Quantcast
[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/tg/ - Traditional Games


View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
[ERROR] No.38220705 [Reply] [Original] [4plebs] [archived.moe]

Even though it will always be a part of all things /tg/ related, we should acknowledge that the fantasy setting is slowly falling out of favor with the general populace. What will game designers go to next? What will they see as the next big thing?

Horror is a likely candidate, as the Cthulhu Mythos, as well as zombies, are insanely popular right now. But those could both be said to be falling out of favor as well, especially zombies, due to over saturation.

What about sci-fi? Star Wars is coming back and could herald a major return of the genre. Or, perhaps we might see a refined Sci-fi genre return with cyberpunk being popular. Android: Netrunner is slowly gaining popularity and could lead that particular charge?

Or will something totally unexpected become the go-to setting for the /tg/ world? Cowboys, either part of the weird west or just the wild west? Pirates have always seemed to be just at the threshold of taking over various aspects of the /tg/ world, maybe their time is near.

What are your thoughts on the state of popular settings as they relate to /tg/?

>> No.38220822

>>38220705
By being aware of this we can stop it. Meta solves everything. I think we've reached a point where the mainstream audience, whatever that means, is so large, that while something may diminish in the percentage, the player base will be so huge that it will still have an influence on the market.
Zombies, aaaah, zombies, the problem there is guns, we know that rules don't work well for those, and even zombies are fading out.
Cthulhu mythos is too niche in my opinion, to become majority of mainstream while still remaining true to its roots.
And general horror reeks of "story heavy" or fluffy systems which get a bad rap.
>mfw I was just saying idk in a long winded way

>> No.38220942

>>38220822
I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I do really think that the mainstream audience affects more than you think. Like I said, there will always be mainstays, but there is always a genre that seems to be more popular than the others. Right now that is obviously fantasy, but I am seeing more and more people try to find alternatives to that particular genre, which is why I think it won't be the go-to setting for /tg/ in the near future.

>> No.38220992

>>38220705
>Even though it will always be a part of all things /tg/ related, we should acknowledge that the fantasy setting is slowly falling out of favor with the general populace.
On what basis do you say this? GoT is running strong, it's one of the most popular settings for vidya, Peter Jackson's Tolkien movies have made a fucking packet... What indications are there that fantasy settings are any worse off now than they've been since, say, the 80s?

>> No.38221104

I don't think Fantasy has run its course. However, high fantasy full of fluff and noblebright has.

>> No.38221105

>>38220992
The sudden surge of other settings, for one. We are experiencing what I like to call "the moment of selection", where the current fad is at a peak and the replacement "options" are being laid out in front of us. Look at other mediums, music for example. Indie music and heavy metal both gained popularity about 8 years ago, while alternative rock (three days grace, breaking benjamin, etc) was ever so slowly losing popularity. Indie music was the obvious choice that was made, as it is really popular today. Music isn't the best example though, as it appeals to a much more varied and wider audience than /tg/ does (do?)

I feel that the same thing is beginning to happen here.

>> No.38221138

>>38221104
Erm, I sort of have to agree with that. And also, realize that in the span of a few years, we have swung back and forth from being unique to embracing the old cliches.

>> No.38221264

Indeed. But even then, some old clich├ęs have been rebooted, much grittier and darker. Hansel and Gretel, the Huntsman, all thoose fairytales who've been remade the last five years.

>> No.38221392

>>38220705
>What are your thoughts on the state of popular settings as they relate to /tg/?
Shit's cyclic, yo. Always were, always will be.

What is popular now will become replaced by something different. The market being oversaturated with one thing leads to that. Fantasy won't die out, but will most likely be dethroned as the default go-to setting by sci-fi (mostly because of the new Star Wars movies coming out). Everyone will jump on that bandwagon, people tired of swords and sorcery will want to play something different, and the market will change to meet their demands. Then, couple of years later, we'll be oversaturated with cheap and generic sci-fi, and then fantasy will make a comeback. Rinse, repeat.

Look at the nineties. You had D&D (especially FR) running strong, only for it to be replaced by different stuff like the oWoD (which even marketed itself as "NOT D&D" for a while) and settings such as Planescape and so on which were different from the norm. Then there was the X-Files craze, and then fantasy came back strong with the Harry Potter and LotR movies. Now your typical fantasy with swords and wizards is everywhere. Then that got stale, and everything started getting the grittier and darker reboot.

After SW hits, we'll see an increase in science fiction series, books and games. Then that will get stale, and we'll come back to fantasy.

>> No.38221472

>>38221392
>Then that will get stale, and we'll come back to fantasy.

I'm curious...why are you sure it will be fantasy again?

>> No.38221515

>>38221472
Because fantasy is the opposite of sci fi. What so YOU think it will be. If not, immediately, we'll eventually come back to it after exhausting all the other genres.

>> No.38221572

>>38221515
I suppose that makes a bit of sense, even if I would personally prefer something other than Sci-Fi or Fantasy to be the go-to.

>> No.38221602

>>38221392
Even though I'm pretty sure you're correct, I just want to point out
>people tired of swords and sorcery will want to play something different
>sci-fi (mostly because of the new Star Wars movies coming out)
>kek

Anyway, I'd love to see more optimistic distant-future sci-fi, the sort of stuff where you've got crazy levels of technology and people are somehow not abusing it to be giant dicks. Or even if they are, stuff turns out well anyway.

That, and space operas. Love me some space opera.

>> No.38221733

Are you confusing High fantasy with being all of fantasy?

>> No.38221857

>>38221572
What makes the most amount of money while appealing to the lowest common denominator will be the go-to. People are lazy like that. If someone makes an amazing cyberpunk movie that wrecks everything else sales-wise, you can bet your ass that will become the default setting in a couple of years.

Look at Twilight, for example. That thing came out of nowhere, earned billions of dollars, and spawned uncountable copies, rip-offs and series based on it. Vampires came back because of it, and from there we got all sorts of urban horror stories like the Vampire Diaries or Grimm or whatever.

>>38221602
Mah nigga.

>> No.38221938

>>38221602

There are already countless systems for fantasy space. Why not do something challenging?

All you're really doing in fantasy space is changing some prefixes.

Oh, right, realism doesn't sell. Everyone lives in their own hyperreality.

>> No.38222148

>>38221938
I didn't say fantasy space, though.

>> No.38222225

>>38222148

Space opera is fantasy space. It has the same rules as fantasy; none.

>> No.38222351

>>38222225
In practice, sure, that's often been the case. The term doesn't inherently denote space magic being behind all pieces of technology though. It's just the easiest route to take.

>> No.38222520

>>38222351
>The term doesn't inherently denote space magic being behind all pieces of technology though. It's just the easiest route to take.

You're right that it's the easiest route to take, which is why 99% of science fiction takes that route. FTL is magic, there's no way around that. You can't say that ringworlds and FTL ships and planet cities aren't magic, since they're outside of the realm of science.

>> No.38222712

>>38222520
>You can't say that ringworlds and FTL ships and planet cities aren't magic, since they're outside of the realm of science.

Oh, so you're one of those people. I don't think this line of conversation is going to get us anywhere, then. Good day and I hope you continue to enjoy your favorite brand of fiction.

>> No.38222888

>>38222712
I'm confused, does he think those are possible or not, or is this a fallacy?
>I cannot into arguments.

>> No.38223074

>>38222712
>Oh, so you're one of those people

People who see evidence and testability as the first set of criterion to call something "scientific", yes.

What are you?

>>38222888

Possible/Impossible is a pointless semantic debate because 100% certainty does not exist. In the real world, you have to make judgement calls on whether or not it's likely that something will exist, and for the last century all we've gotten is evidence against those things ever existing. Can i prove that they're impossible? Nope. Can i prove that bigfoot is impossible? Nope.

Now, if evidence were to be found? I would change my mind. But believing that something MUST or COULD happen merely because it would be supremely convenient is not scientific thinking.

>> No.38223121

>>38222712

Did you pick that image at random or do you think humans are evolving towards psychic powers?

>> No.38223346

>>38223074
See, you fail to understand science fiction outside of near-future science. Do you throw a hissyfit when FTL gets used at all? Because that's kind of core to any sort of interplanetary travel, unless you want players to be playing family lines. You need to suspend your disbelief a bit for the game to work.

>> No.38223550

>>38223346

>See, you fail to understand science fiction outside of near-future science

No, the authors of those works fail to understand that they have no business adding the word "science" to their genre if that's how loose they're going to play reality.

>Do you throw a hissyfit when FTL gets used at all?

I'm mostly just tired of how played out and boring it is. All it does is lessen the work of the creator and impoverish the reader/player.

>Because that's kind of core to any sort of interplanetary travel, unless you want players to be playing family lines. You need to suspend your disbelief a bit for the game to work.

You don't need interstellar travel to make space stories. Ever hear of the moon landings? We've got a lot of rocks and a lot of area for space stations. There's no point in leaving the solar system and relatively few stories take place within the bounds of physics and the heliopause.

Would that be so terrible? That we try to imagine dinosaurs with feathers? Or must we stay in an anachronistic narrative as dictated by dreamers who thought the early 2000's would be a time marked by man venturing out to space in masses?

Enough with the debunked alternate history, what will space ACTUALLY be like?

Am i the only one who finds this appealing? More than FTL space opera?

>> No.38223672

>>38223550
What kind of sci-fi books/series are like that anon? I'm new to literary sci-fi so suggestions are very welcome.

>> No.38224836

>>38223550
The point of science fiction isn't to be scientifically rigorous. The point of science fiction is to posit some divergence from reality and then explore the consequences.

>> No.38224859

>>38224836
>The point of science fiction is to posit some divergence from reality and then explore the consequences.

Citation Needed.

>> No.38225038

>>38220705
If the mainstream does influence the RPG landscape then I believe we're already seeing it in the emergence of narrativist systems. This is the day and age of Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, House of Cards, etc. Narrativist systems are tailored to deliver an experience that can be likened to serialized television and that's striking a nerve with a lot of the RPG community who consumes said television.

So I don't think we're talking fictional genre changes but game style changes.

>> No.38225188

>>38224859
Not really, but look up Asimov or Campbell and then think about the science fiction that actually felt like science fiction versus the science fiction that was just chromed up fantasy.

>> No.38225526

>>38220705
>the fantasy setting is slowly falling out of favor with the general populace
When was it in favor with the general populace anon?

>> No.38225669

>>38220705
Fantasy hasn't really fallen out. GoT is popular now, the Hobbit movies were a big hit with normals, and even urban fantasy stuff still gets a lot of off-and-on hits with daytime TV. Star Wars will likely bring back some interest with space fantasy, especially with the gamers who are despondent about Destiny's failure to be everything their hype hoped for and hype over Halo. Guardians of the Galaxy is pretty space fantasy too. While sci-fi might make some strides with people in the times to come, the more fantastic elements will overcome the more realistic ones in time.

Fantasy might not be as iron age pre-firearm standard as the 80s and 90s made it, but there's nothing wrong with that. Maybe we'll get something Dune-inspired, but realizes it shouldn't actually be Dune because any attempt by that to leave paper media is doomed.

>> No.38225778

>>38223074
Someone who thinks that just because something hasn't been done yet, doesn't mean it can't be done at all. Because I believe that there are still wonders in the universe to be discovered and that the purpose of science is to allow us to achieve what was once thought impossible.

>Possible/Impossible is a pointless semantic debate because 100% certainty does not exist. In the real world, you have to make judgement calls on whether or not it's likely that something will exist, and for the last century all we've gotten is evidence against those things ever existing. Can i prove that they're impossible? Nope. Can i prove that bigfoot is impossible? Nope.

>Now, if evidence were to be found? I would change my mind. But believing that something MUST or COULD happen merely because it would be supremely convenient is not scientific thinking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/164326-nasa-discusses-its-warp-drive-research-prepares-to-create-a-warp-bubble-in-the-lab
http://www.omaha.com/living/working-toward-a-warp-drive-in-his-garage-lab-omahan/article_b6489acf-5622-5419-ac18-0c44474da9c9.html

The potential is there, and it's entirely reasonable to extrapolate that given hundreds of years, the problems that currently hold it back could have been solved through legitimate scientific means. Realism is not synonymous with a lack of imagination.

Also, for the record, Bigfoot was debunked when the dude who created him admitted on his deathbed that it was a hoax.

>> No.38226604

>>38223672
> literary sci-fi
> scientifically accurate
That's a real rarity right there.

>> No.38226654

i'm hoping it's post apoc.

>> No.38226707

>>38220992
>Peter Jackson's Tolkien movies have made a fucking packet
Exactly the reasoning. Compare the numbers from the LoTR movies vs. The Hobbit movies.

>> No.38226960

>>38225778
>Someone who thinks that just because something hasn't been done yet, doesn't mean it can't be done at all.

So in other words you refuge in the fact that since nothing can be proven or disproven to 100% that you will always have a chance of being right no matter what? That's reasonable?

>Alcubierre drives
>Warp bubbles

This tired shit again? Do you know that, outside of reddit, alcubierre warp drives are a laughing stock of actual physicists? Alcubierre made his warp drive figures as part of an intentional thought experiment. They cannot actually work because exotic matter cannot exist and Miguel alcubierre knew that going in, he just wanted to play with the numbers of "what if" as in "what if we lived in a completely different universe"

The ONE guy at ALL of NASA that works on "warp drive" is Harold White, a notoriously discredited scientist that NASA should fire immediately for the least reason that he hasn't published dick-all since he got the job several years ago.

You're barking up the tree with the same dogs as those that chase perpetual motion and the loch ness monster. It's not a good look.

>> No.38226999

>>38225778
>Also, for the record, Bigfoot was debunked when the dude who created him admitted on his deathbed that it was a hoax.

That doesn't prove anything. Sasquatch goes beyond white men's tales.

>> No.38227116

>>38226960
>tfw my dad actually believes in alcubierre drives and warp bubbles.

He's usually sort of smart.

>> No.38227289

>>38227116

Everyone and their idiot cousin has been told time and time again by the internet and shitty movies that it's a sure thing, but it's just pure bunk, and justifying it requires committing a shitload of logical fallacies.

>> No.38227345

>>38227116
>usually

>> No.38227370

>>38226999
Okay, then one less squasatch to worry about, one of them was a hoax, maybe not the rest, but that still reduces their population by one.

>> No.38227432

>>38226999
I am laughing so hard at that 'stache.
Also nice trips.

>> No.38227434

>>38227370

Unless sasquatches are like electrons.

Can't prove they aren't.

Besides, everyone knows that bigfoot is telepathic and telekinetic. That's how he knows when someone is looking at them, and he adjusts the focus on the camera so the pictures are always blurry. he could probably mind control someone on death's door too.

Can't prove it's wrong.

>> No.38227458

>>38227434
>not sure if troll....or sarcasm

>> No.38227512

>>38227434
Best version I've heard is the tiny hidden population of Sasquatches keeps themselves in delivery pizza and internet connection by selling blurry photos of each other to the national enquirer.

>> No.38227565

>>38227434
>he could probably mind control someone on death's door too.

Damn, you've got a point there.

>> No.38227579

>>38227512

Maybe it's people like this who live in the woods and just take advantage of fucking with people.

>> No.38227610

>>38220705
>What will game designers go to next? What will they see as the next big thing?
Weeaboo fantasy.

No, really.

>> No.38227642

>>38227610

I can't believe i have friends that play reccetear.

>> No.38229017

>>38220705
Super Hero will hopefully make a comeback.

>> No.38229100

>>38229017
Given the recent popularity of superhero movies, and the fact that everyone and their grandmother is into comics now, I'd say it already has. Games just have to catch up.

>> No.38234866

>>38220705
I'm sorry, but I thought the post-apocalyptic setting was the obvious new genre now.

>> No.38235009

>>38220705
>the fantasy setting is slowly falling out of favor with the general populace

What? Game of Thrones is stupidly popular. Fantasy is arguably more popular today than it ever has been before.

>>38220705
>What about sci-fi?

Sci-fi is incredibly popular right now. If you look at major box office successes over recent years science fiction films are doing remarkably well, especially if you count superhero movies as sci-fi. Stuff like Avatar, Avengers, Interstellar, etc. are big as fuck.

If you mean shifts within the fiction itself, I think that high fantasy is slowly being eaten away by low fantasy. More than anything, I think that has to do with the political and economic situation that the world is in right now.

>> No.38235875

I think fantasy's alive and well. There's rekindled interest for Tolkien lore since the movies came out, and most of fantasy is derivative work, with a few notable exceptions. Harry Potter has a huge legion of followers, and I bet a lot of people would freakin' orgasm if allowed to play in an official HP setting. The Elder Scrolls is huge, and there's already a few campaign settings dedicated to it. Percy Jackson did well for itself too, even though the setting's a modern/ancient greek mashup. And there's the blemish known as Eragon, which I wish would simply disappear, but it made a ton of cash and has a lot of followers.

>> No.38236066

>>38220705
Seriously, fuck zombies. Ever since Resident Evil came out, there's bloody zombies EVERYWHERE. It's not even funny anymore.

>>38221264
>grimdark reboots of classic tales
I can't stand that shit, it's just a fucking marketing ploy.
1.- Take an established universe everyone cherishes
2.- Make it gritty, grey and bloody.
3.- ???
4.- Profit! (a whole fucking lot)

>> No.38236154

>>38220705
A lot of public dysaffection, obsession with new tech, and a feeling of political apathy is making the soil ripe for a new blooming of cyberpunk. I really think that a new look of it -- something sleeker, more inhuman, with a really pragmatic weirdness to the style -- is going to become a major contender for the Next Big Thing. It also looks great in movies and explores deep in literature, so while it is a great time for it to resonate with audiences it's also a good time for getting that message out to the audiences.

Shadowrun will wane, though. it's too magical.

>> No.38236586

>>38225188
Agreed, the point of sci-fi is that it's rooted in reality while taking a few leaps ahead of currently available technology. There's no magic to explain stuff, every thing that happens has a "scientific" explanation. It's gotta be believable enough without relying too heavily on "because magic!" arguments.

Some fantasy is not inherently bad to have on a sci-fi setting, though... Star Wars has a very strong fantasy element in the Force and the Jedi Knights, and that was sort of the charm of it all. Then Lucas screwed that up by laying down the "science" behind it to downplay the fantasy element, so the formerly mystical universe-spanning Force is just a psychic network generated by mutant mitochondria. WTF.

>>38225038
Agree again. Narration of a compelling story is becoming more desirable than chucking dice and memorizing spell ranges, which oWoD did pretty nicely. Maybe this dislike of mechanical play is some sort of 4E backlash?

>> No.38238671

>>38236586
Extremely doubtful. 4e wasn't half as mechanically obsessed as 3e was, and 5e is just a narrative 3e. Same problems, same obsession with gamism. Don't mistake 4e having a focus on balanced combat rules as being capable only of combat or as rigid by design as some other D&D editions that can be named, let alone when compared to its contemporaries in PnP. That's buying into troll logic, and you'd have to rip out hundreds of pages of the 4e manuals to begin to make that argument.

>> No.38239108

>>38235009

spectacle and making a person feel smart by association are what's popular right now.

science fiction, lacking depth or thought, just makes it so much easier. look at Jupiter Rising.

>> No.38239120

>>38236586
>There's no magic to explain stuff, every thing that happens has a "scientific" explanation.

Technobabble is a scientific explanation now?

That's pathetic.

>> No.38241519

>>38229100
Games were actually a bit ahead of the movies. X-Men Legends, Marvel Ultimate Alliance, Champions Online, City of Heroes, DC Universe Online...

>> No.38241571

>>38241519
>X-Men Legends
>2004
>Marvel Ultimate Alliance
Literally two games on the ps2
>Champions Online
Shitty korean MMO from Cryptic
>City of Heroes
rip in peace ;_;7
>DC Universe Online
Absolutely garbage

And none of these are tg games

>> No.38241687

>>38241571
>Literally two games on the ps2
And their sequels.

>And none of these are tg games
what exactly counts as a tg game then?

>> No.38241943

>>38239120
Of course there's technobabble, writers had to invent machines and concepts that don't exist, but may someday be developed. Some of the scientific principles upon which (good) sci-fi is built on are pretty solid. Take Asimov for instance, who had a pretty solid grasp of physics and biology. Or Verne, who had a lot of revolutionary ideas that 19th century people thought of as ludicrous, and history has proved him right on a lot of em.

Then again, a ton of other writers just took the "magics in spaaaace!" approach and wrote a ton of crap. Which is not that bad if all you want s to read an entertaining tale and tickle your imagination. Ever gone to the movies and that guy kept grumbling about shit could not be real because science? What the fuck are people reading fiction for, then? Suspension of disbelief is mandatory for a tale to be enjoyable. Hell, fiction even seeps into historical records.

>> No.38242416

>>38220705
Next year, when you walk into a game store, you are going to find that most of the rpg games being played are fantasy games. That will be true the year after that as well.

I do not see a time when that is not true. Just because 'movies' is not going to change it.

For whatever reason RPGs seem to draw the fantasy crowd.

Now, if you want to top tabletop board games, then OK. That genre isn't dominated by fantasy games at all. There are some, some are even big. But fantasy is at best an equal player, and probably a lesser one, in that area.

Board game? Yes. But then fantasy isn't king now anyhow.
RPG? No. Although I will say it is going to change to a more Dark fantasy as a rule.

>> No.38242439

>>38241687
Traditional Games

>> No.38242440

Superhero settings are going to be a fad for a while, I'd imagine. Direct result of the new DC and Mahvel films and their tie-ins.

No complaints here, supers settings are great for genremashing and general low-seriousness.

>> No.38242447

>>38241687

a traditional game- IE card, board, or tabletop, dumbass.

>> No.38242497

>>38241687
>what exactly counts as a tg game then?

This is one of those statements that probably makes people happy this is an anon board and not a perma ID board. Because it would be hard to live that one down. It would likely follow you for years.

But thanks to anon, the gentlemen can reinvent himself next thread and be judged on the merits of what he says then. Instead of what silly thing he said some time earlier.

>> No.38242514

>>38242497

but he'll never change what he truly is- a dumbass.

>> No.38242671

>>38242514
He's probably just a kid and honestly didn't understand what he was saying.

>> No.38242709

Urban fantasy seems to be edging out high fantasy, because it's seen as more relatable. Or maybe more gritty.

>> No.38243159

>>38242709
Ugh. More gritty modern urban horror/fantasy? Buffy, Angel, Grimm, Underworld, Blade, Twilight? Fuck that, I'll crawl into a den of mind flayers before I play that shit. There's already enough angsty teens playing WoD.

>> No.38243231

>>38243159

the only experience I've had with WoD was a hypothetical idea a friend explained to me where he created a self-cannibalizing army of clones in Genius, which basically cemented my opinion on it- entertaining, but essentially unplayable. Ateast, unplayable by anyone who even considers thinking about how the rules fit together.

>> No.38243263

>>38220705
>we should acknowledge that the fantasy setting is slowly falling out of favor with the general populace
That certainly hasn't been true among the circle of people I play with. It's still a lot of Dungeons and Dragons, not much else.

>>
Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action