Will trying to maintain legacy and the "feel" of D&D hurt innovation?

[CasvalRemDeikun]

I was referring to people who haven't bought books from WotC, those who stopped with 2e. I thought I had implied that.

Anyway, the car design analogy is a great one: when car companies put out a radically different version of a long-time model, buyers don't warm up to it as well as a retooled, recognizable version of a classic. Radically different cars have to be new models unto themselves.

That would be all well and good if it had any basis in reality. Compare the past four model iterations of cars like the Camry, Accord, or Civic. Each successive iteration bears little resemblance to the previous iteration outside the number of wheels and doors. Oh, and each of these vehicles has steadily increased in buyership every year since they have existed. Certain things are constant, because they are what is necessary to make the car. And with the advent of things like the electric car or hybrid vehicles, some of those things aren't necessary anymore either. Turns out, if you don't innovate, people continue to drive their same car.

Lack of innovation equals stagnation. It is hard if not impossible to sell a non-disposable item to someone year after year without changing something noticeably enough that it warrants another purchase. Much like cars, if you don't change some things noticeably, people will continue using their old books. And that is a problem for companies like Wizards of the Coast, because they don't just make books for the fun of it. They make books because they are owned by a multinational toy company that likes selling products.

 

[billd91]

Except that audience stopped buying books for a reason. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

If that audience stopped buying books because of mistakes WotC/TSR made, then fixing those mistakes and catering to that audience does make for a good business strategy.

I think it's time to stop viewing fans who didn't simply follow along with things other fans think they should have, as not worthy of being listened too.

I'd XP you but I apparently did so too recently.

 

[tlantl]

If you don't buy new books on a regular basis, the brand line and maybe the company dies. That's the problem. If you like new materials for your game, you have to support the company that makes them.

AD&D did fine for two decades without having to resort to printing monthly garbage. TSR over extended themselves trying to do just that and fell on their faces.

The brand will sell in modest numbers for years. Having a major corporation that only cares about ever increasing profits is the reason why there have been four versions in twelve years. It is also the reason it will eventually fail.

Since I don't play their versions of D&D nor will I. Unless the game stops being what it's become, I really don't care what happens to the brand.

 

[El Mahdi]

If you don't buy new books on a regular basis, the brand line and maybe the company dies. That's the problem. If you like new materials for your game, you have to support the company that makes them.

DDI has made this idea obsolete.

 

[avin]

AD&D did fine for two decades without having to resort to printing monthly garbage. TSR over extended themselves trying to do just that and fell on their faces.

The brand will sell in modest numbers for years. Having a major corporation that only cares about ever increasing profits is the reason why there have been four versions in twelve years. It is also the reason it will eventually fail.

Since I don't play their versions of D&D nor will I. Unless the game stops being what it's become, I really don't care what happens to the brand.

People just didn't have other systems to compare and Internet to quickly share their ideas.

Been there, played AD&D, lots of house rules, friends complaining some rules didn't make sense... if the game go back to that it would fail, as TSR failed.

 

[Savage Wombat]

DDI has made this idea obsolete.

You clearly have no idea how many people reject subscription fees out of hand.

 

[Sunseeker]

Except that audience stopped buying books for a reason. Nothing happens in a vacuum.

If that audience stopped buying books because of mistakes WotC/TSR made, then fixing those mistakes and catering to that audience does make for a good business strategy.

I think it's time to stop viewing fans who didn't simply follow along with things other fans think they should have, as not worthy of being listened too.

Money talks, as they say. We're talking about a small audience who hasn't bought anything in 20 years, after more than 2 editions, it's a lot more of "I like what I've got" than "Wizards hasn't made me happy" yet. Wizards isn't going to reclaim any massive market share through the oldschool guys. They are at best fairweather friends, as long as Wizards does everything to make them happy, they'll buy, soon as Wizards does something else, caters to a new audience, they're gone. That doesn't sound like a reliable market to me.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Money talks, as they say. We're talking about a small audience who hasn't bought anything in 20 years, after more than 2 editions, it's a lot more of "I like what I've got" than "Wizards hasn't made me happy" yet. Wizards isn't going to reclaim any massive market share through the oldschool guys. They are at best fairweather friends, as long as Wizards does everything to make them happy, they'll buy, soon as Wizards does something else, caters to a new audience, they're gone. That doesn't sound like a reliable market to me.

We're not talking about the same audience. WotC wants the old school gamers, yes, but they're rally chasing the Pathfinder share of the market. The ones who do buy books, just not THEIR books.

I can see why you would think 5E (so far) looks like a repackaged 1E. But I think it'll be quite different when the full package is available.

 

[El Mahdi]

You clearly have no idea how many people reject subscription fees out of hand.

No, I think I clearly do know this. But I do find it interesting how you're so sure about what I do or don't know. And to think for all of these years, I thought mindreading wasn't actually real...



The edition treadmill is proof that books are not a long term form of sustainable revenue.

DDI is.

One does not need to buy books anymore in order to support D&D. One can instead spend money on DDI and do the same thing.

This is a total refutation of your statement:

If you don't buy new books on a regular basis, the brand line and maybe the company dies. That's the problem. If you like new materials for your game, you have to support the company that makes them.

The existence of DDI makes your statement no longer true. Therefore the idea behind your statement is obsolete.


Good Day to you, Sir. Please enjoy the thread and stay as long as you like.

 

[Savage Wombat]

The edition treadmill is proof that books are not a long term form of sustainable revenue.

DDI is.

This is the point you fail to support. I do not accept your statement that DDI is a "long term form of sustainable revenue.

But I do not expect you will be continuing this discussion.