Yes, I think you raise a fine point there, Bill. One of the main criticisms I've seen of D&D is that it's too exhaustive, mentioning too many games at the expense of the story. With VG, I'm trying to pull back from that, acknowledging that there are dozens of other sequels and knockoffs, etc., but not bothering to mention all of them. Looking back, I think D&D would have been stronger if I'd just stuck to the really important games, perhaps saving the "cataloging" for appendices or footnotes. Then again, I'm sure people would have hated on me for that, too, claiming I did shoddy research since I didn't mention X, Y, Z.
While some of the "minor" criticisms of "Dungeons & Desktops" I've read on Amazon are valid (pictures are too dark, occasional grammatical errors), the criticisms I read sort of scared me after I ordered the book. I half expected to get a pile of photocopied leaflets, written by a CRPG-obsessed five-year-old, stapled together! Imagine my surprise when I received a REAL book!
As for the "too exhaustive" criticism, I do not agree. I haven't finished the book yet (it's not the kind of book you can "speed-read" through), but from what I've read so far, the heck with the critics, I was glad you included all the games you did; it made me want to go out there and play all these lost, historical games! Despite what some of the critics said, I found that "D&D" was not merely a bunch of game reviews, but that each game was carefully reviewed within the context of how it placed within the historical timeline. That was very cool! It was also the point of the book... what were these critics expecting?
How are you supposed to write a book on the history of CRPG's if you skip over the many important games in this genre? Too many games? Give me a break! After all, there's more than 30 years of CRPG's to cover with so many "historical" accomplishments; of course there's going to be a lot of games! I am convinced, though, that you're some troll locked in a dungeon whose sole purpose in life is to play every CRPG ever made exhaustively. :-)
I would have liked to see more comments or interviews with the authors of these games, but I understand how difficult it is to track these people down, much less get them to agree to say anything about the games. You've more than made up for that in your analysis of the games' "historicity" in your book.
I suppose you can't please everyone, but the few criticisms I read on Amazon were over-the-top, in my opinion. Do you have a lot of enemies or something? To be honest, I was never a hardcore CRPG'er, but the book makes me realize how much I missed out on. I'll finish the book this weekend (hopefully.... I've got too many "real life" things going on simultaneously), and post a "countering" review on Amazon. Yes, it will be positive. You are clearly the preeminent authority of CRPG's!
Yes, I think you raise a fine point there, Bill. One of the main criticisms I've seen of D&D is that it's too exhaustive, mentioning too many games at the expense of the story. With VG, I'm trying to pull back from that, acknowledging that there are dozens of other sequels and knockoffs, etc., but not bothering to mention all of them. Looking back, I think D&D would have been stronger if I'd just stuck to the really important games, perhaps saving the "cataloging" for appendices or footnotes. Then again, I'm sure people would have hated on me for that, too, claiming I did shoddy research since I didn't mention X, Y, Z.
While some of the "minor" criticisms of "Dungeons & Desktops" I've read on Amazon are valid (pictures are too dark, occasional grammatical errors), the criticisms I read sort of scared me after I ordered the book. I half expected to get a pile of photocopied leaflets, written by a CRPG-obsessed five-year-old, stapled together! Imagine my surprise when I received a REAL book!
As for the "too exhaustive" criticism, I do not agree. I haven't finished the book yet (it's not the kind of book you can "speed-read" through), but from what I've read so far, the heck with the critics, I was glad you included all the games you did; it made me want to go out there and play all these lost, historical games! Despite what some of the critics said, I found that "D&D" was not merely a bunch of game reviews, but that each game was carefully reviewed within the context of how it placed within the historical timeline. That was very cool! It was also the point of the book... what were these critics expecting?
How are you supposed to write a book on the history of CRPG's if you skip over the many important games in this genre? Too many games? Give me a break! After all, there's more than 30 years of CRPG's to cover with so many "historical" accomplishments; of course there's going to be a lot of games! I am convinced, though, that you're some troll locked in a dungeon whose sole purpose in life is to play every CRPG ever made exhaustively. :-)
I would have liked to see more comments or interviews with the authors of these games, but I understand how difficult it is to track these people down, much less get them to agree to say anything about the games. You've more than made up for that in your analysis of the games' "historicity" in your book.
I suppose you can't please everyone, but the few criticisms I read on Amazon were over-the-top, in my opinion. Do you have a lot of enemies or something? To be honest, I was never a hardcore CRPG'er, but the book makes me realize how much I missed out on. I'll finish the book this weekend (hopefully.... I've got too many "real life" things going on simultaneously), and post a "countering" review on Amazon. Yes, it will be positive. You are clearly the preeminent authority of CRPG's!
qoj hpmoj o+ 6uo73q 3Jv 3svq jnoh 77V