Dear Unregistered! We notice you don't currently have a silver subscription here on EN World. We'd love to encourage you to give it a try, so we've made this coupon for $5 off your first 4-month Silver Subscription. Simply go to the subscription page and enter coupon code SILVER. With that subscription you get access to TWO adventure paths, which between them cover D&D 3.5, Pathfinder, and D&D 4th Edition - War of the Burning Sky (which has been completed) and ZEITGEIST: The Gears of Revolution (which is currently ongoing). You also get a whole bunch of site perks and features here on EN World, including access to the Search function, images and links in your forum signature, a larger PM box, give out more XP at a time, and more. Please give a try; we're proud of our adventure paths, and we're sure you'll love them both!
General RPG DiscussionFor discussion of RPG topics in general, GM/player issues, and topics which don't belong in a specific game forum below.
All the latest EN World
official reviews, columns, and subscriber articles here.
Don't have your subscription yet? It's only $3 a month and you can grab
it right
here!
I would think it self-evident that more awareness of the game, especially in a positive light, would only help to draw in more players, and I think most marketing research would support this.
For me, that is why we should care.
Then, if the goal is to have "more awareness of the game, especially in a positive light", wouldn't that be better served by better product, rather than mere uncritical acceptance of whatever is produced?
It seems clear to me that every product along this line to date, with the exception of the novel lines, has been based on the hope for mere uncritical acceptance of whatever is produced, because of the D&D logo.
That dilutes the D&D logo, and is ultimately damaging to awareness of the game in a positive light.
IMHO. YMMV.
RC
EDIT: It is in the interest of marketers to convince you that your hobby is all of this "cool stuff".
It is not always in your interest, nor in the interest of the hobby.
__________________ No longer associated with this site
Last edited by Raven Crowking; 23rd June 2010 at 06:49 PM..
You seem to be under the impression that your opinion can influence my income, when the truth is I can say whatever the hell I want to you precisely because it doesn't.
Get some grounding. Consider that a site choked with contextual advertising, a banner promoting paid membership, and popups exhorting mobile users to buy paid apps is where you believe you're taking a stand against evil commercial influence. You're fighting for freedom with the backing of the head of the second largest company trying to sell you things.
What ads? I run with AdBlock Plus and NoScript. I see no ads and get no popups. I refuse to waste money on things that I can get for free. I know that I am far from alone in my Web browsing practices. I find your position to be that of a sucker, which is disappointing because I figured you to be wiser and smarter than that.
Flat out, I don't need you. I don't need any publisher. Because of these two facts, you have to work really hard to give me a reason to buy- go learn from Trent Reznor, because he's already figured this out. I can roll my own, I have rolled my own, and I increasingly find it difficult to justify spending money on stuff that I can get for free elsewhere. Setting material? Wikis and YouTube vidoes are fantastic for this sort of stuff--one evening of Ancient Aliens clips on YouTube, which I don't pay a dime for, and I'm set for an indefinite period of time--and are free for the taking. Hell, combine the reading of a Wiki with listening to an audio clip from YouTube and I can make even better use of my time (and can do it on a lunch break, coffee break, etc. so I can fit other time commitments into it). Plenty of weblogs out there can, and do, provide useful information and content without all of the crap that you want out of it- and all without ever going near the matter of PDF piracy.
Art? As in drawings and paintings? Google Image Search with relevant key words solves that problem. You're far more likely to find imagery that you'll want to use in other media, including non-fiction (especially non-fiction for certain genres). Sites like Deviant Art will handle the rest. Storytelling? Writing forums and 'blogs, and that's just the start of what's available for free. TVTropes alone covers so many bases that it's become my go-to place for any issue related to storytelling in its practical form. Design? The Gaming Den, where Frank Trollman puts out in clear, concise language what does and does not work (and why, and shows his work) is just one of many places where folks looking to roll their own can quickly get up to speed- and in similar time learn to master principles and thus become competent at it.
The tabletop RPG hobby is now in a place where it can again become a haven for tinkerers and craftsmen. More and more players are aware that publishers aren't providing a sufficient reason to buy, so they aren't going to do so until that happens. They know that you need them, and that they don't need you. The retro-clone movement, while itself small, signals a larger reawakening of the very qualities that made tabletop RPGs take off to begin with: as a participatory, shared hobby of productive creativity. The publishers that grok this and feed into it are doing just fine, whereas the rest are choking on their own waste with no sensible folks lamenting that fact.
What are you doing to justify your existence? As things are you look like whiny middlemen facing your own extinction, and if that is all that you are then go die in a fire and good riddance to you. Once you're producing something of actual value--and too few of publishers do--then you will actually be worth spending money upon. Until then, get back to work. You shan't be missed if you wish to quit.
"then go die in a fire"? In what way do you think that is appropriate language to use in a discussion? Your out of this thread. ~ Plane Sailing
That's not how tie-ins work. Tie-ins are a way to extract more money from hardcore fans of the main property. They are driven by the popularity of the main property; they do not drive it to any significant extent.
In rare, exceptional cases, a tie-in may explode in popularity and become a success on its own merits, but as I said earlier, that's not something you can plan for. And if it does happen, I really doubt that a handful of "toxic gamers" are going to derail it.
I admit, I'm not an expert here. But I was really under the impression that helping to raise awareness of the brand could help bring in new consumers. If kids watch a D&D tv show, and like it, and then see the game in the store, they would be more likely to try it out.
If adults see a D&D movie that actually does well - that stands on its own, and convinces them the game isn't about devil-worship or whatever other misconceptions they have, but actually has something interesting to offer - that helps the game in the long run. Even if those who see it don't immediately start playing themselves, it at least makes it something more conventional to them, more accepted. When their coworker mentions playing the game, it doesn't seem as weird and unusual as it would if it remained completely alien to them.
And honestly? My very first connection with D&D? Dragonlance novels, and the SSI Gold Box games. I didn't even realize they were D&D when I played them - I just enjoyed the stories in the games, and when I found out some of my friends were playing a game that all these were based on, I leapt to get in on it.
I'm not saying any one product is going to change the world. I simply don't agree with any outlook that says we don't need or want such media connections. Even if they haven't been done well in the past, I think they offer potential to attract new gamers and bring D&D more into the cultural mainstream, both of which are good things for our hobby in the long run.
So, "everyone else" drinks the corporate kool-aid and consumes silently? And people wonder why we have a reputation of being arrogant.
Well, make up your mind. Are we like everyone else, and hence not any more toxic than anyone else? Or are we different? You can't have it both ways.
Clearly, the blog entry suggests that "everyone else" drinks the corporate kool-aid and consumes silently, and that we have a reputation of being toxic because we do not. Do you disagree with this assertation? Your posts do not make it seem so.
(And I, for one, would rather have a reputation for being arrogant, than a reputation for being a patsy. Both are liable to be overstated. The person folks claim is arrogant is often just not easily pushed around. The person folks claim is a patsy is often just a bit too easily pushed around. I have no desire to be easily pushed around.)
RC
__________________ No longer associated with this site
Except the post isn't referring to gamers that are hard to sell to. He is saying that in the story, it wasn't a problem that the gamers weren't buying his pitch, it was that they were "bad for business", and it was better in the long term to actively stop attracting that crowd.
Later on, he explains that "There are customers out there who can faithfully buy from you and still run your company into the ground."
Nowhere does he say these people want these gamers to just stop criticizing and buy their stuff. He's saying they want gamers to buy their stuff without driving away other consumers, or proving to be a hassle or hindrance in some other fashion.
Much of the problem lies in the bullet points that open the article. Those bullet points include "pursuing concrete goals instead of social conversations," which hardly sounds like an objectionable thing; plus "relating cynically to content" and "resisting desired (money-making) behaviors," which sound an awful lot like the reaction of consumers to bad product in the first case and a poor business model in the second.
At that point, a lot of folks concluded that this was bellyaching from somebody who couldn't figure out how to make money off us, decided it was somehow our fault, and then turned his own failure into a sweeping indictment of the gaming community (or some "toxic" subset thereof) as consumers in general. The rest of the post does nothing to lessen this impression.
__________________
There is no fluff. There is no crunch. There are only rules of varying precision. When you understand this, you will be master of the rules, rather than their slave.
Except that I don't recall him saying anything about the size of the market, but he did basically say that RPG people are viewed as "toxic" and don't get much attention because of it.
There's no "except". I agree that this is what the piece said. I find that to be a fundamental flaw of the piece. Why go down the rathole of whether or how we should banish Comic Book Guy behavior if that's not really the issue?
Quote:
The article seems to be a cop out on a client's failure to gain a significant profit from marketing to RPG players.
Cop-outs are what you give when you must explain yourself - when someone asks a question, and you don't have a good answer. If the audience was the client, I'd say it might have been a cop-out. But there's no call to cop-out to the general public about a project the public didn't know happened!
Then, if the goal is to have "more awareness of the game, especially in a positive light", wouldn't that be better served by better product, rather than mere uncritical acceptance of whatever is produced?
It seems clear to me that every product along this line to date, with the exception of the novel lines, has been based on the hope for mere uncritical acceptance of whatever is produced, because of the D&D logo.
That dilutes the D&D logo, and is ultimately damaging to awareness of the game in a positive light.
But again, we aren't complaining about criticism of a product, or simply settling for something of poor quality. We are talking about a whole host of behavior that goes well beyond that.
I admit, the D&D movie was bad. (Though I've heard good things about the second one.) And I confess, I never saw the cartoon show. But I enjoyed the novels and the video game lines. They got me into the game. I'm sure the same is true for others. If the movie was better, I expect it could do the same. Fostering an atmosphere that discourages the creation of such things is depriving yourself of any potential to continue that trend.
Look - in your other post, you say that most criticisms you receive for your game are legitimate ones. You don't assume any malicious intent on the part of the reviewer.
But are you telling me you have never gotten a response that was completely without merit? That was just someone raging at your product, possibly over reasons or expectations that were completely unrelated?
I just don't understand how you can deny the presence of a subset of gamers who really are vocally unpleasant online. Enworld certainly is good at keeping them out, but they do crop up online, among gamers and others. In every group of people, there will be a portion that are simply jerks.
They are the ones this article is about. I don't know how many times it needs to be said - this isn't about legitimate criticism of a product. This is about people who go ahead and buy a product, and then drive others away.
Look, if some people are playing in a game store, and while they are having a good old time, someone walks over and starts mocking them for playing a game he doesn't like, or insists on standing next to the DM pointing out everything he is doing wrong and explaining why his game of choice is so terrible, odds are high those gamers at the table won't have any fun.
And when they walk out and stop visiting the store, the owner is going to be upset at the one guy who is left - even if he keeps purchasing stuff from him every week.
On the internet, there are lots of people like that one guy, and they can band together. And we get the same exact sort of behavior, and thus it makes the gaming crowd as a whole all the more unappealing to outside interests.
Or so the argument goes. Whether true or not, that's the claim being made - that some gamers are jerks, and are ruining it for the rest of us. Trying to distort that into saying that gamers should accept subpar quality products, or should shut up and be happy with whatever they are offered, just seems like a willful misreading of the point.
The thing is some of those are very valid criticisms. 4E combat does take so long that there is room for little else. Maybe if WotC had tried to make 4E have a streamlined, simpler, quicker combat system instead of slowing it down to a crawl, you wouldn't see those criticisms. Focus on making a better product and the criticisms will be fewer and have less impact. I believe one reason D&D Encounters exists is that WotC finally realized that 4E combat takes so long that most adults with real lives will only have time to play one combat encounter a week.
I think the point Hussar was trying to make, Shazman... was that here was a prominent article on a national news website, giving essentially advertising about a hobby that probably 99% of the people who go to that website have no real idea about... and rather than seeing comments that were helping to prop up the industry the article was talking about... (because like it or not, D&D 4E is a prominent part of the roleplaying game industry)... they immediately went into tearing the industry down. How does this help our industry in any way? All ripping on the game mechanics of D&D 4E does (justified or not) is tell people who are unfamiliar with the industry on a whole that apparently it isn't worth even trying to learn more about.
If this article was on a site like ENWorld (a site specifically about the RPG industry, read by people who understand the industry), then yes, making criticisms about 4Es mechanics would be understandable and not a big deal to those of us reading it. But when its out there in the world at large? That nitpicky, fanboy, Comic Book Guy attitude does nothing more than potentially alienate the outside people who have no idea what the complaints are actually about, but they just know that it must suck enough to cause complaints in the first place. And thus people who might have gone to Wikipedia or Google to learn a little bit more about this if it seemed like this game had excited followers and commenters... instead doesn't bother. And that's why the "vocal minority" can cause more harm than good.
No, he really doesn't. He says that a subset of gamers has worse qualities than comparable subsets of other hobbiest populations.
After he gets rolling he eventually comes out and clarifies his target, saying he's met lots of great gamers and not all are like that. But the article starts off all guns blazing and even calling millions of gamers a pox on growth.
By the time people get to the clarification they've already gone on the defensive and are apt to gloss over that he's talking about a certain subset. I was more highlighting that the post comes across as incendiary because it starts off with a wide target before being narrowed down a bit, which at that point I suspect folks are already seeing red.
But you're right, by the mid-point/end he is talking about a subset of gamers - the article just doesn't start off that way very well in my opinion. He should have been more clear up front.
Look - in your other post, you say that most criticisms you receive for your game are legitimate ones. You don't assume any malicious intent on the part of the reviewer.
But are you telling me you have never gotten a response that was completely without merit? That was just someone raging at your product, possibly over reasons or expectations that were completely unrelated?
Sadly, no.
I only wish controversy would stir up interest in my game.
Quote:
I just don't understand how you can deny the presence of a subset of gamers who really are vocally unpleasant online.
I don't.
And, I used to be partial owner of a comic book store -- I know that some customers are not worth the effort. They want too much, in one way or another, for what you are getting back.
But, here's the thing. That jerks exist doesn't colour my view of all gamers, or of all comic readers. And I know that I pissed some folks off with policies that said, in effect, we wouldn't cater to jerks. I'm sure some folks complained. I bet someone might even have blogged.
So what?
I can no more cause the sun to stop shining that I can prevent such behaviour, and I have no intention of wasting my time trying to do so.
Pick a percentage: 5%, 10%, 15%. No matter what percentage of people you think are jerks, it is your fault if you don't take that into account when you set up shop. No one else's.
RC
__________________ No longer associated with this site
I propose a test of the jerkiness level of gamers online vs. other hobbyists. I think a comparison of admin actions on this forum compared to other non-gaming forums would provide a fruitful comparison. Are people banned more frequently here? Are threads locked more often here because of jerky behavior? Anyone have any experience in this area?
Anecdotally, an individual investor forum I once followed had similar rules (grandma-friendly) but rarely had banning except for spam.
What ads? I run with AdBlock Plus and NoScript. I see no ads and get no popups. I refuse to waste money on things that I can get for free. I know that I am far from alone in my Web browsing practices. I find your position to be that of a sucker, which is disappointing because I figured you to be wiser and smarter than that.
Flat out, I don't need you. I don't need any publisher. Because of these two facts, you have to work really hard to give me a reason to buy- go learn from Trent Reznor, because he's already figured this out. I can roll my own, I have rolled my own, and I increasingly find it difficult to justify spending money on stuff that I can get for free elsewhere. Setting material? Wikis and YouTube vidoes are fantastic for this sort of stuff--one evening of Ancient Aliens clips on YouTube, which I don't pay a dime for, and I'm set for an indefinite period of time--and are free for the taking. Hell, combine the reading of a Wiki with listening to an audio clip from YouTube and I can make even better use of my time (and can do it on a lunch break, coffee break, etc. so I can fit other time commitments into it). Plenty of weblogs out there can, and do, provide useful information and content without all of the crap that you want out of it- and all without ever going near the matter of PDF piracy.
Art? As in drawings and paintings? Google Image Search with relevant key words solves that problem. You're far more likely to find imagery that you'll want to use in other media, including non-fiction (especially non-fiction for certain genres). Sites like Deviant Art will handle the rest. Storytelling? Writing forums and 'blogs, and that's just the start of what's available for free. TVTropes alone covers so many bases that it's become my go-to place for any issue related to storytelling in its practical form. Design? The Gaming Den, where Frank Trollman puts out in clear, concise language what does and does not work (and why, and shows his work) is just one of many places where folks looking to roll their own can quickly get up to speed- and in similar time learn to master principles and thus become competent at it.
The tabletop RPG hobby is now in a place where it can again become a haven for tinkerers and craftsmen. More and more players are aware that publishers aren't providing a sufficient reason to buy, so they aren't going to do so until that happens. They know that you need them, and that they don't need you. The retro-clone movement, while itself small, signals a larger reawakening of the very qualities that made tabletop RPGs take off to begin with: as a participatory, shared hobby of productive creativity. The publishers that grok this and feed into it are doing just fine, whereas the rest are choking on their own waste with no sensible folks lamenting that fact.
What are you doing to justify your existence? As things are you look like whiny middlemen facing your own extinction, and if that is all that you are then go die in a fire and good riddance to you. Once you're producing something of actual value--and too few of publishers do--then you will actually be worth spending money upon. Until then, get back to work. You shan't be missed if you wish to quit.
I think the point Hussar was trying to make, Shazman... was that here was a prominent article on a national news website, giving essentially advertising about a hobby that probably 99% of the people who go to that website have no real idea about... and rather than seeing comments that were helping to prop up the industry the article was talking about... (because like it or not, D&D 4E is a prominent part of the roleplaying game industry)... they immediately went into tearing the industry down. How does this help our industry in any way?
You are right. Here was advertising prominently maquerading as a news item, and probably based upon a press release devised by WotC.
That is, after all, a rather standard practice these days. Companies send out press releases to news agencies, which are disguised as news items, and they get used as filler because, frankly, it is cost effective to do so.
Now, I am not going to get into whether or not WotC or 4e are good for "the industry" in the short term or the long term. What I am going to do is suggest that no one is under any obligation to prop up either "the industry" or WotC. No one is under any obligation to see an ad pretending to be news and help it reach its advertising objective.
Nor did they tear "the industry" down; they had complaints about 4e.
Nor is "the industry" the hobby.
RC
__________________ No longer associated with this site
Well, make up your mind. Are we like everyone else, and hence not any more toxic than anyone else? Or are we different? You can't have it both ways.
You're trying to connect two parts of my argument together that don't obviously go hand in hand. Us being perceived as toxic =/= everyone else drinking the kool-aid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven Crowking
Clearly, the blog entry suggests that "everyone else" drinks the corporate kool-aid and consumes silently, and that we have a reputation of being toxic because we do not. Do you disagree with this assertation? Your posts do not make it seem so.
I did not read that inference from the blog. But then I wasn't looking at it through offense-laden lenses. I don't believe that "everyone else" consumes silently. Some do, some critique constructively, and some rave like lunatics. The assertion of the blog was that TTRPGers have a larger number of ravers than other groups that producers can market to. And, more importantly, that people outside of the RPG community disproportionately perceive that all of us are raving lunatics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven Crowking
(And I, for one, would rather have a reputation for being arrogant, than a reputation for being a patsy. Both are liable to be overstated. The person folks claim is arrogant is often just not easily pushed around. The person folks claim is a patsy is often just a bit too easily pushed around. I have no desire to be easily pushed around.)
Nor do I. That is why I'd like to find a way to have our hobby not perceived incorrectly and why I do care to change that perception. The status quo is that we are nothing but geeks and losers, living in our mothers basements, pretending to be elves and that we should be marginalized in all areas of society except our own little niche.
What I am going to do is suggest that no one is under any obligation to prop up either "the industry" or WotC. No one is under any obligation to see an ad pretending to be news and help it reach its advertising objective.
I agree with you. No one is obligated to go say good things about the article. But why do so many people feel the need to go out of their way to bash something every chance they get?
I don't go out of my way to bash Brittney Spears every time an article pops up. Every time you mention RCFRP I don't spew bile against it because it's not my game of choice.
And to ignore the fact that comments like these could drive a potential new gamer away is sticking your head in the sand. And you said up thread that new players helps grow the hobby. So is driving a potential new player away damaging the hobby or not. You can't have it both ways.
Recent News
Linear Mode
