The Shadowrun Situation

[Taharqa]

Also, notice the same people crying foul about NDAs and metaplot is the same guy defending corruption. That seriously confuses me. What, it's okay for the company to screw the contractor, but not the other way around?
-Crissa

I am sorry, can you point out to me when I defended corruption? I have actually several times explicitly stated my feelings about Coleman's confirmed actions. Please look back and refresh yourself before making statements that are incorrect.

Of course this type of argumentation has been common throughout this thread. Fuchs is the master of it. The logic goes like this: Because Loren Coleman did one bad thing, he must have done anything else that I want to accuse him of or that anyone else accuses him of. Anyone who continues to work at CGL/IMR must also be in cahoots with Coleman. Furthermore, anyone who actually argues that we should not be reactionary and jump to conclusions must be either one of his cronies or a dupe.

There is a wonderful elegance to this rationale, because however invalid it might be on a logical basis, it is virtually untouchable by any form of reasoned argument.

[Doom]

"one bad thing"? Dude, systematically looting a company over the course of years is not on the same level as taking the last donut. You simply can't systematically channel funds without engaging in a host of other bad things (eg, lying about where the money is, not paying people that rightfully should have their money, etc, etc).

[Endovior]

Agreed. The issue here, of course, is that Taharqa's defending Loren Coleman without explicitly defending Loren Coleman for whatever strange reason. He likes to cultivate this image of some kind of enlightened neutral third party... specifically, one that's not obviously on the side of fraud while simultaneously being a vicious enemy of anyone who opposes said side.

Nobody here buys that sort of contradictory mess, of course... the 'Concern Troll' label remains apt. No one actually takes Taharqa seriously, but the ones who haven't outright muted him still see his posts, and thus occasionally respond.

[Fuchs]

Once you get some clue, or integrity, and consider what actually was admitted by CGL (co-mingling of money, a cardinal sin of business), and what a lot of former employes confirmed (lots of bad business practises, exploiting freelancers, basically) you might change your view.

You can try to paint it all with the brush of speculation, but what is known, through various sources, makes it pretty clear that only those who support Coleman for whatever reason there is still work at CGL/IMR.

[Alansmithee]

I do know that CGL isn't in the habit of revealing metaplots to people without NDAs. You may be legally in the clear if CGl fucked up its paperwork, but that doesn't make it any less of a slimeball thing to do.

But all of that misses the bigger issue. Revealing a plot with the purpose of derailing it suggests that you think you are the gatekeeper of what is good and bad for the SR line, and that you have the right to deprive other fans of making that choice for themselves. That you are arrogant has never really been in question, but to see how far it reaches is illuminating.

You are a fraud, Frank. People who have to self-promote their integrity, desire for truth and justice, bravery, etc. are rarely, if ever, the ones possessing those traits. Actions speak louder than words.

I think you're quite off-base here. How are fans supposed to make a choice without all the information? By your own logic, him revealing elements of the metaplot is something good for the community (as it helps people choose beforehand if they like how things are progressing, and possibly impact said progression)

[adamjury]

I'd just like to say something about the NDA situation: several staff members, including myself, never signed one. The NDA situation at Catalyst was a complete mess. There was no way for a staff member to _check_ if someone had signed an NDA. No central database, not even an alphabetized filing cabinet in Seattle.

And to correct one thing that keeps getting stated, because Bull heard it or thought he heard it and kept repeating it -- not because he believed it to be true, but because he wanted to believe it to be true -- to the point that Frank started repeating it: SR4 did not outsell previous editions of SR.

SR4 did very well in terms of unit sales for FanPro and Catalyst, compared to other RPGs of that time period, but the 90s were much different in terms of volume, and comparing RPG production and sales from 1990-1999 and 2000-2009 is something that needs to be done very carefully, given the major changes in the market.

[Zinegata]

I'd just like to say something about the NDA situation: several staff members, including myself, never signed one. The NDA situation at Catalyst was a complete mess. There was no way for a staff member to _check_ if someone had signed an NDA. No central database, not even an alphabetized filing cabinet in Seattle.

... *facepalm*

Good God is there anything that Catalyst ever did correctly on the business end?

What are we gonna hear next? Catalyst doesn't actually exist because they never properly filed the papers?

[Juton]

SR4 did very well in terms of unit sales for FanPro and Catalyst, compared to other RPGs of that time period, but the 90s were much different in terms of volume, and comparing RPG production and sales from 1990-1999 and 2000-2009 is something that needs to be done very carefully, given the major changes in the market.

I didn't get into gaming until the around 2005. Can some one expound on how big a difference there is between the nineties and aughties? Did the bigger names just sell more or was there more competition?

[Zinegata]

Basically RPGs were a much, much bigger market in the past. They've been pretty much declining every decade, and the sale levels today are but a fraction of what they were.

Also, the period just before 2000 was pretty good to non-D&D RPGs, since at the time D&D was still in disarray.

[TheFlatline]

SR4 did very well in terms of unit sales for FanPro and Catalyst, compared to other RPGs of that time period, but the 90s were much different in terms of volume, and comparing RPG production and sales from 1990-1999 and 2000-2009 is something that needs to be done very carefully, given the major changes in the market.

I didn't get into gaming until the around 2005. Can some one expound on how big a difference there is between the nineties and aughties? Did the bigger names just sell more or was there more competition?

Consoles and PC games are really hurting RPGs.

It's funny. I'll generally make the statement that RPGs released in the last 10 years tend to be better written and have smoother rules than in the 90's, but they aren't as popular.

Part of the problem is that we haven't had a good match-up of a popular RPG with counter culture (every goth in my high school in the 90's was a White Wolf/Vampire fanatic, even if they didn't play any of the games), nor have we had a really good controversy to draw attention to the hobby.

Another problem is that CRPGs are getting more complicated in their design and capabilities. MMOs like WoW are designed like Skinner-conditioning experiments, and are more addiction fulfillment than actual RPGs.

It also doesn't help that thanks to games like the Final Fantasy series (christ, all JRPGs in general) that what constitutes an RPG to an average gamer is blurry. Not two weeks ago I got into a disagreement online over what an RPG was. I argued it was a story-centric game where decisions you made had an influence on the plot, if not the outcome of the story. I emphasized the "roleplaying" aspect of RPGs. The other person said a game wasn't an RPG unless there were levels and a granular inventory and an upgrade system.

Pretty much all non-electronic media is on a steady decline sadly. RPGs are one of them.

[Username17]

I do think that was about the best face they could possibly put on being dropped by all their distributors except PSI.

Also, I really am puzzled by people who think that absconding with all the proceeds from several conventions a year for several years constitutes "one thing." That's a separate theft, a separate lie, a separate cheat for every convention, for every person who was owed money on those sales, for every corporation who are owed royalties. I am puzzled by people who think that withholding payment and contracts to creative staff for months or years while getting yourself a new mansion built in Snohomish constitutes "one thing." That's a separate lie, a separate cheat, and a separate theft for each and every single writer and artist so defrauded. And a another one for each such contract so abrogated with each contractor.

This isn't one bad thing, this is a collection of hundreds of wrong things. Hell, the thing where he used the company account as an ATM is one wrong thing every single time he or his wife drew money out - adding up to over six hundred wrong things just in that category of wrong things.

-Username17

[Fuchs]

People always try the "he made a mistake as well" defense. They never learn that it doesn't mean the criminal gets off - it only means the criminal gets jail, and the guy who parked in front of the "no parking" sign when he saw the criminal acting gets fined (if at all).

[Clutch9800]

This isn't one bad thing, this is a collection of hundreds of wrong things. Hell, the thing where he used the company account as an ATM is one wrong thing every single time he or his wife drew money out - adding up to over six hundred wrong things just in that category of wrong things.

But you and I both know that it doesn't pile on like that. I mean, if it ever does become a criminal prosecution situation the D.A. will certainly trot out each and every instance as a seperate crime. That's a tactic to get the defendant to plead out. I mean, how many times have we heard "A 28 count indictment was unsealed in King County Court today in the case of The People versus The Guy who messed with Sasquatch"; but in the end the guy pleads out to one count of mail fraud, gets sentenced to a year, and does 4 months because of good time? If that. (And this is a guy who put a sleeping Sasquatche's hand in a bowl of warm water, with predictable results. Certainly a most infamous crime.

And another thing. Where's your evidence that the other distributors "dropped" them? They can't* owe any money to Alliance, the three tier distribution system doesn't work that way. You get paid by the distributor, not the other way around.

Clutch

*Maybe "can't" is too strong a word.

[PoliteNewb]

Are you being obtuse? Frank isn't referring to separate incidents in the sense of "counts" of criminal charges (at least, I don't believe he is).

He's making the simple and valid point that Coleman did not "slip up once". He intentionally and repeatedly performed a series of bad acts. A long series, by the look of it.

In an ethical sense, the claim that Coleman just did "one bad thing" is nonsensical, if not outright lying.

[Crissa]

And another thing. Where's your evidence that the other distributors "dropped" them? They can't* owe any money to Alliance, the three tier distribution system doesn't work that way. You get paid by the distributor, not the other way around.

Clutch

*Maybe "can't" is too strong a word.

-They could have gotten an advance
-They could have failed to deliver books
-They could have failed to deliver books Alliance is allowed to sell
-Alliance could have a deal whereby it won't sell books while printers it works with are not being paid.

There's lots of reasons you might end up getting dropped by a distributer, as distributers have lots of different rules, and how they operate can be different.

Yes, generally, Publisher puts the books on the Distributer's shelf, who then doesn't pay the Publisher until they sell, and the Distributer returns the remainder. Retail buys product from the Distributer, paying (or at least owing) immediately, and can't return the unused portion.

Book stores (it used to be any books store, but never game or comic stores, but now it's just the big ones) and news stands used to return the unsold product to the publisher for a refund. That is the way TSR went under: They owed a huge amount to the largest book chain in the country for returned books.

So it is possible to 'owe' money to a distributer.

-Crissa

[Clutch9800]

-They could have gotten an advance
-They could have failed to deliver books
-They could have failed to deliver books Alliance is allowed to sell
-Alliance could have a deal whereby it won't sell books while printers it works with are not being paid.

Yeah,

But did they?

Here and other places people tend to take what Frank says as fact.

I'm just asking if there's any evidence that were in fact dropped by other distributors.

Could be they just made a deal for exclusive distribution rights in exchange for a little financing.

Wierder things have happened.

Clutch

[Username17]

Well, PSI was one of their distributors, and now they are the only distributor. They can put a happy face on that all they want, but normally people are excited when they add a distributor, not when they lose one.

I'm not Alliance, I'm not even in New York. But IMR did screw over Alliance several times in the last year by not delivering product, and cutting down to less distributors is generally considered a bad thing.

-Username17

[Asbestos Underwear]

The PSI move looks like something designed to appease Topps. PSI offers more back office function to small publishers than Alliance. I'd bet the new setup involves sending sales reports and checks straight to Topps each month, bypassing IMR. Question is whether this is something IMR cooked up in house to show accountability and process improvement or something Topps demanded.

[adamjury]

Yes, generally, Publisher puts the books on the Distributer's shelf, who then doesn't pay the Publisher until they sell, and the Distributer returns the remainder. Retail buys product from the Distributer, paying (or at least owing) immediately, and can't return the unused portion.

Hobby game distributors typically don't return remainders now, because they often don't buy enough to ever have remainders.

What often happens is a publisher will ship their entire print run to a distributor like PSI or Alliance, and that distributor will sell to other stores and distributors ... but until the distributor or another distributor has paid for the books, the entire print run still belongs to the publisher.

And of course, sometimes the primary distributor helps out a publisher by footing part of the print bill, which gets books in the system but crimps the publisher's cash flow later down the line.

[Clutch9800]

Yes, generally, Publisher puts the books on the Distributer's shelf, who then doesn't pay the Publisher until they sell, and the Distributer returns the remainder. Retail buys product from the Distributer, paying (or at least owing) immediately, and can't return the unused portion.

Hobby game distributors typically don't return remainders now, because they often don't buy enough to ever have remainders.

What often happens is a publisher will ship their entire print run to a distributor like PSI or Alliance, and that distributor will sell to other stores and distributors ... but until the distributor or another distributor has paid for the books, the entire print run still belongs to the publisher.

And of course, sometimes the primary distributor helps out a publisher by footing part of the print bill, which gets books in the system but crimps the publisher's cash flow later down the line.

Didn't "stripping" books used to be a big deal? I mean, they were supposed to have the front cover ripped off when they were sent back after not having sold?

For some reason that rings a bell.

Anyway, on an aside. The fact that AH posted a lot of his unpublished Shadowrun stuff up over on Dumpshock seems to bode well for CGL retaining the Shadowrun license.

To paraphrase Joad Cressbeckler, "I hung a man or two in my time but that don't make me a Judge. So's I ain't passing no judgement on that hard case Ancient History. But you gotta be fuller than a tick on Stump-licker to give away for free something that you might sell!"

Between that and the sole distributorship deal, I think things are looking good for CGL retaining the license.

Clutch

[martian_bob]

...
Didn't "stripping" books used to be a big deal? I mean, they were supposed to have the front cover ripped off when they were sent back after not having sold?

For some reason that rings a bell.

Yup - but those were usually mass-market paperbacks meant to be pulped, not RPG books.

Anyway, on an aside. The fact that AH posted a lot of his unpublished Shadowrun stuff up over on Dumpshock seems to bode well for CGL retaining the Shadowrun license.

To paraphrase Joad Cressbeckler, "I hung a man or two in my time but that don't make me a Judge. So's I ain't passing no judgement on that hard case Ancient History. But you gotta be fuller than a tick on Stump-licker to give away for free something that you might sell!"

Between that and the sole distributorship deal, I think things are looking good for CGL retaining the license.

Clutch

Isn't that a contradiction? If the stuff is posted on Dumpshock, doesn't that mean it's not... being... sold?

[Blasted]

According to guys on the battletech boards, Alliance was refusing to take orders for CGL or IWM, on the basis that they were no longer in business.
I'm not sure signing an exclusivity deal with your remaining distributor is a good reason to be upbeat about retaining the license.
OTOH, I would have expected the license to be awarded before June 1 if Topps were happy to remain with CGL. If that were the case CGL would be announcing it very loudly.

[adamjury]

Clutch is trying to say that since AH has given away his work, that a publisher wouldn't buy it from him in the future. I think this depends a lot on the publisher and on what they believe in ... with Eclipse Phase, we found that Creative Commons-licensing the entire book and letting it be freely distributed _helped_ our print and PDF sales. Not everyone believes that simply because something can be obtained for free (legally), that it has no value to them, to other people, or in other formats.

[Crissa]

Yup - but those were usually mass-market paperbacks meant to be pulped, not RPG books.

However, as I said, that's what happened to TSR. And that's why there's a big first-secondary market of hardcovers, and why they get priced down so quickly. The publisher would rather let them go at a base rate than pay the stores back.

Alliance doesn't do that. But if Alliance wasn't getting shipped new product, I can see their decision as not rash. And when was the last time IMR shipped something, period?

-Crissa

[adamjury]

According to guys on the battletech boards, Alliance was refusing to take orders for CGL or IWM, on the basis that they were no longer in business.

If you're talking about StCptMara (Cardul on Dumpshock), he has a history of saying stuff like that. I seem to remember I once wrangled the name of his FLGS out of him, and CGL had Alliance call that FLGS, and the FLGS basically said "That dude will listen to what we say and then just pretend we said something else."

He doesn't know a thing but will happily take his cobbled-together knowledge of the game industry, make shit up, and then state it as if it were fact.