Topic: possible future trends?
Started by: Jack Spencer Jr
Started on: 10/30/2001
Board: RPG Theory
On 10/30/2001 at 4:55am, Jack Spencer Jr wrote:
possible future trends?
I debated with myself about whether to post this here or not. I already posted it on RPGnet's forums here.
Basically, I foresee games that allow other players to sustain interest in the game when their character is not present and/or they have no direct stake in the proceedings will gain a foothold.
The sort of game that does this is a narrativist system with a good Premise, I suspect, but I'm sure Gamist and Simulationist solutions are possible.
Also, GM-less games help with this as players not in a scene must take up GMing duties as varies by system. Also, Gm-less games will gain a foothold since they solve the problem of finding someone willing and able to run a game, sometimes a problem for new players and constantly a problem to find someone who's style of GMing you agree with. (Well, for some.)
I note that many of these sorts of games already exist but they haven't gained much of a following. The reason is simple. The bulk of the gaming community (as it were) already has the games they want or at least tan idea for the games they want and games like I've describe here simply aren't it. These new games are more for new players.
I got this notion from Kubasik's Interactive Toolkit:
...Moreover, increasing numbers of people are introduced to the hobby through games like Vampire: The Masquerade and other recent story-based games. Newcomers are bypassing the once standard apprenticeship with D&D, advancing to more "-sophisticated" games. Obviously, these new players don't want the D&D stuff. They want the story and character stuff of more recent games.
We've already discussed elsewhere about the true nature of VtM, but Kubasik wrote this for White Wolf, so we can let that slide, I think, and really see his point.
This is mostly old ground being covered here, but I hadn't put it all together before.
The problem lies in getting these game to the people who would enjoy playing them. They aren't amoung the D&D player. Or, more likely, there aren't that many amoung the D&D players.
I guess all we can do is keep plugging away at this sort of thing and hope that eventually a game catches on and that opens the door for more games, and more people.
Which was original purpose for my post. I've seen many, many people post something about bringing people into the hobby. The fact is, anyone who come into the hobby as it currently stands probably already is in the hobby. (There may be some, too numerous to dismiss but to few to tip the balances). Hence the hobby needs to grow. Not change, per se. There is nothing wrong with D&D and other games and it's there for the people who play them. But grow to offer games to these other people who would play if only the right game existed.
Or such is my theory, anyway.
On 10/30/2001 at 5:20am, Bankuei wrote:
RE: possible future trends?
I agree in that I'd like to see the gaming world grow, although I think a few roadblocks that currently stand in the way of most rpg's need to be overcome.
The first is that rpg's require time. It takes time to build a good character, it takes time to learn the rules(even rules lite, if you've never roleplayed before), it takes time to learn the setting, it takes time to come up with a deep scenario, and it takes time to play.
If games could be taken down to bite sized non-commital sizes(as Magic did), you could get more people willing to experiment. Few games are the kind that have been run in an hour, and few have clean objectives that make for a victory condition.
Second, roleplaying is social, but not like cards or sports. You can meet a whole lot of new people playing cards, or even watching sports. The social factor is what makes LARPS more successful at drawing new crowds. Old school rpgs stick to a small cell and stay that way.
Third, people tend to shy away from rpgs because they involve at least 1 of three things many folks are shy about: Talking to a group(albeit small), math, or writing. Just try to convince most people that they ARE creative.
Online rpg's have blown up simply because you can quit when you want to(time), "meet" new people, and if you say something stupid, you can always log off.
If nothing else, at least we have creative folks up here working on new styles of play. Maybe we'll be lucky enough to catch wind of the new genre in the future. :smile:
Kuei
On 10/30/2001 at 6:22am, Jack Spencer Jr wrote:
RE: possible future trends?
On 2001-10-30 00:20, Bankuei wrote:
Third, people tend to shy away from rpgs because they involve at least 1 of three things many folks are shy about: Talking to a group(albeit small), math, or writing.
Interesting quote when compared to the Harlan Ellison quote (paraphrased) "Everyone thinks they can write, drive, and [ pitch whoopie ]"
I guess that you can be able to do something (or just think you can) and still be shy about it.
[ This Message was edited by: pblock on 2001-10-30 01:23 ]