Scott Thorne, a retailer, comments on recent events

[JohnRTroy]

Yep.
A lot of people who swore they would never give up on vinyl are walking around with their entire music library on an IPod.


Digital WILL replace paper and in the not so distant future.
And, assuming cloud based technology also evolves to keep up, the distinction between a PDF on an IPad and a DDI-type service may be very hard to identify.

While I doubt paper will "disappear", I do think there's a lot of people who say "there will always be X" as being somewhat myopic.

Lots of popular forms of entertainment expressions have either died or changed over time, as either technology or culture evolved. Here are some examples:

Vaudeville.
Medicine Shows
Minstrel Shows
Music Halls/Concert Saloons.
Jukeboxes
Tab Shows
Silent Film

It stands to reason that any form of entertainment is not immune to changes in civilization, technology, or culture.

That's why I think there will be major changes in the RPG as we know it over the next few decades, and in other forms of entertainment (newspapers are dying, and I have a feeling the regular comic strip as well as the traditional [Western] comic book will disappear in the next decade or two).

 

[mudbunny]

It stands to reason that any form of entertainment is not immune to changes in civilization, technology, or culture.

That's why I think there will be major changes in the RPG as we know it over the next few decades, and in other forms of entertainment (newspapers are dying, and I have a feeling the regular comic strip as well as the traditional [Western] comic book will disappear in the next decade or two).

In the months leading up to the release of 4E, the designers stated that they borrowed/stole/derivatized things from games/culture that had emerged since the release of 3E. Things like WoW, eurogames, as well as the large number of indie RPGs (*cough*savage worlds*cough*) are all places that influenced 4E.

Just the same way, the things that are being released today (Dresden Files RPG/FATE system for example) will have a large influence on the next edition of D&D.

 

[JohnRTroy]

True, and that's also why I made my statements about the OGL, because the license has little direct influence on the game. Techniques and ideas for rules come regardless of the legal means around it. I don't see that license as a major factor to influence creativity.

Although I see the RPG evolution coming as perhaps games that either have a lot of physical accessories (cards, tokens, board-game hybrids), or games that increase their on-line status as virtual table-tops, or more complex multiplayer games are developed. That's why I think the RPG will increasingly evolve into new formats, and depending on your POV, I think the stuff with just a rulesbook and dice could either fade or become an isolated niche, depending on how the new forms influence the new generation.

 

[shadzar]

In the months leading up to the release of 4E, the designers stated that they borrowed/stole/derivatized things from games/culture that had emerged since the release of 3E. Things like WoW, eurogames, as well as the large number of indie RPGs (*cough*savage worlds*cough*) are all places that influenced 4E.

Just the same way, the things that are being released today (Dresden Files RPG/FATE system for example) will have a large influence on the next edition of D&D.

I wonder how long before this change creates something new entirely that is unrecognizable, in which the original thing is lost, and to gain it back as an option for people, you just have to release it again when it is found wanted?

"The more things change, the more change stays the same" as opposed to "the more things change, the more things stay the same".

 

[mudbunny]

I wonder how long before this change creates something new entirely that is unrecognizable, in which the original thing is lost, and to gain it back as an option for people, you just have to release it again when it is found wanted?

"The more things change, the more change stays the same" as opposed to "the more things change, the more things stay the same".

But, when this change happens, will there be any significant amount of an audience that wants (or even knows) of the original thing anymore?

 

[shadzar]

But, when this change happens, will there be any significant amount of an audience that wants (or even knows) of the original thing anymore?

Was there a need to make the original not known anymore then, or did it happen on its own?

So was the original forced out by the change, or the people the change was made upon?

or

Who/what needed the change if anyone needed it as opposed to one or some just wanting it?

 

[Matt James]

There's a new in-store play program starting in September that seems designed specifically to use the cards.

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (A New D&D In-Store Play Program)

We're talking about one sub-event of the entire game. I'm still confused on how people are saying these are required for the entire game-system.

 

[mudbunny]

Was there a need to make the original not known anymore then, or did it happen on its own?

My assumption is that it happened on its own. That the people who were interested in keeping it there became an insignificant part of the customer base as compared to those that had no interest one way or another or who preferred something different.

So was the original forced out by the change, or the people the change was made upon?

I am wondering if that should be "the people the change was made for"? The phrase makes more sense to me when phrased that way.

Who/what needed the change if anyone needed it as opposed to one or some just wanting it?

Or, was the intended audience simply not interested in the thing that was changed anymore?

There is no one reason why something is changed. Sometimes it is changed because the people that were making the product decided to change it. Sometime it is because the buying public decided that it was no longer a desirable feature. Sometimes economics makes it no longer viable.

What is desirable or wanted goes in cycles. Eventually, what is considered "old fashioned" and "outdated" will be considered in-style again.

 

[shadzar]

My assumption is that it happened on its own. That the people who were interested in keeping it there became an insignificant part of the customer base as compared to those that had no interest one way or another or who preferred something different.

Did they become insignificant or were made to be insignificant?

It seems to be the attempt to make them appear insignificant is what happened in light of the "retro clones" and continued existence of OGL material and even full versions of OGL games.

So one or a group, purposefully tried to make them become hidden from view in order to gain more themselves.

I am wondering if that should be "the people the change was made for"? The phrase makes more sense to me when phrased that way.

Or does it work both ways? Some the changes were "made for" while others it was "forced upon".

The sense in the question really comes form what you are trying to ask with it correct?

This is because all didn't require the change, so again why did the change occur to begin with?

Or, was the intended audience simply not interested in the thing that was changed anymore?

There is no one reason why something is changed. Sometimes it is changed because the people that were making the product decided to change it. Sometime it is because the buying public decided that it was no longer a desirable feature. Sometimes economics makes it no longer viable.

What is desirable or wanted goes in cycles. Eventually, what is considered "old fashioned" and "outdated" will be considered in-style again.

The problem is the concept of "old-fashioned" and "outdated" isn't always held by all. Some view it and "move on" to newer things, while others see the "old-fashioned" things working perfectly well still and need not be changed, nor a new thing to replace them.

 

[Wicht]

True, and that's also why I made my statements about the OGL, because the license has little direct influence on the game. Techniques and ideas for rules come regardless of the legal means around it. I don't see that license as a major factor to influence creativity.

I won't quibble about creativity. There's no way to verify it either way. On the other hand, the OGL greatly aids Productivity and that is something I think it would be wrong to leave out of the discussion.

Moreover, the increase in Productivity allowed by the OGL also directly influences how many people have an opportunity to contribute to the hobby.

So sure, maybe Mearls would have found doors open to him without the OGL, but on the other hand, having more doors available makes it far more likely that any one person can gain the recognition necessary to rise to the top.