WotC WotC blacklist. Discussion

[UngainlyTitan]

I thought that vtt was the second attempt not the first?

My memory was that, initially, they outsourced a 3d VTT to some local company that formed specially for the bid and demoed the VTT prior to the 4e release. It was supposed to be unveiled at the same time as the 4e release. When the time came it was DOA and they started hiring more developers and the murder/suicide happens. Then they start again but walk themselves in to a technological dead end.

Also Joseph would have been in charge of that anyway. He was a video game developer/designer before WotC, and from what I remember was brought in specifically because they wanted a 3D video game like vtt. But I could be misremembering.

I am not sure if they were going for a 3D VTT the second time around but I could be wrong. I am, having used VTTs quite sceptical of 3D VTTs. They require too much investment from the DM or a willingness to let the software take care of the details with a limited ability for customisation.

 

[Hussar]

My memory was that, initially, they outsourced a 3d VTT to some local company that formed specially for the bid and demoed the VTT prior to the 4e release. It was supposed to be unveiled at the same time as the 4e release. When the time came it was DOA and they started hiring more developers and the murder/suicide happens. Then they start again but walk themselves in to a technological dead end.

I am not sure if they were going for a 3D VTT the second time around but I could be wrong. I am, having used VTTs quite sceptical of 3D VTTs. They require too much investment from the DM or a willingness to let the software take care of the details with a limited ability for customisation.

Well, to be fair, it was a 3d character builder that was demoed that was meant to work with the 3d VTT. All of that was was pretty much scrapped with the actual VTT they did get working in the tail end of 4e. It was actually a quite good VTT and worked perfectly fine. Had they had a bit more time with it, it would have fully integrated the online tools and been an outstanding VTT.

But, yeah, the demo they had was for the project that got so tragically ended. Of course, the tragedy didn't really come out right away - so people kept piling on WotC for over promising and not delivering. By the time the facts of the tragedy came to light, the torches and pitchforks crowd had already moved on so, it was generally held that it was all WotC's fault.

 

[humble minion]

it was generally held that it was all WotC's fault.

Well, to be fair, it pretty much was. If you’re a large company like hasbro/WotC and you outsource a major promised component of a major product line to a software hour so small and badly organised that it can be completely and irretrievably derailed by the loss of one person, then it’s a disastrously bad management decision. People change jobs, people get sick, people have personal crises amd tragedies. Single points of failure are anathema in software dev, and this sad history clearly demonstrates why.

 

[Hussar]

Well, to be fair, it pretty much was. If you’re a large company like hasbro/WotC and you outsource a major promised component of a major product line to a software hour so small and badly organised that it can be completely and irretrievably derailed by the loss of one person, then it’s a disastrously bad management decision. People change jobs, people get sick, people have personal crises amd tragedies. Single points of failure are anathema in software dev, and this sad history clearly demonstrates why.

Dude, come on. The lead developer and his wife, who also was part of the project die in the middle of project development, and you're expecting this to have no effect on the project?

Let's not forget, it's 2006/7 - WotC is, in fact, a very small company with a few dozen employees run on a shoe string budget and hasn't made a significant profit in almost ten years. The reason WotC went with a small company is because they absolutely didn't have the money to do anything bigger.

It's easy to make these kinds of statements now, but, back then? Good grief, the whole concept of a VTT was still pretty new (most had only been out for maybe 5 or 6 years by then) and a lot of the fandom was VERY hostile to the notion.

And, of course, when they didn't deliver, this became a HUGE talking point to "prove" that WotC hated fans, was completely incompetent and ate puppies. The fact that this particular issue was pretty much entirely not their fault didn't matter at all.

 

[jasper]

… Being unable to follow the project guidelines is bad enough for a new writer, then asking to have your name taken off the book is a career killer….

I was at an author con this weekend. Everyone on the panels said for the slush pile ALWAYS follow the guidelines listed. And one editor hinted if you can’t follow the instructions your great art of work goes into the can. Glitter. Crayon. And other ways of standing out were mocked.

I have black listed the power company, gas company and IRS but they still do business with me.

Hussar bad Hussar. It is catsup with dogs and mustard with cats.

 

[Deset Gled]

Well, to be fair, it pretty much was. If you’re a large company like hasbro/WotC and you outsource a major promised component of a major product line to a software hour so small and badly organised that it can be completely and irretrievably derailed by the loss of one person, then it’s a disastrously bad management decision. People change jobs, people get sick, people have personal crises amd tragedies. Single points of failure are anathema in software dev, and this sad history clearly demonstrates why.

Is important to remember that at the time D&D was not a major product line of Hasbro, and the idea of a VTT was an experiment, not a major component of TTRPGs.

The world is a very different place now. I'm not going to use it as an example of good management, but let's not judge the project unfairly, either.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Well, to be fair, it pretty much was. If you’re a large company like hasbro/WotC and you outsource a major promised component of a major product line to a software hour so small and badly organised that it can be completely and irretrievably derailed by the loss of one person, then it’s a disastrously bad management decision. People change jobs, people get sick, people have personal crises amd tragedies. Single points of failure are anathema in software dev, and this sad history clearly demonstrates why.

It's certainly not best practice. In actuality, speaking from experience, it's not all that uncommon. Software shops are businesses, and programmers typically command relatively high salaries. That's even moreso the case for experienced devs. It's shortsighted, but the business owners frequently opt against redundancy in order to maximize profit.

 

[Blue]

Let's not forget, it's 2006/7 - WotC is, in fact, a very small company with a few dozen employees run on a shoe string budget and hasn't made a significant profit in almost ten years. The reason WotC went with a small company is because they absolutely didn't have the money to do anything bigger.

I was under the impression that Wizards of the Coast has been quite profitable since the 90s with M:tG. Can you point me towards some information they were having those problems?

 

[Parmandur]

I was under the impression that Wizards of the Coast has been quite profitable since the 90s with M:tG. Can you point me towards some information they were having those problems?

WotChad always been quite profitable...D&D less so.

 

[darjr]

4e was pitched to Hasbro by WotC as a computer / internet / public play / cross media based phenomenon to make the brand as big as magic or One of Hasbros top tier brands. Hasbro dumped loads of cash into WotC for it. It was a huge investment and gamble.