Johnny Wilson on Dragon 300 at www.gamingreport.com

Hey, does anyone know if there's a Gaming Report Lite? You know, something with more basic code involved? Because my computer goes nuts trying to read all the applets and such they slap up on their site.

I have no trouble loading virtually any other site so I'm thinking it's a problem on their end. I'd love to keep up with GR but all I can do right now is stare at the pretty banner at the top.

Forgive my ignorance, but what was Johnny Wilson doing on Good Morning America discussing Mortal Kombat and debating school shootings on CNN? Who was he before he came to Dragon?

He used to be a clergyman, but I don't know for how long. That's why they have a nice Greek name for the new publishing company--Paizo. (Just in case; the New Testament was written in Greek, so many pastors learn it.) Maybe that's why, Meepo.

CrazyMage said:

When it comes to catching trout, nothing beats the German light infantry.

Click to expand...

What the heck is that? Is there some story to this, cause it's brilliant.

Marius Delphus said:

Forgive me, but I'm having a bit of trouble with the logical premises here. Leaving aside the unsubtle jab at the mentioned well-known writer, this statement seems to claim that D&D lost market share in the 90s because D&D was too "innocent"; specifically (and here I am trying to read between the lines a bit), (a) D&D rules had no "gritty" (read "vile") content and (b) D&D villains weren't "gritty" enough. Is there a market survey that supports the causational link here, or should we read this as a statement of opinion?

Click to expand...

Well, I can't say for sure, but I can say that D&D in the 90s came across as pandering to it's audience, in the same way that Avalanche currently does, with an emphasis on boobage and blood, and not necessarily on content. I don't think he means innocent, so much as infantile. Not having been an active player of D&D at that time, I can't comment on how accurate it is...but I can comment on the one or two D&D products I bought that SUCKED. Essentially, he claims that D&D was being designed for a market from ten to fifteen years prior, or so I read it.

As for the jab at a particular writer...well, that writer took the first punch, and his reply at gaming report doesn't seem to take much umbrage with it, so I won't.

MeepoTheMighty said:

Forgive my ignorance, but what was Johnny Wilson doing on Good Morning America discussing Mortal Kombat and debating school shootings on CNN? Who was he before he came to Dragon?

Click to expand...

Johnny helped start Computer Gaming World and was its editor for about 15 years until he left there to become group publisher at Wizards of the Coast. As an editor in the field since its infancy, he is considered an expert on computer games, so often speaks on various gaming topics.

Sabre

Default Name Player said:

Actually, it's the opposite of what you're saying that's true. <snip statistics>

Click to expand...

Nice statistics. This could extend what I thought. Do you have statistics for all films for those years? Not just the top grossers. What I'd like to see is the average gross for films by rating. My original thought was that the top films would do better with a lower rating (thus increasing the possible audience). However, if you didn't have a top film then you would be better off making sure you had an "R" rated movie. Your statistics don't argue either way, unfortunately.

It's possible the industry has changed in the last couple of years. I know putting a major movie out that wasn't "R" (especially action movies) was considered suicide a few years ago. For example, most in the industry expected "The Last Action" hero would be a bomb because they deliberately didn't release an "R" rated movie, before it was finished.

Still, I think the movie industry, the RPG magazine industry and Disneyland (mentioned by another poster right under the original article) are different enough that it's a tenuous connection at best.

David A. Blizzard

WizarDru said:

Well, I can't say for sure, but I can say that D&D in the 90s came across as pandering to it's audience, in the same way that Avalanche currently does, with an emphasis on boobage and blood, and not necessarily on content. I don't think he means innocent, so much as infantile. Not having been an active player of D&D at that time, I can't comment on how accurate it is...but I can comment on the one or two D&D products I bought that SUCKED. Essentially, he claims that D&D was being designed for a market from ten to fifteen years prior, or so I read it.

Click to expand...

I thought he was referring to the whole tanar'ri/baatezu phenomenon.

Glyfair said:

Nice statistics. This could extend what I thought. Do you have statistics for all films for those years? Not just the top grossers. What I'd like to see is the average gross for films by rating. My original thought was that the top films would do better with a lower rating (thus increasing the possible audience). However, if you didn't have a top film then you would be better off making sure you had an "R" rated movie. Your statistics don't argue either way, unfortunately.

It's possible the industry has changed in the last couple of years. I know putting a major movie out that wasn't "R" (especially action movies) was considered suicide a few years ago. For example, most in the industry expected "The Last Action" hero would be a bomb because they deliberately didn't release an "R" rated movie, before it was finished.

Click to expand...

R rated movies have historically grossed less than PG-13 rated movies. Here are the grosses for movies from 2001. I can tell just by glancing at the list (and yes, top 50 movies are a good measure) that PG-13 movies made more overall than R movies.

Glyfair said:

Nice statistics. This could extend what I thought. Do you have statistics for all films for those years? Not just the top grossers. What I'd like to see is the average gross for films by rating. My original thought was that the top films would do better with a lower rating (thus increasing the possible audience). However, if you didn't have a top film then you would be better off making sure you had an "R" rated movie. Your statistics don't argue either way, unfortunately.

Click to expand...

The chart below is from an NYU Stern School of Business paper. The authors argue that the success of G rated films is somewhat difficult to guage by rating alone, as animated features completely blow away live action G-rated films in terms of gross receipts. The authors also look at other predictors of film success, such as whether the film has top stars or not, etc.

Edit: Link to paper - http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~jsimonof/movies/movies.pdf