Cons of Fans

From: Nick Brooke <Nick_Brooke_at_btinternet.com>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 06:28:40 +0100


Eric writes:

> Just a short note on broad-based numbers and percentiles...

Agreed there aren't many of us. But we *are* trying to improve future products today. Issaries' target market of 1.2m potential Glorantha-buyers are not. And they might well appreciate those better products.

> If a company is smart, it motivates and uses its core fan base to
> expand the appeal of the game.

Yep. The question facing us now is, how big is that "if"?

> Here are some pros and cons that must be considered (there are more)
> with fan published material.

I'll skip the pro's as "agreed", and look only at the con's.

> Can contradict 'official' material (which despite some digester's loathing
> of it, is still important to the majority of new gamers in the industry)

Yes, in the more normal cases. But when the 'official' material is only being produced many years *after* pioneering fan material, this *needn't* be such a problem. Glorantha is rather an exception in this regard.

Also, I think there can be greater difficulties when 'official' material contradicts previously printed 'official' material. Let's all hope Issaries products don't greg themselves too often. (Can the leopard change his spots?)

> Can cause crediting and intellectual property problems if ideas are
similar
> to what the company publishes.

Chaosium and Issaries have always had generous policies regarding fans' use of their material: I'm sure the fans I know would return the favour. (Speaking for myself, I have always explicitly done so when asked by Greg). And a credit only takes a few words in normal-sized print near the front of the book, after all.

> Can flood the market with lower quality products. (Causes both pricing and
> quality issues)

Going forward, I can see how this might be a problem. In the past, however, fan material was hardly overwhelming a Gloranthan marketplace that was *already* saturated with high-quality official products. :-)

> Can cause more work (less profit) trying to gather existing parts than to
> write something new.

Possibly. Can also cause less work (more profit) getting input from authors who've already written something of mostly acceptable quality. This is a tricky one to balance. How are the empirical studies turning out?

:::: Email: <mailto:Nick_Brooke_at_btinternet.com> Nick
:::: Website: <http://www.btinternet.com/~Nick_Brooke/>


Powered by hypermail