Has anyone else noticed a general trend in gaming of moving back toward older editions of games? I ran across this Oldhammer movement in the Warhammer community recently where they basically play the game as it was in its first two editions. It struck me that some of reasoning was very similar to that of the OSR in rpgs, namely that they were essentially moving back to a "lighter" play style in which official army lists aren't needed and things are adjudicated by a referee instead of bickering over rules. There also seems to be an emphasis on playing cool homebrew scenarios instead of just what is in the core rulebook.

I have also heard a great deal of bitching in certain circles of the local Magic community that the game "just ain't right" anymore, though I have seen no real conscious consensus as to what that means.

Is there some sort of general trend developing here? Or am I just bored as hell and reading too much into things?

I hadn't really noticed it but I'm not surprised.  Games get more complex and messy as they age and evolve.  Sometimes I think that's why there's a market for new games at all.

Yeah it does seem like many times there is a great game that gets further fucked up with every new edition. It seems like nothing ever really gets fixed you just end up with a new set of inconsistencies in place of the old ones. I am not very familiar with the older Warhammer rules but my understanding is that there were less of them and the game was not built around using only Games Workshop miniatures.

I wonder if any of it has to do with the companies that produce games growing into more professional business models that seem to get out of touch with the actual hobbies? I also wonder if the drive to justify selling new rules books plays a role into the general bloat.

I'm putting together a WoW guild that's focusing on doing older PvE content, mainly Classic, BC and WotLK dungeons. Does that count?

It's not table top, but it is an old school movement in a game so... sure why not?

Ogre

Is there really much reason to release new editions of things like RPGs anyway? It's not like computer games where you get better graphics and a smarter AI, the reasons for new editions are more commercially driven rather than customer driven. I mean if there are errata or glaring system holes, fix those, but otherwise build out settings instead of new systems.

It's the vinyl-cassette tape-CD-MP3 business model except you often don't get the same thing only better, you get something very similar with a whole bunch of stuff tacked on to make it look different.

The industry has every reason in the world to release new editions.

The real questions here are:

1. Does the new edition actually needs to be a new game? CoC has been printing the same widely acclaimed game for 6 editions now. They seem intent on fiddling with the engine for 7th, and I'm curious to see what they'll do and how it's going to turn out for them.

2. Do you want a new edition? Do you, as a gamer, feel that the new edition is an improvement over whatever it is that you're playing now?

I think that's all there is to it, really.

It doesn't quite fit the OP, but there is a "flourishing", if you will, of BRP derived games.

Quote from: The Butcher;651906The industry has every reason in the world to release new editions.

The real questions here are:

1. Does the new edition actually needs to be a new game? CoC has been printing the same widely acclaimed game for 6 editions now. They seem intent on fiddling with the engine for 7th, and I'm curious to see what they'll do and how it's going to turn out for them.

2. Do you want a new edition? Do you, as a gamer, feel that the new edition is an improvement over whatever it is that you're playing now?

I think that's all there is to it, really.

I can agree with this, I think as businesses gaming companies need new editions to a large degree. I think the problem is the mindset that a new edition has to be a major overhaul of the game. I prefer to see better layouts, integrated errata, and addressing of minor issues. Honestly RPGs tend to have shitty layouts, I would rather see this kind of thing fixes in a new edition. I think Troll Lord Games has it right in this respect, each new edition is just an effort to get cleaner more efficient layouts with some minor rules updates, though their level of success may vary in this regard.

Last time I played Monopoly, we used an actual shoe, an actual iron, and an actual Scottie as playing pieces.

The battleship was deemed impractical, however.

I see a little bit of this in tabletop minis gaming.  There's a presence (I don't think it's strong enough to call it a "movement") online of bloggers and hobbyists who prefer older editions of Games Worshop properties- Rogue Trader, 40k 2nd edition, earlier versions of Warhammer (Oldhammer), Man of War, Space Fleet, etc.  It's pretty easy to find battle reports of folks playing these games, but it doesn't seem to be particularly widespread, nor has it generated self-published and small press redesigns of games like we've seen from the old school RPG crowd.

Quote from: Arkansan;651838I am not very familiar with the older Warhammer rules but my understanding is that there were less of them and the game was not built around using only Games Workshop miniatures.

I wonder if any of it has to do with the companies that produce games growing into more professional business models that seem to get out of touch with the actual hobbies? I also wonder if the drive to justify selling new rules books plays a role into the general bloat.

GW started to lose contacts with their roots already in late 90's, when they decided to "streamline" their armies, and removed the Squats and the Beastmen from 40K .... not to mention their discontiuation of their Epic line.
Sure, streamlining was something interesting to try out, but it was also obvious that they were focussing on the "big sellers" ...
Their own magazine, White Dwarf, used to include articles on non-GW-things, and they practically endorsed using whatever was appropriate for their games.

Today ... They are just a moneyhungry company that just happens to make great miniatures (since Citadel Miniatures was absorbed into GW).

Quote from: Angry_Douchebag;651961I see a little bit of this in tabletop minis gaming.  There's a presence (I don't think it's strong enough to call it a "movement") online of bloggers and hobbyists who prefer older editions of Games Worshop properties- Rogue Trader, 40k 2nd edition, earlier versions of Warhammer (Oldhammer), Man of War, Space Fleet, etc.  It's pretty easy to find battle reports of folks playing these games, but it doesn't seem to be particularly widespread, nor has it generated self-published and small press redesigns of games like we've seen from the old school RPG crowd.

I give you 3 reasons for the bolded part:
* GW still make great minis, no doubt, and that has kept a lot faithful.
* GW is menacingly highstrung about what they deem as their IP ... so people can't make all-too-obvious copies of GW-Games, without risking a C&D.
* D&D and basic roleplay has been around longer than GW.
Just give them time, and they'll find ways to get around GW's "Intellectual property"-claims, as well as getting their own works out.

I've played with Oldhammer guys because I love Mordheim. I prefer small squad skirmish so stuff like Mordheim and Lunchhammer (500 point WFB) are more my style.

I know guys at cons who still run awesome 40k Epic events and they always get a bunch of players. Nobody is showing up for the rules however, just the coolness of the mass battle.

Sadly, Warmaster, the 10mm Warhammer Fantasy game never got an audience. The rules were very good. More fun than WFB for me.

I've played a few Rogue Trader games for nostalgia, but I prefer the current rules in 40k. Sure I miss the Squat and Ogryns, but overall 40k gets better with each edition (with some bumps in the road).