Ampersand: 2011 releases officially gutted

[DEFCON 1]

If I hadn't bought the PH3, no way in hell would I try to understand what an ardent or psion does based on a reading of DDI. It's basically not a friendly way to gain information- it's a pain in the ass trying to put the pieces together.

Which is why putting new classes with all-new mechanics that need to be explained on the bookshelves makes sense, and I wouldn't say they would (or should) stop doing that. But Psionic Power? Where the only "completely new" information is perhaps a new build class ability? That could easily appear in a Dragon Magazine article with little to no fuss. And if this new build was only to appear via DDI... it would inspire more people who want that information to actually buy a subscription, at which point they'd experience what they'd also get from the RC, CB, MT and VTT.

I think moving to an increasingly electronic form of distribution is a terrible mistake, because WotC doesn't seem to be able to handle their current electronic offerings. Why on earth would I have faith that moving more and more stuff to their least successful (in the sense of "easy and fun to access and use information") channel will improve anything?

Now this is completely different. You're not arguing that they shouldn't do it because it doesn't make financial sense to do so... you're arguing they shouldn't do it because you personally don't like how they've done it previously. But that kind of personal opinion on your part will have very little influence on whether it will continue, because for every person like you who hasn't liked how they've done their digital projects in the past, there's a person like me who's been quite happy with the online tools I've been getting since being a DDI subscriber. So our personal opinions on how they run their business cancel each other out. Thus it goes back to WotC's feeling of what makes the most financial sense for them to run their business in the future.

Certainly, this isn't D&D's death knell, but it's looking like the death knell of many people's willingness to spend money on D&D.

Just like every other change that has occurred over the lifespan of the game. Every change loses someone who doesn't like the change, and their hope is always that someone new comes in to take their place. And losing one person who would buy three hardcovers (which produces only a small amount of cash for WotC) and replacing him with one person who will buy a DDI subscription (which is almost all funneled directly into the company) is a good change in the long run for the financial health of the company.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If 2, then my question is Would content delivered in new ways, along with new ways to experience D&D bring new blood into the game?

Almost every new media delivery system brings new revenue. Look at media's long-standing vanguard/beneficiary of new tech: porn.

It predates printing. Every media advance- sculpture => paper => painting => printed books => photography => magazines => film => home video => Internet- has resulted in a massive penetration into the new markets, swelling the coffers of the pornographers. Why? Access, pure & simple. Each advance has made getting porn easier, cheaper, and more anonymous...meaning that potential customers can now avoid virtually all moral backlash & embarrassment when sampling the product. Or becoming a repeat customer.

So yeah, digital media of today, as well as those we have yet to imagine, will bring new blood.





(all double entendres you saw above are the product of your dirty mind)

 

[Scribble]

So I completely understand why people are resistant to the idea of game books no longer being books... but from a cost to profit point of view it just makes too much sense not to continue in this path.

It's not as simple though as saying if it's cheaper then there will be more profits. There are generally a lot of factors that go into whether a plan of action will be ultimately more profitable, and sometimes the plan that's "cheaper" on the back end might not always be the one that leads to the most profits.

It sounds logical, but what if say, your cheaper option ends up opening the door for added costs down the road that the more expensive plan does not?

I personally want them to make more digital products, but I don't have enough info to understand if it would be a good, or bad business move.

 

[Klaus]

There's also the aspect of a brand's visibility. D&D *needs* shelf space to remain visible.

 

[Scribble]

There's also the aspect of a brand's visibility. D&D *needs* shelf space to remain visible.

I don't know if that's true.

I don't disagree that D&D, like any brand, needs to stay visible- but whether or not shelf space is the best way to do that is up for debate.

 

[Chainsaw Mage]

But the books whose primary purpose is game mechanics? Absolutely, those could be taken down from the shelves and moved online. Do any of you "sit down to read" your Adventurer's Vault? Or pick up your Player's Handbook and read the Powers sections of all eight classes?

It may be hard to believe, but yes, some of us actually do read our rulebooks.

(I'm surprised such a point is even debated/discussed, frankly. RPGs have *always* been defined by cerebral types reading hundreds of pages of rules and enjoying it).

 

[tmanbeaubien]

A great friend of mine, TheHalfling, pointed me at this thread and I've read it with deep interest.

Here's a question - when did you realize that a digital facet of D&D made some sense? I have some specific moments for myself -
1. When I bought a super-duper Excel Spreadsheet (with almost more macros than there are stars in the sky) to manage 3rd edition character sheets. An Excel Spreadsheet! I can (and have) gone on at some length about the great failure of WOTC to produce a character builder/manager program anytime in the 10-15 years before they actually did.

2. When I got an email telling me that my PDF copy of the 4e Player's Handbook (purchased at RPGNow.com) was out of date - a newer version was available with corrections and errata. (Obviously this was before the great drought happened.) This still happens for me with Paizo stuff I've bought.

3. When I picked up the 4e Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide and flipped to the emaciated husk which passed for an index.

Since the beginning of 4e, I have not bought one of the powers books because I've been a DDI subscriber. It just didn't make sense to do so. I have lots of the other books because of the fluff that I want/need as a DM. I have multiple copies of the tile sets and bunches of the minis. My group plays in person around a table and we play just like in the old days, except with an iPhone app to track HPs and conditions, my iPad for compendium access and a nice magnetic board to track initiative. But the crazy bloodthirsty fighter who just has to kill every single foe on the board is still with us and the thi..rogue who tries to palm a gem out of the locked chest he just opened is right behind you too. They still argue with the town watch as to who threw the first punch. Etc, etc.

I dearly understand the love of physical books, but for books of rules - things which are tweaked, errata'd, polished and updated - the internet makes a huge amount of sense. Remember when some of us old folks were kids, they'd print a new updated set of encyclopedias every year? Well, that just doesn't happen anymore. It's too slow, it's too expensive, it's to heavy to carry around. And as mentioned above, it must cost too much to even bother to hire enough editors to make a good index for your books.

Paizo sells all their stuff in PDF format too and I mean every thing they publish with words in it. Works beautifully on my iPad at the table. Much easier on my shoulder when I carry it around. I'd buy more books (er, publications??) from WOTC if they were available electronically to enjoy.

So, like it or not, I think that our hobby is going to change - based on $$$ (atoms being expensive to shape, color and move in bulk), based on ease of use, based on overload of information, based on timeliness of updates. We may play it the same way we always have (or nearly so), but we're going to purchase (or purchase access to it) in very different ways.

 

[Klaus]

I don't know if that's true.

I don't disagree that D&D, like any brand, needs to stay visible- but whether or not shelf space is the best way to do that is up for debate.

Y'see, the interwebz are very "pulverized". There are few sites possible consumers go that overlap. Everywhere you go on the web, you go because you meant to (apart from site I never ever visited thankyouverymuch... ). But going to a mall, strolling into a bookstore, those are common activities for a wide range of people. Or looking about and seeing the D&D logo on a book on the window. The effect is quite different than seeing it on a web banner.

I think that yes, D&D does need to have a physical world presence. Books on a bookstore, comics on a newsstand, action figures in a toy store. It makes the brand "real", y'know what I mean?

 

[Scribble]

Y'see, the interwebz are very "pulverized". There are few sites possible consumers go that overlap. Everywhere you go on the web, you go because you meant to (apart from site I never ever visited thankyouverymuch... ). But going to a mall, strolling into a bookstore, those are common activities for a wide range of people. Or looking about and seeing the D&D logo on a book on the window. The effect is quite different than seeing it on a web banner.

I think that yes, D&D does need to have a physical world presence. Books on a bookstore, comics on a newsstand, action figures in a toy store. It makes the brand "real", y'know what I mean?

I get what you mean, but I don't agree that that's the only way to keep it in the public eye, nor do I agree that the only other way is web banners!

I don't disagree that toys, and comics and such are a good thing- but books on a shelf aren't the end all be all of advertising...

In fact more important then just letting people know it exists, I think is getting people to understand WHAT it is that actually exists.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It sounds logical, but what if say, your cheaper option ends up opening the door for added costs down the road that the more expensive plan does not?

Obviously I can't comment on the actual numbers here because I have no idea. All I can do is look at what WotC's been doing, along with what all other media and entertainment companies have been doing at the same time and then making educated guesses.

And based upon the music, television, VOD, book, and computer industries... people are moving further down the digital river. I really don't see how you could come to any other conclusion. Sure, the speed at which we're drifing down the river can be debated, and the speed at which older formats become obsolete can be also... but the fact we're still moving down it I don't believe can be. Anyone's welcome to try and debate it if they'd like. I welcome the opportunity to talk.