A Pro's Review of 2013

[LAW0306]

Introduction
Twilight 2000 was always one of those games that I read more than I played. I spent a lot of time coming up with scenarios and survivor communities but very rarely got to play it. I played a short campaign - as a player - where I blew myself up with a grenade that bounced back down the stairs to me after a bad roll - but that was about it. The whole 'military unit' campaign flavour, accompanied by the embarrassingly Americanocentric viewpoint of the material made it a poor fit for the freewheeling, British RPG groups I've always been a part of, but I loved the setting and while not a greatly played game it holds a seat of affection for me.

(majority of the text removed at the request of the originating website)-kato13

HERE IS THE LINK

http://www.flamesrising.com/twilight-2013-rpg-review/

[kato13]

(text removed at the request of the originating website)

Score
Style 2
Substance 4
Overall 3

Review by James 'Grim' Desborough

-----------------------------------------------------------
Followup comments are generally positive for the game.

I find it odd that they don't say what the scores are out of

I am guessing 5 since it says that is it not below average.


Researched the reviewer and he is a published author for both WotC and Steve Jackson Games

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_1_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=James%20Desborough

[Twilight2000v3MM]

I always found it kinda hard to read reviews of anyhting from a person that may or may have done work for a competing company. I maybe wrong, and if I am I apologize.

I couldn't post a review of T2K13 and be unbiased.

[LAW0306]

could not fit the last stuff in so i put the link for all to read wanted to be as up front and honest as possable.

[kato13]

I figured you hit the post size limit, it is kinda annoying. I am still trying to increase it but I think it is a fundamental database/software issue I have been unable to resolve.

[Targan]

I intend to write a review of my own but have decided to playtest the game first. I'll let everyone here know when it is done.

[Mohoender]

Also I agree with some of the comments in that review I find it, personnaly, needlessly harsh on the game and often out of site. A good exemple is the comment on the PDF version. It works perfectly with (of course) all the problems coming with PDF. If it doesn't go fast, the writer must change his computer. Other critics are perfectly well made and I might make my comment on them but later as I might not have enough room for it at this moment.

However taking for my self one of the rating given below here is mine:
Game Play: I don't know I have played it yet (and might for the time coming)
Rules- clarity: 7 out of 10 (agree)
Rules- completeness: 9 out of 10 (agree)
Character creation: 8 out of 10 (I love the original way)
Background Story: 5 out of 10 (that is personnal and often well defended by the creators)

Then I found interesting to post the answers to this review as I found them good as well. Sorry I didn't post two of these comments but the last ones had come to insults and I didn't want to transfer these to this forum.

(text removed at the request of the originating website)

[kato13]

I also looked at the comments but while positive they are anonymous. The original review writer did connect his name and reputation to his words so I have to give that a little more weight.

[Mohoender]

Here I the comment I wanted to make. They are more of a critic toward what I found to be a partial review.

I agree that The T2K was Americanocentric (so to say) but that was never a true problem and enough material was available to overcome easily what some could see as a problem. Many people around here posted way enough to do that and still do.

The point about Cyberpunk is silly at best as both games have not much in common beside the general mess (and I played both). Of course it is Paranoic but as time proved, the original T2K was that as well

PDF has no problem as long as you get the proper computer (always a problem with PDF). I agree with the low amount of illustration but more would have make the book even bigger. Just a tiny little point, PDF are always expensive to print and as a matter of fact, a hard copy would be nice.

About rules the answers I just posted said it all. I haven't gone through all of them and I remain unable to comment them. By the way, after 25 years of roleplaying I have never read any rules in full. I have full respect for those who do but find them nuts in the meantime.

The comment on artwork is not that false but it is unfair. When you know how hard and expensive it is to come up with something outstanding you become more forgiving. By the way it has become a bad habit to concentrate on artwork. As a result, among some new games you have great artworks illustrating "No Games". Another point, in the former T2K, the artwork was not better and that would be a critic you can make toward T2013 (they could have improved a bit).

About writing what is said is saddly true. However, almost no book is coming out today with proper corrections made. The problem is that the editors are not doing their job anymore (that's a reader opinion) and even prize wining books are full of spelling and typing mistakes.

I agree with the figures. 10% is hard but you could have made the oposite critic on the original T2K. I agree about the Flu (a flu only is not enough). I also agree with the critic on countries role but that is their position and I never agreed to the original T2K as well. Many have said that timelines... are very personnal and I strongly agree even if I love to share and read them. By the way they are making their point and they had to make a decision.

Here would be my comments. As always they reflect a personnal position and can be widely critisized.

[Mohoender]

I also looked at the comments but while positive they are anonymous. The original review writer did connect his name and reputation to his words so I have to give that a little more weight.

That is a point but this is still internet and most comments (including ours) are anonymous. They went up to defend it and actually, they essentially made it on the rules as critics (even harsh) made on the other points are made on some solid ground. Even as the writer was not anonymous, the comments made on the book size..., and the way he makes them could have been done with some more sense of measure (or so I think). At last, I give more weight to any comments made by any of you on this forum as we are all amateurs with, then, no interests behind them (or so I can think). The guy is writing on what seem to be a pro site that is living on how many people they attract more than on how well made their comments are done.

[Targan]

That is a point but this is still internet and most comments (including ours) are anonymous.

This is true but I am happy to back up any comments I make on the internet in person with anyone who might like to come and see me about them. I actually got into some trouble on some of the old RPGHost forums when some smart arsed fools started getting personal and I invited them to meet with me face to face. There are others here (Law springs to mind) who I am sure would be happy to do the same. I would be (and have been) prepared to provide my full name and some details via PM or other methods.

[Mohoender]

This is true but I am happy to back up any comments I make on the internet in person with anyone who might like to come and see me about them. I actually got into some trouble on some of the old RPGHost forums when some smart arsed fools started getting personal and I invited them to meet with me face to face. There are others here (Law springs to mind) who I am sure would be happy to do the same. I would be (and have been) prepared to provide my full name and some details via PM or other methods.

I agree with you Targan. That is also why I didn't post the nasty comments that followed. I consider people making anonymous insults to be about nothing. However, I found the people attacking the reviewer idea of a "monster book" with heavy rules to be fair.

I'm playing star wars and that makes a 2 meter raw on my desk. I have played dungeons & dragons and T2013 is small compare to it. The first T2K was already a "monster book" but still a great game (in my opinion). And that comment would be true for amost every RPG. Strangely that has become a general comment from so-called pro; a comment that is never made against well known RPG (representing several meters raw but considered surprisingly light). Of course, we could make games with plenty of storyline and very thin rules. However, this is something you can find already, it is called a novel and so-called pro are strangely overseeing that. The best RPG I ever played were done with no rules. That is also why I quit making games and I'm working on my first novel (2 years behind already ).

In that particular case, many critics are true but needlessly offensive and they could have hit me more if they were made with more measure. Actually, I have made many of them myself (artwork, spelling, timeline...) but I really wish to give this game a chance. There are too few games out everyyear now and if that suits a number of player, no need to burn it in public place.

[kato13]

I had a respectful request to remove the full text of the linked article from the owner of the originating website. For legal and just plain neighborly reasons I obliged them.

In general we should post snippets, but I understand Law's desire to not edit as not to appear to be adding his own bias. I also was reluctant to delete anything for the same reasons but I will respect this request.

[Tegyrius]

At last, I give more weight to any comments made by any of you on this forum as we are all amateurs with, then, no interests behind them (or so I can think). The guy is writing on what seem to be a pro site that is living on how many people they attract more than on how well made their comments are done.

Well, he is writing from the perspective of someone who's published in the industry - ergo, as much of a "pro" as me, and with companies as well-known as any for which I've worked. I won't say that makes his opinion any more right, but I do feel it makes him more at least somewhat more informed on game design within the constraints of the industry.

Even if I don't agree with a lot of what he wrote.

This is true but I am happy to back up any comments I make on the internet in person with anyone who might like to come and see me about them. I actually got into some trouble on some of the old RPGHost forums when some smart arsed fools started getting personal and I invited them to meet with me face to face.

Mmm... with all due respect, Targan, I don't see such invitations as carrying any particular value, given the impracticality of making a transcontinental or transoceanic flight for the sole purpose of face-to-face discussion on something that ultimately really isn't that important when you put it in perspective. It's a lot more reasonable to make such requests if you're in the same city, but the distributed nature of this medium has some weird effects on what would otherwise be somewhat normal social conventions. I'll acknowledge the principle of geographically-induced consequences, though.

However, I found the people attacking the reviewer idea of a "monster book" with heavy rules to be fair.

Why am I not surprised at this, given your stated position on the lack of completeness in certain parts of the book As I noted over in the 93GS forums (and in the original review's comment thread), I'm baffled by his insistence that the book is too big, given that every other size complaint I can recall has had to do with the lack of certain content on the military-heavy end of the scale.

- C.

[Targan]

Mmm... with all due respect, Targan, I don't see such invitations as carrying any particular value, given the impracticality of making a transcontinental or transoceanic flight for the sole purpose of face-to-face discussion on something that ultimately really isn't that important when you put it in perspective. It's a lot more reasonable to make such requests if you're in the same city, but the distributed nature of this medium has some weird effects on what would otherwise be somewhat normal social conventions. I'll acknowledge the principle of geographically-induced consequences, though.

I take no offence to the above comments and you are absolutely right. It should be noted that

A) When I started posting on the old forums I had only recently started posting on internet forums as I had never before had home internet access, and I was unused to the amazing levels of crassness and rudeness that the internet seems to bring out in some people; and
B) I stopped trying to "call people out" on their rudeness fairly quickly when I realised the futility of it.

Its just that in Australian society (much like in American society I suspect) if an adult male is openly verbally rude to another adult male they can very shortly expect a punch in the face. I've found that one of the benefits of getting older is that I have become less and less inclined to take crap from people. And if it comes to a physical confrontation my opponent had best be prepared to knock me out because once I'm pissed off I find it REALLY hard to back off.

The community at this forum is generally quite even tempered and I really do respect everyones' opinons here. It is actually very rare for things to get heated around here and I really like that.