So, John... you are here defining growth for a single company.
Some might define growth based on the outward expansion of many systems into the market. Anyone who *doesn't* publish sees an apparent growth on the indie level. Look at the internet. There are thousands. Mainstream? You can mention any number of others, but it's pretty much DnD. I have only ever seen d20 in stores. EVER. I only offer my perspective as a consumer here. It doesn't amount to business experience, I admit... but this is what I see.

On that note, what is the advantage of paper publishing for the indie game? Who does one sell to? I ask because I want to know these things before I (hopefully) move from consumer to producer.

With respect to Snakes on a Plane, Levi wrote:

Quote from: Levi KornelsenThe movie also made significantly more money than it cost, in a healthy industry.

Which doesn't line it up real well, to me, as an example or counter-example to games that are pulling more profit-per-unit in a (mostly cottage) industry that is, on the whole, losing it.

"Significantly more money than it cost" is not the same as the "break even point" for the studio that financed the movie.  They need to make enough profit to support the studio system that distributes the movie, advertizing, theater costs (prints, etc.), and so on.  As far as I can find, it hasn't broken even yet.  If you want another example of Internet hype producing disappointment, look at Serenity.  On paper, it exceeded costs.  It didn't make enough for the studio to consider it profitable, thus you won't be seeing a Serenity 2.

@T-Willard:
Nobody asked you to make RPGs. Nobody forced you to do it. It is for your own ego, that you do it. So live with it, if other people call that vanity press.

Quote from: beejazzSo, John... you are here defining growth for a single company.

Not entirely.  Part of what supports the group of Indie gamers that most people are talking about involves cooperative marketing and shared costs for things like con tables.  Like I said, you can find threads talking about how the table at GenCon that many Indie publishers shared had scalability problems this year.

Quote from: beejazzSome might define growth based on the outward expansion of many systems into the market. Anyone who *doesn't* publish sees an apparent growth on the indie level. Look at the internet. There are thousands. Mainstream? You can mention any number of others, but it's pretty much DnD. I have only ever seen d20 in stores. EVER. I only offer my perspective as a consumer here. It doesn't amount to business experience, I admit... but this is what I see.

Well, if the number of titles explode but the audience for the games don't grow to absorb the titles, what happens?

Quote from: beejazzOn that note, what is the advantage of paper publishing for the indie game? Who does one sell to? I ask because I want to know these things before I (hopefully) move from consumer to producer.

Basically printed material is still more convenient for many things than a computer screen (FYI, I personally own a workgroup-class laser printer with a duplexing module for double-sided printing that I've had for many years).  And published books, even from a print-on-demand shop, look and feel better than what most people can produce on their home or even work printers.

Let me be absolutely clear here.

The best of both worlds, while you are small, is to affiliate with a print-on-demand shop that can produce one-off bound books from PDF's.  Basically, you only produce the printed books you need and you can even find companies that will deal with running the e-commerce site and shipping for you.  I agree that's a great place to start with low risk, to see if your game will sell.  And you should certainly listen to advice from Indie publishers about how to handle this sort of thing.

I would not advise paying for a print run of a few thousand bound books unless you can eat the cost as a loss if they don't sell or have a very good reason (that other people who will be honest with you agree with) to think you'll sell out.  My points about growth are aimed at going to the next level, once an Indie publisher has grown.  Get there, and then worry about whether you can scale or not.

Quote from: beejazzI have only ever seen d20 in stores. EVER.

You mean in non-gaming stores?  I don't ever recall seeing D20 on the shelf in a general book store anywhere. Well I didn't look that closely, but all I recall seeing in any store was a few D&D books. No D20.

EDIT That being rule books. I do know Wizkid's Shadowrun novels get general bookstore circulation. I've even seen them on shelves, and not just the latest ones. But That's something a bit different.

But I'll check the online catalogue for Chapters-Indigo (roughly the equivalent to Borders in the US).

Ok, it lists a number of different D&D books, All Flesh Must Be Eaten (Unisystem), Talislanta(D20), The Wildside Gaming System (whoa, that's gotta be pretty close to 'indie', it's owner written/published by an English prof in the US NE who also publishes annotated Lovecraft books), Marvel Universe (it's own diceless system of some sort I believe), Splicers (Palladium), Star Wars(D20), Magic Frontiers (some sort of "science fantasy" genre published 8 years ago, so obviously not D20 but I've never heard of it, anyone?), "Performing The Pilgrims: A Study Of Ethnohistorical Role-playing At Plimoth Plantation" (?), and so on.

So yup I guess they do stock D20 in the big warehouse out back. But it sure isn't alone.  On the shelf? The whole of it is dwarfed by poker self-help books.

John, what you suggest is reasonable.

If (hypothetically) I had a store (again, not yet... more of a goal) would it be more viable to seek a publisher or to print in-store?

Because whether I get around to setting up shop or not, there isn't anyone who's going to sell my game locally. You just gotta love that American south.:mad:

Quote from: blakkieYou mean in non-gaming stores?  I don't ever recall seeing D20 on the shelf in a general book store. Well I didn't look that closely, but all I recall seeing where a few D&D books. No D20.

But I'll check the online catalogue for Chapters-Indigo (roughly the equivalent to Borders in the US).

Ok, it lists a number of different D&D books, All Flesh Must Be Eaten (Unisystem), Talislanta(D20), The Wildside Gaming System (whoa, that's gotta be pretty close to 'indie', it's owner written/published by an English prof in the US NE who also publishes annotated Lovecraft books), Marvel Universe (it's own diceless system of some sort I believe), Splicers (Palladium), Star Wars(D20), Magic Frontiers (some sort of "science fantasy" genre published 8 years ago, so obviously not D20 but I've never heard of it, anyone?), "Performing The Pilgrims: A Study Of Ethnohistorical Role-playing At Plimoth Plantation" (?), and so on.

So yup I guess they do stock D20 in the big warehouse out back. But it sure isn't alone.  On the shelf? The whole of it is dwarfed by poker self-help books.

Thus far on shelves I've seen Dungeons and Dragons, Star Wars, (rarely) d20modern or past or future, and (before WoW, mind you) Warcraft d20. The *old* version (last year's Dragon Con introduced me to the update).

Quote from: beejazzIf (hypothetically) I had a store (again, not yet... more of a goal) would it be more viable to seek a publisher or to print in-store?

I'm not really sure what you are looking to do here.  Unless you can afford a lot of expensive printing equipment, you'll never match the quality of a print-on-demand company.  Are you trying to print games, get your own game printed, or sell games?  They aren't the same businesses.  

If you want to publish your own game or games, one of the Indie publishers here should step in and give you advice.  It will probably be more valuable to you and more specific than what I can offer.

Quote from: beejazzBecause whether I get around to setting up shop or not, there isn't anyone who's going to sell my game locally. You just gotta love that American south.:mad:

Well, opening a store just to sell your own game probably isn't a good idea, unless you think you can be successful selling a lot of other peoples' games, too.  If you open a brick and mortar store for any reason, talk to other small business owners that run their own stores first.  Bottom line.  Find out what you are doing before you spend money trying to do it.

Quote from: beejazzThus far on shelves I've seen Dungeons and Dragons, Star Wars, (rarely) d20modern or past or future, and (before WoW, mind you) Warcraft d20. The *old* version (last year's Dragon Con introduced me to the update).

Curious, although it is sort of a red herring to the topic.

Incidentally it has peaked my interest in this "The Wildside Gaming System: Fantasy Role-Playing Edition".  I checked RPGnet, no review. Well there is a review for "Wild Side", but that's some sort of smash 'em up derby dice game.

I also checked the FLGS online catalogue and miss there too, and that's no small feat.  This place has the offical policy of  "If it's in print, we'll try to stock it." They even stock a lot of stuff that is OOP too.

So it seems that guy has gone totally outside normal gaming channels. Perhaps using contacts gained from publishing his other books to get the book into general interest book stores?  Curiously some of his other books are on Drive-Thru, but not that one.  I'm going to take this into that games-I-know-nothing-about thread.  The upshot of it though seems to be contacts and/or desire is what you need to get it into mainstream big-box stores.

Quote from: John MorrowI'm not really sure what you are looking to do here.  Unless you can afford a lot of expensive printing equipment, you'll never match the quality of a print-on-demand company.  Are you trying to print games, get your own game printed, or sell games?  They aren't the same businesses.  

If you want to publish your own game or games, one of the Indie publishers here should step in and give you advice.  It will probably be more valuable to you and more specific than what I can offer.



Well, opening a store just to sell your own game probably isn't a good idea, unless you think you can be successful selling a lot of other peoples' games, too.  If you open a brick and mortar store for any reason, talk to other small business owners that run their own stores first.  Bottom line.  Find out what you are doing before you spend money trying to do it.

Again, all hypothetical. These are long term plans that are just coming about as of recently. Not to mention it being almost 4am. As for opening a store just to sell my own games, I *know* that's unrealistic. I can't rely on selling one product that no one has even heard of to sustain something as costly as a store... and besides, I don't write that fast. As for printing equipment, all I see myself needing is front-and-back black-and-white. Is that really expensive?

And I know it may have come off as if game stores *can't* exist in this area, but that's just not the case. One did exist, but closed recently because business was better on the internet.

Something doesn't fit between a store moving its operations to the internet as opposed to your idea that after a certain point it's better to move into paper. But, as you pointed out, publishing and gaming stores are two diferrent businesses.

But the move to paper requires a store that will *sell* the paper product, if I am not mistaken. And if (as discussed on another thread) the little gaming store is dying and (as discussed above) the big bookstore doesn't sell my product, where does that leave me? Selling paper copies over the internet?

Quote from: blakkieCurious, although it is sort of a red herring to the topic.

Incidentally it has peaked my interest in this "The Wildside Gaming System: Fantasy Role-Playing Edition".  I checked RPGnet, no review. Well there is a review for "Wild Side", but that's some sort of smash 'em up derby dice game.

I also checked the FLGS online catalogue and miss there too, and that's no small feat.  This place has the offical policy of  "If it's in print, we'll try to stock it." They even stock a lot of stuff that is OOP too.

So it seems that guy has gone totally outside normal gaming channels. Perhaps using contacts gained from publishing his other books to get the book into general interest book stores?  Curiously some of his other books are on Drive-Thru, but not that one.  I'm going to take this into that games-I-know-nothing-about thread.  The upshot of it though seems to be contacts and/or desire is what you need to get it into mainstream big-box stores.

Curious.
Seriously, what sort of game is this? I mean, is there any content-reason this game should be overlooked by gaming venues and picked up by the mainstream? Is it (like you said) contacts? Maybe a contract with the publisher?

Quote from: beejazzCurious.
Seriously, what sort of game is this? I mean, is there any content-reason this game should be overlooked by gaming venues and picked up by the mainstream? Is it (like you said) contacts? Maybe a contract with the publisher?

I haven't read that close yet, but it seems to be some sort of swords & sorcery deal.  There are some PDF excerts on the page here: http://www.wildsidegame.com/  EDIT They also have a free PDF for download of a print published adventure, with some portions (at least the pre-gen characters) left out of the PDF.

They do have a message board buried in there, but I haven't browsed it yet at all.

Quote from: John MorrowI'll be as happy as you are if they can.  I'm not trying to damn you to failure.  I'm trying to get you and other Indie publishers to think about what growth means rather than just assuming the sky is the limit and that they can just keep doing whatever they are doing on autopilot forever.  And I want you to get compensated for your labor and to be able to quit your day job if you want.  If you don't, that's fine, but it should be an option for those who work hard and want to.

Ohhhhhh!  Okay!  I've been misjudging your tone.  Mea culpa.  I'm sorry about that.

Purely in the interest of clearing things up:  You've been saying, in rough paraphrased way, "The indie model doesn't scale up with individual success and growing sales."

Now there are some details left unsaid there, and there are (at least) two ways of filling in the gaps to make a larger statement.  One way is this:  "The indie model cannot scale up with individual success and growing sales, no matter how hard someone thinks about it, or how savvy a business-man they are.  The model of author-ownership is, down to its core, incapable of such a thing."

My read on your tone was that you were saying that, and from this most recent post it becomes clear that you really weren't.  I apologize.  I should have read more charitably, and I could have been more productive.  At the least I should have asked for clarification.

Another way the statements can be unpacked (and one which I now suspect is closer to your true intent) is this:  "The indie model won't just naturally scale up with individual success and growing sales.  It's going to take some serious thought and careful consideration for people to figure out how to do it.  It may be possible, it may not, but it's certainly not going to happen by accident."

I am in total agreement with that.  Business of any model don't just run themselves.  As an author-owner I try to be constantly on the ball, thinking about the business world I'm in, the exigencies, patterns and opportunities, with at least as much intensity and focus as I think about roleplaying itself.

I don't think every author-owner does that (I do lament some of the missed business opportunities I see around me... but hey, if they don't want to turn their mental energies that way, and are content with the result, that's their thing) but I think a good number of them do.  Nobody I know expects author-ownership to be our little dancing monkey and turn out more and more money the longer we monotonously grind the gurney.  But at the same time, I think a lot of us (and certainly myself) see opportunities to the model that go substantially beyond the success we've achieved so far.  There's a lot of serious, concentrated thought going into how to get there from here.

Are you cool with that?

Quote from: TonyLBNow there are some details left unsaid there, and there are (at least) two ways of filling in the gaps to make a larger statement.  One way is this:  "The indie model cannot scale up with individual success and growing sales, no matter how hard someone thinks about it, or how savvy a business-man they are.  The model of author-ownership is, down to its core, incapable of such a thing."

My read on your tone was that you were saying that, and from this most recent post it becomes clear that you really weren't.  I apologize.  I should have read more charitably, and I could have been more productive.  At the least I should have asked for clarification.

To be honest, I'm primarily saying the latter but there are some elements of the model that I see that I do think may inevitably suffer because of scale.  Levi started out this thread by saying Indie games are growing because:

Quote from: Levi KornelsenLet me tell you a few of the reasons that I think this is so.

• Because the writers of these products are personally enthusiastic about them, and that enthusiasm is contagious.
  
• Because the games are individually cheap, and don't require supplements; the buy-in is low, low, low.
• Because the fans of these games can swap stories about hunting them down and getting them, and about how the different games affect their play.
• Because there's some small controversy, as people react negatively to some of them.  Many of these game provoke a reaction, and that sells games.

There's no reason I can see why the few notable-sized companies can't duplicate most of that.  What confuses me is why they haven't.

Let me see if I can cut right to the point on each of these points.

Personal enthusiasm is a wonderful thing but even if a game author can maintain that personal enthusiasm (and that's a big reason to try to get the hobby to rise above being a meat-grinder for authors since that kills enthusiasm and drives people out of writing for this hobby), it's ultimately quality that sells these games.  Enthusiasm only gets you so far.

And with respect to "contagious enthusiasm", it's much more difficult for an author to personally reach a large market and convey that sort of enthusiasm than it is to reach a small market only on Internet message boards and gaming conventions.  Notable-sized companies all the way up to Wizards do send their authors and other representatives out onto the web with enthusiasm (see the upcoming releases material on the Wizards site, for example, or Bruce Baugh's pitches of his various games), but they are less personal or reach on a small part of the audience the larger the audience gets.  So I think Levi is wrong to expect this to just keep scaling and driving continual growth and I think he's missing part of it.

Cheap prices are easy to support if you don't care about making any money.  That (along with avoiding the meat-grinder) was the whole point of my profitability arguments.  I think some of the Indie authors know this and are already pricing their games higher (like the whole traditional industry did when it realized it couldn't stay in business with $20 books, led by companies like DP9 who explained why they were raising prices) and some of the Indie games already have prices that are comparable, if not more expensive with respect to size, than mainstream commercial games.  

I also think it's fair, in and apples-to-apples sort of way to compare Amazon prices to Indie game prices when the Indie game is only sold online and not in the three-tier system.  If someone can find Lulu.com, they can find Amazon.com.  So, again, I don't think the low prices can last forever as an Indie game grows unless you have authors happy to never quit their day jobs, happy to live in poverty, or are subsidized in some other way.  Game companies have already experienced the problems of pricing too low to stay in business, which is why they started raising prices.

With respect to the thrill of hunting down and getting games from the fans, I don't think that making the games hard to find or buy scales to a large audience.  Almost by definition, to reach a large audience, a large audience has to be able to find and buy the game.  If I need to pay via PayPal and wait for the author to get around to mailing a game personally, it's a hassle to me, not a victory.  

Of course once it becomes easy to buy the game, the whole "Indie mystique" that appeals to some fans has to disappear.  This is the same thing that happens to anything that relies on the mystique of small size as a selling point.  When they grow, they are seen as "selling out".  

I think negative reactions work the same way.  A large part of any potential large audience are not going to be contrarians or rebels and they are going to take negative reviews at face value, not as something that peaks their curiosity.

Quote from: TonyLBAnother way the statements can be unpacked (and one which I now suspect is closer to your true intent) is this:  "The indie model won't just naturally scale up with individual success and growing sales.  It's going to take some serious thought and careful consideration for people to figure out how to do it.  It may be possible, it may not, but it's certainly not going to happen by accident."

Correct.  And part of what I'm taking issue with is Levi's assumption that the elements he detailed are going to carry Indie games through higher and higher growth (based on his apparent assumptiont that larger game companies should be able to do the same thing) when it's really going to require a lot of other work, too.  Even if you can maintain the enthusiasm and personal touch as you grow (more power to you with that), it's going to take more than a personal touch, low price, Internet presence, "Indie mystique" to keep growing, so Indie author-owners shouldn't assume that they can just keep growing without doing anything differently along the way.  

In the process, they might find that their effort start looking more like a game company and  less like their initial Indie effort because that's exactly how a lot of game companies got to where they are now.  They didn't turn into companies to become more impersonal and less enthusiastic.  They did it to deal with scale issues.  That's how small companies generally survive getting big.  And rather than think that there is nothing to learn from game companies, Indie author-owners should be looking at game companies to understand why they do things the way they do.  Maybe you can figure out how to do things better, but you are more likely to figure that out looking at the way things are done now than you are assuming you've got nothing to learn from existing companies.  (I'm not saying that you, personally, are doing that, but I think some people do.)

Quote from: TonyLBI am in total agreement with that.  Business of any model don't just run themselves.  As an author-owner I try to be constantly on the ball, thinking about the business world I'm in, the exigencies, patterns and opportunities, with at least as much intensity and focus as I think about roleplaying itself.

And if you are doing that, you are already in better shape than a lot of small businesses.  A lot of people who enter into small businesses want to do something they love but they assume the business part will just happen without any effort.  I think some of this  this is a side effect of the belief that successful business people and rich people don't do any work and just collect money.  Just looking at how quickly lottery  winners and heirs blow their fortunes illustrates that making and keeping money generally isn't easy, no matter what you see in the movies.

Even though I lack the resources and am not willing to take the risks needed to start a small business, I admire the people who do and talk to them.  I talk to FLGS owners, for example, about what sells and how they are doing.  I know it isn't easy and takes a lot of hard work.  And if Indie people are going to do all that hard work, they should work to succeed.

Quote from: TonyLBI don't think every author-owner does that (I do lament some of the missed business opportunities I see around me... but hey, if they don't want to turn their mental energies that way, and are content with the result, that's their thing) but I think a good number of them do.  Nobody I know expects author-ownership to be our little dancing monkey and turn out more and more money the longer we monotonously grind the gurney.

And that's great, then.  But I do get the feeling that some Indie fans are thinking that way, including Levi's list that started out the thread.  Nowhere on his list was the sort of foundation building that you are saying is being done.  That's the problem with making it look easy.  People start to believe it is easy and then wonder why big companies don't do the same if it is so easy.  That's also part of the point I was trying to make (though not so effectively).  Success through growth is neither automatic nor easy.  If it were, fewer small businesses would fail than do.

Quote from: TonyLBBut at the same time, I think a lot of us (and certainly myself) see opportunities to the model that go substantially beyond the success we've achieved so far.  There's a lot of serious, concentrated thought going into how to get there from here.

Oh, I absolutely believe that some of the Indie games can break out and achieve a lot of success.  I don't believe all with because I don't believe the Indie appraoch is some magic formula that can't fail.

I personally believe that the flexible games that cater to multiple styles of play rather than "coherent" games will will sell to a broader audience (with a broader mix of styles and preferences) but I don't even rule out the idea that Indie games could tap into a market that could feed a lot of growth.  

I simply believe (and this is purely my own belief with no hard evidence to back it up, so feel free to ignore this opinion) that the disgruntled gamers that a lot of the thematic games appeal to represent only a small part of the traditional role-playing market but may also represent the tip a larger untapped market that doesn't play traditional RPGs (or doesn't play them anymore).  That's why I suggested looking into selling into straight science fiction and fantasy conventions as interactive storytelling games that can be played in a night rather than selling them as traditional RPGs or into role-playing conventions.  In other words, pitch the games to the people who don't play traditional games for all the reasons that the thematic games do differently.  I think there is a bigger market in the people who passed on traditional RPGs or gave up on them early than there is in the traditional role-playing market among gamers whose styles have changed over the years.  That's where I thing the thematic games could really take root, much as White Wolf did in the Goth community.  Of course I could be wrong.

Quote from: TonyLBAre you cool with that?

Sure.  If you are already thinking about growth, then you are on the right track and probably don't need my advise.

For what it's worth, I read Levi's list in a different light.  I may well have been too charitable to him, 'cuz I know him pretty well.

I look at the list and I think "Yep ... that's a decent description about how we've collectively gotten to where we are now.  Some of that may provide some guidance as to how we should get to where we want to be tomorrow."

Increasingly, I see people asking that question individually:  Not "Where should the indie community as a whole go, so as to do better for all of us?" but "Okay, here I am, an indie author-owner.  Where do I, personally, want my business to go in order to do better for me?"  That's going to lead us in different directions, and I think that rocks.  We've learned how cool it can be to have many diverse types of games.  Now I'm eager to see how cool it can be to have many diverse types of game companies.

But, because they're asking the question individually, a lot of these people (myself included) have been quietly dropping out of ongoing public discussion about where the fate of the overall indie community.  The folks in those discussions are self-selected to be the ones that think that the direction of the overall community is vitally important.  The folks who (like me) figure that the community direction is made up of an aggregate of all of our individual directions tend to be under-represented in discussion.