Re: The Death of PBM

From: madcentral@aol.com (MadCentral)

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0000

>Hi Steve,
Thanks for your fascinating thoughts on the (current and future) state
of PBM. I largely agree with you, finding the same trends within my own
business. Given that the Timewyrm mixed and hand moderated games are
totally different to those run by Madhouse and (according to my latest
player survey) have a widely disparate different player base, the
similarities are interesting. <<

Your games do generally target a difference group of players, I agree, although
we do share the same overall ''audience''.  Your direct competition isn't us,
as you quite correctly point out.  I imagine State of Mind, Silver Dreamer,
Undying King etc are your competitors.

>>I've also seen a trend towards switching from email to paper play, at
least when it comes to receiving turns. Orders increasingly arrive by
email. Comments generally fall along the lines of:
"Email is convenient but I like the thud of an envelope on the doormat.
Besides I like doing my turn on the train/in the bath/curcled up in a
comfy chair."<<

Yes.  I have heard those comments many, many, many times too.  There is
something ''retro'' about mail player that will always slip back into fashion,
I feel.  Personally, I agree.  I find receiving turns by e-mail totally
soulless.

>>I fail to see why email players should actually get turns cheaper.<<

I agree and,  in fact, have based company policy solidly upon the ''no
difference'' statement between email and mail.  It has been received with much
welcome from my players as a whole.

>>At present I'd estimate 75% of my players to have internet access.
Diplomacy within games is conducted about 50%via email, though
increasingly I've been picking up a trend towards sending reams of data
via email, then discussing more complex things (such as treaties and
politics) over the phone.<<

Yes, this is very common,

>> No sign of people using ICQ or similar to chat
over the net, which slightly surprises me. <<

I've seen a little of that, but not much.  We have a lot of US and OZ players
via the global madhouse organisation, and they tend to do more e-mail stuff
there because of (a) cheaper email/phone and (b) poorer mail.

>>Exactly. Advertising in Flagship is very much preaching to the
converted.<<

Yep.  Although the ones you *do* get from Flagship are usuallt the most
influential players... the ones who will get ten friends to join with them.

>> Would you agree that more new players still come from the
recommendation of other players (whether via the net, in Flagship's
Rumours or general conversations)?<<

Generally, yes.  Although I have had some good results from large mailshots and
non-hobby mags.

> In the future I predict that many smaller commercial companies will
> simply  disappear and that new ones will not be as common as in the past.

>> This has also proved a good influence when it comes
to the basic business stuff where (alas) many small PBM firms are rather
weak (good accounting, bulk buying of materials to cut down on costs etc
etc)<<

Larger business are generally not interested in investing in PBM because its
nature is not immediately-obvious as a profitable one.  That's changing though,
and big companies are showing an interest.  Its only a matter of time before
some of them buy into the hobby.  However, I prefer the idea that maybe some of
the hobbys current GMs will branch out and become larger themselves.  I've seen
a few who have the ambition to do so.

>>Really?  I'm not sure there is much sign of this at present.<<

That's why its a prediction! <grin>

>> Board games
are increasingly hard to come by, a situation which was not helped by
Hasbro's acquisition of Avalon Hill. True a major gaming force like
Hasbro OUGHT to be able to promote board games in a big way,but will
they? <<

Such things come and go in fashion.  I believe we'll see a boom in the next few
years and that the boom, even after is subsides, will leave the hobby in a much
stronger position for the future.

>>Come to that, the effect of Hasbro's recent aquisition of WotC is
going to be, um, interesting. <<

It certainly is.  Personally, I think WOTC are a deeply hot/cold type of
company.  Sometimes they surprise me by doing great things, other times they
really mess up.  They have been pretty good at making money, I'll give them
that, but I wonder how much of that was a roll-on from the luck in getting
Magic at the beginning.  After all, before Magic they didn't have a great
reputation at all...

>>Could be good, could be bad - Hasbro do have a reputation for deleting any
line which doesn't shift X units. <<

But they dont mind throwing big money into promotion...

>>I agree. The loss of Phildee was a blow, a number or players I know
simply gave up on PBM at that point (though some are now drifting back).
The effect of someone big like KJC or Madhouse going down doesn't bear
thinking about. Likewise with Flagship. <<

Nice to be included in the list!  Thanks! <grin>

>>This would be bad for PBM and (probably) bad for you. The competition
between the two of you has been generally a good thing for both
companies and PBM as a whole.<<

I agree.  It wouldn't be as much fun, either.

>>The arrival of Madhouse and its subsequent growth has played an
interesting part in the way PBM is now developing. A number of GM's have
watched and learnt a great deal (Undying King, Harlequin to name but
two) - and look how their businesses and reputations are growing! <<

Indeed.  I told Harlequin a few years ago that they would be the next
''growth'' company and they laughed!  I spoke to them the other day and they
remembered what I'd said and were, like, ''how did you know?''.  That was easy.
Enthusiasm, commitment and hard work over the long term.  I could see they had
it back then even if they couldnt.

Undying King try hard too, but I'm not quite so sure about their choices of
games.  If I were them I'd think carefully about my next few releases, they are
at a tricky point and need to tread carefully if they want to keep growing.

>>I have long held the view that PBM GM's will, before too long, fall into
one of two catagories. Those running games as a business and those
running games largely for fun. <<

I agree.  And I don't think this is a bad thing.

>>There's a big growth market in free games - and I'm not talking about
those that normally feature on this list. I know several GM's who have a
lot of spare time (at work or at home), have relatively highly paid jobs
and want to spend their leisure time running games. <<

I think that's great.

>>Possibly they played
a lot of board games/rpg when they were younger (and poorer) and now
wish to relive their youth!<<

These people bring new players into the hobby and those people graduate to
commercial games.  I am all for it!

>>Both commercial and free games can prosper, it comes down to whether the
games are good enough and whether the GM offers a good service to his
players/customers.<<

I could not agree more.

>> In both catagories there will be people that fall by the
wayside, like any other part of life there are going to be winners and
also rans. I don't like it, but that's the way life is. <<

Its not that bad, really.  Even the companies who fail will *usually* have had
a good time doing so.  It's a shame when its a dirty fold, but more and more
companies are rallying to help players hit by this, so I dont see it as a
problem for much longer.

>> Whichever way you look
at it, the greatest danger to PBM comes from the mouths of doomsayers
who keep crying that "The End is Nigh" without giving any real evidence.<<

Ooh yes.  That's the truest thing you've said.  Although whether they are a
danger or just an annoyance Im not quite so sure.  After all, they've always
been around... and yet... we are still here!

Steve

References

Re: The Death of PBM
ColinForbes <timewyrm@suilven.demon.co.uk>
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

Re: The Death of PBM
ColinForbes <timewyrm@suilven.demon.co.uk>
Mon, 13 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0000