So what exactly is the root cause of the D&D rules' staying power?

[aramis erak]

That's exactly it. It's about branding. There's nothing unique about D&D; but it does its job well and is more well known as a term than "tabletop roleplaying game" is. Hell, I know people who say they're playing D&D when they're playing something else entirely.

the brand is also much bigger than the RPG. The novels supposedly make at least as much as the RPG line. The videogames more than either alone.
The related tabletop games also do a nice chunk of change.

D&D isn't JUST the RPG; it is a whole collection of cross reinforcing brands and games in all aspects of gaming.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The N1500 (released 1972) was a tape-based machine that used a format called VCR, as linked above, not to be confused with VHS or Betamax. That clearly predates Betamax from 1975.

It did beat the Sony...and it was “not ready for primetime:

The Philips VCR system was only marketed in the U.K., mainland Europe, Australia and South Africa. In mid-1977, Philips announced they were considering distribution of the format in North America, and it was test marketed for several months. Because the format was initially designed only for use with the 625-line 50 Hz PAL system, VCR units had to be modified in order to work with the 60 Hz NTSC system. Unfortunately, for mechanical and electronic reasons, the tape speed had to be increased by 20%, which resulted in a 60-minute PAL tape running for 50 minutes in a NTSC machine. DuPont announced a thinner videotape formulation that would allow a 60-minute NTSC VCR tape (and roughly 70 minutes in PAL), but the tape was even less reliable than previous formulations. Ultimately, Philips abandoned any hope of trying to sell their VCR format in North America, partly because of the reliability issues, and partly because of the introduction of VHS that same year.

Essentially, it wasn’t even ready for the markets in which it debuted- almost a public beta test. That’s virtually the definition of jumping the gun.

Like some of the early automobiles, those who classify technology may or may not consider that a legit consumer product. (I don’t know.)

 

[pogre]

the brand is also much bigger than the RPG. The novels supposedly make at least as much as the RPG line. The videogames more than either alone.
The related tabletop games also do a nice chunk of change.

D&D isn't JUST the RPG; it is a whole collection of cross reinforcing brands and games in all aspects of gaming.

AND, the movies! Don't forget about the movies! Oh wait....

 

[tomBitonti]

I'm sure other games designed by other folks did come up with many of these elements. I can't believe there's no war game pre-D&D where units have individual hit counts. There are war games pre-D&D where units are of different classes. The way it came out would have been much different, but D&D is not the one true origin for many of these things, especially outside the RPG world.

I’m vaguely remembering reading that a key differentiator of D&D was the shift from units to individuals. I didn’t think the assignment of numerical values was very new, nor the idea of class — which maps pretty well to type.

Applying HP, which started as a statistical measure of a unit, to individuals, seems integral to the transition.

Advancement feels like the difference between veteran and non-veteran units, and not very new. The experience system does seem new.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Nothing is as enduring as the unfocused rage and mindless determination of a D&D enthusiast with time to kill and something to prove by arguing over the internet about the time-travel paradox of supplanting an obscure game system in order to precede the works of Gygax (and others) just to make a point while waiting for the next semi-annual product announcement from WotC. And THAT is why DnD endures. It's not the game, it's the fanatics.

 

[prosfilaes]

Now we’re talking alternate universes.

At the end of the day, I’m not saying that Gygax and Arneson invented all these things. But I think it was the forerunner of the industry, and these design aspecta have seeped out into other areas because of D&D. Perhaps it would have happened anyway...but that’s irrelevant.

D&D’s influence is pervasive, and I think that adds to its staying power.

Whenever you're talking about "why" something happened, you're talking about alternate universes. "Why did the lightbulb break? Because you dropped it" presumes in an alternate universe where you didn't drop it, it wouldn't have broken. Given the number of lightbulbs we deal with, that's an easy statement to make, but we don't have a bunch of RPG industries that we can test under controlled industries; we just have history, and our guesses about what would have happened. As [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] points out, we do have data from other industries to look at, but 60-70% is far from the certainty of "lightbulbs don't break unless they're dropped".

If it would have happened anyway, than D&D didn't cause it. That's what to cause means. This is an example of the post hoc fallacy.

I don't see how D&D's influence being pervasive adds to its staying power. It means there's so many slightly different alternatives that it's hard for D&D to distinguish itself from the crowd. It's like when Coke was losing market share and the company was flailing about for something to do; part of the problem was that colas are hard to distinguish between each other so it's all advertising. The more you can buy games that play like D&D, the harder it is for D&D to stand out because of its game play.

 

[prosfilaes]

Essentially, it wasn’t even ready for the markets in which it debuted- almost a public beta test. That’s virtually the definition of jumping the gun.

Most of the reviews of the original D&D have implied that calling it a public beta test might be generous, that nobody could take the original books and play without having played with someone else and having learned all the things not written down.

I don't exactly doubt the 60-70% figure as a figure useful for business majors. I'm just unconvinced that it means a whole lot without a lot of understanding of what's being counted and what isn't.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Well it is correlation, but not causation.

And the literature behind the number talks about the various factors as to why being first matters so much. As mentioned, it defines the market- the expectations of investors and consumers. It also become the face of the marketer the general public, the benchmark against which future competitors will be measured, the standard against which those competitors make design decisions of emulation, refinement or wholesale rejection.

If the product has any kind of legs, it gets the first bite at the profits available, which can translate into improved marketing, improvements in quality, improvements in production efficiency, etc., further increasing the producer’s ability to capture market share. That could also mean a virtual monopoly if no competition arises in a timely fashion.

 

[aramis erak]

AND, the movies! Don't forget about the movies! Oh wait....

Fuggedabout da movies.

 

[aramis erak]

Most of the reviews of the original D&D have implied that calling it a public beta test might be generous, that nobody could take the original books and play without having played with someone else and having learned all the things not written down.

I don't exactly doubt the 60-70% figure as a figure useful for business majors. I'm just unconvinced that it means a whole lot without a lot of understanding of what's being counted and what isn't.

Even when it does... Rifts vs Torg. Rifts 1990 for both. Rifts was scheduled for later, but got rushed out the door, and took a lead. Meanwhile, Torg was 3 months late, and many thought it derivative of Rifts, despite the adverts starting earlier.

They're both "invading Realities" settings, but Torg is the one that suffered despite higher production quality and a more sensible approach to the invasion of alternate realities.