Discussion YMMV / TheNewOrderLastDaysOfEurope

Huh, you were a developer back then? Just give me the entry you're planning to do and I'll see if it's worth a look.

And as unfortunate illustrations manifest themselves… I don’t want to edit war, so I’ll just ask here for someone else to weigh in and/or help out.

I would agree with this as well, I understand there is difficulty keeping YMMV pages objective but those entries seem to be solely representing one point of view regarding new content. In addition, I would like to add that many of the changes that are blamed on "realism" are just adding more to old content (Speer and Bormann facelifts) or replacing old content that whitewashes Nazis such as Burgundy and Heydrich (which seems to portray ordinary aspects of the Nazi ideology followed by most in the regime as being "esoteric", leading to strange aspects such as Bormann being portrayed as more moderate than Himmler).

I mostly agree, and I wrote literally all of them. Just last night, I cut a bunch of one.

I don't mind if other people want to remove or moderate parts of them, but I also think they are at least describing a real phenomenon, that stuff people used to be happy to hear about is now something that, at the very least, a very real and very vocal segment of their core audience is now generally unhappy to hear about, whatever their reasons or motives. I don't believe it's fair to say that they need to be totally expunged just because they represent petty complaining.

I very strongly disagree with what you just did, but I also don’t want to get in trouble so I guess I’ll leave it at that. But I will tell you that I personally feel this falls dangerously close to erasing perfectly legitimate entries because they express an opinion you, personally, disagree with rather than because they don’t represent an example of the trope or the reactions of a broad swath of the audience.

Ok, thanks for telling me that it was moreso an observation about why certain people aren't happy with the changes. So I am going to apologize for the generalization of these entries and instantly deleting them off the bat, it just looked rather odd and purely from the prespective of those that "don't like where the mod is going" rather than a more neutral prespective.

I think maybe we could compromise on this topic to a degree. I am not sure that we can have Franchise Original Sin entries regarding the backlash against the reworks, but if we could, maybe compromise on this by rewriting the whole entries to be one entry and highlight it's mainly referring to the "anti-rework" crowd in TNO.

However, I feel in general Broken Base works more as an entry here if you want to go into the complaints in greater detail.

I feel the broken base does go into most of that as it stands. My intent was more to track why and how descriptions of reworks and the motives behind them went from something my crowd was mostly happy and excited about to something that has my crowd turned off and unhappy.

Because again, I do think this is something that’s been around from the beginning and that the reason people like me are unhappy is because it has escalated over time.

Also, I will probably edit at least one of the broken base entries to better explain why people who don’t like the changes are unhappy because I am pretty sure the original entries were written by people on your end of the argument and I have felt the need to change them many times over time to try to better articulate why people like me are unhappy besides sheer inertia and reactionarism.

Well? I would like to restore at least some of it.

I think adding some of the content from your original entries into a Broken Base entry would work, as long as it represents both sides of the argument and not just your point of view. I appreciate that not everyone is happy regarding changes to existing TNO content but it would be an injustice in my eyes to only have one side of the argument portrayed (which was my original issue with the Franchise Original Sin entries).

And to be clear, I also don't like it when Broken Base entries just straight-up fail to represent both sides of a broken base, or when they deliberately present one side as in the wrong and the other as in the right.

But I don't agree that Franchise Original Sin needs to constantly add the other side of a given argument. The What Could Have Been page sure doesn't feel the need to give the other side of the argument a fair shake while explaining the rationale for cutting things! Just being clear that "many fans" feel a certain way should be enough, so long as it's not a full-on shoehorn. It's not a trope that needs that beyond its presence on the YMMV page, which in my eyes already presents it as something that doesn't represent an unqualified, factual subject so much as a variable opinion to begin with.

If it needs rewriting to be less wordy and over-negative, sure. I myself felt I went overboard trying to tie in Japan and Brittany to show the slow escalation of a process that arguably started in its current form in Italy and ended with basically the entire German sphere being totally removed or reworked.

Hello.

I've been thinking a bit on this discussion and I do believe that the described discontent of some fans over reworked content is a prevalent opinion in the TNO fandom. Even if it is a subjective view that can be agreed or disagreed with, I've seen it enough times that it could warrant an entry on the YMMV page, which is about opinions like this.

I believe the most problematic element of the original entries is that they were listed under Franchise Original Sin. Specifically, I don't think this should be under that trope because the rework updates have yet to be released, so it can't yet be accurately described as "bad" or "good". For the time being, the upcoming reworks are not yet viable to be described under Franchise Original Sin. When the reworks do release and get a negative, or at least controversial, reception, then it could be added to that trope.

I personally believe this situation can be resolved by describing the disaffection under Tainted by the Preview. It is a YMMV trope suited for upcoming content like the reworks and is applicable for both universal and non-universal audience reactions. So long as the entry doesn't get too complain-y (hence Complaining About Shows You Don't Like), I believe it could work.

But again, the entries themselves weren’t just complaining. They were an attempt to understand or explore why the same reasoning being applied to reworking or removing things that were well received, or at least not as poorly received, is now resulting in things that are poorly received.

Tainted by the preview is also probably a trope that needs to be on here at some point, but I do not feel it addresses my core complaint that my entries were deleted because the deleter disagreed with them, not because they were factually inaccurate or failed to fit the trope. (Although they did need trimming and revision.)

Yeah, sorry for implying that your entries were just complaining. That was uncalled for.

I agree that a YMMV item shouldn't be removed solely because one troper disagreed with the opinion, but I still don't believe that Franchise Original Sin is applicable here, not only because the reworks need to be released first (as I explained prior), but also because this trope is more so about the work itself than the rationale of the developers.

This trope is dependent on the full work releasing and identifying flaws in it that could be found in earlier updates (i.e. the removal of the Antikhrist in relatively early updates). A developer's reasoning behind reworking content isn't really a "flaw" that can be found in the mod and can only be known through Word of God statements that might not necessarily apply to the work (i.e. Death of the Author). Instead, Franchise Original Sin would judge the content on their own merits; if the reworked content is consistently being criticized as more boring than the old content, then the trope will explain how the replacement of exciting content could be traced all the way back to the Antikhrist's removal.

This is why I tried to focus the entries on fan reactions rather than the content, but alright. I guess patiently waiting for the reworks to actually be released and then gauging the reaction is a legitimate request, not least because I find myself somewhat persuaded by the fact that I’m the only one arguing this point of view for my own entries and three different people all disagree with me.

I vote to purge. I rarely hear all that much about Kaiserredux on the TNO side, and while what I do occasionally hear is unflattering, it's hardly uncommon in the handful of other mod communities I'm in. Kaiserredux has got a toxic reputation.

Yeah, even on our site a lot of the Kaiserredux character pages are just, like, weird racist memes? Like the three different Hotep paths in the Black Belt Republic that only seem to exist to laugh at wacky minorities even if it makes little historical sense, or the wide variety of "ethnic minorities want to destroy the white man" paths that just come off as...uncomfortably obsessive. Also, I knew an Indian guy who went on their discord and he said they immediately called him the N-word?

Regardless, this specific instance on the YMMV page seems pretty petty, childish and shameless and should probably just be edited out. If someone could do that, that'd be fantastic.

Doesn't seem to be that far from the truth from what I've noticed on both mods' Discord servers, to be honest (not that TNO comes up much on the KX server either).