Why aren't RPGs poplular

[S'mon]

The games are highly complex compared to in the '80s, because hardcore gamers like complexity and are the easiest to market to. This restricts appeal to the wider market. Same thing happened with wargames in the '70s.

 

[Umbran]

Maybe nobody used that particular two-word phrase, but that's because the language permits so many other ways of saying it -- including less vague ways, of which there have been examples aplenty.

Less vague ways, sir, have this habit of looking at the trees rather than the forest. Too much focus on the possible particulars means one can lose the larger picture. The OP asks what "went wrong" - my assertion is absolutely nothing went wrong - RPGs are behaving rather like most hobbies do.

As with most matters of personal taste, there are probably as many particular reasons for not liking RPGs as there are people who don't like them. Why focus on just a few?

 

[Cadfan]

How popular do you think RPGs ought to be?

I mean, its a hobby. Its competing with a lot of other hobbies, starting with model trains and ending with programming Linux kernels. Not everyone has hobbies. But of the people who do, they can only have so many. We're probably more popular than fly fishing. We're probably more popular than storm photography. What's the 'right' level of popularity?

 

[BryonD]

Its competing with a lot of other hobbies, starting with model trains and ending with programming Linux kernels.

And there are a lot more variations of options now than there were in the 80s.

If there had been WoW in the 80s, some notable fraction of the D&D community would have been doing THAT instead. And if MMOs did not exist now there would be some notable fractional increase in the number of tabletop RPGers now. It isn't a simple direct relationship. I'm sure some people actual discover D&D through WoW. But ultimately people will tend toward what they enjoy the most. And you don't have to stop enjoying tabletop RPGs to discover some new thing that you enjoy even more.

And I don't mean to imply that WoW is the answer or to blame, or is even necessarily a critical piece. It is just an easy example. There are tons of alternatives that did not exist before. Some of them in the "gamer" related, others not.

 

[samursus]

TLDR;

My experience points to a couple things: exposure and time/location constraints.

Firstly, many/most people don't even really know what goes on in a RPG. When I asked my gf if she was interested in trying out D&D, she really had no idea what it was, except that you dressed up like a wizard or an elf when you played

Now that she has 4 or 5 sessions under her, she has gotten into it with the best of them! She bought her own dice, PHB 1 & 2, and is getting attached to her character.

She tells her friends about her Changeling Bard, and they kind of get a glossy-eyed look; they have no idea what she is going on about.

Secondly, many of the group I used to play with now don't have the disposable time OR have moved away from the friends they used to play with... some have found other people to play with, but like any organizied group activity, its not always easy to get all the ducks in a row.

And, thirdly, I agree that many other leisure activities are easier to pick up and leave (CCG's, MMO's,vidya games,movies).

After starting to play RPG's again after a long hiatus (thank you 4e), I have really come to appreciate what a great return I get for my time and effort. My gf and I found something else we enjoy doing together. We met a neat couple who we are starting to do other things with. We are getting to be proactively creative, unlike most of the passive entertainment out there. We are gettting better at basic math and I am becoming a mentat from keeping track of combat conditions/bonuses (thank you 4e ).

But most of all we are having so much fun!

 

[AllisterH]

I'd like to throw out two things that I think have been insufficiently examined. First, for high school students, the school day has been getting longer and the school year longer, while more homework is being assigned per class (test scores have still barely budged, but that's another topic). Far from being lazy, the modern teenager is far more likely to be overworked. Time to do their own thing is a commodity, and many times, I can easily imagine something fairly brainless being the focus of interest. College students, too, more credit hours each semester, more papers per class. Thus, the feeder group is really pressed for time compared to twenty years ago. Adolescence is not what it was. Let's toss in, too, smaller family sizes and kids being born later, which means kids these days are less likely to be recruited by an older sibling.

.

This is a good point pawsplay.

For all the bellyaching about the defiencies of the new generation, they ARE being subject to more homework, more hours in school and more "structured" time activities (every kid nowadays has some afterschool obligation it seems)

Hell, in Canada, they recently released a study showing that kindergarteners are actually subject to the same amount of time in homework that 20 years ago a 2nd grader would have to do.

 

[haakon1]

The games are highly complex compared to in the '80s, because hardcore gamers like complexity and are the easiest to market to. This restricts appeal to the wider market. Same thing happened with wargames in the '70s.

If hard core gamer = likes complexity and constant rules updates, then yes, but then all you're saying is "gamers who like complexity and rules updates like to be sold complexity and rules updates", which ain't saying much.

I postulate that a significant chunk (the majority? the overwhelming majority of people I game with, at least) of the gamer audience isn't that interested in the rules and doesn't like updates (thus the popular non-acceptance of 4e), and that those who are "rules gamers" are very much segmented into their own little niches (thus the edition wars).

So the problem is that the games industry "has to sell something" and has chased down the rules gamer audience to exhaustion, leaving the "we just want to play" gamers, and the general public, far far behind.

Perhaps we're saying the same thing -- it's just that I blame the producers supplying niche rules-oriented products, while you blame consumer demand.

 

[Ariosto]

As with most matters of personal taste, there are probably as many particular reasons for not liking RPGs as there are people who don't like them. Why focus on just a few?

The only way to focus is on one at a time. Are there not probably as many particular reasons for liking?

"Well, some people like this stuff and some don't. What if we could ask why, and try to add to the 'like' column? What madness! One might as well suppose that we could actually advertise features of the product, so people could see that it's something they'll probably like and therefore decide to try it."

 

[Ariosto]

I postulate that a significant chunk (the majority? the overwhelming majority of people I game with, at least) of the gamer audience isn't that interested in the rules and doesn't like updates (thus the popular non-acceptance of 4e), and that those who are "rules gamers" are very much segmented into their own little niches (thus the edition wars).

Who is buying the most, and the most profitable, products?

Some business plans are fiduciary responsibility; some are not. WotC is not a "non-profit" corporation, and even the "profit enough" model seems to be as archaic as the "company man".

 

[Victim]

The games are highly complex compared to in the '80s, because hardcore gamers like complexity and are the easiest to market to. This restricts appeal to the wider market. Same thing happened with wargames in the '70s.

I'd imagine that a lot of the time the wider market is perfectly happy use someone else's RPG rule book. If they don't buy something, then why market to them?

Moreover, the overhead on even simple RPGs is generally a lot more than a computer game which handles the rules itself, has instant matchmaking online, doesn't require reading the manual, automatically does any record keeping needed (rpgs are generally played in campaigns which require multiple plays to get full value).

Competing in terms of ease of play against video games and even many modern hardcore boardgames seems like a massively losing proposition.

In some ways, the real question might be "how are RPGs this popular in the first place?" considering all the competing hobbies, time investments and coordination issues, cooperative nature, lack of monetary rewards (as opposed to a poker group/fantasy sports things), need for a dedicated referee player, etc. What an amazing idea to hang on in spite of everything.