NEW YORK (AP) — Hasbro Inc. said Monday that first-quarter profit fell 47 percent as retailers cut back on their inventory, but the toy maker said products tied into new movies like the upcoming Transformers film should boost future results.
The maker of board games such as Clue and Scrabble also said it instituted a salary freeze and is hiring only for critical positions in an effort to cut costs.
"We don't believe these results are a reflection of the underlying strength of our brands," Chief Executive Brian Goldner said in a conference call. Instead, he said, they were a by-product of retailers cutting inventory levels in the poor economy.
Profit for the three months ended March 29 fell to $19.7 million, or 14 cents per share, from $37.5 million, or 25 cents per share. That matched the estimate of analysts polled by Thomson Reuters.
Revenue dropped 12 percent to $621.3 million from $704.2 million. Excluding the stronger dollar, revenue fell about 6 percent. Hasbro has more than 40 percent of its sales in other countries. Analysts had expected revenue of $644.9 million.
Goldner said the company expected revenue to decline because of the economy, the impact of the stronger dollar and retailers cutting inventory.
At Hasbro's larger rival Mattel Inc., sales had fallen 15 percent overall in the first quarter because of the stronger dollar and cautious orders from stores that are still feeling the sting from the holidays.
Retailers have been lowering inventory levels after one of the weakest holiday seasons in decades. Hasbro suggested Monday that the worst could be over, saying its shipments fell in January and February but rose in March.
"In the U.S. we're probably through the worst of it," Chief Financial Officer David Hargreaves said, but added, "I'm not sure we are in some of the international markets," including Australia.
Star Wars, Playskool, Nerf and board game sales were strong in the U.S., but sales of Littlest Pet Shop, Transformers and Marvel brands declined. Internationally, Star Wars and Nerf sales were strong while Transformers and My Little Pony sales fell.
The first quarter is the least important season for toy makers. Last week, Mattel reported a loss of $51 million for the quarter ended March 31, but got a boost from heavily promoted the 50th anniversary of its Barbie brand during the quarter.
Pawtucket, R.I.-based Hasbro expects its results to improve as the year goes on, since it has products tied to several upcoming movies including "X-Men Origins: Wolverine," which opens on May 1, "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen," which opens June 24, and "G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra," which opens Aug. 7.
It expects revenue and earnings to rise in the next three quarters, though it did not give specifics.
"Based on the strength of our product line, we believe the two most recent quarters will prove to have been the most challenging for Hasbro in this economic cycle," Hargreaves said.
Hasbro shares fell 49 cents, or 1.7 percent, to $27.42 in morning trading.
"We would use any weakness as an opportunity to build positions," said Wachovia analyst Tim Conder, who reiterated his 'Outperform' rating on the stock. "We believe toy companies have an opportunity to post solid (2009) earnings growth within an overall challenging consumer environment."
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Anyone know how this may affect D&D?
Not at all.
Hasbro's fortunes are as related to and affected by D&D as PepsiCo is related to and affected by Pizza Hut. There is a connection, but no direct line item impact.
If Hasbro starts losing money from its primary lines, it might look for a buyer for WotC (or even spin it off), but even that is unlikely to have a huge impact on the product line.
Not at all.
Hasbro's fortunes are as related to and affected by D&D as PepsiCo is related to and affected by Pizza Hut. There is a connection, but no direct line item impact.
If Hasbro starts losing money from its primary lines, it might look for a buyer for WotC (or even spin it off), but even that is unlikely to have a huge impact on the product line.
The extension of this is, of course, that if/when Hasbro starts talking about selling WotC, that's when it's time for us to seriously consider worrying about the future of D&D. As it stands, as long as WotC continues to make enough money to justify its existence, things ought to be fine.
As always, the best thing you can do to help sustain the D&D brand is to buy their products, and to convince others to do the same. After all, it's us, the consumers, who as a group ultimately decide whether or not a company succeeds or fails.
I'm sorry, I think you all misunderstood me.
I'm wondering how long it will take before Hasbro sells off D&D so it can be bought up by a company like Paizo. Sure, the buyer *could* keep the products going as they are, but I personally wouldn't care if they did.
:heehee
I'm sorry, I think you all misunderstood me.
I'm wondering how long it will take before Hasbro sells off D&D so it can be bought up by a company like Paizo. Sure, the buyer *could* keep the products going as they are, but I personally wouldn't care if they did.
Paizo? Really? Hmmm....
WotC made me quit D&D back in 2000, then brought me back with 4E.
Paizo acquiring D&D is a sure way to make me drop it again. Oh well...there are sooo many RPGs out there, as well as all the D&D legacy material.
:heehee
I'm sorry, I think you all misunderstood me.
I'm wondering how long it will take before Hasbro sells off D&D so it can be bought up by a company like Paizo. Sure, the buyer *could* keep the products going as they are, but I personally wouldn't care if they did.
I think that the news that there is even a .01% chance of Paizo owning D&D would kill me...
Where is Paizo going to get the money to buy WOTC? XD
Seriously. The closest competitor for D&D is probably White Wolf RPGs, and they're still a few steps behind pulling in the sort of revenue WotC is.
:heehee
I'm sorry, I think you all misunderstood me.
I'm wondering how long it will take before Hasbro sells off D&D so it can be bought up by a company like Paizo. Sure, the buyer *could* keep the products going as they are, but I personally wouldn't care if they did.
Hasbro wont sell off something that is profitable, I think they would sooner sell off any action figure lines before a game product lines.
Seriously. The closest competitor for D&D is probably White Wolf RPGs, and they're still a few steps behind pulling in the sort of revenue WotC is.
Not that they'd buy it - they've got a reputation to maintain.
Not that they'd buy it - they've got a reputation to maintain.
True. They wouldn't want to raise expectations now, after all these years of establishing where they are.
Is this true for you even if they would still produce 4th Edition?
I mean, I've been a D&D fan all my life. I've owned all the editions (yes, including 4th), but since I dislike the mechanics of 4th Edition and the changes they've made to the Forgotten Realms, I choose to no longer buy any D&D books.
Nice to see there are people even more fickle about their game than I am.
Wotc won't get sold off because it's a low expense high profit margin department. I think that Mylittlepony would sooner would get the axe.
True. They wouldn't want to raise expectations now, after all these years of establishing where they are.
I feel like I'm missing something about your post.@MattDroz: I wouldn't drop D&D if WW took it over. I've dropped it already. I loved 3.x, I don't like 4e, simple as that. Now I'm simply working on completing my 3.x library, and otherwise looking into other RPGs - such as those from White Wolf or Paizo.
Does no one remember that Wizards of the Coast were the usurpers just a mere 10 years ago? D&D was bought out by a CCG company and the naysayers prophesized the doom of the game. Then they managed to make it not only profitable, but extremely popular again.
Given Pathfinder's incompetency with systems, (adventures aren't so bad though) yeah I probably would cease buying. Paizo couldn't make a good game with instructions of what -not to do- (more than half the 3e phb) given to them and spelled out. I'd hate to see what they come up with on their own.
Wotc won't get sold off because it's a low expense high profit margin department. I think that Mylittlepony would sooner would get the axe.
As for opinions regarding Paizo's design, incompetency? Really? Wow. So, you must REALLY hate 3rd Edition, since most of the people that are working there cut their teeth at WotC when they were producing 3E.
And as for My Little Pony getting the axe, that's just f*in' hilarious. Did you read the article I linked? Hasbro's money makers (i.e. their 'low-expense/high-profit') were what were mentioned in the article (Transformers, GI Joe, My Little Pony). Dungeons & Dragons and WotC weren't even noted as part of Hasbro, so I don't think they make as much money for Hasbro as you think...
And from what I've read of Crapfinder, it's more of the same so they clearly didn't learn their lesson from the last go around either.
Toy Lines are more expensive to produce and keep going than books. (tons more) they are also much more subject to being overstocked.
Also this is the first quarter which is never good for the Toys industry.
Also this is the first quarter which is never good for the Toys industry.
With poor sales at the retailers in the 4Q, the 1Q sales from the manufacturers were going to fall. Since the supply at the retailers wasn't depleted, they didn't need to order more to restock.
1Q earnings dropping aren't a good indicator. All they do is tell you how the retail market moved in the 4Q of last year. 2Q and 3Q earnings will be telling, but not as much as the 4Q for this year will. Toy companies will sell their products no matter what happens. No matter how bad the economy gets, people will still buy toys for their children.
I wouldn't worry about WotC or their product line. The game and gaming market should actually improve if the economy gets worse. It doesn't cost as much to buy one game or gaming book and it can provide alot more entertainment than other, more expensive forms of entertainment.
If the gaming industry tanks P&P will still chug along if not do better given how much more bang for the buck you get with a P&P game.
If the gaming industry tanks P&P will still chug along if not do better given how much more bang for the buck you get with a P&P game.
Not sure about that one, would say it heavily depends on the game in question. I mean, a P&P game is seldom one book (unless we're talking FATAL), and conversely, there are some pretty cheap video games out there that can provide you with (sometimes literally) hundreds of hours of gaming fun. Though I admit that those are getting less and less.
Xbox live downloaded games I could see lasting because they are cheap to make. But pretty soon all of the few remaining small time publishers and developers are going to be eaten up by the big boys.
True but that one book provides tons of usability. You'll never just put it aside after the first character. (and if you do you shouldn't have bought the book in my opinion and just borrowed a friend's).
On the other hand, you'll need more than one book for every single character. Might be an extreme example, but I once made a character using thirteen books without trying. Which quickly grows costly
Xbox live downloaded games I could see lasting because they are cheap to make. But pretty soon all of the few remaining small time publishers and developers are going to be eaten up by the big boys.
That fear has been around for quite some time, and is part of what makes the small guys survive. I don't think they'll get eaten up, because the gaming industry is quite reliant on the original ideas and impulses that (apparently) only small indie groups can provide. One of the absolute blockbusters here in Germany a few years back was a game called Far Cry, which (allegedly) reinvented the shooter. Sure, the company is now part of Ubisoft (and FC2 blows), but the idea is there, and so is the precedent. New indie designers are coming up all the time. I'm sure it's a pretty tough, not to say ungrateful business, but those with enough originality will always have the drive to get their ideas through. That's what makes a truly great game IMO.
True but that one book provides tons of usability. You'll never just put it aside after the first character. (and if you do you shouldn't have bought the book in my opinion and just borrowed a friend's).
One set of books can keep one group or several entertained for hours on end. And it doesn't require things like electricity or expensive electronic components. You can play D&D sitting around a campfire in a park if you're force to live in your car. You can carry three books and a notebook in a backpack along with everything else you own if need be. P&P gaming is portable and cheap.
One set of books can keep one group or several entertained for hours on end. And it doesn't require things like electricity or expensive electronic components. You can play D&D sitting around a campfire in a park if you're force to live in your car. You can carry three books and a notebook in a backpack along with everything else you own if need be. P&P gaming is portable and cheap.
So is video gaming (for me): a notebook and a box of games smaller than the smallest P&P library I've seen (Hell, you could just crack the games). Furthermore, P&P is highly dependant on you finding a group to play with regularly. If you are not that lucky, then the bang-for-your-buck ratio is going down fast. I'm not saying I'm being overcharged on my gaming books, simply that as far as the ratio goes, for me, video gaming has been the more rentable pastime. So far. If I actually found a cool group that lasts longer than a year, this might change.
Still, let's say you're group chips in and buys the three core books (about $15-$25 a person) and each person also picks up one book they really want. By the theories here, they have all they need to play the game for a year (or more) without needing to spend anymore money.
How will Hasbro look at that and say 'Check out this money-maker!'? The only way to be profitable is to market the books so that the players buy every single one. We've seen it before, even as recently as the PHB 2. Sure, it's selling well, but can you honestly tell me it's selling as well as the PHB? Which each new book, players begin to look at the newest release and ask themselves 'Do I need this book?' instead of automatically picking it up.
At some point the cost of the new books outweighs the profit. It has happened in 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition, other game systems and it will happen in 4th edition. The business plan of releasing a 'sequel' every year and one campaign a year (3 books) is meant to forestall that for as long as possible. I can see people still buying PHB 3 for the Monk (and probably samurai, ninja and wu-jen), but what happens to the PHB 4? or 5? or 6?
I just find it interesting that the 4E fans think that only one company can produce D&D.
I find it interesting that no one in this thread has actually said that. A couple of folks have said they don't like Paizo's products, one person implied they aren't a fan of White Wolf, and several folks said that neither of those companies could afford to buy WotC anyway.
What was your point, again?
My point in all of this is that people posting on the boards (myself included) don't mean squat in the grand scheme of things. I like Forgotten Realms, but don't like how they've changed the setting. I like Saga Edition for Star Wars, thinking it balances Jedi/non-Jedi very well, but consider 4th Edition to be one step away 'click-tech' miniatures. I like to play BattleTech, but prefer to keep miniatures to a minimum in my RPGs.
All in all, every person here has their own quirks, likes and dislikes. By posting the article, I had hoped to see if anyone else thought there was a good chance that Hasbro would divest themselves of the Roleplaying market, since they are better equipped for board games and action figures and, in my humble opinion, never really understood the whole genre's basis being nothing more than guidelines to keep everyone's imagination on the same page.
Finally, the D&D license/IP is actually very cheap. The high cost is buying Wizards of the Coast and securing all of the employees and such. If one doesn't worry about the people, one does not have to spend much.
P.S. By the way, when you quote my post, it's nice to take it into context as well, since I posted that after reading the first two posts after I suggested they should sell off the license:
Paizo? Really? Hmmm....
WotC made me quit D&D back in 2000, then brought me back with 4E.
Paizo acquiring D&D is a sure way to make me drop it again. Oh well...there are sooo many RPGs out there, as well as all the D&D legacy material.
I think that the news that there is even a .01% chance of Paizo owning D&D would kill me...
Well, considering that White Wolf and Paizo were the two most obvious choices to purchase the license, I assumed (yes, I know, it's horrible!) that was what the posters had intended from their language. I only mentioned Paizo since they are producing something close to a previous edition (I could have mentioned Kenzer & Company too since their Hackmaster is reminiscent of 2nd Edition). Others brought up White Wolf (the #2 company for the last couple of decades).
My point was that "two people don't like Paizo's games" is not the same thing as "the 4e supporters think no other company can make D&D".
P.S. By the way, when you quote my post, it's nice to take it into context as well, since I posted that after reading the first two posts after I suggested they should sell off the license:
I read the context. My point was that your post was stretching the context out of recognizability.
You're right. I apologize for stretching two responses to all the 4E supporters. I shouldn't have categorized all 4E fans with those that responded.
And even those two posters didn't say that "no other company can make D&D."
Nice to know how the deck is stacked around here every now and again.
Yes... very interesting that I'm being 'ganged up on' about that assumption, but no one is saying a word about Cpt. Micha's slander of Paizo and 'Crapfinder'.
Nice to know how the deck is stacked around here every now and again.
Well, maybe not many of us like Pathfinder, so we see no reason to defend it. Also, Cpt. Micha is entitled to his opinion. As are you, for that matter.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Which is what this whole thread, ultimately, is about. My opinion is that Hasbro does not know how to design or support an RPG and should sell off the license. And, the only reason I keep defending that opinion is because, that too, is my right.
It just amazes me how forum threads seem to be flooded with people (especially on these boards) who feel the need to come out of their way to voice their difference in opinion and attack the original person's opinion due to that difference.
Yes... very interesting that I'm being 'ganged up on' about that assumption, but no one is saying a word about Cpt. Micha's slander of Paizo and 'Crapfinder'.
Nice to know how the deck is stacked around here every now and again.
It's just the sort of things most of us have stopped caring about. I like Pathfinder as well, and am certainly willing to defend it against any argument, but since Cpt. Micha didn't make an argument, what the Hell.
But it's true that overdoses of 4e have been known to turn even the most gentle posters into aggressive trolls every now and then. Humm... [insert conspiracy-theorimoticon here]As it is they aren't even competitive with White Wolf.
The Industry right now (at least the companies that matter) have taken a different tack than what 3e was. (actually when 3e came out design wise it was pretty far outdated).
It's crapfinder because they did the things that should not have been done under any circumstance. Such as making casters even better than they were.
I'm more than a little tired of seeing people "ZOMG HASBRO IS DUMB THEY KILLED TEH GAEMZ! BUY PAIZO!" when Paizo is far more guilty of being retarded when it comes to making systems.
Here's a fun fact: most of the 4e team worked on 3e. Wotc kept the members of the team they felt were -worth a damn- because the books they made either sold well, or had very solid principles of design in them. They ditched the Loser String. Some of which have found their way over to Pathfinder (and really only the "good ones" of the Loser String did).
Paizo simply put doesn't have the budget to make a game like D&D on their own nor a good enough design team.
White Wolf is honestly the only real serious candidate for owning a game like D&D that isn't wizards. And they don't have the budget to buy Wizards if wizards was being sold off.
D&D 1e and Chainmail originated from one man with no money you say. To which I reply this, It certainly shows it in the quality department.
If Paizo made the quality, they'd be up and coming and on the upswing. They've stayed about where they were.
As it is they aren't even competitive with White Wolf.
Yep, 10,000 downloads in a single week and selling out of their limited run in 2 days at GenCon means they don't have any upswing. First off, they have a different marketing and order strategy, so there's no way you can even compare them to White Wolf or Wotc since they do not rely on book and gaming stores to sell their products.
The Industry right now (at least the companies that matter) have taken a different tack than what 3e was. (actually when 3e came out design wise it was pretty far outdated).
It's crapfinder because they did the things that should not have been done under any circumstance. Such as making casters even better than they were.
So, 3.5 was broken enough that WotC moved forward with 4th Edition, but the changes Pathfinder made to satisfy the needs of a audience that liked the rules is wrong? Yes, we get it, you don't like Pathfinder. Guess what, I don't like 4th Edition so I think the changes have helped my game.
I'm more than a little tired of seeing people "ZOMG HASBRO IS DUMB THEY KILLED TEH GAEMZ! BUY PAIZO!" when Paizo is far more guilty of being retarded when it comes to making systems.
Here's a fun fact: most of the 4e team worked on 3e. Wotc kept the members of the team they felt were -worth a damn- because the books they made either sold well, or had very solid principles of design in them. They ditched the Loser String. Some of which have found their way over to Pathfinder (and really only the "good ones" of the Loser String did).
I'll be sure to let Monte and SKR know they were the 'Loser String'.
Paizo simply put doesn't have the budget to make a game like D&D on their own nor a good enough design team.
Well, guess we'll see at GenCon. By my tally, of the non-sanctioned events, 40% are running 4th edition and another 40% are running 3rd/Pathfinder. Sounds like they have half the market. And with the release of Pathfinder at GenCon, we'll see how well it goes over.
White Wolf is honestly the only real serious candidate for owning a game like D&D that isn't wizards. And they don't have the budget to buy Wizards if wizards was being sold off.
I'm not talking about buying the company, just the IP license. Take the company out of the picture and the price goes way down.
D&D 1e and Chainmail originated from one man with no money you say. To which I reply this, It certainly shows it in the quality department.
I don't even know where this came from.
I'll have an essay as to why he is one. As well as an alternate phb containing what he should have done when designing Third Edition.
Gencon isn't really an indicator of the market at all. Much like E3 really isn't. It's just a showcase of what's new that year.
Amazon.com sales charts are a much better indicator as are Barnes and Noble and Borders.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=node%3D1000%2C86%2C4402%2C4442&field-keywords=&x=0&y=0
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?SRT=S&SZE=10&WRD=Fantasy+and+Roleplaying&SAT=1
http://www.borders.com/online/store/SearchResults?view=2&rpp=25&type=1&kids=false&nav=5185&simple=true&book_search=fantasy+and+%22role+playing%22 (reset the sort by Best Sellers on borders)
As an IP D&D would never be let go by Hasbro, they'd sell Wizards off to someone but they'd never let go of D&D. (Hasbro doesn't sell off Ips)
My opinion is that Hasbro does not know how to design or support an RPG and should sell off the license.
Fortunately Hasbro lets WotC deal with all that. D&D is fine in the hands of Hasbro because they don't actually do anything with it.
Monte Cook is a loser as far as being a game designer goes. If you bring him onto this forum I will tell him as much. Just let me know when he's coming by.
I'll have an essay as to why he is one. As well as an alternate phb containing what he should have done when designing Third Edition.
Gencon isn't really an indicator of the market at all. Much like E3 really isn't. It's just a showcase of what's new that year.
Amazon.com sales charts are a much better indicator as are Barnes and Noble and Borders.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=node%3D1000%2C86%2C4402%2C4442&field-keywords=&x=0&y=0
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?SRT=S&SZE=10&WRD=Fantasy+and+Roleplaying&SAT=1
http://www.borders.com/online/store/SearchResults?view=2&rpp=25&type=1&kids=false&nav=5185&simple=true&book_search=fantasy+and+%22role+playing%22 (reset the sort by Best Sellers on borders)
As an IP D&D would never be let go by Hasbro, they'd sell Wizards off to someone but they'd never let go of D&D. (Hasbro doesn't sell off Ips)
Whatever. You win. 4th Edition is TEH GAMEZ. You're right. I mean, who am I to argue that my own personal opinion means anything against how many books they sell? Why should my own taste for the Pathfinder/3.5 rules mean squat when it's obvious that a international company proves it can outsell a MUCH smaller competitor.
Now, I'm just going to update my ignore list and go back to playing how I want to play.
Because frankly we're tired of seeing the 3e whiner's club post the same inane crap over and over again with no evidence to support their wild speculation (and to completely go against the grain of Hasbro IP policy at that).
Him believing that D&D is better off in the hands of a company like Paizo though I do find particularly offensive. It's a snide subtle way of saying "Paizo makes real games Wizard's doesn't"
D&D would do anything -but- improve in Paizo's hands. If anything it would get worse as evidenced by Pathfinder making what was bad about 3e even worse.
The Op had his choice of forums to post this on, he hates 4e. Yet he frequents this board. It's like punching yourself in the crotch over and over, if you enjoy doing so then keep on.. but if you don't like the feeling you get from it. Why do you keep doing it?
Him believing that D&D is better off in the hands of a company like Paizo though I do find particularly offensive. It's a snide subtle way of saying "Paizo makes real games Wizard's doesn't"
What he actually said was "Hasbro doesn't know what to do with D&D, maybe a company devoted to producing RPGs would do a better job with it."
What he actually said was "Hasbro doesn't know what to do with D&D, maybe a company devoted to producing RPGs would do a better job with it."
Which again hints at incompetency at Wizards Of The Coast. It's generally considered bad form to insult a company on their own forum and suggest that the game is better off in the hands of an inferior competitor. (which Paizo was the one that chose to be a competitor. Not Wotc)
(now if he means their legal department and how it is starting to get frighteningly TSR Esque I'll agree with him completely. I doubt anyone on this forum would think that TSR was even remotely intelligent in how they handled the IP as far as the legal department goes)
To be fair, you over reacted quite a bit. The OP definitely, and I think all of MattDroz's posts, were polite, and not provoctative. He asked a fair question given the evidence at hand. He didn't suggest D&D would fail if Hasbro sold it (in fact, I'd be led to believe Matt thinks D&D would improve given the fact that he said Hasbro doesn't know what to do with D&D).
He asked a loaded question, and when he didn't get the responses he wanted he went "lol dummies" and loaded it up further. And he's been smarmy and supercilious ever since, plus playing the "oh poor me attacked for my OPINIONS" martyr card.
Well, wasn't he attacked for his opinions? Presentation aside, he has been attacked for what he believes. True is true.
Actually at no point did I attack him.
I have however attacked Paizo in the same fashion that he has Wizards of the Coast. (though only on the Wizard's forum. I didn't go trolling over to the Paizo forums with my Paizo hate because, well... see reference about punching self in the crotch. I don't enjoy the pain that comes with it. so why do it. And I sure as hell shouldn't be exposed to Paizo on a Wizards Of The Coast Forum.)
Well, wasn't he attacked for his opinions? Presentation aside, he has been attacked for what he believes. True is true.
He blames us for ganging up on him for assuming that all 4e supporters think that no other company than WotC/Hasbro can make D&D.
Edit: Wow, I'm just tripping all over the language filter this morning. Does it also catch urinate?
P1: I don't like 4e.
P2: I don't like you saying you don't like 4e.
P1: I don't like you saying you don't like me saying I don't like 4e.
P2: Yeah? Well, I don't ....
Stop it. See a topic you're (general "you") gettin' defensive about? Leave it be. It's really that simple. There's no great crusade to stop misinformation any more. That's just an excuse to act like an ******* when dealing with someone you happen to disagree with.
Well, wasn't he attacked for his opinions? Presentation aside, he has been attacked for what he believes. True is true.
Actually, no. Some folks said they don't like Paizo or their games (note: I have no experience with either Paizo or their games. I honestly don't care about them). Some folks said it was unlikely that Hasbro would sell D&D, or that other companies could buy it. Those aren't "attacking him for his opinions", those are "expressing opinions different from his."
What I objected to was his characterization of those posts as "thinking that no other company could make D&D", which didn't come close to representing what anyone had actually said. That may actually be his opinion of those posters, or of 4th edition supporters in general. Nevertheless, I didn't "attack him for his opinions". I disagreed with those opinions. He got huffy about Cpt. Micha (and confused "slander" and "libel" in the process). The only other "opinion" he's expressed in this thread (which he didn't get around to until page 2) is that he thinks that Hasbro doesn't do a good job making D&D. He hasn't been attacked for that opinion either -- other people have, again, expressed that their opinion is different.
TL;DR version: He hasn't been attacked for his opinions. Expressing differing opinions isn't "attacking someone for their opinions". He's been "attacked", if you must call it so, for acting like a twit.
Alright. Treat each other as poorly as you wish. I honestly couldn't care less. It's just so ... last year, you know? Anyhoo ... I'm off to find something interesting to read. Or something with actual merit. Nah, f that. I'll take entertainment value over substance right now.
My beef isn't with the designers of the game. I've posted here that I like what they've done with the Saga edition of Star Wars and that the current edition is a good rule set. I just don't like it with Dungeons & Dragons. What I have problems with is a company that is looking to produce books just to meet a bottom line instead of trying to make the game better and more interesting. Hence why I think a smaller company is better for the game.
As for playing the 'martyr card',
Like I give two s**ts about what people think of me. The only reason I pointed out that I'm being 'attacked' is because too often I see those that don't play 4th Edition D&D as being attacked for being on the boards here. Also, the fact that Cpt Micha has said MUCH worse stuff about Pathfinder, 3rd Edition, designers and players than I have ever even thought about 4th Edition.
And for the record I love 4e...much happier with the system...but I have no issue playing 3e cause my friends still play it and I like hanging w/ my friends...
Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay is also a fantastic game.
I'm partial to pre murdered 7th Sea as well. (The non d20 version is the good one)
I'm curious about Deadlands (pre d20 and haven't tried it yet though).
I'm interested in Dark Heresy as well (haven't played it yet got a couple of books though).
The difference between me and MattDroz: I have standards. I don't play crappy games. Which 3e/Pathfinder are most definitely in that category.