Is the RPG Industry on Life Support? (Merged w/"Nothing Dies")

[diaglo]

It seems that the mere existence of Diaglo would remind people that no game ever dies.

Sleep well gamers, nothing is going to kill your hobby as long as you play.

i've still got room enough at my table too.. just visit the Gamers Seeking Gamers forum.

 

[hong]

Yup.

When I was 13 (gawd, was it really 21 years ago? ), all I wanted to do was kill the monsters and take their stuff...

Ha! I, for one, have outgrown all that silly adolescent nonsense. Now that I'm 32 (33 in two weeks' time), what I want to do is kill the monsters, take their stuff, and agonise about it for hours to my girlfriend.


Hong "the compleat roleplayer" Ooi

 

[JoeGKushner]

Well now, don't get me wrong. I'm not making any value judgement on hack-n-slash vs. social play.

But the poster asked what he could do, so I answered as plainly as possible.

If you want to run a social game, don't be surprised that 13 year olds aren't flocking to it.

Wulf

True enough. I myself find that I honestly don't want any kids at the game and the adults can have my stle expalined to them once and adjust and join or know that it's not for them and move on. I personally don't feel that it's my job to 'expand' the hobby. If the publishers can't be bothered to do it and that's their industry, I certainly ain't adding it to my list of things to do. (not saying that publishers don't focus their efforts, just noting that it's not my job to do so.)

 

[barsoomcore]

So if somebody cuts off the life support, do I have to stop playing? Is it legal to play with a corpse? Should this thread be titled The Trouble With Gary?

I'm not convinced diaglo exists, in point of fact.

 

[MerricB]

Two matters:

Is the RPG Industry in trouble?

How many players are participating in Role-Playing Games? Is this growing, shrinking or remaining stable?

As to the first: I don't know. Small companies (and most RPG companies are small, these days) are almost always on the edge, especially with RPGs.

Some other companies have made bad business decisions with respect to RPGs. (I'm looking at Decipher)

Other companies have increased their output of RPG material (Wizards).

One of the key problems that faces anyone in the RPG industry is to get past the core problem at the heart of ongoing RPG sales: most RPG customers don't need supplements.

I think this is especially true of D&D. With Vampire, the design of the world was an important part of the game, and thus additional sourcebooks on the world (clans, regions, etc.) were somewhat more integral to the game than a book like "Frostburn" or "Complete Warrior" is to D&D. The core D&D books give so much play in their pages that anything else is a luxury.

As to the second issue, the player base for RPGs - which is not identical to those actually buying supplements, though it is related:

I do think that the D&D 3.5E system is too much for many new gamers. It isn't that the system is overly complicated (it might be), but there are too many options - thus giving a sense of Information Overload. The release of the D&D Basic Game is very important, and I look forward to seeing its effect on the player base.

I also think that the release of C&C may be a positive step towards addressing the needs of those players for whom D&D 3.5E is just "too much".

However, the effects of the competition for the gamer dollar shouldn't be dismissed. Board games, computer games, ccgs and other things (not even games!) have also greatly improved over the years. The competition is much harder.

Cheers!

 

[Faraer]

Let's not forget that the whole idea of an RPG industry is paradoxical, because the medium's distinguishing feature is that you make your own art/entertainment rather than consuming it passively. The industry is as big as it is because circa 1990 companies realized you could sell lots of books to players, often at the expense of DMs and their campaigns.

There's a big difference between killing monsters and taking their stuff in the original mindset, style and context of D&D and just killing monsters and taking their stuff. The former assumes you've read some of the DMG reading list, for instance.

And I'll say it again: no attempt has ever been made to market RPGs to educated, creative adults who are not already players.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Seriously, can anyone expound on who was on the panel for the GenCon SoCal seminar on "The State of the RPG Industry"?

I suspect that the panel consisted of two Trolls and Chicken Little

I have my doubts that things are as bad for the RPG industry as some would like to think. As with many things, it is possible that RPGs are heading into a down-cycle, but it will likely come back at some point and the reason for it could be one of many things: better marketing, a new ruleset that captures more people's attention, a surge in the U.S. economy, Tom Hanks and Ron Howard do the next D&D movie, or the older RPGers spark a new baby boom and raise all their kids to play.

My take on a few of the original points:

Complexity: I wonder about the complexity issue as being a deterrent to new players. As a long time player it is hard to judge whether or not the game is too hard to learn. I do know that even back when I learned to play D&D, it was a lot better to learn from someone who already knew the game as opposed to just reading the books.

Fragmentation: While this may be bad for a particular publisher, I do not believe that it is bad for the industry. Are the board game companies out there saying, "we need fewer games to boost interest. There are just too many titles with different rules - people aren't willing to try them unless we have a few core rule sets." As long as the particular fragments are supported, more choice will probably equal greater interest.

Video Games: I will echo those who have said, "I did both as a kid and I still do both today". I think it will be a very long time before video games can emulate the complexity of RPGs. Yes, you can play Halo 2 and fire a rocket launcher and drive the Weasle and do all kinds of great things, but try and tell the computer that you want to try and grab a rope, hang from it with one hand, shoot the rocket launcher at the baddies with the other and use the recoil to swing you up to the next level. I guarantee the computer will not let you...but your DM might.

One thing I wonder is if some people directly link growth of the video game industry to RPGs, either thinking that a) growth of video games = shrinkage of RPS or b) the RPG industry is failing because it is not growing as fast as the video game industry. Both of these suppositions would be a huge mistake.

 

[philreed]

I have my doubts that things are as bad for the RPG industry as some would like to think.

What information do you have to back this up? Things are actually worse in the print industry than I've seen mentioned here (or elsewhere online).

 

[Monte At Home]

I'd love to see five prominent _print_ industry professionals post a message to this thread saying that their business is doing "absolutely great."

Love it.

--Erik

My business is doing absolutely great.

And from what I hear, things at WotC are doing well, so it would be fairly easy to get four people from there to post here, but I'm guessing you meant industry professionals from different companies. (Although I'll still contend that the industry is so small and so dominated by one company that the _industry_ doesn't need five companies doing well to be doing well.)

That all said, I'm sure we could get five industry professionals to say their business is doing great, but why would you believe them, or believe me, for that matter? With only a few exceptions, game industry people, for the most part only either self-aggrandize or complain in public forums or at cons. In fact, I've been on a dozen or more of those "State of the Industry" panels at cons and they almost always go like this:

Person A: The industry is in the toilet.
Person B: Yeah, things aren't good.
Person C: Well, MY company is doing great.

How do the people listening figure out who to believe? The truth is, all three could be correct. Or they could be only stating things from their own point of view. Or they could just be saying what they think people want or need to hear. I guess my point is, sadly, asking industry professionals how they're doing isn't an accurate read on how the industry is doing.

 

[Fedifensor]

Home versus Living games

Most roleplaying games are run in people's homes. That's not something that's easy for a new player to find. Either you know these people or you don't. Even those that put up ads as looking for a new player are usually very picky about who they choose to allow in their game. A new player would have to be spectacular for them to choose someone who has little idea of the game.

Honestly, over the past few years, I've seen that trend changed. Before 3rd edition, I'd go to a convention once or twice a year, and otherwise play in a home environment. The RPGA was something I'd heard of, but not paid much attention to. Now, I play more "Living" campaigns than home games, often run at game days at a local gaming store. Even the Living games run at a person's house are usually advertised in advance on public mailing lists.

My home game disintegrated early this year. At least two of the players admitted that they didn't have time for it anymore - yet they play Living games all the time, especially Living Greyhawk. Trying to rebuild the group has been difficult - why play a home game with a lifespan of 1-2 years when you can play a Living campaign with a long-term duration and carry your characters from game to game, even if you move to a different part of the country?

Personally, I think home games allow for a lot more depth, while the Living games are like popcorn - filling for someone who's hungry, but certainly not as nutritious in the long run. Unfortunately, D&D seems to be in its junk food phase.