[Monte Rant] Designers who think they're above roleplay

[King_Stannis]

a few weeks ago there was a thread about rpg pricing, in which many members of the industry - lead by ryan d. agreed that rpg products were severely underpriced. in one of the most shameful displays i've ever seen, some members (ie consumers) here gladly said that they would pay more money for their rpg products. in fact, many - in essence- said, "bring it on". i hope those same people realize that if they get their wish, they will be not only be getting jobbed by paying more for the same quality, but they could very well be paying more money to someone who thumbs their noses at them.

 

[coyote6]

I don't expect publishers or business guys to play the games they publish.

I'd like it if the writers they pay to write those games did play those games, because I think that it helps them write better material for the game. The crappiest things I've seen for any game have made me think, "Do they even play this game? Heck, did they read it?" And, guess what, most every time I've been able to find out, the answer has been "no."

If somebody actually is able to write good solid stuff for a game without actually playing it -- well, hey, alright. Good for them. I wonder what they would be capable of if they did play, but as long as it doesn't suck, I'll be satisfied.

I'll give money to buy good product. I expect that most people that don't play the games they write for don't make good product.

And, ultimately, if some game writer wants to laugh at me behind their hand, they can go right ahead. They're the ones doing a job they don't really care about, and making crappy money doing it, to boot. So which one of us is the bigger idiot?

 

[Ace]

Re: Re: Re: Maybeee yall should reread this?

Yeah and a lot of cola bottlers are stuck bottling coke or pepsi because people with no taste refuse to branch out a little and experiment with other brands. And a lot of poor guys who want to open up a little hot dog stand are stuck managing McDonalds because thats where people with who with no imagination eat. Life is tough that way. My heart bleeds I am sure.

Seriously, many of us, I know, have branched out (Have you seen the interest in CoC lately) and come back to DnD not because we have no imagination but because its like a first crush or an old reliable that is always there for you. Or were you not trying to insult most of the posters on this board

Take a chill pill. You might be a market Darwinist others may think waste flows down hill. It is all a matter of opinion.

Let me add, no where in my post did I say D&d was bad. I play 3e every two weeks or so and like it.. However I dislikede 2e and 1e strongly as for the most part .

The crucial difference you missed is between playing because thats what I like (a good thing) and playing when its no one can agree on anything else or is willing to step outside the comfort zone of the system at the request of a friend.

By all means play what you like but in the interest of good sportsmanship try what someone else likes too.

 

[R.X.DIEM]

Re: I'm curious !

With so many people involved in the RPG industry on the forum. How many of you agree that you really don't have to play any of the games to make a good, playable, imaginative product?

Still waiting. Or would you all rather just point fingers at each other and make accusations!

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Re: Re: I'm curious !

Still waiting. Or would you all rather just point fingers at each other and make accusations!

I don't agree. If one doesn't play regularly, at the very least one should be thoroughly conversant with the rules one is writing for. And if one knows the rules that well, one is either a player or a masochist. Why would you know so much about something unless it was very lucrative (and we know RPG designing, in general, is not) or because you loved it? To do otherwise would be senseless.

 

[jasamcarl]

Ace.....

You essentially asserted that the public is in some way WRONG in supporting a dominant network of material..and your example is symantically disingenuous, as of course they WANTED to play D&D, as they had the option to not play at all and yet they decided to...please....Presumably the same effect is endgendered within designers, who probably play in the same circles; thus, apathy towards d20 is unlikly the cause of this phenomena..

That being said, Monte failed to make a coherent economic argument or design argument as to any tangible effect that this compartmentalism has on quality. Whatever benefits recreational play might contribute, they must be VERY marginal, otherwise the market would punish such behavior and quite possibly provide higher returns to those who 'play a lot.' I want to see some real stat coorelation between 'Talent' and passion before i will buy into this....

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Yeah, but...why go into this line of work if you don't love to game? It's not like any but a very limited few ever made any real money from it.

 

[rounser]

Whatever benefits recreational play might contribute, they must be VERY marginal, otherwise the market would punish such behavior and quite possibly provide higher returns to those who 'play a lot.'

I think you may be assuming too much about "obvious improvements". Cultural norms alone can cause this sort of thing never to even be considered.

 

[jasamcarl]

I disagree....

Those who employ the people in question may not make this type of assoiciation, but judging by employee performance would still tend to favor this trait, regardless if that trait is even taken into consideration...

Colonel, your point is well taken, but that being said, one would still expect the 'best and brightest' to still take up an inordinate amount of the market as they would have the most compensation to compliment their love of the 'game.'

Which brings me to this point; in such a minor market as gaming, their is obviously going to be a great degree of 'sorting' based upon on job utility; i think you have all made the mistake of assuming these people don't like what they do; which is probably not true. They love MAKING games. You know, the actual THEORY and technical facets such as probability, rational choice models, etc that underly all those dice mechanics? That can very easily be a different passion than roleplaying, but nonetheless valid. Not all mechanics would like to be race car drivers...

I'm not disputing that playing in one's off time would not improve an individual's skill's; after all, its just that more experience. But i still maintain that the effect is VERY small indeed... otherwise, we would see a lot more turnover than we probably already do.

In conclusion, i believe that the marginal benefit to spending an extra hour MAKING the game is probably more beneficial than spending that same hour PLAYING it....

 

[Monte At Home]

Re: Ace.....

That being said, Monte failed to make a coherent economic argument or design argument as to any tangible effect that this compartmentalism has on quality.

I failed to make any religious or philosophical arguments as well. What are you talking about?

And I never mentioned compartmentalism. I'm not even sure what that means in this context.

It's a rant. To sum up, it says "there are some game designers who don't play and that sucks." The end. It wasn't meant to be a treatise on the economics of game design.

(It actually goes a little further and suggests that you can tell when this is the case if you look closely at a product. Astute reviewers on this site and elsewhere have noted the low quality of some of these products. I have no way to provide sales data as to whether it affects sales or not, even if I wanted to. No one does, because publishers don't really share that info.)