Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5079611" data-attributes="member: 22779">I realize that I made a mistake here.Content =/= marketing.  That's totally my bad too because I brought up content in the initial post.  The content inside the game is not what I meant.  And I totally did not mean that D&D was immature or anything like that as a pasttime.  Again, I can see how people could get that from my first post, and, again, totally my bad.My question is solely about the marketing.  Gygaxian prose notwithstanding, 1e was not marketed anywhere other than in teen circles.  Comic books, cartoons, TV ads that show teens playing (often with their families), that sort of thing.That's what I'm questioning.  Whether the actual game is targeted towards this or that audience - well,  honestly, I don't think we can get too far there.  But, as far as marketing goes, the game has always been pointed pretty squarely at teens.BTW, Lanefan, do you know why they put the cut off at 35 for 3e?  It's because their research showed that after 35, the vast majority of players stop spending money on the hobby.  Yes, I know some are the exception, but, this is what they found out.  After 35, it doesn't matter what your game looks like, people don't spend money on gaming.  So, 3e was designed for people who were going to buy a new game.  Playstyles and whatnot had very little to do with it at all.  It was all about the money.</blockquote>