Someone explain why the following are rpg.net darlings. Where does the conspiracy lie -- fanboy or social shilling?

EDIT: to further the conspiracy, why do they post about it on rpg.net rather than on the publisher's message boards when they have a post-purchase question about the game?

Reign
Exalted
Riddle of Steel
Burning Wheel
Dogs in the Vineyard
Spirit of the Century
Fate
Weapons of the Gods

I think that in the cases of Reign and Burning Wheel, the authors are fairly visible on the boards and so, i guess, build up a bit of word of mouth before their games are released.

Weapons of the Gods and before it, Nobilis, get a lot of their rub off of Borgstrom's tricky writing and the production values of the books.

Before we get too far into this thread, I'd like to note that we have our favorite games around here, some of which enjoy undue celebrity for a few shining moments.  Iron Gauntlets was a bit of a Darling around here at one point.  Mercenaries, Spies, & Private Eyes could be going that way as well.

Quote from: jrientsBefore we get too far into this thread, I'd like to note that we have our favorite games around here, some of which enjoy undue celebrity for a few shining moments.  Iron Gauntlets was a bit of a Darling around here at one point.  Mercenaries, Spies, & Private Eyes could be going that way as well.

We're talking maybe an instant compared to a year at rpg.net. Can't really compare them as this place IMO has far more individuality, which is a good thing.

Spirit of the Century and Fate became darlings, I think, due to the enthusiasm of the creators and the Aspect mechanics.  The creators are very upbeat about their game design, and they engage in a lively debate about the merits and potential flaws in what they've done.  The Aspect mechanics added to the Fudge engine provide Forge-esque "narrative play" while the rest of the system is solidly "sim".  Aspects also get away from the rigid split of non-attribute character traits into Merits and Flaws; the use of Fate points and Aspect compulsion turn any "merit" or "flaw" into an advantage or disadvantage based on the situation.  

   Also, the book itself is gorgeous and conveys a wild enthusiasm for playing pulp action.  It may be more neo-pulp than what was in the original genre, but I certainly had an itch to face off against Gorilla Khan after finishing.

I think it would be interesting if we could get some statistics about how many actual fans/posters those darlings have. Enthusiastic fans with lots of free time will be able to create a rather unrealistic image.

Quote from: jrientsIron Gauntlets was a bit of a Darling around here at one point.  Mercenaries, Spies, & Private Eyes could be going that way as well.

Guilty, both counts.  And don't forget your, uh, uh, your Traveller and that crazy "Critical Encounters" game you kids play in the garage.  You and your friends are gonna hafta start bringing your own Mountain Dews, Jeffrey.

It's a social phenomenon that has little or nothing to do with the actual quality of the games.  Most of the time a game builds to darling status before it's even released and anyone has actually read it.  Look at what happened with Weapons of the gods and Secret of Zir'An.

Somebody finds the game, shills it on the board in as positive and overenthusiastic a manner as possible, and suddenly it's the It Thing, and actually daring to suggest it's anything less than perfect is immediately branded as trolling.  The board gets flooded with glowing posts about it, often that clearly show a complete blindness to even the idea that the game is less than perfect.

If the game hits market and turns out to be really, really bad, then generally it dies off within a week, and everyone fidgets nervously when it's brought up.

Otherwise, it devours the threads for a few months, then magically disappears.  Some months later someone will bring it up, but the enthusiasm has since dulled, and you can often start weeding out the ones who've actually played it because suddenly the commentary isn't all-praise-all-the-time.  

Some of them have lasting effects, games you still can't have an actual intelligent or useful conversation about, like Transhuman Space, which for all the praise it gets, I've still yet to see a single fucking post about there that suggest what you would actually PLAY.  Yeah, I get that you can play a cyborg catgirl with 300 kinds of neural implants, but what does she actually DO?  

Mostly though, it's only Exalted that continues to last.  And I think that's more to do with all the supplement wanking that goes on than anything, as most of the conversation seems to be endless arguments about setting canon.  The rest are just fantastic illustrations of why powergaming will always sell . . .

OK, so what's the spark that makes people want to start shilling before the game has even been released? How are they brainwashed?

Quote from: pigames.netSomeone explain why the following are rpg.net darlings.

Because most of the avid posters at RPGnet are people who like the idea of gaming but don't do much actual gaming? That's just a hunch.

Many of the games highly touted at RPGnet are interesting reads and are loaded with interesting concepts, but the ideas and concepts aren't necessarily transferable to the game table.
Take Spirit of the Century, for example. It's a great game filled with great ideas, especially the Aspects stuff. Unfortunately, I can't see either of my regular playing groups playing it. Why? Because the whole idea of the Aspects requires massive cooperation (and compromise) between the players. Inevitably, arguements would arise and games would degenerate into lengthy debates. I could probably get away with a one-shot or two, but then they'd exploit the system and there'd be shouting matches.

Quote from: pigames.netOK, so what's the spark that makes people want to start shilling before the game has even been released? How are they brainwashed?

It's just the clique snowball effect is all.  I wouldn't call it "brainwashing", that's silly, and suggests you're not really addressing this conversation in good faith.

It's just a matter of the right people praising it, combined with the universally positive nature of that praise, most of which often stems more from a lack of information than anything else, whether it's not even having read the book, not having read the book completely or having really considered how it works together as a whole, or not having palyed the game.  Instead they latch on to certain "cool concepts" and tend to be blind to the rest of the system, because it's really as much about joining the herd as it is about the actual game.

Have you ever bought a new game, and at first just from a glance through, you were really excited about the game, but then as you read it, the more you started to notice the flaws in it, or you finished reading it and you jsut didnt' know what to do with it?  Gamma World 4th was like this for me, I was initially very excited by the concept, the character system was cool, and the combat was a nice proto-d20, and then it hits the labyrinthine item ideintification and the wierd, counterintuitive skill system, and suddenly I wasn't so excited anymore.

Basically with RPGnet is that it's a matter of someone posting that initial excitement, everybody else getting caught up on it, and it becomes such a wave of ppositivity that the latter phase of actual honest, complete analysis never really occurs.

I don't think there's a single trigger that activates the brainwashing. Rpg.net isn't Telefon. But some ideas gamers like are: cooperative play requiring less GM homework (SotC), involved mechanics that integrate the story (DitV), robust combat systems that don't require minis or grids or whatnot (BW), and, of course, the Real Ultimate Power (Exalted). I think games that catch fire over there are newish, usually offering something appealing to enough people to get a little buzz.

Darlings here seem to be a little grittier than the Real Ultimate Power games. They tend to be old games with good mechanics. There may be a higher percentage of older, more grognardy gamers here. I don't know.

That doesn't explain why it is discussed at length after purchase at rpg.net when it could just as easily be discussed at the appropriate publisher's message board, where the question can be directly answered with the appropriate authority. That suggests to me that most post-purchase questions are shilling.

Quote from: pigames.netThat doesn't explain why it is discussed at length after purchase at rpg.net when it could just as easily be discussed at the appropriate publisher's message board, where the question can be directly answered with the appropriate authority. That suggests to me that most post-purchase questions are shilling.

I could ask the same question about any game, discussed on any non-manufacturer forum.  Are you really wanting to have a conversation here, or are you making a vain attempt at mockery?

Quote from: J ArcaneI could ask the same question about any game, discussed on any non-manufacturer forum.  Are you really wanting to have a conversation here, or are you making a vain attempt at mockery?

What the hell is your problem? I'm asking the questions that no one seems to want to ask, yet everyone suspects that it occurs. What have you done that you are being defensive about it?