D&D (2024) The Very Real Possibility and Impact of Microtransactions in One D&D

[Clint_L]

In terms of microtransactions, will there be a way to spend $10,000 on the game? Will children be able to put their parents into debt, even accidentally? That's the kind of stuff we see in video games that is predatory in my opinion.

Ummm...I've spent a lot more than that on the game...miniatures. Terrain. Dwarven Forge has a new Kickstarter next week...

I don't think it's predatory unless you use deceptive tactics or cultivate addictive behaviours, or implement a pay to win scheme.

 

[Malmuria]

Ummm...I've spent a lot more than that on the game...miniatures. Terrain. Dwarven Forge has a new Kickstarter next week...

I would say people who invest 5 digits in terrain are outliers in terms of ttrpg spending

I don't think it's predatory unless you use deceptive tactics or cultivate addictive behaviours, or implement a pay to win scheme.

But more to the point I assume you have the extra $10,000 to spend on terrain or whatever. Microtransactions and loot boxes in video games become a problem especially when people who don't have that much money still manage to spend themselves into debt. They take advantage of people with addictive personalities (especially re: gambling mechanics) and people who are children.

 

[MGibster]

Opening a thread with bias, hyperbole and histrionics is not likely to lead to a valuable discussion IMO.

We frequently hear those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And given the history of monetization in the video game industry, which includes microtransactions, I think we're in for a negative consumer experience for D&D. Quite frankly, I'm more than a little flabbergasted that WotC's announcement to their shareholders about their plans to rectify the undermonetization was largely met with indifference here.

In the beginning, the monetization won't be egregious just like it wasn't for video games. Bethesda got the ball rolling with the horse armor DLC they offered back in 2006 for $2.50 and I think WotC will start out in a similar manner. It's just cosmetic, nothing you really need or helps you with the game after all. But WotC's business model is going to pivot to monetizing it's customer base. It doesn't matter if tons of people leave D&D in droves so longs as their new model brings in more money.

Buying piles of extra and, often, useless books with additional rules, classes and feats was, essentially, micro transactions of the past. I never felt the need to buy extra books and I’ll never need to buy whatever they offer in the new iteration of D&D. I’m more concerned about my hobby being locked behind a subscription pay wall. I’m happy to move to a different system instead.

I think we need to stick to a useful definition of microtransaction beyond anything you buy for a game. If I buy the DLC for Resident Evil the Village for $20, it's not really a microtransaction, is it? A microtransaction is typically defined as a purchase made for a nominal fee. That $15 Complete Book of Elves comes out to the equivalent of $32 in today's money. Not a microtransaction.

TSR failed in the same decade that it adopted this strategy...

Yes, but TSR failed because of the way they were structured, especially their finances, not because D&D wasn't selling well enough.

 

[mamba]

Yes, but TSR failed because of the way they were structured, especially their finances, not because D&D wasn't selling well enough.

pretty sure they failed precisely because D&D was not selling enough (or their profit margin on most of it was way too low / nonexistent, pick your poison)

 

[MGibster]

pretty sure they failed precisely because D&D was not selling enough (or their profit margin on most of it was way too low / nonexistent, pick your poison)

What ultimately got TSR in the end was the way they managed their cash. The first was their odd arrangement with Random House where they would pay TSR up front for their books on the assumption that they would all sell. TSR used this to their advantage by overproducing books and sending them to Random House in order to essentially receive loans. But around 1995 Random House said, "Nah, that's cool. We're going to send you back this unsold inventory and you can pay us back for it."

Another factor in TSR's demise is something called, uh, factoring. TSR would accept pre-orders from retailers offering them huge discounts, then they would go to a group of investors to get a loan based on those pre-orders. The advantage of doing this meant that TSR would get paid upfront at the beginning of the year, but the disadvantage to this was two-fold: They lacked the flexibility to make changes based on current market conditions and this loan ate 15-20% of their profit margin. When Lorraine Williams knew Dragon Dice wasn't going to sell as many units as they produced, but because of factoring she didn't have much of a choice.

Of course TSR had other problems. While I miss the cornucopia of settings in the 1990s, it wasn't so good for TSR as they were competing against their own products, customers didn't necessarily want to buy a setting knowing there was a good chance it'd be gone in a year or two, and there was no way some of them would ever be truly profitable. But these were problems TSR could have weathered had they not structured their finances with factoring and those Random House loans.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Have to say, microtransactions can be a fun thing or a poisonous thing.
I don't have a problem with them if done appropriately... this is a wait and see for me.

My favorite microtransactions are DLC for video games. I already have the game and I can choose to buy more of it if I like it or not.

My least favorite microtransactions are "time savers" or "pay to win" elements in games... especially if in loot boxes or otherwise randomized...that can lead to addictive gambling type behaviors. And it also incentivizes the company to make the vanilla game extra painful to play (i.e. not fun) unless you spend money on them. I avoid many free to play games for this reason.

I don't think we know what WotC is planning in this regard.

EDIT... I think I might be being overbroad about the definition of microtransactions... DO DLC count? Or is that a sub-transaction, or just a transaction? But a $20 amazing DLC costs a lot less than $100 worth of "gems" or "dubloons" or whatever in game currency might be. I think this is part of "what are they planning?" Even the definition of what microtransactions are is somewhat nebulous, at least so far in this thread, and to me in general, the more I think about it.

 

[Krachek]

My only fear is the Wotc VTT project take over the rules and new features development.

For now VTT implement the game written in the books. In the future the VTT requirement may reverse the process. That won’t be good for my taste.

 

[cbwjm]

What kind of microtransactions are we thinking they'll have? Randomised VTT miniatures or miniature set packs (like orc pack gets you a half dozen different models)? Terrain packs? I'm probably fine with these, though less keen on anything randomised. Not that I'm intending to use the wotc vtt, but I may change my mind in the future depending on how good it is.

Can't imagine what other microtransactions they'd have beyond those and the current dndbeyond transactions that are actually a decent deal given that they count towards full purchase.

 

[Storyteller Hero]

With VTT, WotC can sell virtual minis as microtransactions, selling packs and individual pieces, using existing templates as well as new ones, avoiding the costs of physical production.

Character builders can emulate to some extent how the character creators in RPG Maker engines work, with accessory packs sold as DLC.

Dungeon and Dragon can be revived as a subscription-based service, or new individual issues could be sold as microtransactions.

 

[Clint_L]

I would say people who invest 5 digits in terrain are outliers in terms of ttrpg spending


But more to the point I assume you have the extra $10,000 to spend on terrain or whatever. Microtransactions and loot boxes in video games become a problem especially when people who don't have that much money still manage to spend themselves into debt. They take advantage of people with addictive personalities (especially re: gambling mechanics) and people who are children.

Definitely an outlier. My point is that just because someone spends a lot of money on a hobby doesn't mean they are being victimized in some way. If they are being victimized, then of course that's wrong.

I agree with what you are saying, but I am not sure I see how loot boxes, gambling mechanics, or pay to win get implemented into a virtual tabletop for an RPG. It seems like folks are ignoring some very distinct mechanical differences between a video game and a VTT.

If you use a VTT, you still can't just sit down and play D&D for 15-20 minutes. It's still a roleplaying game that needs to be organized with other players. There's still a DM calling the shots.