I believe Disney has some censorship rights on what/when certain content gets released. How else might we explain revisiting old, unchanging content (do we expect any major bombshells about Jawas that will forever skew the galaxy?) over committing to new content.

Why blame Disney? I mean sure it's easy to blame them, they're the big faceless corporation but without knowing the details of the contracts in question how can anyone say for sure that Disney is the reason we aren't getting new material? Maybe the RPG line just isn't meant to get new content. I played the d20 and Saga edition and they didn't exactly trailblaze with new content. As a matter of fact I'm pretty sure if I were to honestly sit down and look through all my old d20 and Saga books I would come away with the knowledge that I could have had the exact same info just by using the Wookie (though in d20's defense this was in the days before Google was a hot thing soooo I'll grant them leeway).

Like maybe the folks on high who run Star Wars (the good folks at Lucasfilm) just don't want the rpg to be a source of new material simply because it's an extremely niche market and fans would go ape if they had to suddenly invest in an rpg (of all things) to be kept current on the canon story. From a pure business and numbers sense no one (not Lucasfilms nor Disney) has any real incentive to release new information via such a small market that is the rpg industry. They'd anger to many fans doing that. More fans than those that are upset in the rpg crowd.

Here's something to remember about when WEG published. There was virutally nothing in the EU at that time. So to sell a game they had to make stuff up. They benefited from publishing in at a time where Lucasfilms did not care what was done in the EU. But now Lucasfilm cares and now we live in an age where what new information is presented is tightly controlled.

We're never gonna get that back. Let's move on.

Also ..... and this is worth repeating as I've said it before ..... but the fans on these forums really really do a bad job of actually making it known that they would prefer new content over old content. The things that get requested the most, to be seen in upcoming books is basically rehashes. We frequently start up threads to rehash old material. Sure there are new threads about new stuff but when a new product comes out we don't ask for the nitty grity detials of how Drac was changed and what new elements were added. We ask about which weapon/starship/gear/planet/ item from X EU source is in the book. I mean I'm sure to some extent FFG has general orders about what new content they can introduce but most of the time, on these forums, all we talk about are old elements and how we'd like to see them in X splat book. We feed the drive to produce old content as much as FFG decides not to offer up new things.

I think the lack of commitment from FFG tells us all we need to know about any future EU content.

I don't see a lack of commitment from FFG. Like at all. We are still getting fresh and new product. They have operated under this current model for sometime. They tell us about new product when it is ready to print. That's always been the case. So FFG isn't really showing us a lack of commitment. They just aren't giving us as much new info as we want. But you'll notice most RPG companies these days are pretty tight lipped when it comes to new product.

Strike Three: FFG grasps at straws for new fans (who've been waiting over a hundred days for any word on new EotE content- gutsy to ignore a fanbase), and clumsily crafts stories - NO RULES - about smashing together X-Wing and AoR for a game/campaign. Did someone owe someone else a favor at FFG, for this content to continually slide through editing? Do the editors play the game, to see how poorly the premise is established to forcible mate these two different products?

Considering how often the books sells out I honestly do not think FFG is grasping at straws for new fans. They may be attempting to entice some new customers with TFA box set but this game line appears to be extremely healthy. The only real problem I see is that we aren't given as much info as we the fans want. But FFG isn't obligated to tell us as much as we want to know. They have a set pattern. One that Absol is able to predict fairly accurately I might add.This indicates that they have far reaching plans for the rpg line even if we haven't heard anything new about X splat book yet.

Also I'm glad there are no rules for mashing together X Wing and AoR. It wouldn't really work well and any attempt would be subpar and only make the fan base mad.

I play games other than Star Wars at the table, and I visit other forums for games based on existing IP. They often point to the FFG games as an example of how a publisher can get an established title and churn out high-quality, frequent additions, and ask why their game can't do the same. (The last example I read was over on the Dragon Age forums where nothing new has been released in forever.)

So as much as we'd like to see more stuff coming, we have it pretty good, comparatively speaking.

I play games other than Star Wars at the table, and I visit other forums for games based on existing IP. They often point to the FFG games as an example of how a publisher can get an established title and churn out high-quality, frequent additions, and ask why their game can't do the same. (The last example I read was over on the Dragon Age forums where nothing new has been released in forever.)

So as much as we'd like to see more stuff coming, we have it pretty good, comparatively speaking.

To be honest I think the thing that makes this situation look bad for FFG is the nature of how they divided this Star Wars experience up. If this were a single Star Wars line then it would be crystal clear that we are swimming in gaming support. I can't recall a time under WotC where we were getting 4 to 6 new books a year (which is what we're close to right now under FFG). But since the game line is divided up into three bits and everyone has their favorite line then a lack of new product announcements in one line (I'm still convinced that TFA box took EotE book slot) gives the appearance that something is amiss and that FFG isn't committed to the line.

Also a bit more on the whole old content vs new content ....... but you know nostalgia sells. It sells very very well. We get repackaged stuff (whether it's Star Wars, D&D, or movie remakes) mostly because we buy it like hot cakes. When FFG (or Disney, or Micheal Bay) is able to sell out products that is mostly condensed info that we can get for free from the Wookie there really isn't an incentive to venture off into new territory. We make it clear that we are more than willing to buy old material again and again and again. It's easy to rail against FFG because they haven't told us anything new in the Star Wars universe but we don't exactly give them a reason to. They know they have our money regardless of what they print. We, the consumer, make it profitable for companies, whether we're talking about FFG and WotC to Disney to Micheal Bay and whatever childhood memory he wants to destroy next, to make bank off of telling us the same stuff we were getting 20 to 30 years ago.

To be honest if I were in FFG's position, and I knew that I could sell out on books that is just retreads of information found on Wookiepedia just with my own spin and a bit of updated material here and there ..... I would in a heart beat. Like no question which option I would choose.

I would love a Tapani sector source book or focused adventure. I've had several PCs I've played that were native to the sector. Also I would love some new Tapani sector ships including hopefully some native to Fondor. It has always bugged me that of the three biggest shipbuilding centers in Star Wars Fondor is the only one without an established native shipwright firm. I don't think it has any ship designs established as being developed there either so far.

(The last example I read was over on the Dragon Age forums where nothing new has been released in forever.)

Agreed that's a crying shame. Green Ronin are a company that - like FFG - feels like it understands gamers.

The Dragon Age RPG is an outstanding book, just as I think D&D5 is the best edition. But the lack of supplements for either is depressing.

At least FFG gives us regular stuff, at sensible intervals, unlike the monthly deluge of Pathfinder power-creep.

(The last example I read was over on the Dragon Age forums where nothing new has been released in forever.)

Agreed that's a crying shame. Green Ronin are a company that - like FFG - feels like it understands gamers.

The Dragon Age RPG is an outstanding book, just as I think D&D5 is the best edition. But the lack of supplements for either is depressing.

At least FFG gives us regular stuff, at sensible intervals, unlike the monthly deluge of Pathfinder power-creep.

Dragon Age was the first RPG I ever played, and personally, I think it has the best dice system save the EotE one. It is simple, there aren't tons of percentile charts, and I find combat to be very engaging especially with an experienced GM. I agree that it is sad that they aren't able to offer very many new things for the RPG, (I am one of the people who waited three years for set two, and again for set three) but I heard somewhere that Bioware is a pain to work with.

Yup, my two go-to RPG's for teaching new players are EotE, and Dragon Age.

I never got Set Three - but the Core Book is brilliant, everything under one cover and all the little snarls of the original system worked out and improved upon. It's just a shame that Green Ronin are doing their own fantasy game, and that's taking priority over Dragon Age. I'm sure a lot of DA players would be interested in an RPG, and it's a really good rules set, not just some crummy 3rd rate rules with a big IP slapped on it. Straightforward without being too simple, and it really does evoke the feel and setting of the videogame.

(The last example I read was over on the Dragon Age forums where nothing new has been released in forever.)

Agreed that's a crying shame. Green Ronin are a company that - like FFG - feels like it understands gamers.

The Dragon Age RPG is an outstanding book, just as I think D&D5 is the best edition. But the lack of supplements for either is depressing.

At least FFG gives us regular stuff, at sensible intervals, unlike the monthly deluge of Pathfinder power-creep.

WotC is one of the reasons why I ultimately feel like we have no reason to complain about things over in Star Wars land. They release .... what .... one adventure a year now? I think maybe one actual splat book in the 2 or 3 years the games been out? My god .....Granted it could be worse. We could be in the boat that Onyx Path created when they release a ton of information about their products and then it takes years for any given project to come to fruition.

I think that's what FFG is attempting to avoid. They announce product information when they know for sure they have a release date coming soon. And honestly I respect that a lot more than the companies who tell us what we want to know but then for one reason or another can't deliver it in a timely fashion. I know it's frustrating to not know what is coming next but honestly Absol's predictions continue to hold up (give or take a week or two). Which indicates to me that FFG has long term plans in mind and that this game is healthy and striving. If this were any other company I'd say the lack of information at any given moment should worry us. But FFG seems to have this all under control so I don't think we need to worry.

(The last example I read was over on the Dragon Age forums where nothing new has been released in forever.)

Agreed that's a crying shame. Green Ronin are a company that - like FFG - feels like it understands gamers.

The Dragon Age RPG is an outstanding book, just as I think D&D5 is the best edition. But the lack of supplements for either is depressing.

At least FFG gives us regular stuff, at sensible intervals, unlike the monthly deluge of Pathfinder power-creep.

WotC is one of the reasons why I ultimately feel like we have no reason to complain about things over in Star Wars land. They release .... what .... one adventure a year now? I think maybe one actual splat book in the 2 or 3 years the games been out? My god .....Granted it could be worse. We could be in the boat that Onyx Path created when they release a ton of information about their products and then it takes years for any given project to come to fruition.

I think that's what FFG is attempting to avoid. They announce product information when they know for sure they have a release date coming soon. And honestly I respect that a lot more than the companies who tell us what we want to know but then for one reason or another can't deliver it in a timely fashion. I know it's frustrating to not know what is coming next but honestly Absol's predictions continue to hold up (give or take a week or two). Which indicates to me that FFG has long term plans in mind and that this game is healthy and striving. If this were any other company I'd say the lack of information at any given moment should worry us. But FFG seems to have this all under control so I don't think we need to worry.

Classic example. Palladium. I remember in the 90s my FLGS laughed when I asked when a book that was announced would be in this month...cause palladium never on time. usually months to years late. By not announcing they don't have to worry about things like the freelancer is late...or worse not up to snuff. or Lucas is slow to approve.. etc. They bassically announce when the product is going to printer.

WotC is one of the reasons why I ultimately feel like we have no reason to complain about things over in Star Wars land. They release .... what .... one adventure a year now? I think maybe one actual splat book in the 2 or 3 years the games been out? My god .....

WotC have admitted they do not care about the RPG. The game is kept alive on life-support so they can sell minis and the MMO, and maintain the brand name. The bean counters believe that blind collectible mini packs and monthly MMO subscriptions bring repeat $$$ rather than RPG books (despite Paizo making lots of money off the latter)

In fact, as much as I dislike Pathfinder, I feel Paizo has it right here; they nurture the RPG first, and all the cross-selling stuff like novels and card games comes on from that... not the other way around as WotC do it.

I feel 5th edition D&D is probably the smoothest, best realised version of the game, and it's a shame it arrived stillborn. I don't believe we will see any further splatbooks until WOTC sell the IP to someone who cares about it. Which may not happen if they can make money off the minis and computer games.

FFG is a different situation altogether. Unlike D&D, the RPG isn't the original or baseline product. We understand that an RPG is a niche product compared to X-Wing, the card game and Imperial Assault. Nevertheless, they produce a regular pace of quality RPG products (even if they've slowed over the last year). This provides a regular talking point for fans and a feeling that their game is in good health and there is something to look forward to. Wisely, FFG don't over-promise like some companies do.

I have a hard time believing that the Lucasfilm Group, let alone Disney corporate, is expending the resources it would take to police a role-playing game line. The return on investment just isn't there for a corporate behemoth to be 100% hands-on.

Look at it this way... compared to the market that Dungeons & Dragons and Pathfinder hold, the number of Star Wars RPG players - or any other tabletop RPG for that matter - is a fraction of a percent. Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast couldn't get enough players to buy books in order to make a SW RPG profitable. In any other industry a SW IP license *should* be a license to print money. Part of me wonders if FFG looks at the entirety of the SW line - board games, minis games, card games and RPGs - and judges its success with the IP on the whole rather than on a line-by-line profit margin. X-Wing minis *may* be subsidizing the RPG but with a justification that RPG players may be inclined to purchase more profitable games ( Imperial Assault , Armada , et. all) if they happen to like the RPG.

All that said, my preference is that FFG put out books without freaking out what's going to be canon and what isn't. The official origins of the A- or B-wing fighters or who fought who at the Battle of Malachor 3000 years ago shouldn't affect anyone's game. If it bothers you that much, just say that Admiral Ackbar and the Verpine were working to mass develop Quarrie's prototype and Research Station Shantipole was named after the planet Shantipole.

I have a hard time believing that the Lucasfilm Group, let alone Disney corporate, is expending the resources it would take to police a role-playing game line. The return on investment just isn't there for a corporate behemoth to be 100% hands-on.

Look at it this way... compared to the market that Dungeons & Dragons and Pathfinder hold, the number of Star Wars RPG players - or any other tabletop RPG for that matter - is a fraction of a percent. Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast couldn't get enough players to buy books in order to make a SW RPG profitable. In any other industry a SW IP license *should* be a license to print money. Part of me wonders if FFG looks at the entirety of the SW line - board games, minis games, card games and RPGs - and judges its success with the IP on the whole rather than on a line-by-line profit margin. X-Wing minis *may* be subsidizing the RPG but with a justification that RPG players may be inclined to purchase more profitable games ( Imperial Assault , Armada , et. all) if they happen to like the RPG.

All that said, my preference is that FFG put out books without freaking out what's going to be canon and what isn't. The official origins of the A- or B-wing fighters or who fought who at the Battle of Malachor 3000 years ago shouldn't affect anyone's game. If it bothers you that much, just say that Admiral Ackbar and the Verpine were working to mass develop Quarrie's prototype and Research Station Shantipole was named after the planet Shantipole.

One of the things that has bothered me with the FFG line is that they dont look at it as a whole product line, but more as separate games. If compatability had been engineered into the game at the start, that would have been an excellent way to get players to buy multiple lines. As it is, there is not really any reason for a player of one game to invest in another. If you could have your characters fly X-wings, or command Nebulon-b frigates, using the X-wing and Armada rules, then there would be alot more reason for an RPG player to buy those games. It works the other way too.

I dont think that WOTC couldnt get enough players to make the SW license profitable, but that they just didnt. The original d20 SW rules kinda blew. Well, not kinda. It wasnt until SAGA that they had a decent game, but by then the license was just the playtest for 4e D&D. Had they seriously kept up with the game, they could have made a profit.

I also dont think WOTC is a good example of how to run a game company. Piazo makes enough to stay in operation with a game they got second hand and a customer base that was heavily fractured. They have stayed in business for years with less customers than WOTC had with 3e. That leads me to believe that it is the corporate structure that is the problem. Something above D&D in WOTC or Hasbro is interfering with the ability of D&D to prosper.

I dont think that WOTC couldnt get enough players to make the SW license profitable, but that they just didnt. The original d20 SW rules kinda blew. Well, not kinda. It wasnt until SAGA that they had a decent game, but by then the license was just the playtest for 4e D&D. Had they seriously kept up with the game, they could have made a profit.

<snip>

I have toi seriously disagree on that. The RCRB rules were ten times better than SAGA. I refused to play that ilk. They went backwards when they create Saga Edition big time, by getting rid of skills and going back to "Armor classes" instead of sticking with armor damage reduction. Armor does not prevent a person from getting hit. Armor absorbs damage after you have been hit!!!

WotC have admitted they do not care about the RPG. The game is kept alive on life-support so they can sell minis and the MMO, and maintain the brand name. The bean counters believe that blind collectible mini packs and monthly MMO subscriptions bring repeat $$$ rather than RPG books (despite Paizo making lots of money off the latter)

I was not aware of that. That's a shame then as 5th Edition is actually a solid rule set.

I have a hard time believing that the Lucasfilm Group, let alone Disney corporate, is expending the resources it would take to police a role-playing game line. The return on investment just isn't there for a corporate behemoth to be 100% hands-on.

I don't think they police every little small detail. However there is a Continuity Editor whose job is to keep track of what goes on in the various projects and make sense of it. At least they had one before the Disney buy. I'm not sure if Disney kept the position. At any rate, while they may not police every detail as far as I know they still have to send Lucasfilm something for them to approve story wise to make sure it stays true to the Star Wars brand. Whether that's a full copy of the book in question or just a general outline and notes I'm not sure. But on some level each book has to go through a Lucasfilm approval process before it's green lighted for sale.

This is another reason why I don't think people should worry about lack of news. Despite them remaining silent they still produce announcements and news and product on a predictable schedule. In order to do that and get approval from Lucasfilm, handle rewrites they ask, and then get final approval you have to be working months, if not a year or more, in advance in order to be as consistent as they currently are.

One of the things that has bothered me with the FFG line is that they dont look at it as a whole product line, but more as separate games.

And for this I am thankful. I'm glad that each line stands on it's own. I don't want my rpg product to be an advertisement for the LCG, mini's, and board games. I'm very happy that each product stands on it's own merits and fans can buy one or the other without having products they don't want shoved at them all the time. The mini's aspect of Saga was highly annoying.

I don't think they police every little small detail. However there is a Continuity Editor whose job is to keep track of what goes on in the various projects and make sense of it. At least they had one before the Disney buy. I'm not sure if Disney kept the position. At any rate, while they may not police every detail as far as I know they still have to send Lucasfilm something for them to approve story wise to make sure it stays true to the Star Wars brand. Whether that's a full copy of the book in question or just a general outline and notes I'm not sure. But on some level each book has to go through a Lucasfilm approval process before it's green lighted for sale.

I mentioned her earlier, it's Jennifer Heddle. Look on the "Credits" page of each book and you'll see her listed as a Senior Editor in the Lucasfilm Licensing section. She's quoted frequently on Wookieepedia as the person who declares what does and doesn't count as official canon so she'd be the authority you're looking for.

I would love a Tapani sector source book or focused adventure. I've had several PCs I've played that were native to the sector. Also I would love some new Tapani sector ships including hopefully some native to Fondor. It has always bugged me that of the three biggest shipbuilding centers in Star Wars Fondor is the only one without an established native shipwright firm. I don't think it has any ship designs established as being developed there either so far.

Well, I did get a wild hair the other night and began making notes for this little conversion...

Well, I did get a wild hair the other night and began making notes for this little conversion...

Backed!

I dont think that WOTC couldnt get enough players to make the SW license profitable, but that they just didnt. The original d20 SW rules kinda blew. Well, not kinda. It wasnt until SAGA that they had a decent game, but by then the license was just the playtest for 4e D&D. Had they seriously kept up with the game, they could have made a profit.

<snip>

I have toi seriously disagree on that. The RCRB rules were ten times better than SAGA. I refused to play that ilk. They went backwards when they create Saga Edition big time, by getting rid of skills and going back to "Armor classes" instead of sticking with armor damage reduction. Armor does not prevent a person from getting hit. Armor absorbs damage after you have been hit!!!

Tramp... the statistics in Saga worked decently as a movie simulator, i.e. it was a game that played like the movies... RCR didn't, it tried to model causes correctly at the cost of having statistics that were piss poor. In game design, to get a game that plays right statistically you have to design for effect... if you ALSO design for cause that's gravy. Your game preference in this matter is akin to choosing to drink gravy INSTEAD OF eating steak and potatoes without gravy. It's a matter of missing the forest for the trees.

FFG got both cause and effect done decently (the stats could be a but better behaved though, getting a boost die is generally better than upgrading 1 green to a yellow) and so is superior to both RCR and Saga.

One of the things that has bothered me with the FFG line is that they dont look at it as a whole product line, but more as separate games.

And for this I am thankful. I'm glad that each line stands on it's own. I don't want my rpg product to be an advertisement for the LCG, mini's, and board games. I'm very happy that each product stands on it's own merits and fans can buy one or the other without having products they don't want shoved at them all the time. The mini's aspect of Saga was highly annoying.

I actually love using minis with maps, even for FFG star wars, squares I can take or leave

One of the things that has bothered me with the FFG line is that they dont look at it as a whole product line, but more as separate games.

And for this I am thankful. I'm glad that each line stands on it's own. I don't want my rpg product to be an advertisement for the LCG, mini's, and board games. I'm very happy that each product stands on it's own merits and fans can buy one or the other without having products they don't want shoved at them all the time. The mini's aspect of Saga was highly annoying.

I actually love using minis with maps, even for FFG star wars, squares I can take or leave

I'm not saying people shouldn't use mini's. I'm saying that designing your games as if they are all one interconnected whole is bad. Under WotC the rpg served as a vehicle to sell mini's. Combat and mechanics were written to support mini play. Both suffered as a result. Under FFG you can use mini's but the rpg isn't designed so that mini's is a must. Furthermore since mini play, board game play, and LCG play are all different than rpg play the fact that FFG isn't trying to combine them into one giant whole allows for each to really focus on their unique aspects of enjoyment. X Wing gets to be fast and deadly in a way that it wouldn't be able to if it were serving as a vehicle for the rpg game play.

The fact that they're not interconnected makes each product stronger. So sure use mini's if that's your thing. I'm not saying don't. I'm just saying the game likely would not be as good as it is (and by game I'm referring to all of their Star Wars product lines) if they were some interconnected mess meant to convince people to buy ALL the product lines.

One of the things that has bothered me with the FFG line is that they dont look at it as a whole product line, but more as separate games.

And for this I am thankful. I'm glad that each line stands on it's own. I don't want my rpg product to be an advertisement for the LCG, mini's, and board games. I'm very happy that each product stands on it's own merits and fans can buy one or the other without having products they don't want shoved at them all the time. The mini's aspect of Saga was highly annoying.

I actually love using minis with maps, even for FFG star wars, squares I can take or leave

I'm not saying people shouldn't use mini's. I'm saying that designing your games as if they are all one interconnected whole is bad. Under WotC the rpg served as a vehicle to sell mini's. Combat and mechanics were written to support mini play. Both suffered as a result. Under FFG you can use mini's but the rpg isn't designed so that mini's is a must. Furthermore since mini play, board game play, and LCG play are all different than rpg play the fact that FFG isn't trying to combine them into one giant whole allows for each to really focus on their unique aspects of enjoyment. X Wing gets to be fast and deadly in a way that it wouldn't be able to if it were serving as a vehicle for the rpg game play.

The fact that they're not interconnected makes each product stronger. So sure use mini's if that's your thing. I'm not saying don't. I'm just saying the game likely would not be as good as it is (and by game I'm referring to all of their Star Wars product lines) if they were some interconnected mess meant to convince people to buy ALL the product lines.

No, it doesnt. No interconnection means that people only buy what they are interested in. It means RPGers dont buy minis and mini gamers dont buy RPGs. That is pretty much by definition not stronger.

Plus, you assertion that making the games interconnected means they all have to play the same is not correct. You are also assuming that the rules have to be identical for every usage. It would not take that much effort to make rules to use the stuff in the X-wing box with a set of EotE rules without changing the X-wing rules at all. That might get us some space rules for the RPG which arent a muddled nonsensical mess too. There arent good rules in the RPG for fighter combat, fleet actions or mass combat, but there are whole games made for these things.

You guys are refering to different meanings of the word "stronger" in this case.

That leads me to believe that it is the corporate structure that is the problem. Something above D&D in WOTC or Hasbro is interfering with the ability of D&D to prosper.

Hasbro and the bean counters have made it very clear that the RPG will only get the bare minimum of support. It is simply being used to push the sales of blind packaged minis and monthly MMO subscriptions, as they believe this is what sells. D&D will get some rehashed adventure every 6-12 months, a new Monster Manual and that's it.

At this point, the D&D team is basically just Mike Mearls in a straightjacket, babbling nonsense as he channels dread Azathoth. And some poor work experience kid writing his crazed ramblings down and trying to turn them into a monthly article. (And goddam if they still aren't better than the rubbish Bryan Young comes out with!)

I'm actually kinda surprised more fans aren't annoyed at this, but WotC nuked their own forums, for the same reason as Bioware and Games Workshop did; to reduce organised criticism. You can't have a discussion on Facebook and Twitter, only soundbites, and things like Reddit are much harder to follow than a dedicated forum like this one. This way the opposition is dispersed and rendered impotent. Sad that they think of paying customers as 'opposition', but (unlike Paizo or FFG) these companies have always had an adversarial relationship with the fanbase.

Well, I did get a wild hair the other night and began making notes for this little conversion...

I'd buy the hell out of that, Nytwyng.

One of the things that has bothered me with the FFG line is that they dont look at it as a whole product line, but more as separate games. If compatability had been engineered into the game at the start, that would have been an excellent way to get players to buy multiple lines. As it is, there is not really any reason for a player of one game to invest in another. If you could have your characters fly X-wings, or command Nebulon-b frigates, using the X-wing and Armada rules, then there would be alot more reason for an RPG player to buy those games. It works the other way too.

I really don't think it would. A lot of people - FFG included - seem to think this is an amazing concept, but it's not, because they are all trying to do different things. X-Wing is (as far as I can see) a game in its own right, with very detailed tactical rules and very high casualties.

The RPG tries (not always successfully... *cough*obligation*cough* ) to eschew detailed rules for distance, manoeuvring etc. in exchange for narrative-style rules that properly convey the pace of a pulp action adventure game. It's actually pretty hard for PCs to die in the RPG, while minions like stormtroopers and Biggs are easily blasted to smithereens.

As Kael and others have said, having several good games under the same IP banner is fine; that broadens your market. Trying to mash them all together really is a bad idea. Elements that appeal to RPG fans won't appeal to tactical minis gamers and vice-versa. You'll just alienate both sides.

It's similar to the way that in recent years, single-player videogames have tried (and failed) to push a multiplayer aspect in games like Tomb Raider, Dragon Age and Mass Effect. The multiplayer aspect is never very good, and only takes time and resources away from the single player game (the thing that attracted fans in the first place). Those who like Multiplayer will simply play better games that were actually designed for that, while the RPG fans just don't bother with the Multiplayer, because that isn't what they want from the franchise.