WotC Hasbro Earnings Call: WotC/BG3 carrying Hasbro

[Hussar]

To be fair, this is also what Blizzard thought about how World of Warcraft would do.

Given the crunch-and-layoff cycle of major game studios, they tend to be pretty pessimistic about their chances, even when the evidence suggests they're sitting on a hit. No one wants to walk into the office, expecting champagne and bonus checks and be given a surprise pink slip instead. So it's pretty common to go full Eeyore as your game is released, as a psychological defense mechanism.

Isn’t the reason for this the fact that the majority of times they are entirely right? How many time has that anticipated game fizzled on release?

 

[bedir than]

I read this as "WotC made us a lot of cash, we are taking that out of Wizards, and investing into other segments and initiatives to diversify. Thanks BG3."

"Internal publishing build out"

 

[Mind of tempest]

You are presuming that lore matters. A “lore disaster “ to me is a rocking product no longer chained to dead authors. To each his own I guess.

I think it is more when they make something with stuff to really chew on I see that the more lore less modern race options tend to be harder to fit unless either player or DM has a clear thought on them some more clear baselines there would help.

setting also needs lore to inspire people to want to go there the book is to a certain degree a travel brochure.

Isn’t the reason for this the fact that the majority of times they are entirely right? How many time has that anticipated game fizzled on release?

depends on why sometimes they just get put on the wrong hardware or something bigger realises around the same time that fights for the same users. then you get the real stupid mistakes or poor judgment messing it up.

 

[Hussar]

setting also needs lore to inspire people to want to go there the book is to a certain degree a travel brochure.

Oh, I don't disagree. I know there are lots of people who want to read RPG books like they were books. I'm not one of them. I see RPG books as references for the game. If it's not directly applicable to the game, I'm not particularly interested. Don't tell me there is a cult of XX in town Y. Give me an entire list of NPC's, with names and stat blocks, three locations where the cult operates and then two or three short adventures revolving around that cult. Which doesn't leave a whole lot of room for all that other "travel brochure" stuff.

I've never been a lore guy. I'm just not. Books like the FRCS are wasted on me. I won't buy them or read them. So, I'm really happy with the direction WotC is going with its supplements. I get why people aren't happy. But, considering that there's the DM's Guild right there, with authors like Ed Greenwood doing Forgotten Realms supplements or that new supplement for Planescape done by a bunch of people who truly love the setting, I'm of the opinion that everyone is getting what they want. If it was reversed, and WotC was doing mostly lore books and adventures/DM supplements were on DM's Guild, I'd just buy my stuff there.

I guess I just don't really understand the constant drum beat that WotC is somehow making this huge mistake by not doing lore filled books. The lore is all right there in DM's Guild. You can have a hosepipe of setting lore for every WotC setting. What's the problem?

 

[Hussar]

Are those the same people who confidently assert that WotC's every move is carefully planned out in advance, backed up by consumer analysis, market testing, and other forms of data collection, and so look askance at anyone who dares to suggest that WotC is capable of making decisions that are not only mistaken, but so obviously bad that it's hard to understand what they were thinking?

I know right. A company that discovers a fairly minor flaw in its production delays release for a couple of weeks to make sure that the product is right must be an absolutely terrible company that is so obviously bad that it's hard to understand what they were thinking.

What a terrible company.

 

[Alzrius]

I know right. A company that discovers a fairly minor flaw in its production delays release for a couple of weeks to make sure that the product is right must be an absolutely terrible company that is so obviously bad that it's hard to understand what they were thinking.

What a terrible company.

What are you talking about? They're a great company; they're so committed to making sure their stuff has a flawless release that they send out the very best in hired goons to retrieve products that people legally acquire before the street date. How could anyone not understand that?

They're an inspiration to us all.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Oh, I don't disagree. I know there are lots of people who want to read RPG books like they were books. I'm not one of them. I see RPG books as references for the game. If it's not directly applicable to the game, I'm not particularly interested. Don't tell me there is a cult of XX in town Y. Give me an entire list of NPC's, with names and stat blocks, three locations where the cult operates and then two or three short adventures revolving around that cult. Which doesn't leave a whole lot of room for all that other "travel brochure" stuff.

I've never been a lore guy. I'm just not. Books like the FRCS are wasted on me. I won't buy them or read them. So, I'm really happy with the direction WotC is going with its supplements. I get why people aren't happy. But, considering that there's the DM's Guild right there, with authors like Ed Greenwood doing Forgotten Realms supplements or that new supplement for Planescape done by a bunch of people who truly love the setting, I'm of the opinion that everyone is getting what they want. If it was reversed, and WotC was doing mostly lore books and adventures/DM supplements were on DM's Guild, I'd just buy my stuff there.

I guess I just don't really understand the constant drum beat that WotC is somehow making this huge mistake by not doing lore filled books. The lore is all right there in DM's Guild. You can have a hosepipe of setting lore for every WotC setting. What's the problem?

the lore is more like the way to fix the blank page writing problem which I and many others suffer from.

 

[mamba]

I doubt they had numbers thst even suggested that.

which part, because having a number for expected sales seems like the bare minimum, and average % EA sales is not that far fetched either. If they had neither, then there is not really a basis for wondering if their EA sales would be all there is. I already said the numbers are made up...

 

[Parmandur]

which part, because having a number for expected sales seems like the bare minimum, and average % EA sales is not that far fetched either. If they had neither, then there is not really a basis for wondering if their EA sales would be all there is. I already said the numbers are made up...

Yeah, fair, but I doubt they were ignoring any numbers: if you look at the history of games like this significantly north of 2 million basically never happens.

 

[Hussar]

which part, because having a number for expected sales seems like the bare minimum, and average % EA sales is not that far fetched either. If they had neither, then there is not really a basis for wondering if their EA sales would be all there is. I already said the numbers are made up...

I know you don't mean it, but, every time you use EA, I'm associating it with EA the gaming company, not Early Release. Silly brain.