A new Star Wars RPG idea...

[Voidbearer]

Hi all,

 

I know that this is a long shot at best, but I cannot think of a better place to begin than the deep-end. I know there are lots of game ideas out there, and that this idea might get ignored, but I do have a Star Wars RPG idea, based on a Star Wars character I have been wanting to RP in a pen-and-paper game.

 

It is set between episodes III and IV, and it follows a Force User who witnessed the Jedi Purge. If I was to submit this idea, to say, you guys. What would be the best way to go about that?

 

Hoping for feedback

[Tale]

Nobody's interested in ideas. Everytime I say that, which has been many times, I always fear someone taking it harshly. Thinking I think their idea is stupid. But it doesn't matter if it's stupid or not, nobody's interested.

 

Here's the thing you have to know about ideas. Everyone has ideas, probably several. Creative types, writers, designers, artists, they have more than most. And the big difference between their ideas and your idea is that they will like their ideas better, they will understand how to implement their idea more, and their idea will have a better grounding in what is a reasonable scope of work.

 

So by default, any idea they come up with is better for them than any idea you can come up with. There's only one way for your idea to be made. Do it yourself. Or get rich enough to pay other people to do it for you.

[Walsingham]

That's a wee bit harsh, Tale.

 

~

 

The classic way to pitch any proposal is: situation, complication, resolution.

 

This means

 

1) How things stand right now, overview.

2) What means things won't, or shouldn't carry on as they are now. This is where the guy you are talking to gets interested. Because these should be THEIR concerns, or an elaboration of them.

3) What the solution will do _in general terms_. Don't get all technical.

 

So, for example, [i'm pulling this out of my ear, so feel free to mock]

 

Games sales although strong, appear to have polarised into a tiny number of big budget games, and swathes of smaller releases. Further fragmentation has occurred as some gamers move to mobile devices.

 

The difficulty for games studios is that financiers are looking for big budget success stories, but are unforgiving when they fail to materialise. Smaller releases, rather than being seen as low risk, are seen as too low a payout. This means games studios are running huge risks on uncertain markets.

 

The solution to this problem is to create a number of small releases which testbed innovative game mechanics, and gamer groups; but which later can be integrated as a single combined big budget release, using celebrity appearances and high level marketing. This way risk is apportioned in small doses, but bigger investors may still be interested.

 

~

 

You see, Voidbearer, the key is to think not why YOU want to do the project. But why the bloke on the other side of the table wants to do it.

[Osvir]

You see, Voidbearer, the key is to think not why YOU want to do the project. But why the bloke on the other side of the table wants to do it.

Exactly this. Or so I believe.

 

But Tale has a point. I mean, I think my own ideas are pretty darn good, but it's not always that other people think so too (it's because they either fail to see the greater picture or I am not explaining it properly, or they have their own ideas about it). Sometimes I even realize my own ideas are shiet from the get-go (to be frank) then when others bring me the insight of it as well, then it gives me a chance to reform and re-construct my idea. Sometimes I might have an idea I am a little bit unsure about or it is incomplete, so I post it with lots of enthusiasm simply to fish out more thoughts and input on the idea so that I can form a bigger idea out of it or build on it even further.

 

Because let's be honest, if I thought all of my ideas were REALLY GREAT, then I'd never post them at all and just hoard them for my own selfish use. The point of discussion, in my opinion, is to improve on something that "might" be great for a large audience, get input and feedback, then come back to the discussion with a stronger and EVEN GREATER idea than what was originally presented.

 

I am fairly certain Obsidian is aware of this as well (having been developing games for a long time), so when they present ideas they think are "the bomb" and really awesome and they come to the conclusion that "This is a really good idea" BUT when someone in their community points out an aspect of the idea that's not "that good" it might make Obsidian reform and re-construct it with that aspect in mind and make the idea stronger than previously.

 

I believe inXile posted their Vision Document for this exact reason, apart from transparency. "Hey guys, this is our vision and our idea. We think it's pretty strong" is probably what they thought and it probably was their conclusion of what they thought would be great in the game... how much insight did they gain from doing that and hearing their community give them feedback? Did their vision change and grow? I don't know, I didn't follow that, but I believe it did.

 

I also think that Project: Eternity is going to become a better game than it ever could have been thanks to both Kickstarter and the Community discussion. So in that way I think Tale's statement is wrong. Sure, people might think "My idea is better than yours" but I think that together "We can make the idea stronger, better & create a more satisfying product out of it" is the exact opposite of what Tale is saying. As long as people stick to the vision and the end-product.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Osvir

[Walsingham]

I feel obliged to stick up for Tale if anyone new is reading this. He's really consistent in being open and unlike many others he actually read the OP. I only commented because he's normally so nice.

 

After a LOT of experience I really can't give you any better advice than the above. Although I could elaborate a little with some thinking points regarding the 'other side of the table'.

 

Situation - Don't over-reach, but make sure your overview is well researched. Any factual errors or out of date info will drop you at the first hurdle.

 

Complication - I hate this bit, because frankly most really serious complications are hard to sum up. They need graphs, and coloured crayons, and sometimes waving your arms around in a threatening manner. The key is to remember that the bloke you are talking to doesn't WANT to do anything new or different. You have to tell him why doing nothing is no-longer an option.

 

Resolution - The hardest thing for me is not getting technical about why the solution is great. But the bloke on the other side doesn't want to know technical detail. Not yet. Maybe not ever. Just tell him why the outcomes will be right for him. Payoffs, scheduling, risk, low amounts of effort.

 

~

 

But here's the thing. I've been ignoring my own advice in describing this to you. Because I'm trying to pitch you an idea.

 

You are a bright guy, committed to gaming, with a lot of energy and enthusiasm. You have at least one good idea you would like to get across to potential investors and collaborators.

 

The problem is that investors and collaborators hear hundreds of great ideas every month. They cannot afford to invest time and attention untangling what is good about your idea, and what makes it worth working on. So they reject almost every idea as a matter of normal policy. Consequently your idea won't get used if you pitch it the same way everyone else does.

 

There is a solution which will let you quickly explain your ideas in a way which is respectful, quick, repeatable, and won't leave you feeling drained. This solution won't make every pitch work. But it will give you the best shot every time. The solution is to phrase your pitch in the form of the situation, complication, and your resolution.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Walsingham