The End of the Gaming Renaissance

[Ariosto]

I think the way it worked at TSR in the late '80s was that
(1) People way up at the top came up with a list of product concepts. Maybe they consulted various departments, or maybe not.
(2) They pitched this list to Random House (distributor of TSR products to the book trade), and then adjusted according to the response.
(3) They told the department heads, "This is what we're going to do". There might be considerable room to define just what kind of content would lie behind the cover of a book with such-and-such a title, but it was on the release schedule.

 

[Umbran]

(2) They pitched this list to Random House (distributor of TSR products to the book trade), and then adjusted according to the response.

Hm. I have never heard any suggestion that TSR "pitched" ideas to Random House before they were written. You have some cite for this, or is it just a guess?

 

[Ariosto]

I was remembering this:

Several months before the start of the year (maybe in Sept or Oct, I don't recall exactly), the entire design department (game designers and editors) would be called into a meeting. There our manager would hand us all next year's schedule. On it were all the products that were to be published by TSR over the following year. Each product (module, hardback, supplement, etc.) would have its name listed, the product line it fell into, its page length, and the month it was to be published. There would be much laughing over some of the stupid names the execs picked out for products, but altogether it wasn't a jolly process.

This schedule was presented to us as a fait accompli, set by upper management. I believe it was also vetted by Random House, our publisher, which had a tremendous amount of influence on TSR's schedule and sticking to it (think in terms of how Wal-Mart dictates everything to its suppliers and you'll have some idea). We could bitch about various products, refuse to work on them, point out stupidities, and so on. We were able to push back sometimes and get products dropped or shifted around. But our primary function at that point was to decide which designer and which editor worked on each product. That was mostly on a volunteer basis. When it got down to products in lines people didn't like to work on (Buck Rogers, MSH for most people, D&D [by that time a sideshow compared to AD&D], etc.), most of those were farmed out to freelancers as no internal employees wanted them.

I can't swear that this was the process every year (I just don't remember), but it was for at least several of the five years I was there and maybe all five. No one in that room, with the minor exception of our dept. manager, had any say in the products that would come out next year for TSR. It was all decided by upper management, with some input from our manager.

Breault was an editor/developer/writer at TSR from 1984 - 1989 and continued to do freelance work for them from 1989 through 1992.

 

[Hussar]

Another thought about the difference between Renaissance and Post Modern (if that's the right terms) RPG's.

Transparency.

In Renaissance era games, there was little to no transparency. Game ideas were not explained and, quite often, even if they were to be explained, it would amount to, "Well, it seemed like a good idea." For example, in 1e, why were THOSE particular numbers chosen for the level limits of non-human characters? Why does a longsword do d12 damage vs large creatures but a batle axe only d8? On and on.

The numbers often were arbitrary.

Compare to games, particularly games published post OGL. You get designer sidebars right in the text of the games TELLING you why these numbers were chosen. Often the numbers can be reverse engineered to the point where you can see exactly how that number was chosen.

Look at 3e D&D. Why do you never give a +1 stat bonus? Anyone who has played 3e for a decent amount of time can answer that question. Why do no creatures move 25 feet? On and on.

Now, I'm not saying anything is perfect. There are loads of unanswered questions out there. But, the difference is, Post Modern games make the attempt to be as transparent as possible to the users. Renaissance games made no such attempt.

 

[Ariosto]

RuneQuest in 1978 offered "The Reasons Why" for skill-rating factors derived from characteristics, but the reasoning was based on what was being modeled.

The following year, the AD&D DMG was chock full of the philosophy behind the game.

Minutia about each little number as part of an abstract system? No, not quite. Even the Champions text was not that obsessive.

Come to think of it, the 3e and 4e books didn't impress me that way either. Really, where is the explanation in 4e of why a longsword has the stats it has, or why Hammer and Anvil does 1[W]+Strength modifier damage, or why halflings are more Intimidating than dwarves and elves, etc.? Maybe you've got selective-spectrum shades on, so that you notice more of something here even though there's really no more of it than there.

 

[Starfox]

A big part of the problem for new games today is the growth of the market. Hobby RPGs are a victim of the success of the hobby. In 1976, there was one RPG on the market. When I began in 1979, there was maybe ten, three of which were major. Up 'till about 1985, it was possible to be aware of a majority of the games in the marketplace, or at least it felt like that in remote Sweden. Today? Thousands, and a staggering amount of new ones each year if you count the PDF market.

This is compounded by the ease of physical production. No matter how crappy the game, its easy to bang together a reasonably-looking PDF and start distribution. Every homebrew can become a published game in short order. The percentage of games that appeals to each customer is very small, and what appeals to me might not appeal to you. There is only so much peer review can do, which makes it hard for a good game to penetrate by word of mouth alone. Above all it takes time, and time can ruin any business.

All this leads to professionalization. Only companies with a solid budget can create and market a product that gets penetration. And games are now products, not individual works of art. There is nothing special about this, it happens in most markets. Look at the MMO market, where Everquest once reigned supreme there are now one market leader and a huge flora of wannabees, almost exactly like pen-and-paper role playing games.

If you want to call this Renaissance and post-modern, go ahead, but the terms seem quite out of context to me. I would talk of an emerging market and a mature market instead.

 

[S'mon]

And, in addition, you can't get away with the "talented amateur" approach because the distributors won't pick you up. Your game might be the greatest thing in the world, but, if it's soft cover, black and white, you might as well not even bother.

Hmm...

Amazon.com: Labyrinth Lord (9780615150314): Daniel Proctor: Books

 

[Hussar]

Hmm...

Amazon.com: Labyrinth Lord (9780615150314): Daniel Proctor: Books

Sigh.

Shame on me for saying things too strongly. Yes, of course there are some products that don't fit what I said. Retro-clones leveraging nostalgia for early era games should be excepted.

I guess what I should have said was, by and large, if your books are soft cover and black and white, it's going to be a serious uphill battle to get your books on the shelves.

The standards for production values have risen considerably in the past ten years or so.

Is anyone going to debate that point?

 

[Cam Banks]

I guess what I should have said was, by and large, if your books are soft cover and black and white, it's going to be a serious uphill battle to get your books on the shelves.

There are probably more B&W interior game books available now than color. And it's also much cheaper to produce perfect-bound books than hardbound ones. Even White Wolf's books aren't true full-color; they're usually black ink with one other color. I think the problem is that WotC is the exception, rather than the rule, in hobby game publishing at the moment.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Aus_Snow]

There are probably more B&W interior game books available now than color. And it's also much cheaper to produce perfect-bound books than hardbound ones. Even White Wolf's books aren't true full-color; they're usually black ink with one other color. I think the problem is that WotC is the exception, rather than the rule, in hobby game publishing at the moment.

Thank you, for putting things more clearly and concisely than I would've ended up doing so. Hopefully, because you are involved in RPG creation / publishing, the way you've said it won't be automatically dismissed.