The Real Reason(s) Behind the PDF Debacle

[LightPhoenix]

Actually, I would argue that piracy is nothing more than competition - and the product they were offerring was superior in quality at a lower price. If WotC had offered fully indexed pdfs (and well-scanned in the case of back catalog items that they didn't have the ability to directly convert) at a reasonable price, then piracy would not be able to compete as successfully.

It's very hard for a business, that needs to make money and thus charge for its products, to compete with a price point of (effectively) 0.

 

[ExploderWizard]

CardinalXimenes is exactly right. By eliminating the option for PDF's you are reducing the possibilities of a 0-day release. Consumers that MUST HAVE IT as soon as it comes out will be forced to buy the hard copy. One might argue that WotC has lost some of their customer base from the fallout of PDFgate, but this is just nerdrage, empty threats. That's why its so truely aggrivating. They've screwed us over and we're mad as hell, but deep down inside we know we will still be handing them over our money.

I think CardinalXimenes had a good point about the 0 delay acquisition of new products. This goes right along with the general instant gratification needs of our times. Nowadays, waiting for anything is unbearable because we have become so spoiled by technology.

The bolded part deserves special comment. As a consumer of older edition material I am comfortable saying that this is not true for everyone. It was a heavy handed "buy 4E and like it" move designed to try and bury older edition products. Its what I would do if I only cared about making money instead of giving customers the product they wanted. If I had plans to release a crappy watered down copy of a popular setting or adventure then I certainly wouldn't want to also have the higher quality original version sitting on the virtual shelf for comparison. If the best real competition that you have for a product is your own earlier version of it then its time to revisit your current product and ask: why would my customers be more interested in my older products? When you are ready to accept the answer to that question, you will have found enlightenment.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The 0 delay acquisition is definitely important.
It might actually be one of the reasons why so many movies have one world-wide release day. There are people that have watched the leaked unfinished cut of the new Wolverine movie, despite the fact that it lacked most of the CGI. (I've seen a youtube video from a episode of the new Knight Rider with incomplete CGI - trust me, it's not pretty... )

 

[Umbran]

He then goes on to talk about piracy thus deflecting attention and ENWorld doesn't pursue the matter of the other reasons...

This shows that the piracy argument for pulling PDFs was bogus to begin with even in the eyes of WotC.

Um, no, it doesn't. It means that the piracy argument is only a partial explanation. Partial does not equate to bogus.

By the way, ENWorld didn't "pursue" anything, because the format did not allow for follow-up questions.

 

[fanboy2000]

This shows that the piracy argument for pulling PDFs was bogus to begin with even in the eyes of WotC.

So let me get this straight: if someone says A and B were both reasons to do X, it's evidence that A is an invalid reason if that person then goes on to talk about A?

What I find the most amazing is that you seem to be implying that limiting or reducing piracy isn't a strategic business decision.

 

[3catcircus]

It's very hard for a business, that needs to make money and thus charge for its products, to compete with a price point of (effectively) 0.

Well - when the pdf (not the content, but the media) becomes a commodity, then the producer of the content needs to differentiate itself and make wanting to buy from them worthwhile.

When you offer something the other competitors don't at an attractive price, consumers will buy it. Had WotC offered cheap (or free) PDFs to those that bought the dead trees, piracy numbers wouldn't be nearly as high. On this very website, I called out Rouse on this issue last year and was told that I was insane and didn't know what I was talking about.

The Paizo model works. Selling PDFs for $20 and dead trees for $30 doesn't work. Heck - charging full price for 3.x pdf products was bad business practice from the beginning. Sure - some people bought them, but I always felt that charging full price for different media (when there was no physicalness to said media) was extremely arrogant on their part.

iTunes is successful because their price point doesn't feel like a ripoff. I'm willing to bet that the best sales on RPGNow and Paizo were for the back catalog items (the ones they charged $4.95 on average). Five bucks doesn't feel like a ripoff (despite the fact that, at the time or initial release back in the 80s, a new D&D module retailed for around the same price in your FLGS).

If you give people something the competition can't offer, you will be the lead competitor.

 

[CardinalXimenes]

Had WotC offered cheap (or free) PDFs to those that bought the dead trees, piracy numbers wouldn't be nearly as high. On this very website, I called out Rouse on this issue last year and was told that I was insane and didn't know what I was talking about.

Oddly enough, this idea was exactly what WotC originally wanted to do, until they realized that they could think of no feasible way to accomplish it. You've called them out on an idea they've openly stated they have no idea how to do right.

Arguments such as this, saying that WotC would salve the wounds of piracy if only they did X, Y, and Z often neglect to acknowledge that accomplishing X, Y, and Z might be presently impossible. I can propose that WotC would kill the pirate market dead if only they made their PDFs impossible to copy by illicit means... and I'd be completely right. I'd just be proposing something that no one knows how to do.

Linking the purchase of a physical object with the unlocking of a virtual add-on requires that the physical object have some kind of access code attached to it. This code has to be such that a ganker cannot simply copy it out of the book and then go online to collect. Anyone who can think of a way to feasibly do this when it is a _book_ that is the physical object, something that is intended to be opened and paged through by a prospective buyer, should quickly communicate their insight to WotC. And as a tip, shrinkwrapping your hardbounds is not a live option.

 

[Starbuck_II]

So let me get this straight: if someone says A and B were both reasons to do X, it's evidence that A is an invalid reason if that person then goes on to talk about A?

No, only if the conclusion must follow from having both A and B be true at the same time. There are arguments that only need one or the other being true.

If the argument is convex (or was it the other one) then it only needs one to be true for the whole argument to be valid, but the conclusion can still be wrong.

So logically, it isn't invalid. I took logic class: I understand what makes a conclusion valid. Just because it feels wrong doesn't mean it isn't logical.

 

[3catcircus]

Oddly enough, this idea was exactly what WotC originally wanted to do, until they realized that they could think of no feasible way to accomplish it. You've called them out on an idea they've openly stated they have no idea how to do right.

Arguments such as this, saying that WotC would salve the wounds of piracy if only they did X, Y, and Z often neglect to acknowledge that accomplishing X, Y, and Z might be presently impossible. I can propose that WotC would kill the pirate market dead if only they made their PDFs impossible to copy by illicit means... and I'd be completely right. I'd just be proposing something that no one knows how to do.

Linking the purchase of a physical object with the unlocking of a virtual add-on requires that the physical object have some kind of access code attached to it. This code has to be such that a ganker cannot simply copy it out of the book and then go online to collect. Anyone who can think of a way to feasibly do this when it is a _book_ that is the physical object, something that is intended to be opened and paged through by a prospective buyer, should quickly communicate their insight to WotC. And as a tip, shrinkwrapping your hardbounds is not a live option.

Actually - I'd argue that their argument that there was no way to do it right really meant either they were afraid of piracy or that they wanted to maximize profit.

No way (as has already been proven) would them giving away pdfs for free or cheap to those who bought the hardcovers stop piracy, but it would certainly lessen piracy. When obtaining something by piracy is more convenient, then of course people are gonna do it. WotC *chose* to make it more convenient to download an illegal copy. They've brought this on themselves, to some extent.

The *right* way to do it would be to include a pdf download with the purchase of the book, know that you'll have the equivalent of "shrinkage" due to piracy, and continue to count your profits. The moment that you start deciding that maximizing profit means limiting your potential sales, you've already lost.

 

[Fenes]

Um, no, it doesn't. It means that the piracy argument is only a partial explanation. Partial does not equate to bogus.

By the way, ENWorld didn't "pursue" anything, because the format did not allow for follow-up questions.

Which is a shame. The evasive "both" can cover "a tiny little bit of this, and the rest of that", and "equally both", and all between them. In short, no real information was provided. If that had been asking the questions I'd have asked straight back "and what was the major reason?".

Honestly, we all know that the piracy reason makes no sense for the PDFs that were out already, so could we please stop playing cute semantics here? That interview is full of evasive courtroom answers, and void of any information.