Scribble
First Post
It was just to the point and answered the questions- No need to be longer.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Rule-of-Three: 07/24/2012
- Thread starter Wizards of the Coast
- Start date
It was just to the point and answered the questions- No need to be longer.
Pour
First Post
I'm kind of liking being the black sheep edition of the family. The writing has been on the wall since the first edition neutral publication reared its head that WotC would not be supporting 4e in any appreciable capacity. Turning over support entirely on the anemic digital offerings is really one foot in the grave. Quality over quantity, sure, but it was always an implied 1) content would never trickle down to 3-5 articles a 'publication' and 2) quantity could return, alongside quality. That never happened.
Also, despite very early optimism at his lead, I don't think Mike Mearls really likes the edition, and he's steered the ship toward new waters. Essentials was a retrograde, albeit a tolerable one had it been one explored avenue (akin to a Gamma World like stint), but we now know it really was the first flag that things were rolling back. And so they have.
I could be totally off base, but I read from this Ro3 that 4e content has been planned until December, then it's up for grabs where they want to take things. Sadly, there's no mention of the tools, because I don't think they know what's happening with them. Undercutting 4e undercuts a need for DDI as it exists now. With no direct edition support, it's hard to see where things go from here, edition neutrals and reprints until 5e I guess.
I imagine DDI will be supported until mid-next year, then turned off under the "There wasn't a large enough demand for it", despite being the very ones who smothered it. You know, like Epic tier.
Also, despite very early optimism at his lead, I don't think Mike Mearls really likes the edition, and he's steered the ship toward new waters. Essentials was a retrograde, albeit a tolerable one had it been one explored avenue (akin to a Gamma World like stint), but we now know it really was the first flag that things were rolling back. And so they have.
I could be totally off base, but I read from this Ro3 that 4e content has been planned until December, then it's up for grabs where they want to take things. Sadly, there's no mention of the tools, because I don't think they know what's happening with them. Undercutting 4e undercuts a need for DDI as it exists now. With no direct edition support, it's hard to see where things go from here, edition neutrals and reprints until 5e I guess.
I imagine DDI will be supported until mid-next year, then turned off under the "There wasn't a large enough demand for it", despite being the very ones who smothered it. You know, like Epic tier.
Ahnehnois
First Post
[MENTION=59411]Pour[/MENTION] I'm not seeing the "black sheep" aspect. I think this is pretty clear:
And this really isn't dissimilar to the demise of 3e support leading up to the 4e release. We got a bunch of insubstantial and expensive 4e preview books, and before that insubstantial products like Elder Evils and the Rules Compendium (full of bizzarely anti-D&D sidebars), and before that a slow stream of small-niche and often poor-quality releases (ToB, WoL, etc.). The many great article series (Eye of the Mind, Far Corners of the World, etc.) on their website disappeared. 3e as an actively supported game died out at least a year before 4e, more depending on how you look at it.
At least, unlike DDI, they couldn't kill the SRD.
If they can't sell the core rulebooks they've already printed, why would they print new supplements? It may be that they've shot themselves in the foot, but one way or another they've gotten to where they are. It's not profitable for them to make these products.
And this really isn't dissimilar to the demise of 3e support leading up to the 4e release. We got a bunch of insubstantial and expensive 4e preview books, and before that insubstantial products like Elder Evils and the Rules Compendium (full of bizzarely anti-D&D sidebars), and before that a slow stream of small-niche and often poor-quality releases (ToB, WoL, etc.). The many great article series (Eye of the Mind, Far Corners of the World, etc.) on their website disappeared. 3e as an actively supported game died out at least a year before 4e, more depending on how you look at it.
At least, unlike DDI, they couldn't kill the SRD.
Mattachine
Adventurer
[snark]Good thing WotC went away from downloadable tools to online tools. That way, when 4e ends, subscribers won't have to be bothered with obsolete tools anymore.[/snark]
I fear that 4e will be remembered as "D&D: Internet Edition", which failed.
I fear that 4e will be remembered as "D&D: Internet Edition", which failed.
Jester David
Hero
Given the DDI editorial team is "still discussing plans for 2013" I wonder if the next announcement involves the cancellation of Dragon and Dungeon.
Pour
First Post
@ Ahnehnois , Not even a little bit?
I should clarify I'm not screaming foul. I don't think this Ro3 says much we didn't already know. It sounds, as you said, the typical death of an edition stuff, but you honestly don't believe 4e is the black sheep of the D&D family? I prefer the edition, mind you, but I believe Cookie Monster said it best, "One of these things is not like the other things. One of these things just doesn't belong."
It's no slight against past editions or 4e. Hey, play what you like, prefer what you like, edition war on any side you like. I'm not making a judgement, just an observation. And maybe posing a question that deserves its own thread, namely could you see 4e clawing its way out of the corpse of a dead edition and assuming its own game IP.
I think 4e may be different enough to warrant its own title, properties, and most of all continued evolution unbeholden to D&D elements of the past, or what some would call things like "sacred cows" or "the soul of D&D" or "nostalgia" or whatever else. I think I'm saying in effect that 4e doesn't have to be D&D anymore, and I don't think fans of past editions or 4e will shed a single tear over the split. If 4e actually wants to exist beyond next year, this divorce must take place.
I should clarify I'm not screaming foul. I don't think this Ro3 says much we didn't already know. It sounds, as you said, the typical death of an edition stuff, but you honestly don't believe 4e is the black sheep of the D&D family? I prefer the edition, mind you, but I believe Cookie Monster said it best, "One of these things is not like the other things. One of these things just doesn't belong."
It's no slight against past editions or 4e. Hey, play what you like, prefer what you like, edition war on any side you like. I'm not making a judgement, just an observation. And maybe posing a question that deserves its own thread, namely could you see 4e clawing its way out of the corpse of a dead edition and assuming its own game IP.
I think 4e may be different enough to warrant its own title, properties, and most of all continued evolution unbeholden to D&D elements of the past, or what some would call things like "sacred cows" or "the soul of D&D" or "nostalgia" or whatever else. I think I'm saying in effect that 4e doesn't have to be D&D anymore, and I don't think fans of past editions or 4e will shed a single tear over the split. If 4e actually wants to exist beyond next year, this divorce must take place.
Ahnehnois
First Post
I think that would be a very positive step for the community, but I don't know that Hasbro would let it happen. Whatever D&D is, rpgs are bigger than that. If more different rpg systems were on the market and reasonably successful, I think it would be good for the hobby.
Dice4Hire
First Post
Not likely.
Jester David
Hero
The magazines have shrunk to half the size. And come December there will be layoffs. A year of not really selling much new product because they announced a new edition. There will be serious staff cuts, meaning either the DDI team or the D&D Next team.
Who do you think is expendable?
Echohawk
Shirokinukatsukami fan
Not selling much new RPG product maybe, but I seem to recall a podcast/panel discussion/interview where the success of their line of board games was mentioned as reducing the pressure on the D&D team to produce more books just for the sake of having product to sell.
I don't really know enough about the relative scale or profitability of the board game market versus the RPG market to know if it is feasible for D&D board game sales to offset D&D RPG sales significantly. If the board games are selling well enough, is it possible that WotC aren't so worried about fewer RPG releases for a year or so?
Similar Threads
