I get the feeling that discussions (OK, arguments) like this keep cropping up because of the kind of triple genre that BattleTech spans, each which have their own, unique demands.
Fiction: Innately limiting--it requires a coherent story with a beginning, middle and an end. Events must happen for understandable reasons, mysteries must be resolved, otherwise the author looks like they're making things up or pulling things out of their arse (deus ex machina and all that). Readers want to know "What happened next?"
Roleplaying: Require player agency and centricity. The players must be the heroes of the story. So any RPG based on literature (not only BTU, but any game based on Lord of the Rings or Dune or Game of Thrones or whatever) immediately runs into the problem of either sidelining the characters into minor roles, or allowing players to impact major events and thus have any future fiction in the series be useless as a source of game ideas. Players want to know "What can my character do next?"
Miniature Tabletop Wargaming: Require things like (re)playability, scalability, fairness and fun. Both sides must have a chance of winning, whatever that means in each scenario, which precludes against having one side represented by PCs the other by NPCs. This seems to be the crowd that wants more 'stuff.' More designs, more minis, more stuff to collect. "What can I buy next?"
I'd imagine most players are a mix of two or three of the above, but I think frustration with the Blackout comes down to people who are here mainly or more for the fiction. If you're roleplaying or strictly wargaming, it matters far less, as you'll be making up the universe anyway.
So above I see someone with a fiction issue ("The blackout limits the stories that can be told") gets a wargaming answer ("You can use the rules to play any kind of game you like.") Like people are speaking different languages to each other.
I was trying so hard not to post in this thread. :(
Speaking for myself, I was spoiled with regular plot advancements to the BT storyline growing up, and honestly it is something I expect; rightly or wrongly. Conversely, BT having a stagnant timeline is nothing new and there have been times when the plotline hasn't moved for years; sometimes intentional and other times because of outside forces (business imperatives). So, a stagnant timeline is not in itself a detriment, since we've been stuck for awhile, but the manner in which we've been stuck has gotten tired.
Simply put, we were let with a "cliffhanger," and as George R.R. Martin, can attest requires resolution, or 'riot.' As any other writer, producer, or artist can confirm. If you look at Warhammer 40K (BT's more successful neighbor), stagnation was written into the story, but they left no "cliffhangers" only "possibilities," and GW has only recently advanced the plotline to sell more stuff. As an aside I always thought BT's advancing time/storyline were one of the IP's strengths and uniquenesses. But, that's another thread.
So, if CGL wants to stagnate the timeline again, fine, resolve the "cliffhangers" and leave a few future "possibilities," but neatly tied up. As cliffhangers imply a future. A future we've been denied for sometime.
Then, call it a wrap, and we're good for another decade. Fan expectation, is not unreasonable here, and those implying so, seems off.
Poll
