Slices of the Same Pie (

[Rezolution]

It seems to me that, when designing new games, a lot of game companies take into account what gamers are likely to purchase when making their design decisions. As a result, the RPG industry tends to produce a lot of similar games, since companies want to produce things that they think will be bought. The argument against doing something different (like a game about the Napoleonic era without magic or other types of "nifities") is that not enough gamers would buy it to make it worth doing.

Conventional game company wisdom suggests two possible paths: 1) make products gamers are likely to buy, or 2)make the kinds of products you want, but don't expect a lot of people to buy it.

Couldn't there be a third path, i.e. make the kinds of products you want that people *will* buy? I've often wondered why game companies all seem to be going for slices of the same pie that is the RPG-buying public. Why isn't anyone going after untapped markets, or creating markets for their products where before there was none? This kind of thing is done all the time with other types of products, and I don't see why it can't be the same way with RPGs. I think it's entirely possible to both create a great new game and make at least some money doing it -- it just hasn't been done yet.

Any thoughts on this?

[Misguided]

Timothy,

This sounds great, but I don't think it is as simple as you think. I think companies do try to do these things. "Creating markets" can be a very expensive proposition, i.e. this requires advertising, and lots of it. Reaching into untapped markets requires recognizing an untapped market that is sizable enough to be worth developing the products for.

Truthfully, I sometimes wonder which of these two is really happening. As consumers, we often don't know we have to have a wonder-widget until somebody puts it in front of our faces. So was there an untapped market that wanted wonder-widgets (and we just didn't know it yet) or was the market created?

When Vampire: the masquerade stormed onto the scene, was it because it tapped into an existing gothic subculture that wanted an rpg to express their inner fantasies or was that market created, to an extent by the game?

Seriously, I think game designers would fall over themselves to do what you are suggesting if they could.

[S. John Ross]

<B>Couldn't there be a third path, i.e. make the kinds of products you want that people *will* buy?</B>

Gee? D'ya think?

We get such geniuses around here.

[Guildofblades]

Hi Everyone,

Something that needs to be considered is that "going after new markets" tends not to be an easy proposition.

Understanding that 90-95% of new businesses fail, its easy enough to understand why most businessmen don't want to try anything harder than they have to. They just can't afford to take the risks.

The Guild of Blades supports a number of products lines, each one designed with two thoughts in mind:

1) How significant is the existing consumer base for this game concept.

2) How much interest will this game raise among the non gaming public.

It has been out intent from day 1 to try and expand our business as much into new markets and into the existing core market. But you have to understand this costs money, and takes time.

Any business that intends to target new markets solely is about 99.9% likely to fail. Building a business that services an existing market is often what gives a business the luxury of trying to expand that market by tying product into other markets.

Where a great many hobby game companies fail is they never seek to expand into those new markets. Though since most small press will go out of business within 2-3 years of starting and never truly establishes itself within its core market, I think its perfectly understandable why you don't see much effort by those companies to branch into other markets. Simply trying would decrease their chance of surviving within their core market.

[Zweihander]

What you are talking about, Timothy is the Brass Ring of RPG creating. Even in corporate settings, I think that the people involved in making the RPG are not so jaded or cyinical as to not want to make a game they like and that people will buy. If there is a lack of alternative games and settings it is largely because of a collective lack of interest in them. Even with agressive marketing, some ideas just won't fly.

Crystal Pepsi anyone?

[NPC Chris D]

Originally posted by Timothy Moerke
Couldn't there be a third path, i.e. make the kinds of products you want that people *will* buy?

The ease of doing this is directly proportional to the degree to which people already want to buy what it is you are reporting, so this isn't so much a third way as a component of the other two --
if you already have a product that fills a large demand, you hype it well and it sells even better; a niche product well hyped, well,
will sell better than otherwise, at least in the short term, but
its harder to artificially create a lasting demand, unless your
product is actually addictive.

And this "third way" is called "marketing".

Chris Dicely

[Rezolution]

Originally posted by Zweihander
I think that the people involved in making the RPG are not so jaded or cyinical as to not want to make a game they like and that people will buy. If there is a lack of alternative games and settings it is largely because of a collective lack of interest in them. Even with agressive marketing, some ideas just won't fly.

Crystal Pepsi anyone?

Yeah, Crystal Pepsi is a good example. :) I agree that some ideas just will not work -- no amount of advertising and marketing can save a product that nobody ever will want. But I'm wondering about why some people *only* think about the collective lack of interest of gamers, and not the collective great interest that other potential markets could have.

[Rezolution]

Originally posted by Sjohn
[BGee? D'ya think?

We get such geniuses around here. [/B]

First, stop being an ass.

Second, I agree that this is Bloody Obvious -- what I am wondering is why not everyone in the RPG industry realizes it.

[Rezolution]

Originally posted by NPC Chris D

...but its harder to artificially create a lasting demand, unless your
product is actually addictive.

And this "third way" is called "marketing".

Chris Dicely

I disagree; it can and has been done with products that are not addictive. Look at Rollerblades -- that's a great example of creating a demand where before there was none. Until Rollerblade, Inc. started selling them, there was no demand for rollerblades. But they saw an opportunity to create demand for their product, and successfully did so.

There are other examples, but this is the best one I could think of off the top of my head.

[Gareth-Michael Skarka]

Originally posted by Timothy Moerke
But I'm wondering about why some people *only* think about the collective lack of interest of gamers, and not the collective great interest that other potential markets could have.

Because the operative word in the second part of that sentence is COULD. There is no guarantee that the "collective great interest" will materialize...and when you're talking about spending ten to twenty thousand dollars to produce, market, and distribute a commercially-available RPG, that uncertainty becomes a very tangible factor in the decision.

Plus, even if the game is "successful", in this industry there are a few levels of success: Most games that meet that definition make enough money to cover their costs, pay the people involved, and produce the next product. A couple of those games become successful to the point of making enough money to seriously expand the companies that produce them....and lastly, only a small handful of games (1-5, tops) every decade or so are successful enough to be "big hits" and create their own markets.

So, given those odds....given that even in the unlikely event that it will be successful, it will most likely only barely cover expenses and make enough money to continue the line, are you willing to chuck even 10K at it?

GMS

[Gareth-Michael Skarka]

Originally posted by Timothy Moerke
[B
First, stop being an ass.

Second, I agree that this is Bloody Obvious -- what I am wondering is why not everyone in the RPG industry realizes it. [/B]

Maybe it's because everyone in the RPG industry DOES realize it, and knows a helluva lot more about the factors involved than you do, and so raising such an obvious point in such a babe-in-the-woods fashion makes YOU look more like an ass than SJohn does for giving you guff about it.

GMS

[Gareth-Michael Skarka]

Originally posted by Timothy Moerke


I disagree; it can and has been done with products that are not addictive. Look at Rollerblades -- that's a great example of creating a demand where before there was none. Until Rollerblade, Inc. started selling them, there was no demand for rollerblades. But they saw an opportunity to create demand for their product, and successfully did so.

There are other examples, but this is the best one I could think of off the top of my head.

Pretty bad example, since you're wrong.

Rollerblades were an effort to address the demands of ice hockey players, speed skaters, etc. who wanted to practice in the off-season, off the ice, but using skates that more closely modeled the physics of ice skates. (old four-wheel roller skates don't work the same way)

The demand was already there. Someone noticed the demand, and did something about it.

GMS

[Rezolution]

Originally posted by Misguided
Timothy,

This sounds great, but I don't think it is as simple as you think. I think companies do try to do these things. "Creating markets" can be a very expensive proposition, i.e. this requires advertising, and lots of it. Reaching into untapped markets requires recognizing an untapped market that is sizable enough to be worth developing the products for.

I don't think it's simple, but I do think it is possible, and more doable than a lot of companies realize. Advertising isn't necessary for this -- well, it can certainly be used, but it is by no means the only way to do it. It could be done with public relations, which doesn't have to cost anything other than a person's time. Also, it could be done with a good low-cost guerilla marketing campaign. This last route would probably be more effective than an ad campaign, actually.

[Rezolution]

Originally posted by Gareth-Michael Skarka


Because the operative word in the second part of that sentence is COULD.
(snip)So, given those odds....given that even in the unlikely event that it will be successful, it will most likely only barely cover expenses and make enough money to continue the line, are you willing to chuck even 10K at it?

GMS

That's a good point. I guess I was thinking of this from the point of view of a company that had the money to spend on something like this, which would be few (heck, probably none at all) game companies. if you're going to spend the money to make a quality game, it only makes sense to go after people that will buy it. Wrongful thinking on my part.

Timothy

[Rezolution]

Originally posted by Gareth-Michael Skarka

Maybe it's because everyone in the RPG industry DOES realize it, and knows a helluva lot more about the factors involved than you do, and so raising such an obvious point in such a babe-in-the-woods fashion makes YOU look more like an ass than SJohn does for giving you guff about it.

GMS

First off, I disagree that everyone in the RPG industry realizes it. Some, yes, but not all. More than once I've heard designers and companies say, "Yeah, we'd like to make game x, but we won't since we don't think it will sell" in cases where the game probably has a much better chance than they think.

As to your second point, you're right, they do know more than I do about industry stuff. But again, I don't think everyone in the RPG industry realizes that they don't have to be limited by what the conventional wisdom says.

Third, I asked a simple, honest question that others here were able to address in a mature and polite manner. I don't see how that makes me more of an ass than Sjohn.

(Edited for clarification)

[Alka-Seltzer]

Originally posted by Timothy Moerke

Third, I asked a simple, honest question that others here were able to address in a mature and polite manner. I don't see how that makes me more of an ass than Sjohn.

(Edited for clarification)


How about this. You are telling a group of mostly industry insiders that A: they (or people like them) make inferior knockoffs of whatever the current popular game is in hopes that they will sell better or B: make highly original groundbreakers but dont care about the profits because its for the art. Your solution? Make highly original games that do sell well! Why didnt we think of that? And inferior popular things selling much better while strange and new, yet potentialy much better, products dont? What a mind blower! Why, that explains all those first person shooters! And why they keep making action movies with no plot but thirty million dollar explosions and crappy crappy cgi.

In contrast Sjohn made light of your intelligence AND managed to properly convey sarcasm with only text which is not easy. He was also mildy amusing and quite brief.

so you both make subtle but undeniable jabs at other peoples intelligence. However his was intentional while yours was accidental. Adding all the points together we find that you have a total of 87 while he has an impressive 320.5 points. So he wins and you are the ass. But I'm happy cause I got to use the word zeitgeist again, thats twice in one day now. Good for me!

Sorry if I've made an ass of myself here, im in kind of a mood. You should see what I said to the USAF starwars gm, I almost feel bad about that now.

[Mock]

Wow. Was all that really necessary?

[Alka-Seltzer]

Originally posted by Mock
Wow. Was all that really necessary?

No.

[NPC BNakagawa]

Everybody always says (especially on message boards and newsgroups) that they are looking for something new and innovative.

But in the end, everyone ends up buying new and improved versions of the same thing they bought last time. Sales figures bear this out. Most of the best selling computer games end with numbers like III, XI and 2002. In the realm of paper games, the best sellers end with things like 3rd edition, d20 and revised.

All I have to say about making games for the untapped market is that at least half of such efforts end up in bargain bins and flea markets. There are occasional exceptions and some of them have enjoyed remarkable success. Not enough to offset the odds of finding such a hit to tempt investors, though. Unless you're willing to put your money where your mouth is, you're just blowing steam.

$0.02

[NPC Chris D]

Originally posted by Timothy Moerke
I disagree; it can and has been done with products that are not addictive.

Hence why I said "harder" and not "impossible", also note that I said that the difficulty is related to how much the product does
not match existing demand, so the usual concern of either making something that conforms to existing demand, or expecting less sales if it does not, still applies if you are trying to pump up the demand with a marketing blitz.

Chris Dicely

[NPC - Invisible Jon]

Originally posted by Misguided

This sounds great, but I don't think it is as simple as you think. I think companies do try to do these things. "Creating markets" can be a very expensive proposition, i.e. this requires advertising, and lots of it. Reaching into untapped markets requires recognizing an untapped market that is sizable enough to be worth developing the products for.


I think that Lewis is taking the right approach with his game Children of the Sun. Create a fertile intellectual property and take the time to develop and nurture it. If it's rich and well-considered AND if it hits the right nerve in the gaming community, then it might take off.

It's just tricky, it is. No one can truly know what's going to kick off into high gear. You just create the best darn IP you can.

Best Regards,

Jonathan Leistiko

Free games on the 15th of each month at:
http://www.invisible-city.com/games/

[Misguided]

Thanks Jon,

If only it were as simple as making a "good game", whatever that is...