A Meaningful "What If"

King of Old School · May 06, 2008, 05:16:11 PM

Quote from: Pierce InverarityThing is, my uneducated guess would be that the readership of scifi books has always been larger than that of fantasy books.

The buyership of fantasy books is (and has been for some time) larger than the buyership of SF books.

My knowledge of the sales figures is educated. My uneducated guess for the reasons why would be in large part that fantasy books have greater appeal to female readers than SF books for a variety of reasons; since women are statistically a larger market for book sales than men, the results are inevitable.

KoOS

Pierce Inverarity · May 06, 2008, 05:25:47 PM

Not doubting what you say, KoOS, and come to think of it the recent romantic fantasy genre makes it plausible, but do you have some figures and details for that? It would be really interesting to learn more about it.

Dwight · May 06, 2008, 05:26:56 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditThe original poster posited: what if TSR had expanded D&D to other possible kinds of settings (D&D Sci Fi, D&D Superheros, etc)? Would they have ended up having a much wider dominance of the market?

Meaningful? Besides, what the question should be, as you basically point out in your post, is "What if TSR put out a game for a future/modern era that didn't suck monkeyballs?" Shadowrun is a single setting modern/near future game that has kept going and going and keeping sustaining sales since 1989 for one simple reason. It didn't suck hard at doing modern. RIFTs is still going inspite of the author, that says something about it too.

TSR's offerings sucked monkeyballs. Hell D20 Modern still does. It's only once you leave the official path that you get some brilliant work that kills the suck.

Aos · May 06, 2008, 05:28:03 PM

Quote from: Pierce InverarityNot doubting what you say, KoOS, and come to think of it the recent romantic fantasy genre makes it plausible, but do you have some figures and details for that? It would be really interesting to learn more about it.

I'm fairly sure that he is right. I don't even think you need to bring Romantic Fantasy into it- Robert Jordan, frex, has a huge female fan base iirc.

jgants · May 06, 2008, 05:29:14 PM

I think fantasy just plain works better for the form of role-playing. Sort of how Dragon's Lair just worked better than Space Ace. There's just something simple about the fantasy of killing monsters and taking their stuff while exploring a dangerous dungeon that doesn't translate correctly into sci-fi.

There are certainly more popular genres than Fantasy - Action, Horror, Comedy, Romance... If it was just about popularity, we would have seen a lot more RPGs over the years that resembled Die Hard, Stephen King, Titanic, Gone with the Wind, or the M*A*S*H TV show.

Now, imagine where we'd be if instead of having wargaming for a hobby, Gygax was a big fan of Little House on the Prairie :eek:

Dwight · May 06, 2008, 05:31:16 PM

Quote from: jgantsI think fantasy just plain works better for the form of role-playing.

Can't compute...

QuoteThere's just something simple about the fantasy of killing monsters and taking their stuff while exploring a dangerous dungeon that doesn't translate correctly into sci-fi.

Need more FRUIT!

Well shit yeah. If you treat RPG limited to that....maybe.

Aos · May 06, 2008, 05:32:15 PM

Quote from: jgantsNow, imagine where we'd be if instead of having wargaming for a hobby, Gygax was a big fan of Little House on the Prairie :eek:

Scrap booking, obviously.

Haffrung · May 06, 2008, 06:02:22 PM

Quote from: jgantsI think fantasy just plain works better for the form of role-playing.

I agree. Sci-fi has to be much more integrated in terms of setting, science, and roles. I have a hard time imagining what a generic sci-fi game setting would even look like. Again, that's what made D&D so broadly appealing - it wasn't Middle Earth, or Hyperboria, or even Greyhawk. It was all of the above and none of the above. You could buy White Plume Mountain or Keep in the Borderlands off the shelf and run it one week, and the next week run your home-made dungeon. Would a sci-fi game really be that flexible? And could you make it simple enough that loads of 12 and 14 year olds who weren't gearheads would want to play?

J Arcane · May 06, 2008, 06:21:02 PM

Quote from: DwightCan't compute...

Need more FRUIT!

Well shit yeah. If you treat RPG limited to that....maybe.

The mechanics and gameplay of D&D are what made it a success over other games.

People like killing shit for loot and XP. There's currently 10 million people playing World of Warcraft. Millions of people all over the world have bought piles of Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest games. Diablo II sold 3 million copies in six months, and still sells even today.

It's the gameplay that made D&D big, not the setting. Gary could've been really into sci-fi wargaming, and we'd all be killing bug-eyed monsters in rock quarries.

And it's also the refusal to accept the value of D&D's gameplay paradigm that has buried so many of it's competitors over the years.

jhkim · May 06, 2008, 06:25:32 PM

Quote from: jgantsI think fantasy just plain works better for the form of role-playing. Sort of how Dragon's Lair just worked better than Space Ace. There's just something simple about the fantasy of killing monsters and taking their stuff while exploring a dangerous dungeon that doesn't translate correctly into sci-fi.

I think to there is very simple reason for difficulty in translating play. Dungeons have walls, and pseudo-medieval times have limited options for transportation and information. That makes it much easier to constrain the scope of play.

In modern-day or sci-fi games, characters can call anyone, go anywhere, or look up anything fairly easily. That makes it a lot harder to come up with a simple adventure structure that a new GM can come up with and run smoothly.

jgants · May 06, 2008, 06:40:48 PM

Quote from: HaffrungI agree. Sci-fi has to be much more integrated in terms of setting, science, and roles. I have a hard time imagining what a generic sci-fi game setting would even look like.

Yep, that's exactly what I was thinking - the trappings of a "fantasy world" are fairly consistent - medieval technology, kingdoms of different races, dangerous monsters, hazardous expanses of isolated wilderness, and ancient ruins with treasure.

The trappings of "science fiction" vary so wildly as have almost nothing in common.

Quote from: jhkimI think to there is very simple reason for difficulty in translating play. Dungeons have walls, and pseudo-medieval times have limited options for transportation and information. That makes it much easier to constrain the scope of play.

In modern-day or sci-fi games, characters can call anyone, go anywhere, or look up anything fairly easily. That makes it a lot harder to come up with a simple adventure structure that a new GM can come up with and run smoothly.

Oh, yes, this is definately a big part of it, too. Modern and Sci-Fi games are a great deal more complicated to run - particularly when questions about technology and things come up.

Dwight · May 06, 2008, 07:25:55 PM

*shoots jgants, takes his phat gold chains*

Quote from: jhkimI think to there is very simple reason for difficulty in translating play. Dungeons have walls, and pseudo-medieval times have limited options for transportation and information. That makes it much easier to constrain the scope of play.

In modern-day or sci-fi games, characters can call anyone, go anywhere, or look up anything fairly easily. That makes it a lot harder to come up with a simple adventure structure that a new GM can come up with and run smoothly.

You can't use the same railroading techniques, no. Now if originally there had been better developed ideas about running the game without the railroad of dungeon walls....

Killing things and taking their stuff works in lots of settings if you don't fall into the dungeon crutch thinking. Of course even computer games generally have moved beyond that (MMOGs aside).

J Arcane · May 06, 2008, 07:31:44 PM

QuoteKilling things and taking their stuff works in lots of settings if you don't fall into the dungeon crutch thinking. Of course even computer games generally have moved beyond that (MMOGs aside).

Do you even play video games at all?

Dwight · May 06, 2008, 07:35:12 PM

Quote from: J ArcaneDo you even play video games at all?

Yes.

J Arcane · May 06, 2008, 07:37:14 PM

Quote from: DwightYes.

Then I am generally rendered stunned by your ability to come to such an utterly fallacious conclusion.