GURPS/4E... could be more attractive?

[Hex]

Let's not forget that D&D is now being bankrolled by a major player in the toy industry...not only does it bring in bigger budgets but real credibility among the general populous. Ask the average joe on the street if they've heard of Steve Jackson games...then ask them if they've heard of Hasbro.

[Ragabash Moon]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

I think you're wrong. I think it has a lot more to do with D&D's extra 10 years of building a player base, during most of which time it had virtually no significant competition in its market. (And it's a popular market, too; I note that TSR published a number of RPGs, and none of them took off the way D&D did.)

This is not accurate. Other companies have offered similar licenses, some of which are even less restrictive than the d20 license. The difference was that they didn't have the large and entrenched fanbase that D&D does, so their licenses didn't get nearly the publicity that the OGL and d20 licenses did.

Most of the gamers I know QUIT playing D&D when 3.0 came out, they didn't think it was needed OR wanted, and they don't play D&D 3.0, they don't play d20 anything, they like their THAC0 and screw the d20 system! Now, maybe most gamers i know are anal-retentive refuse to accept change jerks, but...

As for the OGL, maybe it's the advertising then, because it was the first time *I* ever heard of a company saying "Hey, you can make your own game with our system!"

Originally Posted by Hex

Let's not forget that D&D is now being bankrolled by a major player in the toy industry...not only does it bring in bigger budgets but real credibility among the general populous. Ask the average joe on the street if they've heard of Steve Jackson games...then ask them if they've heard of Hasbro.

Point.

[Doktor Teufel]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

I think [D&D's popularity] has a lot more to do with D&D's extra 10 years of building a player base, during most of which time it had virtually no significant competition in its market.

Indeed. D&D is like Vaseline, Kleenex, Q-Tip, Coke, Vicks VapoRub, et cetera: it's a household name, the most well-known of its kind, and people are very comfortable with that. Who knows what would happen if you took a chance on another "brand"? People will often grab whatever is the most popular, without inspecting other "brands" to see if they're better.

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

(And it's a popular market, too; I note that TSR published a number of RPGs, and none of them took off the way D&D did.)

Yeah. I liked ALTERNITY, but it never really gained a lot of popularity.

[DreadDomain]

Originally Posted by Rev_Pee_Kitty

Is this having an effect on sales? According to one FLGS, the answer is a definite yes. Old-school GURPS fans might not mind a book with no (or bad) art as long as it's crammed with useful text, but any product lives on new blood -- the maxim of the business world is "grow or die". Does GURPS need to get more attractive?

I really didn't like the look of the new edition at first. I found the three-columns layout annoying, the colored borders just boring and the overall art unattractive. In short, I thought it lacked character and mood. I was even more disappointed my Banestorm. Even though the art was generally better then in the Basic Set, I thought it was even worst to endure the boring borders for a setting book. A fantasy book could have been much more interesting (visually) with texture and fancy borders (and a good continental map but that is another story).

Still, the look grew on me. I finally like how it looks. Sure I still believe the art could be improved a lot and the style of the borders could be personalized depending on the type of book (fantasy or super or science-fiction).

So I guess yes, the visual could be improved in a way that would help sales. I was sold to GURPS from the get go so even if I strongly disliked the look I bought it and gave it enough time so it could grow on me.

Someone else, not knowing GURPS, might not give it the same chance.

[Minauros]

I'm pretty sure that the idea that more attractive products sell better is a done deal. The only question I see is why let a product go out the door that didn't look as good as the competition? Maybe there were monetary concerns with that amount of artwork. Maybe the designer in question had not looked to see what he was up against. Maybe everyone liked the way it looked when it went out.

To me, this is a more interesting question.

[Chris Aylott]

The answer is embodied in the old line, "An artist's work is never done, simply abandoned."

My guess is that there has never been a book in the history of man that the publisher was completely satisfied with. (Especially in the days of cuneiform; you just don't want to mess with errata on clay tablets.) There's always going to be a piece of art you don't love, or one more misspelled word that you didn't catch, or a phrase that could have been smarter or funnier.

So you do the best you can, and you resign yourself to the fact that there will come a point -- usually ten minutes before the last FedEx pickup on the day it absolutely has to go to the printers -- when you have to say, "This book is as good as we can make it this time," and let it go. And then you go out and do the next book better.

So it's really not about comparing yourself to other publishers. It's about doing the best you can with the time and money and talent that you have, and always trying to improve your work. The market will let you know if what you're doing is good enough, and SJ Games seems to have done all right on that front.

best wishes,

[Qoltar]

Chris Aylott,
I wasn't knocking your efforts - just need better paper for "LITE" I wanna help you push your stuff.

- E.W. Charlton

[PK]

Originally Posted by Chris Aylott

So it's really not about comparing yourself to other publishers. It's about doing the best you can with the time and money and talent that you have, and always trying to improve your work. The market will let you know if what you're doing is good enough, and SJ Games seems to have done all right on that front.

Chris, I hope you don't think I started this thread to knock SJG or the quality of the books. It was more at how struck I was by the vastly different opinions between FLGS guy ("GURPS needs to focus more on artwork and presentation to be more eye-catching.") and old-school GURPS/3E fans ("I hate that they went to hardcover and color because I feel like I'm paying for it. Give me text I can read and a decent layout and nothing more, please.")

When I told him of the reaction (I'm tempted to say "backlash") that ensued when fans found out GURPS was going to hardbound, color, 240-page books, he (FLGS guy) was absolutely floored.

So, I didn't really want this to be a "What's wrong with SJG that their artwork sucks?" thread... more of a, "Do you guys think this is right? Do you think that presentation matters as much as content?"

[Chris Aylott]

Originally Posted by Rev_Pee_Kitty

Chris, I hope you don't think I started this thread to knock SJG or the quality of the books.

Don't worry, I didn't take it that way at all. Just trying to give you an idea of where we're coming from when we look at the books ourselves.

It was more at how struck I was by the vastly different opinions between FLGS guy ("GURPS needs to focus more on artwork and presentation to be more eye-catching.") and old-school GURPS/3E fans ("I hate that they went to hardcover and color because I feel like I'm paying for it. Give me text I can read and a decent layout and nothing more, please.")"

And to prosper and grow, we need to please both sets of customers. A bit tricky, to say the least, but that's what makes the job fun. :)

best wishes,

[capnq]

Originally Posted by Rev_Pee_Kitty

It was more at how struck I was by the vastly different opinions between FLGS guy ("GURPS needs to focus more on artwork and presentation to be more eye-catching.") and old-school GURPS/3E fans ("I hate that they went to hardcover and color because I feel like I'm paying for it. Give me text I can read and a decent layout and nothing more, please.") [...] So, I didn't really want this to be a "What's wrong with SJG that their artwork sucks?" thread... more of a, "Do you guys think this is right? Do you think that presentation matters as much as content?"

IMO what's important is that the presentation be distinctive. Show that GURPS is different from the competition. Make it stand out from the clutter on the display shelves. How do you do that? I dunno, I'm not a graphic designer.