WotC Hasbro CEO Chris Cox, "I would say that the underlying thesis of our D&D business is all about digital,”

[Zardnaar]

Here's the problem though.

WotC doesn't have that kind of money.

It's not at that level of profitable. Trying to buy them right now, you'd be looking at paying probably very high hundreds of millions, if not billions. And you no doubt have competition. I don't think for one second that Microsoft and Sony aren't sniffing around, which raises the asking price. Hasbro does have that kind of money, but whether it would deploy it to buy a games studio when they've had such a bad history with digital is questionable.

And ultimately, it's a private company, so you could just get told no at any price. Or you could buy it and then the talent could flee (indeed, if they any kind of profit-sharing or internal share schemes, that's not even unlikely, because a whole bunch of them will suddenly be a lot more secure financially - you can work around that by kinda locking people in for a year or three but that's very expensive too).

On top of all of that, I'm not sure Larian's brand really sits well within that of Hasbro, because BG3 is very much not a tame, PG-13 type of game, but that is part of why it's succeeding so hard - virtually every super-successful CRPG has been rather bloody and raunchy (shades of Game of Thrones).

Wanting to move into digital in this way is just genuinely a difficult move to make. And I don't think they've made the right choices so far, re: digital (which has sadly been true for the last 23 years).

Larians a smaller company than Paradox interactive who has multiple flagship titles. Well pre BG3.

I don't regard either one as a triple AAA developer but Larians probably in better place than WotC options.

I'm waiting to see what they'll produce.

 

[Scribe]

Hasbro/Wizards buying Larian would be a mistake. The success is in the licensing, not in owning the shop.

On top of all of that, I'm not sure Larian's brand really sits well within that of Hasbro, because BG3 is very much not a tame, PG-13 type of game, but that is part of why it's succeeding so hard - virtually every super-successful CRPG has been rather bloody and raunchy (shades of Game of Thrones).

Yep, almost as if there was a market beyond the tepid over sanitized product Wizards has been pushing down our throats for years now.

When I very early rescued a certain Druid, leading to whole sale slaughter on some Goblins (including what I believe where children who tried to raise the alarm) and then engaged in a conversation with blood/sweat/grime all over our characters, while I knew I was in FR before, this was the D&D I have been missing.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I have not watched the video, I really do not care about what the internal conflicts are within WoTC nor am I too bothered about the digital strategy.
No business on earth was going to let the fiftieth anniversary of their flagship product pass without an update. We could have predicted that back 2014 (for all I know someone did but were laughed at because everyone knew sixth edition would be out before that).
The internal dog fighting about digital is not really going to impact the design of the D&D revision, unless there is faction fighting within the design team and I have no reason to believe that is the case.
Any revised version of D&D that is subject to marketing focus that the survey process is, is going to be pretty conservative as to changes.
Finally, a word on digital. The future is going to be largely digital. Book will never completely disappear, no more than handsaws have disappeared in the age of 3D Printing and CNC machines.
The base game is in the creative commons and they have promised that the revised game will also. D&D's fate is not tied to a single company.
I wish WotC luck on their digital endeavours and I will partake as I see fit.

No, the future is the hybrid model, they aren't directly incentivize digital only, it's the physical/digital bundles they are pushing with stuff like special digital Modron dice and character sheets, early access to products like Planescape before even digital only.

Why because the bundles allow them to sell you the same product twice, just in different formats and your buying directly from WotC for max profits compared to an LGS or Amazon.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Yes, presumably because they strongly associated that brand with the 1.1 and 2.0 OGLs and the OGL debacle in general, and thus turned what was already a kind of questionable branding choice (if you really don't want people to see it as a new edition, why are you naming it like it is one?) into an actively negative brand.

Further, they'd been calling the 3D VTT "One D&D", and they've got to have poured far, far more money into that at this point than they have into D&D itself over the last few years (given the sheer number of employees - 250+ as opposed to what, like 30? Less?), so presumably they're going to rename that as well. It was a dumb and confusing name to be calling the VTT anyway.

I do think going "all in" on digital is, really, not the best plan. And I say that as someone who pretty much only buys digital products for 5E. I get that it's technically forward-looking and so on, but this is all just a higher-budget rerun on 4E's loftier goals, but with a system and playerbase who aren't as into that approach (I think, anyway).

Also good luck convincing Larian to make any more D&D games in the foreseeable future. BG3 is beyond amazing and we'll probably see a "Definitive Edition" with a lot of QoL improvements and some revised/improved content/gameplay eventually, based on Larian's track record and the fact that a 97 Metacritic CRPG (it stayed at that when it went from 14 to 26 critic reviews, I note!) is likely to be fairly evergreen, but an expansion or the like? Seems a little unlikely based on Larian's statements (admittedly mostly made before 97% Metacritic, 800k simultaneous players on Steam and so on). Another full D&D game in the same engine? Seems extremely unlikely and would probably be pretty far out, time-wise.

And who else is going to make a game that's even like an 85-90%-type game? All the big AAAs either don't make CRPGs or exclusively use their own IPs to do so.

None of WotC's owned studios is an AAA, despite Archetype having been in recruiting mode for like, 4+ years now. They doubled in size in 2021, but have been sitting at 70 employees for about six months now, just flat. Larian has 400 employees and was able to increase from less significantly less than 100 to that number in about 3 years, I note.

I don't think I've seen it used derogatorily yet, but it's certainly been used as an identifier for the new edition or whatever you want to call it.

But WotC hopelessly tainted it by using that term in associated with the OGL debacle.

Its down to just 96 metacritic score, because of jealous Zelda fans review bombing apparently I'm hearing.

 

[Blue]

Which are the ones that don't do so?

I linked my source of the case notes form the Supreme Court results. Either it's in there in which case you can find it just as easily as I can, or it's not, in which case I'm unsure how you would expect me to know.

But really, unless you are trying to say that the Supreme Court is misinformed in this matter, we do need to take as a truth that there are many.

 

[Hussar]

So a company buying an game from a failing company is automatically a cash grab? Including when they invest significantly in making a new updated edition before printing anything and realizing any profits?

That's... a mighty interesting definition of a "cash grab". It seems to include any business venture that hopes to be profitable.

So, the fact that they turned around, a couple of years later, and sold the company to Hasbro for fantastic money means that 3e was nothing but fan service and had absolutely nothing to do with making a profit?

Frankly, that seems to be the definition of "cash grab". Any business venture that hopes to be profitable is a "cash grab". No matter what, WotC is only ever allowed to lose money, otherwise, it's a "cash grab".

Think of how much money they are investing in D&Done. We're talking millions and more millions of dollars. Years of engagement with the fandom. HUGE amounts of outreach. They are pouring a TON of money into this. Probably far, far more money than has ever been invested in D&D previously. Heck, the purchase of D&D Beyond makes it a much larger investment in the hobby than at any point previous.

Let's put this in perspective shall we?

WotC purchases TSR for $25 million
Hasbro purchases WotC for $325 million. Not a bad turnaround on a what, two year investment.

WotC purchases D&DBeyond for 146.3 million.

But, yeah, WotC only interested in the cash grab?

 

[Scribe]

WotC purchases TSR for $25 million
Hasbro purchases WotC for $325 million. Not a bad turnaround on a what, two year investment.

Hold up. Are we implying D&D is why WotC was worth $325 million to Hasbro here?

 

[Zardnaar]

So, the fact that they turned around, a couple of years later, and sold the company to Hasbro for fantastic money means that 3e was nothing but fan service and had absolutely nothing to do with making a profit?

Frankly, that seems to be the definition of "cash grab". Any business venture that hopes to be profitable is a "cash grab". No matter what, WotC is only ever allowed to lose money, otherwise, it's a "cash grab".

Think of how much money they are investing in D&Done. We're talking millions and more millions of dollars. Years of engagement with the fandom. HUGE amounts of outreach. They are pouring a TON of money into this. Probably far, far more money than has ever been invested in D&D previously. Heck, the purchase of D&D Beyond makes it a much larger investment in the hobby than at any point previous.

Let's put this in perspective shall we?

WotC purchases TSR for $25 million
Hasbro purchases WotC for $325 million. Not a bad turnaround on a what, two year investment.

WotC purchases D&DBeyond for 146.3 million.

But, yeah, WotC only interested in the cash grab?

Nice straw man I didn't claim one D&D was a cash grab. 5E will be a decade old next year when new edition comes out. That's a decent run.

3.5 and 4E came out very rapidly after the previous versions of the game specifically to cash in.

Pretty much every other edition was an attempt to improve the game. Except 1E.

 

[Hussar]

Hold up. Are we implying D&D is why WotC was worth $325 million to Hasbro here?

Oh no. Of course not. It was Pokémon and Magic. DnD was an afterthought.

My point is though, the idea of “cash grab” seems to directly overlap with whatever edition warring someone wants to peddle.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I'm a crotech analog only player (if I want to playbsomwthing digital, I'll fire up Fure Emblem, not play D&D), but if they pull it off it would be worth the investment. And it is worth resembling that the same leadership team in place now have pulled off the digital side with Magic, and hugely so. With enough resources and time, which they have both of, it can be done well. And if it is done well, I think people who are into that sort of thing will go for it.

If I were Chris Cocks I'd drive a dump truck of money into Belgium and buy Larian entirely and make it an internal studio.

I am sure he has thought of offering, but Microsoft have offered and Larian turned them down. So perhaps he will not risk the relationship.