Marketability question.
Thick hardcover of a generic sci-fi rpg. Everything from planets new to space travel, "cyberpunk" developed planets, and galactic empires. Provided settings within the game line. Worth working on?
WotC pwns fantasy but D20 gets more bogged down and convoluted the further into space it gets. So I'm wondering if a I designed a system suited to interplanetary adventure (something I want to do personally) would it also be a good business move.
Lemme know, I'm workin through Easter.
Quote from: Del on April 15, 2006, 03:07:35 AM
Marketability question.
Thick hardcover of a generic sci-fi rpg. Everything from planets new to space travel, "cyberpunk" developed planets, and galactic empires. Provided settings within the game line. Worth working on?
WotC pwns fantasy but D20 gets more bogged down and convoluted the further into space it gets. So I'm wondering if a I designed a system suited to interplanetary adventure (something I want to do personally) would it also be a good business move.
Lemme know, I'm workin through Easter.
"Worth working on?" is not a question anyone but you can answer, because no two people will mean the same thing when they say it.
My personal advice is, if you want to do it, do it. With current printing technology and a well thought out approach, it is nearly impossible to put a game onto the market and not make money on it, even a fairly high cost item like a thick shiny hardback.
However, be aware that producing an RPG in the first place is not "a good business move." Lots and lots of people have put a lot of time in and made it into a decent second income or hobby-that-doesn't-lose-money. No one in the RPG industry is doing better business than they could be doing elsewhere for less hassle. No one. Write an RPG because you want to write it, be secure in the awareness that - if you are careful and thoughtful - it's nearly impossible to lose money, but do not labour under the illusion that you'll make much, either.
thanks,
James
In my opinion, d20 Modern is okay but d20 Futures is a mess--there's some good stuff there, but I didn't like the spaceship rules. Also, the book tries to cover too many parts of the sci-fi setting--apocalypse, space opera, cyberpunk, anime, etc.--so it's kind of scattered.
Which segues into my advice. Yes, a nice ruleset designed specifically for science fiction should be welcomed by the market. BUT ... it has to have
- A) Rules that are different enough from other systems to make it worth the buyer's money,
- B) Rules that fit the particulars of science fiction gaming, not SF gaming cramed into a generic system,
- C) And a setting with a hook.
I think you'll need to brainstorm on that last one before pouring all that effort into the game. (If you're looking for a commercially-viable rpg, that is. Like James said, do it for the love of developing games if that's your cup of tea.) System matters, but so does setting. How would your setting be different from other SF games? Why should I play your game instead of Generic SF RPG? You'll need a hook, man. Something to drag in those of us who prefer a cool game universe over a cool game mechanic.
Quotethink you'll need to brainstorm on that last one before pouring all that effort into the game. (If you're looking for a commercially-viable rpg, that is.
Actually I do have a nice hook and t's got a humourous angle.
Rogue: Emperor is the setting that makes the most of all the details in the rulebook where an all-powerful emperor no one can find constantly meddles in afffairs of the civilized planetary systems based on their moral behaviour. Smack that sex-bot and you may be punished by a Tribe invader fleet suddenly appearing in your solar system. Execute an old man and you may find your sun exploding.
Thats just a rough idea and there is a whole mechanism behind the Emperor that I won't go into detail here.
I publish Dawning Star, which was the first full-scale campaign setting using the d20 Future rules. I've spent the last year and change trying to get some mindshare going. It's been a tough road to hoe despite our relative success (e.g., nominated for an ENnie for best d20 game). I can tell you from experience that sci-fi is a much harder genre to make a go of it than fantasy on the one end of the spectrum or a "niche genre" at the other end of the spectrum. In my opinion, there are two reasons for this
First, moreso than any other genre (with the obvious exception of D&D-based fantasy), sci-fi rpgers have their "pet games." There are people who are positively commited to Traveler, Space Opera, Star Wars (both versions), Blue Planet, etc. Even though these lines are, for the most part, "dead" their proponents continue to play them and show very little willingness to change.
Second, sci-fi covers a wealth of sins: space opera, post-apoc, Firefly/Serenity, Aliens, etc. For DS, we tried to (and I think succeeded) create a setting that would accomodate a number of sub-genres. Still, it's hard to get someone who wants to run a Firefly game to pick up our book rather than play Serenity. It's hard to get someone who wants to run a Space Opera game to pick up our book rather than play Space Opera or Traveler. Etc., etc.
I'm not saying you shouldn't go forward with your project. I'm just saying that I think sci-fi is indeed a tougher genre to sell in than others.
In general terms, sci-fi has certainly been a failed genre in role-playing games. However, I don't think it's because it's a tough genre, not really. I think that failure is a reflection of the "sci-fi" games that have been released. The vast, vast majority of these titles are warmed-over fantasy tropes replacing magic wands with lasers and chainmail with powered armor. The quest is deeply embedded in these games, and is often the primary narrative structure ("Your corporate backer wants you to do X on planet Y but it's guarded by alien race Z"). There's very little attention given to how the science fiction source material works, and consequently, most of these games aren't "really" science fiction, they're fantasy with a scifi color palette.
I think it's like a federal law that I must mention Joshua Newman's upcoming game Shock: here. The game has you take a new technology and juxtapose it with a moral issue and play out the ensuing conflicts. This is one formula that produces science fiction (more specifically, speculative fiction). No doubt there are more. If you want to publish a scifi RPG, I'd strongly suggest that you develop your own formula -- ask yourself what makes your game science fiction many times over throughout the design process. If you can produce a game that actually creates science fiction play and not another space fantasy title, I think you'll find a worthwhile market waiting for you.
I would reccomend my own humble article on SF games, 'Breaking the Heart of the Universe"
for my feeling on the subject of SF RPGs.
Quote from: Blankshield on April 15, 2006, 10:37:16 AM
if you are careful and thoughtful - it's nearly impossible to lose money.
I must be the most thoughtless and uncarfulperson out there. Maybe its just because I'm the least interested in selling anything and the least able to sell person on the planet. But anywho I wrote a Science Fiction game and I've had little interest. The people that I know love it, (in spite of my inability to sell) but I haven't had a lot of people downloading the book. Everyone that I talk to wants to play fantasy. Oh well!
And in case anyone is going to argue about my claim of Science Fiction over Sci-Fi, the game has potential for both, and I've ran both kinds of games. (And couldn't moral issues about science be easily replaced by moral issues about magic? The same charge can easily be made.)
Boy, I sure hope you can make money writing a science fiction RPG. I'I had moret than 600 downloads of my playtest versions of Shock: which indicates some level of interest.
But you know, you gotta sell stuff. Stuff doesn't sell itself. You have to make a community of people who are into stuff like the stuff you're making.
Whether it's magic or technology doesn't make any difference about whether it's science fiction on not. In fact, there's a discussion about that over at my forum (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?board=56.0")from a while back. What matters is the difference between your society as a player and that within the fiction. The science, technology, magic, and so forth is in service to those differences.
Hi Del,
Here's my advice, and I urge you to disobey it and show that I'm wrong, if you disagree.
A big ol' hardcover science fiction role-playing game is not currently a good sell, especially not through the game stores. Historically they have done very poorly, especially when they take a kitchen-sink approach, trying to do everything from early Star Trek to cyberpunk to transhuman to surrealism to et cetera. When you sell "you can do anything!", you're really selling nothing.
I suggest that you make the Rogue: Emperor concept the central feature of the game you publish. It reminds me of the excellent Alastor novels by Jack Vance.
Best, Ron
P.S. Emmett, that was an empty, incoherent post. You're expected to bring some critical thinking into your posting at the Forge. More whiny trash like that gets ported to the Inactive File.
It's no surprise to me that I totally agree with Ron:
Make an SF setting that does something specific, something unique and memorable. It sounds like you're off to a good start with that. Then stick to your rayguns. Don't try to make it all things to all men. That will make it no things to anyone. It's distinction that makes art fly, not similarity.
That goes for your game design as well as book design and marketing.
Look carefully at all your publishing and distribution (small "d" there) options and make sure your product is good. You'll do fine.
QuoteI suggest that you make the Rogue: Emperor concept the central feature of the game you publish. It reminds me of the excellent Alastor novels by Jack Vance.
QuoteMake an SF setting that does something specific, something unique and memorable. It sounds like you're off to a good start with that. Then stick to your rayguns. Don't try to make it all things to all men. That will make it no things to anyone. It's distinction that makes art fly, not similarity.
This is quite encouraging. My original concept was around the Emperor setting but I get dragged into D20 thinking where I think I need to generalize and tool-kit everything.
That being said the big RPG may be going on the back burner as I will probably be busy with the boardgame line I am developing. I can't say cause the contract aint signed yet but I may have very, very good news soon.
Thanks everyone for the advice!
Be careful with that D20 thinking. You can't outproduce them with a similar product. Make something unique down to the core of the rules.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on April 25, 2006, 10:17:07 AM
P.S. Emmett, that was an empty, incoherent post. You're expected to bring some critical thinking into your posting at the Forge. More whiny trash like that gets ported to the Inactive File.
Sorry Ron, I was trying to give my dissenting opinion while not trying to be confrontational to Blankshield. I Also was qualifying that I may not be the best yardstick to go by because of my lack of ability. Hows this. . .
Del,
I've found that despite a large market for fantasy, or near future sci-fi there is very little in the way of Space Opera RPG because of a lack of interest. There are some notable examples such as the Star Wars franchise but that market is largely inspired by the movies and therefore most people look to the Star Wars game explicitly. Games like Traveler have their dedicated fans but they tend to be so dedicated that they aren't interested in crossing over. It remains a very difficult to break into the Science Fiction mindshare.
Fantastic! Thanks Del.
Best, Ron
This very well may be straying off-topic, but:
QuoteI suggest that you make the Rogue: Emperor concept the central feature of the game you publish. It reminds me of the excellent Alastor novels by Jack Vance.
QuoteMake an SF setting that does something specific, something unique and memorable.
Who plays the Emperor, Del? Cause from where I sit, the PCs playing your generic sci fi operative/heroes and having everything that they work for and are invested in stomped on by the Emperor running in and telling them that they're wrong -- that's a recipe for suck. However, the PCs being the
operatives of the Emperor, simultaneously serving as his vanguard and protecting the people from his rampages, sounds totally
awesome. Quick! Fix everything before the Emperor arrives!
Hit 'Post' too soon. My point being: when you "make the game about the Emperor" you need to really make the game about the Emperor such that each and every game is touched by the inescapable influence or presence of the Emperor. Making the PCs work for the Emperor is simply a straightforward way to go about doing that.
I totally agree with Josh there. Want to take this over to First Thoughts and discuss content, Del?
It's worth noting that even the most notable success in the science fiction, Traveller, never bothered with the shiny hardcover release. The game always felt indy, right down to the release in what poets would call a chapbook (the little black books). I wouldn't go for the big outlay release; GDW made their money with an indy look and feel and there isn't a lot of market evidence to suggest that there's money for a high-polish release.
The advice to make the game your own is solid. You're not going to unseat the dedicated Traveller fans since the game already gives them everything they want. Something new an unique, on the other hand, like the game you described, could capture some interest.
As a note, I was paneling with Marc Miller at a convention a few months ago and he's already pushing the new ground-up design of -another- Traveller. If there is a big SF void, then you'd be competing against that, so make sure you distinguish yourself that you're not going to compete against people who might want something that hearkens back to classic Traveller.
Greg Porter
BTRC
P.S. The best way to make a small fortune in the rpg business? Start with a large fortune...