Reviews: Why they are often useless...

[hunter]

so on Dec 14 we got a review on RPGNow for T20 Lite. A glowing 5 star review. Today we get a new review for T20 Book 1 - Characters and Combat. A 1 star review.

Both by the same person.

But wait, it gets better! He complains in the 1 star review that he was surprised that T20 was, gasp!, using the d20 System! And then he complains the rules were 'incomplete' but he's reviewing 1 book out of 3!

Someone want to try and make sense of this for me????

 

[atpollard]

Someone want to try and make sense of this for me????

It is hard to be certain without knowing the details of this specific case, but I have found that the NIMH statistic that "1 person in 10 sufferes from some form of mental illness" helps me to just accept many of life's human paradoxes.

 

[far-trader]

T20 Lite was free and he paid a couple dollars for Book 1? Split personality? Christmas sugar rush during the first and New Years hangover during the second?

I can't recall, does RPGNow have a comment feature on reviews? If it does I'm sure you have made the case there. If not maybe another review could clear up the issue and present a counter point.

 

[hunter]

T20 Lite was free and he paid a couple dollars for Book 1? Split personality? Christmas sugar rush during the first and New Years hangover during the second?

I can't recall, does RPGNow have a comment feature on reviews? If it does I'm sure you have made the case there. If not maybe another review could clear up the issue and present a counter point.

Yes they do have a review comment feature, but it's not working at the moment. Trust me I tried

 

[hunter]

It is hard to be certain without knowing the details of this specific case, but I have found that the NIMH statistic that "1 person in 10 sufferes from some form of mental illness" helps me to just accept many of life's human paradoxes.

Original T20 Lite Review

New T20 Book 1 Review

Check them both out, in order and you may begin to see my confusion

 

[robject]

Ummm, both reviews present an interesting brand of schizophrenia.

And the second review... "venerable d20"? Hmmm.

"it deserves a place among the very best of the Traveller canon books"
yet it "is really not ready for its market".

 

[Blue Ghost]

so on Dec 14 we got a review on RPGNow for T20 Lite. A glowing 5 star review. Today we get a new review for T20 Book 1 - Characters and Combat. A 1 star review.

Both by the same person.

But wait, it gets better! He complains in the 1 star review that he was surprised that T20 was, gasp!, using the d20 System! And then he complains the rules were 'incomplete' but he's reviewing 1 book out of 3!

Someone want to try and make sense of this for me????

Maybe he forgot to pop a prozac or something.

 

[hunter]

Christ now he's posted a review of Book 2 and claims that apparently I don't know anything about Traveller because the design systems are obviously based on the d20 system....

New Flakey Review

 

[Valarian]

He obviously missed the hint in the T20 name :rofl:

 

[hunter]

Well the part about the design systems it truly a joke considering they are based on High Guard and the original CT vehicles...

 

[Space Hamster]

Hey look at the bright side. In the Book 1 review he gives you credit for designing it like forth edition DnD before WotC even started working on it.

This "Traveller" system makes little or no differentiation between itself and D&D 4.0. In fact, the three core rule rulebooks can be opened up and used without modification with the Traveller D20 system.

I want to know how he got the core books already.:rofl:

 

[hunter]

What makes me really go 'WTH?' is the fact he reviewed T20 Lite on December 14 and gave it 5 stars!

Book 1 - Characters and Combat is pretty much T20 Lite with more classes, skills and feats.

Go figure...

Well I guess if you look at it the right way it balances out? 5 stars for T20 Lite and 1 Star for Book 1 is an average of 3????

 

[Border Reiver]

Is it just me or is the 5 star review more critical than the 1 star effort?

 

[hunter]

At this point I don't know whether I am more amused or annoyed, but I think amused it starting to win

 

[Spinward Scout]

I'm confused, too.

Especially in the second review the part about: "This "Traveller" system makes little or no differentiation between itself and D&D 4.0."

Hunter, you didn't tell us you had a time-machine. Can you shoot me a copy of D&D 4.0 before it gets a copyright?

Here's another:

"In fact, the three core rule rulebooks can be opened up and used without modification with the Traveller D20 system."

Umm, you have to modify any D&D character to use the Lifeblood/Stamina system. And the combat system is different than any other d20 game as far as I know. Although Star Wars is close. Maybe I should say the damage system.

Or this one:

"Unfortunately, the original Universe has been edited down to where it is still exciting. "

Why would that be unfortunate?

And his spelling sucks.

I wouldn't take it personally.

There aren't many critics I ever agree with.

 

[deniable]

OK, here's my favorite:
"It seemed to me that the writers had a much firmer grip on low tech weapons, equipment and technology than they did in the ultra-modern world of the Imperium." Err... it's almost like you're treating the Imperium as Science Fiction or something.

The rest of it is a little odd.

On an unrelated note, I remember a posting somewhere about Steve Jackson giving up after trying to get Amazon to remove reviews of products he had no intention of publishing. That would have been an interesting conversation.

 

[aramis]

It is hard to be certain without knowing the details of this specific case, but I have found that the NIMH statistic that "1 person in 10 sufferes from some form of mental illness" helps me to just accept many of life's human paradoxes.

In 1999, the number was 1 in 5, not 1 in 10. (National Mental Health Association, Campaign for Clinical Depression materials.)

1 in 10 was seriously mentally ill. BTW, for Alaska, same time frame, the numbers were 1 in 4 and 1 in 6, for the same time frame.

 

[BlackBat242]

In the early 1990s, I read the forward to a book in the Psych department of Weber State University, Ogden Ut.

The forward was written by the President of the American Psychiatric Association, and he said "This work brings us closer to the day when we will understand the neuroses underlying all human behavior, and will be able to get everyone the proper counselling and treatment".

Underlining mine, to emphasize the point... these groups want to "counsel & treat" everyone, without exception. No one is sane, we all need their "help". [and they need our fees for that help]

So yes, saying 1 in 5 is "mentally ill", and 1 in 10 "need treatment" is just the current stage, expect the numbers to increase periodically.

 

[hunter]

In the early 1990s, I read the forward to a book in the Psych department of Weber State University, Ogden Ut.

The forward was written by the President of the American Psychiatric Association, and he said "This work brings us closer to the day when we will understand the neuroses underlying all human behavior, and will be able to get everyone the proper counselling and treatment".

Underlining mine, to emphasize the point... these groups want to "counsel & treat" everyone, without exception. No one is sane, we all need their "help". [and they need our fees for that help]

So yes, saying 1 in 5 is "mentally ill", and 1 in 10 "need treatment" is just the current stage, expect the numbers to increase periodically.

So THAT's where you've wandered off too Mr. Johnson...come along now, it's really time for your meds and treatment.

Don't worry folks, we'll see he gets the best of care!

 

[Jeff M. Hopper]

Hunter, I can't read those reviews while sober. Then again, I don't think sobriety had much to do with the writing of the reviews.