I've got to admit preferring the Mongoose version of 2300AD myself, despite owning nearly everything for the original version. A very nice alt-setting to the 3I, but it uses their version of Traveller very nicely. Of course it was the setting that I really enjoyed in the original game more than the rules.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
What will happen to 4th edition?
- Thread starter vivsavage
- Start date
- Status
I've got to admit preferring the Mongoose version of 2300AD myself, despite owning nearly everything for the original version. A very nice alt-setting to the 3I, but it uses their version of Traveller very nicely. Of course it was the setting that I really enjoyed in the original game more than the rules.
prosfilaes
Adventurer
The d20 crash was when WotC produced 3.5 without warning, leaving d20 publishers, distributors and stores with large amounts of d20 products that were largely unsellable. I don't know what the impact was on WotC, but it's not directly about WotC.
Which would explain part of the reason why 3.0 PHB is available for 5 bucks on Amazon and the 3.5 PHB is still running 15. But I never saw anyone sticking with 3.0. I'm curious what the numbers were for the DMGs, and if they were substantially different. Also, I was under the impression the 3.5 splatbooks sold a lot better then the 3.0 splatbooks, the d20 crash (having driven competing splatbooks out of the market) and making them hardback apparently helped that.
Imaro
Legend
Oh I don't know... discussion, something you keep pretending it's your job to moderate as opposed to leaving it to those whose job it is to handle... Wonder what makes someone think "Yes, pretending to be a mod when I have no authority and harassing others about their oppinions is an excellent use of my time."??
You don't want me to post in the thread because I have a dislike of 4e... but you don't want only positive posts... so is it a personal thing then?
Yeah and you continue your imaginary modding... bro, lol.
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
The setting never really grabbed me. I don't honestly recall the details of it well-enough to articulate exactly why, but one of the big things about it was it seemed to very much de-emphasize running around in a ship exploring. I always thought that was a major draw of the original game. I don't recall that 2300 really let you even OWN a ship, maybe it was possible. I seem to recall that there was a very restricted set of places you could go, and that was the main downside. It wasn't like you could just take your jump 2 scout and head off into the unknown.
sgtscott658
First Post
Lets keep in mind that WotC was not deep into 3.0 as it was for 3.5. There were a few soft bound splat books and adventures for 3.0 but nothing comparable to 3.5's amount of books. So I dont think there was "d20" crash, how could there be when third party publishers began cranking out 3.5 material. Some good some bad some relegated to the trash bin.
When 4E arrived on the scene thats when thing went to hell in a hand basket for WoTC, people either left the hobby, stuck with 3.5 and a few went on to 4E. Yes I'm sure the number of initial books sold must tell a different story but everybody buys the new shiny object, its when that shine wears off can it still be a sustainable product?
3.5 was sustainable IMHO, I my enjoyable D&D campaigns were in 3.5 but I think WoTC wanted to shut down the third party producers and they thought 4E would be that ticket to victory, well that failed because Pathfinder has proven that 3.5 is still around. Where are all the 4E third party producers anyway?
When 4E arrived on the scene thats when thing went to hell in a hand basket for WoTC, people either left the hobby, stuck with 3.5 and a few went on to 4E. Yes I'm sure the number of initial books sold must tell a different story but everybody buys the new shiny object, its when that shine wears off can it still be a sustainable product?
3.5 was sustainable IMHO, I my enjoyable D&D campaigns were in 3.5 but I think WoTC wanted to shut down the third party producers and they thought 4E would be that ticket to victory, well that failed because Pathfinder has proven that 3.5 is still around. Where are all the 4E third party producers anyway?
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Yeah, all these figures you see online are dubious. I read in an interview with one of the former WotC guys that the 4e core books sold more than any previous edition. Of course he may have meant implicitly "right out of the gate" or something, I don't really recall the exact wording. But that's it see, things are remembered, memory is unreliable, maybe I remember it exactly right, but maybe the guy that said it didn't know or misremembered or lied, or maybe there was some subtle qualifier in there, maybe even just contextual.
So, the Eric Mona figure COULD be correct and the quote I read could be correct and the problem was simply sustained interest in the face of things like PF. I gotta believe PF hurt D&D a good bit. It was JUST enough of a refresh that a lot of people bought it even if they were basically happy 3.5 players, and its really rather hard to find someone that wouldn't quickly and painlessly migrate to PF without a big ruckus. You can take your 3.5 group and nobody will get all steamed or feel unhappy about learning a new game, its just not really that new.
Obviously that begs the question about what WotC should have done, but I think the problem there is twofold. First is the NARRATIVE, "plucky 3PP left out in the cold strikes off on its own to help players left behind by nasty WotC 4e moneygrab" vs "Nasty WotC 4e (albeit 3.75) money grab, why bother?". They just couldn't win there. Releasing a 3.75 for WotC would have been stillborn. It would have sold some books, but it would have been a slow and hard sell, probably slower and harder than 3.5, not what they were after.
The point being most of the people that bought PF wouldn't have bought 3.75. OTOH producing 4e wasn't a better solution. I'll give Mike credit for one thing. He has shaped the anti-4e backlash into a more sympathetic narrative for WotC. Now its the "poor bumbling fools have learned from their mistake" narrative.
However, they still face the OTHER WotC problem. WotC has it would seem driven out all the really creative talent they ever had in house. At least they somehow don't UNLEASH it creatively. I think things are just too much "brand management" over there. When Paizo releases a product its cool. When WotC releases a product its much more bland.
Neonchameleon
Legend
The size of the DDI usergroup which also posted on the WotC Boards was public (even if it broke last November when WotC "upgraded" their boards). As of March 2013 there were about 81,000 subscribers (with numbers dropping off to 73,400 by last November at the upgrade). For there to have been only 100k PHBs sold that would mean that 80% of people who bought the 4e PHB were still subscribing to DDI by March 2013 - or there was a significant number of people that subscribed to DDI without ever buying the PHB. I know I wasn't still subscribing by then!
So I'd say your numbers were pretty inaccurate there.
Imaro
Legend
Honestly this is what I thought happened, the d20 bubble bursting with 3.5 not 3.0...
Neonchameleon
Legend
My belief is that 3.5 was a deliberate pin to pop the bubble. People having to work out whether they stayed with the rules or updated them and making it more awkward for shovelware producers.
Neonchameleon
Legend
The GSL was a horrible license to work with. The suits weren't going to allow The Book of Erotic Fantasy MK II - and basically shut down much of the market. It wasn't helped by Goodman Games' Dungeon Crawl Classics line being a terrible fit for 4e and people seeing that and the GSL as the trailblazer.
- Status
Similar Threads
