|
But I frankly think that WOTC is putting everyone's business on the table in a big gamble, and the best thing anyone can do is break that dependence, by either releasing their own nice 'core' rulebooks like Monte Cook and others have done, or some other mechanism.
Yeah, I had to make that "dependence" bold. The Wizards aren't gambling with other people's business. They are making a change to their product. Everyone else left themselves open for a "gamble" by basically being hangers-on.
I can't recall, but are any other of the top earning companies in the RPG market share d20 companies? I don't believe they are. They each have their own system.
So, if d20 falters with the release of 4e,yeah it may change the whole d20 industry but I can't help but think that it will give folks using their own systems a chance at a bigger piece of the pie.
d20 may be the "Big Dog" and yeah, it has a huge fan base; but it is most definitely not the "be all, end all" of RPG's.
White Wolf is the only other one that even comes close, IIRC, with HERO, Steve Jackson Games and Palladium fighting for a distant third...Yeah, in the past,White Wolf was a VERY distant 2nd. In past RPG market shares I had seen, you could combine ALL of the other companies and still end up with a smaller market share than WotC.
D&D alone (no 3rd party companies included) is approximately 45-50% of the market. All White Wolf games combined are about 21-22%. Mongoose is #3 and continuing their ascent upward.
Can RPGs survive without a truly successful 4E. Short of the long: Yes. Longer version: All of us that are not going to 4E but sticking with 3.5, we're use to buying between 2 book every month to one book every two months. With no more WotC books, first we'll look around for stuff we can steal for our existing games. We'll read it, steal some stuff and fall inlove with this one aspect of this game. We'll tell they group we want to run it and the group will either switch completely or come up with a homebrew of a mix between the two.
Word will get out as to which companies make stuff that's good to steal stuff from. People will drift that direction and eventually a new game will get big.
The single biggest problem is name recognition. D&D, thanks to all the negative press back in the 80's will forever reign supreme with name recognition. WotC may sell it off and if 4E flops, the only one that's going to buy it is someone that loves it enough to do a good job with it (just like how WotC did back in the day, and just like how WEG did with Star Wars 2nd Ed, and how Mongoose is doing now with Traveller).
But we have to understand that WOTC, honestly, doesn't care if D&D dies if they can sell a few million $40 supplements right now..and they don't care if D&D as we currently understands it dies if they can convert a huge number of folks to a microtransactional subscription-based product.
The corporate heads may not care, but I'd wager that many if not all the designers care. I may not like what they've been coming up with flavor wise. Nor for some of the rules changes, but I think they (the designers) are all still die-hard gamers at heart.
The corporate heads may not care, but I'd wager that many if not all the designers care. I may not like what they've been coming up with flavor wise. Nor for some of the rules changes, but I think they (the designers) are all still die-hard gamers at heart.
True... but it sure looks like they are die-hard gamers who are out to re-invent D&D in some new guise so that the game remains relevant and able to draw new players.
Their efforts, thus far, seem to be pushing away those who have enjoyed D&D for years. I realize that the game has changed quite a bit over the years but, essentially, is still the same game.
Many "old-timers" just don't see 4th edition as the same game because the PHB options (particularly) don't have a familiar ring to them. Too much is being changed in order to "freshen up" the game.
But we have to understand that WOTC, honestly, doesn't care if D&D dies if they can sell a few million $40 supplements right now..and they don't care if D&D as we currently understands it dies if they can convert a huge number of folks to a microtransactional subscription-based product.
The corporate heads may not care, but I'd wager that many if not all the designers care. I may not like what they've been coming up with flavor wise. Nor for some of the rules changes, but I think they (the designers) are all still die-hard gamers at heart.
I think James and lojakz are both correct. Unfortunately, I think designers' preferences are automatically subordinate to WotC's agenda. Either designers get with WotC's program, or WotC gets new designers (which has already happened, a couple of times I think).
My two (more) cents :)
A notable quote:Sitting down to a board game and strategizing for hours might seem archaic in today's chaotic society, especially when there are updated alternatives, such as the Nintendo Wii, Playstation 3, and Webkinz.
But, in fact, round-the-table gaming remains a prominent American pastime, and recently, board games have enjoyed a revival.
Sales have more than doubled in the past nine years, according to market research firm NPD Group. In 1998, nationwide sales were roughly $314 million; last year, they grew to $802.2 million, an increase of 13 percent over 2005.
As far as RPG's go, even if the new edition flops and WotC gasps its final bloated breaths....will the industry die?
Nah. Less bloat. Plenty of creative minds out there. Regardless of the ever hot high-tech wiz-bangery, there will always be people who want some real socializing around a table.
This has been my experience, too. My friend and I have been attracting new players to table top D&D that were strictly video gamers until now. And I think they now enjoy the table top RPG as much, if not more than the video games they're used to playing. It's a social evening with the guys (in our case, the group is all guys), they get to roll dice, and laugh when all sorts of major mishaps happen (i.e., critical fumbles). The newbies are always happy to play, and as they get more comfortable with the game's fairly complex rules, their enthusiasm only seems to increase.
I haven't played a video game in over a decade (I realize that may be an exception to the rule, as well).
And among non-gamer friends, getting together every couple of weeks to play board games has become the norm, for the same reasons listed above. It's nice to get out of the house, socialize with friends, and laugh. My girlfriend has even requested board games for Xmas!
So while table top RPGs and board games will wax and wane in popularity over time, I have a feeling that they will always be in a position to make a comeback. In a sense, what attracts people to certain activities is their sense of "novelty." After people have been oversaturated with video games, I think it would only make sense for many of them to want to (re)discover board games or table top RPGs at some point in their lives.
Or perhaps this is just wishful thinking based on my experience with an admittedly limited sample of the population? ;-)
I don't know... All I know is that regardless of edition and technological change, my heart will always be with board games and table top RPGs...
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I think we need to remember every gaming company is bi-polar, it's just more evident with WotC.
There are the gaming folks, like Richard Baker and the like who honestly feel they have the best interests of the game at the heart. Even if we find the mechanical changes annoying at best, damned stupid at worse.
Then there are the 'suits' who look at the bottom line. They're likely the ones driving at the edition change to make it profitable.
As to the dream of WotC/Hasbro selling D&D, forget it, The IP alone is worth it as electronic, media, etc property.
|
I think we need to remember every gaming company is bi-polar, it's just more evident with WotC.
There are the gaming folks, like Richard Baker and the like who honestly feel they have the best interests of the game at the heart. Even if we find the mechanical changes annoying at best, damned stupid at worse.
Then there are the 'suits' who look at the bottom line. They're likely the ones driving at the edition change to make it profitable.
As to the dream of WotC/Hasbro selling D&D, forget it, The IP alone is worth it as electronic, media, etc property.
Someone did a really nice summary of the people who are now the designers at WotC for this 4th edition, and the various other companies they came from. That was really quite interesting to see. I will try to find a reference and edit it in, because it was worth it. Are they gamers? Yep. Were they D&D gamers? No. Do they obviously think their previous creations were better than D&D? I would. Would I, given the chance, want to forward my own agenda if I had a chance at remaking D&D? I think the natural answer is yes.
Part of the problem is that we do have gamers at WotC making 4e, but they aren't D&D gamers. A cardboard box designer shouldn't be drawing up plans for a house. Sure, they're both kinda box-like, but it's not the same. All designers are not created equal. :)
Now, I think we can be fairly certain there is nobody from Hasbro sitting around at the WotC offices making sure they do exactly what Hasbro wants. Megacorps don't work that way. They issue some kind of (usually unreasonable) order, and then expect it to happen by the people lower on the food chain. The "suits" as you call them at WotC would receive such marching orders and then translate that - again, probably not in detail - to the design heads. The orders were likely something along the lines of "we need to make D&D more interesting to the ADHD MMORPGers to get their subscription money every month, and we don't care what you have to do to get it." The designers are then responsible for carrying out those orders under the direction of the heads.
As for the designers thinking they "honestly feel they have the best intersts of the game at heart" - I don't think so. Unless you first parse that through the filter of "we have orders from above and I want to keep my job". I'm not expecting anybody to be so noble as to say "I cannot tolerate the changes you want me to make, so I quit!". However, the force with which the changes have been shoved at us (even though little has been revealed as yet), and the strategy employed to make us want 4e (3e was terrible, I can't believe you are still playing that horrid game... what are you, an idiot? Sheesh... we fixed it, though, don't worry, we saved you from that horrible piece of trash we were selling books for several months after we announced the upcoming RPG saviour) being one of making other things look like they're broken rather than featuring the good things about 4e (and if they are truly holding up the changes that have been announced so far as the "best parts of 4e" then I sense trouble), then it's entirely possible that 4e could be a real flop.
3e really couldn't fail. Even with market share falling off with 2e having been around for so long, TSR/WotC would capture most of the people's attention who still played D&D, and then would certainly grab in some new players who had probably played D&D before but moved on to another system after they got bored with 2e. The situation is totally different now.... there is a *lot* of good, current, new material for 3.5 that is still available on the shelves, and still planned to be released. They aren't trying to take people back into the fold, they are trying to convert people (and with lines like "you shouldn't try to convert your campaign, just bring it to an end and start fresh with 4e", that's apparent). The new people who do show up will, for the most part, be unlikely to stay in the hobby very long (bolstering someone else's point that they don't care if they get long-time customers, just a lot of sales of $40 books at the beginning), and they are most definitely segmenting their current customer base.
As for WotC selling D&D because the IP is "worth it" - well, not if it flops. It will then not only be seen as the "devil game that makes kids kill themselves" (the "devil" part being strongly bolstered by the strange design changes and choices they're making for 4e), but a financial loser (in that it can't make as much money as M:TG, for example).
Can the industry survive? Most definitely. I would be willing to bet it's a very small percentage of the gaming community who started gaming because they had an interest outside of being introduced to the game by a friend/acquaintance/"DM advertising for players". Have you ever seen D&D advertising outside your FLGS or in gaming products/mags? I don't think I have. That's the nature of the game - it's social, and you really can't play it by yourself. Someone generally has to tell a new person about the game and it goes from there. Even with 4e seemingly trying to emulate a MMORPG, it's a different audience. If I want to play WoW I can sit by myself at my computer and play it. It can still be social, but in a different way - I can still be by myself to actually play the game.
So I think the industry will continue along just fine, especially if there are some large companies who are willing to take the lead in making sure the current version of D&D continues to have support in the years to come.
Since I jumped in on this before, let me get back on the train. Regarding board games and a resurgence of interest in them. That's great, but I'll admit, analogies don't always work perfectly. I also think that the type of boardgames that people play have changed quite a bit.
As far as RPGs not dying out goes, I'm not really thinking they will die and never be seen again, and what I was talking about was merely conjecture on my part. What I'm wondering about is if they become a super niche market. Smaller companies that know what to sell their product for and how to market them will still survive, but we won't see a tabletop version of the game making the name for itself that the game did in the 80s, and even the state of the game right now probably won't be seen again. But this is just conjecture, and I don't have any inside knowledge on this.
I guess in the end, I'm in the acceptance state. I know D&D is changing, and its changing from what I want it to be, but that doesn't mean it will fail, and it doesn't mean that D&D should be what I want it to be, but it doesn't mean that to accept this means I have to be on board with it either. If this does take off, that's great, I'll be wrong, and the hobby will rise to new heights, and I hope others get what I have out of it over the years.
As far as the designers go, I honestly think that most of the designers are gamers at heart that really do want to put out a good game. I can say that some of the lead designers seem to not be "deep immersion" role players, and that's fine. I also don't doubt that the designers are doing what they are because these are their ideas. I don't think that Hasbro is telling them to do each and every thing they are. I'd be amazed if the guys at Hasbro even know what the Abyss is, what the Great Wheel is, or that Mystra and the Weave control magic in Faerun.
What I do think has happened is that Hasbro has given WOTC benchmarks to hit, saying that if they are making X in this quarter, they have to hit 2X next quarter, and 3X the quarter after that. I think that 3.5 may have been the result of the first deadline, and that 3.5 has fallen short of the benchmarks, and something else had to be done (in fact, I think that it started falling short of the benchmarks fairly early).
Now, if I'm pressed for time and I have to bring my profits up, and I know edition changes bring in money, I'm not so sure that it wouldn't occur to me to make a new edition as well. And if 3.5 isn't very old,and isn't reviled or considered outdated, then, as Monte Cook pointed out, you really have to offer something different to convince people to buy it. Plus I think they (WOTC) may have had a directive from Hasbro to not just make 3X or whatever, but to lower the demographic as well.
Meaning, of course, that 3.5 isn't horribly broken, and there isn't really a need for a new edition, but rather that there is a need for WOTC to produce a new edition. I do think that if WOTC wasn't part of a larger corporate structure, we likely would not be seeing this, but that's not really cogent to the discussion at this point. As Erik Mona pointed out a few months ago, if Hasbro has five employees in Division A, and Division A makes 5X, then why do the people in WOTC only make X with twice as many people in it? The larger the corporation, the more the story is about numbers. I'm not saying this is evil, wrong or bad, its just that the CEO of Hasbro cares about what the profit margin for WOTC is, but he doesn't really care if we want Bane in the core pantheon or not.
As to the dream of WotC/Hasbro selling D&D, forget it, The IP alone is worth it as electronic, media, etc property.
I dunno about all that. The movies stung the studios (not our fault)bad enough part 2 went straight to video with no theatrical release. D&D:Online is no longer on the shelves (but WoW, LotR, and GuildWars are) so how are they supposed to get new customers like that. If D&D4 tanks (and that is a big 'if') I don't see how the novels will do any good for it. D&D:Heroes was one of the worst reviewed games for XBox and did not sell well at all. NWN (1&2)is about the only recent winner I can think of, but that would be a fleeting success in the wake of a failed edition. KoTOR wouldn't count. Though it is d20 based it is Lucas's property.
One thing about all of this that I find interesting is that those who do their earning based on d20 are a little apprehensive about what 4e will bring for them.
Those that make their money with another system are a little optimistic about what 4e will bring for them.
Too true!
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
One thing about all of this that I find interesting is that those who do their earning based on d20 are a little apprehensive about what 4e will bring for them.
Those that make their money with another system are a little optimistic about what 4e will bring for them.
That's one of the reasons that I think Paizo's better off if AP 3 isn't 4.0. If that's the case, it's 6 months of having a 3.5 adventure path, and Game Mastery being 4.x. This will give Paizo a fair idea of feeling out the market with 3.5 and 4.0.
It might also allow the other 3rd party companies out there to discover if they will want to move on to 4.x or embrace another engine, wheter it be True20 OSRIC, 3.pathfinder or what have you.
Sploooooorrrtch
Sploooooorrrtch
Vomit Guy, you do raise a valid point about cycles and phases, but I just don't see what spaghetti has to do with.
Sploooooorrrtch
I too believe you have a point. If they make a mess all over themselves, as you have done, will they provide the supplies for clean up?
Now I'm off to find my rubber boots.
Sploooooorrrtch
Dude. That's just nasty.
-The Gneech
Two cents, for what it's worth.
A couple of questions, a couple of points of view.
Will 4e be open?
Apart from the blanket statement that there will be no compatiblity between editions, has anyone actually heard about how the rules will differ?
I want to be a fan of d20, but I struggle with it as many of my players are "rules lite". We are an older crowd, and so poring through rule books for understanding is secondary to telling stories. And between games there's kids, wives, business travel... Looking at the stat block for a 10th or 12th level characters requires a lot of reading and a knowledge of some fairly arcane rules to understand why certain feats are valuable and others are not. More than many "beer and pretzels" players are willing to invest. For introducing new players d20 is a write-off. Too many options, rules, modifiers, exceptions.... It takes the focus off what (I believe) is really important in gaming: adventuring.
Hopefully, 4E will eliminate some of these issues.
Unfortunately, the cost of 4e will be challenge because for a new generation of players is looking to purchase it. The core books will probably come in at $45-50 a pop, meaning an investment of ~$150 just for the rule books. Stack that with the cost of settings, miniatures, battlemaps, dice, etc and it's well beyond the reach of an "exploratory" 'tween. This is compared to 1st Edition which I purchased for $15 and it included the rules, a module (B1: Keep on the Borderland... ah, the crawl) and dice. At the time, it was cheaper than Monopoly(tm).
Somehow, all of the rule additions and crunch hasn't improved the hobby. For myself, I use Savage Worlds and convert d20. My players were recently able to pick up the Explorer's Edition for $10 and have a set of rules of their own.
Not arguing a point, just putting in an opinion.
Craig
I'm a bit bemused by the fear for the Hobby. But then D&D has never been the sole game of my group, over the years we've played WoD, Exalted, Gurps, Fuzion, D&D 2nd Ed and 3.5, flirted with Fading suns and Earthdawn, and typically been playing 2 different games at once. Like wise the image of a 'divided' hobby seems odd to me, I'm a gamer not a D&D player, and more than happy to try other systems.
To me a failed 4E could well invigorate a stagnant hobby as Steve Jackson Games, White Wolf and others make gains.
Theres a lot of doom and gloom about the loss of FLGS's, but I cant find one within more than 100 miles of me so anything I get I order on line, its not the end so long as Amazon stocks things. (Sorry guys but your overseas shipping is a bit high)
If the average player is getting older its not because the game no longer appeals, not cause for a new edition, but because its longer as visible. In the past weve had witch hunts (any publicity is good, for each 9 morons you get 1 intelligent persons curiosity) a cartoon, and of corse the hoast of books, that presence has dwindled. LoTR was a huge success this should be our age, but Wizards haven't taken best advantage of that.
4E is mistimed, misguided, and built up as the sole source of Rollplaying. It is only a game, one of many. But to sum up my point Its not the Only Game in Town, so take this opportunity to try other systems, you might be surprised.
That was very close to why I ended up playing Castles and Crusades. That, and it was very compatible with most of my D&D3 stuff.
A poorly-selling 4E will not kill D&D, let alone "the industry". Hasbro is a very large corporation and the worst thing that will happen is that a lot of designers will get fired and the WotC unit will be reorganized into something more profitable, relegating the tabletop unit to an occasional book publisher focused on cards, board games and various electronic IPs. That will present the rest of the rpg industry with an opportunity to increase their own sales; once those pick up Hasbro will again jump into high production mode.
TSR went bankrupt because it was highly specialized. WotC by itself, let alone Hasbro, is orders of magnitude more diversified and hence far more resilient to any structural downturn in the sector or miscalculation with a new edition. D&D is here to stay, and so is WotC.
There is also the possibility (incomprehensible to such grognards as myself) that the Digital Initiative will be a phenomenal success and that D&D will slowly transmogrify into an online game.
|
The failure of the new edition might not kill the D&D brand, but it could still have a big effect on the hobby. After all, Hasbro porobably wants to separate the well-known and saleable brand from the rather clunky and unhip paper-based roleplaying game - see its proliferation into other things like the miniatures game, the search for more revenues by going online. "D&D" might continue, but D&D as we know it might not.
I hope the new edition is a success, but it will be based on the quality of the good and how good it is at attracting new players. I, personally, will reserve judgement - I'm not going to buy it just because I wan't to support the hobby, it will need to convert me like they managed to with 3E by the sheer quality of the product.
|
|
But then D&D has never been the sole game of my group, over the years we've played WoD, Exalted, Gurps, Fuzion, D&D 2nd Ed and 3.5, flirted with Fading suns and Earthdawn, and typically been playing 2 different games at once. Like wise the image of a 'divided' hobby seems odd to me, I'm a gamer not a D&D player, and more than happy to try other systems.
I'm the same way.
I don't play d20, 3e, or whatever you want to call it. 90% of the books on my shelf are not d20 books so it is hard for me to understand how some people think that if 4e tanks it will somehow be the doom of the industry.
it is hard for me to understand how some people think that if 4e tanks it will somehow be the doom of the industry.
TSR and D&D certainly weren't the competition. In the late 80s/early 90s, ICE and other "second-tier" companies like GDW, Steve Jackson, and West End fed off the scraps that TSR left behind, and were happy to do so. Almost without exception, every member of our various audiences was a former D&D player. That person left D&D looking for something simpler, something more complicated, or something different, and all the second tier companies offered the customer their various options. But the options were really so different that these game companies didn't have to fight over customers that much.
D&D is the "gateway drug" into RPGs for most people. The basic theory is is that if D&D tanks, then eventually other companies won't have the pool of dissatisfied customers in the future to draw from.
For the longest time, cable TV thrived off of people that were tired of watching CBS, NBC, and ABC. They wanted to watch reruns of their old favorite shows; they wanted 24 hour news or the weather when they needed it, or whatever. Now Cable TV has stations that are geared for kids and some parents start their kids off watching those channels as opposed to CBS, NBC or Fox (since ABC's viewership tanked).
If D&D tanks, yea, things in the industry will change, but others will spring up to take its place.
Splooooorrrrrtch
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I'm too lazy to look up the exact quote, but to paraphrase the Architect from the Matrix Reloaded, "there are levels of survival below this.""There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept." That's two you owe me, junior. ;)
Thanks Russ! I apprecaite the assist. Start (mis)quoting more so I can pay you back.
4e is not your fathers D&D. And now we will have to deal with the next D&D movie being filled with Dragon-men and Warforge sacking the Temple of Elemental Evil.
And now we will have to deal with the next D&D movie
Is there going to be another D&D Movie? I heard there's going to be a dragonlance movie (that looks aweful) and something else (that looks equally aweful).
And now we will have to deal with the next D&D movieIs there going to be another D&D Movie? I heard there's going to be a dragonlance movie (that looks aweful) and something else (that looks equally aweful).
No but pending the release of 4e when Hollywood does come a knockin to do a "Real D&D movie" it will have to based off this new format of the rules.
I always hoped they do TOEE as a Three-part movie...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
If 4th Edition flops - well, there will be a dent in the hobby stores sales. But i doubt it will be fatal. Face it, the "RPG only" store is pretty much a thing of the past anyway, with most making the bulk of their money on Cards, Minis and Books, with Comics and RPGs thrown in as "special interest" material.
Other systems have always stood besides D&D, with the players never touching or caring about it much, especially here in europe. So yeah, i would hope for a good, successful 4th Edition, but if they drop the ball, they drop the ball - not the entire hobby.
I always hoped they do TOEE as a Three-part movie...
I'll be in the theaters for that trilogy as fast as I hit the theaters for LotR on opening night 3 years in a row. More power to Iuz to make it happen!
How many old school/grognards are they gonna lose come 4e? Are there that many 9-13 year olds ready to fill the vacuum?
Alienating a large portion of your consumer base, that is not gonna sell books,they should have really looked into changes before applying them to paper. Perhaps they should have had some polls on 4e as to what players/Dm may have wanted instead what the designers felt needed to be changed.
What's next a really bad Saturday morning cartoon to go along with it.
Man. I really hope they do have a bad cartoon to go along with it. I love my bad d&d cartoons.
SplooooorrrrrtchHe said "something will spring up", yes, but I'm quite sure he wasn't talking about spaghetti... ;)
I'm sure that's what I stepped in.
Cthulhu will persist. That is a really high-quality product with a deservedly loyal following. I am confident it would weather the storm. I tend to think of RPGing as American, and I imagine that we're the biggest producers and consumers of tabletop gaming. But Chaosium also says somewhere that 50% or more of Cthulhu players are not American (which explains why their website catalog features translated versions of so many of their products--the only RPG company I've seen that does that).
Maybe the RPG scene elsewhere (primarily Europe, I'm guessing) wouldn't be devastated by a D&D debacle.
It was simple from the start.
Stick with ONE edition of the game, but expand it and clean it up and offer that FOR FREE!
Only switch to a new edition if necessary AND make sure the new edition is somewhat compatible with the old edition. In other words, don't destroy people's games and telling them to start all over, make sure the new edition stays true to its "soul", so to speak.
3.5E had many years to milk with many ideas and products they could've produced.
Remember that thread awhile back, before GenCon, that the Brand Manager Scott Rouse posted? He asked "Name the Top Ten D&D products you would like to see them produce."
Many many people posted practically the same thing: Fiendish Codex III: Yugoloths, Fey Book (ala Draconomicon style), Giant Book (likewise), Complete Psionics 2, more environment books, Oriental Adventure books...
3.5E still had a long ways to go. They introduced Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic, the new classes for the Complete Series, Magic of Incarnum, all material they COULD'VE expanded upon.
Offer FREE tools online to make the best use of this stuff. Hell, look at Star Wars Miniatures! They have a database for their figures. Why not one for D&D? Beyond the incomplete Spell Index, Feat Index, and Monster Index they had (they didn't include material from Dragon/Dungeon, the morons, considering that material is 100% official).
If 4E is unsuccessful, to what extent do you think it will hurt the 'industry'? How will it impact your FLGS? Your favorite game publishers? Your table?
I have absolutely no idea how it'll affect "the industry" - I'm just not that in tune with said industry, nor do I particularly care.
It won't affect my table one teeny weeny bit.