Well, there are a couple of problems:
1) Unlike football, where we can pore over reams of stats to form some sort of objective basis for an argument (e.g. a 7-9 team that lost 6 of its games by a total of 11 points, has a positive points-for-and-against, and has the toughest strength of schedule in the conference according to opponents' W-L), here we can't even establish that MGT is in fact the equivalent of a 7-9 team. Some people would describe it as 9-7, some people would describe it as 13-3. As it is a game we're talking about, I think the people who actually play and enjoy it on a regular basis are probably as entitled to view it as something other than a 7-9 football team.
Well, I agree that opinions can vary. I was just explaining my own view and the fact that it perplexes me that people are so sensitive to criticism about a (IMHO) rather average RPG.
2) Frankly, in a forum that ostensibly exists for fans of the game...
I've always thought that this forum exists to
discuss the game, warts and all. Can't really see the point of having a forum that only allows praise of a game.
...anyone who comes in here and asserts that MGT is the gaming equivalent of the Detroit Lions (S4 springs to mind here) should expect a little vitriol in return.
I dunno...maybe I'm just getting tired, but it seems to me that folks should be able to distinguish between a criticism of a game they like and a personal attack.
I mean, after awhile one might ask why people who thoroughly dislike a game (be it MGT, GURPS, BRP, Hackmaster, Bunnies & Burrows, whatever) bother to post in a forum dedicated to that game, unless it's to pick fights.
If all he ever said was "MGT sux", I'd agree. But I think that S4 has engaged in the topic at hand -- in this thread, the appropriateness and limits of a 2d6 system -- and posted accordingly. Along with some unflattering comments about MGT
Yes, I can agree that it's not cricket to hijack an MGT thread and turn it into a CT thread. But the dividing line is difficult to draw.
And this is largely the fault of Mongoose -- as noted, they have stridently positioned MGT as "CT Second Edition" (my words, not theirs). So they've put the issue on the table. Fans should not be allowed to remove the issue from consideration merely because the comparison isn't flattering to CT, IMHO. Also complicating the issue is that CT and MGT use very similar mechanics. It's inevitable that relevant comparisons between the systems would be made, and I see nothing sinister in that.
In any case, threadjacking is relatively easy to correct. If a moderator thinks that a thread is no longer on topic in this forum, he can move it to the appropriate forum.
Fair's fair, though. It might be helpful if MGT fans didn't pounce on every critique of MGT as though their mother's sexual habits and appearance were being questioned
And I wouldn't lobby for someone's exclusion from a forum (or the censorship of his ideas) merely because he happens to dislike a game that I like -- and stridently makes the case. (Not accusing you of such; but I do detect a sentiment in others in this direction).
Seems to me that criticisms of a game stand on their own. If they are opinion, then there are two grownup responses IMHO -- attempt to change the speaker's mind or agree to disagree and move on.
If the criticisms are factual criticisms, then contra evidence can be produced and the issue hashed out.
This is far better, IMHO, than getting pissy, tattling to moderators about alleged sleights, etc.
Besides -- I've observed this before -- in my experience, critics of a game are often far more helpful at
improving the game than fans are. Someone who truly wants MGt to be successful should theoretically *want* its flaws to be exposed so that they can be corrected. That's the beauty of gaming...a game is *never* completed. It's only abandoned.
