I hear you, however...
This should be a very easy matter if we just keep the definitions straight and in order, and trust them. If a game is able to function in its own right, without any evident dependencies on any other games in order to function properly and fully - it is by definition a game (in this particular context anyway).... All this "standalone expansions" BS is a marketing ploy. A devised sham-hybrid, to disguise an actual game to supposedly be something else. It is usually and essentially spin-off products that "leans" on the brand of another more established product to improve it own chances for commercial success. FOTS is exactly this kind of product. By definition it is game, however it is marketed as an expansion. NTW would probably be marketed in the exact same way if it had not been that the ETW-brand was so tarnished at the time - so they, the SEGA marketing people, promoted it as a "full game" instead...
By definition both NTW and FOTS are "full games" in their own right, not expansions... Setting, theme and features etc. etc are irrelevant. That are non-factors in terms of functionality as a game. If we stick to the definitions this is a non-matter. In terms of the forum this certainly screws things up, but personally I think it is better to stay true and straight then to bunch up stuff that does not really have any evident dependencies. FOTS has no true dependencies to STW2, as I understand it. Similarities perhaps, but then again so does MTW1 and MTW2 as well. Similarities are irrelevant in terms of definition. Either it meet the criterions of the definition or it fails to do so.
I say, keep things apart. In terms of NTW, it is promoted by SEGA as a game in its own right, by definition it also successfully meet such criterions - and it clearly has no evident dependencies to ETW. FOTS was promoted as an expansion, but by definition it is a game. I'm certainly inclined to say that CA should face consequence for screwing around like this and bunch it up with STW2. However, in a strict, more accurate and proper sense, any title (including FOTS) that can by definition be considered as a game deserve their own sections. Therefore give the damn thing its own section. This will also make things easier for the future as definition can serve as a solid, accurate and unquestionable tool for policy on future TW-releases...
...
Now, I realize that this does create blatant problems for the plans of "shortening" the entire size of forum and its sections. Personally, I regard that idea (even if I can fully understand the motive for it) as rather dubious and unrealistic as it basically aims to wet-nurse people who are openly too lazy to do some mere scrolling. It also makes the highly questionable assumption that new TW-releases will not ever happen and yet again expand the forum all over again... And in addition to all that, why should other and older games be punished, as to cater people who are so lazy that they can not bother themselves to scroll? Are such people really the future of this site? I seriously doubt that, to be perfectly honest here. I have yet to see anything that would actually support that with some credibility (by all means forward it, if it exists).
The forum length will get ever longer, regardless what you guys do, as another and another TW-game are released eventually. To shorten it, in effect "dumb-it down" with careless cuts in sub-sections will only make various people scream and possibly even make them leave this site. How is that a good thing? All for the sake of wet-nursing people who are too lazy to scroll. It just don't add up... Am I missing something?
- A
Bookmarks