Re: For PBM game moderators

From: madcentral@aol.com (MadCentral)

Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 12:41:24 +0000

>Because we do extensive market studies, latching onto market data at
every opporunity. We've been doing that for the six years we've been in
business.<<

Which does not necessarily mean you are any good at it.  If this sounds mean,
it's not *meant* to.  I'm just saying that any successful company is likely to
be watching the market as best they are able.  My own research does not tally
with yours, and I've been in the hobby business considerably longer than you.
Of course, I may also be no good at market research.  <grin>  I don't deny that
at all.

>> Truth is, I doubt many game manufacturers have a clearer look
at the bic picture.<<

I don't believe there *is* a "big picture".  There are too many different
avenues of gaming and people are too diverse.  Something that seems impossible
one year goes on to rock the world the next.  If you'd told people before MtG
that card games were going to be huge, they'd have laughed.  If you'd told TSR
that D&D would end up open-licensed with dozens of companies making modules and
products they'd have choked.  If you'd said Game Boy would outlive most of the
consoles around when it appeared, nobody would have believed you.

>>Oh, I agree. But I am not basing those assumptions on the way Board
Games, RPGS, or other forms of gaming sell. I am basing my assumptions
on the facts that:
  1) The PBM/PBEM hobby continues to draw more and more upon the
Internet as the primary means to market itself. <<

Many companies which are not primarily Internet Businesses nevertheless use the
Internet in a growing way for marketing.  The fact that you advertise heavily
on the internet does not *necessarily* mean thats the only future route to
success, only that you respect the fact that so many people use the internet
its a good place to advertise.  I don't agree that the hobby is "drawing in on
itself" at all.  I see steady growth in every area.  In the old days many
smaller companies set up brief failing PBM enterprises and then disappeared.
The sort of people who did this gave the hobby a bad name, and the fact that
there are fewer of them now is a *good* thing.  That doesn't reflect the hobby
closing in, only the bar being raised on what is needed to successfully enter
it.

>>And.
  2) The larger majority of hobbyist in the PBM/PBEM hobby that support
the industry with their money are older and most started their interest
in the hobby prior to the recent evolution of the Internet as a
communications and gaming medium.<<

Im sorry, but thats simply not true in my experience.  Our customer base has
*always* stayed between the 20-35 age rage as its majority.  Given that we've
been in business for over a decade, then my average ages should have shifted up
10 years.  They haven't.  We have many older players who've been with us a
long, long time, but we also have as many early 20's as ever, still making up
the majority of our player base.  Where your statement true, this couldn't
possibly be the case.

>> I have no doubt the commercial
companies have achieved greater fiscal success in the last few years as
the Internet has allowed those companies to reach out further to bring
in those older players and a few younger ones pre disposed to trying
this sort of game.<<

Our growth has remained steady throughout our history and the advent of the
internet did nothing to improve or reduce it.  The internet provided a new
avenue as some older avenues became less used, as part of the normal
moderisation of all businesses.  The internet has improved game
*communications*, no doubt about that at all, but actual game play?  It's
certainly given people another way to play, but the games themselves haven't
changed very much.

>> But that growth will reach and end once those rare
consumers are found.<<

If you think those customers are *rare*, or that your growth is going to end,
then I respectfully suggest you must be doing something wrong.  I don't know
enough about your business, nor would I be rude enough to suggest what that
might be.  But I can tell you that I haven't experienced any problems finding
new players, nor continuing steady growth, nor do I find recruits and newbies
*rare* in any way at all.

>> Rest assured they are a rare bread.<<

I haven't found that to be so.

>>  3) Like all markets, the future of this market will depend on the
markets ability to adapt and appeal to the next generation.<<

This is an interesting statement.  You seem to think that the "next generation"
(a somewhat nebulous idea at the best of times) will like different things to
the current generation.  Certainly, the "flavour" of what they like will
change.  How much the actual "body" will change though, I wouldn't stake bets
on.  The basics of game design, what makes a game good, what makes people keep
playing, I don't believe these things change.  The gloss on the surface is dead
easy to alter.

>> That next
generation is growing up having had online interactive gaming options
most of their lives. Their expectations have been set pretty high in
what they think an online game should deliver in game play opportunity
and graphical appearance.<<

This is a different topic and we could talk forever about it.  Personally, I've
found many young gamers to be very disatisfied with the games they've
experienced online. Once they get past the pretty colours and 3-D they don't
find much actual *game* underneath.  In the end, it is the meat of the game
that will equal lasting success, and as long as your marketing is sufficient to
show players you have have that meat, they'll play.  If you build it, they will
come, as it were. <g>

>> You and I realize that PBM/PBEM offers a
totally different gaming experience than what they are used to, but we
have to MAKE THEM REALIZE that before we can sell to them.<<

Well of course.  But that has been the problem with advertising turn-based
games since the 1980's and is not a new problem, nor anything to do with the
internet.  How good you are at conveying what your game has going for it will
correspond with your games future success.

>> And thats a
hard road without the hobby evolving to a higher standard of
packaging/visual appeal. <<

The hobby has been evolving to higher standards of visual appeal throughout its
entire history.  KJC wiped out many competitors by moving to laser printing
instead of dot matrix, with little map icons and suchlike.  A steadily
evolution of appearance is important because people are more likely to buy into
something that looks the part.  That's not quite the same thing as making PBEMs
more and more like "computer games".  As an option, certainly.  You can't have
too many options for play.

>>Before you can hope to convince them of
anything you have to first grab their attention somehow.<<

*** BOO! ***      < - there are many ways to grab attention.

>>Oh no doubt. What I think you are missing is today's fans are NOT
tomarrow's fans.<<

Of course they are, unless they all suddenly die.  There will be new fans, as
there always have been, and old fans will come back who are not here right now.

>> There is a generation gap here and the hobby will have
to drastically change within the next 10 years or so or the next
generation will leave it behind.<<

The hobby is always changing and improving itself.  I don't think that there is
any generation gap that means any alteration in the pace or style of change is
necessary.  You cannot predict what the future will bring, nor what the future
fans will enjoy, if you could you'd be a very, very rich man.  If you assume
that the future will be high-gloss computer games, and then everybody gets so
sick of them because everything has gone that way that they start looking for
"retro" games, you'll fail.  Im not suggesting that will happen, but it could.
Stranger things have.  The important thing is your core mechanics, and your
promotion.  If there's a game there, people will play it and play it and play
it.  If there's only gloss there, you will die.  That's all there is to it.

>>Of course everyone doesn't want the same thing. But you might run a
successful commercial enterprise with 1,000 or 5,000 players today.
Though next year as you lose 3 players to age or disinterest and find
yourself not well suited to recruit from the younger generation and
hence only recruit 1 new player, your paying player base will eventually
evaporate.<<

This is true in every business.  Similar comments have been made to me in the
past, by people who are no longer in the hobby while we're still going strong.
Everything you say is true, but what I question is whether you actually have a
handle on what is "necessary to recruit the younger generation".  I'm not
saying that I have, or that you necessarily have not as you are clearly doing
just fine too, but I believe all you can do is look at your track record and
your current customer base.  If you see growth and steady improvement, then you
must be on the right track.  If you see decay, you know you need to take
action.

>> Also, I don't know if you have age data on your consumer
base, but my bet is that your "average age" is well into the mid 30's
isn't it?<<

No, it isn't.  Our age range, much as it has always been, sits between 20 and
30 for 70% of our customer base, with an actual average of 25.6 years old.  The
other 30% vary very wildly from our youngest player (7 years old) to our oldest
(70+, prefers not to reveal her exact age.)

>> But what happened instead was some guy
who shall remain nameless saw the results AFTER the votes had been
tallied, saw who had won the award and THEN simply decided that it
should not get an award because it didn't have nearly as many votes as
winners of other categories. Well, Duh, it was a write in. They told us
this is what happened. I personally think that is very foul,<<

Well, it does seem a little unfair.  Perhaps the ORIGINS guys who read this
list would care to comment?  In the end, I suppose, the decisions about
write-in votes and what categories to include remains up to the Origins
organisers.  Perhaps they thought you'd cheated, or rigged the votes?  Even
though what you describe sounds unfair to me, I cant see they actually cheated.
 If they'd given the award to somebody who didn't have as many votes as you,
*that* would be cheating.  To decide not to include the category isn't
cheating, just a bit mean.  Without hearing their side of this, its hard to see
why they would make such a decision, but they were probably within their rights
to do it.

>>implementing a policy to strip a game of an award AFTER the votes are
tallied and a winner should be known. What has always frustrated me is,
if it was decided then that the game needed X amount of votes to win, as
they decided after the fact, then at least they should be able to tell
us what X is. Don't you think that is reasonable? <<

Yes, I do think its reasonable, but I also see that a new circumstance might
result in the need to make a decision which wont always be popular.  Perhaps
they'd never had a write-in win before with so few votes?  They thought about
it and thought "this is silly, lets drop the award for this year."  I dunno.
It seems pointless to get upset about it, though.  Why not just join the
organisation and push for changes and clearer rules?  That would be a more
positive response.

>>Sure. But X is a
nebelous number that has never been devulged to us. Or if you care to
translate, "we gave you a bullshit reason as to why your game didn't win
because we don't want to say that it just didn't win because we just
didn't feel like giving it to you".<<

I can see it upsets you.  Im sure it would upset me too.  But it may be that
the decision wasn't meant to spite you, only made in haste and without enough
forethought.

>>Well, my opinion is, if the awards committee will allow such an
arbitrary decision to happen to one award from one company for one award
category, then why should ANYONE believe that sort of things doesn't
happen all the time? How can anyone think to support such a corrupt
awards process?<<

What you've described isn't *corrupt*.  To decide not to run an award category
isn't corrupt, only a little unpleasant for those affected.  To deliberately
miscount would ber corrupt.  Your anger is making you see things and say things
which aren't fair.  You seem to be the victim of some bad luck, possibly a
little malicious, I don't know.  Bounce back from it and try to affect positive
change.  You'll be making a contribution to the hobby and you'll feel better
too!

>>Ah yes. How is the development of that project coming along. It sounded
like a neat one.<<

It was *abnormals* our super-hero game from the neXus engine.  Its coming along
nicely, but still has plenty of work to do.  Its a big project.

>>Those companies that continue to operate their
operation based upon the old model will slowly diminish. I don't know
enough about your growth plans to presume to know weather its a good one
or not. It certainly seems to be something that is working for you
*now*. As I suggest above, simply be leery about the slow transformation
in the consumer base as we migrate from servicing one generation to the
next.<<

But we've been in the business considerably longer than you have and that same
"slow transformation" you think is occuring has been going on the whole time.
We've continued to grow.  To some extent we are talking at cross-purposes
because im not sure we mean the same thing when we talk about "the old model".
My only point is that you, in turn, should be leery in assuming you know
exactly what form this "transformation" is going to take.

>>Well, genre interest is a good marketing focuss. Not the only one. I
guess my point is, targeting "gamers" exclusively is not neccessarily a
future thinking prospect. Target *anyone* that is interested in the
theme of the game being promoted. There are far more people who don't
game anything at present than those who do.<<

I dont think I've ever met *anyone* who doesn't play *some* sort of game.  But
I digress.  I don't believe you need to target non-gamers, if by "gamer" we
assume somebody who plays a lot of games in the PBM, RPG, Board or related
hobby, because people come into those hobbies all the time in their tens of
thousands.  I'm happy to let WotC, White Wolf, Manga Cartoons and Harry Potter
et al introduce kids to the hobby, while I'll pick up people ready to "game" in
the style of game I make.  There are millions of them, and more and more every
day.

>> But that brings me back to
my original point. Its *those* masses that will become harder and harder
to recruit and turn into gamers/pbm/pbem gamers if the games marketing
to them don't evolve to become a tad more like other things they've come
to expect from online offerings.<<

And this is the original point I do not agree with.  I am finding it easier and
easier to recruit, because those other things they've experienced teach them
the sort of things which used to be hard to get across to newcomers.  People
already know why turn-based gaming might be fun, they already know how to
roleplay to some extent, they are already familiar with the themes our hobby
has in common.  All I need to do is say "try this, its free, and if you really
like it you can play it a lot more in depth by paying to do so."  As long as
the meat of the game is there, they will keep playing.

>> Its getting tougher and tougher to rise
to that next level as surely just about everyone now sees the graphics
and such as presented by the leader computer games now being marketing
thru TV commercials.<<

And yet we don't bother with high-level graphics at all, except in advertising
(which has always been the case) and still get plenty of new players both free
and commercial.  I don't dispute that a high-gloss route is one that'll work,
but its like an arms race against giant firms.  Dump the big guns and make sure
the game itself is strong, and you'll still prosper in PBM/PBEM, but you won't
have to expend ever more time and effort trying to "keep up".  Not that Im
saying we don't regularly improve the "look" of our games and products, only
that it does not have to be our highest priority.  In the graphics war we
declared neutral years ago, and people who come to us look for something
different.  They look for content.

>>I'm sure I would, but I still doubt the millions figure. If I had to
pull a figure out of the air and we included 1) traditional PBM, 2)
PBEM, 3) Turn Based Web Games, 4) Muds, 5) MUSHES, and 6) Web Supported
PBEM, then I might guess as many as 400,000 to 750,000 active players.<<

There was a free turn-based soccer game run last year that had nearly a million
players on its own, run by tesco.net as part of its portal.  The games closed
right now, I believe, but it didn't have much trouble building the numbers.  In
your list, you forget message-based roleplaying games, forum-based roleplaying
games, interactive fiction of many sorts, computer PBEMs like Stars, VGAPlanets
etc, sports games run via newspapers and other media.  Several of the British
newspapers have run very simple games which are, nonetheless, turn-based, with
immense player bases.

>>Though that includes the casual players who only play the occassional
free game as well. Now, if we include turn based interactive games such
as RISK, Axis & Allies, and toss in the online RPG like activity in many
of the romance chat rooms and game rooms, then I would certainly agree
there are millions.<<

Where Risk, Axis and Allies, and Online RPGs are concerned, as long as they are
played turn-based over time and not as tabletops, they are certainly PBEMs, and
must be included.  Those people would come into any PBEM understanding how the
mechanics of such a game would work and why it would be a good way to play.

Steve T.

References

Re: For PBM game moderators
"Ryan S. Johnson" <dowrie@guildofblades.com>
Wed, 05 Feb 2003 06:11:20 +0000

Referenced By

Re: For PBM game moderators
"Ryan S. Johnson" <dowrie@guildofblades.com>
Wed, 05 Feb 2003 06:11:20 +0000