Why do some people want Traveller to fail?

[Allensh]

What I see is for every “X version is the best and I will never change” fan that Hates Mongoose Traveller, there seems to be another rabid “Pro-Mongoose Traveller” fan that takes any observation or criticism as a personal attack on their God, Country and Mother.

This part of the board is dedicated to Mongoose Traveller...and yet ANY time a thread is started about this game someone, be it you. or Supplement Four, or someone, has to engage in threadcrapping. We get it - you don't like Mongoose Traveller. If I did that kind of thing in the CT section there would be holy hell to pay (not that I would anyway, as I like CT well enough). Observation or criticism is one thing...constant repetition of it gets very very old.

Also, exaggerated hyperbole doesn't make you any more right or any more intellectual. Its just tiring.

I fail to understand how anyone could expect a game line that is just being started to have the depth of detail that CT had by 1986, say. This is unrealistic. Sure its going to be less detailed. That's just fine by me; I never used the great majority of that stuff anyway. Others will want that. That's ok..it will happen eventually.

Let's see..kick off a new game line with some obscure corner of Traveller history, like T4 tried to do or with THE most popular era in the game's history. Seems like a fairly easy business decision to me. I'm sure we will eventually see the second Civil War covered and maybe even the New Era (although Avenger has done a fairly good treatment of that as is). Maybe even Mileau 0 someday; I would like that, actually. as in my opinion that era produced the best Traveller adventure I personally have ever ran, The Long Way Home.

As for T20...I was a playtester on T20. Good game...but like all games (yes, even MGT) it has issues. And with QLI being run in the manner it presently is, it had no chance. If T20 had been that successful would there even be a MGT? Maybe not.

THIS is Traveller's best chance to regain its position as the preminent science fiction RPG. If you want to keep playin older versions, fine. Enjoy yourself. But realize that NEW people have to start playing Traveller or it will never get that spot back. MGT will (and is) getting those new people, from all indications.

Allen

 

[mike wightman]

Compare Supplement 3 with the MgT Spinward Marches - I know which provides the greater setting detail.

A couple more like that and mongoose will have fleshed out the 3rd Imperium setting more than GDW did

 

[MJD]

The cancellation of ACT was absolutely nothing to do with Mongoose Traveller. Indeed, Mongoose had not begun to make moves towards getting a license at that point.

Marc told me that he was not willing to allow ACT because it would compete with T5. Whatever information anyone has from any source whatsoever to the contrary, fact is that:

ACT was vetoed by Marc Miller specifically because he thought it would compete with T5.


This is coming from the author/prospective publisher of ACT and the reason came from Marc himself. No idea who has said what to the contrary but this is fact straight from the source.

 

[Gallowglacht]

A fair question, all the way around. But this is essentially the reason. T4 was dead on arrival, even though there were the rare diamonds in its deepest, most troubled "rough ". Mostly because of the timing of its delivery, and helped not at all by its almost complete lack of editorial competence.

But as an RPG gamer, and worse, a 'Traveller', I don't think the brand can afford another poor showing as an armed & xenophobic niche in a niche market of niches. Plus, we need to support our local FLGS if and where they continue to exist. Better to buy another new Traveller product than picking up Turd: The Flushing or some other case of buyers remorse looking for a homeless shelter. Trust me, I have shelves and shelves of those too.

Even if, for the sake of arguement, I happens to be Turd; In Space. All you would get in the future is a slightly polished turd. Now I don't think MGT is a Turd, and neither do those who bought it. I don't think its great, it doesn't suit my playstyle and I think it is presented very poorly. But I want to like it, find the diamond in the rough. But because I haven't liked what I've seen so far I guess I need to hear some encouraging signs. And hearing "buy it/ vote for it because its Traveller" is damning with very faint praise.

I don't know if this is making sense, but it feels faguely off-putting to see it in terms of supporting a "brand" rather than a good game. I play because it feels more alive than Transhuman space or Blue Planet, more "real" than Dragonstar/Dawning star and othe sci-fantasy games; not because I'm a "Traveller". If Traveller sucks, it should die, not live because it was great back in the day. If Traveller flourishes, it should do so because its a good game, not out of misplaced loyalty. Am I wrong??

[The above is meant just for discussion. I don't think MGT is a turd, and I believe the majority of people who bought it bought it because they liked it. Its just that seeing this type of comment and the "vote for Traveller in the ennies to show how united we are" gives me doubts. It is not meant as anti-Traveller. The joke in my sig is a "if you can't laugh at yourself" type dealio.
This ends the thread jack, but I'll still be interested in opinions and might post a poll on the idea of supporting Traveller as a brand. Unless something bright and shiney distracts me.]

 

[rust]

This ends the thread jack, but I'll still be interested in opinions...

Well, I would not buy any Traveller material if I did not see any use for it in
my setting and campaign. In fact, there are lots of Traveller stuff I did not
buy because its content did not convince me. My main reason to buy MGT
was the (in my opinion) excellent character generation system. Had MGT on-
ly been a reprint of CT, I would not have bought it, and I would not have vo-
ted for it.

 

[Allensh]

The cancellation of ACT was absolutely nothing to do with Mongoose Traveller. Indeed, Mongoose had not begun to make moves towards getting a license at that point.

Marc told me that he was not willing to allow ACT because it would compete with T5. Whatever information anyone has from any source whatsoever to the contrary, fact is that:

ACT was vetoed by Marc Miller specifically because he thought it would compete with T5.


This is coming from the author/prospective publisher of ACT and the reason came from Marc himself. No idea who has said what to the contrary but this is fact straight from the source.

Understood. I apologize for spreading an inaccuracy.

Allen

 

[Allensh]

I don't know if this is making sense, but it feels faguely off-putting to see it in terms of supporting a "brand" rather than a good game. I play because it feels more alive than Transhuman space or Blue Planet, more "real" than Dragonstar/Dawning star and othe sci-fantasy games; not because I'm a "Traveller". If Traveller sucks, it should die, not live because it was great back in the day. If Traveller flourishes, it should do so because its a good game, not out of misplaced loyalty. Am I wrong??

I obviously don't agree with your view of the book...but no, you shouldn't support something if you don't like it. Not supporting something does not have to include interjecting negative opinions into discussions that occur on a message board about said game just because you can...and of course I am not saying that you have been doing that. Others have.

Discussion of the style and presentation of MGT is obviously off-topic for this thread but...I myself found it refreshing to read an RPG that didn't resort to annoying graphics, pretentious writing styles and/or bad game fiction to "immerse the reader in the game world". I found MGT to be straightforward and simple, easy to get, and in some ways better written than previous editions. Yes, some of the art is atrocious; I guess the art isn't that important to me. Artists don't come cheap, and the gaming industry as a whole can't afford to pay like magazines or other publications (WotC being an exception). I liked a nice simple black-and-white book.

I support Mongoose Traveller because I like it. It does exactly what I want an edition of Traveller to do. I have run it and its enjoyable.

Allen

 

[Supplement Four]

EDIT: Confession time. My initial hostility towards T5 was largely caused by the cancellation of Martin J. Dougherty's Avenger Classic Traveller project which at the time was thought to be due to T5. Information that has come to light since suggests it was really more due to the advent of MGT. ACT was excellent.

Actually, it wasn't. ACT has many more problems than MGT has, and if the choice was between ACT or MGT, I'd jump on MGT and be very, very happy about it.

 

[Vargas]

This part of the board is dedicated to Mongoose Traveller...and yet ANY time a thread is started about this game someone, be it you. or Supplement Four, or someone, has to engage in threadcrapping.

IMO the thread title invites comparisons between MGT and earlier versions of the game. Additionally, I think it's understandable that the latest version, no matter who publishes it, will be compared to the six major versions which preceded it and that those comments will wind up in the part of the board dedicated to that version. YMM/OV.

 

[Supplement Four]

What I see is for every “X version is the best and I will never change” fan that Hates Mongoose Traveller, there seems to be another rabid “Pro-Mongoose Traveller” fan that takes any observation or criticism as a personal attack on their God, Country and Mother.

Sorry, but my morning orange juice just came out of my nose.

I haven't seen anyone that specifically wants MGT to fail. I have seen a lot of people very disappointed in it (including myself). It might have a lot of excitement in the sales department, but in the gaming department, it is very lacking. Is it a bad game? Nope.

Spinward echoes what Andrew said and how I feel as well. MGT isn't a "bad" game. It's just not what it could have been. It didn't live up to its opportunity. And, I am disappointed in it because of that.

It's given me no reason to stop playing CT and jump onboard.

That's what I wanted--a reason to stop playing CT.

Yeah, that's the first thing I noticed - it looks cheap and amateurish, especially compared to something like T20. The layout is dull, and most of the art is ugly or, worse, un-Traveller.

Yes, I am unimpressed with the look of the game as well. I've seen the main rulebook now.

I do like the black covers, the the line and the half arrowhead. That looks "neat". It looks "Traveller".

But, the rest of the book looks like the interior of T4...and that's not good.

I look at Mongoose's Conan game (which I have and use), at all the neat art and "atmosphere" it brings to that universe. And, then I look at MGT, and I wonder how both products could come from the same company.

I'm wondering if part of the reason that MGT is so successful is that each book is less expensive for Mongoose to produce.

This part of the board is dedicated to Mongoose Traveller...and yet ANY time a thread is started about this game someone, be it you. or Supplement Four, or someone, has to engage in threadcrapping.

There's not threadcrapping. If you look at the OP, we were answering the question the man posed. Just like you. Our opinion just happens to be on the other side of the line.

If we were fawning fans of MGT, something tells me you wouldn't accuse us of threadcrapping.

 

[DonM]

I'll admit to being wary of MGT at first, but I'm really starting to warm to it, and yes, I'm deeply involved with T5, and I'm a MASSIVE MT fan.

Here's the part of MGT I don't understand: Since with the SRD, if you don't like a mechanic, you can build and release an open content mechanic for what you want to replace, MGT could and can be the "big tent" for Traveller, especially including those T20 fans, since they can play in both SRDs.

So, why isn't anyone who thinks the MGT mechanics are broken fixing them?

Like S4 could surely build an OGL-based version of the UGM, and since he wouldn't be including how to generate characteristics, he could even use the TLL and it could have the Traveller logo and everything.

 

[Allensh]

If we were fawning fans of MGT, something tells me you wouldn't accuse us of threadcrapping.

If you were fawning fans of MGT and you went into the CT section to a thread about CT and posted NOTHING but negative opinions about CT and kept insisting that MGT was better...yes I would. That's what I meant by "threadcrapping". I don't do that, and I don't like it when other people do.

I like MGT. I recognize that it has warts but all in all I like it and feel it is a worthy succesor to CT. If that makes me a "fawning fan"...well, its easy to trot out terms like that as a form of intimidation. Resorting to namecalling and labeling is also a good way to show that you have nothing really to contribute to this discussion and are reaching.

I don't intimidate that easily, as anyone who knows me at all can testify...but I also feel that I have no reason to discuss this with you further.

Allen

 

[aramis]

So, why isn't anyone who thinks the MGT mechanics are broken fixing them?

Waiting on some permissions from a third party...

 

[Echo]

It is curious that about 95% of the criticisms laid down against Mongoose Traveller, now seem to boil down to the layout and graphic design, rather than any specific issue of how the game runs, these days. And that is coming from critics of all persuasions - the 'grouchy grognards', the 'ultramodernists', and even the occasional 'fawning fanboy'. The game itself, however, remains highly playable and fun - and it doesn't require tweaks or supplements to the game to make it so.

There is a lot less criticism of the game on neutral sites (rpg.net, etc), incidently, along with generally positive reviews. With an easiliy identifyable brand, access to distribution markets and those positive reviews - it's not hard not to see why sales are strong.

Why do various groups keep complaining? Well, as I say, I do think it's a minority of the market that is buying the game currently, but people of a like mind do tend to gather in groups and reinforce their views, often leading to a polarising effect as personalities get involved.

 

[Vargas]

If you were fawning fans of MGT and you went into the CT section to a thread about CT and posted NOTHING but negative opinions about CT and kept insisting that MGT was better...yes I would. That's what I meant by "threadcrapping". I don't do that, and I don't like it when other people do.

Let me restate my earlier comments a different way: When/if T5 comes out, you'll find a bunch of threads alternately praising and condemning it on the T5 board just like you've seen done for MGT. At least that's the way I'll bet. And I have seen people slam other incarnations, including CT, on their "home" boards.

As an aside, I feel that sentiment on RPG.net has been running about 50/50 since MGT's release. Part of it may be due to the fact that a lot of discussion/argument happened last year when it was first announced.

 

[Echo]

This is the latest thread I could find on Mongoose Traveller on the rpg.net forum:

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=407933

Feel free to stomp on their enthusiasm, but there are quite a lot of threads like this on that site - including a long one illustrating the chargen system in progress.

 

[Gallowglacht]

It is curious that about 95% of the criticisms laid down against Mongoose Traveller, now seem to boil down to the layout and graphic design, rather than any specific issue of how the game runs, these days. And that is coming from critics of all persuasions - the 'grouchy grognards', the 'ultramodernists', and even the occasional 'fawning fanboy'. The game itself, however, remains highly playable and fun - and it doesn't require tweaks or supplements to the game to make it so.

Are they though? I have avoided comment as I don't want to appear to be threadcrapping and most of the points were covered during the playtesting when there was plenty of critisism. My main problem with it is the system, the presentation is secondary.
It really isn't just about the art.

It isn't broken, it is playable. It isn't for me, but neither is GURPS, and that is popular too. But its worth noting I don't like it for what it is, not for any vested interest or secret adjenda, and I'm sure it goes for others.
And equaly I believe others love it without vested fanboism.

Have we still not worked past the grognard/fanboi phase?

And back on topic I still don't believe anyone wants it to fail, or could make it fail anyway.

 

[tbeard1999]

It really seems to me that some people around here want the new version of Traveller to fail. Some even seem to be actively campaigning for this, trying to persuade others not to like it or something. All indications in the real world are that their efforts ae for naught, but they keep trying.

Seems to me that, in the absence of reliable mind reading equipment, it would be more sensible to address the arguments that critics of the system make, rather than whinge on about their motives.

I'd also add my observation that a great deal of acrimony has been created by folks who seem utterly intolerant of any criticisms of the game.

Is it because they are so locked into the nostalagia of the past that they can't recognize that a game has to evolve or it will die?

First of all, your assertion that a game "has" to evolve is (a) conclusory; (b) unsupported by evidence and (c) not conceded by everyone.

Second, even if we grant the first statement, you've failed to demonstrate that MGT shows much "evolution". In point of fact, I'd argue that it is an almost completely derivative product that has little in the way of innovative mechanics or concepts. This, of course, is No Problem for me, since I have generally found that the bullsh*t quotient of a game design (and the degree of design incompetence) is often directly proportional to its claimed "innovation", "evolutionary leaps", etc.

So, considering that you've made essentially two empty assertions, I'd say that the most polite response is "answer unclear, try again".

Is it because their favorite past version of Traveller failed (not including CT in this, of course) and this one isn't, and this makes them mad?

Sorry, but I'm not interested in playing Dr. Phil.

I strongly suggest that you (a) respond to specific criticisms of the game, if you can; and (b) accept that some things are subjective, like taste.

And note that your reasoning could be applied to you -- "why are some folks so intolerant of criticism of MGT? Is it because <insert psychobabble>"?

 

[tbeard1999]

It is curious that about 95% of the criticisms laid down against Mongoose Traveller, now seem to boil down to the layout and graphic design, rather than any specific issue of how the game runs, these days.

There have been a large number of posts in this very forum discussing specific objections about the mechanics and other game aspects of MGT.

Given that you almost can't avoid such posts here, I wonder why you find it so difficult to find them?

Perhaps you aren't looking very hard -- or you're intentionally distorting the record?

 

[mbrinkhues]

A lot of the critizism on the game system is based on the open playtest document, NOT on the final product and there on the combat system (That was changed a lot)

Other critizism is heavily debated (number of skills) and only hold by a very few.

Actually most critizism is either repetetive or does only state "something is wrong" and not WHAT