Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Warpiglet-7" data-source="post: 9345442" data-attributes="member: 7025282">Where do the long term players fit into 5e’s success?The simple answer is that they are not that important from a numbers of players point of view.  Folks leaving their 40s are not a huge block in the player pool.  We get reminded of this frequently.  And in some cases it is suggested that a particular game preference is not relevant because it skews “older.” However, I think there is more to the story. Statistics are important but some level of expertise is required to understand their implications. The layperson often looks at one variable in isolation and ignores information that challenges long held beliefs.  We all do it at times.  Its part of being human. However, I think we can be misled.What got me thinking about this was the recent release of the new PHB cover and inclusion of Greyhawk in the DMG.  I went from being pretty neutral about the new books to nearly must-have status.  But I am not a kid anymore so why do they care?  They only care about moving units and there are not that many older players, right? NoWithout input from older/longer term gamers the product would not have been the same.  I think that is safe to say. And with playtesting and consultants and designers, there were gaming vets very involved.  But I think it goes further than that. Would the game have been disseminated as widely without this demographic?  Whether at game stores, clubs or otherwise?  Perhaps the novices could have been seeds at high schools and colleges but would that have been the same?Lastly, with regard to revenue…what would the revenue be without more veteran gamers?  I don’t have data so if you ask for a source, I don’t have it.  But I do not know many “whales” among newer players.  In fact, if today is at all similar with the late 80s/early 90s, there was a lot of borrowing and copying going on.  WOTC and Wizkids have made a mint off of me while my kids use my stuff---even the teens.  And this I think is not totally unique.  If it is revenue we are talking about, 6 out of 12 people at my tables account for 100% of “a lot” of money spent.  And the other half account for none.  The first group averages late 40s and the younger group late teens/early 20s.So what is my point?  My point is that the value of the longer term and older player is often underestimated by the typical poster/self-designated pundit.And if I had clear data supporting this, I bet some of the same folks might be uncomfortable with the notion and try harder to justify the belief that older/longer term gamers are not a disproportionate part of the game’s success considering “individual to individual.” This does not of course say who needs to be pleased moving forward.  People age and die.  You need new customers down the road!  But I don’t think this takes away from what the grogs and longer term players have meant for 5e nor does it take away from what they mean to the near future.Rather, TO ME the shotgun approach that WOTC is using is probably well-advised (though ponderous to some who write off the gray neckbeards as irrelevant).   And I think there is more to the writing off the veteran gamer than is always explicitly stated. In some cases it is fun to say they are few and don’t matter if their preference don’t align with the writer’s.  Or, there may be some level of conflating negative things with longevity in the game.  But again, people look at correlation and simplify things/stereotype to reduce their cognitive load…another human trait. For now, I am satisfied in knowing that I still recognize the game and can have a shared language and participate with newer players, even if I am fond of warriors with bucket helms with polearms…</blockquote>

Verification