Sell Me on ______! (don't we want these threads?)

[DevP]

There were moderationesqe issues here. Basically, the "Sell me on ..." and "What game should I play for ..." threads are frowned upon, or have a hard time fitting in. Very understandably; the former are totally challenging, perhaps rude, and the latter can be unfocused or degrade into pimping of faves by all unhelpfully.

Then again, I think these two kinds of threads can be very powerful. On RPG.net, I've seen some of our favorite games make a sale because of good arguments on these threads. They can be a really good resource.

Can we create our own versions & proper place for these threads? Perhaps there is a more focused version of the "Sell Me"/"What Game" threads that would fit?

My personal intuition is (granted, a bit liberal): "What Game" threads with major talk about the social situation and specific wants with definite Actual Play outcomes could fit there (and perhaps we should encourage after-play reports, as cause & effect); "What Game" threads can also happen in RPG Theory if they're more abstract, talking about how to achieve X play goals and Y play style and Z genre emulation for which mechanics and games, so long as there is dicussion beyond just listing favorites; and "Sell Me" threads could perhaps be standardized into a single sticky thread for each game, kept in each developer's forum.

I can see fundamental objections as reasonable, too, and I'd like to hear those.

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

I think the applied versions that you list at the end are all fine at the Forge, with the proviso that each specialty forum will have its own policy, as it is moderated/defined by its respective owners however they see fit.

It's the undefined versions that won't stand up. "Tell me what game to use for a space opera adventure" simply doesn't provide any information that makes for a valid discussion. I don't see any downside to requiring the undefined versions, if they appear, to shape into defined versions right away.

Every so often, someone private-messages me to ask about which forum they should start a thread in. I merely ask whether it's developing a given game design, addressing an intellectual/comparative issue, applying the Big Model, or discussing actual play. If it's not any of these, then it's usually an excuse to socialize, and the person either chooses one of the applications (leaving the "need to socialize" behind as a priority) or decides not to post.

For threads which are pretty much Sell Me Ons, or a similar thing like Has Anyone Played, and which do not feature an application specific to a Forge forum, I think RPG.net is a grand place for them, and I don't see any need to duplicate that function here at this site.

Best,
Ron

[Doyce]

My personal intuition is (granted, a bit liberal): "What Game" threads with major talk about the social situation and specific wants with definite Actual Play outcomes could fit there (and perhaps we should encourage after-play reports, as cause & effect); "What Game" threads can also happen in RPG Theory if they're more abstract, talking about how to achieve X play goals and Y play style and Z genre emulation for which mechanics and games, so long as there is dicussion beyond just listing favorites.

Ironically, that's almost exactly how I decided I should frame the recent "What Game" thread I posted to Actual Play, so I suppose it's obvious that such guidelines make sense to me.

[Andy Kitkowski]

Can we create our own versions & proper place for these threads? Perhaps there is a more focused version of the "Sell Me"/"What Game" threads that would fit?

I absolutely think that a more directed version of "Sell Me..." will work on Actual Play, especially if you're asking people for Actual Play vignettes to help you understand what playing the game is like.

Goofus doesn't ask directed questions.

Yo bitchezzz. I hear that Inspectres is some mad, maaad funky shit. Make me buy it. GO!

Gallant asks directed questions and requests specific feedback

"Hey guys, I heard about this game called Inspectres. I heard that it was this kind of game: blah blah blah.  I heard about these unique mechanics, like blah and blah and blah blah blah.

I'm very interested in this game, but just hearing about blah and blah... well, I can't quite understand it, or how it might work with my gaming group, who generally prefer blah, blah and blah.

So could someone please:
* Provide perhaps a quick vignette about how you used the blah blah system in play, describing how it worked for you and why?
* Perhaps evoke a story about another quick situation that happened in that game that really made you appreciate it?

Just a thought.  It should be cool if you ask directed questions, especially if you fish for feedback regarding events in Actual Play from other people and their groups.

-Andy

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

That's a good thought, Andy, but even Gallant's post isn't for Actual Play. He'd do better to consider what makes him interested in InSpectres at all, then ask for comparisons or clarifications in RPG Theory.

RPG Theory is a much-abused forum over the last year especially. Speaking not as a moderator, I think it is riddled with the mental equivalent of hand-wringing and a lot of intellectual posturing. (The moderator cannot tell people how to post, so must be silent.)

Gallant would be welcome to post a straightforward "idea" thread along the lines of "How does InSpectres compare to Call of Cthulhu," including salient features of Call of Cthulhu as he has experienced it. If that leads to Actual Play threads, then all the better.

Best,
Ron

[xiombarg]

I dunno... If the site is supposed to support the production and publication of Indie RPGs, shouldn't there be a room for what is, in essence, a "promote this game to me" thread?

[Ron Edwards]

Thoughts, anyone? I don't seem to be able to get mine across.

Best,
Ron

[pete_darby]

If, rather than a coy "sell me" we have a descending of the Forge wolves onto a design, or possibly pair of designs with ostensibly similar goals, ripping them apart to see what they're doing, what they say they're doing, and how far they suceed in their stated goals... well, I'd like to see some of that.

I could try provoking at this point by posting "So, Ron, Sell me on WW StoryTeller system..." but that would be trolling of the worst sort.

[Paul Czege]

Hey Kirt,

...shouldn't there be a room for what is, in essence, a "promote this game to me" thread?

Well, there's promotion and there's promotion. My thinking is that the enduring significance of a given game is best established by efforts promoting actual play...and that there isn't much of a correllation at all between efforts focused on promoting sales and the actual play from which a game's significance is derived. If you promote actual play, sales will follow. If you promote sales, well, you may well get sales, but you also create a population of programmed consumers...a disaffected population whose dissatisfactions, ranging from vague to intense, and buyer's remorse, work against your efforts on behalf of a game's significance.

Paul

[Michael S. Miller]

If you promote sales, well, you may well get sales, but you also create a population of programmed consumers...a disaffected population whose dissatisfactions, ranging from vague to intense, and buyer's remorse, work against your efforts on behalf of a game's significance.

HI, Paul.

You've confused me. Why do you feel that a hypothetical thread that discusses "Game X is designed to do A, B and C. Quality D is a feature, not a bug because of ..." would lead to buyers' remorse? Wouldn't this lead to getting information right from the designer's mouth to the potential customers, and thus a more accurate perception of what they're getting before they buy?

Here's a for-instance. I really love InSpectres. I ran the game at a few local cons shortly after I bought it (2002). Because of the limited, one-shot nature of con games, I'd run a single mission in a 4-hour time slot. I never used the rules for building up your franchise, taking vacation, etc. Thus, my veiw of the game was that it was rather light, very fun, beer-n-pretzels fare. Then, in the discussion forum on one of the game's reviews on rpg.net, Ron mentioned about the thematic heart of the game being how those franchise dice get spent: individual stress v. communal success. BAM! It completely revolutionized my understanding of the game. Next time I run it at a con, I'll do at least three smaller missions so that the franchise rules can get into play.

I think Dev is looking for places where these types of insights/features/selling points an be assembled in one place, rather than scattered over dozens of threads that someone may or may not happen to locate. I think finding a place for such info would be a boon to those promoting their own games. Perhaps the Forge isn't the place for it, but where else should it go?

[Bankuei]

Hi folks,

I've always found, "Sell me on" threads to be opinion polling.  Nice, but...nothing useful emerges.  Between one and three posts give the actual useful features of a game and how it plays, and the rest devolve into "It's cool/It's crap" and random personal fanboy flamewars.  Assuming we knock out the fanboyism(which still happens here, its just under more control), we still only generate a few worthwhile posts and then don't really get the game indepth.

I've found Actual Play threads to be much more revealing.  Maybe, maybe, at best, we could have, "Have you played X, and what was your experiences?" type threads, but I'm still very hesitant.

Chris

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

The Forge is such a place for such things. Just post about Actual Play, RPG Theory (e.g. comparisons, applications), and similar.

That's great promotion for the games and a great source of the kinds of insights you're talking about. I have repeatedly called for people to name a game and ask for any substantive discussion of it in RPG Theory. I'm not sure why that doesn't fill the bill you're talking about.

Best,
Ron

[sirogit]

This may only be tangenially related, but something I always wanted to see is some sort of rough model of very agreeable, very general terms for what paticular games can and can't do well, with relation to what other games can do.

Obviously the substance of "What game for X" threads shows that arriving at an agreeable model of any size could be very difficult.

[daMoose_Neo]

Even a "Sell Me" thread isn't so bad, especially if it were done by people as a "test" as opposed to someone wandering in and posting a one shot deal.
A sales pitch (salesman here :D Cell phones personally) has to cram as much information as possible in a short space. Typically it will showcase the best features of the product. An unscrupulous sales person will only focus on those pluses, totally ignoring the drawbacks. A better sales person will touch on those then blow past as fast as possible. A good sales person will represent not only more than one competing product but showcase the best each one has and what it does better than another (I sell Sprint, Alltell, and now three varieties of Pre-paid, all from different carriers). As long as its INFORMATION thats being posted and not pure BS, then I'd say it was beneficial.

Else, maybe not a thread but a subsection/resource part of the site (apart from the reviews) where you have a bulleted list of the pluses (what the game does well, unique features, etc) as well as drawbacks (what it handles poorly, what needs expansion, issues) and even links back to Actual Play topics illustrating the points. I know we have *roughly* that on the board and I know a lot of people here are familiar with the major titles (Sorcerror, InSpectres, seeing alot of Burning Wheel, Riddle of Steel), but
1) a lot of us aren't and
2) those topics that DO exist are scattered. Searching can dredge up a lot of them, yes, but then theres also the "Well, look at <x title> to see <x feature>" posts in the oddest places. Not all references actually give good information.
Collect the information, organize it, summarize it. Tell me InSpectres is good for this genre, does this, has this unique feature but doesn't handle this or that or is more for X Player. Let me compare that to others on the board side by side.

[talysman]

hmmm, I'm not understanding this thread.

I *thought* I understood it, at first. Dev asked if it's a good idea to have "Sell Me On X" threads, and explained the positive benefits. Ron said that there's nothing wrong with such threads as long as they aren't a general call for proselytizing, but are instead tightly focused on the topic of whichever forum they appear in.

but I dunno, it seems like either people are trying to ask about something *else*, and Ron's not getting it, or Ron answered the question and other people aren't getting it. what is really being asked here? the general shape of the thread is starting to look like:

 Someone: wouldn't it be a good idea to allow X?
 Ron: X is allowed, as long as it meets condition Y.
 Someone: but wouldn't it be a good idea to allow X?
 Ron: but X *is* allowed.
 Someone: then why isn't X allowed?
(etc.)

is there something I'm missing? I thought the perfect forum for "Sell Me On X" threads was Actual Play, with the thread being focused as "hey, someone wants me to GM game X, but I would like to see some actual play examples that highlight what people think are the good or bad points of the system".  or maybe someone thinks a particular rule in game X is flawed, and asks a specific question in the RPG Theory forum about how that rule works, what it supports, what it doesn't support, and how it compares to another rule in game Y.

what is it that people want to talk about that doesn't fit those two options?