Post originally by PhishStyx at 2003-07-07 20:40:13
Converted from Phorums BB System
Wes Johnson wrote:
-------------------------------
I think there has to be something there to insult!
Reparte aside, there will be people who hate Palladium and willing to voice their opinions. There are also people who feel the need to troll to try and validate Palladium as the end-all-be-all of RPG's.
<b>What the @!#$ are you talking about?
Are we even the same conversation (and I use that term in the loosest possible sense)??
I'm talking about the reviewer simply ignoring the book and tossing out insults instead, and what you return with inane garbage about the "end-all..." which I wouldn't say because I don't believe. In fact, I have exactly the same complaint about Sinclair's other review this week. He offers virtually no cogent information concerning the book he's reviewing aside from letting me know that the book isn't for me because I don't happen to play any of those particular systems mentioned in that review. I'd have been considerably more interested in the book if it used stats for Unisystem, but that's beside the point. He didn't discuss <b>THE BOOK</b> in the slightest. He made general statements of a derogatory nature about the company and it's owner who he wouldn't know to look at the man.
</b>
I don't think anything the reviewer said was all that insulting to Palladium Books. They simply did not think the book was all that useful. If that is an insult to you, then you are acting more than a bit foolish.
<b>
No insults?
Ok, how about these quotes:
"And let's not forget, it's the product of Palladium Books and it's draconic owners"
"tunnel vision for their own game system."
"it's just another dull palladium book."
If the reviewer decided before he even picked up the book that it was going to be bad, why bother? Why bother reviewing it? Couldn't he have said in his blurb, "please DON'T read my ignorant review."
As I said before, this is clearly <B>factually untrue</b>:
"8 pages wasted on yet another rehash of the same old tired weapons combat rules presented in virtually every other Palladium book published..."
Palladium specific content constitutes 1.5 pages. The Compendium offers a lot of GENERIC game information that many Palladium fans have adopted for their games.
Apparently, this wasn't good enough to count as a good point because he uses it as a means to a derogatory end:
"thanks to the inclusion of basic data from the real world, like caliber and muzzle velocity."
Sinclair's other review doesn't even include this basic level of factual information. He thinks we should simply trust his word that the "Big Bang" book rates a 10.
</b>
But hey, I am not complaining about you complaining. It amuses me to no end that someone can be so dogmatic and zealous about any game.
I have over the years liked some of what Palladium has done. I have also not liked some of their stuff.
Cheers
<b>
It amuses me that you've basically called yourself a troll by supporting such a crap-ass review because you hate Palladium so much.
I don't much care for D20, but if I read this sort of @!#$ review for a product, I'd come down just as hard.
I'd call this guy's reviews crap-ass if he was talking about toilet paper. The game system and the publisher have nothing to do with it.
Do you get the message? Or do I need to get out the brick?
</b>