Monday, June 16, 2008
Meet the New Game, Same as the Old Game
We won't get fooled again!
So Dungeons & Dragons 4th edition was released last week. I'm hearing a lot of reports of how it's the Best RPG Evar!!1!1, and how it doesn't resemble previous versions of D&D very much. And I know that there are many people out there who feel the latter statement is a prerequisite for the former. I still haven't checked out the rules myself - we were having too much fun playing 3.5 last weekend with some home-brewed naval combat rules. So I guess you can accurately say I don't know what I'm missing.
Now, I'm apparently not alone in this, based on some extremely informal polls - which are likely to be as inaccurate as they are informal. This happens every time there's an "upgrade," of course (hey, I'm still running Windows XP and Office 2000).
"Jedi Wiker" at Declassified suggests one explanation as to why there appears to be a rift in the community - that the marketing campaign surrounding the new edition was pretty divisive, implying the abandonment of the current customer base in the pursuit of the new generation raised on MMO's. His contention - though he prefers 3.5 himself - is that players should ignore the marketing and give the new edition a chance - but not to invest too much into doing so, as he feels many gamers will still prefer their older edition.
As I mentioned above, I think it is far too early to tell whether or not this is a mistake on WotC's part. The "rift" might likely blow over in a couple of years, as these things usually do. And it is not too clear whether the "Your D&D Sucks, You Must Be Stupid To Like It!" message was really implied by their marketing, or if that message was simply attributed to them by both their fans and detractors.
But their message was - as it had to be - "out with the old, and in with the new." When you are selling something durable, there's really no other way to go. At least, I don't think there is. You have to convince your customers that their old but still functional possessions should be replaced.
Which is exactly the problem with the video game business, just as all media industries (that I can think of).
It's not that we haven't hit some new highs with modern games. I'll happily pit modern racing games against Pole Position any day. In many cases, the newer truly is superior.
But there's a landmine in sending this message that "newer is always better, and anything too old is crap and not worth keeping," as Wiker illustrates. Oversell that message, and you may find a couple of corollaries popping up in the minds of your audience:
#1 - Since everything you've done so far has apparently been crap, there's no reason to believe your newest production is anything different.
#2 - If I love something that you think is crap, then our tastes may be so divergant that I should not expect to love what you have created.
Sound familiar at all? Maybe it's just me. Well, Wiker and me.
Fortunately, as a medium matures, respect for and interest in its past also increases. At least, it does for the more mature (read: jaded) audiences who have been through the "new and improved!" cycle a few times.
Labels: Biz
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 11:58 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
"#1 - Since everything you've done so far has apparently been crap, there's no reason to believe your newest production is anything different."
This pretty much sums up my take on D&D 4E.
Although I occasionally (read: rarely) participate in a D&D campaign if I feel the gamemaster is exceptional, my overall feeling with regard to D&D -- in any form -- has been a resounding "Meh!" for a long time now.
Thus, I have never had the desire to purchase anything related to any of the D&D versions. Although D&D 4E sounds like it may be a little more to my liking that previous offerings, it is very likely -- based on my previous experience -- really just more "crap". And I'm not going to waste my money (or even time, for that matter) on "crap". =\
This pretty much sums up my take on D&D 4E.
Although I occasionally (read: rarely) participate in a D&D campaign if I feel the gamemaster is exceptional, my overall feeling with regard to D&D -- in any form -- has been a resounding "Meh!" for a long time now.
Thus, I have never had the desire to purchase anything related to any of the D&D versions. Although D&D 4E sounds like it may be a little more to my liking that previous offerings, it is very likely -- based on my previous experience -- really just more "crap". And I'm not going to waste my money (or even time, for that matter) on "crap". =\
D&D's detractors usually argue that it's not a very good 'role' playing game. And I'd argue that that isn't what D&D has ever tried to be. It started off as rules for a wargame, and the wargaming heart is very much still a part of it.
From reading the 4th ed books, I've felt that they're trying to be alot more upfront about how the rules are primarily about the combat and making it fun, rather than the roleplay. And to me that's a very good thing (being upfront I mean).
The people that love D&D but hate the new edition are probably the people that tried to bend it to fit a preconcived idea of what it is.
In my opinion, if you want to roleplay, play GURPS. If you want to kick kobold ass, play D&D. They're both exceptionally good at doing what it is that they've set out to do.
From reading the 4th ed books, I've felt that they're trying to be alot more upfront about how the rules are primarily about the combat and making it fun, rather than the roleplay. And to me that's a very good thing (being upfront I mean).
The people that love D&D but hate the new edition are probably the people that tried to bend it to fit a preconcived idea of what it is.
In my opinion, if you want to roleplay, play GURPS. If you want to kick kobold ass, play D&D. They're both exceptionally good at doing what it is that they've set out to do.
There is a huge divide over 4th edition. New and veteran players alike are on both sides of the fence -- either they love it or they hate it. There's not much middle ground that I've seen.
I'll tell you something... I've been a D&D player since the 80s, and I pre-ordered 4th edition even though I had my doubts.
Honestly, it's an entirely different game. BUT, that is not necessarily a bad thing. There are things that I love about the new edition, and there are things that I do not love.
In my opinion, after reading the core rulebooks, 4th edition appears to be very balanced and combat seems to be great fun. People should give it an honest playtest before denouncing it. The new SRD should be up within a few weeks I imagine, so there's no need to pay before you play.
I'll tell you something... I've been a D&D player since the 80s, and I pre-ordered 4th edition even though I had my doubts.
Honestly, it's an entirely different game. BUT, that is not necessarily a bad thing. There are things that I love about the new edition, and there are things that I do not love.
In my opinion, after reading the core rulebooks, 4th edition appears to be very balanced and combat seems to be great fun. People should give it an honest playtest before denouncing it. The new SRD should be up within a few weeks I imagine, so there's no need to pay before you play.
# posted by 
: June 17, 2008 12:21 PM
: June 17, 2008 12:21 PM
SRD = System Reference Document.
In other words, if you are familiar with D&D 3.5, their open gaming license allowed outside companies to write and sell content using D&D rules. In order to facilitate this, WOTC released the SRD which contains those rules.
Here's a link to the 3.5 SRD -- http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html
Word is that something similar is planned for 4th edition.
In other words, if you are familiar with D&D 3.5, their open gaming license allowed outside companies to write and sell content using D&D rules. In order to facilitate this, WOTC released the SRD which contains those rules.
Here's a link to the 3.5 SRD -- http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/home.html
Word is that something similar is planned for 4th edition.
# posted by : June 18, 2008 7:56 AM
: June 18, 2008 7:56 AM
One of the interesting things that I think is different between pen and paper RPGs and computer games is that computer games do actually have built-in obsolescence... but not on the level you're talking about, Coyote.
I think (if I read you right) you're talking about the rounds of hardware upgrades and the whole, "our shooter is more awesome and justifies your hardware upgrade because we have an alphabet soup of acronyms to make things look awesome!" That is a trick as far as I'm concerned.
The real obsolescence as far as I see it, is in the game design itself. People get bored of games with a finite content and a set system, because they come to realize that there's nothing left they feel like exploring. (Credit where it's due - I am lifting this thought whole from Raph Koster and his book A Theory of Fun.)
Pen and paper avoids this because there are several open-ended inputs - you have a GM constantly coming up with new situations and encounters, you have your own input where you have as much freedom as you want with your character's actions, and you have your other players and the NPCs. So, the system itself keeps getting invigorated, and can go on a lot longer while keeping you interested.
Post a Comment
I think (if I read you right) you're talking about the rounds of hardware upgrades and the whole, "our shooter is more awesome and justifies your hardware upgrade because we have an alphabet soup of acronyms to make things look awesome!" That is a trick as far as I'm concerned.
The real obsolescence as far as I see it, is in the game design itself. People get bored of games with a finite content and a set system, because they come to realize that there's nothing left they feel like exploring. (Credit where it's due - I am lifting this thought whole from Raph Koster and his book A Theory of Fun.)
Pen and paper avoids this because there are several open-ended inputs - you have a GM constantly coming up with new situations and encounters, you have your own input where you have as much freedom as you want with your character's actions, and you have your other players and the NPCs. So, the system itself keeps getting invigorated, and can go on a lot longer while keeping you interested.
Links to this post:
<< Home
