Ryan Dancey speaks - the Most Successful Year for Fantasy RPGaming ever. However...

[Mark CMG]

All I know for certain is that something has to change, and start changing fast, or the network for TRPGs risks hitting that critical threshold of "holes".

Time to sell sky?

 

[jim pinto]

my tummy hurts

First, thanks for taking the time out to post on here. Usually, these threads die or change into “anime-furries are better than manga-furries” arguments. At least your post was topical.

Secondly, seeing as how you couldn't avoid bringing up your hurt feelings, I've chosen to post my biting remarks on my personal blog.

http://fluidsum.blogspot.com/2005/12/if-they-gave-oscars-for-making-waves.html

What I think of you doesn’t belong on enworld. These people have suffered enough.

Thirdly, I'm going to try to address everything you've said (in context), because that's how debates are done.

First, as someone who knows me, I'll ask you not to make generalizations about my interests in gaming -- especially not pejorative ones. I am and have been a "hobby gamer" long before I was a businessperson. My interest in RPGs is based on a foundation laid when I was 12 years old and played D&D as a sixth-grader. I believe that I'll be playing RPGs until they put me in the ground.

Your original post wasn’t about being a gamer. It was about how much money WoW made and how little YOU/THIS INDUSTRY made in the same year (or last 30 years combined… bad math aside). So, while you might be a gamer at heart, your theme promoted fear and your thread addressed how people need to get together and have fun in a social way (the mission statement of your organized play company if I’m not mistaken).

Second, my paycheck comes primarily from helping new companies to enter the field and bring new games to the table. So my personal financial interests are very much aligned with the average fan -- I want to find new great products and get them to market successfully -- which means you'll have new great products to play. I have no reason to suspect my paycheck is in any danger, because my business is much larger than RPGs. In fact, I have not made a dime in personal income from RPGs since the day I left Wizards of the Coast. D&D and the TRPG category as a whole could vaporize tomorrow, and from a money perspective, it wouldn't impact me one bit.

Precisely everyone’s point on this thread. They will continue to play, with or without new product.

Coming from a former game-publisher employee, I find that statement rather ironic.

As someone who made poverty wages for 9 years, I find that statement highly ignorant.

Making money from publishing games is no more or less greedy than making money from commercializing any other recreational pursuit -- cooking, snowboarding, scrapbooking, etc. Most people I have met in this industry are far more interested in making a great game then they are at making great money -- if they were, they wouldn't be in the gaming industry, where salaries are low, risks are high, and jackpots few.

You’re smart enough to know that only the people at top make a living off of gaming (and a handful of very talented artists). But with only a few exceptions, gaming is not a meritocracy. Game companies do not seek out talented people. They do not recruit the guy who just released Product X. Instead, guys in positions like you hire some kid for 2 cents a word and copy the last great idea. The gaming industry is awash in copies, not trendsetting games.

People fear original ideas. They fear risk. They want to market something like Eberron, rather than something new and exciting like … Collectible DNA (hey, that’s not a bad idea, actually). The last new idea was collectible cards and perhaps… minis. Even D&D 3rd is what D&D 2nd edition should have been.

D&D has been a commercially viable product as long as you've been alive. That tells me that there's something renewable, something resilient in the product that can withstand management incompetence, neglect, misunderstood customers, and misguided development. Clearly, a rational person would have to conclude that pursuing that business is far from short sighted.

Then why is it no longer commercially viable? Why did you have to save it from TSR 8 years ago? Why is there a glut of product no one wants? Why is the gap in the sales of the PHB and the second best supplement so wide? Why is doomsday talk the scourge of Enworld? Why did you start this thread?

Then all things fantasy should be hot too. Including TRPGs. Which they are demonstrably not. I fail to see this correlation. Are you suggesting that WoW is successful because Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings have raised the public conciousness? How to do you square that with the millions of copies of Warcraft and Diablo Blizzard sold prior to the rise of Potter and the restoration of LotR? Do you think that 5 million people are paying their monthly fees because they're caught up in a fad - and that they have no real interest in fantasy, no desire to adventure in their own stories, to be in control of characters expressing their own will and dialog, and that when the "fad" cools they'll move on to something else?

Well. I actually addressed this earlier. If gamers are stinky, WoW allows them to be stinky and not bother anyone. If they are bad GMs and PCs, WoW allows them to kill stuff and play in railroad stories without GM controlled options. If gamer can’t show up on time, don’t have a car, or lack the initiative to get out of their chairs, then WoW allows them to become heroes from the convenience of their bedrooms. If gamers lack social skills, they can shout their heads off in WoW, get booted and then go play Everquest.

Don't you think it would be more reasonable to suggest that there has always been a huge market of potential roleplayers who have found the TRPG environment unsuitable due to complexity, or lack of instruction, or "geek" taint, and that now they have a tool that meets a fundamental creative need - a tool that they know will only get better and better as time, technology, and resources are applied to the form - and will not only continue to use this tool for the rest of their lives (as many D&D players used D&D), but will keep bringing new friends into the shared world to join the fun?

Here is the fundamental question that you, and others in this thread are missing.

Who will we game with?

I don’t know about you, but I’m going to game with DaveMage, Qwillon, Mouseferatu, and BlackRedBlue…



Have you not been following the barrage of notes about this across the internet and among the FLGS supporters with social skills? There’s a lot of people that enjoy the excitement of TRPGs more than CRPGs. Gamers are going to hunt each other down and pay the $20 a month meetup.com fee if necessary to find a group to play with.

Or use organized play.

…

The question I’ll ask to you is… why didn’t the D&D team plan for this before releasing the OGL license? You know, the license that doesn’t require a licensing fee? How short-sighted was this? How much more money did Hasbro make off D&D because someone really wanted to play the Red Dinosaur RPG, but need the PHB to do it? How much money did they lose because company X released the Red Dinosaur RPG before they could?

If you ask me, TRPGs were being lowered into the casket around 1999… but 3.0 gave them a shot of adrenaline and BAM; Frankenstein is alive once again. But if I wanted to know which two poisons killed it…I would look to 3.5 and that free open source document.

And since no one on this thread except you was involved in either of those decisions, why is it the worry of the game community to find some heart paddles to bring it back to life?

So. Here’s another question.

Network games, like TRPGs, are strong and resilient [sic] as long as they face no external competition. The concept of the network externality explains why large games stay large, and popular over long periods of time, despite technical inferiority, changes in fashion, changes in demography, and other factors that should impact them but don't. However, the network externality is susceptible to outside influences in the form of a larger network of greater value and utility.

Also known in some circles as competition.

If WoW is the leading edge of a network of higher value and utility, then TRPGs are doomed -- even if some hard core keeps playing them until they're dust -- because attrition will whittle their numbers to a critical threshold figure that creates enough holes in the network that many people who might want to continue to play will be unable to play due to a lack of people to play with. It will not be sufficient merely to have the desire to play - it will require an accident of geography to allow a game to happen.

Then TRPGs are doomed! You’re rattling the same saber that historical gamers and war gamers have been rattling for 20 years. Game companies need to grow up and learn that a staff of 1,600 administrators and 2 writers is probably a bad design model for a niche hobby. And if they really want it to thrive, they need to target their product at the numbers geeks that thought Star Fleet Battles and Shadowrun involved simple math or target them at the LARP community that touts itself as socially refined in contrast.

[Huge generalizations, I know.]

The wargame community bounced back by making simpler games. When does the RPG community get a clue?

If someone of your professional caliber is worried about all this (and I don’t believe people in your position ever are), then why is there never a 10-year plan? Why was 3.5 released, effectively fracturing D&D players into three camps (3.0, 3.5, and never going to play either again, ever)?

As for the second half of that statement, all things become extinct. ALL. You need to worry about the end of clean air and water before you worry about the death of the TRPG, because those two things are coming in the next 10 years, not the next 30.

And if the end really is extremely f***ing nigh, then get used to the response gamers have been hearing for years: “Whatever the market will bear.”

The easily available solutions to this problem all involve using the internet to foster communication and close gaps of geography -- two problems that MMORPGs solve far, far better than TRPGs ever will.

Every game group is populated by people who are there on the margins -- they aren't hard core dedicated players, they're just in the game for fun and community. Those people are the most likely to gravitate to a WoW-type experience. And when they're having their creative itch scratched, they're less likely to rejoin or sustain a TRPG game group. A TRPG can be quite fun with 5 players, but often very un-fun with 3 players. (please accept that I know that someone out there loves his/her 3 player group -- we're speaking in generalities, not in anecdotal [sic] exceptions.)

Poke enough 1-2 player holes in enough game groups, and suddenly you have a big population of disenfranchised TRPG players - people who can't play because they can't find a game. And there's a feedback loop there too - some players are "partially committed" - they'll make some effort to play, but if the group disintegrates, they're not going to bust their asses trying to put it back together or recruit new players. When those people start dropping out, bigger holes appear - and more people get disenfranchised. Repeat. .

We always come back to the banner I’ve been carrying for years… bad gamers drive people from the hobby. You can’t cure what people are (short of a plague), so you’d better start learning to adapt your product to every walk of beast out there.

WoW doesn’t care if wear the same clothes to every game sessions.

So what stops this cycle?

I see only three options:

* Someone comes up with a way to show that the TRPG experience has value and utility that can't be replaced in an MMORPG, and markets that feature effectively to 12-15 year olds, as well as the existing TRPG population, and allows the TRPG player network to exist safely in parallel with the MMORPG network.

* The TRPG field evolves into a new format with a new genre and targets a new group of players - a new niche market for some reason safe from predation by the fantasy MMORPG titans.

* MMORPGs do turn out to be a fad, and their business models collapse, leaving a residue of some unknown number of new "RPG" players seeking a way to continue to engage in their hobby even after the games that brought them to the concept have been shut off, and the TRPG player network co-opts them.

All I know for certain is that something has to change, and start changing fast, or the network for TRPGs risks hitting that critical threshold of "holes".[/QUOTE]

Well. For those of us in Southern California, this happened 10 years ago. If you don’t meet people in college or your local convention, you don’t meet people to game with. So, either the desire to play is there or its not. How desperate are you to game? Will you roll up characters with the guy who plays NINJAS? Or the gamer who dents every chair you own? Or the one who argues about the rules at every session? What is your threshold?

After all, a thirsty man in the desert will s*ck off a camel.

So… is TRPG need or want?

 

[Vocenoctum]

You’re smart enough to know that only the people at top make a living off of gaming (and a handful of very talented artists). But with only a few exceptions, gaming is not a meritocracy. Game companies do not seek out talented people. They do not recruit the guy who just released Product X. Instead, guys in positions like you hire some kid for 2 cents a word and copy the last great idea. The gaming industry is awash in copies, not trendsetting games.

Sorry, but this just seems wrong. There are plenty of authors drawn in by their quality material, so I can't possibly understand this statement. I'm sure there's plenty of bad authors that keep getting work because they're cheap, but frankly I don't see your statement as true in nearly any sense.

 

[jim pinto]

Sorry, but this just seems wrong. There are plenty of authors drawn in by their quality material, so I can't possibly understand this statement. I'm sure there's plenty of bad authors that keep getting work because they're cheap, but frankly I don't see your statement as true in nearly any sense.

It's not uncommon for a good staff writer to get replaced by some kid who wants to work for free just to get his name in print. Rather than pay creators a liveable wage in gaming, the proverbial carrot continually dangles, forcing established creators to work harder and harder to get by.

A better example is this. Writer A creates UberWorld X. Everyone says, "Damn.' (they stop and say damn.) "That's a great idea." Company A says, "We should hire Writer B and C to create UberWorld XI for us," instead of hiring Writer A to do something new and exciting for them.

After all, how many books are there on drow, fighters, orcs, and ships?

 

[Vocenoctum]

It's not uncommon for a good staff writer to get replaced by some kid who wants to work for free just to get his name in print. Rather than pay creators a liveable wage in gaming, the proverbial carrot continually dangles, forcing established creators to work harder and harder to get by.

A better example is this. Writer A creates UberWorld X. Everyone says, "Damn.' (they stop and say damn.) "That's a great idea." Company A says, "We should hire Writer B and C to create UberWorld XI for us," instead of hiring Writer A to do something new and exciting for them.

After all, how many books are there on drow, fighters, orcs, and ships?

I know exactly what you mean, I just don't see how companies aren't hiring quality talent to write plenty of new products. Repetition is true, certainly, but so what? That doesn't mean they're firing great writers to hire cheaper writers.

 

[Hussar]

* Someone comes up with a way to show that the TRPG experience has value and utility that can't be replaced in an MMORPG, and markets that feature effectively to 12-15 year olds, as well as the existing TRPG population, and allows the TRPG player network to exist safely in parallel with the MMORPG network.

Interesting read, but shows a decided lack of knowledge about CRPG gamers. Studies have shown that the average gamer is 30 years old, been gaming for about 12 years and 40% of them are female.

It's not the teens that are playing MMORPG's, it's the older crowd. The crowd that also, according to Dragon anyway, playes DnD. Except for one glaring difference. Dragon readership is about 5% female.

Borrowing from CRPG's is not a bad thing if we can tap into that market, which is not the market which Jim Pinto is pointing at.

 

[Odhanan]

What annoys me the most about this whole comparison is the comparison of two activities, CRPGs and TRPGs, that are fundamentally different in the way they are played, the type of pleasure they provide, the media they use... that's like comparing RPGs and novels. That's a bad idea.

 

[MerricB]

...and another thread rises from the grave. Don't you wish it hadn't?

Cheers!

 

[BlueBlackRed]

...and another thread rises from the grave. Don't you wish it hadn't?

Cheers!

Yeah, this one ended on an abrupt note with some time-off granted to at least one person.