Quote from: Engine;232183I'm sorry you feel that way.

Don't apologise 32. You're perfectly entitled to ramble on nonsensically before getting to the point. You can then verbosely make said point and feign confusion when no-one gives a flying fuck over a rolling doughnut what the hell you are on about.

Anyone else got more to add the issue of The Collectors Conundrum?

Quote from: Jackalope;232190I don't know if there really are enough of these so called "collectors" to distort the market.

I don't either; it's one of the problems I have in assessing the validity of the thesis. I can only speak from my own experience, and I don't know anyone who buys RPGs and doesn't play them. But I'm also not a member of RPG.net or Storygames, where many of these people, I'm told, are.

Does anyone have anything like an estimate of the proportion of "collectors" to "players," that we might more accurately judge the validity of the thesis?

Quote from: Engine;232177I drive a late 80s BMW. Lest anyone feel I'm being elitist and/or showing off, I should note it's in a condition that would cause any sane human to run screaming from the experience of driving it; I recently spent a couple of months driving it with no clutch - "rev-matching," is the answer to the question some of you are asking - for example. Anyway, I point it out because it's the last of what BMW aficionados consider "real BMWs."

Why is this? Because in the last 80s, facing increased competition from its domestic competitors, BMW was under a great deal of pressure to radically expand its customer base. [Which is the inevitable result of building cars meant to last 20-30+ years.] This meant, since it was the greatest consumer of cars in the world, selling more cars for the US market.

Then as now, Americans were a sizeable people, so the cars needed to be larger, which meant they needed to be heavier, which meant they couldn't change direction - acceleration, cornering, braking - as well. Americans also held the strange - to das Germans - belief that they should be able to do other things while driving, like suck down a Big Gulp, which meant cup holders. [Drinking on Highway 60 while going 70MPH is no big deal; drinking on the autobahn when going 240KPH is highly unwise. Smoking's okay, though: I have a very nice ashtray.] It also meant increased emissions controls [although they wisely chose not to cripple cars for the European market]. In the end, it meant a more complicated, less focused car, which wasn't nearly as much fun to drive, which cost more to repair, and which got radically worse gas mileage [from emissions controls and increased weight]. If someone gave me the choice between a brand new 1986 3-series and a brand new 2008 3-series, I would choose the '86 with no delay.

What's my point with this automotive diversion? The fact is, if BMW hadn't made the changes they did, it is highly unlikely they would still exist as the company we know today. Given the choice between a BMW that made chunky cars and no BMW at all, most BMW fans - and certainly most BMW accountants - would choose the former. While I, of course, would simply drive an old BMW.

If "collectors" - which appears to be the term in use for "people who buy RPGs but don't play them, thus diluting the purity of our gaming intent and sending signals to the RPG companies that we gamers don't agree with" - are significant enough in number to effect the RPG companies' products, they must exist in numbers sufficient to effect their bottom lines. If the voices of collectors are so many that they drown out those of players, they must be a very significant portion of the sales. So you've a choice, between RPG companies making products informed by sales numbers "distorted" by people who aren't playing the game, or RPG companies who don't make nearly so many sales, which in this business often means "no RPG company at all."

While I, of course, will simply play old RPGs.

Whilst I was reading that I was totally agreeing, apart from all the bollocks about cars of course :-)
The truth of the matter is that if collectors are important they they are supporting the industry for everyone else and in so doing they allow good games to get designed and played by other people. Yes there may be more crap but better some crap as well as the good stuff than nothing at all.

As for the collector = good DM I would disagree. I often just make the system up as I had my fill of games that spew 1000 splat books. Now do I have loads of other stuff that feeds this yes sure, libraries of books, etc etc but I don't collect this stuff I buy books to read them so now I have a lot of books.
I think being a fan does help being a DM but even that is not necessary. A really good DM, and I have met a few, can create a great game from nothing

Collectors virtually destroyed the comic industry, and I see the same thing with the RPG industry too.  Although it's more the companies that focus on selling to the collectors than the collectors themselves that are the problem.  You can't blame the collectors for enjoying what they do.

So it more "gaming companies that are too focused on the peripheral community" that is a f*cking pox on the hobby.

Quote from: Quire;232192You're perfectly entitled to ramble on nonsensically before getting to the point. You can then verbosely make said point and feign confusion when no-one gives a flying fuck over a rolling doughnut what the hell you are on about.

No, really, Quire, I'm serious. Clearly you feel my view as presented is incorrect, but thus far all you've done is said that it's incorrect. Could you please elucidate your objections to it, or refute my view? I'm really just putting out a possibility, and corrections to that possibility would be most welcome.

Also, I would personally appreciate it if you could manage to do so in a mature, reasonable fashion, rather than simply insulting me, which doesn't illuminate your own counterpoint in any way; thank you.

Quote from: Stuart;232195Collectors virtually destroyed the comic industry, and I see the same thing with the RPG industry too.

Now that is interesting.

Can you go into that a bit more, Stuart?

Quote from: Engine;232197Also, I would personally appreciate it if you could manage to do so in a mature, reasonable fashion, rather than simply insulting me, which doesn't illuminate your own counterpoint in any way; thank you.

It's not what you do, it's the way that you do it. It's not what you say... and so on.

You know how a lot of people look at you strangely?

They're wondering if you're upside-down, because that shit must surely be coming out of your ass.

Thanks for playing, 32.

I don't think collectors are destroying the hobby. In some ways I think they prop it up financially. I don't think, however, they have much to add to any back and forth chatter about gaming, about games yes, but not about gaming. But, I'm often wrong.

Quote from: Engine;232193I don't either; it's one of the problems I have in assessing the validity of the thesis. I can only speak from my own experience, and I don't know anyone who buys RPGs and doesn't play them. But I'm also not a member of RPG.net or Storygames, where many of these people, I'm told, are.

Oh, I think the non-gamer distortion effect on game forums is quite pronounced.  RPGsite is one of the best in terms of gamer:kibitizer ratios, rpg.net one of the worst.  But I don't know if they have real effect on the market for games.  It certainly does lead to a bunch of noise and poorly informed reviews, bad ideas about in-game behavior, and worse ideas about dealing with OOC inter-player conflicts.  I can pretty much assure you that 90% of the people who champion the "don't play with assholes" idea don't play with anyone.

Seriously, if you have a gaming group and think there is no asshole in it, then the asshole is you.  Because all gaming groups have at least one asshole.

QuoteDoes anyone have anything like an estimate of the proportion of "collectors" to "players," that we might more accurately judge the validity of the thesis

Exactly, need more data.

@Quire: Yes, I thought that was a bit much to ask. Next time, perhaps!

[edit: That was some passive-aggressive bullshit on my part. My sincere apologies, Quire.]

Quote from: Quire;232198Now that is interesting.

Can you go into that a bit more, Stuart?

By over-focusing on making comics "not just for kids!" they ended up making comics that weren't for kids... and then were surprised that they had a shrinking market as they had fewer kids getting into comics to replace people who were growing out of them.

The collectors wanted convoluted, confusing story lines and dark, gritty characters.  They didn't want to grow out of superman and batman -- they wanted them to get older and more "mature" with them.  So rather than add comics for adults, they changed the kids stuff to be more grown up.  Great for the adults... not so great for the kids.

It was a short-term success in that the collectors would buy a lot of product compared to a casual consumer (or kids!) -- but it was a bit like killing the goose that laid the golden egg.  It's was a non-sustainable business, and eventually the house of cards started to collapse.

Over time there was a conscious decision to focus more on the mature gamer, and the collector in particular.  This is virtually the same thing that happened with the comics industry -- but about 10 years later.

The RPG industry saw it's peak in the early 80s when TSR put "Ages 10 and up" on the covers of it's books.  In 2000 WotC decided RPGs would be for adults.

And the results look very, very similar to what we say with the comics industry.

Quote from: Aos;232200I don't think collectors are destroying the hobby. In some ways I think they prop it up financially.

Yeah... That's why I'm asking about it. I'm thinking along the same lines.

I also recognise that people like Balbinus have got a good thinking head on their shoulders, so I'm hoping they can cast a light in my general direction and illuminate me a little.

Quote from: Jackalope;232201Oh, I think the non-gamer distortion effect on game forums is quite pronounced.

One of the greatest errors I see on gaming forums is that people on them feel the population of that forum is representative of gamers as a whole, which just often isn't true at all! So like you say, you can have this terrible kibitzer ratio on a site, while not having one in the market. Need more data.

Quote from: Stuart;232204And the results look very, very similar to what we say with the comics industry.

Stuart, that was very interesting, thanks. It's given me a lot of food for thought.

Quote from: Quire;232198Now that is interesting.

Can you go into that a bit more, Stuart?

I think he's referring to the 90's "speculators".  (EDIT: Actually, it appears Stuart was referring to something else.  Oh, well)

But it's unfair to blame just them.  The full history is quite a sordid affair.

First, you had Marvel owner Ron Perelman constantly raising prices and adding new titles for the more popular properties, all the while alienating a lot of the talent in the industry.  

Then there was Diamond, the distributor who gave anyone and everyone massive amounts of credit.  You could literally open a comic store with a couple hundred bucks at the time.

Finally, speculating comic collectors kept buying new #1 and "limited edition" comics, thinking they would be worth something some day.  However, because they were published in the millions, most are worth about 50% or less of their cover value more than 10 years later.

Chuck Rozanski, owner of Mile High Comics, has written several essays about those times: see http://www.milehighcomics.com/tales/cbg36.html, http://www.milehighcomics.com/tales/cbg37.html, and http://www.milehighcomics.com/tales/cbg38.html for some interesting highlights.