New Faces (Forked: Its the terminology that kills me...)

[Fifth Element]

The only way you can answer this though is with some kind of weird time travel thing where you changed the past 10 years but Hobo still remembered the current 10...

You can't miss soemthing you never knew existed in the first place.

Yeah, that's kinda my point. That is, great things in gaming have occurred in the past 10 years, that most likely would not have if the hobby were dead for those years. To suppose that the next 10 years will not also have great things that would not come about if the hobby were dead is short-sighted.

Think of it this way: imagine that the hobby had died 10 years ago. Think of the great games that have been released in that time. For example, D&D 3.X. Is your gaming life better because of those games? If so, that's whay you care about the health of the hobby.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Bring on the new players. Their energy and clumsy enthusiasm is worth a million times more than jaded proficiency.

Gosh, Cad, that's all bit heavy. Did you just get out of a very bad grognard-filled game or something? Whilst I mostly like new players too, I totally don't agree that it's only veteran types who think only certain fantasy archetypes are acceptable in a game. I've seen that more from new players than old, tbh.

 

[GreatLemur]

FWIW, I don't want people that call their character a "toon" in my MMOs, either. God damn that bugs the hell out of me.

Yeah, it's worth pointing out that anybody worth talking to in any MMO community generally frowns on that term, and will make fun of you for using it. (That's right, the people worth talking to are the ones who alienate other players over minor sub-subcultural distinctions. The rules are different when it's MMOs. They, by definition, have too many players.)

 

[Umbran]

Yeah but if the hobby grows there's much more of a chance to get things you want (even if you also have to deal witha bunch of stuff you don't want) then if the hobby dies... (In which case no one gets anythign they want...)

This implicitly suggests that the situation is digital - grow or die are the only options. I don't think that is the case.

Note that growth isn't even the only way to get new faces - you can have new faces come in as old ones drop away to other activities, and have the hobby as a whole stay the same size. Dynamic equilibrium is a possibility.

As I understand it, it's actually the usual way hobbies go - they get to a certain size, and then stop growing, but persist nigh indefinitely in that state.

 

[Scribble]

Yeah, that's kinda my point. That is, great things in gaming have occurred in the past 10 years, that most likely would not have if the hobby were dead for those years. To suppose that the next 10 years will not also have great things that would not come about if the hobby were dead is short-sighted.

Think of it this way: imagine that the hobby had died 10 years ago. Think of the great games that have been released in that time. For example, D&D 3.X. Is your gaming life better because of those games? If so, that's whay you care about the health of the hobby.

There's that time travel again... Had the hobby died 10 years ago, I'd probably either be not gaming, or playing AD&D 2e. In either case, I wouldn't miss any of the games that came about within the last 10 years because I never knew they existed in the first place.

Should I spend my time worried about that fact that maybe in some alternate reality suddenly a game was created that put game designers ont he same level as movie stars?

I mean I agree I think a healthy hobby is a good one... But I can also see the point of someone who is content with what they have, and not being effected by the death of the hobby overall.

 

[racoffin]

New faces can be a great addition to any game. It's nice to be at the table with people who don't know (and/or don't try) every tweak of character, who are trying to have fun rather than trying to run the most optimal gamesmasher they can. Someone who doesn't know the books backwards and forwards; their reaction to encounters, spells, and events can really help bring a measure of enthusiasm to the table that some of the older players may be missing.

 

[Zinovia]

Note that growth isn't even the only way to get new faces - you can have new faces come in as old ones drop away to other activities, and have the hobby as a whole stay the same size. Dynamic equilibrium is a possibility.

As I understand it, it's actually the usual way hobbies go - they get to a certain size, and then stop growing, but persist nigh indefinitely in that state.

But to maintain that equilibrium there still needs to be a certain influx of new gamers as those who become bored and jaded wander off to other pursuits. Without actively pursuing new gamers, the pool of players for a given system will diminish slowly over time. Of course the best way to create new gamers is to grow them yourself. Teach your kids to play D&D!

 

[radferth]

I specifically wants lots of irritating new WoW refugees joining the hobby. I need someone to feel superior to.

 

[jdrakeh]

Older, experienced players with the wrong attitude are a plague on the hobby and I hate them with the burning fires of a thousand suns that are, themselves, also on fire.

A thousand times, yes.

 

[Tigerbunny]

I have been playing on and off since 1980, and I have in all that time seen way, way more positive energy, great ideas, enthusiasm, innovation, and just plain good table-mates among "those damn kids" of all the "new kids who'll ruin the hobby" waves than I have among the guys (and they're always guys, for some reason) who figured out the Right Way when they were 15 and never, ever want anything or anything that isn't Just Like Them in Their Personal, Private Hobby.

I am 40 years old, and the day I look at the 12-year-old kids in my hobby and scowl and sneer is the day I should hang up the dice bag for good. I have a lot to learn from them, just like (I hope) they have things to learn from us old dinosaurs.