What would WotC need to do to win back the disenchanted?

[Mournblade94]

Fans of prior editions can be upset I suppose, but it's like being mad at Microsoft for not supporting Windows 95. Sure you can use it, but Microsoft is only supporting their current OS (and I believe a few generations back). Or say Sony for not supporting PS2 anymore, mine still works in my basement, but they're focusing on PS3.

This analogy does not apply here. A PS3 is EMPIRICALLY a better system that PS2. It can do more, better graphics, better gameplay because of the hardware. Windows 95 cannot do all the things Vista or MS7 can do.

4e did not improve anything on an empirical level, and there are those, such as myself that think anything it improved, degraded other areas. 4e does not have better art than 3rd edition. Find a person who would say the graphics on PS2 are better than PS3. The gameplay is no better in 4e than 3rd edition. The gameplay for a PS3 improved by leaps and bounds.

Anyone I know that insists the PS2 is better does not own a seventh generation system. Playing PS2 adamantly over PS3 is simply nostalgia. It is the same reason I rigged my Intellivision to play on my TV.

 

[Raven Crowking]

You are 100% correct here.

As I said upstream, even if the "snot nosed kid" spends all his money on games, my small fraction of expendable income beats "all" of his. But only for now.
Eventually, he will have the "small fraction of expendable income" and I'll be dead.

Yes, but if he is "fired as a customer" as you were, when his "small fraction of expendable income" equals yours, then that might not make as much of a difference as you might think.

IOW, this is possibly a good strategy for short-term gain, but it is a poor strategy for long-term survival. "Hook 'em when they're young" is only smart when you intend to keep them hooked.

As renau1g pointed out, TSR-D&D clearly did this or there wouldn't be folks clamouring for access to TSR-D&D materials today. Will there be as many folks clamouring for access to 4e materials in 30 years? Will the then-current edition of D&D have any recognizable continuity with 4e? With 1e?

Only time will tell.


RC

-

 

[BryonD]

On top of which, Paizo certainly wanted to keep them going, and WotC seems to have gotten an agreement from Paizo to not publish a magazine for a set period in order to avoid the competition. It seems that both Paizo and WotC believed that the numbers were large enough to be a concern.

Obviously I am just guessing here, with no useful knowledge to support this.....

But I don't think "not profitable enough" was the issue.


I think it simply came down to WotC's Gleemax ---> DDI strategy. They had a plan and rolling the magazines into that plan was part of the larger strategy.

 

[BryonD]

Yes, but if he is "fired as a customer" as you were, when his "small fraction of expendable income" equals yours, then that might not make as much of a difference as you might think.

I didn't say firing customers was a good idea.

You can market new customers without alienating the old.

Please don't confuse: "I agree with *this part*" of the strategy, with "I support the whole effort".

 

[Lanefan]

Therefore, and I mean this in all seriousness, it's probably the shrillest set of voices on message boards like this one which will be heard and acknowledged when the time comes to create and release 5th edition. So if you want to influence the future of the game, don't clamor for PDFs, because that's pointless. Don't ask for nostalgic releases of out of print editions; it's a pipe-dream. Instead, be clear about why 4th edition doesn't satisfy. Don't quit discussing the relative merits of the various editions of the game. Don't be intimidated into silence at the first alarmist cry of "edition war!" It's the only way we'll ever see a new edition of the game that draws upon all the best aspects of its predecessors.

Since I can't give you more ExP, all I can do is say "right on!"

'Round here, though, such discussions seem to be frowned on, which IMHO defeats the purpose. Instead, maybe we could ask for a separate forum area dedicated to 5e speculation and design?

Lan-"despite this, my pipe continues to dream"-efan

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think it simply came down to WotC's Gleemax ---> DDI strategy. They had a plan and rolling the magazines into that plan was part of the larger strategy.

Agree completely.

I didn't say firing customers was a good idea.

You can market new customers without alienating the old.

Please don't confuse: "I agree with *this part*" of the strategy, with "I support the whole effort".

Agreed again. I just wanted to point out that the strategy, while a good one, does require that you attempt to keep your existing customers (old and/or new), because that part seems to have slipped beneath the radar during this discussion.


RC

 

[hutchback]

Something's wrong with this, in that there's many magazines out there that can only dream of those sales numbers and yet still manage to keep going...

Lanefan

It could be due to the fact that most periodicals are profitable because of ad revenues and not subscriptions. This is such a niche that it may have been difficult to acquire enough advertisers to produce the kind of ROI they were looking for. This would be particularly challenging because most companies that would like to advertise in a magazine aimed at this demographic would be publishers of competitive products.

If I had to guess (and that is all this is, a guess), I would speculate that the cost of publishing Dungeon and Dragon magazine where considered a marketing expense. The goal was to promote gameplay and sell new product. Any revenue they made either helped offset the cost or was just considered gravy.

With DDI they can make the same marketing push but cut their expense drastically.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Don't underestimate how much disposable income the young peoples have these days. It's much higher than it used to be, even adjusting for inflation.

When I was a kid I used to get 10p pocket money a week. Now the average in the UK is over £6.

According to this inflation guide there's only been between a three and four-fold increase in prices over that time period, 300-400%.

 

[Lanefan]

When an game designer does a convention, does he get up on stage and design a game for you? Build a new D&D class on the spot for your amusement?

No, but it'd rock if they did!

The build-a-class idea, in particular:

"Over the next few hours, I'm going to go through the design process involved in creating a new D+D character class; and while at the end of the day the class that comes out of this particular exercise might not be everyone's fondest desire, you will have seen the process at work and - given some application of time and effort - be able to better design your own classes to suit your own gaming style and tastes..."

Now would that be any good or what?!

Lanefan

 

[Raven Crowking]

It could be due to the fact that most periodicals are profitable because of ad revenues and not subscriptions. This is such a niche that it may have been difficult to acquire enough advertisers to produce the kind of ROI they were looking for. This would be particularly challenging because most companies that would like to advertise in a magazine aimed at this demographic would be publishers of competitive products.

If I had to guess (and that is all this is, a guess), I would speculate that the cost of publishing Dungeon and Dragon magazine where considered a marketing expense. The goal was to promote gameplay and sell new product. Any revenue they made either helped offset the cost or was just considered gravy.

With DDI they can make the same marketing push but cut their expense drastically.

Um....You are aware that Paizo was paying WotC to publish those magazines? Far from being a source of expense, the magazines were a revenue stream.

When WotC decided to go DDI, it seems likely that offering the only official content as part of the DDI would be a smart move, and hence the online magazines. Not only that, but WotC knew that the Paizo magazines were doing better than they had been when WotC had produced them, so they allowed Paizo to complete their current AP in exchange for an agreement from Paizo not to produce a magazine for a set period of time. Hence the reason that the initial Pathfinder APs were emphatically not in magazine format, even though they used a subscription model.

Selling DDI subscriptions entails less risk, less outlay, and more profit than selling books.....or even minis. And all of the decisions around the release of 4e point directly toward the DDI.....including those that split the community.

Frankly, it might be better (read: more profitable) for WotC to offer a DDI that serves all editions than it is to sell more books of any one edition. But this is only true for TSR-D&D so long as you need the DDI because the books aren't out there, because the systems are simple enough that you don't need character builders, monster builders, or encounter builders to play those games. This could even come in the form of seperate initiatives so as to avoid confusion (which is where this idea could lose revenue!). Older editions might even have a higher price-point under such a scheme.

Or, at least, that is my understanding of it.

RC

.