Worlds of Design: A Pretty High Price

luggage-3524502_1280.jpg

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.

Can an overemphasis on attractive art, components, and hardcovers price gamers out of the market?

High Quality​

As the gamer market has matured, we've begun to see board games that are priced at over 60 U.S. dollars or higher. These are luxury products, with more focus on the look and presentation of the game (usually thanks to its components, miniatures, board, etc.). The problem is that the presentation drives the price up far enough that some people cannot afford to buy these games. In other words, there’s a concern that people are being priced out of gaming.

Keep in mind, in boardgames there’s a tendency for a few people to buy huge numbers of games, while others, through friendship or game clubs, play those games with the buyer. It’s somewhat different for tabletop role-playing games, although game masters still tend to buy most of the material for the group. The issue still applies though: companies have to strike a balance between producing an attractive game and a functional one, all while balancing cost. Not everyone can afford to make or buy a beautiful game.

What’s Driving “Art Inflation”?​

There are so many games (including RPGs) out there, and so many people are exploring games rather than learning to master them, that games seem increasingly designed to be played just one to three times (or one sequence of adventures), because that’s all the time gamers have to devote to them before moving on. Whether a game gets played at all depends partly on how it looks - game explorers will play a game that looks interesting before a game that doesn’t, and in today’s world “interesting” usually involves three dimensional pieces and artwork (artwork is expensive).

In other words it involves expense in the physical production of the game rather than in the design. This can be true in both video games and tabletop games: if you pay attention to video games much you certainly have heard complaints about how developers spent more time on the graphics of a video game than on making the game fun to play.

The question is, has an “ooh, shiny!” attitude leaked into RPGs?

Ooh, Shiny!​

The recent Spelljammer product is an example. With around a $70 list price, you get three pasteboard hardcover “books” all of 64 pages each, and a GM screen, in a slipcase. See Beth’s review for more details on what was included. Why so few pages? I suspect it was because the artwork, high quality paper, hardcover, and slipcase cost a lot of money.

Of course, companies will produce products that the market will bear, and despite my misgivings about the product, it’s clear it has fans. I often wonder, with modern supplements to RPGs, how many people actually use them, though. Are they produced more to be read and admired than to be used? (Kind of like “coffee table books?”)

This happens with board games too. I designed a wargame (Hastings 1066) that I tried to make as inexpensive as possible, as the impetus was something that could be sold in British National Heritage stores at museums and battle sites. The cards and paper strips provided the “board.” Other components included a die and some cubes. A Kickstarter was run and the list price was $35, very low for this kind of game. It did not sell well (though keep in mind, it never got into the kind of distribution I’d envisioned).

I designed another game on the (modified) system, Stalingrad Besieged. The publisher decided to include a mounted board, and three different sets of pieces (mini-cards, blocks, and very large cardboard). This increased the list price to $70. The Kickstarter tells the story. The publishers felt that their clientele were happy enough with the expense, and they made twice as much money. Yet it was all about presentation. The presentation, in other words, helped sell the book, even if it meant fewer people could afford to buy it.

What to Do About It​

We might ask ourselves what’s “natural” for different kinds of games. For board games, showing most of the rules to the players is expected, while for card and video games, hiding these rules is natural. Insofar as much of what happens in RPGs takes place primarily in the mind and imagination, we could say that given sufficient imagination, the game needs very few props and pieces.

If you want to self-publish an RPG product, how do you avoid spending a lot on presentation? Smaller publishers without the resources of large game companies may rely on AI-generated or public-domain art. But the reality is, there’s an increasing expectation of attractive presentations overall as layout software has become more accessible and print-on-demand has surged. And then there’s the Internet itself, which relies on thumbnails and quick scrolling, making it very challenging for any new game from an indie publisher to stand out.

Some publishers try to split the difference by creating “bare bones” versions and more advanced, elaborate games with all the bells and whistles. But this is a luxury too; few indie publishers have the resources to produce both options.

Do We Really Need All That Stuff?

My view is that genuine imagination is in short supply. I don’t mean “brain fever” – that’s easy to generate - I mean imagination that is useful in problem-solving. I wrote about this at some length in "The Chain of Imagination" and "The Lost Art of Making Things Up.”

There's a balance to be struck between indie designers, who are often new to the hobby and don't have the financial resources to pour into their games, and experienced game companies, who can afford to create luxury content that not everyone can afford. In theory, there is room for both audiences; in practice, the luxury games (merely by existing) can raise the bar for the indie games. Artists have a right to make a living; conversely, the market is bound by who will pay for the game, and whether or not they play the game is almost beside the point. There's a danger here though, which is that if a market caters too much to the affluent spectrum, there will be an increasingly smaller customer base to support the creation of new products, and that's bad for gamers everywhere.

In defining what we really need to play RPGs, there’s a spectrum of opinions ranging from the basics (paper, pencil, and imagination) to the elaborate (expensive miniatures and other components). Experienced gamers who grew up with tabletop games before the era of advanced manufacturing and the Internet may lean more on imagination. But today, with the massive amount of gaming choices and the accessibility of crowdfunding means the bar has been raised, and it’s not enough to simply have a good game … it has to be pretty too.

Your Turn: When it comes to buying games, how much does form (it’s presentation, including hardcover vs. softcover, more vs. less art) matter over function (how often you’ll actually play the game)?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio
Sometimes I look at a board game and think wow that looks fun, but then I say. I don't have space for that huge box.

Take Ogre for example, the size of the box grew from something you could throw in your jacket pocket to something that probably didn't fit in the trunk of your car (realistically I have no idea I drive a jeep I don't have a trunk, heck half the year I don't even have doors or a roof).

For me it's often less about price more about storage and portability. I can grab Betrayal at House on the Hill or Catan and bring it to Thanksgiving, and then put them back on a book shelf.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

As the gamer market has matured, we've begun to see board games that are priced at over 60 U.S. dollars or higher.
You mean over 20 years ago...
Twilight Imperium 3rd edition was already $80 in 2005, we left the $60 behind us a long, long time ago! And sure TI3 was a big chunky box, but I have more like those big boxes from that era, all were priced at $80. And FFG was not unique in that pricing scheme for larger games.

Even if we go with the smaller $50-$55 boxes in 2005, in the last 20 years the US has had a 60% inflation rate. So even at $50, that's now $80. Money is worth less.

As for the 'oh-shiny!' in RPGs, it's not for nothing that back in 2000 WotC went full color glossy in their core hardcover rule books, and eventually for all their books. Paizo did the same, everyone that could afford to did so, because if you didn't you were generally just a second tier company/rpg. There were of course exceptions that did very well in the rpg space in B/W, as it was part of their identity (until it wasn't).

If companies payed what the illustrations were worth in the RPG space, yeah, they would be very expensive. But companies traditionally paid peanuts and I doubt that this has changed much. Just ask an illustrator what they made doing pnp RPG illustrations and what they made doing illustrations in any other branch...

If you expect a product to cost more in development and production then it would make selling it, the product shouldn't be made.

EDIT: As for Spelljammer, the 1989 boxed set (kinda flimfsy box), it had 2 softcover books in it with 96 pages each, plus a couple of four color maps. It was $18 at the time, with correction for inflation it would be $42.50 in 2022. RPG boxed sets haven't been viable for a long time, because in many countries not only is it expensive to produce, but very expensive to buy for the consumer. Previously we had 6% VAT on books and 21% VAT on boxed sets...

Making a slipcase, multiple hardcovers, a map, and a DM screen was way more expensive then just doing a regular hardcover book with WAY more art. Vecna was $60 MSRP for 256 pages, twice what was in the $70 MSRP slipcase. And gamers are willing to pay way more then $70 for some bling, the Silver Edition of Spelljammer: Adventures in Space was $195 and is sold out... If you want just the content, DnDBeyond allows you to buy it digitally for $50.
 
Last edited:


While inflation is obviously a factor -- a $70 game today would still have cost $40 a couple of decades ago -- it is clear that people are happier to pay more for a more attractive game. One reason may include the aging of the demographic. When I was younger, I would cut counters by hand and play print and play games. Now, I'll happily pay an extra $20 not to do that.

Back in the day, there were far fewer good games, so people were willing to put in extra work on the ones they wanted to play. I have German games with photocopied English versions of the rules, games with wonky tokens and so on. But that's not because I wanted that -- it's because they were all that was available.

But, honestly, I've always been happy to pay for a better presentation. I like solid, well-designed components and attractive, well-thought out artwork. I'll probably spend 40+ hours playing a game I enjoy at least moderately, so 50 cents an hour for a better experience definitely seems like it's worthwhile.

And this is why I have three copies of Dune. An original version. A version I built myself from fan graphics and purchased PDFs of design items, and the latest version. And why if someone came out with a version of Circus Maximus with miniatures rather than tokens with terrible quality ink that has worn away on several tokens, I would be very likely to go all-in.
 

Tabletop games used to be a niche market, even so-called "family" games like Monopoly. Most board, card, and RPG games were inexpensively produced and more affordable.

I don't miss those times.

Today, tabletop gaming is a more accepted part of society and valued more than it was in the past. This comes along with the need for publishers to create more quality and attractive games that cost significantly more to produce.

I'm good with that.

Of course, out of control inflation and shipping costs are also causing prices to rise, and it's going to get worse with the USA's impending trade wars with China and other nations. That's not good.

I (mostly) only purchase "pretty games" now, even though my budget is limited. To me, the artwork and presentation is part of the experience and increases my enjoyment of the game sitting on my tabletop. Of course, a game's presentation does not mean the game itself is well-designed and fun . . . but if the publishers are putting in the work and producing a professional, attractive game product, I'm more inclined to trust the game design is going to be fun as well. I usually wait for reviews to roll in before pulling the trigger on a new board game for my shelf.

I don't own a lot of board games, but tend to spend a lot on the few I have. I've spent a LOT of money on "Return to Dark Tower" and absolutely love that game. I've even purchased fan made accessories on Etsy for the game!

With RPGs, most of my purchases are digital. I still want good art in the RPG books I buy, but I'm more willing to take a chance on a smaller developer with a smaller art budget. But the physical books that go on my shelf? I want those to be beautiful as well as useful and fun.

And there are still games aimed at the lower end of pricing, games that are a lot of fun. I own quite a few card games that are one-and-done, come in a small box, are well presented but not dripping with full-color art, didn't cost that much, play fast and quick . . . and are great for casual gaming when you don't have time (or the energy) for the massive board games.
 

I’ve noted several times that half of my FLGS is now just WizKid miniatures of every different type. I appreciate that they’re attractive and not too expensive here and there, but I’m concerned given that TTRPGing apparently needs so much plastic now? (I know it doesn’t, but you can’t tell that by looking in a game store or watching a stream.)

I find myself more concerned about environmental impact now, and I’m drawn to PDF and paper more than heavy cardboard and plastic.
 


Can an overemphasis on attractive art, components, and hardcovers price gamers out of the market?
Can? Yes. Objectively, the higher prices rise, the more customers there will be that cannot afford it even if they're interested. As with anything, it's a trade-off. Lower cost paid for presentation and material will broaden the potential pool, but narrow interest from folks who desire the tactile things. Every game has to decide where it falls between the extremes of "literally free to use" and "so expensive 99% of people can't afford it".

Your Turn: When it comes to buying games, how much does form (it’s presentation, including hardcover vs. softcover, more vs. less art) matter over function (how often you’ll actually play the game)?
Function is mostly dominant over form for me. Form is very nice to have, and if it is utterly and completely neglected I may not give the rules sufficient attention because minimal form isn't that difficult to do. But a game that looks phenomenal and "reads" wonderfully but which has cruddy, weak, or ineffectual game design is going to turn me off extremely quickly. A game that merely looks tolerable but which has genuinely clever game design and well-built rules that actually achieve the design goals set for them will 100% catch and hold my attention.

Any project is a balance. I favor a balance between form and function that gives distinct but not exclusive primacy to function. I can get my own "form" stuff. Creating more or better function is not nearly as easy.
 

If i'm buying physical rpg book, i'm buying it exclusively as an art book that won't be used in game. I'll flip trough, admire nice art and put it on the shelf to look pretty. For actual game use, i prefer bare bones, tech manual style and digital format that is at bare minimum, searchable with ctrl+f, but better yet, bookmarked and has hyperlinked index. Best example of it is Mork Borg. I have physical copy ( Mork Borg, Cy_Borg and Corp Borg). I like it's art style and that's only reason i bought those books. But for play, i use downloaded minimalist pdf with just plain text rules.
 

The TSR style boxed sets were, and still are, fine by me. i don’t need full-bleed full color hardcovers. good stiff cardstock covers are fine, as are folded cardstock boxes. (Those can be made much more durable by strategic application of clear packaging tape.)
I mostly do pdf unless there are good components…. TFT Legacy Edition… Blade Runner, Twilight 2’ 4th edition…

I found spelljammer for 5th to be an utterly disappointing purchase. Expensive and underwhelming, missing key elements I expected from prior edition…. it was a decent, if short, read.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top