D&D 5E WTF Wizards of the Coast? *RANT* (video link)

[captcorajus]

I'm going to guess that you have never actually run a (real) business. Operators of a business have a fiduciary responsibility to the owners (private or public) to ensure the profitability of owner investment. Problem is there are two sides to the ledger, and screaming about how foolish a company is for ignoring one side (income) while you yourself ignore the other (expenditure) illustrates your failure to grasp the point: If a new "source of revenue" costs the company more to bring to market, then it's not a "source of revenue" but a "source of financial liability". If a new "source of revenue" doesn't have a sizable enough margin to justify the investiture of capital, then it isn't a "source of potential revenue" but a "source of potential financial liability".

Obviously WoTC and it's upstream owners have decided that the profits margins are too thin to be worth the investment or non-existent.

One thing about ASSume.

You would assume incorrectly. I am using my own personal success in running first a corporate business for 10 years, and then my own personal business for the last 10 years, thus 20 years experience as my assessment of WOTC's failure here.

I am also using my knowledge of exactly how digital apps through apple are written and marketed, which in reality very little cost involved.

We are talking about DATA organizational apps here, not reinventing the wheel. The apps have already been written, and the cost to use them is nominal in
that even a 'start up' can afford to utilize the software engine for their own commercial apps.

Any well versed scripter can manage this application as what we are talking about is data manipulation. The equivalent of writing an excel spread sheet, and giving it a pretty skin.

Furthermore, DIGITAL is the way the industry, and business in general is moving. EVERYBODY has an 'app'. This is called a TREND. You might want to look it up, as its a very important term when it comes to running a business. Its probably the single most important business trend in history, which only further serves to underscore WOTC's utter failure to find a revenue model that capitalizes on it.

You would seriously have to be a complete WOTC apologist to not recognize this.

 

[captcorajus]

I'm going to guess that you have never actually run a (real) business. Operators of a business have a fiduciary responsibility to the owners (private or public) to ensure the profitability of owner investment. Problem is there are two sides to the ledger, and screaming about how foolish a company is for ignoring one side (income) while you yourself ignore the other (expenditure) illustrates your failure to grasp the point: If a new "source of revenue" costs the company more to bring to market, then it's not a "source of revenue" but a "source of financial liability". If a new "source of revenue" doesn't have a sizable enough margin to justify the investiture of capital, then it isn't a "source of potential revenue" but a "source of potential financial liability".

Obviously WoTC and it's upstream owners have decided that the profits margins are too thin to be worth the investment or non-existent.

How about we put your theory to the test with actual data?? Hmm?

Here's one app, with 292 total ratings at 4.5 stars out of 5:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/fifth-edition-character-sheet/id967650851?mt=8

While the numbers for total downloads is a closely guarded secret we can make a few assumptions. The app costs $2.99
and a little data mining reveals that on average for an app of this price, it is rated once for every 200 downloads.

Thus, now, we can guess that the total downloads are around 58,000, but for arguments sake, lets round that off to 50,000 total downloads.

At $2.99 a piece, this app developer wrote ONE app and has grossed $150,000. This doesn't count the no pay version of the app, which generates revenue from ads.

Your assertions about profitability are suspect at best.

 

[Blue]

I think it would be a stretch to blame people not buying 4e books with the character builder, which was a damn good tool showing that, at least once, WotC can produce something decent.

I made the choice of continuing to buy books, or continuing to pay for the online tools. I chose the online tools. The rules lookup was very handy during sessions, the (original offline) character builder was decent, and plus I got the magazines.

Plus my experience with the previous edition is that we were looking at a new book a month, so the subscription was cheaper than trying to stay up to date.

Let me say that in clearer words: The online tools allowed me and encouraged me to give up buying any more books.

(If also worked well when they wanted to support 5e. Charge me the same monthly subscription for the tools but without the magazines or bug fixes/missing content getting addressed and I dropped the online tools and don't have enough books to play 4e, so I moved on the 5e. Well, I could go back to 3.5 or earlier pretty easy as well.)

 

[captcorajus]

I made the choice of continuing to buy books, or continuing to pay for the online tools. I chose the online tools. The rules lookup was very handy during sessions, the (original offline) character builder was decent, and plus I got the magazines.

Plus my experience with the previous edition is that we were looking at a new book a month, so the subscription was cheaper than trying to stay up to date.

Let me say that in clearer words: The online tools allowed me and encouraged me to give up buying any more books.

(If also worked well when they wanted to support 5e. Charge me the same monthly subscription for the tools but without the magazines or bug fixes/missing content getting addressed and I dropped the online tools and don't have enough books to play 4e, so I moved on the 5e. Well, I could go back to 3.5 or earlier pretty easy as well.)

Your post is rife with logical fallacies. The first one is that you have started of with a personal anecdote and then used that
to assert that because YOU stopped buying books in favor of using the digital tools, that that was evidence that digital tools
keeps people in general from buying books.

Second, in order for your assertion to be true, one would have to also assume that the 'book of the month' model from WOTC
was producing books that were worth buying.

It is also important to point out that WOTC has stopped publishing on that scale in favor of adventure events, rather than an endless
stream of sourcebooks.

It is just as logical to say that the monthly sourcebook model was a poor one rather than saying digital tools kept you from buying books. Really, who can keep up with an endless stream of classes, feats, and skills being added to the game? Who would want to?

Conversely, WOTC was getting a GUARANTEED $120 a year from you, or the equivalent of three sourcebook purchases a year.

Thus, one can conclude that WOTC was getting money from you on a steady basis even though their publication model was a poor one.

 

[Blue]

Why don't we cut through the bs?

EXCELLENT IDEA.

Wizards is definitely large enough a company to make decent digital tools had they wanted to.

Considering that they have to delay projects when people get pulled off for jury duty, I don't think so. Considering that PF has several multiples of amount of their staff and they don't do it, I really don't think so.

But they don't want to. They have never wanted to.

Well, we can show you are wrong on the "never wanted do". One of the first 4e books I got had a CD with demo tools on it. It was years later but they did come out with a bunch of 4e tools. So they did want to do it.

Please stop the "this sector is smaller than that sector" smokescreen.

Calling actual numbers a smokescreen is ... a smokescreen.

Of course they could have made solid if not spectacular tools on a modest budget.

Is that because they have a record of doing that? Is it because they have staff that do that? Considering how badly some of the tools have died (and even PF had theirs die), are you sure that they could have, and that what you call a "modest budget" wouldn't have impacted the rest of the game?

Some of you make it sound like a digital character sheet is rocket science. Jeez. It's not.

Since one guy tinkering in a basement over a year could do it (see: lots of Web efforts actively cease and desisted) the only explanation left is:

Well, considering that 4e went through a character builder that had a months long bug fix list, and was months behind in implementing new features when anything new came out, it seems like doing it right and in an expandable way isn't easy.

Go ask the PCGen guys if their work was easy and something one guy could whip up in their basement.

Wotc is hoping the modern world is just a bad nightmare, and that people will soon accept again having to do routine calculations that computers could do for you.

Good luck with that.

I'm glad you know why they are doing it. Can you link the the conversation? Was it one a panel, twitter, a video release? Please give me ANYTHING that says this is what they are thinking and you didn't make this up.

Okay, BS cut - that was a good idea.

 

[Greg Benage]

While the numbers for total downloads is a closely guarded secret we can make a few assumptions. The app costs $2.99
and a little data mining reveals that on average for an app of this price, it is rated once for every 200 downloads.

Thus, now, we can guess that the total downloads are around 58,000, but for arguments sake, lets round that off to 50,000 total downloads.

At $2.99 a piece, this app developer wrote ONE app and has grossed $150,000. This doesn't count the no pay version of the app, which generates revenue from ads.

Well, assuming your x200 multiplier is correct, how many of those are free downloads? Or, I guess, to put it another way, how many in-app purchases at $2.99 have actually been made?

How much revenue do the ads generate on the free version?
What is the iStore's percentage?
What does it cost to develop a commercial version that adequately supports the brand?
What does it cost to deliver satisfactory customer/technical support?
What impact does a commercial app have on PHB sales?
Does the app increase the population of people playing D&D and purchasing D&D products? How much?
How would these costs and impacts scale up for the "baseline of full digital tools"?

I don't think you have the required information to answer most of these questions. In any case, using your own example, it seems revenue would likely be very low and unlikely to support even FTE compensation and benefits for development and support.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Other than the desire to 'make money' which one would think is a factor in being in business. As a business, it is their obligation to constantly improve
their business model, and find new sources of revenue. To NOT do so is irresponsible.

Thus, their obligation is to the business.

I'm betting that the head folks at WotC know that their jobs with Hasbro depend on them making money.

It's amazing how easy it is from the outside, with no data, to say, "You are making dumb decisions...let me tell you how to run your business..."

 

[Shasarak]

I made the choice of continuing to buy books, or continuing to pay for the online tools. I chose the online tools. The rules lookup was very handy during sessions, the (original offline) character builder was decent, and plus I got the magazines.

Plus my experience with the previous edition is that we were looking at a new book a month, so the subscription was cheaper than trying to stay up to date.

Let me say that in clearer words: The online tools allowed me and encouraged me to give up buying any more books.

(If also worked well when they wanted to support 5e. Charge me the same monthly subscription for the tools but without the magazines or bug fixes/missing content getting addressed and I dropped the online tools and don't have enough books to play 4e, so I moved on the 5e. Well, I could go back to 3.5 or earlier pretty easy as well.)

So what I am hearing here is that you got the books and you paid for the online tool subscription.

How exactly is that not a win for WotC?

 

[Nickolaidas]

Temperatures seem to be rising a lot on this thread ...

In the end, a number of gamers are dissatisfied with the lack of digital tools, and it's fine to voice that displeasure - that's how supply and demand works.

But there's no need to aggressively challenge other people's opinions. As long as we're outside the house, we have no idea of what the big wigs are thinking, and cannot prove or disprove any theory concerning WOTC's strategy. Thus, both sides have no way of illustrating their point.

The argument is moot, in short.

 

[Blue]

Your post is rife with logical fallacies.

Such as ad hominem attacks?

The first one is that you have started of with a personal anecdote and then used that
to assert that because YOU stopped buying books in favor of using the digital tools, that that was evidence that digital tools
keeps people in general from buying books.

Yes, I was clearly communicating anecdoal evidence. In every case I referred to "I", "me" and "my experience". I am unsure how you can read that and think it applies to everyone.

It looks like your second logical fallacy was to set up something I didn't say and claim I did in order to knock it down.

Second, in order for your assertion to be true, one would have to also assume that the 'book of the month' model from WOTC
was producing books that were worth buying.

That is also incorrect, but in this case your math is bad instead of having a logical fallacy. At $10/month subscription, and part of that offset by the other material in the magazines given, even if only one $30 sourcebook every few months was skipped, it was still a savings.

Oh wait, you're wrong another way. If ANY of the material was worthwhile, the subscription would get it for me vs. the purchase price. So I don't need the whole book to be good, just a part I wanted. For more information about my purchase patterns: I purchased SCAG for 5e and haven't cracked it open except to the character build options because I'm not playing FR right now.

So you were wrong twice there. I could count a third time that you don't get to judge for me what I felt like purchasing, but you've got so many clearly wrong statements that I won't confuse it with a fuzzy one.

It is also important to point out that WOTC has stopped publishing on that scale in favor of adventure events, rather than an endless
stream of sourcebooks.

Wow, another place you're wrong. I specifically pointed out that I was judging it from the publishing rate of the earlier edition.

Once I was already multiple months in an multiple books down, there would have been a debt to purchase all of thsoe books to get caught up.

It is just as logical to say that the monthly sourcebook model was a poor one rather than saying digital tools kept you from buying books. Really, who can keep up with an endless stream of classes, feats, and skills being added to the game? Who would want to?

Well, something you said that isn't wrong. Well, perhaps wrong that WotC saw it as a viable business model so evidently some people wanted to, but considering the eventual backlash from it I'm inclined to let your statement stand.

Conversely, WOTC was getting a GUARANTEED $120 a year from you, or the equivalent of three sourcebook purchases a year.

Thus, one can conclude that WOTC was getting money from you on a steady basis even though their publication model was a poor one.

Incorrect. Your math is correct this time, but the conclusion that their publishing model being bad means that their total content is bad is another fallacy.

Being able to pick and chose between all the books, having other tools that helped me at the table like the Compendium, all of the additional material in the magazines that I couldn't get without the subscription, having useful tools like the character builder, and having everything KEEP UP WITH 4e ERRATA - that can be worthwhile.

And in fact, I found it more worthwhile them buying any of the books that came out after I subscribed.