WotC Hasbro Earnings Call: WotC/BG3 carrying Hasbro

[Oofta]

Heh, it's funny how it's so "obvious" that a game will be a smash hit, AFTER it's become a smash hit. Funny how I don't recall a single whisper about how BG3 was going to be an incredible smash hit in the, what, two year run up of beta testing that it had been doing.

I think it's success has caught everyone by surprise, even the folks at Larian.

 

[Hussar]

I think it's success has caught everyone by surprise, even the folks at Larian.

Agreed. But, according to various people around, it was very obvious that BG3 would be this massive hit. To the point where WotC is foolish for not having adventures and tie in material ready to go right now.

The degree of armchair quarterbacking is pretty impressive.

 

[p_johnston]

I think the degree to which BG3 succeeded is surprising but not out of nowhere. They sold millions of copies before it even officially released. Although come to think of it i kinda wonder if they assumed that would be the majority of sales.

Edit: quick googling puts early access sales at 2.5 million, though admittedly that would be over few years. Still not a bad number.

 

[Deset Gled]

D&D could weather that storm with MtG alone, i.e. WotC didn’t need Hasbro for that. Diversity may be a strength, but if literally everything but MtG and D&D is shrinking, then maybe it is not diverse enough for that.

Eventually WotC’s growth will slow, it might even reverse, whether Hasbro is of any use then remains to be seen.

If WotC goes solo, you're betting the entirety of D&D on the long term outcome of MtG. And there are already folks in this very thread talking about the "bubble" that could pop on MtG at any time. Conversely, brands like Monopoly and NERF are some of the most evergreen brands in Hasbro's folder. Those are the names you want to be associated with if you want to think of D&D in terms of fun by the decade rather than returns by the quarter.

 

[Alzrius]

Agreed. But, according to various people around, it was very obvious that BG3 would be this massive hit. To the point where WotC is foolish for not having adventures and tie in material ready to go right now.

Are those the same people who confidently assert that WotC's every move is carefully planned out in advance, backed up by consumer analysis, market testing, and other forms of data collection, and so look askance at anyone who dares to suggest that WotC is capable of making decisions that are not only mistaken, but so obviously bad that it's hard to understand what they were thinking?

 

[mamba]

BG3 benefitted massively from word of mouth. If people had been playing Starfield, they would not have played BG3, so the word of mouth would not have been generated. This is irrespective of the quality of the games themselves. Starfield had the benefit of big-developer expectations, people would have bought it and played it anyway. It's better to be lucky than good.

Larian was both good and lucky. It would have been a success either way, just not this outsized one. Imo they could still have beat Starfield even then, as I said they probably are still ahead in sales now

 

[Oofta]

Agreed. But, according to various people around, it was very obvious that BG3 would be this massive hit. To the point where WotC is foolish for not having adventures and tie in material ready to go right now.

The degree of armchair quarterbacking is pretty impressive.

I'm going by articles like this: Baldur's Gate 3's Gigantic Success was a Complete Surprise to Larian Studios Head - FandomWire.

“This was not in the books at all. This was way, way beyond what we expected. There’s also no precedent for it, for our type of game to have that many people playing concurrently … everybody here is very happy. You see a lot of smiling faces. At the same time, a lot of focus. We have reports coming in from people having issues, so we’re focused on fixing those issues, that’s very much on everyone’s minds.”

-Swen Vincke

 

[mamba]

Agreed. But, according to various people around, it was very obvious that BG3 would be this massive hit. To the point where WotC is foolish for not having adventures and tie in material ready to go right now.

could anyone see it selling 20+ million copies on Steam alone? No. Was 5+ million almost certain? I’d say yes, given the 2+ million bought in early access.

If you do not have a tie in even at a pretty predictable 5M sales, and certainly the biggest D&D computer game release in years, that kinda is on you. It doesn’t take 20M in sales to justify a tie-in

 

[Parmandur]

could anyone see it selling 20+ million copies on Steam alone? No. Was 5+ million almost certain? I’d say yes, given the 2+ million bought in early access.

If you do not have a tie in even at a pretty predictable 5M sales, and certainly the biggest D&D computer game release in years, that kinda is on you. It doesn’t take 20M in sales to justify a tie-in

Swen was not certain that they would get many more than 2 million: theybwere somewhat worries that the BG3 market was tapped out by early access.

Partly because those early access numbers already made it one of the best selling turn based CRPGs ever made already. They blew the top off the genre, and they did not expect that.

 

[p_johnston]

So i am one of the people who think that the current profitability of Magic isnt sustainable. Im not sure id call it a bubble but WOTC has demonstrated a tendency towards making decisions that i think are detrimental to the long term health of the game over the last decade or so. Things like pushing limited to the point of hurting standard, over saturating the market with to many products, and making decision that hurt local game stores.

I suspect that Arena+Covid has helped bolster them enough that these decisions haven't bit them yet but id be surprised if they dont catch up eventually.