Devil worship as a brand

[pickin_grinnin]

High fantasy movies don't tend to do too well these days, unless they are tied toa successful book or series, have a high budget, and are very well done.

WotC would do better to push a particular D&D setting with any non-rpg marketing, rather than just focusing on the name D&D to pull people in. You can build on a fictional setting better than you can on the name of a game, at least epwhen it comes to the general public. Even then, a high fantasy movie is a real risk.

 

[Remus Lupin]

It seems more reasonable to you that they are fans of medieval court drama?

Yes. Yes it does. Or, more precisely, I think they are fans of well-written dramatic series, with complex plots and characters. Additionally I think they enjoy the fantasy setting and all that entails, including dragons and ice-zombies.

I also think that watching naked people strut around is very enjoyable, and is thus for many people value-added, and gives your eyes something pleasant to do during some of the long, talky bits. But I am dubious that the bulk of the audience tunes in specifically for those elements, though I have no doubt that many of them are entertained by those elements.

But if there isn't a good story, I don't think all the nudity in the world would make the series worth watching. As a case in point, as True Blood has struggled with its story recently, fewer and fewer people are watching it, nudity notwithstanding. And I've never watched it, nudity notwithstanding, because it's not my idea of a good time.

 

[DMZ2112]

Yes. Yes it does. Or, more precisely, I think they are fans of well-written dramatic series, with complex plots and characters. Additionally I think they enjoy the fantasy setting and all that entails, including dragons and ice-zombies.

You and I have very different assessments of humanity. I think we've gone far enough off topic for one thread, however.

 

[Remus Lupin]

You and I have very different assessments of humanity. I think we've gone far enough off topic for one thread, however.

I didn't realize we were doing a whole anthropology here. I'm just taking about Game of Thrones fans, and what I've garnered from literally hundreds of hours (well, ok, maybe A hundred hours) of reading fan analysis of the episodes, following the media around the show, reading comment threads, etc. Every so often someone will go "Look, boobies!" But almost without exception, the bulk of the commentary is on subjects such as "OMG! I can't believe Jaimie did that thing!" and "I wonder if Jon Snow will do that other thing!" and "Tyrion did that thing again," where, in each case, the thing in question was NOT having sex or hacking someone to tiny bits.

But fair enough if you don't want to pursue it further.

 

[DMZ2112]

I'm just taking about Game of Thrones fans, and what I've garnered from literally hundreds of hours (well, ok, maybe A hundred hours) of reading fan analysis of the episodes, following the media around the show, reading comment threads, etc.

Only a hundred hours? NOOB, I NAME THEE.

This at least casts a tighter spotlight on our disagreement. I absolutely agree that those people exist, and indeed that they surround us in this place. I hope it is clear -- I would have thought it obvious -- that I am not talking about any Game of Thrones fan who frequents this board, or for that matter any board.

I'm talking about the millions more people who make the show profitable for HBO. In the same way that we often talk here about the hundreds of thousands of D&D players who make D&D far and away the most popular RPG in the world without ever posting to a forum or even reading news on the Wizards website.

There's a big difference between someone who self-identifies as a 'fan of Game of Thrones' and a person on the street who answers yes to the question, "Are you a Game of Thrones fan?"

 

[Remus Lupin]

Only a hundred hours? NOOB, I NAME THEE.

This at least casts a tighter spotlight on our disagreement. I absolutely agree that those people exist, and indeed that they surround us in this place. I hope it is clear -- I would have thought it obvious -- that I am not talking about any Game of Thrones fan who frequents this board, or for that matter any board.

I'm talking about the millions more people who make the show profitable for HBO. In the same way that we often talk here about the hundreds of thousands of D&D players who make D&D far and away the most popular RPG in the world without ever posting to a forum or even reading news on the Wizards website.

There's a big difference between someone who self-identifies as a 'fan of Game of Thrones' and a person on the street who answers yes to the question, "Are you a Game of Thrones fan?"

Perhaps you're right. But I'd need to see some actual data on that score before I concede the point. My expectation is that naked breasts and bloodshed in themselves, won't compel anyone to watch. But again, I'm content to leave it there, in the absence of hard data to resolve the dispute.

 

[Celebrim]

With regards to Game of Thrones, you guys aren't advancing mutually exclusive positions.

Game of Thrones, whether the book or the TV drama, probably wouldn't have nearly the popular appeal without 'boobies' and unflinching portrayals of violence. I don't know who you've been talking too, but I'm also a commentator on a major literary review site and many fans are quite open about the fact that they like the story for the titillation and vicarious violence. This admiration sometimes goes under different names - 'grittier', 'more realistic', 'more metal', 'more believable characters', ect - and sometimes is more or less consciously admitted but its certain a major portion of why many fans like the story.

On the other hand, Game of Thrones probably wouldn't be popular if it didn't have a fascinating story going or otherwise if all it had was sex and/or violence. Many people still are somewhat ashamed to admit that they have a fascination with gore and sexuality, and if there wasn't some other reward they'd probably self critique their viewing more or at least be less open about sharing their fascination. Likewise, there is only so much sex and gore without context before most people are going to have that particular part of their lizard brain satiated. By offering sex and gore within a story, you are offering higher level aesthetic engagement that prevents it all from becoming tedious while at the same time still having that gripping emotional engagement sexuality and death provides. By offering up nudity and violence in characters you've allowed people to identify with, you let them care what happens and that makes the emotional context even more visceral.

For my part, I think it's pretty undeniable that the sex and the gore is a huge part of the appeal. Countless fans of the series highlight these factors as what was missing for them in fantasy authors like Tolkien and the reason they find Martin a more satisfying read. And conversely, if you don't approve of that sort of content or the way Martin handles it, Martin's flowery prose, baroque style, meandering trickle of a plot, and countless tics of repetitive writing are much more likely to be something you find irritating and inexcusable. I honestly think that sans these elements, there would not be mass market appeal. Without the boobs and the violence, I think most people would find the political maneuvering of great houses in a fantasy kingdom with a plot line heavily borrowed from the historical War of the Roses to be a snore fest. Perhaps its not as egregious of a case as 'Shades of Gray', but its certainly a major component of the appeal.

 

[Hussar]

High fantasy movies don't tend to do too well these days, unless they are tied toa successful book or series, have a high budget, and are very well done.

WotC would do better to push a particular D&D setting with any non-rpg marketing, rather than just focusing on the name D&D to pull people in. You can build on a fictional setting better than you can on the name of a game, at least epwhen it comes to the general public. Even then, a high fantasy movie is a real risk.

How is that different from any other movie?

What series was Frozen based on? A little known Anderson story. High budget is the same for all big tent movies. And, considering Spider Man 2 is making loads of money, "very well done" isn't really required.

Then again, setting isn't what draws people. It's character.

But the idea that high fantasy isn't doing well these days is just false.

 

[pickin_grinnin]

How is that different from any other movie?

What series was Frozen based on? A little known Anderson story. High budget is the same for all big tent movies. And, considering Spider Man 2 is making loads of money, "very well done" isn't really required.

Then again, setting isn't what draws people. It's character.

But the idea that high fantasy isn't doing well these days is just false.

Outside of Lord of the Rings, which is an exception to just about every rule, and Game of Thrones, which is really more middle fantasy and is a very adult-oriented cable series, what high fantasy movies can you name over the past decade that have done well at the box office, in Hollywood terms of "success?"

Frozen isn't high fantasy per se - it's a fairy tale. It's also a children's movie and a Disney movie.

Spider Man 2 is popular because it's a Spider-man movie. The character is what drives the sales of it.

In the end, they have to convince studios and distributors to pick up the movie. As with mainstream publishers, those entities tend to have very strong opinions about what will "sell" and what won't, and those opinions run according to various fads and cycles. Right now, they are more likely to take a serious look at a vampire or zombie movie than a werewolf one. They are more likely to take a look at a gritty or children's fantasy movie than a standard high fantasy one. They are more likely to take a look at an espionage movie that features a lot of action than one that is more low-key. There was a time when they were gung-ho about high fantasy movies, but that's not the case today. That isn't to say that none are being produced - it's just harder to get producers, distributors, and the non-fan public to buy into them. Certain things help, though - having a compelling setting, recognizable characters, etc.

 

[saskganesh]

I'm an adult, Game of Thrones is the biggest single driver to my tabletop for new players. They are not singularly interested in playing a game set in Westeros, but want a setting that feels real, has politics, intrigue, adventure and magic. Most of them have some grounding in LOTR, many have played WOW, most have some love for CRPGS. Satanism ... well not so much. A lot of them are interested in the tabletop RP experience. Nobody is there for a sex sim.I think its a good time to be playing and running D&D as there is a lot of broad genre interest. GOT is trendy right now, and that's a good thing. But I think its an error to marry the system to one setting to rule them all, as one day GOT will end and SOFAI will fade and this niche hobby will continue rolling on and we'll be looking at D&D 6.0 and there will be more talk about trying to make a mainstream breakthrough that will never likely come.Focus marketing on the game's unique strength (the social tabletop experience) and don't obsess about the specific pop culture ties in too much. It's just too fickle.