 |
 |
 |
|
Latest Reviews| Oregon |  | | Reviewed by: Ron McClung |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
D20 News: Paizo Publishing: Were We Thinking? Or Were We?
Posted 2002-09-18 21:11:28 by damonwhite |
|
FelixGuardian Reports: Some thoughts on the Sealed Sections of Dragon #300 and Dungeon #95 by Johnny L Wilson:
"Less than 14% of Dragon's readership is under 18 years old. An even smaller percentage of Dungeon's readership is under 18. The average age of Dragon is 28. The average age of Dungeon is higher. When
we create content and determine the readership level for issues of Dragon and Dungeon, we focus on our target audience. The Catch-22 is that we don't want to lose our small percentage of precocious teenagers. So, in Dragon #300 and Dungeon #95, we attempted the impossible. We attempted to target our older readers while protecting our younger readers.
We did this in a manner that is consistent with my position on game ratings
since the days when Acclaim's Mortal Kombat was the big media issue and I
appeared on ABC-TV Good Morning, America. We did it in a manner that is consistent with the position I took in a debate on CNN with the lawyer for the parents of a child killed in a school shooting. We did it in a manner that is consistent
with the position I took in a segment of Hard Copy and in interviews with Public Radio International following the Columbine shooting as well as in an interview with Canal during the Mortal Kombat controversy.
I said then and I say now that the market must decide. It is the
responsibility of a publisher to let consumers (or in our case, readers) know
what is in an issue so that parents have enough information to determine what
is acceptable or not for their children and so that mature consumers can
determine whether something appeals to their taste or not. It was our intent
to place a warning on the sealed section so that those who didn't want to
have the vile content thrown in their faces didnít have to open it. The
sealed section would also help parents know whether their kids were reading
that section behind their backs or not.
Even back in the days of Mortal Kombat, I argued that being up-front with
consumers was the best way. Software publishers argued back that retailers would reject their products with knee-jerk reactions based on their perceptions.
I contended that it was better to let everyone know about potential
controversy in advance than to be surprised at what they had in the store.
At Paizo Publishing, LLC, we've put our money where my mouth was. Both Dragon
#300 and Dungeon #95 are labeled as having mature content. Both the Dungeon
adventure (which is truly vile) and the Dragon material are contained in
sealed sections. That much was consistent with earlier positions.
Unfortunately, in trying to DEFINE what is VILE before anyone opened the
sealed section, we allowed our author to be so graphic that the INTRODUCTION
that preceded the section was as offensive (or more so) as anything within
the sealed section. IF an individual read the entire article that preceded
the sealed section, they received what was, in many cases, an unwelcome whiff
of the malodorous atrocities within the sealed section. For that, we
apologize.
However, we do not apologize for publishing the sealed sections. Many
retailers have far worse products on their shelves with no warning labels, no
attempt to let the consumer make a decision. Further, we knew when we sealed
the sections that some would complain about how tame the sections were
compared to other published content in the genre. They may be right, but we
determined to err on the side of caution rather than to rub everyoneís noses
in a type of game that is NOT for everyone.
Even a well-known former writer for Dragon and Dungeon has lamented the
inclusion of such horrific and disgusting elements within our pages, crying
out with crocodile tears for an era of innocence that became so mundane, so
unchallenging that the publisher of the world's greatest role-playing game
had to be sold to a competitor. Indeed, that era was so banal that other
role-playing systems stole gamers away from Dungeons & Dragons with systems
and backgrounds that were significantly grittier than the self-censored D&D;
world.
My own friends have asked me the age-old question, Was this coverage really
necessary? with the same rhetorical implication that they used to ask me
about violence in video games. They believe the coverage wasn't necessary and
that violence in video games (and movies, television, comic books and books)
isnít necessary. Yet, the truth is that in order to be truly heroic, one has
to triumph over that which is truly evil. Can we, or even SHOULD we,
self-censor the world of role-playing so that the evil creatures and villains
that parties encounter seem less horrific than the monstrous winged minions
of an Osama bin Laden in real life? Part of the ageless appeal of The Lord of
the Rings trilogy is that the evil is so palpable that the overall triumph
offers hope whether against the backdrops of the rise of Nazi Germany when
many first encountered the books, the televised horrors of the Vietnam
Conflict when I encountered them, or the slaughter of innocents we remember
from 9/11/01. Even in the midst of horrific evil, it is the HOPE that counts.
If there is a value to publishing a guide to the atrocities and perversions
that put the VILE in EVIL, this is it: Evil CAN be defeated! A corollary to
that which is played out many times in D&D; campaigns and fantasy literature
is that Evil is never really as strong as it looks.
That said, do we intend to make sealed sections a regular part of our
editorial content. No! In the same sense that R-rated movies don't usually
make as much money as PG-13 movies, we don't believe it would benefit our
sales or the hobby to focus on VILE subject matter all of the time. We will
only publish more of this material if it is in demand from the readers. Yet,
we insist that the ability to go out on a limb in subject matter keeps the
hobby fresh and alive. If nothing else, it gets us talking about values,
belief systems and shared social context. Such a dialogue cannot answer all
the questions, but it keeps us thinking and growing. I, for one, do not long
to return to the days of the comics code. I'm glad we can get a wider variety
of styles and subject matter than in the days when publishers were afraid to
go outside the lines, even for an issue or two."
Sincerely,
Johnny L. Wilson, President
Paizo Publishing, LLC
Note: I had sent in some fan feedback on mature content to Lisa Stevens and Johnny was kind enough to reply. Thanks Lisa and Johnny
|
| |
|
| "D20 News: Paizo Publishing: Were We Thinking? Or Were We?" | Login/Create an account | 38 Reader Comments |
|
| Comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
Unable to post a comment? Click here for details |
|
|
|
|
|
|
