companies staying away from rpg gamers

rogueattorney said:

rpg companies are trying to sell a bunch of finished paintings to a bunch of painters instead of trying to sell brushes and paints.

<snip>

The truth is, there is a much more blurry line between rpg game makers and rpg game consumers than between, say comic book makers and readers, or video game makers and players, or movie producers and watchers. Failure to admit so puts the producer at risk of alienating one's customers, while admitting so underlines the producers' own lack of importance to the hobby.

Click to expand...

In his blog post GMSkarka criticises this view, of RPGers as artists, as "delusional garbage". I think maybe his language is a little too strong, but I find it hard to reconcile the notion of RPGers as artists with the really obvious evidence of consumerist culture in the RPG hobby - completist purchasers, for example, and the hype that surrounds every release of a new book or set of minis, or the ongoing complaints about the crappiness of WotC modules. If we really are all painters looking for some paints and canvasses, why do we care about the quality of WotC's modules? Or what WotC has done to the 4e Realms?

It seems to me that D&D players, at least - or the online ones, anyway - are actually pretty big consumers of (i) story elements written and marketed by commercial publishers, and (ii) of more-or-less useless junk that is marketed by those same publishers simply on the basis that it carries a certain logo or references a certain story element.

It would be different if RPGers were mostly interested in buying system material to support their own story-telling - Ron Edwards's high-octane premises and system ideas - but that doesn't seem to be the case. WotC has just restructure its D&D Worlds team to give them more prominence in the organisation. And as far as I can see, Paizo and White Wolf make their money almost exclusively by selling stories.

ggroy said:

An earlier article by Malcolm Sheppard on the same topic.

Where Did You Go, Tabletop Joe? | Mob | United | Malcolm | Sheppard

Click to expand...

Well that article starts off with the moan that table top gaming is dieing. Now, that is IMHO a doubtfull premise. Also, implied in that statement is the notion that tabletop gaming ==rpgs, which I am sure comes as a shock to any wargamers and boardgamers outthere.
The trouble with the above claim is that i have been hearing it for 20 years or more, (ever since Lorraine Williams ran TSR) and I have never seen any evidence that it is true.
So without some hard numbers, I'm going to take this with a pinch of salt.

pemerton said:

I think the difference is that politics is worth arguing about - sometimes, it's worth killing about. Games probably aren't.

Click to expand...

The problem with that statement is, from what I have seen in the comments section of Newsweek and other places is, that hate fill comments usually are not worth to time it takes to read them. They add nothing to the debate and generate more smoke than light.

Now, I get what he is saying, but in my experience it is universal on the internet. Now this tidbit
[quote from blog] The core fandom demographic crosses over with the social media power user demographic, providing unprecedented influence on creative decisions. [/quote]
Now according to facebook there are 400 million active users worldwide and according to WoTC there are what 6 million rpger's active (can't find the thread, my search attempts keep crashing the search function - did find the news article that there are 1.5million D&D players)

So if the handfull of rpger are swamping out the great mass of Facebook users then, man you are doing your marketing wrong.

[No message]

pemerton said:

In his blog post GMSkarka criticises this view, of RPGers as artists, as "delusional garbage". I think maybe his language is a little too strong, but I find it hard to reconcile the notion of RPGers as artists with the really obvious evidence of consumerist culture in the RPG hobby - completist purchasers, for example, and the hype that surrounds every release of a new book or set of minis, or the ongoing complaints about the crappiness of WotC modules.

Click to expand...

GMS plain doesn't like the competition - one more gamer putting his campaigns on a heavy DIY basis, one less potential revenue stream for Adamant Entertainment. That's the ugly truth of it. This is the same argument Ed Cha pushed ca. 2003 or so when he suggested that people posting free modules on the Internet were harming pro module producers (conveniently including Ed Cha).

Frankly, I find Gareth's view on gaming offensive, contrary to the basic premise of RPGs as a bottom-up social hobby based on shared amateur creativity, and consider it doomed as a line of business. To the last I also say: good. High time for it. We need more people actively creating entertainment for themselves and their friends, and less staying with a model of passive consumption based on a one-way pro designer-->user relationship.

Coincidentally, what Gareth suggests is contrary to the widespread emergence of people creating computer game mods and levels, custom-tailoring digital entertainment, writing fan fiction or collaborating in RPG-like messageboard/IRC games. Whether the final products are any good is questionable - from a neutral standpoint, they are largely not - but what matters is the act of getting involved and sharing -- the same thing that had made roleplaying games the addictive hobby they became. At its heart, they are about you -- you the consumer/creator, and not the guy with the diplomas from Game Design Academy on his wall telling you what to do.

Rechan said:

So you think we should condone people being jerks? Honestly?

Click to expand...

Personally, I think that the case that people are being "jerks" because they don't like something, and are vocal about it -- especially if it is something they perceive being done to something they care about -- is (at best) unproven.

We live in a culture where deceit is lauded, and honest opinion is "politically incorrect". I am of a mind that deception and manipulation is more "jerky". I could go farther in this, but I have no desire to break EN World's "no politics" ban.

Suffice it to say, no, I do not condone people being jerks. But I very much doubt that you and I would agree on who the real jerks are.


RC

thecasualoblivion said:

The blog doesn't claim that this is a special characteristic of tabletop gamers, it claims that this behavior is much more common in tabletop gamers than in other places.

Click to expand...

Dude, look at the very title of the blog. It claims it is present to sufficient magnitude that tabletop gamers are avoided. It is quite specifically referencing a distinguishing factor within table top gamers. How can you read it and not get that?

FireLance said:

Yup, as thecasualoblivion said, the blog post suggests that this type of behavior is more common among tabletop gamers than people in general. In other words, whenever you encounter this type of behavior on the internet, the person in question has a better than normal chance to be a tabletop gamer.

Click to expand...

The blog is not talking about individual gamers. It is talking about gamers as a collective market target.

And, neither it nor your LotR example provide any evidence that it is true for gamers moreso than movie lovers.

If it is true so strongly amongst gamers then why are you compelled to use a non-gamer example to make the point? Again, you undermine the very point being argued.

1) Erik Mona,
Classic, sir! Pure classic! Bravissimo!

2) Yes some RPGers are jerks...um...so? Anyone over the age of 25 who has NOT noticed about 15% of the Human Race are useless and/or buttholes, has either lived in a one hell of a lovely place, lucky begger, or has been high as a kite!
So, yes, some gamers are buttholes...same as any other section of Humanity.
I have known in RL, ONE gamer who was a munchkin, rules-lawyering, selfish, annoying jackass- deluxe, versus about 10 who weren't.

3) This does ineed seem corporate-management non-Human hyperbabble and whinging.
Yes, we'd all like the jerkwads not to moan, edition bash, put new folks off etc.
Same as we wish similar jerks didn't cause havoc at football, in pubs or whatever.

For every butthole, there's several folk encouraging others to play, see, here's a facet of life nitwits overlook:

You always notice the scumbags, more than you notice the nice folk, because the nice folk do you no harm.

Click to expand...

this always makes it look like there are more ratbags in life than there actually are. We are literally programmed to notice, fear and avoid danger and problems, much more than we do the nice things, because the nice things won't chase us down and eat our livers, or in our case, harangue anyone who likes the new eidition, or whatever it is that gets the nitwit upset...which is about as painful as getting liver-eaten I'd imagine

And do NOT get me started on corporate psychology and the utter tosh there in. Jeesh.

4) I freely admit I am the stereotypical "basement dwelling sweaty fat beard geek"
Sometimes life drops "Captain Tripps" on your head.
I've loved D&D for decades, but now it's one of the few things I'm physically capable of doing, sort of, as I can rarely travel.
What little monies I have either goes on D&D, or art.
My bitching and ranting I reserve for health issues and politics, not D&D. D&D is about fun.
Politics/health are not fun.

I'm fair looking forward to DMing my pal's kids in a few years as they grow up, and release another bunch of D&D nerds on the planet, hehe.

5) And corporate attitudes and machinations can take a big run and jump back up into the flatulent bowels of a curry-slurping pit-fiend, form which they surely descended!
From long, bitter experience, there is nothing so assinine, stupid, blinkered, dangerous and evil in the whole damn world as "corporations" and the group mentalities they create and empower, sigh. Drow ain't got nothin' on 'em!

6) Only a nitwit treats a BIG paying customer with contempt. Sun-Tzu, anyone?
Like oh, try to use them or guide them in more effective manners.
That takes skill and tact, not corporate leet speak and contempt.

7) Gamers are of above average IQ. Corporate consumerism has problems with that when it shouldn't, if, it had half a brain itself (in general, which it doesn't, BP merely being one of a whole line of proofs of this, lol).
Part of the problem is that the corporate world just sees consumers as victims to fleece and use, rather than as the whole damn point of the game!
Selling is a game, "winning" isn't important, making a living and enjoying it is the game. The game itself IS the "candle", i.e. dealing with the customer and creating the product, rather than the damned Quarterlies.
Ah well, folk won't get that till it's way too late.

To quote a certain Mr Rotten:

"Do you like the taste of honey?
Isn't it best without the bees!"

Click to expand...

Be one with your stereotype, or make yer own!

Condone is probably not the best word, but accept might be close to the truth.

Politics stands out as an especially cantankerous area, and people have been crying about the death of democracy since Athens.

And it's not like the feature is unique to the internet. Go to a random barber shop/bar/church cookout and mention universal health care, and see where that conversation goes.

It's true that what edition of D&D someone plays should not be as important as the political issue du jour. The sense of proportion is all out of whack. The Lakers Riot will certainly cure you of the notion that trivial things cannot have disproportionate reactions.

I have a hard time seeing Malcolm's post as anything aside from, well, pretty much exactly what he decries. Sour grapes, as Eric's Grandma might put it. Sounds like when he did this: "We looked at the market at the time and determined that the service was pretty much tailor-made for roleplayers and that they were the most natural early adopters.", he misidentified the market, or perhaps when he did this: "we got actual tabletop gamers from the “leading edge” of the hobby", he attracted the wrong crowd.

I assume if you identified that your product was for political people, and you got people from the "leading edge of politics," you'd find that your assortment of outspoken senators and muckraking pundits was, indeed, a contentious group.

Same thing if you recruited YouTubers. Or comic book fans. Or people really into Ultimate Fighting. Or soccer hooligans. Or [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMdi-lOqDv8"]Lakers Fans[/ame].

And certainly a basketball game matters just about as much to the world as a D&D game.

When D&D fans burn a taxi because of 5e, call me.

Until then, these are just passionate people being passionate about something they do really like.

Which is a great thing, though it also basically makes for a fundamentally unpleasable fanbase.