The Wii May Be the Bane of Roleplaying

Chupacabra said:
A rough timeline list of all the things that were supposedly going to kill off PnP RPGing:

The Personal Computer
Gaming Consoles (generation zero)
The Internet itself
LARPing
Gaming Consoles (N64 / Playstation)
Ultima Online
Everquest
Gaming Consoles (PS2, Game Cube, Xbox)
Next generation MMORPGs
NeverWinter Nights
DnD Online
Gaming Consoles (PS3, XboxLive...now Wii?)

Color me dubious that Wii will do more to dent this hobby's juggernaught than any of the above have.

Arguably, some of them have succeeded. For some of us, there was a pretty dark time for a while. Even after the "resurgence", there's still the fact that you could once find a pen & paper role-playing game for sale in probably every mall in the US. These days that isn't always true.

eyebeams said:
First of all, talking about whether something will "kill" a hobby is not a productive question.

First of all, this is an internet forum: Why would you think "productivity" would be a consideration? (^_^) Second of all, being so literal is not the way to have interesting discussions. (^_^)
 

log in or register to remove this ad


greywulf said:
Interesting post. While I don't think the Revolution wii

Funny you should mention that. I just got into a "discussion" with someone about that name.

While "Nintendo Revolution" sounds cooler in a male-gamer sort of way, I think "Wii" is a far better name for two reasons.

(1) "Nintendo Wii" is a much friendlier name to non gamers, and feels less "for uber male games under the age of 25" than the old name. This makes it more marketable to women and different age groups.

(2) "Wii" has far more global and cross-language appeal than "Revolution". The three characters makes it instantly identifiable and easy to market across Europe and Asia.

Personally, everytime I see "Wii" I think about those letters from the "V" and "V the Final Battle" tv mini series.

250px-JaneBadler%28Diana%29.jpg

200x.jpg


~Le
 

RFisher said:
Arguably, some of them have succeeded. For some of us, there was a pretty dark time for a while. Even after the "resurgence", there's still the fact that you could once find a pen & paper role-playing game for sale in probably every mall in the US. These days that isn't always true.

Well, we enter into the nebulous land of 'maybes' here, but I'd argue that there's a couple of flaws with the 'RPGs will die' theory.

1) False sense of market size: In 1980-1982, D&D EXPLODED onto the zeitgeist. It did not and could not sustain that success. Any more than any other fad could or has. A lot of people expected that success to last or endure...I'm not sure that it was ever realistic to believe that.

2) Some of the blame for the market failure belongs with TSR: Regardless of how you felt about AD&D 2e, it is a fact that many long-time fans did not make the switch and many either left the hobby or moved to another system. TSR did not manage to replace these lost customers and did not manage to bring them back. WotC clearly did manage to, at least initially.

3) The Market is much different now: Comic and Game specialty shops (and truthfully many other different kind of enthusiast-specialty shops) have been adversely affected by Internet retailing and changing printing and production costs. Further, there is a far more diverse selection of materials available now for that same money, even WITHIN the D&D market, let alone the d20 or RPG market as a whole. In 1984, you only really had one or two places you could go to buy a D&D adventure or new rules supplement besides TSR. Now you can get a supplement from dozens of small producers (PDF or print) and through a ton of outlets (amazon, walmart, Paizo and even ENWorld).

Since the RPG industry is still essentially a cottage industry (which only a handful of companies that actually make a full-time go of it), it's hard to even track their success. Part of the problem is that D&D IS the industry, in many practical applications, and when we say 'kill the hobby' we really mean 'kill active D&D sales'. As Diaglo would be quick to point out, there are still folks who play and enjoy systems that are long out of print. The industry's health and the hobby's health aren't necessarily the same thing, though it is one of the few bellweathers we actually have.
 

Dannyalcatraz said:
Hmmm...I game and play REAL sports without the Wii.

I don't think it will be the "Bane of Roleplaying"...though it may cut into a particular gamer's book-buying budget.

It definitely cut into my book-buying budget. I picked up Ultimate Allience and Zelda: Twilight Princess for the Wii instead of buying whatever new books were out there. Also I gotta say I find Wii Sports hella fun.

Would I completely give up RPG's for video gaming? Maybe. I've been playing and running RPG's for over 20 years now and there's something to be said for just being able to immerse yourself in a game without having to wait for the stars to align themselves with everyone else's schedule.

and people complaining about rules.
and people complaining about how they cant use a particular PrC.
or how X, Y and Z is broken or overpowered.
etc, etc...

Sometimes people arent worth the time and effort, sometimes they are, but I'm finding more and more I have less and less patience for the type of nerd pendantry RPG's tend to attract. And the fact that more than a few people look down thier nose at video games as if they were the red headed stepchild of RPG's doesnt help that impression. I'd really for the most part just like to play the game and have fun. Video games allow me to do that for the most part. RPG's used to, when everyone was all wide eyed and innocent. Back when gamers simply fixed or adjusted a rule as opposed to griping and attacking the designers and anyone who disagrees with them on it.

So yeah, I still love the idea of RPG's when I've found a good group, but video games are a good substitute at times when that isnt available.
 


Thanee said:
It also makes you curious about what the heck it is supposed to mean. :D

Maybe Wireless interactive isolation?

You're trying too hard. They can't copyright the word 'We', but they can copyright the word 'Wii', which is how they're trying to convey their concept. The idea is that the Wii is an inclusive, not exclusive, gaming platform, meant to attract many non-gamers or lapsed-gamers back to the fold.

Wii is also a simple and short name that works in quite a few languages without alteration. Hell, the Playstation doesn't meet that criteria for the Japanese (pu-ray-stay-shun), it's core audience (nor does the eck-su-bok-su su-ree-sicku-su-tee, for that matter). How successful this strategy will actually be remains to be seen...but so far it appears to be on track, similar to the DS two years prior...but with a much stronger start than that unit.
 
Last edited:


TheLe said:
(2) "Wii" has far more global and cross-language appeal than "Revolution". The three characters makes it instantly identifiable and easy to market across Europe and Asia.
Fine. Only the American and French gamers can call it "Revolution." The others can call it "Regime."

:]
 

Remove ads

Top