What are the major challenges facing the RPG industry in the next few years?

[Jd Smith1]

To be blunt that first generation of gamers are largely irrelevant for WotC purposes and have been for a long time. WotC don't really care how many people are playing RPGs right now - they care how many people are buying them. Most older gamers have been settled on systems they like for a good long time and that's not a monetizable group. They may have a shelf full of books (something that's impossible with 5e) but when they have something that works for them why change? This, I think, is part of why 40% of the WotC market is under 25.

Can you point me to where WOTC has stated that policy? I can't seem to find it.

So 60% are over 25....

Not actually much of an issue; RPGs are cheap. The three core D&D books are each the cost of a AAA video game - and you don't need one per player. I've on one several occasions commented that we were all playing in the pub, all of us were eating a meal there, and the food and drink bill for each of us was more than the RPG PDFs we were using. How cheap RPGs are is a problem for the industry - but by the same token a poor economy leaving people time rich and cash poor is good for RPGs.

Actually, they aren't, and it isn't. For a 20-something with six figures of student debt and trouble making rent, buying the three core books is a substantial investment.

Of course, he can always get them free via file-sharing.

Virtual reality has been the Next Big Thing since the late 80s and most of the attempts have been less effective than the VirtualBoy.

I've seen and used the tech being marketed for training. Right now the best is still priced high, but as the technology matures, it will become cheaper, and quickly.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Can you point me to where WOTC has stated that policy? I can't seem to find it.

What policy? It's not a matter of policy that you can't get money from people happy with what they have. It's a matter of observation.

So 60% are over 25....

Which still means the population skews very young and they (or IME Critical Role) are doing a very good job getting in new players.

Actually, they aren't, and it isn't. For a 20-something with six figures of student debt and trouble making rent, buying the three core books is a substantial investment.

Of course, he can always get them free via file-sharing.

Or do what I do because I point blank refuse to buy any book that offers thanks to a certain two WotC consultants (I will get the PHB when the new print run becomes readily available). Use the SRD. You only need one player between the group with the books.

As mentioned, the three core books are each the cost of an AAA video game.

I've seen and used the tech being marketed for training. Right now the best is still priced high, but as the technology matures, it will become cheaper, and quickly.

I've heard this tune before. Maybe this time it will be right and there do seem to be technical limitations for the "screen door effect" and a 90fps resolution to prevent grogginess needed. But I don't think it's going to be much different this time.

 

[Campbell]

Elder millennial here who games with other millennials and some Gen Z folks.

No matter how immersive it is I have like zero interest in virtual reality. The reason board games and roleplaying games have exploded in popularity in the last couple years has a lot to do with movement towards more face to face interactions. Right now I desperately want to get back to the table so I can see everyone's faces and socialize more.

Even when it comes to video games I have pretty little interest in VR. I am not particularly looking for even more immersive experiences. Game play mechanics, competition, and socialization are a big component of what makes games fun for me. I also like to maintain a certain level of awareness over my environment so I can respond to things like social media, incoming phone calls, my puppy, etc.

 

[hawkeyefan]

A couple of things that I can think of off the top of my head.

1) What happens when the current bubble bursts?

RPGs Are currently enjoying a bit of a boom. This is due to a lot of factors, which are all feeding into the current proliferation. At some point, things will kind of settle to a norm. How much will they settle? What impact will that have on the big publishers like WotC, and to smaller publishers like the indie creators on Itch.io?

I mean, there's the possibility that it's all an upward rise from here. That RPGs simply continue to grow in popularity and continue to diversify into new areas of content and gameplay. I think it's probably an overly optimistic hope, but anything is possible.

I think that WotC's position as the industry leader is f huge importance in this regard. How profitable does the game need to remain in order for Hasbro to keep it going? How successful does the movie need to be (or probably more likely, how much damage can it do if it's bad)? How do they handle current challenges, and how does that impact their fan base? I think the industry overall will largely be shaped by these things.

2) Changing technology and media

This has already been mentioned in some ways, but I don't know if it's as much a threat to RPGs (the "VR may kill RPGs" idea seems to echo past concerns about every new media totally destroying all those that came before it), but more about how they influence RPGs and shape the way that they're played. A large part of the current boom has to do with online play and streaming play. A lot of the success of this is very surprising to many people. The internet didn't kill RPGs....it elevated them in new ways. Something like VR will likely do the same thing.

I'm picturing a much more literal virtual tabletop where my friends and I sit and face each other and pick up virtual dice to roll and so on. New means and modes of play would seem to open up, just as the internet did for streaming play and remote play.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'm picturing a much more literal virtual tabletop where my friends and I sit and face each other and pick up virtual dice to roll and so on. New means and modes of play would seem to open up, just as the internet did for streaming play and remote play.

I suspect so myself. VR or AR - AR may be better and more social. For example, if you and me had AR headsets, and we were in the same location, we could have the game map and "mini" virtually projected on to a table or whatever in front of us, and be interacting with it together, where other people we were playing with could be by themselves or in groups, also projected in AR, on to avatars around the table, also able to interact with it and so on.

One saving grace of games, so far, is that virtually all games with any kind of budget, are designed to be games, in the win/lose sense. Which is not what RPGs are. If you wanted to make a VR sort of "replacement" for D&D, to have acceptable graphics, sound, AI (which would really mean some next-gen AI, but which is on the way), random/AI generation methods for terrain/adventures/etc., you'd need to invest a lot. Potentially hundreds of millions (looking at the history of MMOs here - Destiny totalled up at somewhere around $500-700m, SWTOR before that at $200-300m, even WoW in 2004 was $100m) and not a single game company has shown the remotest willingness to invest even tens of millions on projects which aren't about win/lose-type games, let alone hundreds of millions.

This is also why MMORPGs have been so much less of a threat to RPGs than they might have. Had MMORPGs stuck with making role-playing actually a thing, and going for systems that promoted RP-ish player interaction (rather than "hilarious" PKing or the like), they might have somewhat replaced TT RPGs. But since WoW, they've gone in a more gamist direction, where it's all numbers and hotbars and speedrunning dungeons and where RPers are actively verbally abused and even denounced as "bads" and so on, and segregated to their own servers (which are a very small percentage of the servers overall). Some smaller products have tried for a more TT RPG-like deal, but even then, the fact that you're not the heroes of the story, just people hanging out in a virtual world means the audience is very different to that of TT RPGs.

 

[Gorgon Zee]

VR will replace F2F gaming in exactly the same way that movies replaced books (They won't)
Some people will prefer one; some people the other. Most people like some of both.

Unless we get to a far enough future that VR is capable of perfectly simulating reality, very large numbers of people are going to prefer being with their friends rather than experiencing a not-quite-right VR world at the same time as their friends.

VR can supplement F2F gaming in the same way that other technology does, but for many of the games I like to play, it's unlikely to do that much. For crunchy game systems I can see it being a lot more use; I play 4E and a VR Roll20 replacement would be pretty sweet. But for a Hillfolk game? Not much gain. I don't really see it being any more than evolutionary.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I suspect so myself. VR or AR - AR may be better and more social. For example, if you and me had AR headsets, and we were in the same location, we could have the game map and "mini" virtually projected on to a table or whatever in front of us, and be interacting with it together, where other people we were playing with could be by themselves or in groups, also projected in AR, on to avatars around the table, also able to interact with it and so on.

Right. VR or AR is a delivery system, not a competing product. I think it'll be used to assist and possibly enhance gaming.