Improving the gaming industry

[rushlight]

WOTC has done so with the release of DnD3.x. Some people (myself included) sometimes complain about it having a more 'CRPG' like feel, but this is actually a good marketing ploy to attract a new generation of players whose first exposure to 'role'playing is from CRPG's. The launch of Eberron, with a new look/feel gameworld is similarly an attempt to unlock a different kind of audience in addition to the FR people.

I also am wary of the new trend at WOTC. More than that, I really fear a "mainstreaming" of the hobby that would be required for the growth level that some are considering.

To make the industry larger, you'll need to appeal to a wider audience. To do that, you'll need to change the product. The problem is, when you "mainstream" RPGs, you will lose people like me. I don't usually like "mainstream" things. An example of this is the D&D movie (and it's new sequel). Those products were dumbed down for the general public. Yet they were nearly abhorred by the gamers - because we are not the general public.

If D&D becomes mainstream, will nearly all of us will become "fringe" gamers? Perhaps with a sub-industry that provides a small amount of material to us? Is that an improvement over our current state?

Why is there no good introductory / basic version of DnD?

I'd like to see something like this, targeted at ages 10-12 or so. But still advanced enough so that it flows into a more advanced system. Don't dumb it down. Trust that the smart kids will get it. Making it to simple will turn off the smart kids (they'll just skip it, or wait to get a more advanced version) and the dumb ones won't get it anyway.

why is there not more focus on modules, which are essentially the 'one shot' products that should generate cash?

Modules are fine, but many DMs prefer to write their own worlds or scenarios. It's why you DM. If all you wanna do is see what happens at the end of the module, you'd be a player.

I will say that I'm not opposed to growing the hobby. I'm opposed to changing it for the sake of growth.

 

[mythusmage]

A Proposition

Maybe if we smartened up RPGs they would draw a larger audience.

 

[Munin]

I consider myself to be pretty stereotypical of the average player. I game 3 to 4 times a months, at about 4 hours a session. I own the core rulebooks, a couple of setting books, and a smattering of reference books. 2/3rds of the ENies nominees I haven't even heard of, much less purchased, and I never will.
Why? I don't have the time, or the need. This year I'll buy one or two more books, and a couple of adventures. That will satisfy my groups needs. Of the other players, most own the PHB, but that's about it. There simply isn't a demand in our group to support this industry.

But the industry is not the Game. My group is dedicated. We game week in and week out, and they gripe and moan on the off weeks. Just this past session we introduced a brand new player, a 15 year-old, to the game (we're all 30-somethings), and it was great.

One of my players is the owner of the FLGS. He caters to the Games Workshop crowd. Is he a filthy, money-grubbing capitalist who is only in it for the money? No. He's a married man with a wife and kid who has bills to pay. Wargamers will drop an easy $200 on an army and not bat an eye. I'll buy maybe two $40 sourcebooks and a dozen or so minis. Who would you cater to?


Lastly, I have to say that drawing a correlation between crpgs and pnp games is a bad idea. I've played both equally for the better chunk of my life (my first crpg was Ultima II), and I have to say that the only _only_ common factor between a pnp rpg and a crpg is the setting. That's it.
The experience is not the same, the reward is not the same, and the game is not the same.
In my opinion, the extent that the current version of D&D is broken (and there are broken parts) is the extent to which the developers were influenced by the crpg.

 

[William Ronald]

Whisper72 wrote:

There are several things I do not understand though:

- why is there no good introductory / basic version of DnD? The set of 3 core rulebooks is larger than the old Gutenberg Bible, and at times more difficult to understand, whether you know German or not, especially for not-yet gamers.
A version with only the four basic classes, limits on spells/powers available, maybe only for the first 10-12 levels or so etc. to get ppl going. Just a bit more then the very limited introductory box which only covers levels 1 and 2.

If I remember correctly, the new boxed set wil be otu in September. Also, one of the problems with TSR, in the eyes of many, was the simultaneous support for the AD&D and D&D lines, essentially dividing up the market.

Also, many publishers are producing modules, but WotC has declared a few times that adventures are not major moneymakers.

mythusmage: How would you propose smartening up RPGs? Do you poropose more works based on history, myth, legend and literature? (For example Green Ronin's Testament and The Wheel of Time series?)

 

[Arnwyn]

Heck, I wonder how many ENWorlders would be gaming more if it weren't for the time they spent on the boards.

Not me. I'd just be more productive at the office. :\

What changes should companies, gaming industry support organizations such as GAMA or the RPGA, and the gaming public do to improve the health of our hobby?

Really, in the case of consumers, all I think they should should do is buy the products they like and do not buy the products they don't. I certainly don't think consumers are obligated to do anything more. I know that I, for one, have no intention of "supporting" the gaming industry, just as I don't "support" the grocery business, don't "support" the book trade, and don't "support" the automobile industry. I buy what I want or need, and that's it.

 

[William Ronald]

Not me. I'd just be more productive at the office. :\

Really, in the case of consumers, all I think they should should do is buy the products they like and do not buy the products they don't. I certainly don't think consumers are obligated to do anything more. I know that I, for one, have no intention of "supporting" the gaming industry, just as I don't "support" the grocery business, don't "support" the book trade, and don't "support" the automobile industry. I buy what I want or need, and that's it.

Hmm, maybe I should have titled this "Improving the gaming hobby " instead. I would argue that you make several good points. However, the automobile and book industries do have fan organizations. Sometimes, these fan groups can bring a few good insights to the companies.

Also, I would argue that making sure that the total population of gamers is stable or growing is in the long term interest of current gamers. If there are fewer customers, then companies may leave the industry or reduce the amount of new products.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

There's also a LOT more competition for people's free time nowadays. The internet, video games, card games, sports... it's all better than it used to be and there's a lot more of it. Heck, I wonder how many ENWorlders would be gaming more if it weren't for the time they spent on the boards.

If I would have had the options for devouring my free time when I started playing that I have today, I would have never started gaming. Of that I'm 99% sure.

 

[Crothian]

Maybe if we smartened up RPGs they would draw a larger audience.

Are RPGs dumb now? How would you "smarten" them up? It's a vague statement and needs a bit more to back it up.

 

[eyebeams]

The central issue is this:

There aren't enough gamers around.

As it stands, RPGs don't really "compete," with the exception of a few D20 books that cover similar ground. People don't choose one RPG over the other in the sense that they size up the relative merits of each. Increasing Vampire's sales won't correspondingly shrink sales of GURPS or D&D.

Now getting more gamers requires a couple of things:

Coherent branding: Right now you have a situation where every company is a second tier company in their own minds, or thinks they're on the way to becoming one. There are a few exceptions, but all in all, we really do need a formal delineation of professional, semi-professional and amateur publications.

We also need to present the genres we see come up all the time to the general public. Look at record stores: Yeah, there is unclassifiable music out there, but simply being slotted means that it directs prospective buyers into the right slot, such as:

Horror
Modern
Fantasy
Pulp
Universal

Look at RPGNow. It makes its money by directing gamers to prodsucts they've probably never heard of before, but in familiar genres. Think about it: A new gamer is going to be uninformed about dead tree products in exactly the same way, but we don't give them any guidance at all.

Better IP Management: The comics industry is somewhat similar to gaming. It has a collapse in the 90s. It suffered from corporate chicanery that almost ruined the front runner (Marvel).

Now comics are still dying, but they have the strength of their properties to keep titles around even at lower sales volume, to keep their relationship with fans strong and to act as a sandbox to develop future properties. You might even have fans of the IP get into the game, but that's always been chancey so I won't make a strong claim for that.

Collective Representation: We need a group to represent the industry without playing favourites in a *proactive* fashion. Anti-defamation research and tactics are well and good, but nobody's coming out and saying that there's a cool hobby out there with these facets and these products. Instaed, we have every company going it alone.

Back to comparisons to the comics industry, why not have a "free game day," packed with lots a lots of demo pamphlets. Why not actually alert the general public to awards and events of interest instead of waiting to respond to accusations of terminal geekiness or Satanism?

Creator Recognition: Right now many companies treat creators as replaceable cogs in a wheel. When you have companies offering a penny a ward and telling prospects that they better learn to love getting treated like crap, then you send the message that said companies really don't give a damn about quality. Creator loyalty can do nothing but strengthen brand loyalty, ensure quality and, to be frank, discourage poor products from piggybacking on successfull genres and ideas.

Less Fanservice: Cut the in-jokes, the bikina models on covers and the rest. Few people will reject something for not having this stuff, but more people will reject it for being there.

 

[mythusmage]

mythusmage: How would you propose smartening up RPGs? Do you poropose more works based on history, myth, legend and literature? (For example Green Ronin's Testament and The Wheel of Time series?)

Not exactly. What you mention is a part of it, but not the whole. It's not even the core. How to smarten up RPGs?

First, establish what RPGs are, and what they are not. Establish their strengths and weaknesses, and play to the strengths.

Second, improve the writing. You want to draw people in, not alienate them with dishwater prose.

Three, rethink game mastering. A Game Master is not just an arbitrator, but a presenter. He is guide, stage manager, director, producer, and minor and supporting roles.

Focus on what RPGs are about (and it's not the combat) and focus well. That, in part, is what I mean by 'smartened up'.