https://meatcastle.substack.com/p/talking-about-adventures-systems An interesting grab-bag of a piece that touches on the state of #ttrpg reviewing.

I will say though that the complaint that people are reviewing hypothetical pieces is a familiar maker-side complaint:

A) All evaluation is relative to an ideal. Good reviewers make that clear. Especially in ttrpgs.

B) If reviewers are failing to detect your intent, then it is a sign that your writing or your blurbing are insufficiently clear.

D) These issues are tough to navigate and are partly why I stopped reviewing ttrpg products:

I can only ever speak to my experience running a game and given how far outside all of the major silos my preferred playstyle falls, I suspect it was not useful.

Also, ttrpg people don't really know what to do with reviewers... What they want is what they have: Influencers who can make them feel enthusiastic about products they most likely won't read let alone play.

@Taskerland I for one liked your reviews of games, but I can imagine there's an inherent tension, in not only going "this is my opinion" but also "this is my groups opinion lensed through how I GMed it"

I still believe there is a strong argument for a "what do you get in a game for your money" which seems mostly absent in youtubery - and it's hard to judge what to make of someone's opinion of the intangibles unless you know they share your own house stylings.

@Printdevil Thank you - This is a problem with all artforms to some extent but it is particularly an issue in RPGs.

Partly because, at the end of the day, all published materials will be filtered through the GM or the facilitator. They shape the group's experience of the game in a way that does not happen with any other medium.

Other media tend to be more relaxed about this... authors and artists often encourage diverging interpretations while RPG designers demand end-to-end control.

@Printdevil Thank you - This is a problem with all artforms to some extent but it is particularly an issue in RPGs.

Partly because, at the end of the day, all published materials will be filtered through the GM or the facilitator. They shape the group's experience of the game in a way that does not happen with any other medium.

Other media tend to be more relaxed about this... authors and artists often encourage diverging interpretations while RPG designers demand end-to-end control.

@Taskerland I wonder to what extent that's because gaming has so few real producers of any magnitude so those who monetize their thoughts on it, have lean into WotC (and other salient producers)

I think though it has as a field started to resemble music reviewing in that it nets you nothing to dislike a popular release and your money will be made on finding a group of people who agree with you liking it.

Actually Draw Steel/DaggerThing are just album releases aren't they? Release-Tour, Next.

@Taskerland @Printdevil A quite separate problem, which is more obvious in boardgames: if you review positively you get more stuff from the publisher. If you review negatively you don't. (Which is fair enough on their part, they have no financial interest in negative reviews.) If you review _everything_ positively, nobody's going to call you on it (except awkward bastards like me to say things like "another boring looking kickstarter, does it have a review by UndeadViking,, they really couldn't find anyone else to say something nice about it could they?".
So there's basically no incentive apart from your own intrinsic honesty to be an honest reviewer, never mind a critic. Which is why I applaud No Pun Included, who are AIUI the _only_ boardgame reviewers not to accept review copies.
But back in the RPG world you have the same people, "woo a new thing from Hasbro best D&D ever".

@Taskerland @Printdevil A quite separate problem, which is more obvious in boardgames: if you review positively you get more stuff from the publisher. If you review negatively you don't. (Which is fair enough on their part, they have no financial interest in negative reviews.) If you review _everything_ positively, nobody's going to call you on it (except awkward bastards like me to say things like "another boring looking kickstarter, does it have a review by UndeadViking,, they really couldn't find anyone else to say something nice about it could they?".
So there's basically no incentive apart from your own intrinsic honesty to be an honest reviewer, never mind a critic. Which is why I applaud No Pun Included, who are AIUI the _only_ boardgame reviewers not to accept review copies.
But back in the RPG world you have the same people, "woo a new thing from Hasbro best D&D ever".

@Printdevil The question of why certain media generate robust critical traditions is interesting but the rule of thumb is that developing it and maintaining it requires effort and TTRPGs have never been willing (either at producer or consumer level) to support that style of commentary.

TTRPG people historically like the chef-patron yelling at diners from the kitchen door. Nowadays they want validation for spending money on stuff they won't use.

@RogerBW Quite so. RPG people often drone on about how people need to play stuff before they review it but Questing Beast and Playful Void are respected despite *never* playing what they review. Why? Because they rarely put out negative reviews and sellers appreciate sales while buyers want validation for their purchases. @Printdevil

My nephew who has nothing intrinsically wrong with him and is now a grown man, used to think every game was the best game ever, and every day was the best day ever. A complete delight in novelty.

I don't actually have a fault with that, and I'd be mildly jealous of the joy if I weren't made of poisonous bats and Guy de Maupassant references.

@RogerBW @Taskerland

@RogerBW Quite so. RPG people often drone on about how people need to play stuff before they review it but Questing Beast and Playful Void are respected despite *never* playing what they review. Why? Because they rarely put out negative reviews and sellers appreciate sales while buyers want validation for their purchases. @Printdevil

@Printdevil If I started behaving like that people would just assume that I had hit my head. @RogerBW

@Taskerland @Printdevil Oh yeah, I first met that with high-end digital cameras: big expensive thing, and some people want to be reassured they've bought the right one.

@Taskerland @Printdevil Oh yeah, I first met that with high-end digital cameras: big expensive thing, and some people want to be reassured they've bought the right one.

Like Stereophiles, Camera Owners are a special form of lunatic.

I've seen it at the extreme end of Studios going almost bankrupt because of sudden urgent need of "the £20,000 lens they will use once"

This is why I recommend fixating on a single appearance monster from the early seventies. You can feel like a compleatist in a matter of hours, without having to teach yourself Japanese like @vortiwife

@RogerBW @Taskerland

@RogerBW @Printdevil Cameras pose a similar challenge as they're tools and people can use tools in any number of different ways. Impossible for a reviewer to know if a given camera will fit in a particular workflow. Even 'sharpness' of lenses is not a neutral characteristics as some lenses are pleasingly imperfect for some people.

@Printdevil @RogerBW @Taskerland i know that saying the words "Leica M8" can activate a kind of manchurian candidate response in a certain kind of camera nerd

@Printdevil If I started behaving like that people would just assume that I had hit my head. @RogerBW

People have made careers out of weird old imperfect lenses indeed.

Anything with tools always tends to border between jealous modernity, frothingly specific obsession and wondering if you are collecting Victorian ones because they have a dragon on the handle.

@Taskerland @RogerBW