Quote from: jgantsThey may not do that for you.  I know they don't do that for me.  But they do for a lot of gamers.  I have seen people who completely abandon PnP for WoW.  It's not just an urban legend, it does occasionally happen.

And I saw them abandon rpgs for MtG and girlfriends and recall this same conversation about them (yes, even girlfriends- it was early in the hobby's history). Sure people left, but people came- the hobby lived and even had growth cycles afterwards.

There is a lot of Been There Done That.

Could this time be different? Sure, everything dies.

Is it different this time? I see no hard data indicating that it is, Dancey provided none to me (and if he had, I would have made a very different post). My own knowledge of what drives MMORPGs and PnP play says that it's unlikely.

So until something changes, I'm sticking with this: "Dancey goes Forge bat nuts. Film at 11".

Quote from: gleichmanAnd I saw them abandon rpgs for MtG and girlfriends and recall this same conversation about them (yes, even girlfriends- it was early in the hobby's history). Sure people left, but people came- the hobby lived and even had growth cycles afterwards.

There is a lot of Been There Done That.

Could this time be different? Sure, everything dies.

Is it different this time? I see no hard data indicating that it is, Dancey provided none to me (and if he had, I would have made a very different post). My own knowledge of what drives MMORPGs and PnP plays says that it's unlikely.

So until something changes, I'm sticking with this: "Dancey goes Forge bat nuts. Film at 11".

See, MtG is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about.  MtG was, in fact, a huge threat to the industry for the very same reason as WoW.  A lot of people abandoned RPGs in favor of CCGs.  Not everyone, but enough people to cause some real problems.

Or did you miss the part in the mid/late 90's when game stores went out of business in droves and half of the industry died off?  Remember all those mid-tier companies we used to have?

Sure, D20 gave to a new boom cycle that picked things back up again, to a degree; but the industry is still a shade of its former self.

I'm not saying Dancey is right about the scope of the problem, just that it could be a really serious problem in the future (on the level of CCGs or worse).

Quote from: jgantsOr did you miss the part in the mid/late 90's when game stores went out of business in droves and half of the industry died off?  Remember all those mid-tier companies we used to have?

I recall it, and I recall why (it wasn't for the reasons you seem to believe).

Quote from: cmagounOf course, the argument then becomes that since the power gamers and thinkers are gone, we should make different games because the story gamers are not being served by D&D even though the vast majority play D&D. This is the exact same argument that has been bandied about for the better part of a decade, isn't it? "You story gamers are playing the wrong game and you have no idea you are playing the wrong game. If I could just get you to understand that my game is the right game, you would finally start having fun. What? You are having fun playing the wrong game? No, you aren't."

Though Mr. Gleichman and I choose to highlight different portions of the text, I agree that this is a brilliant post.

Thanks cmagoun.

Quote from: gleichmanI recall it, and I recall why (it wasn't for the reasons you seem to believe).

I'm not saying CCGs were the sole reason for all the problems, but they were a contributing factor.  They didn't cause the bad financial situations, but they did exacerbate them.

The same as now.  If WoW magically disappeared, the industry would still have issues.  But WoW is certainly exacerbating the situation.

This time is a bit different, of course, since 95% of the industry is held by two larger corporations that aren't focused on RPGs.  Whether that will make things better (financial stability to ride out rough periods) or worse (demands for profit results) remains to be seen.

Quote from: gleichmanThis is where we break company, for I lived through those times and remember them rather well.

Those games were widely accepted. New exciting ones even made the news. More people played them, including many that played rpgs, and vastly more money was spent on them. An almost exact match for MMORPGs of today in fact.

So no, I don't see a more direct compete here. I see different tastes picking and selecting different hobbies like I've always seen. Which is exactly what the two models would suggest.

I may not have expressed myself clearly, so I'd like to try again to make sure we're really disagreeing.

What I meant was that Defender et. al. competed with RPGs purely on a time/money level: both were "things to do" in the broad realm that included bug collecting, model rocketry, etc. Only later, with the advent of increasingly sophisticated, graphically attractive, and versatile RPG/MMO games (BTW I'm talking about the change from say Temple of Apshai or even Rogue to a modern-day MMO) do I think you start to see increased competition, not just for warm bodies in general, but specifically for an audience that's "in it" for many of the same things that were previously available only through tabletop RPGs.

Again, I think this is a matter of degree, and I'm not sure where the needle points. If you really think that the competition between MMOs and PnP games isn't significantly greater than between MMOs and building plastic models--let's just say I'm skeptical but I don't discount the idea out of hand.

Quote from: gleichmanI recall it, and I recall why (it wasn't for the reasons you seem to believe).

I'm interested in seeing your take on this. (Or a link to an earlier discussion.)

Quote from: Elliot WilenAgain, I think this is a matter of degree, and I'm not sure where the needle points. If you really think that the competition between MMOs and PnP games isn't significantly greater than between MMOs and building plastic models--let's just say I'm skeptical but I don't discount the idea out of hand.

Given Bartle's and WotC's models for why people play their respective games, I going to have to say that it's more akin to MMO and plastic models than not. They are just too different IMO.

I do think there is some overlap, but I don't consider it significant (i.e. changes and/or wrecks the hobby) at this time and with the information that I have.

I am open to changing my view on it, but it's going to take some data of equal standing to open that door.

Quote from: Elliot WilenI'm interested in seeing your take on this. (Or a link to an earlier discussion.)

I don't have link as I wasn't directly involved. So I'm remembering old articles and conversations with store owners from a decade ago to make this post.

With that in mind, it was my understanding that the CCG boom including speculation on card prices was very much akin to the dot.com boom. Lots of new people started coming to game stores with lots of money to be spent. This resulted in overbuying of stock and given individual card value- speculation on said stock.

When the bubble broke, stores went down in flames due to over investment in product that was no longer moving fast enough- until things reached a new market level.

RPGs were affected indirectly in a number of ways. The CCG boom did take players away because of general time/money limits but not a significant number in and of itself. Game Store support for rpgs dropped as their resources turned to the more profitable (at first) CCG market, and lastly when the bubble popped- the impact was on the same retail supply chain that serviced rpgs.

But the rpg hobby rebounded, CCGs went to their proper market niche (still bigger than rpgs last I checked), and now the whole issue is a distant memory.

Quote from: gleichmanGiven Bartle's and WotC's models for why people play their respective games, I going to have to say that it's more akin to MMO and plastic models than not. They are just too different IMO.

I do think there is some overlap, but I don't consider it significant (i.e. changes and/or wrecks the hobby) at this time and with the information that I have.

I am open to changing my view on it, but it's going to take some data of equal standing to open that door.

Let me see if I can take this from another angle to see if I'm getting the gist of it.

There are X million WoW players not because they canibalized RPG's, but because the market for that product is a much, much larger market - it, by it's very nature, grabbed all sorts of people that would never play RPG's. There will, of course, be people who leave PnP RPG's for WoW et al, but it's no more than left for Mario Brothers. Is that right?

I wonder, did skateboard manufacturers worry when tony Hawk put out an XBox game?  It's probably not a great example, and I'm not trying to be snarky. In a weird way, it could just show how niche the RPG hobby is that it's not threatened by WoW, if you take that view...

In your opinion, at what point will an MMO be a significant threat? Ever?  Is there some technology advancement that you could see occurring that would make it direct competition?

One thing that isn't brought up enough here is that with MMO's being so incredibly huge, there's actually a big opportunity for fun RPGs to attract a whole new pool of players, in the right social circumstances.

Especially those who like MMOs OK but would like to focus more on roleplaying, creative problem-solving, etc. I'm sure there are a lot of those.

What I'm suggesting is that even if there's an RPG -> MMO drain, it may not be all bad news. If the total number of gamers grows by 100x and we get just 2% of those over time from drift back the other way, we double the number of RPG players.

Quote from: gleichmanI don't have link as I wasn't directly involved. So I'm remembering old articles and conversations with store owners from a decade ago to make this post.

Thanks, that makes a great deal of sense. It still leaves me wondering why I no longer get to play [my favorite game] as much as I used to, but even discounting personal factors there's a plethora of general changes in leisure activities that can help explain the change before resorting to CCGs.

Quote from: James J SkachThere are X million WoW players not because they canibalized RPG's, but because the market for that product is a much, much larger market - it, by it's very nature, grabbed all sorts of people that would never play RPG's. There will, of course, be people who leave PnP RPG's for WoW et al, but it's no more than left for Mario Brothers. Is that right?

That's my take on it.

Quote from: James J SkachIn your opinion, at what point will an MMO be a significant threat? Ever?  Is there some technology advancement that you could see occurring that would make it direct competition?

Interesting question that. Sort of a reverse take on Dancey's goal.

If one goes over the model provided by WotC, one could play with the key requirements provided there and match them against Bartle's model to see where conflicts occur, and what they have in common. It would be a fun exercise I think.


Bartles seemed of the opinion (I may be putting words in his mouth here, but it is the impression I got) that a MMORPG couldn't service the needs of a PnP player without giving up key elements of what made it an MMORPG in the first place. And I can't say that I disagree with him, servicing Killers for example seems counter to needs of most PnP Groups as does giving up storyline and system control.

My own idea was a MMORPG where most of the game was 'instanced' for a defined group or guild. This allows you to play with who you want. Added to the ability to allow different storylines depending upon in-game choices (and perhaps campaign starting options) and one might get something close- but that's not a MMORPG but is instead more of multi-player computer rpg.

Some time back, I watched the launch of Neverwinter Nights with some interest, but that gets into what is in effect a virtual desktop. That product however didn't serve as it was too difficult to use, and too limited in rule set. Further developments along those lines may be of interest. But again, not a MMORPG.

I'd be interesting in hearing other people's takes on your question.

Quote from: Elliot WilenThe only thing IMO that would give hope to Dancey's conjecture is the "bandwagon effect" of "network externalities".

Which is probably why he'd prefer to use D&D as the platform for his evil plans.  He could hope to drag the D&D player base into his brave new world.  But then he's forgetting the 2e lesson that he talked about while explaining why 3e was designed the way it was.  If you take things away from people that they like, they'll stay with what they have or jump ship.

Quote from: Elliot WilenIn short I predict that without an "unfocused" D&D to hold things together, you're likely to end up with two even smaller niches (because the internal synergies aren't as strong with smaller audiences) of "simulationists" and "storytellers".

Correct.  What Dancey probably doesn't realize (and most story game advocates don't seem to get it) is that "simulationist" role-players who play for the experience of being their characters not only don't get a lot out of story games but the sort of fiddly player-level mechanics that he's been talking about actually ruin the game for them.  So he winds up alienating a group at least as large as the story gamers by going in that direction.

Quote from: jgantsSee, MtG is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about.  MtG was, in fact, a huge threat to the industry for the very same reason as WoW.  A lot of people abandoned RPGs in favor of CCGs.  Not everyone, but enough people to cause some real problems.

Or did you miss the part in the mid/late 90's when game stores went out of business in droves and half of the industry died off?

No, I remember games stores managing to stay in business solely because of the money they were making on CCGs and would have gone under if it wasn't for M:tG.

After all RPGs and CCGs were both sold in the same store, one doing well at the others expense didn't effect the store at all, the fact CCGs did so well actually helped the store, and folks that came in just because of the CCGs were at least exposed to RPGs.

MMORPGs are likely to be a bigger problem, because they aren't sold in the same place. So money spent on a MMORPG isn't helping a gaming store at all, and customers buying MMORPGs aren't being exposed to traditional RPGs at all.

Still I think Ryan is wrong on his solution, giving up on nearly a quarter of your traditional market (Powergamers) just because you expect them to be more attracted to MMORPGs is hardly a strategy to save the industry.

I'd be interested to know if his five gamer model from WotC research data ever linked gamer types to spending patterns, because I wouldn't be surprised if the powergamers turned out to be the ones that bought the most rulebooks. After all the story people can probably come up with their own fluff if they are spending hours on character backgrounds. If so giving up on that 22% would be even more foolish.