There's Powerful Deviltry at Work Here...

[Celebrim]

Ghostrider and Constantine both did pretty well at the box office.

This is as completely unrelated to the topic as your comment is, but Ghostrider had a budget of $110 million and grossed $115 million at the domestic box office. I doubt that the producers of the film characterized that as 'pretty well'. Almost no movie truly loses money any more given foreign markets, DVD sales, and residuals, but with that budget and that return it probably comes fairly close.

Not that its poor performance had anything to do with its occult material.

 

[Celebrim]

The magnitude of the flash in the pan isn't the point. The flash in the pan is the point.

Depending on the shape of the graph, the characterization of it as a 'flash in the pan' is probably not apt.

In any event, I'm making the unprovable assertion that the magitude of what you call 'the flash in the pan' was much smaller than it would have been without the negative press. We can never prove what might have happened. For the same reason that its impossible to prove that the game wouldn't have become big without the negative press, I can't prove that it wouldn't have become bigger without it.

I'm just telling you the sense I have of things based on the information I have. If that's not your sense of it, that's fine, but I don't think the 'common sense' notion amongst D&D players that all that negative press was good for the game is one which ought to go untested in your mind.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Depending on the shape of the graph, the characterization of it as a 'flash in the pan' is probably not apt.

In any event, I'm making the unprovable assertion that the magitude of what you call 'the flash in the pan' was much smaller than it would have been without the negative press. We can never prove what might have happened. For the same reason that its impossible to prove that the game wouldn't have become big without the negative press, I can't prove that it wouldn't have become bigger without it.

I'm just telling you the sense I have of things based on the information I have. If that's not your sense of it, that's fine, but I don't think the 'common sense' notion amongst D&D players that all that negative press was good for the game is one which ought to go untested in your mind.

I dunno. I think WizarDru's timeline up there is pretty good evidence that the controversy and the spike in popularity were largely uncorrelated.

 

[WizarDru]

The magnitude of the flash in the pan isn't the point. The flash in the pan is the point.

What he said.

Cabbage Patch Kids are still on the market, but now sell to a niche audience. Webkinz were on the shelves for YEARS, but then late last year they suddenly caught fire. In all likelihood, they will not be able to sustain their massive growth and popularity. Pong, as a brand, is not making any real money....but then neither is the 1973 version of D&D. However, the basic idea of Pong (just like the basic idea of D&D) still does...one need only look at Laser Table Tennis on Nintendo's Wii Play or Peggle to see that. The variations on Rubik's Cube (and in fact, the original) are still on the market, selling niche numbers. D&D fits into that pattern. By 1985, TSR had laid off 75% of it's staff....and while the Blume's gross mis-management was certainly the reason, the fact is that revenues had plateaued by that point. D&D's popularity had peaked and the market was shrinking rapidly.

 

[Minicol]

I actually see demons and such as "grognard-friendly," rather than "new hotness". Demons aren't anything new.

.

Well, I can only speak for myself : No, thank you.
My interest in demons only goes as far as the Great wheel and the sanitized version of Planescape going along with it. And that's it.

I think that despite the fact that they've been along since Eldritch Wizardry, they are one of the lamest parts of the games. They are an easy way out for lazy designers who don't have the creativity to create an interesting setting, or the skill to write a successful adventure.

They can be of interest in a once-in-a-while exception horror adventure. Not as a main course on the menu.

Give me a great world, give me new races, give me an adventure plot. And forget about this crap.

 

[KoshPWNZYou]

According to this report, criticism of D&D reached it's peak between 1988 and 1992. So I'm not really seeing a relation between the controversy of D&D in the pop culture and sales.

I'm certainly not going to assert that controversy was the 'reason D&D ever got big.' But Gygax himself seemed to think there was some correlation. He wrote this in Dragon Magazine #35, a few months after the Egbert disappearance:

Things were moving apace, not at all unlike what we had planned, when news of the missing university student began to break. It was given nationwide coverage, and D&D was prominently mentioned in most of the stories. All hell broke loose at our offices—a veritable barrage of phone calls and personal calls from reporters from newspapers, radio stations, TV and magazines. When the chap turned up relatively safe and sound, the stories on D&D didn’t stop; they just no longer mentioned him. Hectic, but great. It did things for sales you wouldn’t believe. It also took up about 75% of my time, and in the meanwhile, our long-range planning was beginning to bear fruit.

 

[Minicol]

Just for my curiosity : I was only recently aware of the "real" occult material in "Tome of Magic". I read it before, and found it intriguing, and that was it.

How come so many people in the US seem to be aware of the subject. is it something that was widely advertised ?

I do not condone the book in any fashion, I am rather appalled by this, but i'd like to know.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Well, I can only speak for myself

That's true. It's not a controversial claim that demons have been in D&D since OD&D, and have been one of the most consistently popular antagonists across all the editions. The vast majority of gamers who played through early editions of the game faced off against Type IV demons and their ilk, and their places of prominence in the various Monster Manuals speak to a widespread acceptance of their status as popular bad guys. They also play to the same grim-&-gritty fantasy fiction archetypes that I mention above, which influenced the mood and design of the early game. Lots of hidden temples to awful things that sacrifice poor innocents to gain terrible powers, as depicted on the cover of Eldritch Wizardry.

My point was, and is, that this whole demon thing is nothing new. Considering that your reservations concerning demons goes back to an OD&D supplement, you're only proving my point. You recoiled at demons in D&D in the 70s, and now new people are recoiling at demons in D&D 30 years later. This is not a new phenomenon, and certainly isn't evidence of some escalation of the demon quotient of D&D.

 

[Nifft]

Just for my curiosity : I was only recently aware of the "real" occult material in "Tome of Magic". I read it before, and found it intriguing, and that was it.

How come so many people in the US seem to be aware of the subject. is it something that was widely advertised ?

I do not condone the book in any fashion, I am rather appalled by this, but i'd like to know.

The "real" occult material? The only "real" things are some names and seal designs, but that's hardly more "real" than stealing names from "real" religious (e.g. Tiamat). The Binder's pact-buddies ("Vestiges") are not "real" at all -- nor are they even demonic! Their moral neutrality is very much a departure from the source material, but is perfect for their role in the D&D adaptation.

IMHO the ToM Binder did a fantastic job of bringing a new mechanic alive with links and references to "real" mythology. I do heartily condone and approve of ToM's Binder.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Minicol]

That's true. It's not a controversial claim that demons have been in D&D since OD&D, and have been one of the most consistently popular antagonists across all the editions. QUOTE]

oh, in that respect, I agree with you. I just wanted to say that I felt they have been way overused this far.