| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1NicodaudelJul 08, 2014 12:02:24 | Fast Company has posted an article about how WotC has leveraged, and plans to continue leveraging, technology during the development and release of D&D 5e - online public playtest, Project: Morningstar, etc.
Of special interest are two figures we haven't seen before. Brand Director Nathan Stewart is quoted as saying there were more than 175,000 unique playtesters (a number we've heard repeatedly), with 636,010 total playtest downloads over 17 months (~37,412 per month) and 25,000 responses to the first playtest survey.
|
| #2NicodaudelJul 08, 2014 15:33:54 | Given that certain folks have insisted the playtest and surveys were self-selecting, too small a sample, etc., I'm surprised no one has an interest in these new numbers - especially since WotC is notoriously tight lipped about its internal data. 25k responses to the May 2012 packet is a substantial number, though hardly barnstorming.
The only additional figures I'd like yet to see are the number of responses to each survey thereafter, if only to track how that 25k fluctuated packet by packet through Oct 2013. On the downside, if only 1/7 (25k out of 175k) or fewer of unique playtesters completed each survey, feedback was coming from an especially select group, which could explain why any number of people felt later packets weren't in line with their hopes for DDN. |
| #3PolarisJul 08, 2014 15:50:01 | That's becasue the numbers don't mean much. This is a puff piece meant to promote the new edition [not that there's anything wrong with that....quite the contrary, I've been expecting more of this sort of thing tbh], but we don't know how many of those 25,000 were part of the initial survey process, nor do we know how many surveys were filled out since then, nor do we have any demographics of who filled out the surveys. Mind you, I'm not expecting any such thing in a public article [too easy for competitors to take advantage of such information], but it does mean that there is a lot less to these numbers than meet the eye.
They sound impressive [and they are supposed to] but I'm not impressed at least not until I learn what's behind those numbers (such as a few of the things I mentioned above) and Wotc is very unlikely to release that info.
-Polaris |
| #4Tony_VargasJul 08, 2014 16:14:54 | "We had over 175,000 Active Playtesters that signed up and downloaded at least one packet. In total we saw 636,010 downloads over 17 months," says Stewart. "After the initial packet release we saw over 25,000 participants respond to our questionnaire."
25k out of 175k is a huge response to a survey. Of course, not all of those 175k necessarily signed up for the /first/ playtest, making it even more impressive.
Total participants and d/ls is interesting (and does point to most playtesters /not/ seeing the whole thing through.) Monthly numbers could suggest whether that was because people were piling on as it gained momentum, or dropping out as they gave up on the direction it was heading, or if there was just churn.
Quoting only the first survey response isn't quite so positive, though. That could mean the first was the strongest response.
|
| (Reply to #4)Polaris |
|
| #6ChrisCarlsonJul 08, 2014 16:43:07 | Oh, oh. Speculating is fun. I wanna play...
I think they only anounced the initial month's number because, after that, the playtest pool got so massive and popular that--were they to reveal those numbers--they'd look like they were either being braggards, or artificially inflating the figures to puff themselves up. So they felt it best just to keep those to themselves and simply release the relatively modest first month's count.
But all that's just my guess... |
| #7NicodaudelJul 08, 2014 16:45:00 |
|
| #8akaddkJul 08, 2014 17:09:00 |
|
| #9ZardnaarJul 08, 2014 17:44:59 | The playtest was advertised on DDI in Dragon and Dungeon correct? 25000 is around 1/3 of DDI members and 13k wouldbe enough for a majority. Probably explains things like martial healing anyway if 4E players like those things and WoTC had a direct line to them via DDI. 1 in 5 DDI members would be enough to skew the results.
|
| #10RundellJul 08, 2014 18:14:27 |
|
| #11NicodaudelJul 12, 2014 13:24:15 | Just re-reading the DDN blog and Legends & Lore columns during the entire life of the 5e playtest - Jan 2012 announcement through Oct 2013 final playtest packet . . . In his 24 Sep 2012 Legends & Lore column, Mike Mearls notes that more than 85,000 people had already participated in the playtest, which is nearly half (48.6%) of the aggregate number for the entire playtest (175,000+).
I'll let everyone draw their own conclusions, but that number suggests the playtest ramped up quickly during the first 4 months or so, then spent 18 months drawing fewer and fewer new (i.e. unique) playtesters. Again, as I said above, that dynamic indicates (but does not prove) that later rounds of feedback were coming from an especially select group, which could explain why any number of people felt later packets weren't in line with their hopes for 5e. |
| #12RustedKitsuneJul 12, 2014 13:39:12 | I didn't even playtest, didn't like the idea of 5th edition, felt it was going to be even worse than 4e, and hated 4e with a passion soothed only by tiny incidental rules that I stole for 3.5/PF games (mainly it was the minions rule: 1hp versions of standard monsters - still a threat, still required a roll to hit that didn't auto-succeed, but dropped with any hit. Great rule, perfect for massive waves of minions). And yet, 5e has surprised me by being, imho, good. I could bash out a set of comprehensive houserules in less than 30 minutes, which speaks to one of the reasons as to why I like it. So even if I don't like the direction it takes later on, I can still rewrite everything to my preference. And so can you! [That was a generic you] |
| (Reply to #12)AaronOfBarbaria |
|