D&D 5E Perfect example of the kind of interaction that I wish Wizards had with it's community.

[Dire Bare]

Ah, that's what I thought, you were using outdated stuff and claiming it's still current.

He is referring to years prior to that, and says later it was entirely scrapped and they were rescued by the books of WOTC being combined. And then literally every person above him at Hasbro involved with that is no longer there, and most of the people at WOTC at the time are gone as well. It's about as past tense as you can get - the whole thing is gone as a concept and there is zero evidence it's still in effect.

But, we all went down this debate 5 years ago. Even the argument is old at this point. I didn't think anyone was still kicking it around.

Relax. You seem a bit aggressive on this for some odd reason.

About the only thing in question is the exact number, but who cares? 50 million, 10 million, 100 million, the situation is the same. You seem to be focused on the least important part of his post.

 

[doctorhook]

I was over on the WotC Community at the time. I registered here, posted a couple times, but mostly lurked. That was my main site (until the most recent site upgrades made posting on my iPad frustrating to impossible and left me unable to log in).

Ah yes. I put in a fair bit of time over there too, once upon a time. Unfortunately, last time I was there it seemed like everything from the old forums was gone, which was frustrating. Too many layout changes too, and inconsistent moderation. It wasn't bad in 2008, but now I mostly only pop over when I want a reminder of how good things are here at ENWorld. (Seriously, between the WotC boards and news site comments sections, I've come to truly appreciate quality moderators.)

RPGs are a greying hobby at best. There's certainly some life and room for new player, but the heydays are over and aren't coming back. Strategies do need to change from one of heavy expansion and sales to preservation and long term sustaining of the brand.
A movie *might* help, as would a TV show. But that's well outside of WotC's control. They have to proceed as if that's not happening.

True story. TTRPGs aren't likely to dry up totally, but they're probably never gonna dominate the market. They're also changing: TTRPGs that aren't easy to digitally integrate are going to fall by the wayside. My group uses Roll20 on a flatscreen TV, and we'd love some good tools too; I think this is going to become increasingly normal.

Kinda. Since I started frequenting ENWorld more often I moved and now live and work in the Park, and don't make it into Edmonton often anymore.

Cloverbar Rd is my stompin' grounds.

I find it more bittersweet that straight "sucks". Extra books are nice, but quickly becomes too much for me. When I think of the books and content I have from Paizo that will never be used... it's scary. The majority of my RPG collection might as well be University textbooks for subjects I dropped.
Current Jester is chafing for new content and books, but Future Jester will be happy with the restrained content. And I'm horrible to Future Jester and make him put up with all kinds of pain, so this just feels like karma.

lol I hear ya. I've accumulated a lot of stuff too; some of it is great, and some of it is unlikely to ever see use ever again. Mostly no regrets, but my collection is only two shelves of a bookcase.

 

[Shasarak]

Indeed. The immediate response to Dancey's info was, "Oh noes! D&D is going to be mothballed!" No one seemed to connect the dots with the $50 million target and the incessant D&D layoffs. Now they've got a much leaner team (I don't buy that it's a "skeleton crew"), and they've moved from a splat heavy strategy to a wider brand licensing one. That's more of a viable option now than in 2005-2007 because since then they got the digital rights back from Atari, and have a good chance of getting the movie rights back.

I do not buy that it is a "lean team" when you fire your two editors.

 

[Patrick McGill]

I'm going to have to agree with those saying the developers are avoiding forums due to bad forum behavior. Forums, especially these days, always seem to have stockpiles of kindling ready to blaze at the smallest perceived slight. They don't gain much from interacting with fans via this platform. Social media, like Twitter, is quickly becoming the greatest platform, as it keeps the questions small. You can't rant with 140 characters, or else it's rather annoying to do so with tweet after tweet.


They definitely ARE communicating with fans, however. A lot better than they used to, I think. Hell, the whole playtest was one big communication platform. It wasn't open, but communication doesn't need to be. They're perfectly willing to answer questions on twitter, and much of any of the developers feeds are simply them answering such questions.

Them not being able to talk about unreleased products is nothing new, I fear. But I would hardly say the developers are silent. They're just not coming to our stomping grounds because, well, we have a tendency to stomp.

 

[Gundark]

WotC teases all the damn time. [...] they were teasing 5e before it came, and the inclusion of certain elements in the design.

Yeah they hinted heavily at 5e before the announcement. The only thing that was surprising was how soon after 4e it was.

 

[Mistwell]

Personally, I find that Dancey does a good job of taking the industry's pulse. I also have a soft spot for him as a driving force behind the OGL. The 2011 interview has Dancey talking about big suprises for D&D in the works. My take is that he was looped in on the D&D Next initiative. Hasbro is a big company looking at the long term. The $50M+ target for D&D sounds reasonable and I see no reason for Hasbro to have changed that target. It's all speculative, by I think it shows that Dancey was correctly looking forward to the current model for D&D, a leaner team due to how 4e played out as well as a plan for maximizing the brand's exposure. I'd love to hear his take on how the last 4 years have or haven't meshed with his expectations for D&D as a brand and for the industry as a whole.

We don't have to speculate. We KNOW they scrapped that target and everything associated with that whole topic. Dancey himself said that. D&D was put under the general WOTC umbrella. There is no more D&D target from Hasbro - they are no longer a separately measured accounting entity for Hasbro.

 

[Mistwell]

Relax. You seem a bit aggressive on this for some odd reason.

About the only thing in question is the exact number, but who cares? 50 million, 10 million, 100 million, the situation is the same. You seem to be focused on the least important part of his post.

No really the situation is totally different now. There is NO D&D target, of any sum. It's no longer counted that way - targets were shuffled to include more than just D&D, quite a while ago (before even the interview Dancey was giving back then). Dancey himself explained that since, and so did others.

I am "aggressive" (a loaded term usually intended to goad people) because we've (the board that is) had this discussion a dozen times at this point. If you missed the stuff that came after, normally I'd go find it but after this much discussion already behind us, I am just no longer inclined to go dig it up once again. It's just one of those zombie topics that won't die - someone always brings up this canard it seems, no matter how many times and people knock it back down. It's like whack a mole. We could have Mearls himself come to this board and explain there is no $50M target, and a couple months later someone will claim there is such a target again.

 

[Dire Bare]

I would argue that a D&D that only releases one or two TRPG products per year and focuses on board games and licensing is in trouble, even if it's a business model that makes lots of money for Hasbro. It's still bad for the game. I don't give two hoots about the success of Wizards as a company (or as a division of Hasbro), except insofar as it affects the game.

I realize that that means my priorities and Hasbro's, and probably Wizards', don't align, and that's OK. It's just one more sad fact of life.

Bad for the game? As in, a business model that allows WotC to continue publishing the game? If D&D had to stand on its own without licensed products to support it, D&D would likely be mothballed.

And, even if we could ignore that . . . the idea that a slow release schedule is bad for the game itself is also subject to a WIDE variety of opinion, and most certainly isn't a given. Whether WotC makes any sort of profit on D&D or not, I'm glad for the slow-but-sure release schedule, it's one I can keep up with at this point in my life!

D&D is not "in trouble" any way you slice it. It may not be meeting your desires, but that ain't the same thing.

 

[Dire Bare]

No really the situation is totally different now. There is NO D&D target, of any sum. It's no longer counted that way - targets were shuffled to include more than just D&D, quite a while ago (before even the interview Dancey was giving back then). Dancey himself explained that since, and so did others.

I am "aggressive" (a loaded term usually intended to goad people) because we've (the board that is) had this discussion a dozen times at this point. If you missed the stuff that came after, normally I'd go find it but after this much discussion already behind us, I am just no longer inclined to go dig it up once again. It's just one of those zombie topics that won't die - someone always brings up this canard it seems, no matter how many times and people knock it back down. It's like whack a mole. We could have Mearls himself come to this board and explain there is no $50M target, and a couple months later someone will claim there is such a target again.

Sorry Mistwell, wasn't my intent to goad you, and in retrospect, my post does sound that way.

Still, I think we're focusing on details that are somewhat less important . . . especially when none of us really know the real details and we're all armchair quarterbacking here. I may be misunderstanding Iosue's point, and perhaps your rebuttal, but this is the way I'm looking at it . . .

To continue to be published, D&D needs to be profitable. At one point perhaps, profits had to reach a specific target number ($50,000?), at another the game itself stood alone in the accounting, later the game and brand stood together. Now perhaps D&D plus Magic together need to hit a certain target number. Any way you look at it, D&D needs to turn a profit to continue to exist.

Many fans seem to think the current publishing model for the game isn't going to earn a reasonable "WotC-sized" profit, and that the game is "in trouble". I highly doubt that is the case. I'm very confident in WotC's decision-making that have given us the new game and its new publishing model, and that it will give us a sustainable, and profitable (for WotC), run for D&D. Perhaps I'm so confident because this slow release schedule lines up very well with my own desires for D&D, and I'm also tired of the negativity and nitpicking among the online fan base.

Also, not all of us follow the developments of D&D's business side as closely as you seem to. So again, relax a bit if several of us aren't up to speed and have missed or forgotten previous developments.

EDIT: Upon a smidge more reflection, I'm not so sure that "many" fans are upset and worried that D&D is "in trouble". More like "some" fans who happen to be very vocal and repetitive!

 

[Iosue]

We don't have to speculate. We KNOW they scrapped that target and everything associated with that whole topic. Dancey himself said that. D&D was put under the general WOTC umbrella. There is no more D&D target from Hasbro - they are no longer a separately measured accounting entity for Hasbro.

Dancey said that the current regime doesn't have to answer for the promises of the previous regime. However, Hasbro is still pursuing a Core Brand strategy, which means D&D still needs to clear $50 million if it wants to lavish in Core Brand support. Maybe they don't. But as Dancey noted, D&D could not maintain its 70+ employees without Core Brand financial support, and the division has been culled accordingly. Whether the current team's pitch to Hasbro included a goal for Core Brand status or not, they do need to bring in big bucks if they want to expand.

As for D&D put under the general WotC umbrella, this is the first I'm hearing of it. WotC is not mentioned in the Investor Reports. Lots of individual brands are. Magic is, as a Franchise Brand (and they say, "Franchise Brand" a lot). I recall you making a very convincing argument that WotC's star was ascendant in Hasbro because Games was up, and WotC was making up most of the revenue growth in Games. That doesn't mean that for purposes of deciding its operating budget D&D is counted along with Magic in WotC. I would be very happy if that is true, but I haven't seen any evidence of it. I do see evidence of Magic being treated special. I do see evidence of Hasbro still pursuing a Core Brand strategy. I do see evidence of the D&D division being trimmed down from its 3e heyday. I do see evidence of D&D looking outside of the RPG for streams of brand revenue. I'm going to assume that any brand that thinks it can become a Franchise Brand will endeavor to become one. Whatever the particular target number may be.

Again, all of which is to say, "D&D not dead, not on last legs, not being thrown bone by Hasbro before mothballs -- D&D exploring new ways to bring in revenue and increase its profile in the company with licensing avenues it's never had before since WotC took over." Something tells me we don't disagree on that.