Corporate Agenda: Murder Netrunner
When bad things happen to good games.
Android: Netrunner has been murdered, my friends.
Who did the deed? It's hard to say. The six-year-old cyberpunk card game was killed in a most appropriate fashion: through invisible, impersonal corporate machinations beyond any one person's control. Information is scarce at present as to exactly why Netrunner got the axe-apparently its existence was the result of labyrinthine licensing agreements that, for whatever reason, couldn't be renegotiated. Disappointed fans are already disagreeing on who to blame. Ultimately, though, it doesn't matter. In a nondescript conference room in a lousy office park, some suit decided Netrunner was no longer profitable to an adequate degree and moved on to the next agenda item. I bet the meeting was boring.
While the Netrunner community (including me) was certainly shocked by the news, perhaps we shouldn't have been so surprised. Expandable card games are born with a built-in kill switch. The need for a constant stream of product and support means that, unless your game starts with "M" and rhymes with "tragic," you're playing on borrowed time. And while it sucks that Netrunner was seemingly canned due to corporate bad faith rather than a drop in popularity, it had an exceptional run for a card game: two core sets, five deluxe expansions (with a sixth on the way), and eight data cycles. So why does this feel so sad?
I'm having a hard time talking about this with any sort of critical distance, because when it comes to Netrunner, I'm a true believer. I'm a card-carrying cyberpunk junkie, so when the core set was released way back in the halcyon days of 2012, I knew that I had found my game. Being in grad school, I didn't have the scratch to keep up with the relentless expansion pace, but I picked up sets here and there and now have a decent collection. These days I'm more of a Netrunner fan than a player-I'll play a game with friends from time to time but keep up on the news and watch the popular streamers. I know that the nerd community is famous for letting fandom act as a kind of critical blindfold, so I hope you'll forgive me when I say that I am sad right now because I think Netrunner is a very, very special game.
Let's start with the setting and theme. Netrunner is set in the universe established in FFG's 2008 board game Android, a flawed but charming murder mystery. It hits all the beats you expect from the cyberpunk genre, but little more: faceless corporations, gritty near-future tech, and unsubtle social commentary (guys, it's like racism, but against robots). Netrunner started out in this same well-trod territory, but as it expanded and started drawing inspiration from more diverse sources, it became a more and more interesting place to inhabit.
While Netrunner is centered on a familiar trope-lone hackers attempting to subvert the oppressive regimes of megacorps-it largely eschews the rainy streets and gray-on-gray aesthetic that has become the genre stereotype. Instead, it paints a vibrant and strange portrait of the near future, where the psychedelic and mythical frequently sit side-by-side with the almost comically mundane. In a game where digital constructs are named after dead gods and experimental drugs propel hackers through cyberspace, my favorite card depicts something so painfully ordinary it makes me cringe a little.
I'm talking about Day Job, a card that lets you trade your entire turn to make a few dollars. Its art is simple and brilliant-a punk hacker sits unhappily in a cubicle with her fingers pressed like a pistol to her head. Everything I love about Netrunner is right here on this one card: a perfect pairing of theme and mechanics, a sense of humor that extends beyond tired nerd references, and an understanding that sometimes the best way to show corporate oppression isn't through a cyberboot on some android's head, but through a mandatory name tag.
G.K. Chesterton, writing about fairy tales, posits that "they make rivers run with wine only to make us remember, for one wild moment, that they run with water." For being a game ostensibly set in a science fiction future, Netrunner feels like one of the only games I've played to accurately describe what it's like living in 2018. The game plays with hot button topics like mass surveillance, corporate dominance, and populist movements, all without preaching at the player or forsaking its pulpy roots. It reminds us how strange it is to live in the uneasy present, as a blip of data in a hostile, unknowable world.
Netrunner displays this same sort of subtle intelligence when tackling the thorny issues of race and representation, something games historically have been terrible at. The game imagines the future (and in doing so, the present) from a truly global perspective, filling its world with characters of all races, genders, and ages. This is a game where some of the star runners include a working mom, a journalist, a bunch of academics, a kid, and an old man. It also doesn't feel like the game is working through a checkbox or engaging in tokenism-rather, the creators of Netrunner realize that focusing on a diverse set of characters just makes things more interesting. By widening the scope of who gets to be a hero, it turns out we have better stories to tell.
Of course, none of this would matter if the game itself isn't good. Thankfully, it is. I won't get too deep into the mechanics of the thing, but I will say that what makes Netrunner such a compelling experience is that it keeps a laser-sharp focus on the most interesting part of a competitive game: your opponent. There's a reason that the Netrunner community likes to say a player "pilots" a deck. Because no matter how good your deck is, it doesn't mean anything unless you know exactly how to use it against your foe. Each game is built out of a series of feints, bluffs, jabs, and counterattacks. The game is clever because it makes you, the player, feel clever-it heightens your sense of fear, bravery, and brashness. Each decision leads to a new, equally interesting decision. And at the end of the game, you can look back on your duel and see, piece by piece, the story you and your opponent built together.
So, is it sayonara, then? So long and thanks for all the memories? That depends. On one hand, the lack of official support and new cards certainly means that an era has ended. On the other hand, perhaps the reports of Netrunner's death have been exaggerated. If we take away any lesson from the game's world, it's that we can't count on some corporation's whims to take care of us-we have to take care of each other. This is where the "punk" in "cyberpunk" will really be tested. Already plans are percolating for fan-run tournaments, expansions, and campaigns. These folks may not have the resources of a megacorp, but they have gumption, determination, and moxie. I think the community has everything it needs to jury rig the game and keep it humming for years to come, even if it's slightly more cult, slightly more underground. In some ways, it feels like that's what Netrunner should have been all along. I, for one, am optimistic about the broken, grimy, beautiful future.
I used to play the Cyberpunk RPG back in the '80s. The campaign setting was the backdrop for the original Netrunner CCG, and it was set in the year 2013. The second edition rules were set in 2020. One of these days, I should get out the old rulebooks and scenarios and see what they got right and wrong about 2013.
But here's my question -- FFG has lost the license. Does that me Netrunner is dead, or that some other company is going to continue it or restart it as Netrunner 2.0? All I've heard to date is that FFG will no longer publish it.
Given how vanilla the Android setting is I could see the game getting reset in a Blade Runner world or some other, and being published by the original rights holder with all new content. Just a thought, don't have any evidence either way.
jpat wrote: The fact that many of the eulogies I've read contain lines such as "I used to play" is suggestive that maybe there wasn't enough money in it, as the OP concedes, but FFG was clearly operating, it would seem, under the assumption that the license would be renewed, else why a new core set? If, on the other hand, WotC saw this game as successful, rebooting it after stripping out the FFG universe trappings seems likely to annoy people, especially those who may have just gotten into the FFG game on the promise of the revised core. So I don't know. This is a game I always wanted to try, but even though it's probably, if anything, easier now, I know I probably won't because it's a dead game.
I'm just saying that FFG losing the license doesn't mean the game is dead. WOTC may just keep running it, replacing Jinteki with Tyrell or Yoyodyne. Could even be backward compatible. Garfield may have other ideas. Don't know. Maybe not.
Why would you rescind a license for something you're not interested in publishing yourself? FFG was writing a check for it. Either they couldn't come to agreement on price, or WOTC wants it back. Don't know. FFG didn't announce discontinue, they announced they lost the license.
jpat wrote: The fact that many of the eulogies I've read contain lines such as "I used to play" is suggestive that maybe there wasn't enough money in it, as the OP concedes, but FFG was clearly operating, it would seem, under the assumption that the license would be renewed, else why a new core set? If, on the other hand, WotC saw this game as successful, rebooting it after stripping out the FFG universe trappings seems likely to annoy people, especially those who may have just gotten into the FFG game on the promise of the revised core. So I don't know. This is a game I always wanted to try, but even though it's probably, if anything, easier now, I know I probably won't because it's a dead game.
That’s a really good point about so many people saying “I used to play.”
I know nothing about Netrunner, but I think LCG need to be re-booted every few years to get new people interested. It’s too much work, and too overwhelming to get into a LCG after it’s been around for several years.
ubarose wrote:
jpat wrote: The fact that many of the eulogies I've read contain lines such as "I used to play" is suggestive that maybe there wasn't enough money in it, as the OP concedes, but FFG was clearly operating, it would seem, under the assumption that the license would be renewed, else why a new core set? If, on the other hand, WotC saw this game as successful, rebooting it after stripping out the FFG universe trappings seems likely to annoy people, especially those who may have just gotten into the FFG game on the promise of the revised core. So I don't know. This is a game I always wanted to try, but even though it's probably, if anything, easier now, I know I probably won't because it's a dead game.
That’s a really good point about so many people saying “I used to play.”
I know nothing about Netrunner, but I think LCG need to be re-booted every few years to get new people interested. It’s too much work, and too overwhelming to get into a LCG after it’s been around for several years.
It's easier with a game like Magic where the primary skill is deck design, so you can quickly catch up by copying some good deck designs off the internet. Netrunner involves more skill, especially bluffing, and that isn't something that can be easily acquired online.
Shellhead wrote:
ubarose wrote:
jpat wrote: The fact that many of the eulogies I've read contain lines such as "I used to play" is suggestive that maybe there wasn't enough money in it, as the OP concedes, but FFG was clearly operating, it would seem, under the assumption that the license would be renewed, else why a new core set? If, on the other hand, WotC saw this game as successful, rebooting it after stripping out the FFG universe trappings seems likely to annoy people, especially those who may have just gotten into the FFG game on the promise of the revised core. So I don't know. This is a game I always wanted to try, but even though it's probably, if anything, easier now, I know I probably won't because it's a dead game.
That’s a really good point about so many people saying “I used to play.”
I know nothing about Netrunner, but I think LCG need to be re-booted every few years to get new people interested. It’s too much work, and too overwhelming to get into a LCG after it’s been around for several years.
It's easier with a game like Magic where the primary skill is deck design, so you can quickly catch up by copying some good deck designs off the internet. Netrunner involves more skill, especially bluffing, and that isn't something that can be easily acquired online.
I’m not talking about the skills required to learn and play a game. I’m talking about getting into a game when there has been years worth of product released. It’s daunting to figure out what you need to start, and then you see the price of what you are getting into. It’s easier when you come in at the beginning of that train ride. You get a core set and then picking up a pack of cards every couple of months is painless. Re-booting an LCG is probably good for business. It opens up your market to new players, and a large enough chunk of the old players will probably continue to buy., to make it worthwhile.
ubarose wrote:
I’m not talking about the skills required to learn and play a game. I’m talking about getting into a game when there has been years worth of product released. It’s daunting to figure out what you need to start, and then you see the price of what you are getting into. It’s easier when you come in at the beginning of that train ride. You get a core set and then picking up a pack of cards every couple of months is painless. Re-booting an LCG is probably good for business. It opens up your market to new players, and a large enough chunk of the old players will probably continue to buy., to make it worthwhile.
The ironic part in the timing of the announcement is that FFG basically just did this by releasing new core sets. In the other thread the "going forward" recommendation was "a couple of those, the most recent expansion, and some stuff not out yet". Not "all the shit from the last six years".
FFG really had to have been expecting that license renewal to have gone through easily. They did a lot of work over the last year to create a reboot, only to watch the power get pulled at "Loading.... 90%"
charlest wrote: I kind of enjoy how they featured Africa prominently as well as many minorities. Gave the setting a bit of a unique feel.
For me the great thing about it is exactly the opposite: It was never "edgy" in the way it portrayed characters. There was a sense of normalcy, of things just being, well, realistic and logical with the world being portrayed.Shellhead wrote: The most edgy aspect of the Blandroid setting was the androgynous characters.
I'm not the most concious gamer around and this may seem even uncharasteritic of me, but when I play games I always think about sexism and how minorities are portrayed. I can't help it. I always have this hum, this constant analysis going on my head and this is included onit. I notice when games have absurd male ratios or when everyone seems to either follow a gender role or crudely subvert it. When I sit down to play **Blood Rage**, I notice that factions are exclusively male except for one, which is exclusively female. And that makes me think about some pretty crappy stuff and I come to some pretty sad conclusions.
But not Netrunner. It just fit. The brownish cast made sense. The abundance of Asian characters made sense. Women, lesbians and transexual people made sense. The hum quiet down and I could think about the fun things instead of crappy attitudes sipping into gaming.
One thing to keep in mind is that the game hit a low spot after some broken cards were released and many people left or, simply, stopped joining. The game was actually rising again at a pretty good rate after the new head designer passed a great Banned & Restricted list that made the game fun and got rid of much of the crap.jpat wrote: The fact that many of the eulogies I've read contain lines such as "I used to play" is suggestive that maybe there wasn't enough money in it
Not Sure wrote:
ubarose wrote:
I’m not talking about the skills required to learn and play a game. I’m talking about getting into a game when there has been years worth of product released. It’s daunting to figure out what you need to start, and then you see the price of what you are getting into. It’s easier when you come in at the beginning of that train ride. You get a core set and then picking up a pack of cards every couple of months is painless. Re-booting an LCG is probably good for business. It opens up your market to new players, and a large enough chunk of the old players will probably continue to buy., to make it worthwhile.
The ironic part in the timing of the announcement is that FFG basically just did this by releasing new core sets. In the other thread the "going forward" recommendation was "a couple of those, the most recent expansion, and some stuff not out yet". Not "all the shit from the last six years".
FFG really had to have been expecting that license renewal to have gone through easily. They did a lot of work over the last year to create a reboot, only to watch the power get pulled at "Loading.... 90%"
I agree. That is strange. They probably were expecting the license to renew.
Shellhead wrote:
san il defanso wrote: One underrated aspect of this whole process is that the FFG LCG line is now basically dead. They are still doing LOTR I think, and maybe GoT, but Netrunner was the big fish.
Legend of the Five Rings is still going strong.
You're right, I forgot about that one. Hopefully it has a long lifespan.
san il defanso wrote:
Shellhead wrote:
san il defanso wrote: One underrated aspect of this whole process is that the FFG LCG line is now basically dead. They are still doing LOTR I think, and maybe GoT, but Netrunner was the big fish.
Legend of the Five Rings is still going strong.
You're right, I forgot about that one. Hopefully it has a long lifespan.
Forgetting Arkham Horror too which is the greatest expression of the monthly LCG format.
Not to drift too far from the thread, but the LCG model is fine and, this lost license withdstanding, better than ever. Fantasy Flight is experimenting with starter decks (Thrones), six packs in six weeks (Five Rings), upgrade boxes (Arkham) and rotation (Netrunner...oops). The model had been stagnant, relying on its supposedly more consumer friendly release, but they’re pushing and trying new things. It’s fine.
Legomancer wrote: You're in Northampton? Where do you play games?
Yep, in Noho. I tend to play with folks here and in Amherst. I don't do a lot of in-store gaming, but I like going to the WW2 club's occasional game days. What about you?
jpat wrote: The fact that many of the eulogies I've read contain lines such as "I used to play" is suggestive that maybe there wasn't enough money in it, as the OP concedes, but FFG was clearly operating, it would seem, under the assumption that the license would be renewed, else why a new core set?
Yeah, I get the sense that this was at least something of a surprise to FFG--it seems they were ready to stick with Netrunner for the long haul. But in any case the model, while friendlier than CCGs, is still such a financial strain that I just don't think it's built to last for either players or companies.
I do think something like Arkham Horror is much, much easier to dabble in. Due to its cooperative nature, you can pick at the menu a la carte style, paying as you go, versus having what is essentially a monthly subscription fee to stay competitive in something like Netrunner. And heaven help you if you drop out of a card game and want to buy your way back in later.
It's kind of a shame, because when I think of the audience for LCGs or CCGs I tend to think about folks with a lot of free time and a lot of expendable income. Most of the working adults I know might have one of those things, but probably not both. Netrunner is such a complex and rewarding game that I think a lot of folks who aren't interested in the collectible model would really dig it--it's a bummer that its fate has been tied to these capricious market forces.
I guess it's time to snag what I can find / afford and mess around with preconstructed decks or draft or something that will extend its life with casual folks.
Plus, other than in playtesting, I also never intended to do any serious deckbuilding, so in a sense I only ever "used to play" this game. Instead, I've always played a draft format of my own invention (simulating a starter + a few boosters old-school NR sealed format).
I'm sad for the dedicated fans of the game, but really, I wonder how much more game space it had left to explore. Outside-looking-in over the last few cycles, I saw quite a few repeats/refinements of ideas, rather than radical new mechanisms. Anyway, original NR was played long after it died, and I see no reason why this won't be as well. I wouldn't be shocked if someone comes along and reboots it yet again.
Jur wrote: A game lives not because of new releases but because of players. If anybody murders a game, it's the players
Sounds like something a corporate spokesman would say.