The market dying?

[eyebeams]

The fundamental error here is the assumption that what happens with the non-WotC segment of the industry has anything to do with WotC.

Actually, I was talking specifically about the size of WotC's market segment, not how WotC is doing, but let's get at it.

One of the things I've learned while working at WotC is that there's a massive gulf between what people outside the company see and say, and what's actually going on in here. None of the stories, or warnings, or impressions that outsiders gave me have matched my experiences in the least.

I have no idea what it's like to work there. I do know that a corporate/clique line is a powerful force to compel people to interpret things a certain way.

Here's one thing to chew on: if D&D was dying, what do you think WotC would do? Think on that for a moment. What strategies would you see? Do you really think that we'd sit back, tell you everything was going great, and just keep doing the same old thing? People, we are not stupid. Sure, we make mistakes. Just look at The Three Faces of Evil in Dungeon to see a bunch of mine. But we are not dumb. You can bet that if D&D was doing poorly, we would know about it and would take action to reverse that trend.

No, I think you'd say everything was great and then do something different to deal with the problem. You would never *not* say things were doing great. The fact is that you and Charles Rayn saying D&D is doing great is a constant, regardless of how D&D is doing. It's part of the job.

This sort of thing has already happened. WotC has significantly changed their strategy since the release of 3e and are no longer the "corebook company" they were. We never heard any rumbling about how things needed to be changed then, did we?

I can definitely see a surge in FY 2004, even discounting miniatures sales, because of 3.5. It's not as if everybody adopted 3.5 in 2003, and anecdotally I can say that many folks who bought 3e waited for it to be the standard rules set in their area.

Still, it's not for nothing that WotC now advertises D&D as an alternative to MMORPG games -- games that 5 years ago Ryan Dancey claimed were irrelevant as a source of competition.

I would not be surprised at all if other people in RPG publishing saw poor sales and rough times. I see it myself. But they haven't hit D&D. As I mentioned before, it's a mistake to assume that the RPG business and the D&D business are the same thing. The scales are so radically different that any comparison is pointless.

Not so different as I think many here assume, but I certainly don't disagree.

It is completely possible for someone who works in RPGs and someone who works at WotC to have radically different views of the market. Gaming stores are taking a beating, yet the FLGS in Boston (Pandamonium Books and Games) is doing better than ever in RPGs. What's true for one segment or company is not necessarily true for everyone. Saying that because non-D&D and d20 sales are down means that D&D sales *must* be down is like saying that, since WW solds tons of copies of Vampire, Werewolf, and Mage in the early 1990s, TSR must have also had a massive surge in sales at the same time.

You would agree, though (since you've said it before) that the D&D business and the rest of the industry are necessarily related. WW's sales started going south like everyone else's in the mid-late 90s.

Does it work the other way around? Probably not to as great an extent, but the core of the problem for other companies -- the aging gamer population that refreshes at adolescence and winnows away in late teens/early 20s -- is a problem I think WotC is going to face as well.

The reason I think it's so important to talk about this is because slowing that decline in the number of gamers -- especially gamers who are active consumers -- is in everybody's best interest.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

Another thought about increasing GenCon attendance. In my experience, the hobby gamers are getting older. Yes, we are getting new players. However, we aren't getting them at the rate we used to. The current ones are getting older and have more disposable income. They are somewhat fixed in their habits, so don't purchase a lot of new products (and are very selective). However, they do increasingly have the time and money to travel to a gaming convention..

That's not a very good guess. As people get older they don't have time to travel. And if they have kids, they don't have money, either!

 

[Paradigm]

That's not a very good guess. As people get older they don't have time to travel. And if they have kids, they don't have money, either!

I see 2nd generation gamers now. I think that there might be an upward trend in the making. A portion of the current crop of 12-20 year olds has 35-45 year old gamer parents.

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

As a parent, I can vouch that it's easier to scratch my gaming itch by cramming as much play as I can into a four-day vacation than it is to run a regular campaign; the latter often involves paying a sitter, trying to find time when my group (many of whom are also parents) can get together, etc.

(Thankfully, I manage to do both; it'll get easier when my son's old enough to play!)

 

[mearls]

Does it work the other way around? Probably not to as great an extent, but the core of the problem for other companies -- the aging gamer population that refreshes at adolescence and winnows away in late teens/early 20s -- is a problem I think WotC is going to face as well.

I don't think so. I've been thinking about this alot, and I think the emergence of WoW will only help D&D while harming other RPGs. MMORPGs generally stick quite close to the D&D mode of RPGs: fight monsters, grab treasure, power up, go on quests. An entire generation of games has learned that that is what you do in an RPG, whether it be Final Fantasy, WoW, KOTOR, or whatever. Whether consciously or not, back in 2000 D&D 3e captured that basic mode better than any RPG before or since. 3e empowers players. It gives them tons of options. It gives rules that force the DM to "play fair" (CRs, treasure by level, etc).

(As an aside, I still can't believe that RPG designers as a whole haven't grasped the importance and value of a CR-style system.)

There's also the factor that, back in the day, all you needed to design a game as mechanically sound as D&D was a basic understanding of RPGs. I think the number of gamers who leave D&D for other games is falling, both because D&D does a good job of meeting its goals and because the play style of D&D is so player-friendly. As a game player, why swap D&D for something that gives the DM more power over you?

Those two factors, I believe, are behind the trends we're seeing.

(Aside number two: I think that of all the games out there, poker is a far bigger threat to D&D than WoW. Poker, like D&D, is a social game that you play while sitting around a table with your friends. I would argue that WoW helps D&D by keeping gamers who might otherwise give up RPGs (no local group, no time to game) involved in them in at least some form.)

 

[wingsandsword]

Possibly part of the problem is defining terms. wingsandsword refers to the "industry/hobby" dying. What is he referring to? Is he referring to RPGs or is he referring to the overall hobby game market?

Well, that may be part of the confusion. I see it all as one market. I am referring to the overall market, with RPG's being a major and integral component of that market. Almost all the RPG players I know (especially ones who are more active in the hobby) at least dabble in CCG's, some play CMG's, a few are into wargames, some are more of a larper than anything else. Myself, I consider myself mostly a tabletop RPG person, but I larp regularly, I've played CCG's before (but got out a few years ago), I buy CMG's (as add-ons for tabletop games). Today's young Yu-Gi-Oh kid can easily grow up to be tomorrow's D&D player, and today's D&D player can be tomorrows CMG or CCG player, pigeonholing the entire market into tiny subcategories ignores the crossover and cross-pollination the market has.

Collectible Card games are down, miniature games are steady, roleplaying games are going down except for WotC and White Wolf which are bucking the trend by growing.

This is also part of the issue. If WotC and White Wolf are growing, the entire RPG aspect of the industry is likely to be growing. I'd be seriously surprised if together they don't form at least 51%, and thus the majority, of the RPG aspect of the industry. If they are growing, that alone is likely to offset a general drop in the rest of the RPG aspect of the industry. If things are rough for 3rd parties, maybe it's partly because the "d20 bubble" has burst and just producing any dang-fool thing d20 doesn't mean it will sell (it has to be good, and marketed well, it's anecdotal but my FLGS has to reorder Arcana Evolved and Iron Heroes pretty regularly, and they look to be the biggest non-WotC d20 items in the store). Maybe in slightly tougher financial times gamers turn towards recognized and trusted brand names in RPG's (D&D and World of Darkness being the two biggest RPG brands). If your small press RPG company is doing poorly, the industry impact of that is negligable compared to the overall industry. When a minor book (Frostburn Weapons of Incarnum Legacy of the Sandstorm) from WotC outsells your entire product line, it's pretty clear who the Big Dog is.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

You would agree, though (since you've said it before) that the D&D business and the rest of the industry are necessarily related. WW's sales started going south like everyone else's in the mid-late 90s..

Yes, but when D&D 3e launched (which was a great success), did WW's sales go up in its non-d20 segments? I'd guess not. Similarly, I suspect that the 3.5e launch did nothing for WW's sales outside of their d20 lines.

It wouldn't surprise me if WoTC's been taking market share away from d20 and non-d20 publishers (which would account for Eyebeams, Rasy's and Gareth's moaning and groaning about how the industry is about to fail soon). Of all the publishers out there, WoTC's been most consistent in its philosphy that RPGs are games first and foremost, and provided the means to PLAY it as a game, rather than treat it as some sort of cross-over to the improv theatre crowd. The "excessively complicated" feat-trees and prestige classes and combat system that Akrasia and other C&C players complain about could very well be the very features that are drawing in new players and growing the RPG market (kids nowadays are smarter than ever --- in part due to their exposure to video games where RPGs are beginning to approach the complexity and richness that D&D offers). As long as WoTC keeps the fresh blood interested (D&D as the gateway to the hobby being the key observation here), publishers of other games have less ability to siphon off the disinterested D&D players and see their sales shrink.

A few observations: the D&D miniatures game is by all accounts successful, and probably serving as an acquisition vehicle for D&D the RPG. (Is it that inconceivable? Remember that OD&D first evolved from skirmish wargame roots)

Adventures are an amazingly good way to keep players playing D&D. In fact, it is the major strength of D&D that almost no other RPGs can match. (CoC is the only other obvious game with rich pre-made adventures) That the World's Largest Dungeon sold well indicates that a large number of GMs want to avoid prep-work, and players don't demand homebrewed stuff. Keeping DMs happy and able to keep running the game is the most important part of keeping D&D players playing D&D, so when WoTC observed that the 3rd party market has moved almost entirely away from adventures, they publicly announced their shift in strategy to fix that gap. That tells me that WoTC realizes how important adventures are. No other publisher has followed suit and they will have the field to themselves. I predict that Shackled City will do well as well, given the dearth of 3rd party adventures and super-dungeons.

If my guesses are right, I suspect that RPG publishers that do well in the future will have to build a game that:

1. realizes that it's a game, first and foremost
2. provide lots of GM support, in the form of published adventures and other material
3. have a gateway entry to the game that is low-commitment in terms of time, but suitably rich in features and similar enough to the RPG that it will appeal to the young gamer that's been brought up on (relatively complex) video games

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

(As an aside, I still can't believe that RPG designers as a whole haven't grasped the importance and value of a CR-style system.)

That's because most current RPG designers are not system designers. All you have to do is hop over to RPG.net (or visit any of the threads that claim that C&C is superior because it's got most of the player-friendly features of D&D stripped) to realize that the majority of RPG designers today come from the "RPG as improv theatre" crowd as opposed to the system design "RPG as a balanced game" crowd. In fact, the number of folks who sneer at the need for game balance as an important part of the system design is astonishingly high. (Note that the game that most broke the "PCs must be balanced" rule was Ars Magica, and the designer Jonathan Tweet now works at WoTC)

My suspicion is that most RPG designers that are not at WoTC or Green Ronin have no idea what the difference between EL and CR is, and why the distinction is important.

 

[A'koss]

I don't think so. I've been thinking about this alot, and I think the emergence of WoW will only help D&D while harming other RPGs.

I'm afraid I don't quite buy that, certainly not in the long term.

Really, we're only seeing the infancy of MMORPGs. As the graphics and interactivity continue to improve, I truly believe PnP games are going to find themselves increasingly falling to the wayside, even D&D. At some point they will become so engrossing and such a feast for the senses that you will almost be able to hear the coffin nails being hammered for the PnP games. The final nail will come when you can don a pair of VR glasses and completely immerse yourself in a virtual world (this actually scares me on a societal level).

(Aside number two: I think that of all the games out there, poker is a far bigger threat to D&D than WoW. Poker, like D&D, is a social game that you play while sitting around a table with your friends. I would argue that WoW helps D&D by keeping gamers who might otherwise give up RPGs (no local group, no time to game) involved in them in at least some form.)

I don't see poker as an increasing threat to D&D as I do D&D's ability to recruit young new players who will stick with it for the long term over flashier, electronic hobbies.

Just my 2 bits...

 

[Turjan]

That's because most current RPG designers are not system designers. All you have to do is hop over to RPG.net (or visit any of the threads that claim that C&C is superior because it's got most of the player-friendly features of D&D stripped) to realize that the majority of RPG designers today come from the "RPG as improv theatre" crowd as opposed to the system design "RPG as a balanced game" crowd. In fact, the number of folks who sneer at the need for game balance as an important part of the system design is astonishingly high.

You think so? I'm not sure whether all games need good game balance. In CoC you expect to be outclassed. Paranoia is built on the PC's short life span. Then there are games where it's hard to die, anyway (7th Sea). They all cater to different playstyles. Copying D&D doesn't really make sense; otherwise people can play the original .

(Note that the game that most broke the "PCs must be balanced" rule was Ars Magica, and the designer Jonathan Tweet now works at WoTC)

Why "was"? It still is. It's sold as a feature. A mage is supposed to be more powerful than a normal mortal, and Ars Magica wants to evoke this feeling. Here the balance between PC's is consecutive, as the members of the troupe are supposed to take turns.