The hobby and 4e Forked Thread: So...How are Sales of 4E Product?

[xechnao]

That doesn't change the fact that D&D is more closely associated with the concept of RPGs, in the mind of the mainstream, than every other pen-and-paper RPG combined. D&D is the gateway by which the majority of gamers enter the hobby.

This is true. But it may be so only because D&D holds this space. If D&D was to perish as a brand, this does not mean that this space could not be filled by other pen and paper rpgs adequately.

 

[Imaro]

That doesn't change the fact that D&D is more closely associated with the concept of RPGs, in the mind of the mainstream, than every other pen-and-paper RPG combined. D&D is the gateway by which the majority of gamers enter the hobby.

I guess I feel like D&D is totally unnecessary as a gateway rpg. The gateway rpg nowadays, is whatever game the person introducing it to new people chooses. As far as D&D being the rpg everyone has heard of...yeah that's not all positives, it also means many people already have pre-conceived ideas and stereotypes about it (alot of them kinda negative), as opposed to being a blank slate.

I know with some people I've brought rpg's up with...D&D is that game for nerds and geeks...but when I bring up Vampire, I get asked what's that (and get to explain it without all the baggage)?

 

[JoeGKushner]

Look at your emphasis. You're arguging that it's not true anymore but then talking about how it would've done in 1974. These two things are not compatible.

The statement is that D&D acts as a gateway to other RPGs.

Do you disagree with this?

I myself do not because I see it more often in comic stores, Borders, Barnes & Nobels, etc... then I do other books by other companies and will allow casual purchasers more opportunites to engage it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikosandros
IIRC some time ago somone from Steve Jackson Games stated that they always rooted for a successful D&D because it acted as a gateway to other RPGs.

Emphasis mine.

I simply do not believe this is true anymore. Why?
I come to believe that 4e D&D needs other rpgs to claim its success in the market (including D&D's previous editions) more than other rpgs need 4e.
Just imagine if 1974 saw a game identical to 4e instead of OD&D. Do you believe it would sell as much as 4e did in 2008? And more importantly -in the case the answer is no (which I strongly believe so)- do you believe it could grow or have the potential to grow as D&D historically did?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Fifth Element]

I was not talking about specific design. I was talking about achieving the exotic feeling that can attract people in the rpg experience and along with it make a combo that defines the hobby. It is exactly the taste I am taling about.

If you're talking more about the implied setting and "feel" than the mechanics, then I submit 4E still could not have existed in its present form in 1974. Why? Because OD&D was informed by fantasy popular at the time of its creation. The same can be said of 4E. But much of the fantasy informing 4E did not exist in 1974. So my point remains.

My question makes sense.
You know 4e. You can imagine people getting to know a game like 4e without knowing 3e or whatever was there before.
You also know OD&D and you know the history of the hobby. You can now imagine replacing OD&D with a game like 4e in 1974.
Now you can answer the questions.

OD&D in 1974 was unlike any other game. If it were 4E instead, it would still have been unlike any other game. While I can't really imagine a game as slick and polished as 4E being the first game of its type, yes of course there would still be the potential to take off. OD&D filled a space in gamerdom that was previously empty. No reason why a 1974 4E wouldn't have done the same.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I'm baffled by this thread.

1. D&D is a household name, and you can find books labeled D&D on the shelves at Barnes and Noble. No other RPG can spontaneously generate players from nowhere.

2. More RPG players play D&D, and more non-RPG players have heard of D&D. These two facts combine to generate more new players.

3. Like it or not, 4E is the flagship D&D brand, and the new players D&D has historically generated will largely be introduced to 4E.

 

[Fifth Element]

This is true. But it may be so only because D&D holds this space. If D&D was to perish as a brand, this does not mean that this space could not be filled by other pen and paper rpgs adequately.

Yes, true. D&D's position as the gateway RPG has at least as much to do with its market position as its quality and appeal.

But that's irrelevant to the point. I thought we were discussion whether D&D is the gateway RPG, not the question of whether it could be replaced as such if it were to fail.

 

[Fifth Element]

OTOH without the feeling and spirit of "classic" D&D regarding its fluff (contrary to what we have grown ourselves with in the hobby) and with its focus on crunchy tactical rules wouldn't people see it as a board war/skirmish game? Would it have the same potential to growth?

Of course. OD&D started out as a game played by wargamers. Its first ruleset was heavily influenced by wargames.

As to the fluff, I have discussed that already.

 

[xechnao]

Look at your emphasis. You're arguging that it's not true anymore but then talking about how it would've done in 1974. These two things are not compatible.

The statement is that D&D acts as a gateway to other RPGs.

Do you disagree with this?

I myself do not because I see it more often in comic stores, Borders, Barnes & Nobels, etc... then I do other books by other companies and will allow casual purchasers more opportunites to engage it.

1974's OD&D has been fundamental to the hobby and we know it. I am trying to say that even nowadays it is more about OD&D's spirit and ideas and thus the hobby itself (which has been built upon these foundations) than the D&D name.
4e bears the D&D name. I am saying that probably if OD&D was like 4e the hobby would not have grown and become what it is today.

 

[Fifth Element]

4e bears the D&D name. I am saying that probably if OD&D was like 4e the hobby would not have grown and become what it is today (measures included).

But you haven't explained why. If all we're talking about is "spirit" and "ideas", then any edition of D&D would qualify to kick off the hobby in 1974.

This is the flaw in the question. 4E would not be exactly like 4E in 1974, since it would have been informed by ideas at that time, which are not necessarily the same ideas we enjoy now.

These games aren't developed in a vaccuum. They depend greatly on the geek popular culture at the time they are created.

 

[JoeGKushner]

1974's OD&D has been fundamental to the hobby and we know it. I am trying to say that even nowadays it is more about OD&D's spirit and ideas and thus the hobby itself (which has been built upon these foundations) than the D&D name. 4e bears the D&D name.

I am saying that probably if OD&D was like 4e the hobby would not have grown and become what it is today.

I'm still not getting what you're trying to say.


Is it about the spirit of OD&D or is it about OD&D was like 4e?