I have to say, I am struck at the many statements made in this forum by designers that indicate that they just don't like people.

That people, in general, are stupid; need simple entertainment; lazy; want instantaneous gratification; prefer passive activities to active; and so on.

These statements are made with no supporting data. I want to point out that:

a.) America is not the entire world.
b.) The North American Media Outlets are not the entirety of America.
c.) The last twenty five years does not represent all of human entertainment potential.

What do you think people did before television?

They told stories, did amateur theatricals, sang, played musical instruments, played games with sticks and rocks and dirt.

How can individuals who don't like people design, not to mention market, games that people will want to play?

I think that's a strong reason that role-playing as a hobby is stuck in a genre ghetto. Because it's the comfort zone for the designers--who are stuck in a genre subculture.

Meanwhile, "The Sims" is on the cover of Time Magazine, because a lot of people *do* want to role-play. They just don't want to role-play in a pseudo-mediaeval setting of angst ridden horror or high fantasy. They want to role play being rock stars, politicians, mafiosi, football players, and strippers. Because they aren't misanthropes.

Iteresting post, Matt.

It is true that people of all ilks enjoy role-playing, as you pointed out with The Sims. And just because most rpgs and crpgs are of the fantasy slant doesn't mean that's the only thing people want (however it is the preference of many--myself included--I prefer the thematic scope of fantasy over the baggage of dealing with real-world stuff like football and the stock market).

My wife likes to find those fashion websites that let you pick out a body, hair color, etc. and then play "dress up". And she claims she loathes role-playing. The problem isn't that she doesn't like it, she's just damn picky about what *kind* of rp it is and how it is facilitated. She doesn't want to pack a big sword around and add up strength modfiers.

Its a great big world out there and the potential markets for rpgs is phenomenal when you consider that we're talking about a medium that has just as much potential for diversity as painting, music, or anything else.

MK Snyder wrote: I have to say, I am struck at the many statements made in this forum by designers that indicate that they just don't like people.

That people, in general, are stupid; need simple entertainment; lazy; want instantaneous gratification; prefer passive activities to active; and so on.

MK Snyder wrote: I have to say, I am struck at the many statements made in this forum by designers that indicate that they just don't like people.

That people, in general, are stupid; need simple entertainment; lazy; want instantaneous gratification; prefer passive activities to active; and so on.

Hello,

For everyone: Matt Snyder is the designer of Dust Devils and runs the Chimera Creative forum. His Forge username is "Matt Snyder." Maryanne K. Snyder is a different person with many virtues of her own. Her Forge username is "MK Snyder." This public service announcement is intended to sink very deeply into people's brains.

MK, I guess it's hard for me to contribute much until I get a better idea of your perceptions. What posts or comments, in this forum specifically, lead you to think that such an outlook is characteristic? Bearing in mind, of course, that one person presenting an emphatic or repeated example remains an N of 1.

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: Hello,

For everyone: Matt Snyder is the designer of Dust Devils and runs the Chimera Creative forum. His Forge username is "Matt Snyder." Maryanne K. Snyder is a different person with many virtues of her own. Her Forge username is "MK Snyder." This public service announcement is intended to sink very deeply into people's brains.

Funny, I like people, I get along with people, I work in a service oriented industry and get lots of compliments for that. On the other hand, some gamers think I'm rude--because I ask questions, or because I don't like the games they love (something I don't get, if you say "I don't like your favorite game" what is it to me? Big deal, you don't like it.).

But outside of the odd "fan-atic" of a game who can't accept people have tastes that differ from their own, I get along well with others. I get frustrated, annoyed, and even pissed off at others, but thats rare.

James V. West wrote: Iteresting post, Matt.

It is true that people of all ilks enjoy role-playing, as you pointed out with The Sims. And just because most rpgs and crpgs are of the fantasy slant doesn't mean that's the only thing people want (however it is the preference of many--myself included--I prefer the thematic scope of fantasy over the baggage of dealing with real-world stuff like football and the stock market).

My wife likes to find those fashion websites that let you pick out a body, hair color, etc. and then play "dress up". And she claims she loathes role-playing. The problem isn't that she doesn't like it, she's just damn picky about what *kind* of rp it is and how it is facilitated. She doesn't want to pack a big sword around and add up strength modfiers.

Its a great big world out there and the potential markets for rpgs is phenomenal when you consider that we're talking about a medium that has just as much potential for diversity as painting, music, or anything else.

MK, saying "damn picky" was a compliment to her.

By way of the evolution of role-playing games the vast majority of gamers I've ever known are simply happy to go dungeoneering and hack stuff up. It's a wonderful new experience to know someone who dislikes that kind of gaming, but shows a preference for a different kind. It broadens the scope quite a bit.

And, yeah, paper dolls are fun ;-)

Hello,

Maryanne, I'm still waiting for any evidence that designers in this forum don't like people. Can you provide any specific posts or comments that indicate this beyond some "feeling" on your part?

Best,
Ron

James V. West wrote: And, yeah, paper dolls are fun ;-)

It seems to me that what Maryanne was responding to was the 'gamers are smarter' and 'Non-RPGers aren't creattive' (I'm paraphrasing a lot) comments that people were making in the threads on what's mainstream. There may be some us vs. them sentiment there, but I don't see it as a general misanthropy (not to say that those comments weren't wrong; just that they come from sme other place).

BTW, I don't know about any of you, but what is the Hero Machine but paper dolls for RPGers? :-)

Mike

Hi Mike,

Those are isolated comments from folks who are not necessarily game designers, made during a very emotionally-challenging discussion. I think it's reaching extremely far to characterize game design as misanthropic based on those.

But as ever, I await Maryanne's clarification.

Best,
Ron

I think MK's comments are referring to the game designer laments over not knowing how to reach a wider audience, and then blaming pc games and ccgs as killing their chances, followed by the inevitable "well, the customers these days are morons who want to click their mouse for hours on end" rant.

I spoke with Ron about this early in the days of Gaming Outpost. To wit: Game designers who are so caught up in the academia of making role-play games, game system theory and talking about sales, -that it seemed to me that they almost didn't enjoy what they were doing. It sounded like a study group for math homework.

As far as the somewhat off-topic "America isn't the world" list, I submit:
1. It should be.
2. North American outlets provide the best business model and a worthy goal (by sheer volume) to figure out and use (from a distribution and profit standpoint). What shall I consider? The distros in Tibet?
3. On other forms of entertainment; agreed. But I think this goes back to a few designers trying to justify their less than stellar attempts to 'rock the industry' or whatever, by blaming other forms of gaming as the reason they fail. It's almost a non-issue.

As to anyone who role-plays (regardless of format), I still stand by my opinion that people who do role-play are generally smarter than people who don't role-play. So chalk me up as a game designer with respect and appreciation for my audience.

Jeff
www.orbit-rpg.com

I don't know about any game designers making the sort of statements that MK describes, but I've certainly heard them from lots of gamers. This seems to be a common reaction to people who feel that they are being marginalized. I see it in the use of "mundanes" by some science fiction fans to refer to people who aren't part of the SF culture and I've seen it in gamers who denigrate pastimes other than gaming. We've all seen it within gaming when proponents of system X make fun of people who play system Y. Since I've heard these sentiments from so many gamers over the years, I'd be surprised if there weren't some game designers who shared those sentiments.

All this ties into some of the recent discussion on issue of what is mainstream. Some gamers get insular and misanthropic because they feel marginalized. The larger culture sees them as insular and misanthropic and so it marginalizes them further.

I've seen plenty of examples of kids who are less popular for whatever reason identifying strongly with Harry Potter and using terminology from the books--specifically calling everyone else "muggles". I think we can trace this kind of behavior into any kind of marginalized group. I used to be a huge metalhead in high school and I constantly ragged against pop-rock and teeny-bopper music. I honestly thought my music was cooler, smarter, and better.

Take a good look at all the wonderfully academic and quite involving discussion that's going on here at The Forge. I'm one of the least involved people in theory discussion but when I try to talk to someone outside this community about ideas discussed within it, I get blank stares. It would be easy for me to start thinking I'm somehow smarter, somehow involved in a higher arena of thought. But then again, I don't know squat about advanced mathematics. If a mathematician started talking shop to me I'm sure at some point I'd have a blank stare.

JSDiamond wrote:

As far as the somewhat off-topic "America isn't the world" list, I submit:
1. It should be.
2. North American outlets provide the best business model and a worthy goal (by sheer volume) to figure out and use (from a distribution and profit standpoint). What shall I consider? The distros in Tibet?

Irmo,
I was mainly responding to the acidic tone of "America is not the world" comment. I do understand that the EU is the larger market. But IMO it's not one cohesive whole, it's still divided by culture and borders and I am simply speaking from the belief that indie game designers/publishers (no matter where you live in the world) should look toward the American market as a worthy goal (like many artists, musicians, clothing designers, etc.) Making it 'over here' holds up. It's still *the* plateau that many people of other countries reach for.

For myself (living in the U.S.) my only care publishingwise is marketing in the U.S. I am not concerned about international sales. How absurd of me to do so! I'm a one man operation, from writing to illustrating. My practice is 'do the work' before making grand plans for world conquest.

I do apologize for causing any offense and going off topic.

JSDiamond wrote:
For myself (living in the U.S.) my only care publishingwise is marketing in the U.S. I am not concerned about international sales. How absurd of me to do so! I'm a one man operation, from writing to illustrating. My practice is 'do the work' before making grand plans for world conquest.

So, I would just like to point out that English is spoken far beyond the borders of the USA, and at the very least is this is the distribution of your potential audience. Becuase America is not the world. But feel free to shoot yourself in the foot.