I feel like most non-licensed rpgs are written as if they're licensed rpgs. But somehow worse, because the rpg doubles as the source material's one-track plot. None of the runner ups to D&D have more than one campaign setting (aside from GURPS, obviously) and for the most part these campaign settings function more as straightjackets than toolboxes. It's obvious from the prevalence of metaplots and irrelevant repetitive lore bloat that the writers actually want to write novels and comics rather than games. The worst manifestation of this is the fandom inquisition that attacks you for not treating the lore as sacrosanct, even though it's a game where the only limit in your imagination. These fandoms don't want to play games, they want to stroke the writer's ego.

I've been working on a blog dedicated to Chaosium's old dead Nephilim game and I ran smack dab into this while researching the original French version. Here's a summary of the background that you can auto-translate using any modern browser. Notice how it is completely devoted to incredibly bizarre-sounding events that are going to be completely irrelevant to actual gameplay and takes all the fun out of investigating mysteries or GM's creativity by spelling everything out for you without any room for variation? That's what basically all long-running ttrpgs are like now. You're not expected to actually play them, you're expected to read the books for the lore and then go online to stroke the writer's ego with other sycophants.

Words cannot express how stupid and unfun I think this is. If writers want to make a passive media universe, then go do that. Publishing it under the guise of a ttrpg setting is dishonest and has only contributed to the ruination of this hobby.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 02, 2023, 12:40:16 AM
Hey, know that show/movie/book you really like? Well here's  pre-made RPG of it, so you can play in the universe. You don't need to know how to adapt another system to run the setting, it's all done for you. There are hopefully plenty of bad guys and adventures ready to go, just jump in!

I think some of you guys forget that inexperienced gamers play too. Not many people own generic games they use to hack settings, they just buy something designed to emulate the setting (for better or worse.)

While any game can be twisted for anti-gamer purposes, licensed materials are readily leveraged for more confirmation bias while destroying the draw of the IP. You do make a fair point about new players, but I'd push harder for derivative/alternative products that don't add weight to bent knees. Although if new players only means more wokies, I'd rather no new players to let the entire big industry die off with a whimper.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 01, 2023, 06:35:42 PMI no longer buy/play in licensed RPGs because I want to be The Hero, not a hero. So I rather have a more generic Space Opera, S&W, S&P, etc. to run/play. The extra rare exception to that rule is when I want to mine it for ideas, monsters, etc for my games.

This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But the other main issue is how most licensed setting just don't have enough depth. Last year an Alien RPG came out. It looked great and I'm sure the mechanics where decent, but how many times can you be trapped on a space ship with an alien before it gets old? And if you do too much beyond the scope of the source materials, then you lose the advantage you have over a generic game.

There's also the fact that, thanks to wikipedia, nobody needs to buy a licensed source book anymore to get the background material.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 01, 2023, 06:35:42 PMI no longer buy/play in licensed RPGs because I want to be The Hero, not a hero. So I rather have a more generic Space Opera, S&W, S&P, etc. to run/play. The extra rare exception to that rule is when I want to mine it for ideas, monsters, etc for my games.

This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But the other main issue is how most licensed setting just don't have enough depth. Last year an Alien RPG came out. It looked great and I'm sure the mechanics where decent, but how many times can you be trapped on a space ship with an alien before it gets old? And if you do too much beyond the scope of the source materials, then you lose the advantage you have over a generic game.

There's also the fact that, thanks to wikipedia, nobody needs to buy a licensed source book anymore to get the background material.

TBF, in the case of Star Wars you could choose to play AFTER the fall of the Empire. If you don't know/care much about the EU then it's a fair playground where conflicts can provide ample opportunities to be The Hero.

Say you're playing in an Imperial world after the emperor's death, what did the Imperial goons do? Probably set themselves as petty tyrants, there's your chance to shine, liberating one world of the Imperial goons. Then another, and another, etc.

Other settings lack this scope, take the Hyborian Age, what do you do? Play as a "totally not Conan" Cimmerian and conquer another kingdom instead of Aquilonia I guess?

Better to build a setting that resembles the Hyborian Age but without the baggage of the novels/movies/etc. now YOU can be The Hero with zero canon to stand in your way.

Same goes for Barsoom, which is why my Sword & Planet takes place in Venus and will include tools to generate other worlds, even Mars but different from what ERB did. So YOU can unleash your imagination as the GM or become The Hero as a player.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But why? Why does Luke have to kill the Emperor? And, an even broader question, why does that matter? There's a whole galaxy to do stuff in. Luke killing the Emperor is only a problem if (a) you're setting your game in a very narrow window of time, and in one specific place, and (b) if you aren't willing to say "yes, that may be how it happened in the movie, but in this game, Luke Skywalker got into a horrific land speeder accident."

Do you never use the canon from past versions of games or settings? Never do alt histories? I always assumed this was just how everyone did things.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
But the other main issue is how most licensed setting just don't have enough depth. Last year an Alien RPG came out. It looked great and I'm sure the mechanics where decent, but how many times can you be trapped on a space ship with an alien before it gets old? And if you do too much beyond the scope of the source materials, then you lose the advantage you have over a generic game.

On the other hand, this can be an issue. The problem with the Aliens license is that there's really nothing mechanically all that interesting about xenomorphs. They're just a monster. And outside of Xenomorphs, there's nothing to differentiate Aliens from... Hell, Traveler, or any number of other sci-fi RPGs.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 02:04:53 PM

On the other hand, this can be an issue. The problem with the Aliens license is that there's really nothing mechanically all that interesting about xenomorphs. They're just a monster. And outside of Xenomorphs, there's nothing to differentiate Aliens from... Hell, Traveler, or any number of other sci-fi RPGs.

Yes.  Akin to a Monopoly set with a reskinned theme than anything new.  In other words, all style, no substance.   

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 02:04:53 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But why? Why does Luke have to kill the Emperor? And, an even broader question, why does that matter? There's a whole galaxy to do stuff in. Luke killing the Emperor is only a problem if (a) you're setting your game in a very narrow window of time, and in one specific place, and (b) if you aren't willing to say "yes, that may be how it happened in the movie, but in this game, Luke Skywalker got into a horrific land speeder accident."

Do you never use the canon from past versions of games or settings? Never do alt histories? I always assumed this was just how everyone did things.

I agree that there are simple answers -- but I also know that some people aren't satisfied with this. It's the same issue as gaming in historical settings, or many unique-to-RPG settings like Forgotten Realms or World of Darkness.

Some people don't like breaking with canon or even extending canon. Or even if the canon can technically be messed with, the game has a bias to prioritize the original canon. i.e. In Star Wars, the real hero is Luke - and if there are PC heroes they will be pale shadows of Luke at best. An example of this is the Amber Diceless RPG, which makes all of the characters of the novel series as "elders" who are much more powerful than the PCs. There is some tendency for PCs to be small fry sub-heroes who are overshadowed by the novel heroes Corwin and Merlin. There's a similar tendency with Middle Earth, with some games setting up PCs to be equivalent to 1st level D&D novices hugely overshadowed by the heroes of the novels.

I've generally pushed back against this, and had the PCs be HEROES equal to the heroes of the original material. It is not at all difficult. It's just a matter of how one sees the original. I described what I was thinking for a Middle Earth approach recently in this thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/savage-middle-earth/

Likewise, when I ran a James Bond 007 game, my premise was that James Bond really did retire in the 1980s (which was the end of Never Say Never Again). So
the PCs were the next round of double-oh agents who were each roughly his equal. When I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

TSR Marvel Superheroes was a great game back in the day (and the revised edition tweaks a few of the niggles). Well supported with stacks of supplements and adventures.

These days a licensed TTRPG is lucky to get half a dozen books/adventures because the suits that are in charge of handing the license out have unrealistic expectations. They see D&D numbers and expect millions to flow in.

The last three Marvel games were canned within 18 months-2 years of release. Any guesses as to how long the new one will last?

I won't expect it to have any kind of longevity. The playtest release was a damp squib with a universal panning on the various forums. I think they went back to the drawing board with some major stuff for the system but whether its enough to fix things and bring players on board I'm not so sure.

Some Marvel exec will bring it up at some low level meeting about how they sell more branded underwear and lunchboxes than RPGs and that will be it, canned again.

So why buy a doomed game, destined to be forgotten about and with few people remembering it, let alone owning or having played it?

Probably out of curiosity and it will go one the shelves with the other doomed versions of the game.

(Those were Marvel Saga, with cards, Marvel Universe, diceless and Marvel Heroic. That made a reasonable attempt at squishing Wasp onto the same team as Thor but it puts characters into three dice categories and doesn't play great, just ok, in my experience.)

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PM

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 02:04:53 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on March 02, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
This is the biggest downside to licensed RPGs and it's closely related to how, in many licensed setting, the outcome of the central conflict is already knows to all the players. We all know that Luke and Vader kill the Emperor in any game set before then, the actions of the player characters cannot matter. (Which is the same reason I had no interest in the Obi-Wan or Andor shows).

But why? Why does Luke have to kill the Emperor? And, an even broader question, why does that matter? There's a whole galaxy to do stuff in. Luke killing the Emperor is only a problem if (a) you're setting your game in a very narrow window of time, and in one specific place, and (b) if you aren't willing to say "yes, that may be how it happened in the movie, but in this game, Luke Skywalker got into a horrific land speeder accident."

Do you never use the canon from past versions of games or settings? Never do alt histories? I always assumed this was just how everyone did things.

I agree that there are simple answers -- but I also know that some people aren't satisfied with this. It's the same issue as gaming in historical settings, or many unique-to-RPG settings like Forgotten Realms or World of Darkness.

Some people don't like breaking with canon or even extending canon. Or even if the canon can technically be messed with, the game has a bias to prioritize the original canon. i.e. In Star Wars, the real hero is Luke - and if there are PC heroes they will be pale shadows of Luke at best. An example of this is the Amber Diceless RPG, which makes all of the characters of the novel series as "elders" who are much more powerful than the PCs. There is some tendency for PCs to be small fry sub-heroes who are overshadowed by the novel heroes Corwin and Merlin. There's a similar tendency with Middle Earth, with some games setting up PCs to be equivalent to 1st level D&D novices hugely overshadowed by the heroes of the novels.

I've generally pushed back against this, and had the PCs be HEROES equal to the heroes of the original material. It is not at all difficult. It's just a matter of how one sees the original. I described what I was thinking for a Middle Earth approach recently in this thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/savage-middle-earth/

Likewise, when I ran a James Bond 007 game, my premise was that James Bond really did retire in the 1980s (which was the end of Never Say Never Again). So
the PCs were the next round of double-oh agents who were each roughly his equal. When I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

He who destroys the One Ring is The Hero, you're either playing as the Fellowship oir you're just a hero.

James Bond... The names is a marketing thing, but yes, even with James being around you can be other double Oh agaents with different missions to save the world, not the same as Middle Earth.

Star Trek:

Space:

The final frontier.

These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise.

Its 5-year mission:

To explore strange new worlds,

To seek out new life and new civilizations,

To boldly go where no man has gone before.

It is perfectly within the universe canon to have OTHER starships, we even see some while following the voyages of the Enterprise.

So, again, not the same as Middle Earth.

As for "alternate history" Star Wars where Luke died on a speedster... The mere fact that you'd need to say that diminishes my ability to immerse myself in the world, because I KNOW how it goes IN CANON.

But, again, it's a big universe, just choose to play AFTER the death of the Emperor and not on a world we've seen, freeing it from the Empire goons.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 03:58:00 PM
As for "alternate history" Star Wars where Luke died on a speedster... The mere fact that you'd need to say that diminishes my ability to immerse myself in the world, because I KNOW how it goes IN CANON.

But, again, it's a big universe, just choose to play AFTER the death of the Emperor and not on a world we've seen, freeing it from the Empire goons.

So your preference is fine -- and I've had friends say things like this about CANON before as well. However, I trouble understanding why. So I'm hoping you can unpack some of the reasons behind your preference.

---

For example, my James Bond 007 campaign had an "alternate history" premise that James Bond retired in 1983 -- though in canon he continued to have adventures like View to a Kill, The Living Daylights, etc. It seemed like you didn't mind that split from canon, but you couldn't accept an alternate history of Luke Skywalker.

I suspect that it has something to do with how you regard the original Star Wars trilogy. That those stories are real in your mind, and you don't want them changed -- but you are OK with changing the canon storyline in other cases, like with the James Bond movies.

--

On a related note, you suggest that it's fine to have Star Wars adventures after the Emperor is killed -- but you imply that you wouldn't have Middle Earth adventures after Sauron is killed. I feel like both of these have a similar issue -- that the PCs adventures will feel either like minor mopping up after the REAL adventure has finished, or undermining the CANON adventure by having that they didn't really fix things so there needs to be more EPIC heroes.

I have run some Star Wars adventures after the emperor is killed, but I've made it have a change of focus -- especially on the fight over what the New Republic will be like. But I've also run some before the original movies, with it being clear that they could change continuity.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 04:51:56 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 03:58:00 PM
As for "alternate history" Star Wars where Luke died on a speedster... The mere fact that you'd need to say that diminishes my ability to immerse myself in the world, because I KNOW how it goes IN CANON.

But, again, it's a big universe, just choose to play AFTER the death of the Emperor and not on a world we've seen, freeing it from the Empire goons.

So your preference is fine -- and I've had friends say things like this about CANON before as well. However, I trouble understanding why. So I'm hoping you can unpack some of the reasons behind your preference.

---

For example, my James Bond 007 campaign had an "alternate history" premise that James Bond retired in 1983 -- though in canon he continued to have adventures like View to a Kill, The Living Daylights, etc. It seemed like you didn't mind that split from canon, but you couldn't accept an alternate history of Luke Skywalker.

I suspect that it has something to do with how you regard the original Star Wars trilogy. That those stories are real in your mind, and you don't want them changed -- but you are OK with changing the canon storyline in other cases, like with the James Bond movies.

--

On a related note, you suggest that it's fine to have Star Wars adventures after the Emperor is killed -- but you imply that you wouldn't have Middle Earth adventures after Sauron is killed. I feel like both of these have a similar issue -- that the PCs adventures will feel either like minor mopping up after the REAL adventure has finished, or undermining the CANON adventure by having that they didn't really fix things so there needs to be more EPIC heroes.

I have run some Star Wars adventures after the emperor is killed, but I've made it have a change of focus -- especially on the fight over what the New Republic will be like. But I've also run some before the original movies, with it being clear that they could change continuity.

Let me expand: If you're playing in a different time period on Middle Earth AFTER Sauron is defeated I'm fine with that, it doesn't break canon because we don't know what happened after. Not the same as Playing in the same time period.

If you're running a View to a Kill WITHOUT Bond that breaks canon, so it's not the same. As for Bond retiring... We know 00 agents either die or retire, so it's not a big jump to have 00 agents running around after Bond retires, hell you can even have a new 007. You don't even need to retire Bond, we KNOW there's other agents.

Star Trek, we KNOW there's other starships, no one NEEDS to play in the Enterprise, just use the system, create your own starship and crew and the adventures (unless you're running it for non trekkies, then you can even supplant the crew and use the original adventures). So no canon breaking unless you want to run The Trouble with Tribbles with out the Enterprise crew for trekkies.

Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

Notice that in each case you're pretty much using the universe and the rules to play not the IP. Which to me is the same as having a more generic Sword & Sorcery, High Fantasy, Espionage, Space Opera, Sci-Fi, etc setting with no actual ties to ANY IP.

For instance the campaign I'm preparing, it's my take on a "totally not Thundarr" game/world/universe. I'm gonna have obvious callbacks to it but it's not it, I want the feel not the constraints of the IP.

You of course are free to do whatever and to play as you like, as long as you're not trying to force anyone to play your way I see no way it affects me.

On the other hand I'm free to express MY opinion that certain things push me out of immersion and/or are not the optimal way to do it.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PM
I agree that there are simple answers -- but I also know that some people aren't satisfied with this. It's the same issue as gaming in historical settings, or many unique-to-RPG settings like Forgotten Realms or World of Darkness.

Then that strikes me as a player problem, not a fundamental problem with licensed settings.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMSome people don't like breaking with canon or even extending canon.

Again, that's a player problem. Those players are not the target audience for licensed RPGs. There's no point in trying to cater to them, you never will.  It's like trying to make a superhero game to cater to people who fundamentally don't like supers as a genre, like myself. Don't try, I'm not your target market, and in doing so you're going to make the game less appealing to those who are.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMOr even if the canon can technically be messed with, the game has a bias to prioritize the original canon. i.e. In Star Wars, the real hero is Luke - and if there are PC heroes they will be pale shadows of Luke at best. An example of this is the Amber Diceless RPG, which makes all of the characters of the novel series as "elders" who are much more powerful than the PCs. There is some tendency for PCs to be small fry sub-heroes who are overshadowed by the novel heroes Corwin and Merlin. There's a similar tendency with Middle Earth, with some games setting up PCs to be equivalent to 1st level D&D novices hugely overshadowed by the heroes of the novels.

Well, that's just a fundamental problem with the Zero-to-Hero XP progression design of most RPGs - I can't speak to Amber, sorry, never been my cup of tea, in novels or in game. But there's no reason a Star Wars RPG has to make Luke use fundamentally different rules than PCs, except that Luke goes from 1st-level-nobody to 20th-level demigod slayer in the equivalent of about 3 adventures, because movies are movies.

There's no reason a GM can't give a 2nd level hobbit thief a magic McGuffin, tell him to drop it in a lava pool, and boom, he's The Hero! But that makes a good movie or novel, but a poor game.

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMWhen I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

But all the same problems you're talking about are present in a Star Trek game! Just because you give the players their own ship and let them tool around the galaxy, you're either forced to expand the setting beyond the bounds of primary canon, or else the players are just sort of going to be going around in the shadows of Kirk or Picard, visiting the same planets, fighting the same enemies, etc.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

Your stupid and unnecessary is another person's fun and interesting. Alt history and alternate universe stores are pretty popular, last I checked.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PMNotice that in each case you're pretty much using the universe and the rules to play not the IP. Which to me is the same as having a more generic Sword & Sorcery, High Fantasy, Espionage, Space Opera, Sci-Fi, etc setting with no actual ties to ANY IP.

But some people want those ties. Just because I'm not following Luke Skywalker around like a torchbearer doesn't mean I'm not a Jedi, or not fighting the Empire, or in the Clone Wars, or something else.

Could I be a Star Knight, in touch with the Cosmic Essence, wielding a plasma saber, jumping through phase-space, fighting the Stellar Hegemony? Sure, I could design that game in any number of systems on my shelf... Or I could just pull my old WEG Star Wars books down off the shelf, and have it all done for me, and not feel like I'm playing the knockoff Chinese bootleg totally-not-Star Wars.

Quote from: Bruwulf on March 02, 2023, 05:23:44 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 03:07:16 PMWhen I ran Star Trek, the PCs had their own capital ship and were a famed crew on the level of Kirk's or the heroes of other series. etc.

But all the same problems you're talking about are present in a Star Trek game! Just because you give the players their own ship and let them tool around the galaxy, you're either forced to expand the setting beyond the bounds of primary canon, or else the players are just sort of going to be going around in the shadows of Kirk or Picard, visiting the same planets, fighting the same enemies, etc.

Right. I'm saying that it's not a problem for me -- and it hasn't been a problem for most of my players. However, I have talked to a few people who do have a problem with it. They have expressed opinions similar to GeekyBugle. I'd want to acknowledge that it's a preference, and I'm curious about how that preference works.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
If you're running a View to a Kill WITHOUT Bond that breaks canon, so it's not the same. As for Bond retiring... We know 00 agents either die or retire, so it's not a big jump to have 00 agents running around after Bond retires, hell you can even have a new 007. You don't even need to retire Bond, we KNOW there's other agents.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

I'm still stuck on the underlying difference here. Why is it OK for James Bond to retire because there are other agents who can take up the spy work -- but it's not OK for Luke Skywalker to be killed because there are other rebels who can take up the fight against the Empire?

Quote from: jhkim on March 02, 2023, 05:51:06 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
If you're running a View to a Kill WITHOUT Bond that breaks canon, so it's not the same. As for Bond retiring... We know 00 agents either die or retire, so it's not a big jump to have 00 agents running around after Bond retires, hell you can even have a new 007. You don't even need to retire Bond, we KNOW there's other agents.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on March 02, 2023, 05:15:08 PM
Star Wars, IF you want to kill Luke BEFORE he got into the Millenium Falcon it is canon breaking, stupid and unnecessary, you could play AFTER the Emperor's death with different characters in different adventures.

I'm still stuck on the underlying difference here. Why is it OK for James Bond to retire because there are other agents who can take up the spy work -- but it's not OK for Luke Skywalker to be killed because there are other rebels who can take up the fight against the Empire?

Are you really stumped?

Quote
The Empire Strikes Back

Luke flies off to Yavin to save his friends

Obi-Wan> "He was our only hope"

Yoda> "No, there is another"

Not ANYONE could turn Anakin back to the light side and defeat the Emperor.

Meanwhile in 007's universe as long as you have the training and pass the required tests ANYONE can be an agent and then become a 00 agent.

In Star Wars Killing Luke before the defeat/death of the Emperor BREAKS canon and throws me out of immersion.

In a spy game having one agent retire or even die doesn't, because we know those things happen. Furthermore you DON'T need to retire/kill Bond, we KNOW there's OTHER 00 agents around, we just don't see their adventures.

It's like killing Arthur in an Arthurian legends game and killing a G-Man in a gangbusters game and claiming both are the same.

I refuse to believe you're this dense.