The question was,
Q12 Which periods or settings do you prefer?
Please rank your top choices (up to 5) by indicating their score or dragging them in order.
The summary of top periods in the same reverse order as presented in the podcast is:
5. Ancients4. WWII3. Warhammer 40K2. Fantasy (excluding Warhammer Age of Sigmar)1. Sci-Fi (excluding Warhammer 40K)
Sci-Fi came in as the favorite gaming period with WWII way down in fourth place. This ordering of top gaming eras is unlike the popularity witnessed in earlier years. Typically, WWII tended to come out as the favorite gaming era. Have preferences changed so much in one year's time?
The podcast panel was surprised at the results and offered suggestions as to why this result is believable. Still, there was some skepticism with the results. I was asked to investigate.Survey Differences
There is one important note to make with respect to the 2020 responses to this question. The method in which this question was presented in 2020 differed from prior years. Rather than allow a respondent to rank interest for every gaming period on a 1-5 scale, (a respondent could have multiple 1's, 2's etc..), the 2020 survey asked respondents to rank their top five periods in rank order. Only one #1 rank, one #2 rank, and so on. While the question requested that the responses be limited to the top five only, respondents could rank 21 periods if they so chose. Many did!
The survey uses a weighted "score" to compute these rankings. These scores use all ranked responses and are not constrained to the top five choices. Since ranking more than a handful of periods may be subject to error or simply result to filling in the lower ranked responses randomly, I limit my data exploration to the Top 5 responses as requested from the survey. Will restricting this analysis to the top five ranked gaming periods change the survey results? After this question is addressed, I dig into the numbers from several different perspectives.
Top 5 Re-examinedFirst, aggregating the responses across the top five ranked periods for each respondent, yields the following ranked order.
5. Ancients
4. Warhammer 40K
3. Sci-Fi (excluding Warhammer 40K)
2. Fantasy (excluding Warhammer Age of Sigmar)
1. WWII
While the Top 5 periods all remain the same as the survey scoring announced in the podcast, the ordering is different. WWII pops up from #4 to #1 and back to its traditional top placement. Notice, in the graphic below, that Ancients only barely beat out Napoleonics for a top five placing. One of my favorite periods (mid-19th Century European Wars) finds itself in last place in the aggregated top five rankings with difficulty even registering a significant signal. Such colorful uniforms with such little interest. Sigh.
Top Eras by Ranking
What is the consensus First Choice among all respondents? This time, counting each respondent's first choice and aggregating across era, WWII again rises to the top as the most popular era.
While WWII is the most popular First Choice among all periods and present in all of the top five choices, Sci-Fi is present in each of the top five choices too. Each of the Top 5 preferences by ranked choice are provided in the graphics below. Notice that Pulp is the top Fifth Choice. Perhaps, by the time a respondent drills down to fifth choice, Pulp represents somewhat of a crossover period for many different demographics? The five graphs below illustrate the top five era preferences for each of the top five rankings.
One of the data breakouts I enjoy examining is the classification of survey respondents by primary interest. Some gamers focus on historical miniature gaming, some on fantasy and sci-fi miniature gaming, and others enjoy a mix of historical and fantasy/sci-fi wargaming. Let us take a look at each of these groups to see how wargaming preferences differ between primary interest given their top five ranked choices.
First up is the group whose primary interest is in fantasy and sci-fi gaming. The Big Three eras in this grouping are Sci-Fi, Fantasy, and Warhammer 40k. Really no surprise here but notice that Pulp registers into the Top 5.
Breaking out survey responses by age group, I find a fascinating exercise. Well, I find all of this data exploration fascinating but age demographic studies more so. Why? I suppose I enjoy seeing how gaming preferences change as one ages and if my own experience fits into these tendencies.
The table below displays the total counts for each era by age group. Only a respondent's top five ranked choices were included into this tally. While a reader can divine a sense of these tendencies across eras and age groups from this table, spotting take-aways at a glance requires a bit more work.
1. Fantasy2. Sci-fi3. Warhammer 40K4. Warhammer Age of Sigmar5. WWII
What, if any generalizations can be made from these results? Some results may confirm accepted, common knowledge but others may provide a surprise or two.
- Age groups 51+ prefer historicals to fantasy/sci-fi.
- Fantasy makes the Top 5 for every age group except the 61+ age group.
- WWII makes the Top 5 era preference for all age groups and the top choice for age groups 41+.
- ACW and Pike & Shotte seem to be mainstream eras for the 61+ age group only.
- Napoleonics (Ranked Choice #2) and Ancients (Ranked Choice #3) are very popular for the 51+ age groups.
- Warhammer 40K is very popular for the 40 and under age groups.
Final Thoughts
Well, not so much final thoughts but my current and evolving thoughts based upon these data. Looking at these results, I keep returning to the recent debates on the potential demise of historical wargaming. Is historical wargaming dying? What do these data suggest?
With WWII gaming making the top five in every age group, it is difficult to classify historical wargaming as a dying genre. Yes, WWII is more popular in those 41+ age groups but the younger age groups dabble as well. ACW, Ancients, Napoleonics, and Pike & Shotte seem the domain of the 51+ age cohorts. Let me term this group of gaming eras as the Classics. Is this absence from the younger age groups due to lack of interest, lack of exposure to the subject matter, a change in gaming style, barriers to entry, or something else?
When I envision gaming the Classics eras, I expect large armies covering large tables in big battle games. Perhaps gaming styles have changed? No longer are big battles with thousands of troops possible or even desired among the younger age groups? Painting thousands of figures takes time, money, more time, more money, and a lot of determination. Building up armies of this size requires many years spent at the painting desk. Certainly these are not armies to be fielded in a short period of time.
Smaller armies in smaller battles or even skirmish gaming is a more accessible entry into the hobby. Perhaps WWII skirmish gaming and an explosion of figures in plastic are two reasons WWII is popular across all age groups?
Gaming style whether big battles, skirmish gaming, or single figure may be a contributing factor in wargaming era preference. Perhaps location matters? What about figure size? Gaming style, location, and figure size, I leave for consideration at another time.
I encourage readers' thoughts and comments on favorite gaming period. Why do you game what you do?
Thanks Jonathan as always some interesting analysis. I am now wracking my brain to actually remember what I put down. Clearly the link with time patience and money required to game On a larger scale lends towards older (more experienced) gamers. One interesting twist on this is I know several mature gamers who prefer skirmish genres mainly because of the painting vs gaming preference. I can’t remember if this was a question but the trend towards ever better and more detailed painting doesn’t encourage people to complete larger armies. Would be interesting to see the link between painting preference (and quality) and genre I suspect this is heavily weighted toward sci fi fantasy , a few notable exceptions !
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome, Matt! Good to see that you are enjoying these survey analyses. "Mature gamers." Is this an oxymoron?
DeleteI plan to examine collection size vs age and gaming period at some point to assess whether it is the "mature" gamers holding all of the large collections.
The painting quality question was asked in 2019 but not in 2020. A number of new questions were added into the 2020 survey and some oldies were deleted to keep the survey at a reasonable length..
Hi Jonathan - its all very interesting. If I, like you, use my personal gaming history as a guide, I can definitely say I have never been interested in Warhammer or 40k or any of the sci fi stuff. When I started in the hobby around 12-13 years of age, none of the mainstream fantasy/sci fi systems existed. My first period was Napoleonic and I still play that era two or three times a year. Other historical eras have tempted me over the years - to be honest, if I had unlimited resources, I would have armies of Republican Romans etc - but because I don't, and the ancient world tempts me the least, I don't have any figures from before the Dark Ages. So the age of the gamer I don't believe relates directly to the era preferred. Its possibly more societal and a function of our more recent education systems. I know from my own children that they were taught little history at school, and what they were taught I would classify as social history - they know about the Treaty of Waitangi and how the Maoris came to New Zealand and possibly a little bit about how the European colonists cleared the land and created an agriculture based economy - but they know nothing about the Land Wars or New Zealands Part in armed conflicts in the 20th century (other than ANZAC Day of course!) Also, when I was growing up in the late 60's and 70's, we had a constant diet of WW2 based films at the cinema or more commonly on TV - Von Ryans Express, The Great Escape, Where Eagles Dare etc..you really don't see these types of films so often nowadays. I think these changes, along with many others, mean that people under 40 in general have less knowledge of or interest in, the type of history that would lead them to historical wargaming EG watching Downton Abbey or Queen Victoria on TV wont necessarily suggest a WW1 or Crimean army, in the same way as watching the film Cromwell might whet the appetite for ECW figures....This is what I think is behind the fact that sci fi/fantasy leads the way in popularity - but if that's the case, then on one level, it is a good thing - because it means that the leading "period" is the one dominated by younger gamers - and surely that's better than the most popular period being one dominated by 60 or 70 year olds - that would actually be an indication that the hobby was on a terminal trajectory, wouldn't it?
ReplyDeleteKeith, thank you once again for your comprehensive reply.
DeleteWe seem to have had similar upbringing in that we started wargaming young and almost exclusively stuck to historical wargaming. I was raised upon a steady diet of war movies and TV programs that motivated my interest. I was also loved history especially military history and was a voracious reader.
Good point about having the most popular gaming period left to the younger generations. Since ACW and Pike & Shotte seem primarily popular among the oldest survey cohort, does this lead one to the conclusion that ACW and P&S are on their way out?
Like Matt I can't exactly recall what my responses were, but Napoleonics, Ancients and WWII would have been in there. I wonder if the popularity of WWII among the younger age-groups is down to Flames of War, which I suspect a lot of Warhammer gamers would find accessible? Not that I have played it, but I have the rules and it seems to be predicated on saving throws and lots of dice.
ReplyDeleteWarhammer has certainly done the hobby a service by bringing younger people into the hobby, but it doesn't interest me and I find myself playing the same periods I was thirty years ago, albeit with medievals thrown in now. I suspect my preferences were really only developed by what was available at the time, and like Keith by watching war movies and the BBC series of War and Peace.
WWII popularity among the younger age cohorts certainly could be led by Flames of War. I wonder if Bolt Action or Chain of Command might be contributing factors as well? One way to assess this theory is to add figure size into the study along with age group and wargaming era preference. For me, CoC is played in 28mm. Are BA and CoC also gamed in 15mm or 10mm? What about FoW? Is this primarily a 15mm game system?
DeleteI have always thought of Flames of War as being primarily 15mm, with multiple figures to a stand, with RapidFire, Crossfire etc. at 20mm and BA and CoC at 28mm. Which probably explains why I have 15mm, 20mm and 28mm figures in the pile ahead of me. I think adding figure size to the study would add a very interesting dimension to the analysis.
DeleteYou have me beat! I have WWII only in 15mm and 28mm. 6mm looks interesting, though...
DeleteGreat analysis and it should be published as a follow up.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for your encouraging comment, Eric!
DeleteYour latest WotR is sure an inspirational model.
Great work Jonathan, Strange results? Lets hope WSS take no notice what so ever of the results. I don't want to see Sci Fi or 40k in their magazine at all. IMHO that's why its the best magazine.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Ray! Like you, I prefer the historical side of wargaming.
DeleteThe survey certainly includes a lot of data, your analysis is interesting. Pulp, WW2 and Napoleonics certain;y take up the bulk of our small, local group.
ReplyDeletePleased to see that you find this analysis interesting. There are two earlier analyses from the 2020 survey that you may find interesting as well.
DeleteThank you!
Ha!Thank You for a interesting analysis!
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome, Michael!
DeleteThanks Jonathan. The first thing I found strange was that a survey hosted by WSS has such a large Sci-Fi showing, when that magazine is very firmly in the historicals camp. I would not have been surprised at all if a Miniature Wargames magazine driven poll would have delivered that result, as their Sci-Fi / Fantasy element is quite strong, as are the leanings of the editor. THe only thing that I can draw from that is that this year in particular, the poll has reached out far beyond the readership of WSS - a good thing as the survey will be more representative.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I very much agree with your conclusions that the demographic interplay with those who collect and paint for the big battle and those that find skirmish level a better fit, is a big under the bonnet driver to the overall stats.
Amongst all of that, we have the Lardies recent contributions of Sharpe Practice and Infamy Infamy, giving modern Rule support to the skirmish tendency, with similar from Bolt Action and several of the Osprey rule sets encourage that interface between skirmish and small battle, seemingly an increasing sweet spot.
Since the survey was done pre Infamy Infamy and blogs show a lot of ‘new project’ interest in the rules, whether this will drive a strengthening of the Ancients category next year.
You are most welcome, Norm!
DeleteThe 2019 survey was the first year in which I contributed to analysis of the survey data. In 2019, fantasy/sci-fi/Warhammer representations were quite strong as well. The WSS survey reaches a wide audience distributed across the globe. While the survey sampling is based upon self-selection, I think it provides the best data available on our hobby.
It will be very interesting to see if Ancients gaming moves up the list of favorite eras as new rules begin to take hold. I have seen interest in both "Infamy, Infamy" and "Mortem et Gloriam" increasing on blogs of late.
Thanks a lot for your feedback, Norm!
Looking at the numbers, I'm not surprised as they tend to match casual observation at conventions as well as (admittedly harder to ascertain) blog audiences.
ReplyDeleteMy initial, unresearched, reaction is that these popularities tend to reflect three things in general.
1. One is outside cultural influences while we are growing up, such as tv, movies, books. For example, we over 60's were typically children of WWII vets with ww2 being as current as 911 is today and it was prominent on tv, in movies, comic books etc and toy soldiers were easily available locally. Similarly with the ACW, there was a big fuss about the ACW centennial which passed beyond the US border with toy soldiers, tv, movies, bubble gum cards etc (remember that the WW1 centennial has just passed, the ACW was that close 50 years ago) .
2. The early wargaming pioneers, authors of books and rules, and purveys of wargame figures were hugely influential in what periods we initially played and ww2, acw, napoleonics and ancients were popular in part because rules, figures and opponents were easily available. Other stuff, you had to work harder at. The selection of games/oppoents/figures has been growing exponentially and keepibg pace with popular, nongaming communities.
3. Lastly, all but the least social of us tend to play what our friends even if we work on our own pet projects as well.
Great analysis and questions btw.
Thank you, Ross! You make a good generalization on drivers of era popularity.
DeleteOn your second point, while "we" in our generation were motivated and inspired by the wargaming pioneers of Featherstone, Grant, Wesencraft, Morschauser, etc., who fulfills that role for the younger generations?
Good question but having not kept up over the last decade, I'm not in a good position for a well informed answer. I've been too busy trying to finally do the things I wanted to do but only dabbled in before dashing off to keep up with what friends I gamed with were doing or the latest flashy new rules with some interesting new ideas,
DeleteGW of course and all the spin offs by companies like the chaps who did Bolt Action etc, WHA, etc and companies like TFL and that WWII one with the 15mm? boxed sets, not to mention the C&C school and YUP out of my depth!
Fair enough! Thank you.
DeleteThanks for breaking this data down into easily digestible chunks Jonathan! When I first read this the thing that cam to mind was the famous quote; "There are lies, damned lies and statistics!". I think your analysis (especially the last two graphs) has shown a much clearer view of the hobby than the opening one from Jasper and Co.
ReplyDeleteI found the questions this time around didn't allow to me adequately reflect my wargaming interests, as I would rank WWII, SYW, 19thC Europe as my main interests, with the ACW galloping up to join them. I imagine this was true of other gamers. I know from my previous job where we had a Human Factors department, that you have to be very careful how you phrase a questions, what order they're put in etc so as not to skew the outcome.
As mentioned above, the last two charts/graphs I found the most revealing. Looking at the 31-40 age group, all of their top four gaming periods are sci-fi/GW with WWII coming in 5th. This I don't think is too much of a surprise when I look back some 15-20 years when I was a memeber of a wargames club. So those teenagers then who now are in their 30's played exclusively WH40K, Warhammer or other SCi-Fi games. Only one or two played WWII games now and then, but it was rare. So why was that?
Well trying to think about it I think the answer lies in that's what was readily available to them then, as GW shops were everywhere and you could walk in and get everything you needed in one hit. Remember this was before the internet and nline shopping had even reached its infancy. Then throw in GW sponsored gaming clubs in schools and you can see why the kids got hooked, as there was no other real competition.
In a sense this was a similar situation to myself growing up in a village with few bus links into town, so you played with what was easily avaiable, which was Airfix WWII figures and vehicles. The Airfix magazine was full of WWII stuff and only moved onto Napoleonics later on but I was already hooked on WWII. This was aided by the constant stream of War Movies which we avidly watched, as well as ground breaking tv series such as 'The World at War'. To this day WWII probably edges all other periods to second best because of these formative years. There's always that hint of nostalgia when I see a Pz IV on the table as I had an Airfix kit of one.
You mention that historical wargaming is not dying out at present and the data bears this out. But in another 20 years time, will those 30+ somethings that play Sci-Fi/GW currently have moved onto to historical? I doubt it given the data shown.
Maybe the move to more skirmish and small battle sized games as mentioned by yourself and others will reverse this trend. I know from speaking to other gamers over the past few years that space is at a premium for most of us, so those 'classic' large battles are no longer an option for most of us. Also when I was a kid there was only the TV and playing outside to distract us, now we have myriad frorms of entertainment competing with our gaming time. Some 10 years ago I would play my games on a 6' x 4' table with maybe a couple of Battalions aside and play with friends for a good 3-4 hours. Now my games are on a 4' x 4' table and last around 2 hours. Why? For a whole variety of reasons such as limited storage and game space, available time, stamina and other competing demands on my time.
So to end with, once again thankyou for presenting this data and any more info you can glean from it will I'm sure be of interest to all of us fellow gamers.
You are welcome, Steve! Thank you for taking the time to create such an informative reply.
DeleteI am glad you found this analysis easily digestible and useful. Hopefully, these studies have a broader range of interest beyond the few who stop by here.
As for "lies, damnable lies, and statistics," data can be tortured into giving up a whole range of answers. One must remember to remain unbiased and take care in the assumptions used in generating results. Hopefully, I do that. One activity I use to maintain some degree of quality control in these analyses is to ensure that the work is repeatable. If I cannot repeat an analysis exactly from an earlier study, back to the drawing board.
On the question format, you raise a good point (actually more than one) about the way in which this question was asked. As pointed out, last year's question allowed duplicative rankings for more than one period. This year, no duplicate ranking was allowed across periods. I made this suggestion so that correlations between different attributes could be obtained. In prior years, there was no way to align, for example, preferred period to preferred scale. This year, those different attributes can be analyzed differently. I suppose ranking wargaming periods is like rating children, if it difficult to choose a favorite...
I was not at the wargaming "club" in Freiburg for several years, just because I didn't really found people with an interest in periods which I prefer and I felt that it is boring to look at those guys playing with unpainted mostly grey warhammer figures... Older chaps played WWII (40+). Many were talking about how cool historical miniatures are looking endlessly flipping through those Warlord-books (BP, HC)...
ReplyDeleteI have the impression that many find out when they get older that it could be interesting to look in other areas and then WW 2 and Napoleonics are the first periods which are coming into their minds.
Some years ago Saga brought some people in the "historical" "camp" maybe because there are VIKINGS and VIKINGS are so Fantasy... and the mechanics are not too much Historicaly focussed.
Therefore I don't think that Historical wargaming is dying out, just because there are always other guys coming just into the right age to start with serious wargaming.
Looking on the friends of my own acquaintance: only one is 60+, the other are mostly under 40.
But we are all not in a club or something similar, just meeting for gaming or drinking good beer... We certainly are not representive...
A lot of work and refreshing thoughts.
Cheers,
Andrè, thanks for providing your perspective from both the German and under 40 group. I wonder how many historical wargaming recruits came up through the ranks of SAGA? Is SAGA still pulling in some fantasy/sci-fi gamers into historicals? Those would be interesting questions for which to have answers.
DeleteThanks again for offering your thoughts and experiences into the conversation.
Abour Saga: I don't really know. I can only notice what is happening on our German Forum. We almost always find some growing interest in a period, when new rules are just published (like Swordpoint a while ago).
DeleteMaybe it would be more representive, if I would visit conventions like the TACTICA. I would suppose that the TACTICA in Hamburg is a good representation of Wargaming (Historical and Fantasy etc.) in Germany. It actually reflects the rise of importance of Wargaming in Germany. Some decades ago there were no such conventions. Later we had some small conventions in the larger cities of Germany and now we have a large convention in Hamburg, which is of such an importance that even many UK major players like the Perrys come around to present their works. I think that this is a good reflection of the growing importance of wargaming as a hobby in Germany. From this perspective I would not subscribe the fears that the Hobby is dying out (I suppose that you naturally noticed what Sam Mustafa saind on Little Wars TV). Maybe it's different in the US. But worldwide the spread of wargaming as a Hobby should be growing and this fact may even help those manufacturers from UK and US with their fears about a Hobby in decline.
But I didn't answered on your question in your post.
I first played Napoleonics. But later on I had the Impression that no rules are simple enough for me and are reflecting Napoleonic warfare fine enough for my personal taste. My Background was some insight coming from the reenactment Hobby - although my knowledge was a lot deeper several years ago when I was focussed on Napoleonic only.
I some times looked into the medieval period. But I got the Impression that all rules I have ever found didn't reflected the complexety of the feudal Society which had a heavy Impact on medieval warfare (just think of all those sujects escorting the Knights during march and battle!).
I think that Wargaming becomes more true to the period, when we came into Ages when there were definable Units such as it was in the Roman period.
Some times I had the will to Play periods only which I don't reenact to not be upset about all those odd aspects within the rules. Finally I felt that the 18th century is a period which is perfect for wargaming. The complexity of manouvers is maybe very large, but I had the Impression that I could come to satisfying results in my games relying on my own knowledge about the period.
Thanks again for your interesting responses especially regarding Germany, Andrè.
DeleteI enjoyed seeing wargaming evolution as you settled into 18th Century wargaming as your period of choice.
Fascinating: thanks for the analysis! Confirms that feeling one has of being on the fringe as an enthusiast of 19th Century and Pike and Shot gaming!
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome, Ed! Few can accuse you and I of being slaves to fashion and the latest trends.
DeleteAn interesting read Jonathan. I don't have any small armies and even my skirmish WWII forces are quite large. I have never balked at building large armies even when keeping the Empire safe at sea. Having said that the 15-25 years I was definitely too busy.
ReplyDeleteThank you, George. My armies are not small either but I believe we are of similar age cohorts. Like you, I have never backed down from fielding a large army.
DeleteAs always an interesting analysis! I have to say I came in through the fantasy side of the hobby, the first 25mm miniatures game was D&D and although dabbling in historicals couldn't find any one else interested, there followed some decades of 40k and now I'm an almost exclusively historical gamer. Both my nephews started off with 40k and both of them are now primarily historical gamers,playing pike and shot and (in their case) ACW ,they're both below 50 but should be over 60 to be playing what they do!
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
Thank you, Iain!
DeleteIf you and your nephews' progression through the hobby from fantasy/sci-fi to historical wargaming can be used as a barometer then there is hope for continuation of hobby's historical side.
Another thought provoking dive into statistics. Well written and enjoyed by many, including me. 😀
ReplyDeleteI think we’re all a little surprised when our favorite genre is not recognized by the world at large as being the best genre. Though in my case it’s really true that the ACW is the best. People still don’t appreciate a good civil war.
I personally think one reason why ACW is not as popular as it should be is the lack of a modern large skirmish rule set to hit the market. Something like the bolt action of the ACW. Whenever I see someone on TMP ask for such a rule set the overwhelming answer is Brother Versus Brother, which is good, I’ve played it and own it, but it’s not exactly recent and can be hard to get. Other genres like WWII have those in plenty. You might mention SP2 but I’ll counter that TFL rules often have something of learning curve that gamers have to go through that makes them less accessible. Plus, the obvious paradigm of rule makers is to have a core rule book and army list books which the ACW does not lend itself to well. 😀
Oh well.
I also enjoyed reading all the various comments above. 😀
Thank you, Stew! You always offer positive encouragements for these analytics and I appreciate that! Community support is what drives me to dig into these numbers. I find reader commentary just as enlightening as these analyses.
DeleteYou may be surprised to see your favorite period, ACW, not making the Top 5 but I have no such expectation with my Franco-Austrian war (1859) project. According to these survey results, the mid 19th Century periods comes in last. Oh well.
In this easily offended world in which we find ourselves, I wonder if there will become a time when ACW gaming ACW or defending ACW will be untenable? I think colonial gaming may be trodding down this path as well.
An interesting analysis for sure, Jon. Not surprisingly my interests fit well into the 61+ club, aside from no interest in WW2.
ReplyDeletePeter, you are an almost Modern Major General! Have you never had an interest in 20th Century or WWII gaming?
DeleteMy primary interests are pre-20th Century as well.
Interesting look at this thanks Jon! I'm another in the Ancients/Napoleonic, and wannabe 17/18thC group, though not quite over the half century yet! So many Napoleonics still to do for me, though WSS I'll get around to some day hopefully.
ReplyDeleteGlad you enjoyed this analysis, Mark! You fit the profile of a middle-aged historical wargamer well.
DeleteWSS? I would love to see that!
Jonathan, I agree with Keith’s that we are products of our environment. In my impressionable years, age 7-10 [in the 1960s) we played cowboys and Indians, not politically correct today I know, but that drew me to the western movie genre and the film that was my wargaming trigger was “Custer of the West”. Science fiction at the time was limited to relatively corny TV shows like “Lost in Space” and there were no sci-fi games developed...indeed even in historical gaming rules in the 1970s were very limited. The first fantasy figures I can recall were the Minifigs Tolkien range that came out in the mid to late-70s and anyone that played with them was considered to be on the lunatic fringe. D&D was the game changer that brought fantasy into the mainstream, but it was still another ten to fifteen years before fantasy gaming shook of the “weirdo” stigma.
ReplyDeleteSo my immersion into gaming was utterly historical. I have never played a fantasy or science fiction game and in truth have no desire to. For me there is adequate variety in my preferred gaming period (1700 - 1914...with a few forays into Dark Ages, Wars of the Roses, ECW and WWII) to keep me busy for the rest of my life.
After a couple of decades of observing gamers at conventions in New Zealand I also believe personality drives the historical vs other divide. Those observations lead me to the conclusion that historical suits the studious introverted types whereas the extraverted are drawn to the more extreme, perhaps hyper-creative, types. Maybe if sci-fi had had a less corny bent to it when I was growing up things might have been different, but they weren’t and I am comfortable in my historical skin.
Thanks for voicing your thoughts and insights, Mark. Introvert vs extrovert is an interesting bifurcation theory between historical and fantasy/sci-fi gamers. Perhaps, the professor’s questions on the survey could confirm this observation? Also, examining the survey question of “What do you like best about the hobby” might shed light on this bifurcation as well.
DeleteI am comfortable in my historical skin too.
Impressive display of the stats, Jonathan! Taking a cursory look at the info - it would appear a lot of the folks taking the survey are into Scifi/Fantasy - possibly younger crowd. Personally, I'm mainly into historicals - with an ever-expanding interest in it too.
ReplyDeleteGlad you could make heads and tails out of this, Dean! I try to explain what is going on but one never knows if successful until I get some feedback.
DeleteAs for the historical vs sci-fi/fantasy, split, it is actually fairly close.
I am firmly in the Historical camp as well. Like you, my historical interests continue to expand.
Thanks for your comments!