WotC Hasbro Bets Big on D&D

During today's 'Hasbro Fireside Chat', Hasbro's Chris Cocks, chief executive officer, and Cynthia Williams, president of Wizards of the Coast and Digital Gaming mentioned D&D, and about betting big on its name. This was in addition to the Magic: The Gathering discussion they held on the same call.

The following are rough notes on what they said.

D&D Beyond

• Leaning heavily on D&D Beyond
• 13 million registered users
• Give them more ways to express their fandom
• Hired 350 people last year
• Low attrition

What’s next for D&D

• Never been more popular
• Brand under-monetized
• Excited about D&D Beyond possibilities
• Empower accessibility and development of the user base.
• Data driven insight
• Window into how players are playing
• Companion app on their phone
• Start future monetization starting with D&D Beyond
• DMs are 20% of the audience but lions share of purchases
• Digital game recurrent spending for post sale revenue.
• Speed of digital can expand, yearly book model to include current digital style models.
• Reach highly engaged multigenerational fans.
• Dungeons and Dragons has recognition, 10 out of 10
• Cultural phenomenon right now.
• DND strategy is a broad four quadrant strategy
• Like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or Marvel
• New books and accessories, licensed game stuff, and D&D Beyond
• Huge hopes for D&D

What is success for the D&D Movie

• First big light up oppourtunity for 4th quadrant
• Significant marketing
• They think it’ll have significant box office
• It has second most viewed trailer at Paramount, only eclipsed by Transformers
• Will be licensed video games, some on movies
• Then follow up other media, TV, other movies, etc.
• Bullish on D&D.

 

[Alzrius]

People keep trying to tell you that wotc would strangle their own VTT if they ever "closed" it like you are suggesting.

I think that would strangle it too; I just don't think that WotC realizes that. From 4E to the recent troubles with M:tG, they've made some bad decisions that make me hesitate to say "this is clearly a bad idea, therefore it's self-evident that they won't do it."

Talking about "recurrent spending" with regard to the digital environment, right after talking about how much they want to develop D&DB, strikes me as being in line with that. YMMV.

 

[mamba]

And we're discussing the possibility that WotC's won't allow that, as part of their attempts to encourage recurrent spending.

well, I don't think they will close it, that is not a smart move strategically. They will need to get people to adopt it. They also do not need to in order to get people to spend on the WotC assets.

If anything, I can see them turn it into a marketplace eventually where others can sell assets to you, kinda like Valve's Steam, with WotC taking a commission.

 

[Hussar]

It's not that I'm missing the point, it's that I'm pointing out that the one-time transaction of a physical mini never needs to be repeated. The mini is good for all "platforms" (i.e. tabletop games) from then on. A closed VTT environment won't allow that for an asset purchased elsewhere.

Obviously, the ideal is that WotC won't close the VTT that they're developing. But recent statements on their part, and actions with regard to M:tG, have left a lot of people skeptical in that regard, is all.

Again, I'd quibble over "a lot of" people. It certain does feed clicks though.

And, it's very, very unlikely that they're going to make the tabletop so closed that it will be impossible to import material that people make at home. It's possible, true, that's certainly possible. But, given how none of the VTT's on the market work like this, and the fact that WotC has spent a LOT of time and effort regaining people's good will, I really, really doubt it.

 

[MGibster]

Other than the lack of a physical object, there is still no difference to me between someone buying a model on a VTT and buying a mini.

The miniature below is a Wizkids Pathfinder Bone Golem I bought and painted a few years back. It's mine, lock, stock, and barrel and I can do with it what I want. If I wanted, I could even resell it or give it away. And although it was made for Pathfinder, I could use it for D&D, Call of Cthulhu, or a myriad of other games.

 

[Clint_L]

Nice paint job!

Your argument seems to be about ownership of virtual items, which, fair enough, but that ship has sailed. I mean, I hear you - I have thousands upon thousands of dollars and hours invested in my miniatures and terrain. Even if the VTT is amazing in every way - beautiful, intuitive, inexpensive - I am still gonna be reluctant to use it for live games.

One point my students made when I asked them about the VTT (and they were lukewarm about it) was that miniatures-based play is just not feasible for most players. They love my stuff, and are envious of it, but they don't have thousands of dollars and hours to spend. So if this is a more financially feasible alternative (which is likely but not guaranteed), then who am I to begrudge it to others?

Also...it would be pretty cool to be able to customize an in-game avatar to the level of a Heroforge miniature.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Also...it would be pretty cool to be able to customize an in-game avatar to the level of a Heroforge miniature.

I imagine it will have a level similar to that but with a different art style.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The miniature below is a Wizkids Pathfinder Bone Golem I bought and painted a few years back. It's mine, lock, stock, and barrel and I can do with it what I want. If I wanted, I could even resell it or give it away. And although it was made for Pathfinder, I could use it for D&D, Call of Cthulhu, or a myriad of other games.

View attachment 269433

As mentioned that has to do with the lack of physical object.

 

[tetrasodium]

As mentioned that has to do with the lack of physical object.

Uvtt is already an open standard. If wotc is smart they will ensure support from the community and beyond by making an open standard for the model+texture file for their vtt. An open standard solves that # provides them with value

 

[Steel_Wind]

Again, I'd quibble over "a lot of" people. It certain does feed clicks though.

And, it's very, very unlikely that they're going to make the tabletop so closed that it will be impossible to import material that people make at home. It's possible, true, that's certainly possible. But, given how none of the VTT's on the market work like this, and the fact that WotC has spent a LOT of time and effort regaining people's good will, I really, really doubt it.

When it comes to working with 3d assets? An inability to import models into the setting is the default state of all games.

It's hard for end users to approach this as a game developer does, but the software plug-in that WotC will create for its 3d assets will be designed to export a model from their modeling software of choice to their file format used by their 3d VTT.

The code will not exist to import a model into the modeling software, and then export it - because they don't need that and can't use it if they did create it.

Original IP assets used in game are created from scratch, so the 3d modeling workflow to get original assets into their 3d VTT doesn't require the sort of tools community users and modders need to accomplish that. The community's workflow is always radically different and focuses on importing and modifying existing assets, not in creating them from scratch. It's a completely different workflow and way to approach asset creation.

Indeed, it will require devotion of time, money, and bug-testing to create this middleware that they don't need at all to create or sell their service. Even if they wanted to do it, that tells you it will be the LAST THING they will work on.

Now, if there is an easy exporter for blender? That will make all the difference. There are a large number of importers of various models into blender, notably STL and .obj. But the chances WotC uses blender to create VTT assets is virtually nil. They will want more professional modeling software than that. But if they can create an exporter for blender? That would do nicely.

If they do not encrypt their file formats, will answer a question or ten from expert users, and leave the file format relatively generic, they may just leave an exporter for blender to be created by fans of the game 6-12 months after release. That would be in accordance with fan expectations in most 3d games, tbh.

We have seen this issue surface in just about every 3d game in the history of ever. Because WotC is using Unreal5, there are similar importers that were created for other games which use that engine. But every game is different, every file format is subtly different.

This experience has been the rule, not the exception, to virtually every 3d game. Ever.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Man a lot of you seem to be missing the point. A closed system that only works with D&D is one of the potential strengths of this upcoming VTT. If it's made for D&D and nothing else, they can fully support and help automate the system, as they don't have to keep in mind any other systems for it's use.

Like here is my prediction on how the whole thing will work.

As part of a D&D Beyond Subscription (my guess around a $15 a month sub that's cheaper if you buy for a longer period like most subs) you get access to the D&D Digital Table Top. Books you own on Beyond are part of the tabletop along with their various gameplay options. The DM and Players can make custom models based on options they own. Adventures will have their stories and maps brought into the VTT. (Probably not all at once at release, as there is a decent backlog) Along with this there will be premade dungeons / tile sets for sale you can purchase to make your own custom stuff. If nobody owns anything and just has the sub only the basic rules options will be available.