companies staying away from rpg gamers

Vyvyan Basterd · Jun 23, 2010

Raven Crowking said:
I say, "Both are examples of segregating us and them, and either there is a valid segregation or there is not. If there is, then suggesting that we are more critical (and thus less likely to just drink the kool-aid) is valid. If not, then suggesting that we are more critical (and hence more toxic) is not."

Certainly, the CNN comments were not "raving", yet they were pointed out as an example in this trend.

It's not just a matter of being critical. It's the delivery. I agree that the CNN comments were not "raving." I just believe the audience those people were speaking to was wrong. You are trying to equate toxic with critcal when no such assertion is being made and you are pointing at specific examples when the issue is more of general image.

Raven Crowking said:
Really? Not my experience at all.

Lucky you. Apparently you don't watch American media and see how D&D players are typically portrayed. That image is in the average American's mind when they think about roleplayers. Some strides are already being made in TV shows like Big Bang Theory (although they barely mention roleplaying) and movies like Role Models, but only in a small way.

Raven Crowking said:
I am quite certain that they have far more chances than you imagine, and are far more restrained than you imagine.

To me that's like saying a serial killer is more restrained than I imagine because he doesn't kill everyone he encounters.

Raven Crowking said:
Ah, well then. First you need to define what hobby you are talking about, as I suggested upthread. I feel quite certain that there are a number of people who feel 4e actually drains gamers from thier hobby.

I'm sure there are, but that leads into the Scorched Earth mentality mentioned upthread. 4E might lead someone away from RCFRP. Or the person might play 4E for a while, get deeper into the general RP community, learn about other games like RCFRP, and decide they like your game better than 4E and switch. If they turn away from 4E because of jerks on CNN do you think they'd be likely to ever find RCFRP on their own? I don't think it's likely at all. WotC seems to suffer alot of heat for being the 500-lb gorilla, yet their game is the gateway to most people finding the smaller RPG companies.

Qwillion · Jun 23, 2010

This is based only on my experience with licences.

Its not about ill will or vocal discontent, its simply that there is not enough money in it for most companies when you compare it to say making a video game, a movie, a tv show, a CCG, a board game, or even just a novelization.

The people who have gotten involved have a personal love for RPGs and want to see an RPG made out of their product, or be a part of the RPG community.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

SKyOdin · Jun 23, 2010

Dausuul said:
How so, specifically?

I wish I knew. I know that I have been drawn into it myself on a number of occasions. There really does seem to be a culture of consistent vitriolic argument among RPG fans. Since I am neither a psychologist nor a sociologist, I can't really presume to understand the precise mechanisms and causes for this, but I have seen enough of it to believe that it is true.

Raven Crowking · Jun 23, 2010

Mallus said:
No one's advocating 'uncritical acceptance' of product, RC. They're suggesting a slightly higher civility quotient, which, after wincing my way through the comments on the CNN D&D puff-piece, is kinda hard to argue against, even if you don't accept eyebeam's position.

I have to say that I don't think gamers are any less civil than others I have met. OTOH, I didn't make it though all those comments on CNN....I shrugged after the first 20 or so, and decided the rest were likely to be similar.

But, the CNN piece certainly read as ad copy designed to fool you into thinking it was news, and I believe that was the case. It is very, very common for corporations to send out complete copy to news agencies in order to shill their product from a name you may trust. When you hear a news spot about the dangers posed by allergies, you might just want to consider whether or not a company producing allergy medication wrote the copy. Just saying.

And, specifically, can you example what you thought was uncivil?

Also, how would we agree on what constitutes 'better product'?

Good reviews, good gaming, and where we spend our $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

What else?

RC

Mallus · Jun 23, 2010

billd91 said:
Maybe you should listen to him.

I would advise against it.

He's telling you exactly what you're competing against and how high the bar you want to get over is.

No he isn't. Corinth was describing some glorious, post-revolutionary future of the hobby where publishers have withered away and all that remains is the DIY dictatorship of the creative proletariat. Or something like that...

I realize there's always been a strong DIY ethic in the role-playing game community. I also realize that we have some wonderful new tools for assembling and disseminating our own homemade game materials. But none of that is particularly relevant. Because some people don't like to create their own gaming materials. They don't find it rewarding. Or they don't have the time. Or they like creating settings but not modules.

So the idea that a gaming company is suddenly competing against a large number of creative, independent homebrewers strikes me as, well, bunk.

Because the DIY-ers have always been with us. And we're still going strong (I'm a inveterate homebrewer). But the hobby also has even more folks who happily purchase product, and I suspect it always will, well, up until the point it's shrunk down to it's last kernel of old, bearded adherents. This, of course, will suck for me, as I can't grow a proper beard.

I should note that even self-identified members of the OSR I've encountered online seem pretty gung-ho to buy the latest bit of gaming product reconstituted from something EGG scribbled on a couple of cocktail napkins.

Umbran · Jun 23, 2010

GMSkarka said:
I'm perfectly happy to sell to RPG fans -- that doesn't change the fact that I agree with Malcolm's post, because I've seen the same things: namely that the worst elements of the RPG community (which you and others have termed the CBG element) often actively dissuade others from engaging with the community.

I honestly don't see how that's so damned controversial, but there ya go.

The thing's controversial for one small word: "often". As in, "...often actively dissuade..." That, right there, is at the root of it all.

GMSkarka · Jun 23, 2010

Lolth said:
Well here's the thing -- you argue with the same toxic attitude.

Saying "Exhibit A" is the same as a multi-paragraph rant which includes telling me and Malcolm, personally, to "go die in a fire"???

I see from your profile that you're from Finland. I'm guessing that perhaps we might have a cultural/language disconnect here, because seriously -- as Jules said in "Pulp Fiction" -- "It ain't the same ball park, it's not even the same damn sport."

Raven Crowking · Jun 23, 2010

Vyvyan Basterd said:
You are trying to equate toxic with critcal when no such assertion is being made and you are pointing at specific examples when the issue is more of general image.

Cool.

Tell me what "toxic" means and supply me with some examples.

Then we'll both be on the same page.

Apparently you don't watch American media and see how D&D players are typically portrayed.

Can you example this? I thought D&D players were typically ignored.

4E might lead someone away from RCFRP. Or the person might play 4E for a while, get deeper into the general RP community, learn about other games like RCFRP, and decide they like your game better than 4E and switch.

I have players who play both, and I know the second has occurred. I can just hope that, one day, RCFG has enough players to have some lured away by other games! :lol:

But, frankly, it is more important to me that the "jerks on CNN" maintain their right to free speech than it is that anyone ever finds RCFG on their own. RCFG is a game; free speech is a fundamental principle. I am very, very aware that the game is by far the less important of the two.

Nor am I at all certain that WotC is required to grow the hobby. Or even a new game called "D&D", for that matter. All it takes is for me to share my time and enthusiasm, and for others to do likewise. I do believe that a case can be made that the term "D&D" is becoming essentially meaningless, as each subsequent edition dilutes the term's original content and context. I don't know that I believe that case to be solid, however.

There are strong financial incentives for some people to have us believe these things; that is not enough to make them true.

RC

Dausuul · Jun 23, 2010

GMSkarka said:
Saying "Exhibit A" is the same as a multi-paragraph rant which includes telling me and Malcolm, personally, to "go die in a fire"???

I think Lolth is talking about the accumulation of your previous posts, in this thread and on Malcolm's blog. Hence the "final nail" bit.

GMSkarka · Jun 23, 2010

Umbran said:
The thing's controversial for one small word: "often". As in, "...often actively dissuade..." That, right there, is at the root of it all.

Somehow I doubt if I had instead used "on multiple occasions" instead of "often" that the critics on this thread would have suddenly calmed and said "Oh, OK, then."