dickhead and left it at that, then I suppose your criticism of the podcast would be a little more valid, but I didn't hear any of that in the 'cast. I heard a stance towards podcasting behaviour that FtB (apparently) heavily represents. If you're the worst of a bad bunch, what's wrong with being held to task for it? What's wrong with public criticism? You think it's going to engender bad blood between the two? In a podcast that explicitly has the three podcasters making fun of one another as the vilest of offenders?

I dunno, seems like missing the point to me.

[runester]

.

[Kai]

Hey runester.

I was linked to the thread you mentioned over on the FtB forums, and while I did see some of the sycophantic responses you noted, I also noted that one of the hosts (can't recall who) used the opportunity that the thread presented to ask for feedback both positive and negative about their show. I thought that was a good response (though perhaps making a separate thread for the feedback may have worked out better). Rather than get defensive about the situation, really looking at it as a chance to grow as a program...what a concept. I also noted that you were one of the "fans" that took the time to really note what it was that you liked about the program and what areas you felt they could improve.

Anywhoozle, welcome to the forums.

[Oboe Cop]

I also noted that one of the hosts (can't recall who) used the opportunity that the thread presented to ask for feedback both positive and negative about their show. I thought that was a good response (though perhaps making a separate thread for the feedback may have worked out better). Rather than get defensive about the situation, really looking at it as a chance to grow as a program...what a concept.

Yeah, that'd be me.

Thanks!

[K-Mech]

+500 Points to Oboe Cop (Chris) for being rational, and then Dan the control freak shut down and locked the thread.

[Talen Lee]

"meh" - it was pretty good.

Is this how you react to everything you enjoy? ;p