[Deptheads] SoCal Smackdown (Was: Get games up ASAP!)
Evil5757 at aol.com
Evil5757 at aol.com
Thu Jun 10 21:16:31 PDT 2010
I already tried to put in a plan to give all 3 conventions a different feel
and got as many arguments and as many fights going as when I took
Boardgames out of multiple rooms and put them in a big ballroom. No one liked it
and most threatened to quit.
I can lay out a plan for a 2012 implementation that would give each
convention a different feel while keeping the integrity of each department (no
loss of capacity or ability to run your own department). 2011 would be the
preparation year for all departments, with 2012 implementation.
Would it be listened to if I put it together?
John
In a message dated 6/10/2010 8:04:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
nekojin at gmail.com writes:
The flip side of that is that some people who view it as one con, three
times a year, will commit to going to them all, because it's the "same"
convention, and the conventions are a few of their main social events. If it's
three different conventions, you may very well see people treating them
differently - they go to Gamex, but not Gateway, because of location, or
different game schedules, or whatever. It could dramatically RAISE the variance
in attendance between the three conventions. We just had, what, 2000 people
in attendance at Gamex, aka Deadcon? That's terrific, and bringing it up
much closer to the other two conventions.
Polly says, "The other point is that a lot of people will keep going to
Strategicon because it's the convention they've been going to, and the one
that all of their friends go to." She also adds, "It can be difficult to set
up for different layouts. Speaking specifically for video gaming, that is."
She's referring to having to identify where the power outlets are, how to
set up the consoles so that there's sufficient traffic paths through the
room, and so on. With one con, and one location, you can find an ideal setup,
and stick with it.
I'm not saying that your points are bad, Victor, but if people want to go
to other conventions, they'll find excuses to do so, whether we're one
convention three times a year, or three separate and distinct conventions once
a year each. I think that rather than trying to change things up (which
will inevitably lose the convention some attendees, and possibly some staff),
we should first solidify what we do and how we do it.
The only people who really think that LAX is "too far" but Anaheim is
"close enough" are people behind the Orange Curtain, who want a close,
convenient convention. People coming from San Diego probably won't consider it much
of a difference, since they're looking at a minimum of an hour's drive
either way. The same holds true for people coming from the High Desert and
points North of there. There's no such thing as a "perfect" convention
location, and MOST of the gamers who already attend Strategicon would continue to
attend whether it's at LAX, or Burbank, or Anaheim, or Northridge. I'm sure
that most could be convinced to travel to Irvine or Pomona, if they knew
that they were going to be going to a quality convention (which I believe
that we are). What they're NOT going to be as likely to want to do is
remember which convention is which, and where the upcoming one is. It seems like a
trifle (and, honestly, it is) but when we lost a sizable chunk of the
player base with the sudden "surprise" move from the Radisson to the Westin. We
lost some when we moved back to the Radisson, and that move was known well
in advance. It's a pretty safe bet that we'd lose people at each
successive con that was in a "different" location, even if the three conventions
were at three consistent locations, until the attendees fully got used to the
idea that they're separate entities.
It's a hard call to make, but I honestly believe that the status quo is
better than trying to make the three conventions distinct and separate.
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Victor B <_fhoenix88 at yahoo.com_
(mailto:fhoenix88 at yahoo.com) > wrote:
Being seen as one convention 3 times a year is not a good thing. It helps
people decide to go to bay area conventions or local competing conventions
instead of us easier.."I can still go to strategicon in february, so I will
do kubla in may and either strategicon in september or try that new con in
anaheim and still do strategicon the following feb". Being seen as one
convention 3 times means people do not mind missing one of our cons.
Being in 3 locales gives each con an identity and each could draw upon
locals. Obviously we are missing the anaheim crowd and being in the largest
city and surrounding areas in america there are far more gamers to tap for
conventions than 1500. We can't rest on past success. We have to grow and
change like we did by revamping our computer room to a full blown, well run
and supervised video gaming area.
With Twitter, facebook and boards we have better than ever communication
and gamers will network and form conventions in areas we ignore (As we see
now).
V
____________________________________
From: Nekojin <_nekojin at gmail.com_ (mailto:nekojin at gmail.com) >
To: _deptheads at strategicon.net_ (mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net)
Sent: Thu, June 10, 2010 2:34:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Deptheads] SoCal Smackdown (Was: Get games up ASAP!)
A few points:
1.) Many gamers don't view Strategicon as three annual conventions - they
view it as one convention, three times a year. Some of those would resent
having to keep track of three separate locations.
2.) The chatter on the SCSD board pointed out a schism in the miniatures
gamers that I wasn't aware of - that some historical gamers resent and
dislike the Warhammer (and related) players for a variety of reasons, not the
least of which is noise levels. The example given was some players shouting,
"WAAAAAAGH!" at the top of their lungs. To that point, it might be a good
idea to give the Warhammer and similar games a separate area from the
historicals. Perhaps two sections of the same room, separated by a soundwall and
door?
That's all of my thoughts for the moment. I'll probably have more later.
Jason
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Victor B <_fhoenix88 at yahoo.com_
(mailto:fhoenix88 at yahoo.com) > wrote:
Good points.
We also have to remember that SCS ran the large warmachine event last year
that robyn mentioned wanted to line up for us but we were unwilling to
take space from other departments to accomidate half a ballroom worth of
miniature tourneys.
It was give and take situation. We had to take away space somewhere to
give it to those large events. Unfortunately we don't have unlimited space. So
miniatures got the shaft last september while we preserved the layots of
the other departments.We had miniatures all over the hotel. Poolside, rooms
near ftiness room on first floor, foyer, etc. That doesn't work. They need
a large room with lighting not spread around like scraps...which is why
miniature gamers felt treated like scraps at strategicon. They are mentioning
that on forums discussing our con vs socal smackdown for miniature gaming.
We don't have the space for 300+ miniature gamers. We already miss out on
500-900 pokemon players that norm sees gaming at anaheim convention center
monthly because we have no space for that group to run it's events at our
convention. Many cons back we took an RPG hit because of lack of space and
private rooms and that cost us rpg gms and staff.
Every action has a reaction.
We need to accomidate 3000 people in large well lit areas to unite the
gaming community under our banner. Currently we overflow at 2000.
The co-owner of the con posted this on a forum ---
This con will definitely be focusing more on miniature games then any
other. We will be featuring all type of games, but when we started the idea for
this convention, it originated with the miniature game player in mind.
Currenly, the schedule that you see is confirmed events, and the board gamers
were much quicker to confirm.
We are going to be offering Flames of War, Malifaux, Warhammer Fantasy,
40K and Ancients. We also have someone interested in running Battletech. If
anyone out there would like to run a miniature game please let me know and
we will work on getting it on the schedule. By this time next week, I am
hoping that the mini schedule is just as full, if not more, so than the board
game section
Miniatures used ,to and still can fill the westin ballrooms.
Would have been nice if SCS contacted us and said "hey...we weren't
kidding about space. If you can't accomidate us miniature gamers will we form
another convention that will trump you in miniature gaming and also bleed you
in board games, rpg, & collectables." In the short term gamers win because
they have 2 cons wooing them and working hard to get them to attend their
con. In the long term it splits the gaming community, splits gms ad
volunteers, and makes game companies and vendors decide who to support.
Years ago I mentioned that we should make all 3 of our cons feel different
and have each in a different local (and some staff could rotate to prevent
burnout). Leave orccon at LAX since it is successful there, move may to
burbank or inland valley, and move september to anaheim.
Maybe we can negotiate a future merger that has gateway in
anaheim.(pending hotel contract with sheraton). Even if it is 2 years down the road a
merger that has gateway in anaheim would benefit us, them, and gamers. Plus we
get their manpower and support (minus the haters) for other cons.
V
____________________________________
From: Eric Burgess <_erburgess at gmail.com_ (mailto:erburgess at gmail.com) >
To: _deptheads at strategicon.net_ (mailto:deptheads at strategicon.net)
Sent: Thu, June 10, 2010 11:42:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Deptheads] SoCal Smackdown (Was: Get games up ASAP!)
I think the idea of asking for exclusivity right now is dead so we can
probably drop it. The MIBs were an example of a group we could work with on
it. I think people jumped too much onto that individual situation because I
didn't make it clear I was talking about enforcing exclusivity with
organizations in general.
That said, I am not convinced that SJG would drop us like a hot potato if
we asked them nicely to support our convention in the interest of
consolidating the community rather than breaking it apart. I doubt SJG wants to send
prize support to two locations every time, especially since SCS attendance
numbers will be in the toilet at this convention and maybe for a while. If
SJG says 'no' and they want to support every con anywhere no matter how
close to an established convention with a long history with them, we won't
fight but there is nothing wrong with asking. We are simply trying to defend
our attendees and the community. I know Steve well enough to know he is a
business man and gets how it works.
Like Eric N, I think Vic's sage advice is right on the money but I don't
really think there is such a large community that there is room for both.
The more important point is that two conventions in SoCal on the same weekend
is a fundamentally terrible idea for every gamer in SoCal. The SCS are
absolute idiots for mounting it rather than working with us to improve what
they dislike (even the location) or targeting another time. Forget Veteran's
Day - what about going against Origins for 4th of July weekend? Driving to
Ohio is further than LAX. And, to be honest, I'm not convinced holiday
weekends are such a big deal - I think we lose hundreds of attendees by being
ON those weekends when people have other things to do. The only exception is
Orccon since few people have strong traditions on Presidents' Day like
they do for the other two big weekends. There are tons of conventions that do
well on non-holiday weekends throughout the US. They absolutely have
choices.
One key way to stop them is to gain a level of exclusivity in
relationships to ensure that the whole gaming community gets served. Everyone in LA/OC
would be better off if one convention was huge rather than having a few on
the same weekend. While the kumbaya-vibe seems to be the way most would
like to go, the bottom line is the publishers will never come out and truly
support this community if it remains splintered. SCS is already offering the
chance to be 'exclusive' for that Warmachine event - why can't we have
that, too? I just spoke to Mayfair about our next Settlers event and they
wanted to offer it to Kublacon as well. They realize the loss of value for us
and were apologetic about even suggesting it. And I'm trying to get them to
not do it, but politely. I don't see a reason why we can't reach out to many
organizations and ask them to commit to us, where they will get the best
exposure and make the argument that we are simply making sure we the
community as a whole gets served.
Obviously, Strategicon has faced assaults before (notably ConQuest and
even GenCon SoCal) and come out on top. But they all weakened the convention.
My concern is that we will need to kick this effort in the teeth at some
point. I'd rather do it when they are a non-starter than when they have
established themselves and maybe realize that Presidents' Day is a better time
to draw people out.
Just my two cents.
...ERB
_www.boardgamebabylon.com_ (http://www.boardgamebabylon.com/)
_www.strategicon.net_ (http://www.strategicon.net/)
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Robyn Nixon <_robynln at gmail.com_
(mailto:robynln at gmail.com) > wrote:
So basically
MIB for Steve Jackson Games
PG for Privateer Press
MI for Mongoose Publishing
Henchmen for Wyrd Games
All of them are volunteer programs that pay their volunteers in product
for running events and demos.
On 6/10/10 10:44 AM, "Devi Hughes" <_devi at ocbg.net_ (http://devi@ocbg.net/)
> wrote:
To clarify, MIBs are compensated with Steve Jackson Games product only.
We get a lot of product, but compensation is only in the form of games, not
monetary compensation. Unfortunately, the hotel staff won't accept the
latest Munchkin expansion in exchange for a hotel room. :)
_______________________________________________
Deptheads mailing list
_Deptheads at strategicon.net_ (mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net)
_http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads_
(http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads)
_______________________________________________
Deptheads mailing list
_Deptheads at strategicon.net_ (mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net)
_http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads_
(http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads)
--
"Would you like another drink, sir?" asked the bartender.
"I think not," replied Descartes, and promptly vanished.
_______________________________________________
Deptheads mailing list
_Deptheads at strategicon.net_ (mailto:Deptheads at strategicon.net)
_http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads_
(http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads)
--
"Would you like another drink, sir?" asked the bartender.
"I think not," replied Descartes, and promptly vanished.
_______________________________________________
Deptheads mailing list
Deptheads at strategicon.net
http://mordred.punk.net/mailman/listinfo/deptheads
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mordred.punk.net/pipermail/deptheads/attachments/20100610/1fc9e0e9/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Deptheads
mailing list