Ryan Dancey interview on Fear the Boot

[Wraith-Hunter]

Great interview! I was also very interested in the market research WoTC did on people who play/buy games. The fact that they said they didn't include +35 year olds was interesting, since according to them these were not the people who buy the majority of the games.

I'm sure that will invoke some discussions among gamers here as to whether people believe tha to be true or not.

So, do ya?

I played in a group, started when I was 21 or so and I was the youngest. DM and his buddy were in their 30's, now in their 40's. They bought quite a few products. They would run a campaignfor a 1-3 years, then switch to a different setting. I know we played some Al-Qudiem (probably spelling it wrong), FR, GreyHawk, Birthright, a couple others and are now doing Eberron. Even a CoC

I think they like the variety, and are willing to pick something else up if they have new/younger players attending.

But if they have an established group of the same guys that play all the time, I can see them not spending as much on new stuff.

Me I'm 32 and I like trying new things, would buy 4e when it comes out. But generally don't like non-D&D. Though wouldn't mind playing star wars. No interest in Vampire type games.

 

[Wormwood]

That really was one excellent hour spent. Dancey's comments are always worthy of a listen.

Agreed.

Between this and his "every five levels" theory, Dancey is on a bit of a roll. Keep 'em coming.

 

[Kunimatyu]

I believe Dancey hit the nail on the head with his MMO comment, namely, that for the average player, the current MMO experience is good enough that they'll take it over pen and paper play - GMs, however, are out in the cold.

His miniatures gaming comment was interesting -- I wonder if WotC feels that they have to turn D&D into a minis-centric game to survive?

...I wonder if they're right?

 

[MojoGM]

Most of the D&D-playing 35+ year olds I know are far too set in their ways to purchase lots of new stuff.

Maybe it's all those lost braincells?

I turn 35 this July...I wonder if I'll stop buying stuff?

That would certainly help my aching wallet....

 

[Warbringer]

Most of the D&D-playing 35+ year olds I know are far too set in their ways to purchase lots of new stuff.

hmmm, I wonder were all my 33+ stuff came from

 

[Mark CMG]

I believe Dancey hit the nail on the head with his MMO comment, namely, that for the average player, the current MMO experience is good enough that they'll take it over pen and paper play

I don't think that is quite what he asserts. He doesn't seem to say they will take something over the other but rather in lieu of the other.

I think I see what I was missing in Dancey's continued assertions that online CRPGs will ultimately replace tabletop RPGs. It's his caveat that eventually older tabletop RPGers will die off and enough people will be introduced first, and only, to online CRPGs (and thus will never know that they are missing something that only tabletop RPGs offer). It's an interesting theory but I am familiar with enough CRPGers who have come to the tabletop experience subsequently and once they do, they understand why online CRPGs might be a good aternative but will never be a replacement for tabletop RPGs.

I get the feeling that he thinks of tabetop RPGs as buggywhips as opposed to chess sets. It is probably true that more people play chess online but that doesn't mean chess sets will disappear . . . nor that they will stop being made.

I think some of what I guess seems to be frustration in his assertion stems from some desire to see the tabletop RPG market grow at a rate it just never will. He has flat out said he has no horse in an online CRPG race. I look forward to seeing what the next few/five years brings.

 

[Kunimatyu]

I don't think that is quite what he asserts. He doesn't seem to say they will take something over the other but rather in lieu of the other.

I think I see what I was missing in Dancey's continued assertions that online CRPGs will ultimately replace tabletop RPGs. It's his caveat that eventually older tabletop RPGers will die off and enough people will be introduced first, and only, to online CRPGs (and thus will never know that they are missing something that only tabletop RPGs offer). It's an interesting theory but I am familiar with enough CRPGers who have come to the tabletop experience subsequently and once they do, they understand why online CRPGs might be a good aternative but will never be a replacement for tabletop RPGs.

I get the feeling that he thinks of tabetop RPGs as buggywhips as opposed to chess sets. It is probably true that more people play chess online but that doesn't mean chess sets will disappear . . . nor that they will stop being made.

I think some of what I guess seems to be frustration in his assertion stems from some desire to see the tabletop RPG market grow at a rate it just never will. He has flat out said he has no horse in an online CRPG race. I look forward to seeing what the next few/five years brings.

I hope you're right on this. I do know of at least some people who were more receptive to D&D after playing WoW( ::shudder:: ) for a year, so the recruitment idea isn't totally implausible.

I do feel that if WotC avertised effectively to WoW players, they might have a sustainable market for pen-and-paper RPGing for a long time to come. It's a pity that White Wolf's World of Warcraft D&D 3.5 game sucked so hard; with quality mechanics, many new players could have been drawn in.

And also -- I wonder whether a WoW-themed D&D Minis expansion would be a great idea or a terrible one. It would certainly be a license to print money, that's for sure.

 

[Steel_Wind]

I'm in an established group of gamers. Most have been gaming 25-30 years (several of us have games with each other through that time, for that matter). We are now in our forties.

We break the typical mold as we:

• switched systems back to 3.0 after 15 years with Rolemaster;
• will try other systems from time to time;
• collectively, we spend an obscene amount of money on new products. 3 or more of our group buy every single WotC release for D&D every month and have every 3.x hardcover they've released. The balance of the group buy 6 or more WotC books a year;
• Three of us also went in for D&D minis in a big way and 2 of us have literally every DDM ever made. If all older gamers were like us, Hasbro would be reporting D&D sales in their report to shareholders and wishing CCGs made as much money as D&D; and,
• and we're all quite mobile and live in both urban and suburban areas
  

Like anything else, it's simply a market trend; not a rule. Hardcore gamers spend a fair bit on their hobby. When they have large incomes, they have a lot more to spend on it. Often, that extra money and reduced available time means that they don't game much at all anymore...

But for those that do - we're raining money like a proverbial thunderstorm. The more WotC buckets the better.

I do wonder if Ryan Dancey's observations on older gamers and the money they spend has held true for the period of time AFTER 3.x. The market data they collected seems to relate to the period of time just prior to 3.0

When 3.x was released, a lot of former D&D players - many of whom were older - came back into the fold. Those returning players bought new stuff as a result of our return - and continue to do so.

 

[MerricB]

Great interview! I was also very interested in the market research WoTC did on people who play/buy games. The fact that they said they didn't include +35 year olds was interesting, since according to them these were not the people who buy the majority of the games.

I'm sure that will invoke some discussions among gamers here as to whether people believe tha to be true or not.

So, do ya?

Very much so. I'm not really talking about the people who frequent EN World and RPG.net, as we tend to be a lot more active than most gamers. However, the "hidden" gamer population who actually play the game more than talk about it would do as he suggests.

Cheers!

 

[buzz]

I get the feeling that he thinks of tabetop RPGs as buggywhips as opposed to chess sets. It is probably true that more people play chess online but that doesn't mean chess sets will disappear . . . nor that they will stop being made.

I think one relevant point that was hinted at in the interview was the idea of providing what CRPGs can't. And, as both Dancey says and Bruce Baugh has said, typical D&D play (and similar games) provide a default experience that CRPGs can at least approximate. I.e., if you want to kill things and take their stuff, WoW can do that pretty much just as good, if not better (in some ways) than a TRPG. Ditto if you want to be a passive observer of a detailed game world and/or plotline. Add in the comment about Moore's law, and CRPGs are only going to keep on approximating the experience better and better.

However --and I don't mean to sound like an indie fanboy, 'cause it's D&D that I play most often-- there are newer games that provide an experience that simply cannot (yet) be duplicated with a CRPG. The non-tactical, premise-focused, heavy-player-input games like Dogs in the Vineyard, Burning Wheel, Prime Time Adventures, and Sorcerer simply can't be done other than via a group of people sitting around a table (or at least communicating via some method, e.g., Skype). This is exactly what the FtB host was trying to get at.

These kinds of games may not be able to counteract the "long tail," but they're a better argument for the tabletop than D&D*, unfortunately.


* Typical D&D, at least. There are certainly groups out there who de-emphasize the tactical aspect and play up the "human element," as it were. And again, we're talking about "good enough" play experience, not an identical one.