AnotherGuy
Hero
I realise there are a lot of factors at play but movie franchises and comics prove you wrong.
D&D General Why grognards still matter
- Thread starter Mercurius
- Start date
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I think that actually supports my contention.
The contention made was the following:
I would strongly suggest they are part of the engine, but not the core of the engine, let alone the engine itself.
Also, if we're talking Classic WoW, let's be very clear - that hard disproves the idea that you can say "Hardcore fans/Grognards". It shows it is definitely not true to regard those two groups as the same thing or massively overlapping. The majority of Classic players are not grognards in WoW (or generally). They're not, contrary to expectations, old returning WoW players who miss the good old days. That was true when Classic first opened up, but it didn't last.
Instead, they're most high-strung (arguably toxic) hardcore players, the players most obsessed with "challenge" and "status" and so on (outside the Race-For-World-First raiding guilds and similar - though there is overlap with them). Most of them apparently started at some point between Mists of Pandaria and Legion or even later - some are even new to WoW with Classic WoW. It's actually surprisingly rare to find people who play Classic significantly who were around in Vanilla, where in Retail, it's relatively common to find such people.
Do they tend to be more hardcore? Absolutely. The Classic server players strongly tend to be more hardcore in that they spend more time in-game, spend more time researching the game, have strong opinions about the game and other players and so on.
Is Classic WoW valuable? Yes, on multiple levels, but particularly because it attracts a different group of players to WoW and gives them something to do. But it's not the grogs, ironic as that might be. The grogs generally had their fill of Vanilla and after playing it a little on Classic are quickly reminded of everything they hated (or play it enough to bask in nostalgia, but then they're full up on that, because they don't have the friends/guilds etc. that made Vanilla special), so they go back to Retail.
It's a money-maker for sure, and is hardcore-oriented, but it's not grog-oriented (in practice, as much as it might seem that way in theory).
No, they do not. Which movies have succeeded by focusing on "hardcore" audiences rather than the large audiences?
Comics are a fundamentally niche deal at this point - they don't have a non-hardcore audience. They used to have a casual audience, but shed for various reasons, and now constantly flirt with bankruptcy or failure.
Desdichado
Hero
Movie franchises absolutely have to focus on the hardcore fan, but not in such a way that they exclude the casuals and tourists. But if the hardcore guys don't like it, then there's no good word of mouth, and the casuals and tourists never show up. The problem isn't the argument, its the fact that it's cast as a false binary. Focusing on hardcore fans doesn't mean doing hardcore raids in WoW that nobody else cares about, leaving more casual fans feeling neglected. It means focusing on the superfans that will gin up hype and good word of mouth to the people who aren't as invested, while also providing an entertaining experience for everyone else too. But you absolutely have to get it right in the eyes of your superfans.
AnotherGuy
Hero
Witcher died. She-Hulk died. Willow died. Do I need to bother with Disney Star Wars? Amazon's LotR? Phase 4-5 Marvel, Star Trek Disovery, Indiana Jones...
They didn't appease their hardcore fans, they went off script, appeased casual minority audiences, trashed the lore, trashed the hardcore fans, subverted the protagonists...
It's a little too early to say but what are your predictions on the James Bond franchise? Aren't you excited how they're gonna appeal now to a larger audience instead of us "terrible" hardcore fans....
I'm sure Rachel Zegler is gonna smash it out the park with their new take on Snow White
Ruin Explorer
Legend
LOL what are you talking about?
Witcher died because the star quit, bro. He quit to try and do a movie that didn't happen.
She-Hulk was an MCU show that I'm not sure was ever intended to definitely have multiple seasons. Has any MCU show had multiple seasons? By your logic "WandaVision died" for the same reasons!
Willow didn't have a hardcore audience. That was part of the problem lol. I mean, I guess that kind of supports your point but not in the way you think.
With Star Wars, the prequel trilogy caused the "hardcore fans" to want to loathe Star Wars, and basically to want to burn their Star Wars stuff (remember the classic Spaced episode?), but contrary to your logic, it was completely successful in generating an entire new generation of SW fans, many of who didn't see the OT until later. Whether the sequel trilogy will do the same remains unknown, and won't be know for maybe probably 10 years.
Amazon's LotR is badly written, but I'm not sure it's "not for hardcores". It's not really for anyone, I'd suggest. But it's very obsessed with deep Tolkien lore. You need to explain how it's "not for hardcores".
Star Trek Discovery was relatively successful, and Strange New Worlds is even more successful. Both bridge "hardcore" and newer audiences, as does the very successful Lower Decks.
Indiana Jones is a direct counter-example to your own point. I am astonished that you included it.
Also "appeased casual minority audiences"? EXCUSE ME? That sounds awfully like calling them "woke" as a pejorative and I'm pretty sure that's not okay. Do you want to clarify what "casual minority" audiences are maybe? It just sounds a bit racist/sexist mate. Surely that's not what you meant? Especially seems dodgy because you chose a very loaded negative word "appeased", like these audiences are Hitler.
The rest is mostly subjective nonsense too. "Trashed the lore". You know what "Trashed the lore" of Star Trek? Both the Mandalorian and Andor have, and funny, you don't seem mad about either of those. I think the lore gets "trashed" whenever you don't like it, and it's fine whenever you do, so that's the ultimate in subjectivity.
Sacrosanct
Legend
Yeah...none of that is really true. It's just your opinion. I especially roll my eyes at the Star Wars reference, because the prequels came before Disney got involved (which were loathed by hardcore fans), and some of the best regarded Star Wars media came out after Disney took over (Andor, Rogue One, etc.)
this whole dogwhistle about "appeasing casual minorities" is bunk and needs to stop.
Zardnaar
Legend
Heh think I have more 5E books than all the other players in 3 groups put togather.
Found some older players as well. Think I could run a ye Olde TSR edition with players from the era.
Assuming I could get them all available at the same time is the hard part.
Would be interesting to know what % of whales are older players.
Found some older players as well. Think I could run a ye Olde TSR edition with players from the era.
Assuming I could get them all available at the same time is the hard part.
Would be interesting to know what % of whales are older players.
AnotherGuy
Hero
That's actually dogwhistling when you're alluding to someone being an "-ist" when we're talking about hardcore fandom. Also can we just try and keep Hitler from entering every discussion, I'm not sure why people need to go there continually.
Let's take James Bond for example. If they change It to Jane Bond and one does not like it - does that make that one a sexist?
Last edited:
Ruin Explorer
Legend
Nah, I want you to carefully and clearly define what you mean by "appeased casual minority audiences". Also you chose the word "appeased", so no, you don't get to complain about your own choices mate.
Let's hear it, what did you mean by that? Because I think that's pretty key here. Especially as you refused to defend any of your claims whatsoever.
AnotherGuy
Hero
Not playing your game.
I've explained myself clearly enough as have you.
