I've seen the sentiment expressed a few times that there are too many clones. This is both true and misleading. There are too many strictly designed identical clones to old games, this is true. There are also nostalgic pieces that S&W and Basic Fantasy succeeded at being and Labyrinth Lord tried to be. Doing that requires being good at doing that, and there are too many that are bad at that. Lastly there are complete and utter thought experiments using similar mechanics like Into the Odd, Index Card RPG, Ambition & Avarice, LotFP, and even Raven of the Scythe, a game fucking nobody has ever heard of (with 20+ supplements).
So there are too many strict clones full stop. If you find yourself writing those, don't. We already have all of those we will ever need. One of my issues with White Box Fantastic Medieval Adventure Game is that it's just Swords & Wizardry White Box and a goddamn optional Thief class. Don't make another FMAG.
There are too many bad clones of the second category as well. Basically if you're not a good writer, not good at game design, and/or don't have 30 years of nostalgic memories about original games don't write these either. Even people who meet those qualifications can fuck it up, like Hyperborea. Don't make another Hyperborea.
The last type of game we simply don't have enough of and can't get enough of. Some of them are shit, as is the case with anything experimental, but for every five or so sloppy, lazy, pointless White Hacks, there's an Ambition & Avarice 2E that's designed with intelligence and a decent amount of effort and care. Make more of these, because even the shitty ones end up going in interesting directions and potentially informing the better ones.
Oh, if you somehow got to my blog and disagree with my treatment of some games, tough titties. I'm the king of the OSR. It's my divine right to proclaim what is good and what isn't.
