Do RPG fans have survivorship bias?

Survivorship bias posits that declines in standards may be masked after a certain point by survivorship bias: votes coming only from fans whose perception of quality won't change so long as the quantity remains.

Meaning that those fans that went elsewhere when these CRPG games were no longer being produced maintain some perspective on them that those who perservered with lesser titles no longer have as they learned to enjoy them for what they are as opposed to what they should or could be.

There was a period of time in which the traditional RPG was not being made and then Kickstarter happened. Was the reception for those early Kickstarter RPG games influenced by this among surviving traditional RPG fans?

People might say RPG fans are only responding to nostalgia and are therefore blind to faults in these games but I don't think its nostalgia that blinds some fans. Maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree here but what do you guys think?

I don't know about RPG fans in general, but I don't think that's very prevalent around here. We seem to be pretty quick to point out what Obsidan, Larian, InXile, etc., could have done better.

I actually thought the topic was going to be about rpg players being more resilient in general, and having a "survivors mindset" (google it) …damn, disappointed…

Why do I get the feeling this is about Spiderweb Games

I sorta feel the opposite. To me it looks like every rpg that is released gets torn to shreds by what it should be, or what it could be, or all the negative things about it, or how it doesnt compare to the first "real" RPGs on ENIAC or ALTAIR.

I hate mmo transaction console shit as much as the next guy, but I still spend money on the people that are trying. Even if I don't think their game is awesome.

Originally Posted by Wisdom
I sorta feel the opposite. To me it looks like every rpg that is released gets torn to shreds by what it should be, or what it could be, or all the negative things about it, or how it doesnt compare to the first "real" RPGs on ENIAC or ALTAIR.

I hate mmo transaction console shit as much as the next guy, but I still spend money on the people that are trying. Even if I don't think their game is awesome.

Yep, totally agree on both counts. It's astonishing at times the amount that good RPG studios get ripped to shreds online. At least they're trying to make interesting RPGs. I support them for that.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I don't know about RPG fans in general, but I don't think that's very prevalent around here. We seem to be pretty quick to point out what Obsidan, Larian, InXile, etc., could have done better.

I was thinking more of RPG Codex tbh.

I dont think it is that. RPG fans have different things that are important to them than most players. For example Elex is my personal game of the year. I know the game has many aesthetic flaws and the sound design is generic, but the gameplay is AMAZING to me when it comes to exploration, I also love scavenging in the game, like the investment required for lockpicking doesnt really pay dividends until you are in the second half of the game where you go past breaking even. The combat is fun to me, it isnt mind blowing, yet I still love it.

So to most people Elex wouldnt be game of the year, but to me because of what is important to me it is.

I was unable to parse the OP. Could someone else summarize? (Not joking.)

Originally Posted by Dilvish
I was unable to parse the OP. Could someone else summarize? (Not joking.)

Agree, same here. What are we talking about?

I had a random thought about rpg communities. Some are quite reductive in their tastes while others can be overly broad. I wasn't really going anywhere with it through.

Originally Posted by Arkadia7
I actually thought the topic was going to be about rpg players being more resilient in general, and having a "survivors mindset" (google it) …damn, disappointed…

I thought it was going to be about RPG players favoring games which have survivalist elements! The reason being, I am enjoying Elex (and most people around here too) and it has lot of "survivalist" elements to it and really give the feeling of "living off the land" compared to say Skyrim etc.

Originally Posted by Silver
I had a random thought about rpg communities. Some are quite reductive in their tastes while others can be overly broad. I wasn't really going anywhere with it through.

From what I can piece together the post is primarily about the reception of Kickstarter games?

If this is the case, then its not really about the communities but rather about how a lot of Kickstarter games specifically marketed themselves as new version of older games. In these cases it should be obvious that people are more critical to differences between the new version and the older template that is being renewed.

If the post was more general than just kickstarters then a further elaboration would be awesome, as it does sound like a potentially interesting topic.

Well I was sort of going with a what if scenario.

What if those players who walked away from rpgs had some insights that the current rpg community lacks now and if so what are they? I think the reception to D:OS 2 has been eye opening for me because non-rpg fans have embraced it because they appreciate it in a different way I think.

What is a survivorship bias ?

It's IMO nothing.
All I know is that it's year 2017, I'm aware of that and I don't want to play outdated designs (I'm not talking about graphics!).

I'm just happy to have such a selection of quality RPGs today, whether they are ancient, outdated engines (don't hate @joxer. ), or brand spanking new ones. It's definitely a golden age of gaming in general, but certainly for RPGs as well. Especially when you factor in modding, community patching, etc..

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
What is a survivorship bias ?

Explained in the OP, past a point stuck in survival mode, quantity prevails over quality, as long as there is enough, quality is disregarded.

Issue with that is that as soon as there is enough, people are no longer in survival mode. And they must be able to focus on quality exclusively.

There has never been a shortage of RPGs except self imposed: players disregarded offers based on where they come from.

SV is an example: it is considered an original product because players did not want to get the japanese versions made earlier.

We have several good quality franchises right now (or in the recent past). Quantity is not really that high in the West either, unless you count MMOs, mobile games, and RPG Maker.

I understand that better now, but since I mostly think in pictures and examples, I really need an example to fully understand what is meant.

So far, how I understand it, it's like this : No turn-based games made -> people go over to other games and begin to like them.
This is how I understood it, and my feeling tells me that I didn't understand that right.