Should the Industry save Palladium?

[cj.23]

Hi chaps

I was just thinking about what I can do to help Palladium. I own a copy of RIFTS I think someone gave me somewhere, and I have never played the game, of any other P. system. I have noted the many bad things that people have said over the years about the companies policies, and past actions. I however sincerely regret seeing the company in trouble, and would like to help, I just don't want the artwork. I will therefore buy a few books from them as soon as I get piad and hope that helps, or make a small donation if anyone can suggest a useful method.

However, the question is why should we do this, and why have I started a new thread?

Because I would argue that when any of the rpg companies runs in to trouble, the whole rpg indutry suffers. Therefore I was wondering what the other big to medium sized players, and I'm thinking WotC, White Wolf, Mongoose, etc etc can do to help Palladium, and if indeed it would ultimately be in their own self interest to do so, IRRESPECTIVE of any moral case relating to Mr. K.S's peronal merits and the companies past performance.

P. represent as I understand the third biggest company in rpg gaming if you ignore Games Workshop. WotC, White Wolf, Palldium. I may well be wrong, but if I am not, it strengthens my case significantly. It is to large a company to allow decently to fail. Why?

Well simple capitalist business theory would seem to argue that Palladium failing is a GOOD THING for other companies. It reduces the competition, allowing the other rpg comapnies to feed on the gamer dollar, which is now redistributed to companies who perform well, and so the gamer dollar gets better product, and small and large rpg companies expand to take over P's ecological niche in the market.

However, nothing is ever that simple. There are maybe a couple of million gamers in the US? I have no figures, so I am guessing. That means that the market could easily expand: rpgs could grow, and the market could grow. All companies are not catering to the same folks, and therefore I invoke something I was once taught : "when the market is not saturated, competing product increases awareness of the commodity and mutually improves the market." So the more new, different and interesting rpgs are produced, and the more game companies offerring product, the more people will know of and hence become potential customers for ALL rpg products...

If the number for new products and gaming companies shrinks, then so will the overall market. For every 6 gamers who have sat down to play RIFTS or BTS or Palladium Fantasy, 5 may have never played anything else - but one might become aware of the larger world fo rpgs, and buy product from other companies. The market grows.

Now I suspect that most gamers spend as much as they can on gaming products, or as much as they want to. Trying to increase sales from the existing games market, or compete for it is difficult. So instead,a constant influx of new gamers is good for the market. new gamers do not mind if the mechanics are dated etc, in terms of what the mainstream rpg consensus holds. In fact from what I have seen P's books use concepts which are similar to those one finds in many Computer rpgs - and the success of the AD&D manuals in the eighties shows that complex and odd rules systems are not necessarily offputting to new gamers.

So my argument in a nutshell: if P are allowed to go under, the amount of rpg product decreases, and EVERYONE wil suffer the effects a few years down the line. If the rpg industry supports Palladium, and other small starting up companies, then the overall market for their own products will increase.

I may be completely wrong: I know very little about business models or marketing, but I think it's an interesting case. The limiting factor on rpg sales must be recognition of the product, and awareness of what the games have to offer. P may not be able to offer something to very gamers (well mine as far as I know) tastes, but if they continue, grow, and develop their licenses, and continue with things like the RIFTS console games or film, they will draw new gamers in, and everyone benefits. In a limited market mutual aid always makes more sense than competition.

So should themore successful companies try to help Palladium? There is a case.

Thoughts?
cj x

EDITS: typos. My compute locks up randomly so I have to type quickly then edit afterwards

 

[Zachary The First]

Well, several have already expressed their concern and mentioned it on their pages--KenzerCo (Jolly said something in one of the threads) and SJ Games both come to mind. I don't know how much they'll do as companies to help Palladium, but a lot of company guys like KS and Palladium, and will likely support them in this.

 

[Than]

The big question is, if Palladium went away what would their customers do? Would they stop roleplaying, or would they turn to other system? I suspect most would do the latter, although a few would be lost. And since Palladium has turned out very few innovations over the years (its system is an AD&D 1e clone, and most of its settings are generic) there's no great creativity loss. To put it bluntly, I'm not seeing how the industry would be even significantly hurt by Palladium's demise.

From a purely selfish point of view, what I'd really love to see is a couple of Palladium's games redone using a decent system (d20 for preference) and with solid editing. Rifts and the Robotech licence are the main two, but Mechanoids and BtS have some promise as well. And unfortunately I don't see that happening unless Palladium folds and its IP is sold to cover debt.

 

[Kiero]

So should themore successful companies try to help Palladium?

In a word: no. Competition serves a purpose. If the company cannot survive on it's own in the free market, on it's own merits, it doesn't deserve to stay in business.

The market is harsh, but fair.

 

[cj.23]

I see your points; However theory dictates the fact the last two posters have not looked at. Existing gamers are not a sustainable market:eventually they will stop gaming, die off etc. Diversity of companies and product SHOULD in theory expand the market. This was my point in my OP, which is what you need to refute...

Otherwise competition is a destructive practice. It only makes sense in a saturated market.
cj x

 

[grubman]

So should themore successful companies try to help Palladium? There is a case.

I would say yes, WotC should help them out by buying them out for a million dollars. But his makes one wonder, is their PI worth a million? If it is, then Palladium should be able to get themselves out of trouble. If it isn't, well...

 

[Rich Stokes]

So should themore successful companies try to help Palladium?

They already have. By showing them how to make a good, well edited product and not the dated piece of shit system like Palladium use. Since Palladium have ignored that help, they're fucked.

If their products were better, they'd be making money from me. As it stands, they aren't so they're not.

 

[Kiero]

I see your points; However theory dictates the fact the last two posters have not looked at. Existing gamers are not a sustainable market:eventually they will stop gaming, die off etc. Diversity of companies and product SHOULD in theory expand the market. This was my point in my OP, which is what you need to refute...

Otherwise competition is a destructive practice. It only makes sense in a saturated market.
cj x

If existing gamers aren't a "sustainable market" then they ain't worth producing product for. You don't go to the hassle of creating something if there's no revenue potential at the end of it.

If Palladium are doing something worthwhile, yet can't get the thing to market themselves (and thus fail) then someone else will either enter the market to do it, or one of the incumbents will diversify in that direction. That's how the market responds. Preserving Palladium who can't sell simply encourages mediocrity.

Competition is creative destruction, and it always makes sense.

 

[Crimsoncat]

The industry on a whole needs really to do nothing. I am not one who thinks the industry is dying but going through a realignment. In that the companies that make the correct changes will after a time begin to prosper again, some will go from prosperity to struggling and many will simply disappear.
Now no one likes to see companies go out of business but we are in a limited industry and even with modest growth I think the amount of product being put out far exceeds the dollars to buy it. This is part of that cycle.

Now it seems Palladium has had some help being put behind the eight ball. If the person who has alledged stole from them did I hope he gets what he deserves but until he is tried right now all it is an allegation of theft. Other companies including a couple other rpg have had similiar things happen and some fail or pull through so we shall all have to sit and wait to see what happens.

As for what will happen if PB fails, I see many moving to other systems and/or using the books they have with only some leaving the industry all together.

 

[cj.23]

If existing gamers aren't a "sustainable market" then they ain't worth producing product for. You don't go to the hassle of creating something if there's no revenue potential at the end of it.

If thi was the case no one would be writing game books, as for the individual author writng rpg books is NOT a variable activity. I could make easily three times more stacking shelves at my local supermarket. The entire Voluntary Sector, a huge amount of the actual work done in many economies, would fall through. I have no idea about America, but Britain is filled with shops, projects and other enterprises staffed entirely by enthusiastic volunteers...

Howver, we are really talking aout marketing here. Does having several competing companies producing vastly differring products actually increase market awareness? Can anyone with a strong business background and theoretical knowlege of marketing actually convince me that you are right and that competition is the way to go?

cj x