Philosophical question: Do games become "obsolete"?

[TheGM]

Meh.

All this argument seems supercilious to me.

Fact is that people play new games, others don't move on.

I would argue that 1E/2E is still very much alive and well, with many players that thought the entire "skills and feats are core to the game and can't be removed" idea wasn't for them.

That doesn't make it better, but it's not worse either.

Nor is it obsolete. If people are playing it, and even one place (Dragonsfoot) is making modules for it, then it is not obsolete, even by the stretched definition of "out of fashion".

Games do not become obsolete in the manner of technology like 8-tracks. Because there is nothing to break. An 8-track will eventually break, the game won't. The books might weaken, but unless you do horrible things to them, they're going to be readable.

Don.

 

[jdrakeh]

You could say that is objective, but then I could say your statement about music technology is objective as well.

I think that you meant to say subjective. Anyhow, that's really the bottom line - whether or not a given game is obsolete is entirely subjective, as the answer that you get will depend upon who you ask.

 

[tetsujin28]

Hint: Games do not become obsolete. Games are not a technology.

Games do not become obsolete in the manner of technology like 8-tracks. Because there is nothing to break. An 8-track will eventually break, the game won't.

I disagree with the statement. Games are a technology, like any other form of culture. They are even often material culture, rather like an 8-track.

There's nothing wrong with 8-tracks. It's actually pretty difficult to demonstrably prove that, say, cassette tapes do a better job than 8-tracks (or reel-to-reel, for that matter). And sometimes a demonstrably inferior technology (VHS, as an example) will win out over a superior one (BETAMax, in this instance) due to other issues entirely (market saturation, &c.).

Sometimes a game will come along that most folks agree does a better job of whatever an older game did. Now some folks will be hold-outs, and keep to the older version of whatever the technology is (toasters, cars, rpgs, what-have-you). But most will go to the newer version. The older version will become, in effect, obsolete, "no longer fashionable".

 

[tetsujin28]

i still listen to my 8 tracks at work.

Exactly. 8-tracks (and reel-to-reel machines, which many people still own) are perfectly functional. However, they are obsolete in that they are no longer 'fashionable' and, more importantly, no longer supported by major industry. 8-tracks are kept running by dedicated 8-track fans, rather like record players and classic cars.

Or OOP rpgs.

 

[diaglo]

Exactly. 8-tracks (and reel-to-reel machines, which many people still own) are perfectly functional. However, they are obsolete in that they are no longer 'fashionable' and, more importantly, no longer supported by major industry. 8-tracks are kept running by dedicated 8-track fans, rather like record players and classic cars.

Or OOP rpgs.

to me games are not technology but art.

and even technology becomes art at some point.

my 48 Studebaker Champion businessman's coupe is a classic. i don't drive it back and forth to work. it is still functional. gets better gas mileage than my newer truck. but due to lack of parts... it is best used sparingly. i only drive it in Car shows/parades.

 

[Jack of Shadows]

Well,

I can think of a couple examples:

Twilight 2000 - A good game with good mechanics but it deals with a period of time that has become history and too much turned out different than what the game protrayed.

Traveller - A classic but no effort has been made to bring it up to date with more modern concepts. Heck my desktop has more computing power than the 5' square comps they use in starships. Most people buy this on naustalgia rather than to play it.

Jack

 

[MonsterMash]

It's funny seeing all the 3e lovers stating how much more evolved their editon is compared to earlier D&D editions, but ignoring how RuneQuest2 pretty much had everything that 3e brought to D&D (Unified mechanics, comprehensive skill system) and some more (usable system of hits to particular areas vs armour).

/ducks waiting for inevitable flames!



Hopefully this thread will continue as constructive discussion rather than degenerating into an edition war. My take is that compared to technologies, especially the ones I deal with in my day job as an systems analyst, games do not actually become outdated as such, but rules can evolve (e.g. chess, the way it is played now has been fairly static for a while in terms of rules, but there would have been a period before that when things were changing).

In terms of D&D 3e in many ways is a break with earlier editions of D&D because of the thing that I like most about it: unified mechanics, but retains the Vancian magic, level based advancement, iconic races and classes of earlier editions.

 

[Hjorimir]

I tried running a Marvel Super Hero game (FASERIP baby!) for my group recently. I had many years of enjoyment with the system back in the day. But the group, overall, just couldn't get past the weak mechanics of the system. It was inimical to the enjoyment of the game.

Designers build upon older works constantly refining the rules. There is a fine balance to be maintained between rules that make logical sense while at the same time being fast and loose enough to not bog down the game.

Personally, I LOVE 3e when it hit. But I'm now looking evolutions from that system that appear to be of stronger design. Obviously, taste is subjective. For my money True20, Grim Tales, Thieves' World, and Mutants and Masterminds are better designs (with True20 coming out on top).

 

[WayneLigon]

It's funny seeing all the 3e lovers stating how much more evolved their editon is compared to earlier D&D editions, but ignoring how RuneQuest2 pretty much had everything that 3e brought to D&D (Unified mechanics, comprehensive skill system) and some more (usable system of hits to particular areas vs armour).

It certainly did and at the time I was amazed that it simply didn't crush all the opposition and become the industry leader. Two things in my mind held it back: (1) you couldn't eventually become an awesome nigh invulnerable killing machine capable of devestating entire nations (2) the Glorantha setting. I think if they had tried the more (hate to say it) generic fantasy right out of the box, things might have turned out very differently. They eventually did do that, first with Worlds of Wonder, then BRP, then Mythic Europe but by then it was too little too late.

 

[jdrakeh]

I think if they had tried the more (hate to say it) generic fantasy right out of the box, things might have turned out very differently. They eventually did do that, first with Worlds of Wonder...

Worlds of Wonder is BRP

[Note: I've still got a copy of Magic World and Future World, as well as the original BRP rulebook from Worlds of Wonder tucked away for safe keeping ]