![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Apr. 24th, 2007
Okay, maybe I can talk
Apr. 24th, 2007 02:14 am. . . just a little.
First of all, the recent business with Dragon and Dungeon is interesting. I haven't bought either in years, myself, but I was happy that the hobby supported a couple of nice, glossy, easy to get magazines. I don't think I'm alone in this position, but that doesn't mean much. I buy stuff I know I can use directly or indirectly, so that means I'm not in the market for a general-interest D&D mag (though I do, in fact, play D&D pretty often).
What's going on? Is it a big digital migration? Maybe, and if so, that might be okay or awful. Making D&D a computer-based game might introduce a bunch of neat tools, but it also begs that "Why not play an actual computer game?" question. That's the problem with following instead of leading.
Of course, there's also the Marvel Entertainment/DC (Warner) route, where a medium serves as a way to play with IP. That makes the idea of repatriating Dragonlance a good move, but that's not really a decision made for the sake of an RPG.
A credible digital version of any RPG needs to deal with "WNPAACG?" while remaning useful enough to provide something that existing free or cheap applications can't. Lots of people are already playing digital D&D with IM, VOIP and a host of social networking tools. A "D&D Myspace" needs to prove it has value compared to, well, actual Myspace.
That makes content king, but it requires a significant culture shift in gamers (who pride themselves on DIY efforts) that will be adopted by the younger crowd -- and the younger crowd loves roleplaying, but isn't into the values held by current roleplayers.
There are two other significant roleplaying cultures out there: MMO players and post-fanfic roleplayers. The former have what they need; the latter are the antithesis of everything valued by current design and traditional RPG communities. The closest mainstream gaming got to fanfic-players was White Wolf's chat system. These communities favour rigid social and setting conventions and are primarily freeform, with some rules on the side. This was even true in the crazy, crazy WW chats where exploding gunshot-wielding ghouls were par for the course.
And of course, this is the model WoW players seize on when players want RP-style play. They make up communities with rules and spend a lot of time hanging around. It's notable here that nobody *told* these people to approach it that way. These MMO communities led the way, and development followed.
This means that when it comes to the current crop of Net-native roleplayers, the values espoused by traditional gamers over the last decade are irrelevant, or at best apply to a subgroup that these roleplayers don't even *call* roleplayers, but PVPers, Godmoders, etc.
What's interesting, too is that the idea of there being a qualitative difference between strategic and narrative authority is largely absent. People are as likely to think you're a twit for wanting the power to decide what the weather is like as whether or not you win a duel.
This all brings us to the other commodity that, besides content, traditional RPGs bring, and that's subjective moderation. Again, the tabletop community's moving away from it while online culture embraces it. I think part of the cause is that moderation forces people to create genuine social networks, because it's something that can't be easily automated and lends a degree of authenticity in an environment where simulation is trivially easy and omnipresent. That desire for human contact, which contemporary game systems work so hard to turn into mechanistic processes, are valued *because* of the very uncertainties us pre-Net types abandoned ages ago.
First of all, the recent business with Dragon and Dungeon is interesting. I haven't bought either in years, myself, but I was happy that the hobby supported a couple of nice, glossy, easy to get magazines. I don't think I'm alone in this position, but that doesn't mean much. I buy stuff I know I can use directly or indirectly, so that means I'm not in the market for a general-interest D&D mag (though I do, in fact, play D&D pretty often).
What's going on? Is it a big digital migration? Maybe, and if so, that might be okay or awful. Making D&D a computer-based game might introduce a bunch of neat tools, but it also begs that "Why not play an actual computer game?" question. That's the problem with following instead of leading.
Of course, there's also the Marvel Entertainment/DC (Warner) route, where a medium serves as a way to play with IP. That makes the idea of repatriating Dragonlance a good move, but that's not really a decision made for the sake of an RPG.
A credible digital version of any RPG needs to deal with "WNPAACG?" while remaning useful enough to provide something that existing free or cheap applications can't. Lots of people are already playing digital D&D with IM, VOIP and a host of social networking tools. A "D&D Myspace" needs to prove it has value compared to, well, actual Myspace.
That makes content king, but it requires a significant culture shift in gamers (who pride themselves on DIY efforts) that will be adopted by the younger crowd -- and the younger crowd loves roleplaying, but isn't into the values held by current roleplayers.
There are two other significant roleplaying cultures out there: MMO players and post-fanfic roleplayers. The former have what they need; the latter are the antithesis of everything valued by current design and traditional RPG communities. The closest mainstream gaming got to fanfic-players was White Wolf's chat system. These communities favour rigid social and setting conventions and are primarily freeform, with some rules on the side. This was even true in the crazy, crazy WW chats where exploding gunshot-wielding ghouls were par for the course.
And of course, this is the model WoW players seize on when players want RP-style play. They make up communities with rules and spend a lot of time hanging around. It's notable here that nobody *told* these people to approach it that way. These MMO communities led the way, and development followed.
This means that when it comes to the current crop of Net-native roleplayers, the values espoused by traditional gamers over the last decade are irrelevant, or at best apply to a subgroup that these roleplayers don't even *call* roleplayers, but PVPers, Godmoders, etc.
What's interesting, too is that the idea of there being a qualitative difference between strategic and narrative authority is largely absent. People are as likely to think you're a twit for wanting the power to decide what the weather is like as whether or not you win a duel.
This all brings us to the other commodity that, besides content, traditional RPGs bring, and that's subjective moderation. Again, the tabletop community's moving away from it while online culture embraces it. I think part of the cause is that moderation forces people to create genuine social networks, because it's something that can't be easily automated and lends a degree of authenticity in an environment where simulation is trivially easy and omnipresent. That desire for human contact, which contemporary game systems work so hard to turn into mechanistic processes, are valued *because* of the very uncertainties us pre-Net types abandoned ages ago.
Okay, maybe I can talk
Apr. 24th, 2007 02:14 am. . . just a little.
First of all, the recent business with Dragon and Dungeon is interesting. I haven't bought either in years, myself, but I was happy that the hobby supported a couple of nice, glossy, easy to get magazines. I don't think I'm alone in this position, but that doesn't mean much. I buy stuff I know I can use directly or indirectly, so that means I'm not in the market for a general-interest D&D mag (though I do, in fact, play D&D pretty often).
What's going on? Is it a big digital migration? Maybe, and if so, that might be okay or awful. Making D&D a computer-based game might introduce a bunch of neat tools, but it also begs that "Why not play an actual computer game?" question. That's the problem with following instead of leading.
Of course, there's also the Marvel Entertainment/DC (Warner) route, where a medium serves as a way to play with IP. That makes the idea of repatriating Dragonlance a good move, but that's not really a decision made for the sake of an RPG.
A credible digital version of any RPG needs to deal with "WNPAACG?" while remaning useful enough to provide something that existing free or cheap applications can't. Lots of people are already playing digital D&D with IM, VOIP and a host of social networking tools. A "D&D Myspace" needs to prove it has value compared to, well, actual Myspace.
That makes content king, but it requires a significant culture shift in gamers (who pride themselves on DIY efforts) that will be adopted by the younger crowd -- and the younger crowd loves roleplaying, but isn't into the values held by current roleplayers.
There are two other significant roleplaying cultures out there: MMO players and post-fanfic roleplayers. The former have what they need; the latter are the antithesis of everything valued by current design and traditional RPG communities. The closest mainstream gaming got to fanfic-players was White Wolf's chat system. These communities favour rigid social and setting conventions and are primarily freeform, with some rules on the side. This was even true in the crazy, crazy WW chats where exploding gunshot-wielding ghouls were par for the course.
And of course, this is the model WoW players seize on when players want RP-style play. They make up communities with rules and spend a lot of time hanging around. It's notable here that nobody *told* these people to approach it that way. These MMO communities led the way, and development followed.
This means that when it comes to the current crop of Net-native roleplayers, the values espoused by traditional gamers over the last decade are irrelevant, or at best apply to a subgroup that these roleplayers don't even *call* roleplayers, but PVPers, Godmoders, etc.
What's interesting, too is that the idea of there being a qualitative difference between strategic and narrative authority is largely absent. People are as likely to think you're a twit for wanting the power to decide what the weather is like as whether or not you win a duel.
This all brings us to the other commodity that, besides content, traditional RPGs bring, and that's subjective moderation. Again, the tabletop community's moving away from it while online culture embraces it. I think part of the cause is that moderation forces people to create genuine social networks, because it's something that can't be easily automated and lends a degree of authenticity in an environment where simulation is trivially easy and omnipresent. That desire for human contact, which contemporary game systems work so hard to turn into mechanistic processes, are valued *because* of the very uncertainties us pre-Net types abandoned ages ago.
First of all, the recent business with Dragon and Dungeon is interesting. I haven't bought either in years, myself, but I was happy that the hobby supported a couple of nice, glossy, easy to get magazines. I don't think I'm alone in this position, but that doesn't mean much. I buy stuff I know I can use directly or indirectly, so that means I'm not in the market for a general-interest D&D mag (though I do, in fact, play D&D pretty often).
What's going on? Is it a big digital migration? Maybe, and if so, that might be okay or awful. Making D&D a computer-based game might introduce a bunch of neat tools, but it also begs that "Why not play an actual computer game?" question. That's the problem with following instead of leading.
Of course, there's also the Marvel Entertainment/DC (Warner) route, where a medium serves as a way to play with IP. That makes the idea of repatriating Dragonlance a good move, but that's not really a decision made for the sake of an RPG.
A credible digital version of any RPG needs to deal with "WNPAACG?" while remaning useful enough to provide something that existing free or cheap applications can't. Lots of people are already playing digital D&D with IM, VOIP and a host of social networking tools. A "D&D Myspace" needs to prove it has value compared to, well, actual Myspace.
That makes content king, but it requires a significant culture shift in gamers (who pride themselves on DIY efforts) that will be adopted by the younger crowd -- and the younger crowd loves roleplaying, but isn't into the values held by current roleplayers.
There are two other significant roleplaying cultures out there: MMO players and post-fanfic roleplayers. The former have what they need; the latter are the antithesis of everything valued by current design and traditional RPG communities. The closest mainstream gaming got to fanfic-players was White Wolf's chat system. These communities favour rigid social and setting conventions and are primarily freeform, with some rules on the side. This was even true in the crazy, crazy WW chats where exploding gunshot-wielding ghouls were par for the course.
And of course, this is the model WoW players seize on when players want RP-style play. They make up communities with rules and spend a lot of time hanging around. It's notable here that nobody *told* these people to approach it that way. These MMO communities led the way, and development followed.
This means that when it comes to the current crop of Net-native roleplayers, the values espoused by traditional gamers over the last decade are irrelevant, or at best apply to a subgroup that these roleplayers don't even *call* roleplayers, but PVPers, Godmoders, etc.
What's interesting, too is that the idea of there being a qualitative difference between strategic and narrative authority is largely absent. People are as likely to think you're a twit for wanting the power to decide what the weather is like as whether or not you win a duel.
This all brings us to the other commodity that, besides content, traditional RPGs bring, and that's subjective moderation. Again, the tabletop community's moving away from it while online culture embraces it. I think part of the cause is that moderation forces people to create genuine social networks, because it's something that can't be easily automated and lends a degree of authenticity in an environment where simulation is trivially easy and omnipresent. That desire for human contact, which contemporary game systems work so hard to turn into mechanistic processes, are valued *because* of the very uncertainties us pre-Net types abandoned ages ago.
After much prodding from ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
thebitterguy I finally got around to reading about Omega Flight. I never really got into Alpha Flight (that was dronon's bag) and didn't identify with them as being a Canadian team, but man, everything about the new title is botched. It's quite impressive. I think the equivalent would be rebooting the Avengers with Batroc in charge. And renaming them Super Al-Qaeda. And then *not* playing that for laughs.
thebitterguy I finally got around to reading about Omega Flight. I never really got into Alpha Flight (that was dronon's bag) and didn't identify with them as being a Canadian team, but man, everything about the new title is botched. It's quite impressive. I think the equivalent would be rebooting the Avengers with Batroc in charge. And renaming them Super Al-Qaeda. And then *not* playing that for laughs.After much prodding from thebitterguy I finally got around to reading about Omega Flight. I never really got into Alpha Flight (that was dronon's bag) and didn't identify with them as being a Canadian team, but man, everything about the new title is botched. It's quite impressive. I think the equivalent would be rebooting the Avengers with Batroc in charge. And renaming them Super Al-Qaeda. And then *not* playing that for laughs.
thebitterguy I finally got around to reading about Omega Flight. I never really got into Alpha Flight (that was dronon's bag) and didn't identify with them as being a Canadian team, but man, everything about the new title is botched. It's quite impressive. I think the equivalent would be rebooting the Avengers with Batroc in charge. And renaming them Super Al-Qaeda. And then *not* playing that for laughs.Anyway, back to the iPod
Apr. 24th, 2007 06:51 amAh, it was just like old times, what with the iPod fucking up for no apparent reason, possibly because of an issue invisible to normal users because it's embarrassing (like, let us say, the iPod not actually being ready to disconnect even after Windows *and* the iPod both say it is). Except that kbase articles are now written in a friendly, nontechnical and thus, largely useless fashion, forcing me to cobble together a solution from three distantly related, stupid articles, instead, none of which described the problem well (iPod would not turn on or off and simply kept attempting to boot in painful clicks, even after manual reset attempts).
EDIT: Not a solution after all. The iPod went right back to fucking up after synching.
EDIT: Not a solution after all. The iPod went right back to fucking up after synching.
Anyway, back to the iPod
Apr. 24th, 2007 06:51 amAh, it was just like old times, what with the iPod fucking up for no apparent reason, possibly because of an issue invisible to normal users because it's embarrassing (like, let us say, the iPod not actually being ready to disconnect even after Windows *and* the iPod both say it is). Except that kbase articles are now written in a friendly, nontechnical and thus, largely useless fashion, forcing me to cobble together a solution from three distantly related, stupid articles, instead, none of which described the problem well (iPod would not turn on or off and simply kept attempting to boot in painful clicks, even after manual reset attempts).
EDIT: Not a solution after all. The iPod went right back to fucking up after synching.
EDIT: Not a solution after all. The iPod went right back to fucking up after synching.
Hey, Gencon booth people
Apr. 24th, 2007 10:38 pmLet's say that I have products I'd like to sell and promote at Gencon, but I probably won't be able to attend myself. Let's also say that I'm willing to pay some money to anyone interested in setting aside table space and making a reasonable attempt to push my books. How much money would this cost?
If you have abstract answers to these questions, post 'em. If you have concrete offers, email 'em.
If you have abstract answers to these questions, post 'em. If you have concrete offers, email 'em.
Hey, Gencon booth people
Apr. 24th, 2007 10:38 pmLet's say that I have products I'd like to sell and promote at Gencon, but I probably won't be able to attend myself. Let's also say that I'm willing to pay some money to anyone interested in setting aside table space and making a reasonable attempt to push my books. How much money would this cost?
If you have abstract answers to these questions, post 'em. If you have concrete offers, email 'em.
If you have abstract answers to these questions, post 'em. If you have concrete offers, email 'em.