Why aren't RPGs poplular

[Mallus]

Not to mention that this change from country to country.

True. In the US, young adult fiction is very popular now.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Yes. I can log into WOW and play with very little thought or effort. Playing well and running endgame content takes a bit more effort but just playing the game questing/leveling barely requires a brain stem.

Hehe... Back during my brief WoW stint a couple years ago, my favorite part of the game was fishing. Who needs a brainstem?

Add to that the convenience of on-demand play and the ability to play for only a few minutes at a time if you want and the attraction to the busy/attention defecit consumer is obvious.

I really think this gets to the crux of it. WoW can be done without any dependence on anyone else: there are no time or scheduling constraints, and you can still play the game even if none of your buddies are around, for as long or as short as you want.

It's simply MUCH more convenient to CRPG than to PnP RPG. And people are all about convenience!

(Of course, whether that's a good thing is a different topic )

 

[Mallus]

Really the same goes for most computer/console rpg's I've played, and even a game like M:TG can be played on a very simple level relative to how complicated the game can be. I can't speak to Pokemon though, but maybe it's because they're so darn cute.

Anyway I suggest that these are in no way popular because of their complexity, and that the reason that their complexity does not limit their popularity all comes back to a single reason.

They are simple to learn to start with.

Complexity only comes in in terms of extending the lifespan for those who want more than the starting simplicity.

See, I agree with all of this, except for the implication that contemporary pen-and-paper RPG's like 3e or 4e are significantly more complex than the games you mention. You can start simple in later-edition D&D. In fact, a few of my players might argue your DM can remain rather simple, even after years behind the screen...

Again, If a kid can familiarize themselves with a (few?) hundred Pokemon, I suggest that it's not complexity that's keeping them from joining the ranks of D&D players.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Roleplaying games are massively popular, having gone mainstream some time ago in the form of crpgs. WoW had 11.5 million subscribers as of Dec 2008.

Video games are not role-playing games.

 

[ggroy]

What I was trying to get at was that I think TSR made a key mistake in supporting two parallel versions of D&D. Hmm, maybe I should have just said that?

Wonder why exactly two parallel version of D&D were kept around for so long in the first place. Only semi-plausible reason I can think of offhand, would be if the basic and expert D&D box sets (Holmes, Moldvay, Mentzer, etc ...) were huge cash cows for TSR in comparison to AD&D. Most companies aren't willing to give up a cash cow, for whatever reasons.

 

[Mallus]

Video games are not role-playing games.

So the Ultima's, Wizardry's, Temples of Apshai --I'm really showing my age with that one-- Bard's Tales, Might and Magics, SSI Gold Box games, not to mention the Final Fantasy's, Dragon Quests, Star Oceans, Suikoden's, and veritable horde of Pokemons are something other than role-playing games?

Despite being labeled, sold, purchased, played, enjoyed, and widely recognized and discussed as such? For the past 30+ years.

Really?

(don't mind me, I just have a thing against prescriptivism)

 

[Oni]

See, I agree with all of this, except for the implication that contemporary pen-and-paper RPG's like 3e or 4e are significantly more complex than the games you mention. You can start simple in later-edition D&D. In fact, a few of my players might argue your DM can remain rather simple, even after years behind the screen...

Again, If a kid can familiarize themselves with a (few?) hundred Pokemon, I suggest that it's not complexity that's keeping them from joining the ranks of D&D players.

You make a fair point, at their core 3/4e or instance really are not super complicated, and there are many extremely simple rpg's out there, much simpler than any recent version of D&D. Unfortunately, most of the truly simple ones are so little known that the opportunity is not there, and something more mainstream like D&D, or maybe even one of those White Wolf games, with their thick multi-volume rules sets do not give come off as being simple, rather the presentation gives an air of extreme complexity.

Of course I don't think the simplicity/complexity issue is the only at play here, but it certainly doesn't help. Easy to learn, hard to master is an important aspect though, and table top rpg's just don't give off that vibe if you're not familiar with them. The thing with those kids that know the name of all the pokemon is that they learned it gradually because the games were accessible both in ease of play/not being intimidating (for a least the handheld versions) and in terms of culture.

 

[ggroy]

So the Ultima's, Wizardry's, Temples of Apshai --I'm really showing my age with that one-- Bard's Tales, Might and Magics, SSI Gold Box games, not to mention the Final Fantasy's, Dragon Quests, Star Oceans, Suikoden's, and veritable horde of Pokemons are something other than role-playing games?

Despite being labeled, sold, purchased, played, enjoyed, and widely recognized and discussed as such? For the past 30+ years.

Really?

(don't mind me, I just have a thing against prescriptivism)

You missed Nethack, the Sword of Fargoal, and the D&D cartridge for the Intellivision.

NetHack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sword of Fargoal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[delericho]

Wonder why exactly two parallel version of D&D were kept around for so long in the first place.

Ah, now that I know. It all goes back to the falling out between Gygax and Arneson. They collaborated on OD&D, but Gygax took sole credit for AD&D. Arneson sued, and I believe the settlement included the agreement that Arneson would continue to receive royalties for his game, and that TSR would keep it in print to that end.

It wasn't until WotC bought out TSR that this was fully resolved - I presume they made some sort of agreement with Arneson that brought that dispute to a resolution.

 

[delericho]

Statements like this in the age of bestselling young adult book series like Twilight and Harry Potter seem, well, a little silly.

I just read an article online somewhere (io9?) about how young adult fiction is the hottest part of the SF market right now. One of the my favorite new-ish SF authors, Scott Westerfeld, writes YA exclusively now, because that's where the money is.

That's another point. Early editions of D&D were very heavily influenced by Tolkien, Moorcock, Lieber, Vance, Lovecraft and others, to the extent that there were various lawsuits threatened and served. (Halflings were originally Hobbits, Treants were originally Ents, and the very first "Deities & Demigods" included the Cthulhu mythos!)

I suspect that one could construct a really kick-ass game and/or setting by taking elements from Pokemon, Harry Potter, Eragon, and the like, filing off the serial numbers, putting them into a blender, and spicing the result. And so, perhaps we would have a game where the characters are lords of elemental familiars, dragon-riders, and lapsed students at the great academy Grimcrest, out on their adventures for fun and profit. Put that together (have the lawyers take a very good look at it), and market it heavily towards young adults, and you might well have a monster hit on your hands.