But, regardless of my own shortcomings, I've noticed lately a tendency on the forums that just makes me sick. I am talking specifically about tired, depressing, haggard old vultures who seem to take pleasure in the thought of D&D going down in flames. They are people who would probably cause D&D to vanish if they could. Probably out of pure spite. I don't know what shortcomings they have that cause them to be so bitter. But reading their posts makes me feel bad, and that is probably what they want.
Also, I am tired of discussions about D&D vs. Pathfinder. I come to the D&D forums to talk about D&D. I don't think discussions about this game belong in the D&D forum. TBH I am not interested in some washed-up version of D&D 3.5, which I didn't like nearly as much as 4th edition anyway.
I am not talking about people who want to critizise one D&D product or another because they didn't like that particular item/update/whatever. I am talking about disturbed loosers, who for reasons that I can only suspect like to see things crash and burn and also want to speed things along with their ridiculous posts and campaigning. It's not that what they do is truly significant, or that it has any real impact on anything that they are aiming at.
Its that they make me depressed, so if nothing is done to curb them I will stop reading/posting on these forums.
Recently I have noticed an increasing air of negativity on the D&D forums here. First of all, I have to admit that I am sometimes a sucker for controversy and attention. I have started threads that were negative, but sometimes decided not to post things that were positive simply because I knew nobody would care. I'm not exactly proud of this now.
But, regardless of my own shortcomings, I've noticed lately a tendency on the forums that just makes me sick. I am talking specifically about tired, depressing, haggard old vultures who seem to take pleasure in the thought of D&D going down in flames. They are people who would probably cause D&D to vanish if they could. Probably out of pure spite. I don't know what shortcomings they have that cause them to be so bitter. But reading their posts makes me feel bad, and that is probably what they want.
Also, I am tired of discussions about D&D vs. Pathfinder. I come to the D&D forums to talk about D&D. I don't think discussions about this game belong in the D&D forum. TBH I am not interested in some washed-up version of D&D 3.5, which I didn't like nearly as much as 4th edition anyway.
I am not talking about people who want to critizise one D&D product or another because they didn't like that particular item/update/whatever. I am talking about disturbed loosers, who for reasons that I can only suspect like to see things crash and burn and also want to speed things along with their ridiculous posts and campaigning. It's not that what they do is truly significant, or that it has any real impact on anything that they are aiming at.
Its that they make me depressed, so if nothing is done to curb them I will stop reading/posting on these forums.
That's your choice. Really I haven't seen it. I've seen people post about being disapointed with WotC and making educated guesses that WotC is going down in flames, however I haven't seen anyone who actually WANTS this to happen. I've seen posts that criticize WotC decisions, but they are usually well thought out and are based on facts.
What I have seen are people that instead of refuting the arguments and facts decide to villainize the posters and put them in a light of wanting WotC to fail. Such as the above post...
It's tiring.
As for me, I would like to see D&D flourish and astounding product after astounding product being published. That is why I have been frustrated with the recent developments about DDI and Essentials, which have been taking the game into wrong direction. Hence some bitterness.
Exactly. If they hadn't made so many mistakes in the past, I wouldn't cringe everytime I hear them make an anouncement.
Recently I have noticed an increasing air of negativity on the D&D forums here. First of all, I have to admit that I am sometimes a sucker for controversy and attention. I have started threads that were negative, but sometimes decided not to post things that were positive simply because I knew nobody would care. I'm not exactly proud of this now.
But, regardless of my own shortcomings, I've noticed lately a tendency on the forums that just makes me sick. I am talking specifically about tired, depressing, haggard old vultures who seem to take pleasure in the thought of D&D going down in flames. They are people who would probably cause D&D to vanish if they could. Probably out of pure spite. I don't know what shortcomings they have that cause them to be so bitter. But reading their posts makes me feel bad, and that is probably what they want.
Also, I am tired of discussions about D&D vs. Pathfinder. I come to the D&D forums to talk about D&D. I don't think discussions about this game belong in the D&D forum. TBH I am not interested in some washed-up version of D&D 3.5, which I didn't like nearly as much as 4th edition anyway.
I am not talking about people who want to critizise one D&D product or another because they didn't like that particular item/update/whatever. I am talking about disturbed loosers, who for reasons that I can only suspect like to see things crash and burn and also want to speed things along with their ridiculous posts and campaigning. It's not that what they do is truly significant, or that it has any real impact on anything that they are aiming at.
Its that they make me depressed, so if nothing is done to curb them I will stop reading/posting on these forums.
A few things I have noticed as 40 years ( 30 of which has been a gamer) ....
AD&D D&D went to crap in 86 (not the concept idea or system as it has evolved). What I am talking about it the corporate exploitation. It is almost a software patch mentality now when it comes to this game. The spend more time haggling rules and pokemon powers than actually doing what made D&D (in my day) so wonderful... the 6-7 dollar Adventures set in a Campaign realm. In fact I have all the A, D, G, T and S Series in printed form. How many rule books do there need to be really? 10 Books is what the current system is at? That is complete and utter exploitation of the consumer not to mention the deconflicting one has to do between the books. Back in the day it was three books you needed period... the rest was purchased by the kid who saved his allowance frugally and loaned it around in the group. What is WOTC doing for the consumer? Have they produced anything near stable and with longevity? No. 3.0 then 3.5 now 4.0 which the dropped most meat of the RPG and left it a combat system where a two dimensional narrative bridges the scenes in the game. The character builder is flawed ... the rest of the tools really don't produce much in fact they are not even cross platform. The reason the e-table top hasn't appeared was because it would screw with sales... Fantasy Grounds II is perfect for it. Nope they created a system where it brought consumers back into the retail stores to produce revenue for a system that is rapidly going to lose out to the MMORPGs. To really be a player now in the flesh you have to have your pokemon power cards and your minis.... all pre-packaged and over priced... Why because a "toy company" wants you to consume a flashy product that will morph every three to five years to make them money. I have to hand it to them, 4th edition nailed the main consumer audience to a T the video gamers... it is now a video game. Yeah I am old and disgruntled... why because at the same time they produced 3.5- and 4.0 suddenly all the downloadable PDF's for the earlier editions are locked up, Why? the competition and it actually costs less... Thank god for hard drives.
WOTC did a few things right... unfortunately while in search of the golden calf they missed the boat. If they were really dedicated to the consumer there would be a completely different approach to the production and online support to the game.
So if you don't like negativity and criticism suck on that.
I wanna join the guys who want to see D&D go down in flames.
Me too I want TSR back
However, problems grew in the company's business practices. After the emergence of collectible card games, TSR released several new collectable game lines:Dragon Dice and Spellfire. Neither found great success in the market place. Their inventory control became virtually nonexistent, and their warehouse became packed full of unsellable product. At the same time, TSR began retaliating against fan fiction and other creative work derived from TSR intellectual property, which angered many long-time customers and fans. Other new entrants into the RPG genre introduced competing fantasy worlds, which fragmented the RPG community, further reducing TSR's already wilting consumer base. TSR itself introduced no fewer than six campaign settings over the 1990s (Al-Qadim, Birthright,Council of Wyrms, Dark Sun, Planescape and Ravenloft, in addition to the traditional five settings of Mystara, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk andSpelljammer), diluting its own fan base and creating competition between its expensive boxed campaign sets. Some campaign boxed sets (particularly Planescape) actually sold for less money than they cost to make. These and other factors, such as a disastrous year for its fiction lines in 1996 (over one million copies of tie-in books for various game lines were returned to TSR that year), led to TSR ending accumulating over $30 million in debt by 1996, and having to endure multiple rounds of layoffs.[10]Ryan Dancey, Vice President of Wizards of the Coast, believed that TSR failed because of "...a near total inability to listen to its customers, hear what they were saying, and make changes to make those customers happy."[11]
Gee, I sure do miss TSR!
People sure do have rose-tinted glasses... corporations have always sucked. They've always ignored customers, always made mistakes, always tried to get the most profit at the cost of their customer loyalty.
Give credit where credit is due: Wizards, being a for-profit company (surprisingly enough) is trying to make money off of their products, enough to stay afloat, enough to not have another year of hiring freeze and layoffs. And yet for all of that, they still talk to customers, still change their mind on certain product decisions (not all, but some) based on what the forums are saying, they do manage to apologize for some of their mistakes...
I'm not saying Wizards can't be a little bit sometimes. But I've learned to expect that from companies, and compared to the average company? Yeah, Wizards is a good company to be in charge of this license for D&D, because they both care about the game and about the customers, even if that's a bit overshadowed by Hasbro's need for a bottom line and their own need to not be firing their staff every year due to lack of sales.
From Wikipedia:However, problems grew in the company's business practices. After the emergence of collectible card games, TSR released several new collectable game lines:Dragon Dice and Spellfire. Neither found great success in the market place. Their inventory control became virtually nonexistent, and their warehouse became packed full of unsellable product. At the same time, TSR began retaliating against fan fiction and other creative work derived from TSR intellectual property, which angered many long-time customers and fans. Other new entrants into the RPG genre introduced competing fantasy worlds, which fragmented the RPG community, further reducing TSR's already wilting consumer base. TSR itself introduced no fewer than six campaign settings over the 1990s (Al-Qadim, Birthright,Council of Wyrms, Dark Sun, Planescape and Ravenloft, in addition to the traditional five settings of Mystara, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk andSpelljammer), diluting its own fan base and creating competition between its expensive boxed campaign sets. Some campaign boxed sets (particularly Planescape) actually sold for less money than they cost to make. These and other factors, such as a disastrous year for its fiction lines in 1996 (over one million copies of tie-in books for various game lines were returned to TSR that year), led to TSR ending accumulating over $30 million in debt by 1996, and having to endure multiple rounds of layoffs.[10]Ryan Dancey, Vice President of Wizards of the Coast, believed that TSR failed because of "...a near total inability to listen to its customers, hear what they were saying, and make changes to make those customers happy."[11]
Gee, I sure do miss TSR!
People sure do have rose-tinted glasses... corporations have always sucked. They've always ignored customers, always made mistakes, always tried to get the most profit at the cost of their customer loyalty.
Give credit where credit is due: Wizards, being a for-profit company (surprisingly enough) is trying to make money off of their products, enough to stay afloat, enough to not have another year of hiring freeze and layoffs. ( why do you work there/) And yet for all of that, they still talk to customers, still change their mind on certain product decisions (not all, but some) based on what the forums are saying, they do manage to apologize for some of their mistakes...
I'm not saying Wizards can't be a little bit sometimes. But I've learned to expect that from companies, and compared to the average company? Yeah, Wizards is a good company to be in charge of this license for D&D, because they both care about the game and about the customers, even if that's a bit overshadowed by Hasbro's need for a bottom line and their own need to not be firing their staff every year due to lack of sales.
I think at the beginning of my post I state " in '86 it went down hill", Gygax left then. So I don't think it was a rose tinted glasses context to begin with. Were you even around in 86? some how the anime avatar leads me to question it?
The problem is basically you have a younger fan base defending a joke of a product line, 4th ed. You have a company (WOTC) that still hasn't learned from who it succeeded (TSR). As for listening to the fan base... I was around on the forums in the debut of 3.0 and 3.5 it was more of selective hearing than anything. Also the play testing for 3.5 was practically non-existent. I do not deny that there are a few gimmicks of 4th ed that work.. the card concept really can speed up play ( in any Fantasy game system) whether applied spells or feats... I don't buy the whole super magical pokemon nonsense though.
Your quoting of the wiki article is the foreshadowing of the future of WOTC/DND Division at Hasbro... the script has already been written as you have cut and pasted it.
D&D has been "dying" and ending for decades. All the gloom and doomsayers haven't been right yet.
In the next few years the license will be sold and another company will pick it up, probabbly moongoose publishing, .... and history will repeat itself.
It is too valuable for anyone but another multinational company to be able to even think about purchasing.
The chance that Hasbro allows the D&D IP to be sold off is 0.
It is too valuable for anyone but another multinational company to be able to even think about purchasing.
Don't speak to quickly .... we are not out of the recession by a long shot and the sale of that License could mean sustaining the company.
Seriously, this is HASBRO we're talking about, not some dinky company like Games Workshop; they could lose half a billion over the course of the fiscal year and still be making enough of a profit to make both OPEC and the Koch family green with envy.
HASBRO products aren't sold off or even discontinued because they're not making a profit, otherwise crap 1960's era games like Connect Four, Ants InThe Pants, Toss-Across, and Don't Break The Ice would've been eliminated decades ago instead of being upgraded to electronic-enhanced editions.
Seriously, this is HASBRO we're talking about, not some dinky company like Games Workshop; they could lose half a billion over the course of the fiscal year and still be making enough of a profit to make both OPEC and the Koch family green with envy.
HASBRO products aren't sold off or even discontinued because they're not making a profit, otherwise crap 1960's era games like Connect Four, Ants InThe Pants, Toss-Across, and Don't Break The Ice would've been eliminated decades ago instead of being upgraded to electronic-enhanced editions.
1/2 Billion you say? That is a drop in the bucket... example the 9 x 2000 pound JDAMs we dropped in one day cost close to 120million... to arm,drop, fuel the B52... replace the weapons in inventory, the salaries of the 9 guys I was on the ground with... not to mention the crew and the Joint Operations Center that coordinated with the field element. And you compare it to OPEC and the Koch Family... lol give me a break.
Simple smart guy... the majority of hasbro products are not D&D and I doubt it would the make the Koch family, OPEC, Hugo Chavez or De Beers drool with envy. D&D is a failing line. So to save a company it could divest itself from the line. The world economy shrank by 9% .. China the largest producer of Habro toys lost 2 million jobs with plant shuts downs and more are predicted... Those were 2009 figures .... and it just keeps sliding.. Oil prices expecting to rise to in some place it is $5 a gallon (transportation costs).
So here are the facts skippy
1. Oil Prices are on the rise
2. 1-12 Americans are on food stamps ( food or toys easy choice to make)
3. Unemployment rates average 11% (humm medical insurance or house payment or candyland? again easy choice)
4. the Eurozone is in crisis ( I should know I just returned from living in italy )
5. the Chinese economy is shrinking
6. We are close to a shooting war near your center of production, so if the balloon goes up in Korea ... no chutes and ladders...
7. I can't even recall the average American debt to income ratio
Those are the facts. Hasbro's vast stockpile of toys won't mean diddly in the years to come save taxable inventory.
I mirror a lot of the OP.
I've been involved in some negative threads in the near past, but I almost regret it at this point, seeing where people are taking these negativity threads.
I've always felt that when I've posted negative things it's been in the interest of shining a spotlight on problems and trying to find solutions. As the first post implies, that's not what people are doing anymore. Lately people are just posting full-on angry hate and trollitics. I skim the forums once a week or so now and practically never bother to respond just because it's too polarized.
It's so much easier to just stick with Twitter and the RPG blog scene these days.
For the record, 1) I think WotC overall does their best for the D&D brand. I may not always agree with the things they do, but I honestly feel like they're not purposely sabotaging the brand. 2) From what I understand, D&D isn't the primary WotC brand; Magic: The Gathering is the money brand. Therefore, unless for some reason the M:tG brand collapses (it won't) WotC isn't going anywhere.
What amazes me is that people are stuck on ripping 4E mercilessly. If you don't like it, just don't play it. Don't buy the product. If you like Pathfinder, go buy and play it. No one is going to hold it against you. If you like older editions, there is an entire movement making "retro-clones" of previous edition material under the open licenses that Wizards of the Coast made available. Imagine TSR ever considering such an act.
Again, I can be negative, but I always do it in the interest of looking for improvement, and I think there are still people on these forums who attempt to do the same. However, there are far too many trolls just looking to start forest fires and that drowns out any reasonable voices.
Recently I have noticed an increasing air of negativity on the D&D forums here. First of all, I have to admit that I am sometimes a sucker for controversy and attention. I have started threads that were negative, but sometimes decided not to post things that were positive simply because I knew nobody would care. I'm not exactly proud of this now.
But, regardless of my own shortcomings, I've noticed lately a tendency on the forums that just makes me sick. I am talking specifically about tired, depressing, haggard old vultures who seem to take pleasure in the thought of D&D going down in flames. They are people who would probably cause D&D to vanish if they could. Probably out of pure spite. I don't know what shortcomings they have that cause them to be so bitter. But reading their posts makes me feel bad, and that is probably what they want.
Also, I am tired of discussions about D&D vs. Pathfinder. I come to the D&D forums to talk about D&D. I don't think discussions about this game belong in the D&D forum. TBH I am not interested in some washed-up version of D&D 3.5, which I didn't like nearly as much as 4th edition anyway.
I am not talking about people who want to critizise one D&D product or another because they didn't like that particular item/update/whatever. I am talking about disturbed loosers, who for reasons that I can only suspect like to see things crash and burn and also want to speed things along with their ridiculous posts and campaigning. It's not that what they do is truly significant, or that it has any real impact on anything that they are aiming at.
Its that they make me depressed, so if nothing is done to curb them I will stop reading/posting on these forums.
The problem is that a hand of people, most likely just looking for attention, go crazy making negative posts. Everyone gets mad and snaps back. But these handful of people make it more like a job.
Not only do they start numerous threads bashing, they jump on most threads which are positive.
And if you complain to the people who run the forums, or had anything to do with the forums, they suddenly aren't so helpful. They first try the whole "What are you talking about" approach. They then move onto can you give me any examples, and when you do, they shut up. They always give the same lame "If you think they violated the CoC, don't respond in the thread, and report them."
They know what's going on. How hard would it be to be proactive and tell some of the persistant bashers to dial it back, we don't need 4 new threads within an hour? The fact is, WoTC won't ban someone like that.
We've all been on forums for a while, to know when someone is making posts to troll, bait and flame the other readers. It's pretty clear when that's someone's goal.
WoTC could certainly be more proactive about this, but they seem to think they are doing a good job, but this is one area where they really fall down.
The chance that Hasbro allows the D&D IP to be sold off is 0.
It is too valuable for anyone but another multinational company to be able to even think about purchasing.
Don't speak to quickly .... we are not out of the recession by a long shot and the sale of that License could mean sustaining the company.
A recent survey found that D&D is recognized in about 90% of the households across the US. You can't buy that sort of name recognition. IPs like that don't just get sold off that easily. If D&D starts going down the tubes financially (and I do not think that it currently is), Hasbro will just shelve it for a while and bring it back in the future, like they did with Transformers.
Hasbro takes a 1/2 Billon hit somebody gets a pink slip. I really don't think that is too far fetched. And I don't think D&D is just the single issue, you have drilled down to far. Hasbro's profit margin I am sure has shrunk over the last few years.... and people are nervous. If transportation costs alone (let alone manufacturing) go up your consumption rate will go down across the board for all products. No company has pockets so deep to survive such... and your analogies are rather poor. The careless economic models of 90s are gone skippy. When you have pan european defense companies and large US defense contractors in a time of war suffering job cut backs and layoffs, that tells you the economy is not going to support your dreamy forcast of HASBRO's deep pockets to survive such stormy seas.
After looking over the 8 Quarter Progression and 5 years of SEC reports you seem to be the one on drugs here. Operating costs have climbed 125% in the last four quarters, the net profit this year is $375M, Total assests $3.9B, of thos e the liquid is $1.39B...
Here is the total bottom line Net income for fiscal year 2010 was $155M. So your 1/2 a billon hit is hardly absorbable by hasbro they will cut operating costs like they have in the past, and divest to save the core of the company and have currently in last FY they cut 10%+/-. The "other expenses column" usually is where the serverence packages and some losses are hidden from stock holders are tucked into have climbed to $400M just in the last four quarters. Not to mention the Ammoritization and depreciation has climbed 20% in the last four quarters to $68M. So it is in the process of taking the 1/2 Billon hit right as we speak.
and in loooking at the economic forcast for the next year and five years it is Game, Set, Match .... Common sense and and a basic Macro/Mirco comprehension show the trend. This morning I took the time to read for 30 minutes the SEC reports.
The chance that Hasbro allows the D&D IP to be sold off is 0.
It is too valuable for anyone but another multinational company to be able to even think about purchasing.
Don't speak to quickly .... we are not out of the recession by a long shot and the sale of that License could mean sustaining the company.
A recent survey found that D&D is recognized in about 90% of the households across the US. You can't buy that sort of name recognition. IPs like that don't just get sold off that easily. If D&D starts going down the tubes financially (and I do not think that it currently is), Hasbro will just shelve it for a while and bring it back in the future, like they did with Transformers.
Name recognition is not money in the bank. What is the target consumer?, middle class families. What are middle class families doing right now? think......
The chance that Hasbro allows the D&D IP to be sold off is 0.
It is too valuable for anyone but another multinational company to be able to even think about purchasing.
Don't speak to quickly .... we are not out of the recession by a long shot and the sale of that License could mean sustaining the company.
A recent survey found that D&D is recognized in about 90% of the households across the US. You can't buy that sort of name recognition. IPs like that don't just get sold off that easily. If D&D starts going down the tubes financially (and I do not think that it currently is), Hasbro will just shelve it for a while and bring it back in the future, like they did with Transformers.
Name recognition is not money in the bank.
Yeah it is. Name recognition for things is *incredibly* valuable. Names come with expectations and pre-built ideas and concepts, which means that the company with the IP doesn't have to do as much work. Multinational companies with any sort of view on the medium-long term strategies for their properies don't look at how much it is worth now, but how much it is worth over the long run. All it takes is the right combination of events, and you have WotC (and thus Hasbro) making money hats, like Hasbro is with Transformers. There was an IP that was doing OK, but not great, and then the first movie was released. Not a critical hit, but it made scads of money, as did the second.
What is the target consumer?, middle class families. What are middle class families doing right now? think......
They are looking for ways to get the most oout of their money. And there are very few things out there that can offer as high an hours/$ ratio than D&D (and other RPGs).
The chance that Hasbro allows the D&D IP to be sold off is 0.
It is too valuable for anyone but another multinational company to be able to even think about purchasing.
Don't speak to quickly .... we are not out of the recession by a long shot and the sale of that License could mean sustaining the company.
A recent survey found that D&D is recognized in about 90% of the households across the US. You can't buy that sort of name recognition. IPs like that don't just get sold off that easily. If D&D starts going down the tubes financially (and I do not think that it currently is), Hasbro will just shelve it for a while and bring it back in the future, like they did with Transformers.
Name recognition is not money in the bank.
Yeah it is. Name recognition for things is *incredibly* valuable. Names come with expectations and pre-built ideas and concepts, which means that the company with the IP doesn't have to do as much work. Multinational companies with any sort of view on the medium-long term strategies for their properies don't look at how much it is worth now, but how much it is worth over the long run. All it takes is the right combination of events, and you have WotC (and thus Hasbro) making money hats, like Hasbro is with Transformers. There was an IP that was doing OK, but not great, and then the first movie was released. Not a critical hit, but it made scads of money, as did the second.What is the target consumer?, middle class families. What are middle class families doing right now? think......
They are looking for ways to get the most oout of their money. And there are very few things out there that can offer as high an hours/$ ratio than D&D (and other RPGs).
HAH whatever... I think middle america is more concerned about the tax season and long term successful stratagies for education, food and a continued standard of living..."candyland, and monopoly have a larger share" of the market for family happiness per $/hr.
Meanwhile you have the " we are doing great" propoganda tactic to drive share prices up (and they are up 10 dollars over the last two years) ...to raise captial.... but with no dividends for 5 quarters and the fact in the last week it has lost a whole percent and the release of the sec earning filing.... we shall see
You don't have any evidence of anything, at all, you can't prove any of your ideas about profits or success.
DnD is currently the most succesful tabletop game put there as far a anyone can tell.
That can hardly be counted as a failure. You can't even provide evidence that past edition hold-outs would be sources of revenue for Wotc.
Not only that, but wotc has numerous other sucessful brands.
At worst it may have to relaunch dnd but there's no evidence that such a move would be necessary.
There's noreason it would ever ditch the brand because it can just rebuild it.
There I'd no validity to any of your arguements at all.
Bellerphon You don't have any evidence of anything, at all, you can't prove any of your ideas about profits or success. DnD is currently the most succesful tabletop game put there as far a anyone can tell. That can hardly be counted as a failure. You can't even provide evidence that past edition hold-outs would be sources of revenue for Wotc. Not only that, but wotc has numerous other sucessful brands. At worst it may have to relaunch dnd but there's no evidence that such a move would be necessary. There's noreason it would ever ditch the brand because it can just rebuild it. There I'd no validity to any of your arguements at all.
Basic rule of Mirco..... "Marginal cost"
LOL whatever ... My ideas in profits and success are grounded in reality... ,the black ink doesn't lie or in this case the "red protions ot it" , the sec reports and the very announcements and product line failures alone... are validity.
DND tools was promised how long ago...and still no end results. Even when Fantasy Grounds II is a Viable e-Table top.
DND is not the most successful table top game .... to broad a catagory. RPG yeah maybe. But WOTC's DND days are numbered. If it is doing so well then why isn't it moving product in the retail stores. I have two anecdotal examples : Both stores are not moving product... one store has cancelled the encounters social events all together. Ironically the Warhammer dweebs are still renting space as are the magic crad game nerds. The other store, where I tried out 4th edition just recently and walked away knowing its an "epic fail", the manager told me that his Sales are drying up ... and that he predicts in two years 4th ed will be dead.
You want more proof: when the product is selling for minimum of 34% off the retail price on amazon and the list of used book sales are 50% and less... you have a dead line.
Go back to school ...
You want more proof: when the product is selling for minimum of 34% off the retail price on amazon and the list of used book sales are 50% and less... you have a dead line.
And here my experience has been that these prices are pretty standard on Amazon for most books. I should have never bought those C# books, I guess, if it's a dead language.
EDIT: Looks like Star Wars, Song of Ice and Fire, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, and Chronicles of Narnia are all dead, too...
Damn.
DND is not the most successful table top game .... to broad a catagory. RPG yeah maybe. But WOTC's DND days are numbered. If it is doing so well then why isn't it moving product in the retail stores. I have two anecdotal examples : Both stores are not moving product... one store has cancelled the encounters social events all together. Ironically the Warhammer dweebs are still renting space as are the magic crad game nerds. The other store, where I tried out 4th edition just recently and walked away knowing its an "epic fail", the manager told me that his Sales are drying up ... and that he predicts in two years 4th ed will be dead.
I think the reason for that is that you can get D&D books about 30-40 percent cheaper from Amazon and other online stores. I sure know I don't support my FLGS for that reason. I'd bet that the vast majority of D&D books is sold online.
I am amazed at the fundamental lack of understanding that D&D at WOTC is expendable.
Who has said it isn't?? It would just be ridonkulously expensive to buy D&D from Hasbro.
We are in a recession could be a depression soon. WOTC has failed to produce
If you think that WotC relies on D&D as their sole source of profit, you would be sadly mistaken. They have Magic (which allows them to make moneyhats) as well as Dreamblade (I believe) which also allows them to make moneyhats. (Dreamblade is, IIRC, incredibly popular in Japan.)
DND tools was promised how long ago...and still no end results.
Except for the CB, MB, Compendium and the VT (currently in closed beta).
I have two anecdotal examples : Both stores are not moving product... one store has cancelled the encounters social events all together.
The plural of anecdote is not data. The FLGS around here can't keep 4E on the shelves, and I know of other people whose FLGS has spillover Encounters games on the weekend because their wednesday night games are full.
See specifically section 3 of the code, as well as 4.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Debate the topic, not each other's personal characteristics. Do not discuss illegal activities.
I am amazed at the fundamental lack of understanding that D&D at WOTC is expendable.
Who has said it isn't?? It would just be ridonkulously expensive to buy D&D from Hasbro.
Expendable means WOTC can drop it ....We are in a recession could be a depression soon. WOTC has failed to produce
If you think that WotC relies on D&D as their sole source of profit, you would be sadly mistaken. They have Magic (which allows them to make moneyhats) as well as Dreamblade (I believe) which also allows them to make moneyhats. (Dreamblade is, IIRC, incredibly popular in Japan.)
No I don't, I think The Magic Trading card game makes more money than DND... again you miss the poinyt if a product line fails most companies divest... or in this case sell the license like many smaller companies have done the same.
DND tools was promised how long ago...and still no end results.
Except for the CB, MB, Compendium and the VT (currently in closed beta).
And MB is not cross platform, and the compendium is incomplete. CB has too many flaws as did the last few versions... This isn't the first time I invested in tools thinking it would be different... first time okay it was too early five years later I am a fool for dropping the 71 dollars for a year subscription... at least dragon and dungeon are somewhat entertainingI have two anecdotal examples : Both stores are not moving product... one store has cancelled the encounters social events all together.
The plural of anecdote is not data. The FLGS around here can't keep 4E on the shelves, and I know of other people whose FLGS has spillover Encounters games on the weekend because their wednesday night games are full.
Well I am citing local data for two stores in a university town (ranked int he top 25 in the country) Charlottesvile. It was the same a year ago in DC and Richmond,VA. So with the spectrum of population and tax base ... ( scratch that where I was in DC and am in Charlottesville are high income areas) still ... What I have seen and experienced points differently.... I have to ask Washington State?
You have to be working for WOTC in some capacity.
Its that they make me depressed, so if nothing is done to curb them I will stop reading/posting on these forums.
I fear that the conduct of people in this very thread is not helping matters. I'm so sorry.
I go to GenCon with my friends, who have tables in the Artist section, because they are Fantasy Illustrators, many of whom do work for WoTC. And so I've gotten to meet many of the Art Directors at WoTC, and talk with them and hang out.
Maybe they were lying to me. But the fact is, they say, DnD has always made money for WoTC. And that current sales are some of the best the game ever had in it's ENTIRE history, and that because of that, they have been able to put out products that have been only wishes in the past. Certainly Gamma World probably wouldn't have seen life if they weren't making money with DnD. Or games like the Ravenloft board game. And part of this has been realizing what players need vs what they want, vs what they should make.
I've got boxes of mini's. However the tokens are a MUCH smarter product then minis. Same for Dungeon Tiles.
It's not a huge money maker, but it does very well, considering that all RPG games are a niche market. But they also agree that Magic makes way more money then DND.
Not to mention, the profit margin for Magic is bigger, because honestly even the fancy foil cards, cost cents to print.
So, yes, Magic makes more then DnD, it has a way bigger fan base then DnD. A card game is easy to set up, easy to play, doesn't require much prep other then setting up your decks, and you can play a few rounds or many.
But DnD is doing fine, WoTC isn't going to get ride of a brand name like that. If DnD did tank, they most likely shelve it at first, and only consider selling it off if Hasbro was really sinking. Because DnD will most likely tank because fantasy gaming goes completely out of style.
I also know this everyconvention... and trade rep is given talking points.... Military Arms shows (my favorite), with my wife it is IT.... put on a happy face and say positive things.... always helps the sell factor and share prices.
I don't know Dane I think Fantasy is moving more to the e-realm.... If it has a future that is where it is.
I also know this everyconvention... and trade rep is given talking points.... Military Arms shows (my favorite), with my wife it is IT.... put on a happy face and say positive things.... always helps the sell factor and share prices.
These aren't trade reps I'm talking to, these are WoTC employees. Nor was it a case of putting on a positive face and say good things.
Saying that the product you make is a niche product, isn't being all that say nice things, is it? It's being realistic. The fact is, while DnD is having good sales, the RPG game market is shrinking, as the card game market grows. Because card games are easier.
As for the future of fantasy...it certainly needs to figure out how to go digital, that I agree with.
And FYI, D&D has had a very strong following in the digital realm for 25+ years. The difference now is that they took it all in house and stopped letting other people design for them (except for this latest Neverwinter project, which looks like it is shaping up to be a debacle thanks to Cryptic getting their hands on it.
Looking at the lack of current future product releases* compared to almost any point in recent years, I'm surprised that everybody isn't concerned about the D&Ds future
* and I don't mean stuff like dungeon tiles, I mean substantial gaming product like HoS
The magazines look a bit threadbare this month as well and I'm not sure I'd believe that was just down to the xmas break, because I assume there's at least a couple of months lead time.
Looking at the lack of current future product releases* compared to almost any point in recent years, I'm surprised that everybody isn't concerned about the D&Ds future
* and I don't mean stuff like dungeon tiles, I mean substantial gaming product like HoS
The magazines look a bit threadbare this month as well and I'm not sure I'd believe that was just down to the xmas break, because I assume there's at least a couple of months lead time.
I would think so for the artists to flesh it out with color and pics
Looking at the lack of current future product releases* compared to almost any point in recent years, I'm surprised that everybody isn't concerned about the D&Ds future
* and I don't mean stuff like dungeon tiles, I mean substantial gaming product like HoS
The magazines look a bit threadbare this month as well and I'm not sure I'd believe that was just down to the xmas break, because I assume there's at least a couple of months lead time.
I would think so for the artists to flesh it out with color and pics
Take a look at the calendar for Jan 10 - it's got a least 3 times as many articles.
Just a thought, but the last time we had so little on stream was after 3.5 was canned for 4e....
I get the impression that D&D is currently under reviewat WotC/Hasbro and that's why there seem to a pause at the minute, whilst all current projects are being assessed.
Just a thought, but the last time we had so little on stream was after 3.5 was canned for 4e....
Which happens when a development cycle comes to an end, which is often planned to do so around this time of year.
Which happens when a development cycle comes to an end, which is often planned to do so around this time of year.
Agreed.
Also, just expanding on this via theorizing, could it be because WotC figures out what they'll do for the year at the start of the year? Or possibly nothings going on because everybody is coming off...what, a two-week vacation?
I'd assumed they're analysing the postion regarding the essentials line.
However, I expected a bit more to tide us over. A couple of adventure's at least to stop the release schedule looking so empty.
Here's hoping that they don't take too long and we've got positive news of what's planned by the end of February.
If we don't hear anything by then, then I reckon concern will be justified.
You're right in respect of the development cycle.
I'd assumed they're analysing the postion regarding the essentials line.
However, I expected a bit more to tide us over. A couple of adventure's at least to stop the release schedule looking so empty.
Here's hoping that they don't take too long and we've got positive news of what's planned by the end of February.
If we don't hear anything by then, then I reckon concern will be justified.
You know, they aren't that big on releasing adventures, they've said. They cost just as much as anything else they produce, but have a much smaller return.
Barry will just raise our taxes and bail 'em out!
WotC won't fall, no matter how much glee it would fill me with.
Barry will just raise our taxes and bail 'em out!
No I won't!
Being kinda presumptous there, aren't you?
Besides, I don't have the Authority to raise your taxes, or to collect them either.
If I could, I wouldn't have minded the high cost of living where I put my hat.
But I also understand the people currently in charge of the game.
That I understand them doesn't mean I have to like any of what they are doing, I just understand what they are doing.
I liked basic, but at the time it was all there was. Hard to compare it to something not yet in existence.
And it's not like Wizards is responsible for everything, as a lot of the game predates them.
They have not done anything on par with 2nd edition. Granted, I don't make a habit of following names eh. I can't rattle off the names that comprised TSR of the 80s. 2nd edition was so badly managed that eventually I freaked out and turfed my stash for peanuts. I'm a cheap bugger at heart, and that's not like me. I never get rid of things I paid good money for normally.
I hated 2nd so much, that I refused to even acknowledge 3rd as a choice for my wallet.
So the fact I have 4th at all, says that at least it has merit to this cheap bugger.
But it's not like Wizards is better than 1980s TSR. Because the Essentials products are also annoying to me in many ways. And some of it for the same reasons I hated 2nd.
It's junk for the sake of selling junk, and it is actually in some cases physically speaking junk.
Costs too much to sell it as hardcover, oh cry me a river.
I have friends that are gladly buying damnably expensive hardcover rpg games for non Wizards products.
It's not impossible, it is merely possible to do it incorrectly.
I don't know if I would want to play Pathfinder, but, if 4th had been released looking like Essentials is, I'd have taken a pass on buying any of it. I might have possibly taken a look at Pathfinder. Because hardcover stands up to repeated continuous long term readings. Softcover most definitely does not.
Not that softcover can't be made deluxe, but it is rarely done that way.
Match the softcover for Warhammer FRP against an Essentials book, and the Essentials book is completely outclassed.
Match the Essentials books against Palladium books, and the Palladium books outperform them.
I've watched a friend of mine, a hard core Palladium fan just pound on his books bindings. He rolls them up while holding them, and puts all sorts of abuse on them. If he did the same to an Essentials book it would be garbage in short order.
D&D is a fun game over all, but it's not like it's invulnerable to bad decisions.
And I mean bad decisions external to anything connected to the game design itself.
I often think D&D has survived as long as it had mainly on the strength of the game's design regardless of what management often tries to do to it.
But even a great game can't outlive repeated bad management.
There ARE competing games out there, and damned good ones too and they are not normally mired in an obsessive need to use a d20 and a 6 stated PC core design.
One of my DM buddies is a total devotee of Legend of the 5 Rings.
It has some very unique game concepts.
I still wish I could find a fantasy genre version of the Alternity design.
There's lots of room at the table for a lot of nice games out there. It doesn't need to be D&D.
But D&D has the setting so many of us like.
I just wish the current management shows more signs of inspired thinking.
So Belephon, any guesses on how long 4e has?
I am going to quote the store manager I spoke with 2-3 years.
On the surface, that is sad. But I've watched all the other editions come and go with about the same speed, so I suppose it shouldn't be considered a dumb notion.
One does though tend to wonder, what exactly can they do that will make 5th different enough to make anyone care?
Going from Basic to 1st seemed logical as they couldn't know in advance if the game would even fly.
2nd was supposed to be just cleaning up 1st.
3rd was the first major overhaul and 3.5 an admission they made some bad calls.
I think 4th has been the biggest change of direction yet. But how often can you seriously expect a public to just walk away from books that are perfectly fine, all because the source wants to keep selling books simply to make money.
Eventually, the public needs to realize, the game is just a means to put money in the pocket of Wizards. They are not in it to produce a game FOR the fans, the fans are just faceless wallets to be milked to some extent.
When will people tired of being just a cash stream? Will they ever tire of being a cash stream?
2-3 years.
On the surface, that is sad. But I've watched all the other editions come and go with about the same speed, so I suppose it shouldn't be considered a dumb notion.
One does though tend to wonder, what exactly can they do that will make 5th different enough to make anyone care?
Going from Basic to 1st seemed logical as they couldn't know in advance if the game would even fly.
2nd was supposed to be just cleaning up 1st.
3rd was the first major overhaul and 3.5 an admission they made some bad calls.
I think 4th has been the biggest change of direction yet. But how often can you seriously expect a public to just walk away from books that are perfectly fine, all because the source wants to keep selling books simply to make money.
Eventually, the public needs to realize, the game is just a means to put money in the pocket of Wizards. They are not in it to produce a game FOR the fans, the fans are just faceless wallets to be milked to some extent.
When will people tired of being just a cash stream? Will they ever tire of being a cash stream?
Ok, how bout I set up a section of my site where the players can make a game by for and of the players?
So Belephon, any guesses on how long 4e has?
I am going to quote the store manager I spoke with 2-3 years.
I'm confused, does this store manager work for WotC? Because if he's just guessing then forgive me if I treat is as what it is (a guess).
Eventually, the public needs to realize, the game is just a means to put money in the pocket of Wizards.
That's all D&D, or any other commercial product for that matter, has ever been, albeit for different companies.
Eventually, the public needs to realize, the game is just a means to put money in the pocket of Wizards.
That's all D&D, or any other commercial product for that matter, has ever been, albeit for different companies.
No some companies loved the game, while others could care less...
Going from Basic to 1st seemed logical as they couldn't know in advance if the game would even fly.
Basic and AD&D were both released in 1977. You're thinking of OD&D, which was just a Chainmail supplement. But when it was released as an independent game, they did Basic and Advanced simultaneously.
Eventually, the public needs to realize, the game is just a means to put money in the pocket of Wizards.* * *
When will people tired of being just a cash stream? Will they ever tire of being a cash stream?
Arrgh! Activate nerdrage hulk!
Nerdhulk smash!
Eventually, the public needs to realize, the game is just a means to put money in the pocket of Wizards.
That's all D&D, or any other commercial product for that matter, has ever been, albeit for different companies.
No some companies loved the game, while others could care less...
Yeah, that's why TSR totally gave the game away for free...
But too often the fans are just a resource to be exploited.
I don't mind paying a good price for a good product, but I do object to being offered a product, that is then hung out to dry.
I think Essentials is to some extent a full of **** notion. Some like it, but then some like damned near anything. Hard to consider someone that will buy anything, as a very discerning customer.
I'd be more than happy to be able to buy 4th edition in 10 years time and in 20 years time (ok I'll also be happy to be still breathing in 20 years time too
).Why does it need to be 5th edition in 3-5 years?
Why not 4th edition 2nd and 3rd printings?
I like hard covers, and I like hard covers enough to buy a corrected evolved sorted out 3rd printing in 5 years time. Still called 4th edition, just minus all the buggered lousy editting mistakes.
I'd also like to know, that in 5 years time, the tap won't just be turned off on new adventures for 4th edition. But we all know eventually Wizards is going to claim a need for a new edition. And that will mean 4th and anything to do with 4th and anything connected to 4th and that will include Essentials which will be essentially out of luck, as it won't be 5th edition, will be booted out the door.
Doesn't need to be so, but we all know it WILL happen eventually. I might be off by a few months, but Wizards simply isn't built on the premise of keeping 4th alive indefinitely.
They won't release new books like Dungeon Delves for 3 person parties, or anything clever that could make them just as much revenue.
And I seriously suspect the VTT will be barely out the door when rumours of 5th start to be heard. And that's if they get it out the door at all.
Everything we rely on is only going to be welcome till the next edition.
Hell this forum which is so utterly 4th centric and barely worthy to a 3.5 player, will in time get the same over all treatment 3.5 gets now.
Just a matter of time.
Which sucks, and doesn't need to be.
Why does it need to be 5th edition in 3-5 years?
Why not 4th edition 2nd and 3rd printings?
Becuase it doesn't work. Seven to eight years is the most you can expect from an edition of D&D. Sales just drop off the chart and you have to understand that your consumer preferences are atypical, and were Wizards to try to cater to your tastes, they would of the way of TSR.
1e lasted 11 years, but for most of that time, they were a tiny company. Once Gygax left, they were hiring developers left and right. And with mutliple developers came increased payroll. So in 1989, they developed 2e. (And in 1985 -- after only eight years -- Gygax was already contemplating 2e, which probably would have been released in 1987, except that the Blumes ousted Gygax and then squashed any attempts to revise the game... their bad decision was why Lorraine Williams took the reins entirely from them and authorized 2e.)
By 1995, only six years into 2e, Zeb Cook was working on 3e. Lorraine Williams nixed the idea and TSR slowly descended towards bankruptcy. Five years later, Wizards purchased the company and quickly released 2000 (some say, too quickly). Wizards re-released 3e as 3.5 in 2003, allowing them to prolong the inevitable by a year or so as they reprinted 3.0 supplements. 3e lasted 8 years.
In 2008, 4e is released. If the patterns hold, and there's no reason why this edition should be any different, sales will begin to drop off dramatically in 2014 and 5e will be released in 2015.
Chances are someone will try to keep a 4e style game alive, the way that Castles & Crusades was Gygax' attempt to keep 1e alive, that Kenzer & Co's Hackmaster has kept the spirit of 2e alive and that Paizo is keeping 3e alive. But change will come because the alternative is death.
But we all know eventually Wizards is going to claim a need for a new edition.
Yes, because anything else is suicide.
Doesn't need to be so
I have no evidence at all that it doesn't have to be that way. It has to be that way, unless Wizards wants to shut its doors and run its games the way most other gaming companies do: one or two developers who own the company eking out a meager living, a handful of freelancers and artists ocassionally contributing, and just churning out less and less relevant supplements to an ever-diminishing fanbase.
You keep saying it doesn't need to be. Why do you think that? Where are you getting your info from? I keep looking at the history of TSR, the history of White Wolf, the history of Kenzer, of Palladium, of Steve Jackson Games, and I see the same thing. You're running your shop with a threadbare staff, or you're shaking things up every six to eight years.
Which sucks. I'd rather you were wrong.
I'm a wargamer, and I'm used to 'edition' meaning editting out mistakes, not reinventing the entire design and saying it's still the same game.
Maybe it would suck less, if they stop calling it Dungeons and Dragons.
To some extent, 3.5, and 4th have so little in common, to call both Dungeons and Dragons can be part of the problem.
Yes there are some similarities. But I can say two wargames are the same because both are in WW2. Yet, if one is a tactical scale and one is grand strategy scale, there's no reason to call them identical or the same either.
Both games feature Dungeons and both games feature Dragons. But 4th is not 3.5. The designs are not the same. I recently wandered a lot of pdfs of old modules, and to be honest, there is so little in common, that there really is no real point in trying to use old ones in 4th. So much to convert you might as well just do all the work oneself.
As I have mentioned elsewhere, to be honest, I'd love to see a 5th edition just use a prior existing design concept of another RPG. The mechanics of Alternity, frankly they are much better than any of the D&D editions in my view. But the problem, is you can't really ideally steal someone else's design. Well not if you want to claim it as a new product.
So of course, the question becomes, how many times, can a publisher entirely redo the process of generating a paper person based of of 6 stats, and actually look different enough to matter?
Regardless of a perceived need to publish or perish, how often can they succeed in reinventing the wheel basically?
I often see RPGs come out and get slammed for being a 'rip off' of [insert other design here].
However, I've also got to point out that, in the grand scheme of RPGs, they are so similar as to practically be heavy mods of each other. No two RPGs are so similar to each other as these two (excepting other multi-edition RPGs). That said, I think it would do the game some good if 5th Edition took a step back from many of the D&D "staples" that still remain in 4E. For example, I would like to see a class-less, level-less system in 5E. I know it won't happen, but it sure would be nice. I'd also like to see HP go away, in favor of something a little more elegant.
I'm just saying that 3.5E and 4E both share a LOT of D&D's core ideas; enough so that they are called different versions of the same game. I suspect 5E will be yet another small step away from previous editions, rather than the giant leap I would personally prefer. The step will be small enough so that 5E strongly resembles 4E, but each new edition moves further from the dark recesses of madness that is Original Dungeons and Dragons.
Maybe it would suck less, if they stop calling it Dungeons and Dragons.
Get over it. Making things suck less for you isn't anywhere on their to-do list. Nor should it be.
the question becomes, how many times, can a publisher entirely redo the process of generating a paper person based of of 6 stats, and actually look different enough to matter?
Four and counting.
They may even do something radical, like produce an old school rpg called dnd and then make a modern and forward independant rpg and see which does better.
There's a lot that could be done with a 5th edition. Depends what wotc want to do with the system in terms of improving or changing things. They may even do something radical, like produce an old school rpg called dnd and then make a modern and forward independant rpg and see which does better.
The one called D&D would do better, regardless of which one it was. Brand recognition generates alot of sales, regardless of the product. If I produced Nyarlathotep Cola, and the stuff was so good that it made Coke taste like a moldy sweatsock, Coke would still outsell me. People recognize the name Coke, they will tend toi buy it. Same for D&D.
Not a criticism of WOTC or anyone else, just a fact of life.
There's a lot that could be done with a 5th edition. Depends what wotc want to do with the system in terms of improving or changing things. They may even do something radical, like produce an old school rpg called dnd and then make a modern and forward independant rpg and see which does better.
The one called D&D would do better, regardless of which one it was. Brand recognition generates alot of sales, regardless of the product. If I produced Nyarlathotep Cola, and the stuff was so good that it made Coke taste like a moldy sweatsock, Coke would still outsell me. People recognize the name Coke, they will tend toi buy it. Same for D&D.
Not a criticism of WOTC or anyone else, just a fact of life.
In marketing that's called "branding" as in they brand your mind with a cattle brand. When you think of "soda" or whatever the first thing you think is probably Coke or Pepsi, followed by Mountain Dew or Dr. Pepper. This is the real reason they have a million name brand commercials. To make you think of those brands first. Its also the first step in most brainwashing techniques...
There's nothing preventing a player, or group of players, from sticking with an older edition. If you don't like the direction things are going, stick with what you like. There are people out there still playing 1st edition D&D.
@ Novacat: Aye. D&D is way more than any ruleset could ever be.
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore them and just try to have fun.
As a great man once said "WotC could put out boxes full of free money and there'd still be people on the forums complaining about how it's folded".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore thew and just try to have fun.
On the other side of the spectrum "WotC could crap in a box and WotC fanatics would still call it a great game system with limitless potential".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore them and just try to have fun.
Please use only appropriate language, and do not link to other sites that use inappropriate language.
As a great man once said "WotC could put out boxes full of free money and there'd still be people on the forums complaining about how it's folded".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore thew and just try to have fun.
On the other side of the spectrum "WotC could crap in a box and WotC fanatics would still call it a great game system with limitless potential".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore them and just try to have fun.
To some extent true lokiare.
I grew bored of the Firaxis Civ V forums essentially as it was almost 100% heap hate and complaints about the game in how it was so utterly inadequate and in dire need of repair.
But as one person mentioned. If you considered the entire forum number without exception (just for the sake of being brutal with the numbers) and then compared that number to the estimated sales of the title, the complainers still were less than 1% of the sales.
So even if you doubled, tripled or quadrupled the number of that forum and called them equally unhappy people that simply were not posting, you still had what in the end, was still a massively successful item in sales, and probably not even a fraction as bad as the complaints implied.
I for one have been massively enjoying playing it both solo and multiplayer from a woefully under powered laptop with no complaints. My local buddy opponent on a much better computer who plays it nearly to death daily has also found no reason to support the complaints.
I recently wrote a review for Amazon for my purchase a while back now of course, of the Core set for 4th edition.
I stated it was still a much better purchase than Essentials was ever going to offer (in slightly different wording, but the same context).
People can rant all they want about the editing, but in truth, I have yet to encounter a single situation that messed up my game based on any of the errata I have yet to spend any time with.
So while some might like buying the Rules Compendium, there is still no reason to think you need to do it absolutely.
You mgiht get more than enough satisfaction buying the core box set and snubbing Essentials entirely.
Some will loathe anything WotC and mean it, and some will think they can do no wrong, and also mean it.
And I will venture a lot will have never visited this forum at all and have no idea there is errata and likely think Essentials is just more books.
As a great man once said "WotC could put out boxes full of free money and there'd still be people on the forums complaining about how it's folded".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore thew and just try to have fun.
On the other side of the spectrum "WotC could crap in a box and WotC fanatics would still call it a great game system with limitless potential".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore them and just try to have fun.
To some extent true lokiare.
I grew bored of the Firaxis Civ V forums essentially as it was almost 100% heap hate and complaints about the game in how it was so utterly inadequate and in dire need of repair.
But as one person mentioned. If you considered the entire forum number without exception (just for the sake of being brutal with the numbers) and then compared that number to the estimated sales of the title, the complainers still were less than 1% of the sales.
So even if you doubled, tripled or quadrupled the number of that forum and called them equally unhappy people that simply were not posting, you still had what in the end, was still a massively successful item in sales, and probably not even a fraction as bad as the complaints implied.
I for one have been massively enjoying playing it both solo and multiplayer from a woefully under powered laptop with no complaints. My local buddy opponent on a much better computer who plays it nearly to death daily has also found no reason to support the complaints.
I recently wrote a review for Amazon for my purchase a while back now of course, of the Core set for 4th edition.
I stated it was still a much better purchase than Essentials was ever going to offer (in slightly different wording, but the same context).
People can rant all they want about the editing, but in truth, I have yet to encounter a single situation that messed up my game based on any of the errata I have yet to spend any time with.
So while some might like buying the Rules Compendium, there is still no reason to think you need to do it absolutely.
You mgiht get more than enough satisfaction buying the core box set and snubbing Essentials entirely.
Some will loathe anything WotC and mean it, and some will think they can do no wrong, and also mean it.
And I will venture a lot will have never visited this forum at all and have no idea there is errata and likely think Essentials is just more books.
I often found complaints from someone who pushes his own product as a replacement suspect in their motivation to complain.
After all if the product and company are so horrible, how come you are asking people to give you money for your fanzine?
Really. You are going to beat that drum again?
If we are talking about the validity of one's complaint, which OTHERS have brought up, I'm certainly welcome to express my view on it.
Hi. I had to remove some content from this thread because it violates the Code of Conduct or because it quoted content that did.
Please use only appropriate language, and do not link to other sites that use inappropriate language.
Wait…what? Why does my post have an editing notation? I don't remember posting anything that was against the CoC and nothing appears to be edited or missing from what I wrote originally.
Hi. I had to remove some content from this thread because it violates the Code of Conduct or because it quoted content that did.
Please use only appropriate language, and do not link to other sites that use inappropriate language.
Wait…what? Why does my post have an editing notation? I don't remember posting anything that was against the CoC and nothing appears to be edited or missing from what I wrote originally.
They removed your link to TV tropes. Apparently it has bad words on the site or something...
Really. You are going to beat that drum again?
If we are talking about the validity of one's complaint, which OTHERS have brought up, I'm certainly welcome to express my view on it.
Sure, but you should do it in the proper thread. One devoted to Friar's Almanac. I invite you to start such a thread either here or on Friar's Almanac's forums. I have no problem with constructive criticism. By the way I am looking into the use of colors as you mentioned, thanks for the tip...
Hi. I had to remove some content from this thread because it violates the Code of Conduct or because it quoted content that did.
Please use only appropriate language, and do not link to other sites that use inappropriate language.
Wait…what? Why does my post have an editing notation? I don't remember posting anything that was against the CoC and nothing appears to be edited or missing from what I wrote originally.
They removed your link to TV tropes. Apparently it has bad words on the site or something...Really. You are going to beat that drum again?
If we are talking about the validity of one's complaint, which OTHERS have brought up, I'm certainly welcome to express my view on it.
Sure, but you should do it in the proper thread. One devoted to Friar's Almanac. I invite you to start such a thread either here or on Friar's Almanac's forums. I have no problem with constructive criticism. By the way I am looking into the use of colors as you mentioned, thanks for the tip...
Did I mention the Friar's Almanac? Nope. We are talking about people's validity of complaints.
But nice of you to get in another commercial for your fanzine. The last time I reviewed your Friar's Almanac in a thread dicussing it, you reported my post, so they would get removed, claiming copyrighted material. Reviews are allowed to reproduce images and text from material for that very reason, and I clearly said it was a review of your product.
So forgive me if I doubt your ability to take criticism.
The use of color I mentioned was for people with dyslexia. Unless you are making material for just them, then you shouldn't be doing that.
I'm also not inclined to give you free design and layout advice and suggestions. If you wanted that, you should have tried to be more pleasent in general. I'm not trying to get anything from anyone, so I'm free to be myself, and don't have to put on a public face.
Hi. I had to remove some content from this thread because it violates the Code of Conduct or because it quoted content that did.
Please use only appropriate language, and do not link to other sites that use inappropriate language.
Wait…what? Why does my post have an editing notation? I don't remember posting anything that was against the CoC and nothing appears to be edited or missing from what I wrote originally.
They removed your link to TV tropes. Apparently it has bad words on the site or something...Really. You are going to beat that drum again?
If we are talking about the validity of one's complaint, which OTHERS have brought up, I'm certainly welcome to express my view on it.
Sure, but you should do it in the proper thread. One devoted to Friar's Almanac. I invite you to start such a thread either here or on Friar's Almanac's forums. I have no problem with constructive criticism. By the way I am looking into the use of colors as you mentioned, thanks for the tip...
Did I mention the Friar's Almanac? Nope. We are talking about people's validity of complaints.
But nice of you to get in another commercial for your fanzine. The last time I reviewed your Friar's Almanac in a thread dicussing it, you reported my post, so they would get removed, claiming copyrighted material. Reviews are allowed to reproduce images and text from material for that very reason, and I clearly said it was a review of your product.
So forgive me if I doubt your ability to take criticism.
The use of color I mentioned was for people with dyslexia. Unless you are making material for just them, then you shouldn't be doing that.
I'm also not inclined to give you free design and layout advice and suggestions. If you wanted that, you should have tried to be more pleasent in general. I'm not trying to get anything from anyone, so I'm free to be myself, and don't have to put on a public face.
I asked that the images be removed because the EULA of the forums puts anything on the forums as property of WotC, and the person posting them is saying they have the rights to do that. I'm sorry that the ORC got your whole post, that was not my intent. I'm also sorry if you feel somehow wronged by me as that was not my intention.
I asked that the images be removed because the EULA of the forums puts anything on the forums as property of WotC, and the person posting them is saying they have the rights to do that.
You are wrong in the first part of your statement above, but right with the second.
The ToU for the forums (found here) says that if you post something on the site, you give permission to WotC to use it, but that you still own it.
Section 7 of the ToU
By posting or submitting any User Content to or through the Sites or Services, you hereby irrevocably grant to Wizards, its affiliates and sublicensees, a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive, and fully sub-licensable license, to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such User Content (in whole or in part) in any media and to incorporate the User Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed.
I asked that the images be removed because the EULA of the forums puts anything on the forums as property of WotC, and the person posting them is saying they have the rights to do that. I'm sorry that the ORC got your whole post, that was not my intent. I'm also sorry if you feel somehow wronged by me as that was not my intention.
Me personally? I dont feel wronged by you. I have felt that you go out of your way to be negative about WOTC and more, and then present your fanzine and forums as an option to what WoTC offers, it's even in your signature. You act in a way to alienate people, and then want advice and constructive criticism from them? Sorry, I've put in the work to learn about design, layout and more, and in general I'm a sharing person when it comes to knowledge.
But only if I feel that person deserves it.
I on the other hand, know that I can be alienating. And I admit, it's not the best way to be, as long as I don't break the CoC, that's my choice. But at the same time, I'm not selling a product, or services or anything on here. And as much as I think some people are negative to be negative and nasty, I at least respect their right to be here, unlike some that call for others to be booted from the forums, because they can't handle what someone else has to say.
Don't think he has replied recently I guess he was serious and has left the forums for good.
On a more positive note I don't believe WOTC ever did anything to purposfully alienate any fans however 4e was a definite departure from the style of game DND was previously. Which has meant it has divided the existing fans into two sometimes angry but always passionate camps.
They are a publishing house and have had and seem to continue to have problems with digital media which will understandaly annoy some fans especially when they are paying for it.
However the R&D dept love the game and strive with each product to make it better, sometimes they succeed sometimes they don't but they always start out with that intent.
Businesses need to make money, when they struggle they have to look at what they are doing and either change, push through or close shop.
I look forward with anticipation to what will be anounced at DDXP. If I like it I will buy it if I don't I won't but either way I will stick to my belief that the designers and developers are working very hard to make the best products they can so they can make fans happy and bring home a pay cheque.
"I don't believe WOTC ever did anything to purposfully alienate any fans..."
"the R&D dept love the game and strive with each product to make it better..."
"Businesses need to make money... "
I keep seeing these types of comments, but I don't think they matter all that much. If my local restaurant consistently burns the food, but they are trying their hardest to do better, they will maintain a bad reputation until well after they do in fact stop burning the food. Sure it's nice to hear they are trying, but that doesn't fix things (particularly their communication or brand management skills).
Wether R&D loves the game or not doesn't mean they are doing the best for the game.
Look, I love D&D and will continue to play it for the rest of my life in some form or other. But if more negativity is showing-up on the boards, you can bet a handful of disgruntled gamers are the symptom, not the cause.
But if more negativity is showing-up on the boards, you can bet a handful of disgruntled gamers are the symptom, not the cause.
With common sense and logic like this, you risk making things look sane around here.
But if more negativity is showing-up on the boards, you can bet a handful of disgruntled gamers are the symptom, not the cause.
With common sense and logic like this, you risk making things look sane around here.
I wish I could really believe this, but my time on these boards has taught me that sometimes they're just very negative. It seems to come and go in waves, usually with specific "anti-X" themes where X is whatever the hot button issue of the day is. These days it's WotC's business practices (and many times the company itself.) In the past it could be anything from Fighters, to Moderators, to Katanas.
As to whether the amount of negativity is increasing or not, and why: it may be increasing it may not. As I said, it tends to go in cycles, which makes it hard to tell. So far it doesn't seem to be quite as bad as the Edition Wars at least, although it's nearing that level at times. Overall I'd probably blame a general rise in the negativity in current culture, at least here in the States. Although, that's probably not something to discuss in this thread.
And the rebuttale is:
That's a Non Sequitur rather than a rebuttal. The existence of one group has no impact on the existence of another.
And the rebuttale is:
That's a Non Sequitur rather than a rebuttal. The existence of one group has no impact on the existence of another.
Actually, both statements are two of the biggest strawmen I have ever seen. And truthfully, if anything contributes to the 'air of negativity' around here, its that the various sides seem to love constucting Frost Giant-sized straw men positions for the other.
"You guys hate D&D and just like to bitch"
"You guys are a bunch of sheeple who blindly buy whatever the company sells you"
That sort of thing.
Actually, both statements are two of the biggest strawmen I have ever seen. And truthfully, if anything contributes to the 'air of negativity' around here, its that the various sides seem to love constucting Frost Giant-sized straw men positions for the other.
"You guys hate D&D and just like to bitch"
"You guys are a bunch of sheeple who blindly buy whatever the company sells you"
That sort of thing.
Amen.
If both sides could put down their pitchforks and torches and spent all of that imagination and energy on constructive discussions rather than insults, think of all that could be accomplished.
Actually, both statements are two of the biggest strawmen I have ever seen. And truthfully, if anything contributes to the 'air of negativity' around here, its that the various sides seem to love constucting Frost Giant-sized straw men positions for the other.
"You guys hate D&D and just like to bitch"
"You guys are a bunch of sheeple who blindly buy whatever the company sells you"
That sort of thing.
Amen.
If both sides could put down their pitchforks and torches and spent all of that imagination and energy on constructive discussions rather than insults, think of all that could be accomplished.
Agreed. I've been trying to say this for quite some time now.
And the rebuttale is:
That's a Non Sequitur rather than a rebuttal. The existence of one group has no impact on the existence of another.
Actually they do.
No they do not. You have now have laid out an argument that the existence of both groups have a synergy that causes an increased amount of negativity, but as a rebuttal to the previous statement it fails.
To be clear, I'm not saying that the second group doesn't exist (though I've never seen such activity) or that both together do not make things worse. Rather you failed to rebut the previous statement.
So Apologists really contribute, and I think they are even more responsible than Negativists, to the negative atmosphere of these forums.
Well it is really hard to say. On my part I've haven't actually seen such activity, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
I do remember a long period of hard trolling that has left the community over sensitive to some arguments. It could be the source the the enmity that you are seeing.
As a great man once said "WotC could put out boxes full of free money and there'd still be people on the forums complaining about how it's folded".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore them and just try to have fun.
And the rebuttale is: If WotC would put actual dung in boxes, some people would call it the best product WotC has ever made.
And it is a very weak rebuttal indeed, both in structure and intent.
As a great man once said "WotC could put out boxes full of free money and there'd still be people on the forums complaining about how it's folded".
The sad truth is that some people are just whiny jerks. They tend to whine loudly and often, giving the impression they are, as a group, more numerous than is actually the case. Ignore them and just try to have fun.
And the rebuttale is: If WotC would put actual dung in boxes, some people would call it the best product WotC has ever made.
And it is a very weak rebuttal indeed, both in structure and intent.
A weak rebuttal to a weak argument, what do you expect...
Sheesh, put away the epeens, for Gossake.
I hope that greeting helped me sound alittle less negative before I type the following statements. Being negative for the sake of not wanting to help solve the problem is the wrong way to be negative.
Being negative in a constructive way that helps find a solotion to the problem is the correct way to be negative and I dont have problems with folks who post negative things in this way.
As a matter of a fact its essential for things to change for the better, its important to nitpick things sometimes especialy when there is an actual problem.
With all that said I myself am negative about D&D in its current form. But first let me tell you alittle about myself and why you should care what I have to say in the first place. I am 34 years old, Ive been playing D&D since I was 15 years old, wich adds up to 19 years of gaming, and I have been a dungeon master for about 15 years of that amount. I've played alittle of 1st edition...alot of 2nd edition...alot of 3rd edtion and alittle of 4th edtion.
Now, Im not just going to sit here and say that the game sucks. However I will tell you what I dislike about this game in its current version and briefly tell you what I think some solutions to these problems would consist of. I will go through a simple compare of the editions and what they brought to the table and also have taken away from the table. I will warn you ahead of time that these are condensed and just a broad stroke of what I'm trying to convey.
1st edition/ 2nd edition(classify these two together because the two editions are very close to the same format)....
the good- At its core was a good storytelling / roleplaying game ...the games flow had great pacing the game emphisized on monsters being powerful and players having to be more resourceful and in some cases play by the seat of thier pants to survive.
the bad- rules at times were unclear or not comprehensive enough, and sometimes contradictory, this presented some embalances in the game play
3rd edtion/ 3.5 edition (again I classify these two because these were very similar)
the good- alot of rules were more clear and comprehensive
the bad- the vision was good, the ideal of D&D having an actual minature layer with with a more 3 dimentional visual aid was interresting. However the implementation was clunky , gameplay and pacing slowed down tremendously and in a game that focuses on adventure and roleplaying / storytelling...pacing plays a huge role. Also game preperation skyrocketed...and then we start seeing character progression derailing and going out of control lots of overpowered and unbalances with characters
4th edtion -
the good- they did some revision to the preperation wich helped the DM
the bad- they added a card game layer on top of the minature layer that was on top of the rolpelaying layer, unfortunely the minature layer was never fixed and still had its inherent problems and throwing a new layer over the top only expands the problem. I understand why they put the cards into the game, the new generation of people are used to the cards and relate to them, and maybe if they were implemented right it would actualy be a great tool for the game but ultimately I feel that they failed again in the implementation.
Conclusion----
Ultamately the merging of the 3 different systems together is where the flaw lies. My gaming group has went back to second edtion (albeit a heaviely modified version of the 2nd edtion) The game in my oppinion needs an extreme overhaul and then rigorously play tested with a movie directors mentality in mind. The game is about storytelling and roleplaying and thus is alot like movies, so the game play has to flow kinda like your watching a movie. I think it would be great to incorporate the minature and the card game layers in eventualy, but they have to mesh with the core of the game wich is the storytelling / roleplaying.
Other than the "Item Rarity" rule that Essentials laid down, where is this mysterious "card game layer" you're talking about????
The GAMMA WORLD game has cards in it, but 4E D&D does not.
In the words of Inyigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
That's not to mention the more recently added "Fortune Cards".
It's the "powers" there structure is the equivalent to using cards in a card game. In fact, they actually sell (or at least used to sell) cards for the class powers.
That's not to mention the more recently added "Fortune Cards".
The Fortune Cards have been a fairly poorly received idea from everyone so far, based on what I've seen. On the other point, powers are no more a "card game layer" than spells were in previous editions. Hell, I think I even saw spell cards back in the day.
The Fortune Cards have been a fairly poorly received idea from everyone so far, based on what I've seen.
A reflection of the negativity toward a "card game" conversion of D&D.
On the other point, powers are no more a "card game layer" than spells were in previous editions. Hell, I think I even saw spell cards back in the day.
When ALL the players started having "powers" that's when it became a "card game layer" (i.e., covering everyone). Before that only the spell casters needed the books or side notes to remind them of in-turn game mechanics. Not counting 3x complexities that required rules look-ups, but that's a different problem.
If you don't like the game that's one thing but don't throw around labels in some bizarre attempt to justify it. "Card Game Layer" is not a term that means anything.
When ALL the players started having "powers" that's when it became a "card game layer" (i.e., covering everyone).
Ah, "Fighters have shiny things, now it sucks." I'm done.
If you don't like the game that's one thing but don't throw around labels in some bizarre attempt to justify it. "Card Game Layer" is not a term that means anything.
I didn't coin the phrase, I was just trying to provide an explanation for the term. Regardless of whether you like the way powers were designed into the game (I'm not saying it's all bad -- I mostly just think players have too many of them at higher levels), the fact that everyone has them creates a layer of the game that everyone must work with. I understand "Card Game" is a disparaging term, but it is not a bad analogy for how powers work.
I love the game, I think 4e is the best version of the game yet. It has some issues, but I think WotC has some PR issues, which is what stirs the "Air of negetivity."
but it is not a bad analogy for how powers work.
I disagree. Primarily, "cards" imply randomness. There is no randomness in power selection and use. It's not like you have a "hand" that you drew from a "deck". Additionally, the term carries weight in the hobby gaming world. You don't get powers in randomized booster packs that you pay $5 for.
No neeed to explain about layers. I understand what you're trying to say. I just object to the term "Card" because not only is it innacurate, it's language deliberately chosen for effect. It's propoganda.
Additionally, there isn't really as much of a difference between current rules and previous edition rules. 3e fighters, for instance, could charge, attack, full attack, trip, disarm, sunder, cleave, etc, etc. he took feats to accomplish many of these tasks as he levels up. Why aren't these considered cards?
Using cards in D&D isn't even a new concept.
The wizard spell deck was not a CCG element. I know you have been around long enough to know that.
It wasn't. But then again neither are the power cards that one person tried to claim as part of a "card game layer."
The wizard spell deck was not a CCG element. I know you have been around long enough to know that.
I've been around long enough to know that Moving The Goalpost is outside the bounds of reason. If you wish to put forth a new argument, that is fine, but do not move the goalpost on another one.
Anyway, a "CCG element" in 4th would only come from a few places that are not required to play. Fortune cards and a few powers from other odd places like Eldritch Strike may be tinged with "CCG", but are not a requirement to play the game.
See the issue here is that we weren't discussing fortune cards or gamma world. We were specifically discussing powers.
So when you start trying to apply our comments to those products specifically, you are, in fact, moving the goal posts.
If you want to discuss fortune cards we can do that. I'll start: they're completely optional and not required at all to play the game. If you don't like them, there is no requirement to buy them.
I've been around long enough to know that Moving The Goalpost is outside the bounds of reason. If you wish to put forth a new argument, that is fine, but do not move the goalpost on another one.
Anyway, a "CCG element" in 4th would only come from a few places that are not required to play. Fortune cards and a few powers from other odd places like Eldritch Strike may be tinged with "CCG", but are not a requirement to play the game.
I stated months ago that IF gamaworld was a complete game out of the box I'd look into getting it. It is a CCG, I'm not interested.
Another movement of the goalpost. This line of complaints started that the power system in 4th added a "card game layer". You changed it to a "CCG element" in an attempt to refute my counter. You have now moved it from 4th to Gamma World and as such is not a refutation of my statement that you moved the goalpost.
I stated months ago that IF the power cards were a complete set I'd think about getting them. Those are also CCG.
Yet you did not state it here, nor is that the original argument. The standard of proof is on the one that argument, so it is up to you to put it forth.
Additionally, from what I've seen from 4E Power Cards are in bundles that lack rarity or randomness and thus not collectible which is the C in collectible card game. The sets are in groups that allow you to purchase the ones that you wish without getting ones that you don't.
You can even also make your own just fine, so you are purchasing convenience and nothing more.
I had a set of the Magic cards because they are a full set of cards. I'm not seeing your goalpost comment.
You should now. Additionally there was the Deck of Priest Spells, the Deck of Magical Items, and the Deck of Psionic Powers.
The person that started this side topic was trying to compare the “cards” the CB prints to a card game.
That was post 100. Lets see what he actually said.
the bad- they added a card game layer on top of the minature layer that was on top of the rolpelaying layer, unfortunely the minature layer was never fixed and still had its inherent problems and throwing a new layer over the top only expands the problem. I understand why they put the cards into the game, the new generation of people are used to the cards and relate to them, and maybe if they were implemented right it would actualy be a great tool for the game but ultimately I feel that they failed again in the implementation.
he didn't really say exactly what he meant by "card game layer", but he didn't mention the character builder at all.
He never turned up later to explain himself, but I believe that he meant that 4th added cards to the game.
In Post 104 Amulan then went into how the power structure is the "card game layer", but that doesn't equal CCG. Again the character builder isn't mentioned.
After a few other posters gave some counters, I pointed out that AD&D 2nd Ed actually used cards. You then directly refereed to my post with the following.
The wizard spell deck was not a CCG element. I know you have been around long enough to know that.
You where the first to bring up CCG. I though you where defending the previous line of thought. I now believe you where arguing against it, but you still moved the goalpost. The original complain was of a "card game layer" then changed into using that as an analogy of the power structure, and then you changed the opposing argument.
Those are not a card game. They don’t attempt to make 4.0 into a card game. Neither are the cards you mentioned two days ago. Just because the first guy has no clue what he’s talking about is no reason to jump on me for telling him so.
You didn't tell him so, you told me. You also use the term CCG which is a subtype of card game. I then pointed out that you moved the goal post. It really doesn't matter that you are saying he's wrong and/or I am. You still put forth an argument outside of the bounds of reason.