What is "The Forge?"

[jgbrowning]

Here's my "Lemme think about it for a night" take on the different types of RPG gamers. Think Meyers-Briggs for Gamers.

Simulationist - Pretender
Socializer - Gamer
Themeist - Player
Stratigist - Simplist

joe b.

 

[Umbran]

You can fall back on "but it's distribution!" or "I can't market my game!", but they aren't convincing arguments. The market will find a way to your game if it's truly something the market needs...

Two things:

One: you're changing the premise. Earlier, we were talking about the game's "quality". Now you're talking about the game being "something the market truly needs". Those aren't the same thing at all.

Two: "if you build a better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to your door" is an unconvincing assertion. Distribution certainly does matter - it is literally impossible to succeed if people cannot get their hands on your product. As for marketing - word of mouth works sometimes, sure. But you effectively assert that word of mouth alone will guarantee success, and I just don't buy it. Especially in a market so utterly dominated by one or two really major players. I think you're being rather unfair to good products that don't have marketing budgets here - "Well, obvioiusly, you weren't really so good, because if you were you'd not need any advertising to ever succeed."

This is not to say that sometimes a given author might blame lack of marketing or distribution when the root problem really is that their game stinks. But just because some folks lay that blame falsely, doesn't mean all such complaints are unfounded.

 

[d20Dwarf]

Two things:

One: you're changing the premise. Earlier, we were talking about the game's "quality". Now you're talking about the game being "something the market truly needs". Those aren't the same thing at all.

Two: "if you build a better mousetrap, the world will beat a path to your door" is an unconvincing assertion. Distribution certainly does matter - it is literally impossible to succeed if people cannot get their hands on your product. As for marketing - word of mouth works sometimes, sure. But you effectively assert that word of mouth alone will guarantee success, and I just don't buy it. Especially in a market so utterly dominated by one or two really major players. I think you're being rather unfair to good products that don't have marketing budgets here - "Well, obvioiusly, you weren't really so good, because if you were you'd not need any advertising to ever succeed."

This is not to say that sometimes a given author might blame lack of marketing or distribution when the root problem really is that their game stinks. But just because some folks lay that blame falsely, doesn't mean all such complaints are unfounded.

I don't really want to talk about game quality. I've not read much of the Forge's actual games, and I'm not here to bash creators for their work. If we don't agree on the mousetrap analogy, then we're not going to agree, because I define superior products by what the market wants, and especially in this day and age, the market can find what it wants. That's probably one major difference between a commercial designer and an auteur. I certainly sympathize with the artistic mindset, but not with the attitude it seems to engender (and that's certainly not limited to the Forge).

 

[Bastoche]

Bam! And there it is! The infamous 'If you question it, you just don't get it!' mantra. I suppose it was only a matter of time

First, I understand that was on page 3 and this is now on page 6. Second, I'm not a member of the forge "clique" and 3rd, my point is not "If you question it, you just don't get it!" but rather "If you reject it 100%, you just don't get it!'.

 

[Kanegrundar]

First, I understand that was on page 3 and this is now on page 6. Second, I'm not a member of the forge "clique" and 3rd, my point is not "If you question it, you just don't get it!" but rather "If you reject it 100%, you just don't get it!'.

What about "if you reject it 100%, you just don't agree with it"?

 

[d20Dwarf]

What about "if you reject it 100%, you just don't agree with it"?

But everything you write from now on will be directly influenced by it.

 

[Jim Hague]

What about "if you reject it 100%, you just don't agree with it"?

But that would make (gasp!) sense!

 

[Teflon Billy]

...Gaming doesn't have to be about anything. Gaming doesn't even have to be about gaming...

"Gaming doesn't have to be about gaming"... :\

I'm not even going to ask for claification.

I will, however, point out that this is the kind of ivory-tower academic rhetoric that made me think of The Forge in the way I do.

It's perfect example actually. A link to that post mght well become a standard inclusion in future posts on the subect.

 

[Dave Turner]

In short, lack of distribution, marketing, and commercial success is an indicator of an inferior product (in relation to the market). We can game with inferior products, we've been doing it all along, but for the creators of such to deride successful games *with no basis in reality* is sad. They need to prove that their theories are sound via commercial success and a transformation of the roleplaying market. I hope they're interested in doing so.

Right, because commercial success is the sole indicator of a product's worth. The games that have made the most money are obviously the best games, because the mere fact that lots of people like something is the surest indicator of its merits. What game has the best rules? Whichever one made the most money! Danielle Steel and Stephen King are obviously the best writers in the world because they've sold the most books. Titanic is obviously the best movie ever made because it made a whole pile of cash. Commercial benchmarks are the best indicators of a game's quality as a game.

 

[mcrow]

I've read some of Justin's critics. There is a right way to critique somebody's work, and there is a wrong way to critique somebody's work. Saying that a passage doesn't work and explaining why is one thing. Saying a writer can't write because he's a doody head is another. When critiquing a body of work or a specific work you refrain from ad hominen attacks. A fundamental fact of the critic's art I've seen too many people ignore.

Justin gets attacked, Justin responds. I understand why Justin responds as he does, because I would not tolerate the sort of attacks he gets. Say what you like about what I say, but personal attacks will result in a very angry Mythusmage.

When judging a person's actions consider his motivations.

Yup, you are right. It's not right for people to insult him either. Critics who critique peoples work with nothing to back it up are being idiots and are not even worth responding to. I want to point out that I was not one of the people who have trashed Justins work. Justin is well known for his good work from what I gather from most forums. I don't have a opinion one way or the other on his work personally. So i'm out of this conversation because this has become way OT.