D&D General Is DnD being mothballed?

[Parmandur]

Again, I want to stress that my major point here isn't to do with 5E. It's to point out that 3.5/4E's release schedule wasn't necessarily going to lead to disaster. Even if we grant the premise that a slower release schedule has helped 5E, that doesn't mean that the opposite is true (though I can see why some people would think that).

Disaster? No. Suboptimal? Yes.

 

[Parmandur]

Sure, but first you have to figure out how many "one less" actually is in real terms. If he'd only sold one car per month, I'm not sure that would have helped with overall profitability.

That's why WotC puts so much energy into market research. Data is everything.

 

[Alzrius]

Disaster? No. Suboptimal? Yes.

That's highly speculative

That's why WotC puts so much energy into market research. Data is everything.

And didn't that serve them so very well with the OGL v1.1.

 

[Parmandur]

Paizo is a very odd duck among RPG companies, because while most subscribe to the idea that adventures aren't profitable Paizo has made them the core of their business. Making the rules available online means they can include all sorts of things in their APs without any fear that people won't be able to use them because they don't have the books. It's also really convenient when running games and I can look things up without flipping back and forth between multiple books.

Right, exactly, it's a longterm sales strategy.

 

[Parmandur]

That's highly speculative

And didn't that serve them so very well with the OGL v1.1.

You admit yourself thst WptC is getting a better relative ROI with this approach, and all evidennce suggests that they are selling more books in absolute terms, and by a lot. So, that means it is working for more people to buy more books.

Sure, they could adopt a suboptimal strategy, but why?

And, yes, focusing on data helped them reverse course over the OGL in the end.

 

[Alzrius]

You admit yourself thst WptC is getting a better relative ROI with this approach, and all evidennce suggests that they are selling more books in absolute terms, and by a lot. So, that means it is working for more people to buy more books.

No, it means that something is working for getting more people to buy more books. You have yet to demonstrate that the slower release schedule is the major (or even any) reason for that.

Sure, they could adopt a suboptimal strategy, but why?

So you think it's better to continually increase how much money they expect to bring in every year? That's an...interesting strategy.

And, yes, focusing on data helped them reverse course over the OGL in the end.

So you yourself admit that they adopted a suboptimal strategy in the beginning.

 

[dave2008]

No, it means that something is working for getting more people to buy more books. You have yet to demonstrate that the slower release schedule is the major (or even any) reason for that.

And you have yet to demonstrate it is not. The only real evidence I have seen (bookscan and WotC testimony) suggest it absolutely is a factor. You have said there is evidence on the other side, what is it?

 

[Iosue]

So you yourself admit that they adopted a suboptimal strategy in the beginning.

“Leaking the draft OGL 1.1 and term sheets given under NDA,” was not part of their strategy.

 

[Alzrius]

And you have yet to demonstrate it is not. The only real evidence I have seen (bookscan and WotC testimony) suggest it absolutely is a factor. You have said there is evidence on the other side, what is it?

That's not really how burden of proof works; you don't prove that something is not a factor, you prove that it is.

Looking at the bookscan results, I don't see what you're seeing with them suggesting that the slower release schedule is driving sales. Likewise, I've said before that Ben Riggs' seminar suggested that what killed 3.5 was upper management at WotC thinking that they needed an edition reminiscent of WoW to increase revenue, which suggests that they weren't hitting target numbers ($100M as per Ryan Dancey) rather than they weren't able to take in more than they were spending.

 

[Alzrius]

“Leaking the draft OGL 1.1 and term sheets given under NDA,” was not part of their strategy.

I suspect you know that the incredibly poor terms, and trying to renege on the perpetuity of the OGL v1.0, was what I was referring to. That those were leaked doesn't really change anything; the community was always going to rebel against what WotC was trying to pull, and they should have known that and course-corrected ahead of time, rather than after the fact.