companies staying away from rpg gamers

Dausuul · Jun 22, 2010

fanboy2000 said:
If I've read Malcolm's article correctly, he's not talking about a tabletop rpg company upset with it's customers, he's talking about a non-tabletop rpg company wanting to market to tabletop rpg players. Thus Pazio wouldn't be applicable to what he's talking about.

Quoted directly from the article:

Original Article said:
This applies to tabletop RPG companies as much as it does to ventures that might pull gamers from the tabletop to somewhere else.

fanboy2000 · Jun 22, 2010

Yes, but the personal experience he talks about first is from a non-tabletop rpg company. Also right after what you quoted, it talks about expanding beyond the WotC's current customer base. Expanding beyond your current base is what any company does that wants to keep growing.

Sammael · Jun 22, 2010

fanboy2000 said:
The Matrix Trilogy is a good example. If you want to understand every thing the sequels, you might want to watch the Animatrix, and play Enter the Matrix.

Ah. Nice example. Must be at least a part of the reason why I haven't met a living soul who actually likes the two Matrix sequels (while everyone likes the first Matrix movie).

I prefer my media to be stand-alone. Tie-ins are nice, but shouldn't be required for the experience. I also understand why transmedia people would hate people who share this sentiment but tough luck. If I like your movie, I'll go watch it and buy the DVD/Blu-ray. If I like the game tied in to your movie, I'll buy it. But please don't make me buy both to enjoy either one, because I'm likely to buy neither.

Mouseferatu · Jun 22, 2010

Sammael said:
Ah. Nice example. Must be at least a part of the reason why I haven't met a living soul who actually likes the two Matrix sequels (while everyone likes the first Matrix movie).

*raises hand*

I realize I'm the only one in the world, but the second Matrix--minus the rave/orgy scene--is still my favorite of the three. :heh:

billd91 · Jun 22, 2010

thecasualoblivion said:
the toxic section of the D&D community comes from outside WotC's current customer base, or at most is a reaction to toxic people outside the WotC community.

Do you think we can keep edition-war digs at the 4e critics out of this discussion?

GMSkarka · Jun 22, 2010

Sammael said:
Ah. Nice example.

Actually, it's an example of *early attempts* at transmedia, but not really representative, or successful.

A better current example would be HEROES -- where you had a show, webisodes, comics (online and printed), flash games, etc. -- which weren't *required* for you to follow the main storyline, but any elements that you chose to follow would enhance the overall experience.

Transmedia is storytelling across multiple forms of media in order to have a wide array of entry points by which consumers can interact with a particular property.

It's also a threadjack for this discussion, so I'll stop.

Sammael · Jun 22, 2010

fanboy2000 said:
Yes, but the personal experience he talks about first is from a non-tabletop rpg company. Also right after what you quoted, it talks about expanding beyond the WotC's current customer base. Expanding beyond your current base is what any company does that wants to keep growing.

True. Which is why I think WotC should seriously consider splitting D&D into "Basic" and "Advanced" once more. Furthermore, D&D: TCG, D&D Encounters, D&D board games, D&D (flavored) video games, D&D comics, D&D cartoons, D&D live action shows, and so on could all coexist peacefully without stepping on each others' toes.

Sure, the hardcore audience wouldn't like all these new forms of media. But WotC can easily keep the hardcore audience pleased with Advanced D&D while still branching out and expanding.

IMO, what they shouldn't do is let the core audience go, even if a part of that core audience is made of unwashed, abrasive, socially inept people. Just make sure that they don't give a damn about your other D&D-themed products, and they'll leave them (and the new customers) alone.

UngainlyTitan · Jun 22, 2010

The problem I have with the blog is the notion that rpg fanbase is especially toxic, may be the point is that they are especially toxic to the type of transmedia project being planned nowadays.
If so then that point could be made clearer because there was a definite trace of the product was great but for the damn customers

I also wonder about the rpg community having any particular insights about the evolution of transmedia. I would doubt it, with the exception of people who are creative, have media experience and are rpger.

Also, someone up thread likened the rpg industry to companies selling finished paintings to painters. I dispute that, some people in the rpg community are acomplished painter, for sure. But many are like me and we need the products of the rpg industry which are not finished paintings but colour by numbers and join the dots books, to stretch the analogy.

Erik Mona · Jun 22, 2010

Out of curiosity, do BioWare (Dragon Age RPG) and DC Comics (DC Adventures) not count as companies looking to extend their "transmedia" brands with RPG expressions?

If we're not talking about companies like that, what exactly are we discussing?

--Erik

Dausuul · Jun 22, 2010

Sammael said:
True. Which is why I think WotC should seriously consider splitting D&D into "Basic" and "Advanced" once more. Furthermore, D&D: TCG, D&D Encounters, D&D board games, D&D (flavored) video games, D&D comics, D&D cartoons, D&D live action shows, and so on could all coexist peacefully without stepping on each others' toes.

Sure, the hardcore audience wouldn't like all these new forms of media. But WotC can easily keep the hardcore audience pleased with Advanced D&D while still branching out and expanding.

IMO, what they shouldn't do is let the core audience go, even if a part of that core audience is made of unwashed, abrasive, socially inept people. Just make sure that they don't give a damn about your other D&D-themed products, and they'll leave them (and the new customers) alone.

That seems a little backwards to me.

I mean, consider other "transmedia" products. What you have in pretty much all cases is one central property (usually a TV show or movie, but in your proposal the D&D tabletop game) which attracts customers. For casual customers, that's all they buy. Hardcore fans are enticed with additional content. It's the same tie-in model George Lucas was using for Star Wars back in the '80s, just taken a step further by adding original, canonical material to the tie-ins.

The idea that the hardcore fan will buy only the core property, while casual fans will buy all these non-core things... I can't see it happening. I think WotC had the correct approach with 4E; draw in casual fans with a streamlined, easier-to-understand ruleset, and then entice the hardcore fans with minis, splatbooks, and DDI goodies. They may or may not be succeeding, but it's the right general idea.