Oh please, the game has been playable and SR5 errata took longer, plus the second batch of SR5 errata we are still waiting for. Stop attacking SR6 and pretending SR5 is any better, after we heard for years 'We need SR6 because SR5 is broken beyond repair' on the forum.
Michael, I am not a person that has been "attacking" SR6. And it is certainly playable; we have been playing it for two sessions now and have enjoyed ourselves.
But this post really irks me, and I'm going to rant a bit.
I think some people seem to have an axe to grind about changes from SR5 to SR6. Honestly, the level of vitriol and negativity in this forum often shocks me. I'm not going to excuse that. But I could care less what things were like with SR5; I haven't played Shadowrun since 1st edition. This comparison is meaningless to me.
I think I can reasonably say that Catalyst did me wrong. Catalyst charged me $50 at GenCon last year for what they knew was an incomplete and flawed hardcover book; I know they knew it because the "hotfix" came out the day before I bought it! Were they handing out printed copies of the "hotfix" at the GenCon booth? Were they including a little note in the book saying "check this website for important corrections and additions to this rulebook, sorry for the problems"? No, they were not. And even then the "hotfix" team had to know that those 10 pages were just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what would eventually be released.
My fundamental issue is this. Normally errata are something that is generated when a game is out "in the wild" and being played by hundreds or even thousands more players than playtested it. It is minor editing problems, weird rules cases that never came up in playtesting, and sometimes even major blind spots that the designers had that would only come to light with more play. Designers are human beings just like everybody else; they will be the last people to see their own errors. To take two examples, both the One Ring (from Cubicle 7) and Star Trek Adventures (from Modiphius) have ended up with over 10 pages of errata, but in general that errata is...errata. Its stuff that seems at least vaguely reasonable to have shown up in a large rulebook after hundreds of people have used it.
But that is not what the hotfixes and most of the errata that will eventually show up are for SR6 They were doing that work
before the game had even been sold. These issues are things that were noticed almost immediately as soon as people started reading the rulebook. There is nothing in that work that required it to be done after the books were on the boat from China or wherever. Its normal proof-reading and editing stuff done by people who are familiar with reading game rules. So,
why didn't Catalyst have this work done before the game was sent to the printers? I have yet to hear a good answer to that question.
I'm playing SR6. So far I am enjoying it and expect I will continue to do so. I look forward to the official errata. But that enjoyment is despite the rulebook and despite what I consider my reasonable anger at Catalyst. It would be nice if Catalyst could acknowledge this as a thing that happened, say they are sorry, and tell me how they are going to make sure it doesn't happen again. If Catalyst has done this and I've missed it, I will gladly apologize myself for not noticing that act.
Rant completed. Back to your regularly scheduled thread, and sorry for this admittedly off-topic post; I'll delete if moderators tell me I have gone over the line. I don't expect any reply to this, nor honestly would this be a good place for such a reply; I'm already feeling bad about posting it in poor Xelian's thread about toxins. Just tell me where it would be a good place to talk about this and I will go there.