Are we fair to WotC?
- Thread starter Gundark
- Start date
frankthedm
First Post
I'd say Wotc is treated fairly. But that is because I trust WotC as far as I can throw their corporate office.
After they claimed there would be no 4.5, I Essentially gave up any trust I could have in them.
After they claimed there would be no 4.5, I Essentially gave up any trust I could have in them.
It always fills me with a mix of wonderment and horror when I look back about 40 years and see how precisely they predicted our current state of affairs back before anyone had ever heard of a World Wide Web.
- Marty Lund
Last edited:
Serendipity
Explorer
Perfectly stated. When wotc puts out something I want, then I'll purchase. Not until. Same as any company, anywhere.
ExploderWizard
Hero
I am largely indifferent towards WOTC these days because Hasbro feels the same toward a game I have loved for over 30 years. To Hasbro, D&D is just an IP to squeeze as much revenue from as possible. As a company, that is doing what is best for its shareholders. It isn't a personal crusade against gamers. It does create corporate product that feels soulless, thus the indifference. I don't believe this is a problem that will ever be resolved as long as D&D has the Hasbro monkey on its back.
I can't help but think that if in the ramp up to 4e WotC had bothered to stop and ask themselves "are we being fair to our customers?" this thread probably wouldn't exist.
If you take out the Internet forum trolls on both extremes (the "WotC sucks no matter what" & the "WotC is awesome, all evil is due to Hasbro" crowds), then yeah, I think they're being treated fairly. If they don't like how they're being treated, they only have themselves to blame and it's up to them to change it.
If you take out the Internet forum trolls on both extremes (the "WotC sucks no matter what" & the "WotC is awesome, all evil is due to Hasbro" crowds), then yeah, I think they're being treated fairly. If they don't like how they're being treated, they only have themselves to blame and it's up to them to change it.
Vyvyan Basterd
Adventurer
First, I don't think I've ever seen anyone from WotC complain of unfairness or how they're being treated. On the contrary, they seem to acknowledge that such behavior towards them is due to the passion of fans and they welcome it.
Second, you really sound like you're making a case of "blame the victim" to me. Although I feel you and I probably feel more equivalent than it seems. I think that it is the extremists that are unfair, but I wouldn't want to excuse their behavior by saying that WotC only has themselves to blame for such extremists.
Quite the contrary. I think WotC IS trying to turn public perception around and they are making a concerted effort to reclaim lost customers. But I don't give them any sympathy for having to rebuild eggs that they had a large hand in breaking in the first place.
Yes, the extremists are a pain in butt, which is why I cited the need to remove them from consideration. My objection is to the whole premise of the thread. In the ramp up to 4e, WotC still had a lot of customer goodwill, but there was clearly a sense of entitlement or self-importance as the industry's 800 lb. gorilla.
A more recent, but similar example was Microsoft's initial positioning of Xbox One. They were going after a particular customer base (the more casual gamer) and touting Xbox One as a media console. They took for granted the hardcore gamer and were initially dismissive of gamer objections to many of Xbox One's new "features", most of which were undesirable to the majority of gamers. Microsoft has since reversed almost everything that they stated were Xbox One "requirements".
I'm not talking about a person nor a victim. It's basic Business 101. Know your customer. Meet a demand. Companies, like people, screw up. But I'm as tired of the mewling about how the poor 800 lb. gorilla is being treated unfairly. Especially since I can still recall the more fervent 4e fans telling pretty much anyone who had an issue with WotC's communications or how 4e was shaping up "D&D/WotC is the 800 lb. gorilla. Get onboard or get left behind." (paraphrasing)
My issue isn't with WotC - at least not any longer. They went in one direction and I went in another. I'm casually watching the 5e/Next developments out of industry curiosity rather than an interest in D&D. 5e/Next should succeed or fail based on its own merits and saying "Are we really being fair to WotC?" seems misguided at best and disingenuous or perhaps a backdoor "I really want 5e/Next to succeed but I'm worried". YMMV.
I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
Vyvyan Basterd said:
This matches my impression, too.
Which seems smart, to me, and useful. Fans are going to be unfair and reactionary -- they're going to react emotionally, without necessarily intending to be constructive. They're not always going to want to have a good conversation. It's a smart company that can take that, sift the motives from it, find the legitimate concerns, and learn to address them. That's a company that knows how to use criticism to its advantage and think pro-actively about understanding the market they're selling to.
DaveMage
Slumbering in Tsar
WotC wasn't really interested in a "good conversation" when 4e came out.
(I'm still watching those clouds. Heh.)But, to his credit, Mike Mearls *was* listening - and reading all the vitriol and emotion that came from the detractors. Frankly, I think he's the D&D RPG's only hope for survival. If he leaves (or, more likely, is asked to leave), I think D&D as an RPG is done. Or rather, it's done at WotC in any shape or form long time fans would support. The D&D brand would certainly continue to be leveraged in board games, card games, computer games, etc., but the tabletop RPG is likely doomed to stagnation if he leaves.
