QuoteI mean really, why do these threads always devolve?                                                              __________________

Because people take too much pride in their geekdom and games-knowledge.

Quote from: SettembriniSo searching around for a game because you are an unhappy camper is virtueous?

 No, playing GURPS while donating to charity AND saving a damsel in distress  - all in less than 6 hours, THAT would be virtuous.

 But,  That would also be a different thread.

- Ed C.

Pretentiousness:
Art > Music > Film > Gaming > Sports
We're really not that bad

Quote from: SettembriniSo searching around for a game because you are an unhappy camper is virtueous?

Where did you read that?

!i!

Quote from: RPGPunditSo it strikes me that there really are two hobbies, utterly separate.  On the one hand, there's dudes like my brother, who know of four or five games and play one or two. And then there's the gamers who obsess about the games that only 0.1% of the world's gamers have ever heard of, not to mention the idiots on Forums who want to believe and claim that "Scion" or "spirit of the century" or "Truth and justice" are "basically mainstream".

The truth is that anything outside of those few games my brother mentioned (and one or two others possibly, like maybe GURPS) is not and will never be mainstream.  It is a testament to people's abilities to delude themselves to think anything else.

There are far more divisions than just two. I don't see the world in terms of 'mainstream', but in multiple different market groups of various sizes.

One of the things I found fascinating at The Forge and other game design threads was that they seemed to be rediscovering things that had existed in other disciplines, such as improv theatre, stage magic, and even product sales (convincing someone to buy into a premise is little different than convincing them to buy into anything else), from the beginning.

Here's where it gets curious. In most cases, the designers didn't discover these things by observing or being a part of these groups, but only through discussion within their OWN group. And the resulting games did not specifically appeal to anyone in those groups (such as improv actors, magicians, salespeople, or even GAMERS), but to people in a new KIND of group.

Now for a game to become 'mainstream', it needs to appeal to an existing group, like Vampire did. You can't just CREATE a group, you have to find and/or cultivate it. It could very well be that there's a HUGE market for Forge games, just that the individuals in that market are unaware of each other. You also can't target existing gamers because most of them already have a system of choice. In fact, the LAST people you want to target are existing gamers, at least if you want to create the next great RPG.

What I find frustrating is that it is EXTREMELY hard to get data on the average, non-obsessed, "I have a life outside of gaming" gamer, because a web search will only bring back links to the vocal minority, or very creative but very isolated art communities such as The Forge, RPG.net, and theRPGsite. So any data of the kind you shared is very useful.

Quote from: KoltarNo, playing GURPS while donating to charity AND saving a damsel in distress  - all in less than 6 hours, THAT would be virtuous.

What if the charity is Kevin Siembieda? :eek:

!i!

Quote from: KoltarNo, playing GURPS while donating to charity AND saving a damsel in distress  - all in less than 6 hours, THAT would be virtuous.

Donating -> Charity
Damsel-saving > Liberality, possibly Chastity
Playing GURPS -> Patience?

Quote from: Kester PelagiusWhat is an 'actual gamer'?  

I thought we at therpgsite were actual gamers, and following that logic, we play Call of Cthulhu.

Numbers Here

Real gamers play CoC, not D&D

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaWhat if the charity is Kevin Siembieda? :eek:

!i!

 FUNNY!

 Of course ...I meant a REAL  recognizable charity

Quote from: RPGPunditSo how the fuck is it that so many of the members of the second camp can actually believe shit like that "Dogs in the vinyard" has "Popular acclaim"?!

I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally have no illusions about the popularity of such games in my personal circle. Much like you and your brother, if my group knows about any games besides D20, WoD or Shadowrun, it's because I showed it to them. For what it's worth, I've played Capes with several of them and they liked it, and I've got several folks interested in Dogs.

So, y'know, it's just possible that people who haven't heard of obscure shit might in some cases be missing out on something they'd enjoy.

Peace,
-Joel

Back when I found chess interesting, I played it at least once a week for a few years. I was even in my JHS Chess Club for a time.

I have no idea what a Ruy Lopez Opening or a Sicilian Defense is (just found these terms now on Wikipedia). But people who invest passionately in the hobby do know what they are.

If they all of a sudden found a NEW manuver, then that might rock the niche hobbyist world. People on dedicated chess message boards, who talk daily about chess, would surely be talking about these new manuvers. Talking about their experiences with them in their local chess clubs, talking about engaging and defending against them.

And the rest of us chess players who aren't as passionate about the hobby? We'd have no fucking clue. If some chess enthusiast somewhere was talking about the importance of the Lasker-Bauer manuver, who am I to jump onto those boards and say "Hey fuckos! 99% of the world doesn't give a fuck! Your manuver isn't  popular with normal chess players, nor is it important!".

So why should I be bitter about chess hobbyists that are excited about their chess minutiae?

Why should gamers be bitter about gamer hobbyists that are excited about gaming minutiae? SCION is not "popular" or "making waves" with "normal gamers". However, it's 'popular' and 'making waves' with gamers that are passionate about gaming minutiae.

EDIT: It just seems that this problem is a grammatical one. Pundy is upset that people are leaving out the direct objects of their sentences:
"SCION is popular and is selling well." UNTRUE
"SCION is popular and is selling well with hardcore gamers obsessed with the minutiae of the gaming scene." TRUE
Problem is, "...with hardcore gamers obsessed with the minutiae of the gaming scene" is the always the implied direct object of all these self-congratulatory sentences. Some bitter people are not happy with it just being "implied" and want it Actually Etched Into every sentence on the Internet.  Good luck there.

-Andy

That makes a lot of sense.

But sadly, people do not really imply what you imply they imply. Those fuckers really believe for real in the "mass appeal" of, say Polaris or Wushu.

They totally lost the perspective that you so graciously gave them back.

Quote from: SettembriniBut sadly, people do not really imply what you imply they imply. Those fuckers really believe for real in the "mass appeal" of, say Polaris or Wushu.

So? Why does it matter?

Quote from: SettembriniBut sadly, people do not really imply what you imply they imply. Those fuckers really believe for real in the "mass appeal" of, say Polaris or Wushu.

"People."  Which people?  All people?  Some people?  Specific people who can be identified by name?  Does the enemy in your imaginary war have a face?

!i!

Quote from: SettembriniThose fuckers really believe for real in the "mass appeal" of, say Polaris or Wushu.

They totally lost the perspective that you so graciously gave them back.

Did they, really?  Or are you just projecting?  

I'm not asking you to "find evidence" or other rhetorical BS, but I honestly think if I said to someone who loved Wushu and it was all they talked about (who was that guy from RPGNet? Only talked about Wushu, and how he hated gamers?), and in attempt to totally try to stamp out their enthusiasm said, "Hey, when you say 'Wushu is getting popular', you really mean, '...with a handful of gamers on RPGnet', right?" ...I really, truly don't think that they're blinded by love or obsession enough to say, "NO, I mean 'getting popular with EVERYONE' ".

It smells of painting fools with a "crazy brush". Which, admittedly, some folks who say stupid shit deserve sometimes.  But I really can't imagine that someone would really think that "Online passionate gamers" = "All gamers", when pressed to answer for their statements.

I think people are reading too much into others' words. Not adding that "indirectly implied Direct Object" above when it's clear that that's what they meant.

-Andy