AEG Loses Stargate SG-1!!!

[JPL]

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2005/01/tappingin15episodesnextsea.shtml

Just for five episodes, according to this source.

But now we're way off topic. I apologize.

 

[Crothian]

How dare you take us off toipic!! That never happens at EN World, topics always stay fresh and perfect and now you've gone and squandered that....

kidding, I actullay think the topic has run its course......

 

[swrushing]

trying to trim this down a bit...
[/QUOTE]

But they didn't, and the comparison aren't. I fail to see your point here.

and AEg didn;t keep the license either. see the point yet?

And my point is that, given Eden's track record, using Buffy as the example, then, given the same 18 month period, Eden would not have produced as many Stargate products than AEG!

Hey another comparison you wish to make? Sure.

Eden's record with buffy, first 18 months of production 8/2002+ gives us core rulebook, magic box (mar 2003), monster smackdown (may 2003) and while i dont have the specific dates for slayersguide and screen, i see things like erratta pages and reviews for them by late 2003 indicating they were out within the 18 months timeframe. Thats 5 products i can confirm in their first 18 months.

AEG released only 5 products total for stargate and i have to assume you chose you 18 months so as to include all of them.

So, at 5 for 5 in their first 18 months... they produced the exact same number of products.

so your conclusion seems odd, given that you say it is based on comparing eden with buffy and aeg with stargate in their 18 month only window.

Note, i could not pin down the journal, so i asume it is not within the 18 month window even though that kind of belies the 2 year lull comment someone made earlier. if it is indeed more than 2 years back, that puts eden at 6 vs 5, which would make your conclusion and basis even more... unique.

None of us can make accurate predictions, it's all theories based on track records.

we can make precictions and whether they are accurate or nt will be seen later.

I never said I did. I did say that I didn't think Eden would produce as many products as AEG in the same time period.

odd, considering the comparison shows differently. 5 vs 5 in your own chosen use 18 month comparison.

but thats fine.

we will find 9out in a couple of years whether eden does this or does that.

right now, me, i am actually more concerned now that i found the OP page that its possible eden would do stargate using d20 modern. That would be a horrible result, as far as i am concerned, since all my play with d20 modern has been very dissappointing.

 

[Ranger REG]

right now, me, i am actually more concerned now that i found the OP page that its possible eden would do stargate using d20 modern. That would be a horrible result, as far as i am concerned, since all my play with d20 modern has been very dissappointing.

What Odyssey Prime page? It has not been updated since April 11, 2003.

I still doubt it will be d20 of any kind. Eden Studio is following Atlas Games's and Pinnacle's footstep of leaving d20 publishing behind.

 

[Greatwyrm]

Odyssey Prime has also been written for a while. It just keeps getting pushed back to make way for new licensed stuff, like Army of Darkness.

 

[Lord Morte]

FYI I have a copy of QAGS Firefly if anyone is interested in a copy.

Yes, please. Send it to thomsonr at ihug.co.nz.

 

[swrushing]

[/QUOTE]

What Odyssey Prime page? It has not been updated since April 11, 2003.

Ok, so you know the answer to your question. good. IIRC the last posts i saw on forums (over at eden i think, googled) were dated around december 2004, so not too far back. there was some discussion of the stargate lic situation vis-a-vis OP delays.

I still doubt it will be d20 of any kind. Eden Studio is following Atlas Games's and Pinnacle's footstep of leaving d20 publishing behind.

again, i would love it to be true that stargate doesn't become d20 modern based. but, i am a worrier and when i see similar material developed already and on hold, i do get the sense that its possible, maybe even likely, the allure for "well we can use this and save effort..." will be compelling.

here's hoping my worries are unfounded and they will do a fine unisystem game for stargate!

 

[Jhulae]

FYI I have a copy of QAGS Firefly if anyone is interested in a copy.

I would like a copy, please.

jhulae (at) gmail (dot) com

Thanks.

 

[King of Old School]

I was matching one product line with another (Buffy with Spycraft). I didn't include all Spycraft products (so no Stargate SG-1 included, nor any of the Powered by Spycraft products). If you want to include every product published by each gaming company go ahead, but that's not the point I was attempting to make.

The point you're attempting to make is fruitless, as you're comparing a licensed product which must pass approvals (Buffy) with a product wholly owned by the publisher (Spycraft). It's not even apples and oranges, it's cabbage and jellyfish. Everything Eden publishes for Buffy must pass muster at Fox, whereas AEG can publish anything they like and slap a Spycraft label on it. They could publish John Zinser's grocery list as a Spycraft supplement if they like! (For all I know, they already did...)

Even comparing Buffy and SG-1 is misleading, as the licensor is different (Buffy = Fox, SG-1 = MGM/Sony). It's entirely possible that Fox is slower to approve RPG material than was MGM, esp. since Buffy is a more popular franchise and has far more licensee material to approve. We have no idea how each company's licensing department compares with the other in terms of staffing, workrate, policies, etc. Perhaps MGM was far more easygoing about approvals than Fox... or perhaps not. Certainly, Eden has put many of the delays in Buffy/Angel material down to approvals logjams at Fox, and I have no reason to doubt George V. on that point.

Which isn't to say that Eden won't be slower at producing SG-1 material, if they get the license -- they are different companies with different staff, different income streams and different financial resources. From where I sit, it's entirely possible that AEG is just better able to finance large print runs on a more frequent basis than Eden. Of course, that doesn't say anything about how good the products will be when they hit the shelves, frequency aside.

Personally, I hope Eden doesn't pick up the SG-1 license. I like (but don't love) both Unisystem and Spycraft[1], so this isn't about system for me; frankly, it's that I don't much care at all for the SG-1 property and would rather not see any of Eden's already-scarce resources diverted in its favour. I'd take one Beyond Human over two dozen SG-1s.

KoOS

[1] Which is to say, I like the basic Spycraft system as presented in the corebook -- I loathe the Spycraft "collectible rules" publishing model and hope it dies a richly-deserved death with SC2.0.

 

[Ranger REG]

[1] Which is to say, I like the basic Spycraft system as presented in the corebook -- I loathe the Spycraft "collectible rules" publishing model and hope it dies a richly-deserved death with SC2.0.

Hehehe. The "collectible rules" model. Now THAT is how one should market RPG in this competitive market of "collectible" games.

With all due respect, there are fans that like more Spycraft products as much as those who like D&D-labeled products.