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

[Halloween]

Hello Brilliant Gameologists,

Thought I'd drop a line (load?) here in amongst all the delicious and juicy hatred.

You sort of sidle up to the big shocker (le gasp! You hate -yourselves- how shocking!), and while I agree with what you say in this episode I am disappointed with number 4.

You're angry that people who play video games are called ‘gamers’?

...

Seriously?

...

Sorry, just sort of shocked there. All your other points are relevant, but this is just semantic wankery at its most moist and rancid. I was sitting there in Starbucks, coffee in hand, muffin poised but centimeters from my lips, listening in both shock AND horror.

"Surely the Brilliant Gameologists have -enough- Rage-a-hol that they don't have to resort to THIS," I thought, "Their vitriol is more refined then bitching about labels and definitions. This is like watching Yo Yo Ma play the banjo! No! This must be some sort of joke, they'll turn it around, it’ll be some kind of amusing and hilarious joke,  and I'll... oh wait no, they're onto their next topic. They were serious."

And then I shed a single tear and the world grew a little bit darker.

Flowery language aside I am really surprised at you guys. Meg actually says "Well the Mporgs and the rpgeee's are not really gaming either... but that's not what really pisses me off. It's the broad spectrum - and everyone and their mother plays video games. That's not a GAMER, that's 90% of everyone in America."

I know its Bad Form to quote a podcaster, but this whole section just smacked of childish whining that Tommy and his X-Box stole your word from you, and gosh darnit’, you can't be special and different anymore because gra-ma-ma plays wii bowling.

Don't worry guys. *pat pat* You ARE special, but you're special because you do awesome things, like talk to other human beings and collaborate to create engaging and enjoyable experiences forged entirely in the furnace of your friends imaginations. You're not special because you belong to a select group of people who have through some mysterious and arcane process earned themselves the highly auspicious title of "Gamer".

Fuck that crap.

It's a word to define people who partake in a pastime. You play games? Great, you're a gamer. That means precisely bubkis.  You define yourself by your actions, not by your labeling.

Is it annoying when trying to find information on the internet to have to wade through the flood of mmorpg related spooge? Yes. It totally is. Unfortunately, as you said, the video gamers are like... 90% of the population of America, and we tabletoppers are well.... the one stinky guy in the back of the class eating bugs.

So they stole your word. Who cares? Get a new one. Call yourself a "table jockey" or a "diceamagician" or hell, call yourself a Gameologist (that last one sounds like it might have legs).

Leave 'gamer' for the teabagging, halo playing, 13 year olds and gradma and go play some games.

[Meg]

Hello!

So, I'm one of the FtB "sycophants" ...  :-\

I disagree.  You aren't a fawning fanboy just trying to gain their favor.  The fact this post is so well thought out and verbose, to me, makes you NOT a sycophant.

Is there a previous episode where it's discussed?

Not really.  We've poked at Ed Greenwood and Forgotten Realms a few times but decided to make this the sode where we say why we hate it.  It could be a topic in of itself though, so good suggestion!

As for FtB ... without disagreeing, I'm not sure your assessment is relevant.

I think this is actually a really good point.  And the "informal poll" mirrored exactly what we said-- it is regular, has good quality, and isn't boring.  I would absolutely agree with all of those points.

And this is where some of the reaction baffles me.  Someone being involved enough to respond to a point and talk about the product, even when disagreeing or offering negative critique is better than not saying something else.  Love and Hate are different heads of the same coin.  They both involve a passion, and personally, I'd choose passion over apathy any day. 

I can say that podcasts in which there is no show prep, no bumpers or theme, no editing what so ever ... just suck.

I mostly agree but not completely.  I don't believe in mainstreaming podcasts (or books or movies or anything).  I don't think there are a set of rules every podcast should follow.  I think each podcast should set a goal and then do what they can to meet a goal.

Most shows need all of those things, yes.  And most shows that don't have them I don't like either.  But, for example, I like the extremely casual interview style of Theory From the Closet.  I like the "kitchen table" low editing, semi-poor audio quality, no real intro or bumper, etc from Geek Girls Rule.  They each accomplish their goals well and are successful for it.

PS: I also live in New England! I currently live in the Hyde Park area of Boston. It's nice to have a little NE representation - not all gaming podcasts can be from Missouri.

No way!  Well you HAVE to come to JiffyCon then and stay tuned to other things we're doing and join up!  We've also extended the invitation to meet up with anyone so since you're pretty close (we're about 20 miles north), we've got to arrange for something!

Overall, thank you so much for your very well thought out comments.  This was great!  Welcome to our neck of the woods!  I really look forward to hearing your feedback on other episodes.

[Meg]

Hello Brilliant Gameologists,

Thought I'd drop a line (load?) here in amongst all the delicious and juicy hatred.

I can't even quote any more than this because I'll just break into hysterics.  Thank you.  This was fantastic.  So much so that we actually just read a piece of this on the episode we recorded tonight. 

Thank you and welcome!

[Zeke]

Hello Brilliant Gameologists,

Thought I'd drop a line (load?) here in amongst all the delicious and juicy hatred.

I can't even quote any more than this because I'll just break into hysterics.  Thank you.  This was fantastic.  So much so that we actually just read a piece of this on the episode we recorded tonight. 

Thank you and welcome!

I agree. My hat sir, is off to you.

[Oboe Cop]

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

Actually it was locked more over the fact that it had strayed away from the original intent of the thread, and an effort to diffuse a situation before it became something it did not need to become.

[Halloween]

Hello Brilliant Gameologists,

Thought I'd drop a line (load?) here in amongst all the delicious and juicy hatred.

I can't even quote any more than this because I'll just break into hysterics.  Thank you.  This was fantastic.  So much so that we actually just read a piece of this on the episode we recorded tonight. 

Thank you and welcome!

I agree. My hat sir, is off to you.

Excellent! Just as planned...

[russlilly]

Hey Gameologists;

I was worried that your audience might have some serious problems with your hatred of such a popular podcast as FtB, and I wanted to extend to you my support in your opinion, as I did so long ago when you only had three episodes out and I was begging for more from you guys. It was great to find out that another group of people feel the same way I do about what FtB was once, what it is now, and who was really the driving force behind its entertaining quality.

I actually found this show while listening to FtB, and I've listened to every episode they've put out. I agree with what other people on these boards have said about them, that they are great for new podcast listeners, that their structure and regular release dates are attractive and slick. However, I also agree that Dan and Chad's self- and mutual-fellation is a constant annoyance, that they lost their best hosts when Adam, Luke, and Matt moved on to better things, and that their current content is rather lacking due to their detachment from the industry.

However, it seems like many of your listeners already agree with you, so I'll just leave it like that. But add my voice to the pile of Gameologist supporters.

Russ

[benbalestra]

Ah, see there's your problem-- you need to be watching Gallagher with us. 

Gallagher or Gallagher II, his twin brother started doing a rip off of his act.  Last I heard they were suing each other.

Ben

[Josh]

Also, you report not liking anyone's product reviews ... but your own. I have to strongly disagree with you here. While a lot of reviews are crap, basically just a "it sucked!" or "that rocks!" without much detail, there is one reviewer I really appreciate. First, what I'm looking for in a review is not the kind of criticism you find in a book of literary criticism. Instead, I'm looking for enough information to answer the question, "Do I want to run, play, and read this product enough to spend money on it?" So, the reviewer that consistently helps me answer that question is Carol from "All Games Considered." Her reviews are somewhat notorious for their length and thoroughness. After one of her reviews I have a very good idea what the setting, rules, and production quality of the product is like - then I can decide if it's something I want to spend money on.

I meant to comment on this point earlier but it got away from me.  So better late than never...

That review is in fact one of my key examples of how not to do a review.

It made several major technical mistakes

1. Way too long
2. Just said whats in the book.  Never makes any sort of analysis.
3. Brought up none of the bad aspects.  Even the best games have issues, not bringing them up demonstrates a lack of integrity
4. No technical appraisal, either of mechanics or ideas.
5. Was a fan girl, not an objective reviewer.

Also, frankly, I read the same book.  Poorly written, poor mechanics, moderate concept, poor execution of concept.  "Good try" is a stretch of the imagination.

[Shenanigans McGurk]

Dear reader,

In Sode #23 of Brilliant Gameologists, a discussion of ‘The 7 Things We Hate About the Gameosphere’ thing number 6 was the Fear the Boot podcast. 

As Meg invited listeners to post comments, here I go...

First off I will say that I am a continued listener of FtB and see no change of such.  Throughout the various epochs of the show (w/w/out Adam, Chad, Luke etc.) I have enjoyed the structure and listening to all the opinions of the topics.  There have been times when I’ve venomously and veraciously disagreed with opinions of the hosts, but it’s usually a pleasant listen. 


Without being long and drawn out I present (frankly) and ill informed essay about other podcasts.  I’ll simply talk about how it is that I am a fan of both Fear the Boot as well as Brilliant Gameologists.  At BG I’m given points and opinions of whatever it may be that they’re talking about, but somewhere along the way I feel as if I’m intended to agree with those opinions.  This is NOT always the case, but often I feel as if a definite standpoint of a subject is being adjudicated; while I appreciate the stand, as well as the clear and fact-filled discussion, it’s still just an opinion.  Most often these are well-informed opinions and not solely based on individual tastes or single points of reference. 

However, it is for the ‘round table’ discussion that I listen to FtB.  I don’t feel that my personal views are being arguably or forcibly swayed toward any specific opinion.  It’s simple a group of people sitting down jacking around about topics while a recorder is running.  That’s how it’s presented and that’s why I listen.  Much like the reason I like listening to the ‘recorded play’ from Yog-Sothoth.com’s the Bradford Players, I’m not there to learn HOW to play I’m there to listen to how they played. 


Second, huge split between my enjoyment of the shows... personalities.  While I don’t agree with the hosts of either one more or less, it’s the approach and presentation of the two that I appreciate for their distinctions.  FtB’s moderator Dan and I share certain traits, in that we’re stuffy, focused (often unnecessarily and blindsidedly), pin point specific and odd in general.  I admit that enjoyment of his work on the show might simply be that we are cut from a similar douchebag cloth. 

Meg (who I would title the moderator of BG) is wilder, off-the-cuff, well researched and brings a scholarly approach to the discussion.  Meg’s bookish yet well spread way of communicating ideas is a style I also find very enjoyable and conducive to my tastes (such as the writings of H.P. Lovecraft and Ken Wilber).  While BG has advice, it often feels more of a ‘take it or leave it’ then a ‘here’s what we do, take what you can from it’.  Now I’m not saying that each sticks to these styles exclusively, it’s just how I see them, more often then not. 


To speak briefly about The Podgecast - I’ve enjoyed many of the episodes, but unlike both FtB and BG the structure is very loose and nearly uncontrolled at times.  I can’t stand clear channel (AM/FM radio) talk radio and Podgecast often annoys me for some of the same basic reasons; talking over one another, unrehearsed to (in my opinion) a fault at times and occasionally uninteresting or echoing hosts. 


Lastly, Adam - Adam is a very interesting, creative, opinionated fire hose of Adamness.  I enjoyed his input on FtB, Podgecast and other shows he’s host and contributor to, but man, a little bit can go a long way some times.  I’m a fairly quite sort and I enjoy the high energy that Adam brings and I would really enjoy sitting down with him and going absolutely F wild about any topic, but at the end of the night, my head would be ringing like I just left a rock concert.  I look forward to Podgecast, but honestly, if not for Joe and especially Luke, I think I might have dropkicked it from my mp3player by now. 



As I’m sure I’ll be flamed to death for this post I hasten to remind my readers that this is not a well supported OPINION piece, it’s not intended to necessarily lay the grounds for a larger argument or a forthcoming post supporting my thoughts, it just is. 


Thanks all around for podcasting!

[Talen Lee]

As I’m sure I’ll be flamed to death

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Stop acting like having an opinion is a precursor to retaliation. Yeesh. You might not be agreed with, but nobody's going to call you a fuckwit just because you told us what you think.

Unless you told us 'You're all fuckwits.' That might earn you an angry response.

[Josh]

As I’m sure I’ll be flamed to death

No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Stop acting like having an opinion is a precursor to retaliation. Yeesh. You might not be agreed with, but nobody's going to call you a fuckwit just because you told us what you think.

Unless you told us 'You're all fuckwits.' That might earn you an angry response.

Might.  But if it was well supported...

However, it is for the ‘round table’ discussion that I listen to FtB.  I don’t feel that my personal views are being arguably or forcibly swayed toward any specific opinion.  It’s simple a group of people sitting down jacking around about topics while a recorder is running.  That’s how it’s presented and that’s why I listen.  Much like the reason I like listening to the ‘recorded play’ from Yog-Sothoth.com’s the Bradford Players, I’m not there to learn HOW to play I’m there to listen to how they played.

Here is the difference in paradigms:
Our point - It is bad to present poorly rendered ideas.
The other side - present whatever you like, it doesn't matter.

No matter what, someone is going to listen to what you say.  You don't tell kids "it's ok to not use condoms if you don't mind getting stds and/or pregnant."  You say "use condoms."

Furthermore if your entire claim is "what we say is merely our view and entirely without merit*."  It is utterly hypocritical to react poorly when someone says your views are without merit.

You cannot have things both ways.  Either you are a bunch of guys spouting shit OR you are making a real point that you would like to stand by and defend.


*because we believe that nothing has merit.

[Doctor X]

#6 thing we hate about the gameosphere- Fear the Boot (shock!  gasp!)

Just found out about the podcast, listening to them in order but had to skip to this one.  Forced to agree with much of what you've said.  "We hate heavy combat games, but best RPG evar: BATTLETECH!"

Also, does anyone else want to bash Chad's head in every time he pronounces "Shadowrun" with that hyphen that isn't there?

[adam]

To speak briefly about The Podgecast - I’ve enjoyed many of the episodes, but unlike both FtB and BG the structure is very loose and nearly uncontrolled at times.  I can’t stand clear channel (AM/FM radio) talk radio and Podgecast often annoys me for some of the same basic reasons; talking over one another, unrehearsed to (in my opinion) a fault at times and occasionally uninteresting or echoing hosts. 


Lastly, Adam - Adam is a very interesting, creative, opinionated fire hose of Adamness.  I enjoyed his input on FtB, Podgecast and other shows he’s host and contributor to, but man, a little bit can go a long way some times.  I’m a fairly quite sort and I enjoy the high energy that Adam brings and I would really enjoy sitting down with him and going absolutely F wild about any topic, but at the end of the night, my head would be ringing like I just left a rock concert.  I look forward to Podgecast, but honestly, if not for Joe and especially Luke, I think I might have dropkicked it from my mp3player by now.

Finally!  Someone panned me.  I was seriously waiting for this for awhile.  Meg pulls punches. 

That's right Meg, I came to your boards and said it. 

Let me explain:

I've got a different philosophy now.  Before, it was all about the product.  When I joined Back Seat Producers, Tony Mast taught me a very important philosophy: "If it's not fun, why do it?"

I may not be as focused or reserved as before, but I can guarantee you, I'm having more fun on the mics than a lot of hosts I know.  It's therapeutic now, which pleases me greatly.

Thanks for the feedback, though.  I don't want to get my own crew of sycophants. 

[Meg]

Also, does anyone else want to bash Chad's head in every time he pronounces "Shadowrun" with that hyphen that isn't there?

Having the mics on you makes you hyper aware of your own pronunciation flaws-- there is a whole thread about my pronunciation of words on these boards so I have a ton more respect for podcasters in general now and how difficult it is for anyone to sound perfect all of the time.  So no, I don't.

And Adam-- When I do an actual review of the Podgecast I won't pull punches, I promise 

[adam]

And Adam-- When I do an actual review of the Podgecast I won't pull punches, I promise 

I would lose respect for you if you did.
 
 

Man, we need smilies giving people the finger on my boards.

[Talen Lee]

Also, does anyone else want to bash Chad's head in every time he pronounces "Shadowrun" with that hyphen that isn't there?

Having the mics on you makes you hyper aware of your own pronunciation flaws-- there is a whole thread about my pronunciation of words on these boards so I have a ton more respect for podcasters in general now and how difficult it is for anyone to sound perfect all of the time.  So no, I don't.

Great, now I feel bad about it.

The thing is, there's a point at which pronunciation hassling is splitting the finest of hairs. I know what you mean when you say 'bolth.'

[PaulofCthulhu]

Much like the reason I like listening to the ‘recorded play’ from Yog-Sothoth.com’s the Bradford Players, I’m not there to learn HOW to play I’m there to listen to how they played.

Thanks for listening to our games! We've been doing it for nearly six years now. How time flies!

Paul

[Dionysus]

Just finished listening. Funny and on the whole great.

part 7 - hilarious.

FtB - I still listen to them a lot. (actually i listen to BG, FtB, have Game will travel, and PodgeCast) Different opinions. I like to hear other peoples opinions and even though i might strongly disagree, I still enjoy all the above podcasts

World of Darkness... this is an odd one. I agree that i HATE the vampire stuff. the emo "the world hates me" just makes me feel ill. But.... I like the system to a large degree. I've played a number of games of the new World of Darkness as mortals (ie, no fancy vampires etc) and the games flow very nicely for the most part. I also like the Mage game add-on. Played some successful games with that too.

I suppose i like them as the games I played a lot before were Rolemaster, Call of Cthulu, and Runequest. getting away from the match calculations was good - also getting away from linear probability was good too. Basically i like the system because at its core its simple enough to play fast, and complex enough to deal with most situations.

yes, there are some places where it falls down on its face - hard. But I dont feel how other people behave has much impact on my own group enjoy the game/system.

All the same, I'd love to play an "in a wicked age..." campaign, or "houses of the blooded", Or especially a full "Mouse Guard" campaign!

[Josh]

World of Darkness... this is an odd one. I agree that i HATE the vampire stuff. the emo "the world hates me" just makes me feel ill. But.... I like the system to a large degree. I've played a number of games of the new World of Darkness as mortals (ie, no fancy vampires etc) and the games flow very nicely for the most part. I also like the Mage game add-on. Played some successful games with that too.

I suppose i like them as the games I played a lot before were Rolemaster, Call of Cthulu, and Runequest. getting away from the match calculations was good - also getting away from linear probability was good too. Basically i like the system because at its core its simple enough to play fast, and complex enough to deal with most situations.

yes, there are some places where it falls down on its face - hard. But I dont feel how other people behave has much impact on my own group enjoy the game/system.

All the same, I'd love to play an "in a wicked age..." campaign, or "houses of the blooded", Or especially a full "Mouse Guard" campaign!

I think that as you explore the modern world of RPG's you will discover that WoD is not particularly simple or well rounded in comparison.