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

[renau1g]

Sadly, there is no VTT.

RC

Yet... I still hold out hope

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

WotC seems to have gotten an agreement from Paizo to not publish a magazine for a set period in order to avoid the competition.

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.

Do you have a link to back up claims of this non-compete agreement? Or are you just assuming it occurred?

I think Hussar is doing a tad bit of inferring with his own bias, as I don't remember either company claiming the magazines weren't profitable, in fact I specifically remember Paizo claiming they were in fact profitable under them. I also wonder why it would matter to WotC as long as they are getting their licensing fee from Paizo. As I remember it, this was around the same time that WotC began pulling all of it's licenses back in-house.

I remember an article from Erik Mona at the time that put a silver lining on the situation. He lamented the work involved in keeping a magazine going in the face of declining ad revenue. He looked forward to just being adventure writers and not magazine publishers. Now they have people subscribing to their work at over three times the old subscription rate. I think people conflate wanting to continue publishing two magazines named Dragon & Dungeon and Paizo wanting to publish a magazine at all. And without proof of an agreement to not compete, I believe that the fact that they did not go back to a magazine format is truely telling.

 

[Imaro]

I can empirically demonstrate that it is far easier to plan adventures and create PC's for 4e than prior editions with DDI. I have access to every rule book published with the CB and with every monster created plus the ability to scale up or down levels with the click of a button, calculating hp, attacks, etc, in a fraction of a second. Therefore, I have more time available to game, or to pursue other parts of my life. To me that's better. Maybe everyone would rather spend hours and hours going through each MM and writing down stat blocks. Not me, I'd rather go outside and play some sports, go play video games, watch a movie, or play more D&D. YMMV of course.

The funny thing is that DDI is an accessory, which one must pay more for each month, not part of the game system... so your point is kind of moot... you're paying money to have more time... but the game system iytself has nothing to do with it.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I can empirically demonstrate that it is far easier to plan adventures and create PC's for 4e than prior editions with DDI. I have access to every rule book published with the CB and with every monster created plus the ability to scale up or down levels with the click of a button, calculating hp, attacks, etc, in a fraction of a second. Therefore, I have more time available to game, or to pursue other parts of my life. To me that's better. Maybe everyone would rather spend hours and hours going through each MM and writing down stat blocks. Not me, I'd rather go outside and play some sports, go play video games, watch a movie, or play more D&D. YMMV of course.

Funny, all I need is a sheet of paper and a pencil. Doesn't get much easier than that.

 

[James Jacobs]

WotC agreed to extend our license to print the magazines pretty much so we could finish out the Savage Tide adventure path, and that's pretty much all there was to that. There was no "don't make more magazines" clause to any contracts. The reason we went ahead with Pathfinder in a book format, and why we were so adamant about calling it a book, is that the business models for books and the business models for magazines is actually VERY different. Down to things like what kind of fees/taxes we pay, how we can ship products, when and if they can be reprinted, and perhaps most importantly, how and where those products are placed in a store.

Magazines get placed on the magazine rack, and space on that rack is VERY limited and HIGHLY competitive. And as a result, expensive to secure.

Books, on the other hand, have spines, and can thus be shelved spine-out OR front-facing, depending on the available space. More importantly, being classified as a book means that ALL of our products get shelved in the right spot; they're with the RPGs in the RPG section, not lost amid the entire spread of genres for magazines.

And in the end, although a book and a magazine might feel and look similar, the business of printing books and magazines is FAR more efficient than the business of printing and selling magazines. While I would have LOVED to have been able to keep working on the official D&D magazines... I have to be honest. Losing the magazine license and moving on to do Pathfinder has been pretty much, across the board, a sound business development for Paizo.

Launching a book line is not only FAR less expensive than launching a magazine... it's also INCREDIBLY riskier to launch a magazine than it is to launch a book line.

 

[hutchback]

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.
.

No I was unaware of that. Having learned that, I suppose WotC may have felt that they could make more money through DDI than with the licensing agreement.

My last post was just providing some insight as to why anyone would discontinue a magazine with a decent sized readership.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Reynard]

Funny, all I need is a sheet of paper and a pencil. Doesn't get much easier than that.

I think a great deal of the "4E is an objective improvement" sentiment arises from those whose primary experience with D&D was 3E -- either because they started play with 3E, or because they returned to D&D with it. And for that part, in many ways, I can see why 4E is considered an improvement (particularly in respect to the DM's job). That is why upthread I pointed out that some people that are disenchanted with 4E are disenchanted with the "fluff", the non tangibles, the D&Dness of 4E. It is totally subjective, of course, but it is there and you'll see it argued as much (or more) than issues over mechanical bits.

(I am a bit of both, myself; there's 4E stuff I want to steal for my Labyrinth Lord game like the disease track, but overall the PC system totally turns me off and the rampant change for change's sake in the fluff is all bad as far as I am concerned.)

But, really, when it comes down to it, the thing that makes older editions "better" to me is that they are more fun. The focus of play is different than 3E or Pathfinder or 4E and you can do more in less time (this is a big one). The fundamental elements of play are very different and I truly think that because of this, 4E could live alongside some sort of B/X style game the same way that AD&D and BECMI coexisted.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I can't speak to Sony. I'm a Nintendo guy. The Wii can play Game Cube games. You can download hundreds of NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, and even C64 games to your Wii, starting for as little as $5. There are also new games in the 8-bit style being made and available for download, Megaman 9 and 10 being recent notable examples. Also, Nintendo is making "lost" Japanese-only classic games available for download, including lost Super Mario levels, Castlevania X, and the original Sin & Punishment.

Nintendo will often use a bit of synergy with their releases of old and new. i.e., They released the classic original Sin & Punishment via download a few months before the retail release of its sequel.

I think up until very recently Sony was still making PS2 games. My first generation PS3 plays all of my PS2 games pretty flawlessly. Which is a good thing considering that I have over 15 un-played PS2 games in my game library. I havent tried my PSOne games though, hmmm...

My Xbox360 plays my old Xbox games pretty well. But as far as I know Microsoft doesnt make new Xbox games.

And as you pointed out the Wii does play my old Gamecube games.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Well, it is hardly a boycott then. I cannot boycott Coca-Cola by refusing to buy their gasoline. Not buying that which you weren't going to buy anyway isn't a boycott.

It'd be a more accurate analogy to say that you don't boycott New Coke when you buy Pepsi instead.

You can see how that might be a boycott, though.

IMXP, the colloquial use of "boycott" (vs. the formal use) is essentially "I'm not buying Company X's products because Company X has displeased me in some way, and if they had not displeased me, I would be buying their product."

But even with all that, I don't see many posters tossing around the word "Boycott" at all, so saying that it's not a boycott is kind of like saying that you're going to go buy gasoline instead of Coke.

 

[Mournblade94]

I can empirically demonstrate that it is far easier to plan adventures and create PC's for 4e than prior editions with DDI. I have access to every rule book published with the CB and with every monster created plus the ability to scale up or down levels with the click of a button, calculating hp, attacks, etc, in a fraction of a second. Therefore, I have more time available to game, or to pursue other parts of my life. To me that's better. Maybe everyone would rather spend hours and hours going through each MM and writing down stat blocks. Not me, I'd rather go outside and play some sports, go play video games, watch a movie, or play more D&D. YMMV of course.

Is that a function of the system or DDI? It is not inherently built into the system. What you can do is prove that DDI makes the system easier. It is like me saying PS3 is better than PS2 merely because of its network capability. YOu cannot however prove that the 4e system makes adventure building easier. Sorry I won't switch systems because it has a toy attached.

I however have hero lab and find I plan and write quality adventures quick and easy. Empirically there is nothing that makes 4e better than 3rd edition.

Any reason why you're here then? I mean, why waste your time here if you a) don't care, and b) hope the company goes bankrupt?

Point a does not lead into point B. Not caring about the company does not mean I wish it bankrupt. I just don't care if it does bust at this point because I think something else would fill its place.

The post you were quoting however, said I will gladly speak of hypotheticals. That is why I am here.