Shane Hensley comments on the RPG industry

[hellbender]

glut Pronunciation Key (glt)
v. glut·ted, glut·ting, gluts
v. tr.
1.To fill beyond capacity, especially with food; satiate.
2.To flood (a market) with an excess of goods so that supply exceeds demand.

From the definition, I have seen some store shelves that you can easily apply the word glut to. Looks like Shane actually does know what he is talking about.

hellbender

 

[Pramas]

The truth is, there is no one single company that's producing universally terrible products.

I didn't say that there was. I said there are many companies who never would have gotten beyond their first product if not for the d20 logo.

From what I've seen, every company on the market has produced its share of clunkers.

It's the nature of publishing, and also not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about companies who became successfull selling crappy product and how that caused resentment in some pros who had been around.

Have some of those companies gotten better? Sure they have, but what the d20 logo allowed in the first year was the continued existence of companies that would have traditionally been weeded out by market forces.

And as far as resentment goes, last time I checked nobody stopped anyone from pushing a d20 product out the door early in the game. If people wanted to sit on their hands and let other people make money, well, that's their problem. Fortune favors the bold.

I would not characterize working on non-d20 games as "sitting on your hands". Some game designers, as Shane notes, don't like d20. I would rather see game designers with no passion for d20 stay out of it than see completely mercenary projects.

 

[jasamcarl]

Please...i want aggregates. I want to see the proportion of unsold versus sold d20 products versus the equivilant non d20 figure. Then come talk to me. Shane was alluding to numbers telling me the whole story. I want a relevant breakdown of those number with a critical eye.

Pramas, i have difficulty seeing the 'passion' in products. What i do see is balanced mechanics that i'm likely to use. Like shane, your argument is irrational.

And as to poor products surviving, why do you have trouble appreciating that they were valid products simply by virtue of being d20. Usability counts for as much as your creative sentiment of 'quality'.

 

[Umbran]

You're assuming that the problem with games that don't sell well is that nobody has heard of them. I don't think that's the case. I think games that don't sell well have that problem because no one wants to buy them.

Huh?

In what you quoted, I was trying to get d20Dwarf to clarify. It seems to me he'd said:

1) d20 helps smaller games, by incresing overall exposure.
2) increasing exposure woudn't change what's sold.

This seems to entail a fundamental problem of logic. If statement 2 is true, statment 1 cannot betrue, and vice versa. I was asking d20dwarf to untangle this apparent inconsistency.

Where do my assumptions come into it?

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Chips are in there.

We didn't think the average D20 player would want cards. For those who do, it's in the upcoming Epitaph #4, as well as Edges & Hindrances.

Thanks!

Shane

Yes, I forgot that. But the chips aren't as prominent in the d20 version as in the original.

 

[hellbender]

Please...i want aggregates. I want to see the proportion of unsold versus sold d20 products versus the equivilant non d20 figure. Then come talk to me. Shane was alluding to numbers telling me the whole story. I want a relevant breakdown of those number with a critical eye.

That will never happen. There is no way to get an accurate and total breakdown of those numbers, as you are talking multiple companies in multiple countries. Not to mention the fact that there is no fair distributionary edicts that cover the market. Why ask for something that you know is not possible? The best you can hope for is to create a microcosm study, which will still be inaccurate, but might still allude to the greater picture.

hellbender

 

[ColonelHardisson]

The impression i get from deadlands is that it was a pretty poor conversion, misreading what the strengths of d20 were and thus not modifying what needed mods; then the designers turned around and stated that ANY modification would be distasteful to the public.

Well, I have the main d20 book and the monster book, and I inhaled them the day I got them. That doesn't happen a lot with me. I don't think it's nearly as bad as you say it is, but hey, I need to take a look at it again, seeing as how I forgot that chips were used in the d20 version...

 

[jasamcarl]

That will never happen. There is no way to get an accurate and total breakdown of those numbers, as you are talking multiple companies in multiple countries. Not to mention the fact that there is no fair distributionary edicts that cover the market. Why ask for something that you know is not possible? The best you can hope for is to create a microcosm study, which will still be inaccurate, but might still allude to the greater picture.

hellbender

I ask because that is the financial versus fiscal definition of a glut and the one that rational individuals will base descisions on. Its not just the lack of data, the methodology that shane outlined was silly.

As to my request for specific numbers, what you call microcosm i call anecdotal. It would only have any merit if a sufficiently random SAMPLING were taken.

Why do i request such information knowing that it does not exist? Its called a rhetorical question, meant to make the person being asked aware of his/her own ignorance. Now i have a question in turn, if neither you or shane have such data, why are you even making these pretty baseless claims to begin with?

 

[hellbender]

I ask because that is the financial versus fiscal definition of a glut and the one that rational individuals will base descisions on. Its not just the lack of data, the methodology that shane outlined was silly.

As to my request for specific numbers, what you call microcosm i call anecdotal. It would only have any merit if a sufficiently random SAMPLING were taken.

Why do i request such information knowing that it does not exist? Its called a rhetorical question, meant to make the person being asked aware of his/her own ignorance. Now i have a question in turn, if neither you or shane have such data, why are you even making these pretty baseless claims to begin with?

Only speaking for myself, I just agreed with Shane's glut comment based upon the observation of the shelf stock of several stores, the sheer number of d20 products far exceeds that of any other system in my area. Which is not really as baseless as you claim, it is pretty simple marketing strategy based upon physical space devoted to role playing games, and is used quite successfully by a certain company that makes several miniatures games and is based in England. Your rhetorical question can be easily neutralized by sheer market observation. As far as a realistic financial spectrum in the rpg field, as any budding accountant will tell you, '1+1= anything you want it to'. Therefore my comments on observation over numbers.

However, I think you brought up an interesting scenario, one of which I would be interested in taking part in with a totally unbiased attitude; the sampling of several shops that carry role playing games. Back in college I used to do these types of surveys in the field of tobacco products, and if there were other interested people willing to conduct a survey in their respective areas, without bias or altering numbers, for the sake of comparing the sheer number of d20 products in comparison to non-d20 products. However, I would not participate if it would be used in any way to bash anyone or any company, and I would hope that nobody else would participate for any agenda other than producing facts. The survey would not reflect sales, but would reflect a sampling of shelfstock offerings and would have to be done on average of twice a week, for around 3 months to gather varied information reflecting trends and inventory.

hellbender

 

[Pramas]

Pramas, i have difficulty seeing the 'passion' in products. What i do see is balanced mechanics that i'm likely to use. Like shane, your argument is irrational.

My argument is entirely rational. I'm saying that people who are passionate about their work tend to do better work than those who aren't. It's not that radical of a statement.

A designer who doesn't like d20 but is desinging for it because of the money is likely to do sloppy work or to not take the time to really learn the system. I'd rather see work by designers who give a damn.

And yes, I am generalizing.

And as to poor products surviving, why do you have trouble appreciating that they were valid products simply by virtue of being d20. Usability counts for as much as your creative sentiment of 'quality'.

You're right, useability counts. That's why products that are badly designed, poorly written, amuteurly ilustrated, and created without a good grasp of the rules are crap, whether they bear the d20 logo or not. I'm not talking about sentiment, I'm talking about concrete flaws.