Cooled off before the future? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Cooled off before the future? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
boozerker
05-14-07, 12:33 AM Perhaps they ended Drgaon and Dungeon for a possible cool-off period.

A cool-off period before what (?), you may ask.

Well, since you asked . . . (or even if you didn't ;))

If 4e were to be entirely different mechanics, with concepts too foreign to d20, then it makes sense a bit.

That would create incompatibility problems with older issues -- but it's all speculation, though.
bonethug0108
05-14-07, 12:42 AM Seems unlikely. They're magazine issues. They don't have to be compatible with back issues. If d&d goes to 4e, why would it be a problem to simply put 4e support in the magazines, even if it is new mechanics.

3.5 is d20 based, not the magazines themselves.
Roivas
05-14-07, 02:12 AM My guess is that is was something more personal than a business decision, but that's just pure speculation.
_SIN_
05-14-07, 03:29 AM I used to buy both magazines when they supported 2nd edition, and they had no problem with going over to third, then on to 3.5.

Money is going to be the sole reason for the discontinuation. Whether they were losing too much, or think they can make more, I do not know...
CCS
05-15-07, 03:23 PM Perhaps they ended Drgaon and Dungeon for a possible cool-off period.

A cool-off period before what (?), you may ask.

Well, since you asked . . . (or even if you didn't ;))

If 4e were to be entirely different mechanics, with concepts too foreign to d20, then it makes sense a bit.

That would create incompatibility problems with older issues -- but it's all speculation, though.

And weak speculation at that.
Let's pretend that this does indeed hereld the coming of 4th. And let's pretend that it really will be 100% radically different than ANYTHING that's ever come before, D&D or otherwise.

Do you know how that affects a magazine full of articles? That's right, it doesn't. The people who churn out those articles simply switch gears and write for the new format.
They don't go "Oh my! A completely new edition/format! Well, I guess that's it, let's cancel the entire magazine so that STUPID people don't confuse the two (or more) sytems."
Seeker95
05-15-07, 04:36 PM If 4e were to be entirely different mechanics, with concepts too foreign to d20, then it makes sense a bit.It didn't make an impact on the transition from 2e to 3e, or from any other edition change. And some of those were rather major.

I think WotC is simply recognizing the potential of electronic distribution. International subscriptions are more expensive, but do not generate additional revenue. Electronic distribution of content has no international cost adjustments. There are many different possible pricing models for an electronic Dragon: All-or-nothing subscription.
Pay per item.
Account limits with menu purchases.
"My Dragon" tailored content feeds.And then there are the possibilities of wider distribution, kiosks-through-distributors/gaming stores, print-on-demand, preview-payview, etc. And back issues? Piece of cake!

I think it is purely a business model change.
bonethug0108
05-15-07, 05:32 PM Pay per item.

Pray to the gods that it isn't this one.

I think a monthly subscription(somewhere around $5 to $10) would be the preferred method. And have scaling pay plans, so if you subcribe for 6 months you pay less, and if you subscribe for 1 year you pay even less than that.
Optimized_Commoner
05-15-07, 05:49 PM "My Dragon" tailored content feeds.

Ooh, I like this idea. It'd finally mean you could make a "dragon" magazine which catered to all the different campaign settings. Hell, maybe they could even have special guest articles for older editions. That'd make some people out there happy (I remember guest letters to dragon asking for 2e content).

Lot of potential from that one. Hope they use it well.

(Are they keeping the name for the online content? Anyone know?)
CryoSilver
05-15-07, 07:14 PM Seems like just good business sense to me. Large corporations would have little interest in tailoring to small groups of people (like the small distribution of Dragon/Dungeon). It's easier (and cheaper) for them to just put it online.
boozerker
08-19-07, 08:50 PM *Bumpy*

Should be more relevant now ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
boozerker 05-14-07, 12:33 AM	Perhaps they ended Drgaon and Dungeon for a possible cool-off period. A cool-off period before what (?), you may ask. Well, since you asked . . . (or even if you didn't ;)) If 4e were to be entirely different mechanics, with concepts too foreign to d20, then it makes sense a bit. That would create incompatibility problems with older issues -- but it's all speculation, though.
bonethug0108 05-14-07, 12:42 AM	Seems unlikely. They're magazine issues. They don't have to be compatible with back issues. If d&d goes to 4e, why would it be a problem to simply put 4e support in the magazines, even if it is new mechanics. 3.5 is d20 based, not the magazines themselves.
Roivas 05-14-07, 02:12 AM	My guess is that is was something more personal than a business decision, but that's just pure speculation.
_SIN_ 05-14-07, 03:29 AM	I used to buy both magazines when they supported 2nd edition, and they had no problem with going over to third, then on to 3.5. Money is going to be the sole reason for the discontinuation. Whether they were losing too much, or think they can make more, I do not know...
CCS 05-15-07, 03:23 PM	Perhaps they ended Drgaon and Dungeon for a possible cool-off period. A cool-off period before what (?), you may ask. Well, since you asked . . . (or even if you didn't ;)) If 4e were to be entirely different mechanics, with concepts too foreign to d20, then it makes sense a bit. That would create incompatibility problems with older issues -- but it's all speculation, though. And weak speculation at that. Let's pretend that this does indeed hereld the coming of 4th. And let's pretend that it really will be 100% radically different than ANYTHING that's ever come before, D&D or otherwise. Do you know how that affects a magazine full of articles? That's right, it doesn't. The people who churn out those articles simply switch gears and write for the new format. They don't go "Oh my! A completely new edition/format! Well, I guess that's it, let's cancel the entire magazine so that STUPID people don't confuse the two (or more) sytems."
Seeker95 05-15-07, 04:36 PM	If 4e were to be entirely different mechanics, with concepts too foreign to d20, then it makes sense a bit.It didn't make an impact on the transition from 2e to 3e, or from any other edition change. And some of those were rather major. I think WotC is simply recognizing the potential of electronic distribution. International subscriptions are more expensive, but do not generate additional revenue. Electronic distribution of content has no international cost adjustments. There are many different possible pricing models for an electronic Dragon: All-or-nothing subscription. Pay per item. Account limits with menu purchases. "My Dragon" tailored content feeds.And then there are the possibilities of wider distribution, kiosks-through-distributors/gaming stores, print-on-demand, preview-payview, etc. And back issues? Piece of cake! I think it is purely a business model change.
bonethug0108 05-15-07, 05:32 PM	Pay per item. Pray to the gods that it isn't this one. I think a monthly subscription(somewhere around $5 to $10) would be the preferred method. And have scaling pay plans, so if you subcribe for 6 months you pay less, and if you subscribe for 1 year you pay even less than that.
Optimized_Commoner 05-15-07, 05:49 PM	"My Dragon" tailored content feeds. Ooh, I like this idea. It'd finally mean you could make a "dragon" magazine which catered to all the different campaign settings. Hell, maybe they could even have special guest articles for older editions. That'd make some people out there happy (I remember guest letters to dragon asking for 2e content). Lot of potential from that one. Hope they use it well. (Are they keeping the name for the online content? Anyone know?)
CryoSilver 05-15-07, 07:14 PM	Seems like just good business sense to me. Large corporations would have little interest in tailoring to small groups of people (like the small distribution of Dragon/Dungeon). It's easier (and cheaper) for them to just put it online.
boozerker 08-19-07, 08:50 PM	Bumpy Should be more relevant now ;)