Eh; different styles, I suppose. The MGP proposed cover would actually do more for me than the cover you suggested, but either way, the content is what would get me to actually fork over my hard-earned coin.
I find good covers seldom draw me in as much as a poor cover can push me away. In that regard, I'd far rather see something you refer to as 'bulk fantasy' as opposed to something silly, or pandering (I recall some d20 publisher that put out a slew of 'culture' campaign books, and every single one of their covers was a very thin variation on "pretty half-naked girl in a themed bikini holding a weapon against a generic backdrop of said culture").
I actually heard from a couple people that the books weren't that bad, but the cover art they choose really made them (IMHO) look like a fly-by night lowest-common denominator kind of publisher.
In comparison, my favorite cover so far has been the Doraster 'stained glass' cover for RQIII. Actually, I rather liked all the 'thick' campaign book art from the early nineties. They were largely reprints and updates of earlier RQII publications, like Pavis, Shadows on the Borderlands and Sun County, but the covers were intriguing to me. They didn't show any massive battles or typical heroic fights, but rather showed a 'slice of adventurer's life' about the region in question.
To me, that implied a greater level of detail about those sourcebooks than being merely a handful of dry monster stats, and in general that was accurate.
It was a nice change of pace, I think, but at the same time, I kind of doubt they appealed to the mass consumer. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I think 'bulk fantasy' is what your Joe Typical gamer is looking for (and some industry number seem to agree, unfortunately).
RQ always seemed to promote itself towards a different kind of gamer, and as such, it never was an industry leader in terms of sales, but I think I liked it better that way.
I find good covers seldom draw me in as much as a poor cover can push me away. In that regard, I'd far rather see something you refer to as 'bulk fantasy' as opposed to something silly, or pandering (I recall some d20 publisher that put out a slew of 'culture' campaign books, and every single one of their covers was a very thin variation on "pretty half-naked girl in a themed bikini holding a weapon against a generic backdrop of said culture").
I actually heard from a couple people that the books weren't that bad, but the cover art they choose really made them (IMHO) look like a fly-by night lowest-common denominator kind of publisher.
In comparison, my favorite cover so far has been the Doraster 'stained glass' cover for RQIII. Actually, I rather liked all the 'thick' campaign book art from the early nineties. They were largely reprints and updates of earlier RQII publications, like Pavis, Shadows on the Borderlands and Sun County, but the covers were intriguing to me. They didn't show any massive battles or typical heroic fights, but rather showed a 'slice of adventurer's life' about the region in question.
To me, that implied a greater level of detail about those sourcebooks than being merely a handful of dry monster stats, and in general that was accurate.
It was a nice change of pace, I think, but at the same time, I kind of doubt they appealed to the mass consumer. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I think 'bulk fantasy' is what your Joe Typical gamer is looking for (and some industry number seem to agree, unfortunately).
RQ always seemed to promote itself towards a different kind of gamer, and as such, it never was an industry leader in terms of sales, but I think I liked it better that way.
