I find the atmosphere here to be acidic, preferring to insult, dismiss, and focus on "gotchas" over actually discussing, as though the goal of discussion were to "win" in some way, rather than contribute to a whole broader and wiser than any of its creators.
The Codex takes "bettering" to the next lvl... you have seen nothing until you post there. ppl are ridiculed and dismissed based on their join date, avatar and/or location; and the jerk circles there can be a major turn-off, too; f.e, a few moderators and long-termers "Brofisting" (liking) each others' posts for no reason other than they are moderators/long-termers. That said, I think Infinitron's influence has been positive and there is no better place online for in-depth discussion on RPGs. Well, except for my blog :P
Reddit is ok, too. But I don't like the format of posting. It's just a lil' too limiting. Plus ppl tend to downvote good posts out of butthurt and envy. Shallow posts with a funny pic always win.
RPGWatch is just too polite for my tastes. Maybe you would like it there, though?
GameFAQs' game-specific format used to be conducive to in-depth discussion. But now, most of the classic RPG forums are dead and buried.
@joluv, @JuliusBorisov asked a valid question: why am I looking for a community when I am posting in a community. I answered honestly that it's because this community is not wired for discourse but rather for argument. This thread has been a wonderful example of this. With the exception of a few gracious souls, much of this thread has been focused on topics outside the scope of the question (sales success or personal enjoyment) or simply avoiding the problem by mocking me and the examples I listed, dismissing me as a nostalgia-blinded old man who was dissatisfied with a game founded on the nostalgia of old men. When I asked for alternatives rather than recriminations, @Lilura and @JuliusBorisov were kind enough to provide some, while the majority of responses on the matter were content to say "lol u read gamefaqs thats just sad get with the present grampa". Curiously, I do not find such conversation strategies satisfying, enlightening, nor entertaining. A personal flaw on my own part, I am certain.
I am not interested in being right. I am interested in seeing the topic discussed, in seeing thought out and rational points of view from all sides. Barring that, I am content to see the conversation whither and die. Sadly, I have the hubris so very common to humanity, and am compelled to defend myself when attacked and to explain myself when misinterpreted. Were it that I were a humbler man, this thread may have died its ignominious death pages ago.
This is not a forum to discuss. This is a forum to whine about the game, to defend it from those who whine about the game, to ask questions of a reticent developer, and to post vapid polls about which SoD character is your favorite. I never expected more, as it is a merchant forum. And while it may not be the rich feast of compelling conversation I hunger for, dry bread is ambrosia to a starving man.
This is not a forum to discuss. This is a forum to whine about the game, to defend it from those who whine about the game......
I would tentatively suggest that starting a thread titled 'Has Siege of Dragonspear Failed' might be seen as contributing to the very thing you might despair at. It invites people to voice personal opinions on whether the game has or hasn't failed. A binary choice that demands a yes or no answer. Yes it has failed because its rubbish. No it hasn't failed because its great.
You bemoan the fact that 'much of this thread has been focused on topics outside the scope of the question (sales success or personal enjoyment)', and if that is the case, why didn't you ask about sales success and/or personal enjoyment? For the record I don't know anything about the sales, and I enjoyed the game immensely, which is why in my earlier answer I said no, the game hadn't failed.
As for the nature of the forum, since it is the only gaming forum I have ever joined, I really can't comment on how it compares, or what one should expect etc. Suffice to say, I enjoy it.
This is not a forum to discuss. This is a forum to whine about the game, to defend it from those who whine about the game......
I would tentatively suggest that starting a thread titled 'Has Siege of Dragonspear Failed' might be seen as contributing to the very thing you might despair at. It invites people to voice personal opinions on whether the game has or hasn't failed. A binary choice that demands a yes or no answer. Yes it has failed because its rubbish. No it hasn't failed because its great.
You bemoan the fact that 'much of this thread has been focused on topics outside the scope of the question (sales success or personal enjoyment)', and if that is the case, why didn't you ask about sales success and/or personal enjoyment? For the record I don't know anything about the sales, and I enjoyed the game immensely, which is why in my earlier answer I said no, the game hadn't failed.
As for the nature of the forum, since it is the only gaming forum I have ever joined, I really can't comment on how it compares, or what one should expect etc. Suffice to say, I enjoy it.
How is it so hard to understand what I am asking? Whether it succeeded commercially is academic, as the expansion was essentially a bellwether to determine Beamdog's fitness to create Baldur's Gate 3. Seems pretty obvious these days the answer is yes. Personal enjoyment is a pointless question, as even with its flaws the game is better than the vast majority of offerings out there, and the question itself is subjective and simple - yes, no, and kinda. Neither of these questions hold my interest.
The cultural one is the one I actually care about. A cult classic has a new chapter, yet nobody* is talking about the game. A matter of months in and the few venues for discussion have begun to whither and die, while this one seems much more interested in what Beamdog isn't telling us (Collector's Edition, Tablet Edition, BG3, BG2 getting SoD related content) or the flaws of the game (party make-up, bugs, etc) rather than the game itself. I found it strange, as I enjoy reading peoples' perspectives on the Baldur's Gate series, summaries and commentary on the classes, gear, and characters, and such.
As gauche and sinful as it apparently is (a news flash to me), I find I enjoy going to GameFAQs to read the works on the previous games - not because I need it (I know the games backwards), but because I just enjoy reading about other peoples' takes on it, assessments that challenge my own assumptions and force me consider different angles than I would on my own. Amazing how much fire one man's taste for old school can draw on a forum about Baldur's Gate.
And, as I have said, I am pleased to know other peoples' experiences on this forum do not resemble my own. That is good.
*Nobody in this case representing a non-zero but alarmingly limited population. I have found the need for disclaimers like this critical and tiring.
The cultural one is the one I actually care about. A cult classic has a new chapter, yet nobody* is talking about the game. A matter of months in and the few venues for discussion have begun to whither and die, while this one seems much more interested in what Beamdog isn't telling us (Collector's Edition, Tablet Edition, BG3, BG2 getting SoD related content) or the flaws of the game (party make-up, bugs, etc) rather than the game itself.
I am afraid I can't proffer an opinion on people talking about SoD in other forums and such like, as I only come here, and have absolutely no interest in going somewhere else.
So my silence elsewhere over SoD has absolutely nothing to do with my feelings towards the game, and absolutely everything to do with how I interact with the internet. And whilst I may be unique in how I play & perceive SoD & the wider BGEE series and how I interact with the internet, and how ultimately these two activities feed into each other, I may not be that uncommon at all.
I.e. This is the best forum for talking about SoD. This is where people who want to talk about SoD come.
And look what gems we get on the first page: polls for SoD NPCs in BG2; a meme thread (because memes are great for deep discussion); a thread about the lack of evil fighters which immediately turned into an argument about whether Viconia can (or should) tank, for those who think Calemyr's point about the tone of this forum was in any way off; two separate threads about when the CE is coming out; feature requests; problems with achievements; and questions about how to beat specific obstacles (which probably wouldn't be necessary, but for the minor fact that the three walkthroughs for SoD - Gamepressure, Lilura and Finch - have all remained incomplete due to lack of interest (either on the writer's part or the site's fans).
The extent to which the actual campaign is being discussed here is at a bare minimum. That's simple math, not an opinion to be debated. And that's here, on this forum. So if that's the best discourse SoD is generating... well. That's another possible answer to OP's question.
The cultural one is the one I actually care about. A cult classic has a new chapter, yet nobody* is talking about the game. A matter of months in and the few venues for discussion have begun to whither and die, while this one seems much more interested in what Beamdog isn't telling us (Collector's Edition, Tablet Edition, BG3, BG2 getting SoD related content) or the flaws of the game (party make-up, bugs, etc) rather than the game itself.
I share that view, too. And before that, it seemed to me that ppl here were mostly concerned with the tea-cup storms. I believe one of my first posts on this forum was something along the lines of: "Where is the discussion on the campaign itself"? I mean, it was sort of there but not in my face like I was used to.
Plus yeah, merchant forums have never been my ideal cup of tea. I didn't start posting on Bioware Social until just recently, but that's just on the Legacy forums of BG and NWN: where the gurus and die hards hang out; where the newbies only trickle in. When those games first came out I preferred to be posting elsewhere. I posted elsewhere for over a decade (and still mostly do). There were lots of bustling venues to choose from and it was almost all discourse related to the campaign and its ruleset. From newbie stuff like "What does THAC0 stand for?" to grognard complaints like "What, BG isn't even turn-based? This is not D&D!" etc.
Those were fun times, for sure. But it doesn't mean the fun can't continue here, too.
There isn't much to say about it that hasn't already been said. It's good, I enjoyed it, it was well worth the money, I am looking forward to what Beamdog do next. Nuff said.
I don't need any ADHD-depth analysis, and I couldn't give a flying fig about what "cultural impact" it had.
Didn't fail me. Payed the money, played the game, enjoyed it. It might have failed for you, based on what you wanted it to be.
Might be my age, but it's been a long time since I've seen a film, played a game, watched a show and thought 'that was perfect, I wouldn't change a thing about it'. Happiness is what you make of it though, so I separate that out internally and enjoy things for what they are. Helps with people too.
I think maybe your question is several years too early. A cult classic kinda by definition is ignored at the beginning by the predominant culture and becomes a cult classic over time. Siege of Dragonspear has been out for several months. Sure it is an expansion to a classic game but it has only been out for several months. Don't be hasty as Treebeard might say.
I think maybe your question is several years too early. A cult classic kinda by definition is ignored at the beginning by the predominant culture and becomes a cult classic over time. Siege of Dragonspear has been out for several months. Sure it is an expansion to a classic game but it has only been out for several months. Don't be hasty as Treebeard might say.
Compare this site to nearly any other active forum, and the tone is remarkably friendly. Even this discussion, about a contentious topic, has been rather mild.
In my experience, the Beamdog forums are basically a bunch of old hobbits having supper and talking about the best way to cook a turnip.
These are some of the better forums I've encountered in years. Overall fairly polite and on topic. Even the Bioware boards where I frequent are mostly hostile and toxic once a topic has reached three pages. And unfortunately I see this attitude reflected in both Bioware fans and critics.
These are some of the better forums I've encountered in years. Overall fairly polite and on topic. Even the Bioware boards where I frequent are mostly hostile and toxic once a topic has reached three pages. And unfortunately I see this attitude reflected in both Bioware fans and critics.
Hmm I haven't frequented the main forums in general, but the Legacy games section is quite alright for the older games like NwN 1/2 should one look for something. There isn't that much activity, but it's useful if I i'm looking for something.
I suppose you might say that about any large forum though.. There's always a smaller section where people discuss all manner of things and there isn't that much chaos. A certain sweet spot.
These are some of the better forums I've encountered in years. Overall fairly polite and on topic. Even the Bioware boards where I frequent are mostly hostile and toxic once a topic has reached three pages. And unfortunately I see this attitude reflected in both Bioware fans and critics.
Hmm I haven't frequented the main forums in general, but the Legacy games section is quite alright for the older games like NwN 1/2 should one look for something. There isn't that much activity, but it's useful if I i'm looking for something.
I suppose you might say that about any large forum though.. There's always a smaller section where people discuss all manner of things and there isn't that much chaos. A certain sweet spot.
Yeah I was referring more to Mass Effect and Dragon Age sections of the Bio boards rather than the legacy games. A lot of the negative posts and arguments sparked on those forums are due to posters who want attention or are just looking to fight, so they go to the most active sections. I think it's mostly people who purely want to discuss the games who visit the legacy section.
Comments
Reddit is ok, too. But I don't like the format of posting. It's just a lil' too limiting. Plus ppl tend to downvote good posts out of butthurt and envy. Shallow posts with a funny pic always win.
RPGWatch is just too polite for my tastes. Maybe you would like it there, though?
GameFAQs' game-specific format used to be conducive to in-depth discussion. But now, most of the classic RPG forums are dead and buried.
I am not interested in being right. I am interested in seeing the topic discussed, in seeing thought out and rational points of view from all sides. Barring that, I am content to see the conversation whither and die. Sadly, I have the hubris so very common to humanity, and am compelled to defend myself when attacked and to explain myself when misinterpreted. Were it that I were a humbler man, this thread may have died its ignominious death pages ago.
This is not a forum to discuss. This is a forum to whine about the game, to defend it from those who whine about the game, to ask questions of a reticent developer, and to post vapid polls about which SoD character is your favorite. I never expected more, as it is a merchant forum. And while it may not be the rich feast of compelling conversation I hunger for, dry bread is ambrosia to a starving man.
But I don't think it is possible to venture forth without meeting someone who will disagree with you.
You bemoan the fact that 'much of this thread has been focused on topics outside the scope of the question (sales success or personal enjoyment)', and if that is the case, why didn't you ask about sales success and/or personal enjoyment? For the record I don't know anything about the sales, and I enjoyed the game immensely, which is why in my earlier answer I said no, the game hadn't failed.
As for the nature of the forum, since it is the only gaming forum I have ever joined, I really can't comment on how it compares, or what one should expect etc. Suffice to say, I enjoy it.
The cultural one is the one I actually care about. A cult classic has a new chapter, yet nobody* is talking about the game. A matter of months in and the few venues for discussion have begun to whither and die, while this one seems much more interested in what Beamdog isn't telling us (Collector's Edition, Tablet Edition, BG3, BG2 getting SoD related content) or the flaws of the game (party make-up, bugs, etc) rather than the game itself. I found it strange, as I enjoy reading peoples' perspectives on the Baldur's Gate series, summaries and commentary on the classes, gear, and characters, and such.
As gauche and sinful as it apparently is (a news flash to me), I find I enjoy going to GameFAQs to read the works on the previous games - not because I need it (I know the games backwards), but because I just enjoy reading about other peoples' takes on it, assessments that challenge my own assumptions and force me consider different angles than I would on my own. Amazing how much fire one man's taste for old school can draw on a forum about Baldur's Gate.
And, as I have said, I am pleased to know other peoples' experiences on this forum do not resemble my own. That is good.
*Nobody in this case representing a non-zero but alarmingly limited population. I have found the need for disclaimers like this critical and tiring.
So my silence elsewhere over SoD has absolutely nothing to do with my feelings towards the game, and absolutely everything to do with how I interact with the internet. And whilst I may be unique in how I play & perceive SoD & the wider BGEE series and how I interact with the internet, and how ultimately these two activities feed into each other, I may not be that uncommon at all.
The extent to which the actual campaign is being discussed here is at a bare minimum. That's simple math, not an opinion to be debated. And that's here, on this forum. So if that's the best discourse SoD is generating... well. That's another possible answer to OP's question.
Plus yeah, merchant forums have never been my ideal cup of tea. I didn't start posting on Bioware Social until just recently, but that's just on the Legacy forums of BG and NWN: where the gurus and die hards hang out; where the newbies only trickle in. When those games first came out I preferred to be posting elsewhere. I posted elsewhere for over a decade (and still mostly do). There were lots of bustling venues to choose from and it was almost all discourse related to the campaign and its ruleset. From newbie stuff like "What does THAC0 stand for?" to grognard complaints like "What, BG isn't even turn-based? This is not D&D!" etc.
Those were fun times, for sure. But it doesn't mean the fun can't continue here, too.
I don't need any ADHD-depth analysis, and I couldn't give a flying fig about what "cultural impact" it had.
Might be my age, but it's been a long time since I've seen a film, played a game, watched a show and thought 'that was perfect, I wouldn't change a thing about it'. Happiness is what you make of it though, so I separate that out internally and enjoy things for what they are. Helps with people too.
In my experience, the Beamdog forums are basically a bunch of old hobbits having supper and talking about the best way to cook a turnip.
http://www.cultjer.com/video/youre-not-in-kansas-anymore-avatar
I suppose you might say that about any large forum though.. There's always a smaller section where people discuss all manner of things and there isn't that much chaos. A certain sweet spot.