WARNING: Today's post is in response to Ryan Dancey's comments on EN World regarding the past, present, and future of the RPG industry. If you hate reading posts by outsiders with no direct experience, then you are gonna detest this one.
I am the Warden and I wish you a Happy New Year!!
Timing aside, there are many reasons for those of us passionately trying to break into the industry to consider its future. And I don't mean our place in it, I'm talking about it's "survival." I put that word in quotes because I don't believe it'll ever truly go away, but there will be time to get into that later. For now, I want to talk about something few seem to consider in this business and any other, for that matter.
Innovation.
Every goddamn post I've read on the possible future of roleplaying games talks about numerous factors - marketing, distribution, audience, growth, age, technology, and more - yet none of them consider the possibility that the future of RPGs depends predominantly on the innovation of the games available. Seeing as the majority of these posts (or at least the ones I've read) focus on D&D, it does seem as if everyone warrants this entire industry's success on one company's results, even when those results are being questioned by the impact of another very close to home. The consensus seems to be if D&D and/or it's resulting d20 brand should fail, the entire market will collapse.
Don't get me wrong, I completely agree all those other factors mentioned by Mr. Dancey are incredibly valid and there's likely no one better to comment with experience than him. It's just striking - yet no less surprising given my experiences - that the applicability of the games to the audience they're trying to lure is never mentioned. MMOs have threatened the TRPG (traditional RPG) market for sure by giving players what they wanted, an instant world ready at a moment's notice with no prep time and the freedom to play whenever they want rather than wait for their friends to be available. Anyone who stopped playing TRPGs did so because they were going to eventually. It's the same argument used for piracy in that only those who don't want to pay for stuff will steal. But it's just as likely people who steal do so because they don't have the money to pay... right now. When they do have access to cash, they'll pay and do so happily. Can the same not be said for TRPG players?
The irony is that you can turn to D&D itself for evidence of this. In 2000, 3rd edition came out and people flocked to it for the innovation it brought to a familiar game. Even MMOs have gone through their own flashes of innovation, once again spearheaded by the D&D brand. D&D Online skipped the mandatory monthly fee for a free-to-play option, a staple of the MMO industry now which even World of Warcraft has caved to in limited fashion. These points, however, eventually work against my final conclusion.
Perhaps the state of traditional roleplaying games requires new blood, something far from the old guard. The current state of the market doesn't seem to indicate that, but that's the kicker about innovation. It steps out of left field and catches everyone off their feet, giving it the spark to ignite a media frenzy. We all know such an event will occur in all fields of entertainment, it's why everyone's climbing over top of so many corpses to reach that transcending product first. Yet our industry is ignoring the one facet of roleplaying games which made it such a significant experience: the game itself.
When was the last time a truly incredible and original RPG experience came out? Twelve years ago when the aforementioned D&D 3rd Edition was released and even that was rehashing something old. If so many other facets of the industry are changing - from how we produce to how we sell our products - are we sure that keeping the game itself the same is what's needed?
To make this point, I'd like to use one perfect example of inadequate innovation. Crest 3D. You've all seen the ads for it and if you didn't roll your eyes and groan, get the fuck off my blog. It's Crest toothpaste with the word "3D" after it. What the hell's the 3D for? It's not about preventing three forms of dental care which all start with the letter D, it's there simply because "3D" is such a buzz word right now. Not even an effective buzz word at that as slumping theatre attendance would tell us. It's very likely the exact same Crest in every tube but squeezed between a pair of big tits.
If the industry survives the storm of the coming few years and readapts itself to suit an evolving consumer base and its technology, will it just be the same stuff we saw before with big tits or will it be something new and innovating, drawing on what we knew and excelled to new heights? There will always be a demand for these games so long as those generations who have grown up with it continue to exist and those who have played it will always keep fond memories of those bygone days. But it just might be possible that the audience is shrinking because they grew tired of doing the same thing over and over again under different titles and turned to something else to pass their time until the glimmer of hope from something new - and somehow familiar - caught their eye and turned them back to roleplaying.
When I took the train out east last month, we played a game from our seats. Dice and all. A friendly chap around our age passed by on his way back from the bathroom and picked up the unmistakable sound of dice rolling on a table, stepped back, and asked what we were playing. He had played once before and figured us to be much younger than we were. We asked him why he stopped playing and he said he didn't have the time anymore. But the glimmer in his eye told me he would pick it back up in a heartbeat if given the chance. You can toss out as many numbers as you like, read so many surveys, but that glimmer tells me more than anything some business graduate ever could.
Our game was never meant to fit into society. I've said that before and continue to do so. The idea of applying typical business models to it seems a bit ineffective and counterproductive to what we create, yet I understand it's all business can understand. To me, business is risk taken by timid people. Everyone keeps talking about expanding the market and trying to fit into a mould like so many other publishing segments, yet no one with the experience seems willing to proclaim this the best time for designers and publishers to be in the market. We don't have to play by the same-old same-old any more. Is it risky? Yes. Hell yes! We're about to set fire to the forest. Some homes may be destroyed, but that fire will eventually give way to new growth and sprout new life, a place for new homes to be built on a stronger foundation.
All we need is a match.
You know, I was going to post something about this on my blog, but since you got there first, I figure I'll just send folks over here to see all of this.
ReplyDeleteI read the man's article, and there are several issues I take with it. I agree with you, Warden, in that the guy is looking at the situation through coin colored glasses (I'm American, so there's no 'u' in that word....Thank you, Mr. Webster). The very fact that he needed to commission a report on the gaming industry illustrates that. But the report was also written prior to the full impact of the "internet-based social networking phenom".
Back in the 90's, you were hotter than poop on toast when you handed out your email address to business associates. Today, what with smart phones, wi-fi, and mobile cellular internet, people think you are weird if you can't get online near-instantly no matter where you are. When you can send an email, check your favorite web page, listen to voice mail, whip out a text message, Tweet, play Pissed-Off Avians, and (omg) make a phone call all from the same handheld device while taking your dog Sparky for a walk around the block, you should stand there for a moment and wonder why you are so damnably connected.
Me, I keep waiting for the Luddites to lead the technological backlash...not with anticipation but with dread. I'd be one of the first up against the wall when they start throwing rocks. But I don't really think that's gonna happen. We are all now, for the most part, firmly plugged in. And we in the publishing industry need to remember that.
Dancey talks about a contraction in the gaming market, and he blames outside factors beyond the control of the industry. I call shenanigans on that. He starts off his article by describing the poor business practices of TSR. They started this industry if I recall correctly. They were part of it.
He then blames the fall of the brick and mortar book stores who carried so much of the gaming industries product. Instead of bemoaning this, why not look at the cause of the book store collapse: the Internet! When everything is available in a digital format, or as print on demand, or even just from your own home laser printer, then why not look into moving into that venue instead of relying on a dinosaur that's about to become several tons of flammable hydrocarbons?
I could go on and on and rebut almost everything in the article, but then there'd be nothing else for anyone to read. I'll cut to the chase; the problem was myopia and inertia. There is also a third culprit for this dilemma, and it can't be shortened into a single high-falutin' word either; the act of turning a game company over to businessmen who could never understand the product they were trying to sell and market. Would you hire a native Brazilian indian straight out of the Amazon to shill cellular phones? No. He has no concept of the thing you want him to sell, no frame of reference, no experience. He's not even lvl 0.
I'm not saying he couldn't figure it out, but there would be a hell of a learning curve.
Basically, it's like hiring someone to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your money, his time, and annoys the pig.
The industry has been it's own worst enemy. The glut of available RPG systems alone has caused issues by fracturing the market. Yeah, during the golden years overall sales stayed the same, but everybody (and every new body) got a smaller and smaller slice of the pie. And no one bothered to change how they did business.
And so D&D 3.x came out and the brand was saved. Things flourished, and glitter-covered unicorns pooped out rainbows of cash. And the indie market sprang up. That's where I got my start (right, Warden, ol' bean?). And things were pretty good. The market was more focused, but (and this is only one of the places I agree with Darcey) it was nearly all focused on a single product line, that being D&D.
WOTC plugged ahead updating nearly every product they ever made, and hundreds of smaller start-ups rode those coat tails. And then, for some reason, WOTC released 3.5...with all of the inherent incompatibilities with the entire product line they just released. Suddenly my expensive collection was junk, and I needed to buy it all again.
ReplyDeleteThen came the year they announced the upcoming release of 4th edition. And they did it on the Friday afternoon of GenCon. I was helping a friend run a booth that year. She lost her ass. That announcement, and it's timing, made for the quietest sales floor you have ever seen for the rest of that weekend. WOTC managed to kill off several of those smaller companies that had sprouted up to support WOTC's products.
And then came the 4e release, and its inherent incompatibilities with the entire 3.x line. And suddenly, my huger, much more expensive, repurchased collection was junk....again. At that point, I wasn't going to like 4th edition no matter what they did. They could have provided me copies on sheets of gold, help open on the immense bosoms of hot, nympho gamer gurls and I wouldn't have liked it....well maybe then, but ONLY then!
As it turned out it was so horrible that it didn't matter. But I digress...
So 4th ed was announced, and suddenly every third party player started working on a new system of their own, the rumors were flying that the OGL would be repealed, and everyone's product would suddenly need to be taken down from shelves (both physical and digital). A mild panic. And so the marketplace was once again glutted with huge numbers and volumes of competing systems. Another glut, another fragmentation of customer base.
Dancey bemoans the MMO market for its part in killing off the TRPG market, and yet he's heading development on yet another MMO! That's like Cartman saying "Screw you guys, I'm gonna make another MMO just to screw you all harder."
The market isn't really dead. You can't blame the internet and the availability of cheap broadband. And I fail to see the difference between the MMO market and the "T"RPG market; there is only the RPG market and it's various sub-groups. The RPG market has always been a niche market. The same can be said for the board game and strategy game markets. Some people actually occupy all three of these niches, as well as several of the sub-niches contained therein. People like me. But the RPG market is hard to pin down, hard to codify.
Let me put it to you this way; in my gaming/playtesting group I have myself, a business owner, a construction electrician, a security guard, a wiccan priestess, an auto-mechanic, and an artist. How the devil do you put that combination into your business calculators and make it work?
Just for poops and grins try to wrap your brains around this. I also play strategy games in a club, and that group is even more diverse: me, a business owner (a different one), a graphic designer, an IT tech, a college student, a construction laborer, a social worker, a sculptor of miniatures, a postal worker, a teacher, a second teacher (this one is retired), a chef, and a US Army corporal.
I have three kids as well. The older two have gotten pretty good at Yu-Gi-Oh, and now they are learning to play Warhammer 40,000. I've already gotten them to play simple role-playing games and they want to keep playing those as well. The youngest is too young yet, not even being 5...but I'll get him too!
Anyway, the market is diverse, that's the moral. But because of the social networking available today, the tailored advertising that the internet allows, the interested people can be marketed. Getting 5 or more people together for a RPG session may sometimes be a scheduling nightmare, but the internet can take care of that as well. Dancey says that VTT's are haphazard affairs and none of them work very well. SOLUTION: change that. If it's possible to use the internet and have a video conference call that spans seven or nine time zones complete with document handling and graphic displays, why is it not possible for gamers to have this?
ReplyDeleteTo me, nothing is better than sitting around a table with my friends, drinking soda, eating pizza and gummi bears (not at the same time), and rolling dice to see if our imaginary friends can do imaginary things to other imaginary people*. To me, that's comforting, and it's something I will do as often as I can get away with for the rest of my life. I am a permanent market bloc, and I go out of my way to widen the scope of that bloc.
To close this tirade down, ain't nothing wrong with this industry. It's just not remaining static. Nothing remains stable and absolute for long, especially in an era of unprecedented social/political/technological change.
* There are several other things that spring to mind, but they are not really relevant to this context so I will leave them to your own imaginations...
ReplyDeleteNow THAT's a reply. Total agreement when it comes to handling our particular genre as a business - I'd like to think it needs something a little different. So many insiders talk about running RPG production like a million-dollar enterprise yet bemoan Hasbro's "meddling" and forecast the majority of publishers existing with no more than one or two staff. The idea of a small mom-and-pop store operating online in a niche market makes perfect sense. There's a demand for these games, but not a flood. It seems to make more sense only small operations should be involved until your success warrants expansion.
ReplyDeleteI don't need to sell millions. I can happily operate off thousands should I be able to do so successfully. Internet marketing - not entirely viral, mind you - propels itself and word of mouth is the best review. What exists today can sustain smaller publisher to great health (look at Adamant and Open Design) and propel the future of this market into a consumer-friendly, self-sustainable pocket.
Sure, each of us has to fight for our share. That's capitalism, baby. It's no different now than any other time, but there are a lot more variables. If anything should sum up how I feel about these majoritive sentiments, it's that there's more room than ever for the little guy to try something new. Especially something a little more "underground" like TRPGs, which have not caught the same fire as comic book in this pro-geek culture boost.