D&D General Interview with D&D VP Jess Lanzillo on Comicbook.com

[mamba]

No it's definitely been focused around WotC, DDB and the new VTT... I was just making sure I didn't miss where the idea/suggestion/rumor that they would be adding lootboxes and/or micro-transactions originated from.

so what did you find? Did anyone say that WotC would definitely add them to the VTT?

I am not saying that this is not where the little sidetrack started off, but if you look at the last pages it was talking about them in general terms, not specifically about WotC or the VTT

 

[Oofta]

I mean, sure have a different opinion. No problem.





But why is it whenever these threads crop up, instead of just being pro-WotC, there's always these dismissive takes on people who do think there's a problem.



There's a lot of statements that are meaningless in that way. So is "Don't buy it then". So is "Businesses are in business to make money."

I think there's a difference between actions that someone can take, and that includes not buying something, and basically telling people to shut up if they disagree. I don't trust WotC any more than any other company but if they provide a product I don't need, if they start charging more than what I think something is worth I won't buy it.

Yes, part of my opinion is that no one has explained how microtransactions are harmful. There's no evidence they will release loot boxes and I don't see much of an issue if they did as long as they're completely cosmetic.

I'm not pro-WotC and I get tired of that accusation, it's an unwarranted accusation of explicit bias. I just don't look for monsters under the proverbial bed when there aren't any and I accept that we live in a capitalistic society and that companies need to make money in order to stay in business.

 

[TiQuinn]

I think there's a difference between actions that someone can take, and that includes not buying something, and basically telling people to shut up if they disagree. I don't trust WotC any more than any other company but if they provide a product I don't need, if they start charging more than what I think something is worth I won't buy it.

Yes, part of my opinion is that no one has explained how microtransactions are harmful. There's no evidence they will release loot boxes and I don't see much of an issue if they did as long as they're completely cosmetic.

I'm not pro-WotC and I get tired of that accusation, it's an unwarranted accusation of explicit bias. I just don't look for monsters under the proverbial bed when there aren't any and I accept that we live in a capitalistic society and that companies need to make money in order to stay in business.

I think that you can be very adamant about your need for evidence, but then you also say that you don't trust WotC any more than any other company. Why is that? If people can expect a company to act in a manner that is not beneficial to the community at large, like with the OGL debacle as an example, why is it incumbent on people in a message board that carries no greater impact outside of the thread to provide ample evidence when you yourself admit that the nature of a company doesn't make it trustworthy?

I think that's the thing that I don't understand. Okay, sure you don't see harm, and you are waiting for proof of harm, but is it really that crazy to foresee a path where harm could happen? I mean, we have another thread in ENWorld where Free League is forcing Alchemy to take down products that people bought in a HumbleBundle and they only have a week to do it? Is it really outside of the realm of possibility to think where Hasbro might do the same thing? With regard to digitalization, I used to be a big fan of comic books digitally via Comixology until the company was bought by Amazon, and then slowly but surely saw my access to those comics restricted, purchasing became more difficult, apps that I used to read them had access cut off, and the entire experience of reading those comics got so poor that I stopped reading them. Is it crazy for me to take that experience there, and be wary of other companies forays into digital goods, or SaaS products, even if I have no direct evidence that they have - other than they are a company increasingly headed up by executives from companies that have a history of moves such as this?

I get why you personally don't see the evidence - why do you demand it from others?

 

[mamba]

I'm not pro-WotC and I get tired of that accusation, it's an unwarranted accusation of explicit bias.

might have something to do with which side you usually end up on. I am not saying you definitely have one, but there definitely are people who rush to WotC’s defense every chance the get, just like there are some that bash them every chance they get, and it is easy to get lumped into them when you frequently are on one side

I just don't look for monsters under the proverbial bed when there aren't any and I accept that we live in a capitalistic society and that companies need to make money in order to stay in business.

oh, we definitely live in a capitalist society, that does not mean all ways that lead to someone making more money are acceptable. We still ban drugs, limit cigarettes and alcohol, gambling, etc.

I definitely do not subscribe to ‘making more money justifies the means’, capitalism or not

I did not say they would have loot boxes, I said if they do, they will be cosmetic not pay-to-win. I do not like either MTs or lootboxes and usually ignore products that have them, it certainly is a strike against them that they have to overcome and almost none do. The VTT will not be an exception there

 

[mamba]

I mean, we have another thread in ENWorld where Free League is forcing Alchemy to take down products that people bought in a HumbleBundle and they only have a week to do it?

huh? why would they have to do it at all? I would expect that FL had to agree to the bundle beforehand, and if there was no legal requirement to involve them, what is their legal justification for this?

 

[TiQuinn]

huh? why would they have to do it at all? I would expect that FL had to agree to the bundle beforehand, and if there was no legal requirement to involve them, what is their legal justification for this?

I can't explain the ins and outs - and not even sure we have all the deets regardless:

Free League forcing Alchemy VTT to remove PDFs - Anti-consumer behaviour?

Hey all. I recently purchased a bundle of Free League games on Alchemy VTT. Pretty awesome, was looking forward to playing a bunch of sweet Swedish-published games. It included access to a bunch of games via the Alchemy platform and the pdf downloadable for each. All good. Unfortunately, I've...

www.enworld.org

 

[Clint_L]

Let's take WotC out of the equation. Dwarven Forge sells a terrain sampler with random pieces. Why is that bad?

And would it be bad if Foundry did it for their VTT?

Edit: note that "I don't like it" is not an answer.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Digitalization of D&D? What aspects that will take on? Micro-transactions? Lack of micro-transactions? A loot crate model? The impact of digitalization and a move to the VTT on the print rules?

Take your pick.

I think there would be less of an issue if people actually thought about how these things would work in D&D if there were to be adopted.
In my opinion, many of the models used in video game, simply does not work in D&D.
Consider for a moment loot boxes. In video games they provide cosmetics, or are "pay to win" or "pay to skip grind"
If there are cosmetic loot boxes in the online VTT or D&DBeyond, how does that impact your game or mine?
Even if a player in an online vtt game with us has spent dollars to buy a hat of extra shineyness or a custom avatar how does that affect us? and how is it different from buying a model on Heroforge?

As for pay to win or skip grind, what is the person playing to win at? The levelling and challenge is largely set by the DM and I do not see DM surrendering authority to Wizard Merch.
I mean I fully expect microtransaction on the new VTT and for that matter on D&DBeyond but it will be dice, skins, custom art, maps, and creature assets, and the like. Just like all other commercial VTTs out there.

A lot of what people fear is out of the video game industry and only works because it is a video game. The gameplay is set by the developers. (Aside from people enabling this stuff by continuing to buy it).
D&D gameplay is set by the DM and thus Wizards has limited control as to how their game is actually played at the table.

 

[Oofta]

I think that you can be very adamant about your need for evidence, but then you also say that you don't trust WotC any more than any other company. Why is that? If people can expect a company to act in a manner that is not beneficial to the community at large, like with the OGL debacle as an example, why is it incumbent on people in a message board that carries no greater impact outside of the thread to provide ample evidence when you yourself admit that the nature of a company doesn't make it trustworthy?

I just don't see a reason for the concerns from an impact on the hobby standpoint or even from a corporate profit perspective. I can speculate about all sorts of bad things that could happen, but it's always going to be weighed against likelihood and impact. Low likelihood and low impact means I'm not concerned.

I think that's the thing that I don't understand. Okay, sure you don't see harm, and you are waiting for proof of harm, but is it really that crazy to foresee a path where harm could happen? I mean, we have another thread in ENWorld where Free League is forcing Alchemy to take down products that people bought in a HumbleBundle and they only have a week to do it? Is it really outside of the realm of possibility to think where Hasbro might do the same thing? With regard to digitalization, I used to be a big fan of comic books digitally via Comixology until the company was bought by Amazon, and then slowly but surely saw my access to those comics restricted, purchasing became more difficult, apps that I used to read them had access cut off, and the entire experience of reading those comics got so poor that I stopped reading them. Is it crazy for me to take that experience there, and be wary of other companies forays into digital goods, or SaaS products, even if I have no direct evidence that they have - other than they are a company increasingly headed up by executives from companies that have a history of moves such as this?

I get why you personally don't see the evidence - why do you demand it from others?

I've asked for an explanation of what harm could be caused by microtransactions or loot boxes that are purely cosmetic. The explanations haven't been convincing. I have too many things to be concerned about to add things to the list that have not happened, are unlikely to happen and will have minimal impact if they do happen.

While I don't assume the best from WotC or any other company I don't assume the worst either. For me and my groups DDB is worth the money, the VTT vaporware is unproven technology looks promising and there have been no indication from anyone that the types of things you bring up will happen.

 

[TiQuinn]

I just don't see a reason for the concerns from an impact on the hobby standpoint or even from a corporate profit perspective. I can speculate about all sorts of bad things that could happen, but it's always going to be weighed against likelihood and impact. Low likelihood and low impact means I'm not concerned.



I've asked for an explanation of what harm could be caused by microtransactions or loot boxes that are purely cosmetic. The explanations haven't been convincing. I have too many things to be concerned about to add things to the list that have not happened, are unlikely to happen and will have minimal impact if they do happen.

While I don't assume the best from WotC or any other company I don't assume the worst either. For me and my groups DDB is worth the money, the VTT vaporware is unproven technology looks promising and there have been no indication from anyone that the types of things you bring up will happen.

I kind of feel like you missed the point of my post but suffice to say, the people who do have a concern about it don’t owe you an explanation.