D&D 5E Is 5E Special

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
And I'm sure WotC can account for scale. Do you really believe they aren't aware or purposefully ignore the more popular products made by other companies for 5e? There have been multi-million dollar kickstarters for 5e, and you're telling me no one at WotC paid them any mind. I find that logic hard to follow.
I didn't say that. I would bet that they have someone looking over every DMs Guild product for good ideas that the 3rd party site can't realize on its own. Number of copies sold wouldn't be that metric, though. A lot of good ideas can be lost in other bad ideas that kill a product. They will be looking at what is done and making the decision themselves. The success or failure of the 3rd party product would be nearly worthless to look at.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



I mean, a big part of that marketing budget is market research to determine what people actually want. WotC spends tremendous time and energy on that.
My man, if I, as a literal indie publisher, could somehow randomly gain $100,000 for literally just market research and advertising, let alone the millions WotC commands, I would be far more successful. You can't tell me you don't see how ridiculous you're being. Me and literally every other 3PP publisher, even those that get million dollar Kickstarters, cannot compete with WotC in any way when it comes to advertising.

Sorry man, but that's reality. You're literally telling me that I can compete with HASBRO if I just study a bit more. C'mon.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
My man, if I, as a literal indie publisher, could somehow randomly gain $100,000 for literally just market research and advertising, let alone the millions WotC commands, I would be far more successful. You can't tell me you don't see how ridiculous you're being. Me and literally every other 3PP publisher, even those that get million dollar Kickstarters, cannot compete with WotC in any way when it comes to advertising.

Sorry man, but that's reality. You're literally telling me that I can compete with HASBRO if I just study a bit more. C'mon.
...? No? Who said that? I said they have the resources to get accurate market information, and so have better evidence on their hands as to what will sell than their gut feelings or a conspiracy to hurt 4E fan's feelings or something.
 

Imaro

Legend
The issue isn't that WOTC doesn't see it.

The issue is that WOTC decided in 2014 to do a very slow release schedule with alot of ideas crossed off the list of possibilities and stuck to it. The way 5e is released, they has to be big ideas they're missing out on making oodles of cash on.

However they have decided to stick with the plan. I mean it took them 6 years to "fix" the ranger because they had a policy that they wouldn't edit the PHB or DMG except to clarify completely broken or confusing rules.
Weren't campaign settings crossed off the list initially... now we have how many official setting books?? Strangely enough it was also an area where 3PP have been able to and still do flourish...
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
The issue isn't that WOTC doesn't see it.

The issue is that WOTC decided in 2014 to do a very slow release schedule with alot of ideas crossed off the list of possibilities and stuck to it. The way 5e is released, they has to be big ideas they're missing out on making oodles of cash on.

However they have decided to stick with the plan. I mean it took them 6 years to "fix" the ranger because they had a policy that they wouldn't edit the PHB or DMG except to clarify completely broken or confusing rules.
But that's the thing: they wouldn't necessarily are "oodles of cash" I'd they released whatever, whenever. And spending $7 to make $10 instead of $3 to make $8 isn"leaving .only on the table": spending more and having a lower profit is losing money, even if revenue goes up somewhat.
 

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
But that's the thing: they wouldn't necessarily are "oodles of cash" I'd they released whatever, whenever.
You're doing that thing again where you take "criticism of the status quo" and treat it as "inversion to a strawman opposite."

Saying, "Man, the game's release schedule is glacially slow, that sounds like it probably cost them quite a bit in sales" is not the same as saying "they should've been releasing 12 books a year every year." Rebutting the idea of WotC "releas[ing] whatever, whenever" is specious at best, because no one is asking for that.

It is possible to critique a position and ask for a moderate change, rather than wild abandon, which is what you immediately assumed here.

And spending $7 to make $10 instead of $3 to make $8 isn"leaving .only on the table": spending more and having a lower profit is losing money, even if revenue goes up somewhat.
This, at least, is a more cogent point....but you have no data to base it on. Would it have cost them 2.33x as much to only gain 1.25x the money? Or would it have cost them 1.25x as much to make 2.33x as much money? We literally cannot know. WotC doesn't even know.
 

EzekielRaiden

Follower of the Way
Weren't campaign settings crossed off the list initially... now we have how many official setting books?? Strangely enough it was also an area where 3PP have been able to and still do flourish...
Not sure how it could be, considering the very first supplement was SCAG, an official setting book...less than a year after the DMG was published. Meaning it had to have been in the works before the DMG was published.

If the plan was "no setting books at all," it was abandoned before the game even hit the shelves.
 

Parmandur

Book-Friend
You're doing that thing again where you take "criticism of the status quo" and treat it as "inversion to a strawman opposite."

Saying, "Man, the game's release schedule is glacially slow, that sounds like it probably cost them quite a bit in sales" is not the same as saying "they should've been releasing 12 books a year every year." Rebutting the idea of WotC "releas[ing] whatever, whenever" is specious at best, because no one is asking for that.

It is possible to critique a position and ask for a moderate change, rather than wild abandon, which is what you immediately assumed here.


This, at least, is a more cogent point....but you have no data to base it on. Would it have cost them 2.33x as much to only gain 1.25x the money? Or would it have cost them 1.25x as much to make 2.33x as much money? We literally cannot know. WotC doesn't even know.
Neither of us have data to base it on: WotC, however does, and it is their business to run. I see no reason to suspect that this is not the moderate approach.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top