"Do we need professionally made war games and rpgs anymore?" Topic

Once people paid for their games, they became professionals. They hired other fans, players and homebrewers to write for them. They became professionals. Some other fans then went to college for game design and number theory. They became professionals.

That's good, because amateur games can seriously blow. See FATAL. That's not to say professionally done games can't blow. I myself bought several Rifts books if my younger days. Oh, the folly of youth.

There must be something wrong with me because I love Striker. I spent many hours creating vehicles using the rules. However, I also like simplicity and that is why I have decided that next year I am going to do an old school project with Charge/The Wargame (going back to where I started). 25mm Minifigs, single pose figure big units, block painted and gloss varnished. Just for fun.

There seems to be some type of idealized notion about TSR and D&D being some type of eternal cottage industry. This may offer some clarity:

link

The gaming industry is like any other: You need big companies to sustain the market (and they will not innovate …); you need small companies to bring new exciting products to the market (they bring the new stuff to attention); and you need amateurs, the underground scene, hobbyists, whatever you want to call it, to play their roles as inventors, thinkers, avant-garde designers …

By nature, these 3 forces work for different customer bases. Big companies (GW, WOTC, Flames of War) sell products to mainstream people, the followers who are looking for a hobby, but don't care where it came from or what the theoretical underpinnings are. These are the gamers that migrate easily to something else: computer games, girls, whatever.

Small companies cater for the connoisseur market. That market will never be big (maybe 10& to 20% of the entire market in terms of sales). But these small companies might grow into a big company if they hit the right note (e.g. WOTC in the early nineties with MTG, or GW in the eighties with Warhammer). In econmic parlance these companies sell product to 'early adopters'. These are the gamers that probably will be gamers for the rest of their lives. They started with big-company products, and after a couple of years are looking for something better – something that is better than the mass products.

The avant-garde scene (blogs, online rulesets, house-made stuff, the things that show up in local gaming groups, at conventions …) work for the fanatical and dedicated. People who are more interested in developing and defining the hobby, rather than consuming the hobby. Featherstone & Grant in the 60s were definitely in this latter group. Lots of the innovative gaming mechanics you find online are as well.

Hexxenhammer "But it wasn't free to buy. That's what I'm getting at and explaining it badly. If it had stayed a little homebrewed ruleset, there would be 6 retired guys in Wisconsin that played RPG's and the world would be a poorer place. They started a company and got people to buy it. With money. This created an industry. I'm not much of a capitalist, but development and improvement doesn't happen unless people shell out some cash."

And I agree with you, however, that applies to the 1970s, not today. I'm not asking whether professionally made games were a necessity back then, but today. Back then, they certainly were, at least as much as this stuff could ever be considered a necessity.

Hexxenhammer "…amateur games can seriously blow. See FATAL. That's not to say professionally done games can't blow. I myself bought several Rifts books if my younger days. Oh, the folly of youth."

And again, I agree. However, if I download FATAL and find out that it was written by a crass, misogynistic lunatic, with the push of a couple of buttons, the whole thing is off to the recycle bin, and I am out nothing more than a few minutes of my time. Not so if I buy Rifts (or pick your favorite poisonous professionally made game).

I'm not asking whether professionally made games were a necessity back then, but today.

I know, and my answer is still yes. Phil Dutre said it best.

And I don't have a lot of sympathy for anyone who buys a bad set of rules these days. Any company worth buying from will have previews to download if not free "lite" versions and within days of it being released there will be dozens of reviews available, plus innumerable threads on the various related forums. I'd played 4th edition D&D twice before the books ever came out based on what Wizards had released beforehand as previews. And some people go as far as to pull a whole book off of a file sharing site to read before they decide to buy a hardcopy. I don't condone it, but people do it.

Just to take a stroll down memory lane…I remember a game store I would beg my mom to take me to when we were in Fargo. It was huge and had everything. Problem was, the owner shrink-wrapped EVERY BOOK IN THE STORE. You could not browse except by reading the back of the book. If I was really lucky I had MAYBE seen an ad or an article for it in one of my few copies of Dragon magazine. I believe that's how I ended up with a copy of Ninjas and Superspies.

To be fair, if you buy a professionally designed game system sight-unseen, and you don't like it, you deserve what you get. With the number of reviews out there, and even coming here (or to Enworld) and asking the appropriate questions about how a game is/plays will help prevent getting a stinker…

Damon.

Garand "To be fair, if you buy a professionally designed game system sight-unseen, and you don't like it, you deserve what you get."

Nah. A review only tells me whether the reviewer liked it. OD&D consistently got the worst reviews for any rpg that I know of, and it remains my favorite.

I agree wholeheartedly with Phil Dutre. It takes big companies, small companies and amateurs to make a market.

D&D was created by Gygax, Arneson, et al., a long time before most of the WOTC folks were even born, and was done as a set of homebrew rules that these guys just happened to market.

Interesting revision of history, that statement. There was a ton of work done to print, find distribution and exhibit the game.

Could we all game with just "homebrew" rules? Sure. Is the hobby richer for having big companies, small companies and amateurs offer us an abundance of choices? You betcha. Pick your poison. If you don't want to spend money or support "official" genres, don't. But the support of the big companies is why there is such a community of gamers today. Without it, even with the internet and social media, I don't think all of us would have "common ground" to find each other.

Nah. A review only tells me whether the reviewer liked it.

But we don't just have to go on reviews anymore. Just speaking for D&D since I've kept up with it, for about ten years they have produced online previews of every book they've released. There is no possible way you could not know the quality of one of their books before you bought it. 4th ed had many "design diaries" as well. Articles written by the game designers about specific mechanics that they were writing. If you couldn't figure out whether it was something you'd like from that wealth of information, there's no help for you.

Hexxenhammer "If you couldn't figure out whether it was something you'd like from that wealth of information, there's no help for you."

Well, there's no help for me, I guess. I'll just continue stumbling through my ignorant, lousy, unplayable free games, and let the cognoscenti continue to play the really good, expensive stuff.

Based on comments with members of the TSR group during seminars at various conventions, they were initially approached by a major game company in the late 1970s or early 1980s. Several reasons for a lack of agreement included the normal money issues.

The interest died suddenly after TSR on their own got D&D into popular large chain stores but had them pulled after a few months due to complaints by conservative customers who did not like the products theme..

Well, there's no help for me, I guess. I'll just continue stumbling through my ignorant, lousy, unplayable free games, and let the cognoscenti continue to play the really good, expensive stuff.

Well, now I know you're just ing. I never claimed any of that. I claimed that there was good and bad of both, and that they complimented each other. Feel superior with your free rules, I'll continue to play the mass-produced rules I like and write rules (and give them away) for games I can't find elsewhere.

Hexxenhammer "Well, now I know you're just trolling."

Oh, I'm just playing around, hence the "wink*. No need to get angry. It's all good.

I'm playing Labyrinth Lord right now… online, with an old friend who was in my BD&D high school group back in 1981.

But in RL it's D&D 4E country where I live. I won't touch 4E because it's just not D&D as I know it any more. But would I touch it if I didn't have an alternative?

Would you rather play Flames of War, or not play at all? Personally, I would. OTOH, I wouldn't play 40K.

Just where you draw the line is subjective.

"Just where you draw the line is subjective."

Probably the truest statement yet in this discussion.

Do we need professionally made…

If "We" is the gaming community as a whole…
…then of course we do! The hobby will not survive without fresh infusions of hobbyists who come primarily through the gateway drugs and pre-made subcultures of WH, AD@D, Clix, FoW etc. They come, they game, and if they want to stick around, many of them will make their way into other games.

If "We" is the folks over here at TMP…
… at this point in history, probably not. Most of us could have a fine time with the free rulesets and settings that are available, and are competent enough to modify to fit.

However, most of us do use at least some professionally produced material because the many reasons other folks have already listed.

Note that you could exchange the term "professionaly made" for "made by the big companies" and my asessment would be roughly the same.

I'm not much of a capitalist, but development and improvement doesn't happen unless people shell out some cash.

The crux of the question is – was the development an improvement ? The more D&D developped the worse it got. And please don't accuse me of trying to keep the cool (cool – RPG's ? oh ok if you insist) stuff to a clique, there were a lot of players in 1978 – probably the peak of activity, and with a paucity of developed material from TSR and others it was down to the DM to develop his/her own stuff. Imagination. The USP of the game – you had to use your imagination.

I'd guess D&D was developed as far as it needed to be at the release of the 3 AD&D books, and before the Modules started pouring out. Beyond that it's been years of trying to reinvent the wheel and bury the system in tonnes (you know, probably literally) of totally unneccessary stuff to the detriment of the original concept.

20thmaine "The more D&D developped the worse it got. "

Them's my feelings. The more it took on the characteristics of an industry (keep 'em buying more by leaving huge gaps in the rules, swamp the market with campaigns and unnecessary player "aids", re-vamp the whole system every five years, etc.) the less enjoyable it became. I have more fun with a free 0D&D clone and a home made campaign than I ever did with 3.5 and its million or so volumes.

Beyond that it's been years of trying to reinvent the wheel and bury the system in tonnes (you know, probably literally) of totally unneccessary stuff to the detriment of the original concept.

And this started as soon as they published their second book in the 70's. EVERY version was buried in massive amounts of supplements. Count the box sets for 1st edition. Count the "kit" books and even more campaign settings for 2nd edition. If you think it's a new phenomena, you're a .

Have you ever seen a version these questions:
what rules can I use for_____?
I need rules for 28mm/6mm/735mm, what can I use?

Until the day that people figure out they aren't bound by the rules they buy, they will need to buy rules to play.
If that made no sense to you, you're buying rules.

It's a good thing.

Beyond that it's been years of trying to reinvent the wheel and bury the system in tonnes (you know, probably literally) of totally unneccessary stuff to the detriment of the original concept.

And this started as soon as they published their second book in the 70's. EVERY version was buried in massive amounts of supplements. Count the box sets for 1st edition. Count the "kit" books and even more campaign settings for 2nd edition. If you think it's a new phenomena, you're a .

Yeah, hexxenhammer, I guess I would be if I hadn't put :
"I'd guess D&D was developed as far as it needed to be at the release of the 3 AD&D books, and before the Modules started pouring out. " before the sentence you chose to highlight. Nothing like being selective, eh ?

You do seem to have missed the point of my post, perhaps you should give reading it another try, and this time read it slower so you understand.

Oh, and then actually cast your mind back to 1978 (you do remember 1978 don't you ? I assume so as you speak so authoritively of the gaming scene back then) and compare it to today and if you still think there was as much stuff being churned out for RPGs then as now then your memory is seriously at fault.

I'll admit I'm a bit confused by your talk of a second book – D&D was originally 3 books in a little box with a set of dice. There were some supplements thereafter, A5 pamphlets running to ~60 pages each. They didn't really have books until AD&D came along. But you know that, which is what makes your post confusing.

Having more options is always better than having less options

That being said, I think we are in a period where, due to the internet and the ease of self-publishing, the indie market is coming in full force.

"Do we need professionally made war games and rpgs anymore?"

Need?…Well…do we need to continue to have 50,000 penis enhancement compensation devices built and offered for sale each year?
(aka: Corvettes and other sports cars…)…
Do we need to have a 40 gig IPOD instead of a 20 gig IPOD?
Do we need to have Version 18.19.117 update of "Guitar Hero", (Bobby Vintons Greatest Hits), for our Super Duper video game?
Do we need to have another "Reality TV series", or another spinoof of LA Law, or eppy of "Dancing with the Stars?"

There's a big difference between want and need…

"I think what Inquisitor Thaken is getting at is : Do we need the BIG companies (GW, White Wolf, WotC, Perry's, etc…) for rules and minis, or just stick to the littler companies (Black Scorpion, Flagship Games, Paradigm Press, Two Fat Lardies, THW, etc…) for all of our gaming needs?
"

And don't forget, MOST, (if not all) of the BIG companies started off as Little Companies at one time or another. And honestly? Sometimes the big companies DO do things that help overall and occassionally force smaller companies to increase their product.
I've used the argument of Battlefront Minis vs QRF minis for a while now. Look at the Packaging and appearance vs the overall marketibility. Now..which product do you see more of on racks at LGS's, BF blisters or QRF bags (which are occassionally scuffed, coded incorrectly, or have the bottom splitting open and losing small fiddly parts?)…
I'm not knocking QRF stuff, (I've gone into this argument before in the past here), but honestly? If you want to sell more, and be more successful, sometimes you have to follow the business model set by GW or BF, etc…
A few years back I made a post called "GW Hatred", and I asked why people hate Games Workshop?…I can say the same thing about BF. I don't hate BF. I love their stuff. I don't hate FoW, it just really doesn't do anything for me…There's probably a better ruleset WWII out there to my liking, (but then again, I rarely do WWII so I wouldn't know).
And as for needing published modules, campaign supplements etc. Yes I think we do need it. Believe it or not there are GM's and DM's out there that A: Do not have the time to develop a complete adventure, or campaign world, or B: While able to run a small game quite well, simply cannot put a "big stage" together, or get horribly overwhelmed by the idea of developing "The Kingdom of Boosania", as a campaign setting…They simply can't do it.

So yes…I think we need them…

Yes, it's good to have them despite the downsides. If it wasn't for D&D as a kid I wouldn't have been historical wargaming for the last 20 years. And what's more, I'm now into Scifi using 40k figures (but not 40k rules!), as it is what makes my 8 year old tick.

Do we need to have a 40 gig IPOD instead of a 20 gig IPOD?

Yes, we do, and actually 40 gig is really a bit on the small size – only take about 4,000 songs, that's only ~400 albums. If you happen to like classical music then it going to be ~300 CDs.

Otherwise – take your point entireley !