What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[mythago]

Has it though?

I have...doubts, but we both know there is no answer to this, so enjoy the theme parks.

Beyond being snarky, I'm not sure what point you though you were making here.

Big TTRPG publishers are putting out what you call 'disney-fied' games because they think that's what will sell. I presume they are competent enough to look at their own sales and marketing data to see what they should be targeting. Regardless, if they are as stupid as you suggest, they will certainly notice eventually if their happy new supplement's sales are in the basement, or if an indie competitor's World of Joe Abercrombie, But, Like, Even Grimmer's campaign setting is flying off the shelves and spawning a horde of imitators.

 

[Scribe]

Beyond being snarky, I'm not sure what point you though you were making here.

Big TTRPG publishers are putting out what you call 'disney-fied' games because they think that's what will sell. I presume they are competent enough to look at their own sales and marketing data to see what they should be targeting. Regardless, if they are as stupid as you suggest, they will certainly notice eventually if their happy new supplement's sales are in the basement, or if an indie competitor's World of Joe Abercrombie, But, Like, Even Grimmer's campaign setting is flying off the shelves and spawning a horde of imitators.

I'm not saying they are stupid at all. Where am I saying they are stupid?

I am 100% saying they are making (for several years now) a softer, gentler, kid friend game, and art style, and seeking to avoid controversy at all costs.

Thats not the same as saying they are stupid.

(Well ok, their OGL fiasco was really stupid, but thats not what we are discussing.)

They are making their product softer. They feel this is the best path to $$$. We agree? Great.

 

[Faolyn]

Has it though?

Well, yeah. I mean, in the 80s and 90s when a game featuring Big-Breasted Witch Queens plastered was sold, it was assumed that everyone who bought it was a straight guy. The writers didn't take lesbians, gay men, or asexual people into account, or even straight men (or lesbians) who weren't into big boobs. But hey, we all exist and we play. So the market has shifted to include us.

 

[Alzrius]

Beyond being snarky, I'm not sure what point you though you were making here.

You're going to comment about other people for being snarky? Really?

 

[AnotherGuy]

That can be explored, though! That's totally something people do, and they can get critiqued on it!

And you find in the instance of slavery they cannot explore and be critiqued on?

No, you're just being obtuse. Your entire argument is "Where does it end?", when we can just say "Well, it ends here for the moment".

Sadly you may have me mixed up with someone else. That is NOT my argument. Given that you are unaware of what I said I put it to you that you likely don't have an issue with anything I've said.

 

[Gubber Bittencourt]

For those who are sensitive to the subject of slavery in RPGs, how do you see the way it is approached in dragonlance?

 

[Scribe]

Well, yeah. I mean, in the 80s and 90s when a game featuring Big-Breasted Witch Queens plastered was sold, it was assumed that everyone who bought it was a straight guy. The writers didn't take lesbians, gay men, or asexual people into account, or even straight men (or lesbians) who weren't into big boobs. But hey, we all exist and we play. So the market has shifted to include us.

As with many of our past discussions, its not that there is a shift, its that there is the removal of what there was before, instead of it being 'in addition'.

Which is fine, but I somehow doubt that lesbians, or gay men, are a monolith who are all in favour of the safe and gentle approach being taken these days, and its just seemingly the older white straight guys who are into things now 'unacceptable'?

I mean, thats SURELY what we will find with some quick google/twitter searches right?

lol

 

[Alzrius]

I hadn't heard about the changes to Soth, but what you say makes sense. Having murdered his wife and child (and IIRC, the child was murdered for being ugly and/or disabled) and the gods being all, "OK, here's a chance for redemption," it turns the wife and child into mere plot devices.

They are mere plot devices; that's as true in the new version of Soth's story as it was in the old.

 

[mythago]

I'm not saying they are stupid at all. Where am I saying they are stupid?

I am 100% saying they are making (for several years now) a softer, gentler, kid friend game, and art style, and seeking to avoid controversy at all costs.

Well, sorta. I do agree with you that they are trying to make a more broadly-acceptable game and to expand their market, including getting younger players. I don't think they are "seeking to avoid controversy at all costs" (a thing that is truly impossible in the TTRPG hobby anyway) - they've courted plenty of controversy with the changes they've made. They're betting that the people who are honked off at the changes are less important to their financial success than the ones who are neutral or positive as to those changes.

They are making their product softer. They feel this is the best path to $$$. We agree? Great.

We do agree! And look, I get how it's frustrating to realize that a game company is moving away from a style or content or rules set that you prefer; but these are TTRPGs, and we have complete freedom to run our games the way we want. Plus, given the low barrier to entry, it's easier than ever for like minded gamers to put out a product that you like better. To use the theme park metaphor, you can tell Disney you think their park is boring, but the world is full of X-Treme Haunted Houses and Grim Pirate Adventure indie parks where you can spend all your time instead.

 

[Scribe]

Well, sorta. I do agree with you that they are trying to make a more broadly-acceptable game and to expand their market, including getting younger players. I don't think they are "seeking to avoid controversy at all costs" (a thing that is truly impossible in the TTRPG hobby anyway) - they've courted plenty of controversy with the changes they've made. They're betting that the people who are honked off at the changes are less important to their financial success than the ones who are neutral or positive as to those changes.



We do agree! And look, I get how it's frustrating to realize that a game company is moving away from a style or content or rules set that you prefer; but these are TTRPGs, and we have complete freedom to run our games the way we want. Plus, given the low barrier to entry, it's easier than ever for like minded gamers to put out a product that you like better. To use the theme park metaphor, you can tell Disney you think their park is boring, but the world is full of X-Treme Haunted Houses and Grim Pirate Adventure indie parks where you can spend all your time instead.

Absolutely! So we are on the same page, and I dont know when we diverged really.