To Game or Not to Game

[eruditus]

My last post on scripting brings to mind an interesting question...

When creating a game i realize that you can't possibly make the "best game ever." There are too many people who like too many different styles and concepts. Inevidably you can easily find completely dichotimous opinions about the very same sample.

That being said, who do you write, and more importantly, market a game to? yourself? Everyone who happens by in hopes they shell out the cash? In a community this close-knit couldn't that become a problem? Lets say Jerry the Gamer really likes Burning Wheel (largely cause elves use songs) and runs a session or two at his local game shop and at every con he gets to. Yet he has no real clue about the rules and is far too block-headed to interact on such a scholarly, well-thought, reasoned level as we do in this forum *choke*....

I digress...

So he runs the game completely wrong and his players step away from the table with the attitude of "this game is complete ASS." Such a thing happened with Chi Chan. I have no idea if the game is any good but it hits the bottom of the spending barrel (despite my interest in that zany Voltaire) because a friend said it sucked in a con game he played of it. Does a designer, especially a small press designer, where each copy is a commodity and a means to further one's future manufacturing goals, have a responsibility to "cut someone off?" This is certainly true for small entrepenaurial persuits where it often becomes necessary to claim "maybe this service isn't right for you" to avoid future problems (almost always followed up with "I know where you can go for something more suited to your needs").

I realize that this isn't often practical and egos generally get in the way, but how does one combat bad representation like this? There has been many instances I have seen on rpgnet or some such review site where some bonehead completely misrepresents a game and other boneheads start ripping on the game with no real defense from bonehead number one...

or should we make it our responsibility to scour the country side for backwater conventions and find those who would ruin our game and "convince" them that they are too stupid to game with the aid of the opinion-swaying power of an NYPD issue steel-core billy club?

[luke]

You raise a difficult issue that all creators must address at some point.

For me, I've realized that I cannot control everyone's reaction to the game. It's just not possible. Once the game leaves my hands it becomes a completely indepedent entity. The decision to like or dislike rests firmly on the shoulders of each person who plays the game or reads the books. Little I can say or do will influence that.

If someone is out in the world actively disparaging the game, knowingly or unknowingly, I feel it is my job as the shepherd of this brown and red flock to educated them. That's a strong term, too loaded for my tastes, but to at the very least talk to the person and try to bring our sense of game closer together. I want everyone who enjoys the game to play it, whether I approve of how they play or not. Of course I want everyone to enjoy it "as is," but that just isn't done in our hobby. We are all tweakers.

So what can you do? Very little. Everyone is going to have their own opinion. Everyone is going to their own thing. You can only do your personal best at presenting and promoting your game and hope for the best.

Or hire a million dollar marketing team to tell the world why they should play your game and how exactly to play it... And that still doesn't work....

-abzu