Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MoogleEmpMog" data-source="post: 2411269" data-attributes="member: 22882">But this cuts to the core of the issue, at least for me.  Those peripheral people will do whatever they do, and it is essentially impossible for a game company to meaningfully contribute to their experience.  They're no more a viable market for the industry than people who can't read.  What they do is (or at least should be) totally irrelevant to what game companies produce.They don't need the game companies, and the game companies don't need them.  They're non-interactive segments of the population.There's also the matter of 'the greatest good for the greatest number.'  I think it's safe to say that the number of people who like reasonably complex RPGs, such as d20, HERO, GURPS, or even Storyteller, Unisystem or SilCore, vastly outweigh the number of people who prefer ultralight games.  It makes sense and, from a certain perspective, even serves the public good for any and all game companies to focus on games of at least medium complexity.I gather that Ryan's study showed gamers preferring heavy games to medium.  I honestly prefer medium to heavy, myself, but only in point-buy systems (light to medium class systems are, like pre-3.x D&D or C&C, far too fixed upon their pseudo-archetypes for my tastes) - but I'd rather see the industry thrive and produce product I like rather than falter trying to market product I like better.</blockquote>