Should WOTC Survey on Future Product Demand, and if so what should they ask? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Mistwell Jul 27, 2015 11:53:58	The issue of "If WOTC makes product X, it means they have less resources to focus on making product Y" keeps coming up in variosu threads about types of products WOTC should make for D&D. This is more an issue of opportunity cost: WOTC probably wants to focus on the products people want the most, all other things being equal. A poll on this topic would really work best if WOTC asked, "Which of the following products would you prefer we work on next" and then list a bunch of products for customers to rank, rather than simply asking "is this something you want" for everything and having no way to judge how much people want one product type versus another type they also want. I guess the list could be something like: 1) A large sandbox adventure 2) A book focused on one setting (Greyhawk, Dragon Lance, etc.) 3) Dieties and Demigods 4) Another Monster Book (Fiend Folio/MM 2) 5) A Planar Handbook 6) A Psionics Handbook 7) A book of general race and class options (PHB 2/Complete Adventurer) 8) A Book of Monsters As Races/Classes (Savage Species) 9) An Arms, Equipment, and Magic Items Guide 10) A book of NPCs (Enemies and Allies) 11) A book focusing on a specific Race (Races of Stone, etc..) 12) A book focusing on a type of class (Arcane, Divine, Warrior, Etc.) 13) A Spell Compendium (new spells for all spellcasting classes) 14) A book focusing on a type of environment (Sandstorm, Libris Mortis, Frostburn, Dungeonscape, Cityscape, etc..) 15) A Book focusing on new DM options (DMG 2) 16) A book of challenges (Traps, Puzzles, Dungeon Rooms, Set Pieces) 17) A book focusing on a specific type of creature (iendish Codex, Draconomicon, etc.) 18) A book of short adventures 19) A book focused on a section of a setting (Sword Coast) 20) A Survival Handbook (Dungeon Survival Handbook, Wilderness Survival Guide, etc.) As you expand the list, you'd want a ranking system for the survey rather than just one choice. You could rank each product from 1 to 20, or have something like "Mark 1 for your top choice, 2 for your second best choice, etc.." and let people rank five or even ten total choices (with no rank counting as a zero). What do you think, is this something you think WOTC should do? If so, what should the list look like? Should it break up some of these categories, like "Setting book", into more specific line items? Is there a point where the list becomes too unwieldly and would result in fewer respondants?
#2 bawylie Jul 27, 2015 12:20:48	I'd rather they didn't poll this. I like the direction they're going currently. And I'd prefer a cohesive development strategy to one based on the competing priorities of what the customer base feels like it wants today.
#3 Mistwell Jul 27, 2015 12:36:43	bawylie wrote:
#4 MechaPilot Jul 27, 2015 12:44:14	I think a proper licensing agreement would solve the problem much better than polls would. With a proper license, third parties could produce the products that WotC won't/can't, and without tying up WotC resources.
(Reply to #2) Zardnaar	bawylie wrote:
#6 Mistwell Jul 27, 2015 12:51:28	MechaPilot wrote:
#7 Mistwell Jul 27, 2015 12:52:15	Zardnaar wrote:
(Reply to #3) bawylie	Mistwell wrote:
#9 Mistwell Jul 27, 2015 14:43:21	bawylie wrote:
#10 Elfcrusher Jul 27, 2015 14:12:51	First they should poll on how many people want a poll, and then... No, I'm with Bawylie. I'd rather have designers execute their vision, and then I can choose to participate or not. Writing games is a creative endeavor. Treating it too much like laundry detergent risks killing the art.
#11 Shasarak Jul 27, 2015 14:15:56	Zardnaar wrote:
#12 Elfcrusher Jul 27, 2015 14:22:23	The opposite of a sandbox isn't a railroad, but for those who think it is you might be better off creating your own.
#13 Hebitsuikaza Jul 27, 2015 14:23:37	Shasarak wrote:
#14 Wuzzard Jul 27, 2015 14:40:20	I think WOTC is doing the right thing by producing mostly just AP, with extra content folded in. TL;DR - its better for growing the player base. This is my reasoning. Lots of folks here are complaining about bloat, usually meaning the stuff they don't want. Sometimes an argument is put forth that too much product on the shelf is a detractor for new players. It is too daunting if it looks like a new player has to make many purchases just to get started. My theory is that this doesn't happen if it looks like from a player's perspective that there is just one book they have to buy (or not even) to get started. If you look at the shelf and see PHB, PHB2, PHB3, ..., Class Splat1, Class Splat2, ..., where do you possibly start? Is just the PHB good enough? How do you know that is the place to start? Do you need the Complete Wizard Gizmo Guide if you want to play a wizard? What about he Unearthed Alchemist Field Guid to potions, scrolls and flying brooms? Will you be behind like you are playing MTG will old/superceded cards? When the new player looks at the shelf and sees PHB, and Game Module1, Game Module2, Game Module3, at least they know that they only need PHB to play, and maybe one of those game modules, not all of them. This helps if the game modules look distinct from the PHB, more like a board game with expansions. The advanced, experienced players know that extra classes & races are found in game modules, and/or maybe free online.
(Reply to #10) bawylie	Elfcrusher wrote:
(Reply to #14) Zardnaar	Wuzzard wrote:
#17 BRJN Jul 27, 2015 17:06:46	Such a poll should provide 20 options and ask for your #1 - #5. Then put a fill-in-the-blank at bottom for anything not covered above. I am fully aware that it would take a year or more for present product pipeline to complete the production cycle, and the polled items to show up over the event horizon.
#18 Gnarl Jul 27, 2015 17:32:08	I don't really see how it could hurt to have a poll. There's sometimes a difference between what your customers want and what your customers think they want so the results would need to be taken with a grain of salt. I personally don't like their current strategy. I'd much rather have a different mix of character options, adventures, campaign settings, and other things than the one we have right now. I'm fine with the release schedule though.
#19 frothsof Jul 27, 2015 17:49:43	According to a recent Greenwood interview, they sound like they already have the storylines and products planned out for years.
#20 Grazel Jul 27, 2015 18:26:06	Mistwell wrote:
#21 EthanSental Jul 27, 2015 20:21:33	Since the original thread asked for " what should the list look like" and yet 20 posts in and no one has covered it. I'd go with top 10 at most and of the top 10, go with 3 splat type character option books, another 3 on secondary books like monster manual 2 and Deities and demigods, and the last some 32 or 64 page adventures all the way up to the AP size we've seen with 5e. WoTC then gets feedback based on a tighter idea of what to produce in the main areas of interest. maybe do the 1st place is worth 10 down to 1, but something sticks out from my LSS training from last year that might be a better way of scoring the votes but it might not work across a computer voting medium. I agree with another post that no matter what, some one will whine if they had a polled, that person voted and picked something that didnt receive many votes and didn't get produced...probably whine about it until the next edition came out as well.
#22 TenaciousJ Jul 27, 2015 22:02:21	I'd like to see 1 or 2 other campaign settings served. Forgotten Realms might be the most popular flavor, but some people do not want vanilla. The adventure paths are a good thing because it seems like DMs are always the choke point on how many groups a given area can support, and people frequently say that DMing is too hard. These adventures will make DMing easy mode for more people, and they can transition to their own custom campaigns once they get experienced. Though I did not learn that way, I'm sure plenty of old school DMs did.
#23 lawrencehoy Jul 27, 2015 22:30:28	bawylie wrote:
#24 Gnarl Jul 28, 2015 5:30:43	lawrencehoy wrote:
(Reply to #23) bawylie	Ok, but I'm still not going to oppose broad-based market research. Gauging interest/demand, etc. "Polling" sounded to me like "voting" for what comes next, rather than an invitation to indicate interest. That's my bad on misinterpreting the OP. Apologies. lawrencehoy wrote:
(Reply to #25) lawrencehoy	bawylie wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Mistwell

Jul 27, 2015 11:53:58

The issue of "If WOTC makes product X, it means they have less resources to focus on making product Y" keeps coming up in variosu threads about types of products WOTC should make for D&D. This is more an issue of opportunity cost: WOTC probably wants to focus on the products people want the most, all other things being equal.

A poll on this topic would really work best if WOTC asked, "Which of the following products would you prefer we work on next" and then list a bunch of products for customers to rank, rather than simply asking "is this something you want" for everything and having no way to judge how much people want one product type versus another type they also want.

I guess the list could be something like:

1) A large sandbox adventure

2) A book focused on one setting (Greyhawk, Dragon Lance, etc.)

3) Dieties and Demigods

4) Another Monster Book (Fiend Folio/MM 2)

5) A Planar Handbook

6) A Psionics Handbook

7) A book of general race and class options (PHB 2/Complete Adventurer)

8) A Book of Monsters As Races/Classes (Savage Species)

9) An Arms, Equipment, and Magic Items Guide

10) A book of NPCs (Enemies and Allies)

11) A book focusing on a specific Race (Races of Stone, etc..)

12) A book focusing on a type of class (Arcane, Divine, Warrior, Etc.)

13) A Spell Compendium (new spells for all spellcasting classes)

14) A book focusing on a type of environment (Sandstorm, Libris Mortis, Frostburn, Dungeonscape, Cityscape, etc..)

15) A Book focusing on new DM options (DMG 2)

16) A book of challenges (Traps, Puzzles, Dungeon Rooms, Set Pieces)

17) A book focusing on a specific type of creature (iendish Codex, Draconomicon, etc.)

18) A book of short adventures

19) A book focused on a section of a setting (Sword Coast)

20) A Survival Handbook (Dungeon Survival Handbook, Wilderness Survival Guide, etc.)

As you expand the list, you'd want a ranking system for the survey rather than just one choice. You could rank each product from 1 to 20, or have something like "Mark 1 for your top choice, 2 for your second best choice, etc.." and let people rank five or even ten total choices (with no rank counting as a zero).

What do you think, is this something you think WOTC should do?

If so, what should the list look like?

Should it break up some of these categories, like "Setting book", into more specific line items?

Is there a point where the list becomes too unwieldly and would result in fewer respondants?

bawylie

Jul 27, 2015 12:20:48

I'd rather they didn't poll this.

I like the direction they're going currently. And I'd prefer a cohesive development strategy to one based on the competing priorities of what the customer base feels like it wants today.

Mistwell

Jul 27, 2015 12:36:43

bawylie wrote:

MechaPilot

Jul 27, 2015 12:44:14

I think a proper licensing agreement would solve the problem much better than polls would. With a proper license, third parties could produce the products that WotC won't/can't, and without tying up WotC resources.

(Reply to #2)

Zardnaar

bawylie wrote:

Mistwell

Jul 27, 2015 12:51:28

MechaPilot wrote:

Mistwell

Jul 27, 2015 12:52:15

Zardnaar wrote:

(Reply to #3)

bawylie

Mistwell wrote:

Mistwell

Jul 27, 2015 14:43:21

bawylie wrote:

#10

Elfcrusher

Jul 27, 2015 14:12:51

First they should poll on how many people want a poll, and then...

No, I'm with Bawylie. I'd rather have designers execute their vision, and then I can choose to participate or not. Writing games is a creative endeavor. Treating it too much like laundry detergent risks killing the art.

#11

Shasarak

Jul 27, 2015 14:15:56

Zardnaar wrote:

#12

Elfcrusher

Jul 27, 2015 14:22:23

The opposite of a sandbox isn't a railroad, but for those who think it is you might be better off creating your own.

#13

Hebitsuikaza

Jul 27, 2015 14:23:37

Shasarak wrote:

#14

Wuzzard

Jul 27, 2015 14:40:20

I think WOTC is doing the right thing by producing mostly just AP, with extra content folded in.

TL;DR - its better for growing the player base.

This is my reasoning. Lots of folks here are complaining about bloat, usually meaning the stuff they don't want. Sometimes an argument is put forth that too much product on the shelf is a detractor for new players. It is too daunting if it looks like a new player has to make many purchases just to get started. My theory is that this doesn't happen if it looks like from a player's perspective that there is just one book they have to buy (or not even) to get started. If you look at the shelf and see PHB, PHB2, PHB3, ..., Class Splat1, Class Splat2, ..., where do you possibly start? Is just the PHB good enough? How do you know that is the place to start? Do you need the Complete Wizard Gizmo Guide if you want to play a wizard? What about he Unearthed Alchemist Field Guid to potions, scrolls and flying brooms? Will you be behind like you are playing MTG will old/superceded cards?

When the new player looks at the shelf and sees PHB, and Game Module1, Game Module2, Game Module3, at least they know that they only need PHB to play, and maybe one of those game modules, not all of them. This helps if the game modules look distinct from the PHB, more like a board game with expansions.

The advanced, experienced players know that extra classes & races are found in game modules, and/or maybe free online.

(Reply to #10)

bawylie

Elfcrusher wrote:

(Reply to #14)

Zardnaar

Wuzzard wrote:

#17

BRJN

Jul 27, 2015 17:06:46

Such a poll should provide 20 options and ask for your #1 - #5. Then put a fill-in-the-blank at bottom for anything not covered above.

I am fully aware that it would take a year or more for present product pipeline to complete the production cycle, and the polled items to show up over the event horizon.

#18

Gnarl

Jul 27, 2015 17:32:08

I don't really see how it could hurt to have a poll. There's sometimes a difference between what your customers want and what your customers think they want so the results would need to be taken with a grain of salt.

I personally don't like their current strategy. I'd much rather have a different mix of character options, adventures, campaign settings, and other things than the one we have right now. I'm fine with the release schedule though.

#19

frothsof

Jul 27, 2015 17:49:43

According to a recent Greenwood interview, they sound like they already have the storylines and products planned out for years.

#20

Grazel

Jul 27, 2015 18:26:06

Mistwell wrote:

#21

EthanSental

Jul 27, 2015 20:21:33

Since the original thread asked for " what should the list look like" and yet 20 posts in and no one has covered it.

I'd go with top 10 at most and of the top 10, go with 3 splat type character option books, another 3 on secondary books like monster manual 2 and Deities and demigods, and the last some 32 or 64 page adventures all the way up to the AP size we've seen with 5e. WoTC then gets feedback based on a tighter idea of what to produce in the main areas of interest. maybe do the 1st place is worth 10 down to 1, but something sticks out from my LSS training from last year that might be a better way of scoring the votes but it might not work across a computer voting medium.

I agree with another post that no matter what, some one will whine if they had a polled, that person voted and picked something that didnt receive many votes and didn't get produced...probably whine about it until the next edition came out as well.

#22

TenaciousJ

Jul 27, 2015 22:02:21

I'd like to see 1 or 2 other campaign settings served. Forgotten Realms might be the most popular flavor, but some people do not want vanilla.

The adventure paths are a good thing because it seems like DMs are always the choke point on how many groups a given area can support, and people frequently say that DMing is too hard. These adventures will make DMing easy mode for more people, and they can transition to their own custom campaigns once they get experienced. Though I did not learn that way, I'm sure plenty of old school DMs did.

#23

lawrencehoy

Jul 27, 2015 22:30:28

bawylie wrote:

#24

Gnarl

Jul 28, 2015 5:30:43

lawrencehoy wrote:

(Reply to #23)

bawylie

Ok, but I'm still not going to oppose broad-based market research. Gauging interest/demand, etc. "Polling" sounded to me like "voting" for what comes next, rather than an invitation to indicate interest. That's my bad on misinterpreting the OP. Apologies.

lawrencehoy wrote:

(Reply to #25)

lawrencehoy

bawylie wrote: