WotC Brand New D&D Video Game from WotC's New Acquisition Tuque Games

Tuque Games has announced it's working on a brand new D&/D video game. "We're developing a brand-new game based in the widely celebrated, enduring, and immensely popular Dungeons & Dragons universe. This yet to be announced title is steepled in classic D&D lore. We aspire to push this game to new heights for the genre. It’s an honour and a privilege to begin a new chapter for Dungeons & Dragons video games."

Not only that, but the company has been purchased by WotC! The press release went out earlier today:

---

RENTON, Wash., Oct. 29, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Wizards of the Coast, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. (NASDAQ: HAS), today announced that it has acquired Tuque Games, a digital game development studio based in Montreal. Tuque is led by veterans of the game industry with experience working for leading publishers. Tuque will continue the development of games for Wizards of the Coast's best-known brands, beginning with Dungeons & Dragons.

"At Wizards, we're continuing our commitment to creating new ways to bring our fan favorite brands to life," said Chris Cocks, President, Wizards of the Coast. "Our unique approach of connecting fans around the tabletop as well as through our expanding portfolio of digital games is redefining what it means to be a games company."

Founded in 2012 by Jeff Hattem, Tuque Games released their first title, Livelock, to critical acclaim in 2016. Now with over 55 full-time employees, Tuque will focus on the development of digital games based on the popular Dungeons & Dragons franchise.

"Tuque is thrilled to have the opportunity to be part of the Wizards of the Coast team," said Jeff Hattem, Founder, Tuque Games. "By working more closely together, we can accelerate our joint vision and bring to life new games, characters and worlds in Wizards of the Coast's roster of franchises."

"In Tuque, we believe we have found a unique partner that pairs the nimbleness of an indie studio with the veteran leadership and scale required to deliver complex AAA games for our largest franchises," said David Schwartz, VP of Digital Publishing, Wizards of the Coast. "We are excited to bring Jeff and the Tuque team to the Wizards of the Coast family, which we believe will allow us to continue to meet the needs of our fans while enabling us to scale our digital games development capabilities even faster."

---

It seems there's a bit of a D&D video game renaissance going on. Baldur's Gate 3 is coming, as is Solasta: Crown of the Magister.

 

[Dausuul]

Please stop saying things that aren't true and are the result of your own, as you put it "uneducated opinion".

The question isn't so much whether "AAA" is inherently a buzzword; rather, it's whether Tuque is using it that way. They wouldn't be the first company to take a term that has an accepted definition within the industry, and use it to hype their stuff even though they do not meet the definition... particularly when the customer base is familiar with the term but is fuzzy on the technical meaning.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What the staff of Tuque was PRIOR to being gained by WotC is really inconsequential as HASBRO has enough cash to change any or all of your specifications if HASBRO feels it is warranted.

You're missing the point.

To make good AAA games, you need experience making AAA games. Normally that's acquired by hiring people with strong AAA experience, particularly people who were leads on several games. Further, you normally have a core of people with this experience and build the studio out from there.

WotC have ignored this and instead picked a studio which lacks AAA veterans, and has expanded to 55 people without gaining a significant number of AAA veterans (to judge from their LinkedIns). They are now trying to hire AAA people - but only for junior positions! So you'll have people with AAA experience being told what to do by people with less/no AAA experience. Anyone who has worked in a real business can guess how well that's going to go!

I actually agree with you on one point - Hasbro do have enough money to completely create an AAA studio and AAA games! But that begs the question, why acquire this studio, instead of one of the many ones which do have AAA experience and Hasbro could certainly afford. Why buy a studio at all, in fact? That's the unanswered question here. It doesn't make logical or strategic sense for them to buy a studio to make AAA games (it would arguably make sense to buy a studio to make mobile games, but they didn't).

I can only see two real answers, neither of them terribly attractive:

1) WotC is unable to get AAA developers to use the D&D license.

This may well be true. If so it may be a combination of WotC wanting too much from studios, and studios themselves simply not feeling the D&D license is valuable enough to be worth WotC looking over their shoulder. It's also clear WotC has had some scuffles and made some bad decisions here. Quite recently they rejected Obsidian and Beamdog who wanted to make D&D games (particularly BG3). Bioware also rejected WotC long ago, because they felt WotC were unreasonable, and they could make their own IP more successfully (which proved to be correct - Dragon Age has been very successful whilst D&D games have been very unsuccessful, in the last decade or so).

2) WotC can get AAA developers, but is empire-building, as has been discussed.

And let's be clear - if this goes badly, which it probably will, it will be WotC who suffers, not Hasbro.

The question isn't so much whether "AAA" is inherently a buzzword; rather, it's whether Tuque is using it that way.

I would agree if just Tuque were using it, but WotC had this to say:

"In Tuque, we believe we have found a unique partner that pairs the nimbleness of an indie studio with the veteran leadership and scale required to deliver complex AAA games for our largest franchises," said David Schwartz, VP of Digital Publishing, Wizards of the Coast.

That's clearly not a buzzword-ish usage of AAA. They talk about scale, about "veteran leadership" (confusingly, given the LinkedIn doesn't show any), and "complex AAA games", which means AAA is being used in the proper sense. So WotC believe they will get actual AAA games out of this.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[GreyLord]

You're missing the point.

To make good AAA games, you need experience making AAA games. Normally that's acquired by hiring people with strong AAA experience, particularly people who were leads on several games. Further, you normally have a core of people with this experience and build the studio out from there.

WotC have ignored this and instead picked a studio which lacks AAA veterans, and has expanded to 55 people without gaining a significant number of AAA veterans (to judge from their LinkedIns). They are now trying to hire AAA people - but only for junior positions! So you'll have people with AAA experience being told what to do by people with less/no AAA experience. Anyone who has worked in a real business can guess how well that's going to go!

I actually agree with you on one point - Hasbro do have enough money to completely create an AAA studio and AAA games! But that begs the question, why acquire this studio, instead of one of the many ones which do have AAA experience and Hasbro could certainly afford. Why buy a studio at all, in fact? That's the unanswered question here. It doesn't make logical or strategic sense for them to buy a studio to make AAA games (it would arguably make sense to buy a studio to make mobile games, but they didn't).

I can only see two real answers, neither of them terribly attractive:

1) WotC is unable to get AAA developers to use the D&D license.

This may well be true. If so it may be a combination of WotC wanting too much from studios, and studios themselves simply not feeling the D&D license is valuable enough to be worth WotC looking over their shoulder. It's also clear WotC has had some scuffles and made some bad decisions here. Quite recently they rejected Obsidian and Beamdog who wanted to make D&D games (particularly BG3). Bioware also rejected WotC long ago, because they felt WotC were unreasonable, and they could make their own IP more successfully (which proved to be correct - Dragon Age has been very successful whilst D&D games have been very unsuccessful, in the last decade or so).

2) WotC can get AAA developers, but is empire-building, as has been discussed.

And let's be clear - if this goes badly, which it probably will, it will be WotC who suffers, not Hasbro.

So you consider Obsidian AAA by your standards? but not Larian???

Interesting.

In regards to
1) My take...

I think WotC is trying a multi-branched approach. They have the AAA company to try to make a D&D game (though, for some reason you do not consider them as such, even though they have at least 200 employees from what I see) through license and contract. They have smaller companies contracting to make games.

This is yet another part of that multi-branch approach. This one has them acquiring a studio. Part of the reason they are doing this is because there may be a LOT of people who KNOW they don't know a ton of how to go about developing a game. The people in charge of Tuque made a good presentation that indicates that even if they don't have the funds, they have a better basic idea of how to go about what WotC wants with the game studio than others. That, backed up by the VP and others who have been involved with D&D games seem to indicate it is a decent calculated risk to accomplish what WotC has planned.

So may see this as a throw it at the wall and see what sticks type of strategy, though others could basically say it's hedging your bets. See which one is the most profitable in the long run.

2) Yes, it is empire building.

Edit: Why Tuque instead of someone else?

This IS about money to a degree. It's a calculated risk (something the goes with the territory). It would cost a LOT MORE money to acquire some of the other studios. This (in my take on the situation) is one where by their presentation (actually perhaps, multiple visits and presentations) showed that WotC could get the most of what it needed for the most affordable amount of money. If an AAA game is wanted (not that this is necessarily what is going to come next) there seem to be people who at least understand what needs to be done within Tuque to accomplish he goals desired...and what needs to be done.

 

[Parmandur]

ASBRO is).

If it is about SALES...than it becomes much more subjective. There are many games I've seen over the years that say they are AAA games, and have sold to stores...but the sale through rate stinks (meaning the stores get them on the shelves, but then they don't sale and you see the game in the $20 bin a few months later in droves). If EA makes a game that no one buys...is that an AAA game or is it something else. If a small company makes something like...say...Minecraft (which when it was made was VERY SMALL initially) is that a AAA game...or is it just an Indie.

It's actually pretty simple: it's about budget, not sales. AAA games are big budget games with flashy effects. Minecraft is not AAA, but the flashy big budget failure Mass Effect: Andromeda is AAA. It is cut and dry.

 

[Parmandur]

So you consider Obsidian AAA by your standards? but not Larian???

Interesting.

In regards to
1) My take...

I think WotC is trying a multi-branched approach. They have the AAA company to try to make a D&D game (though, for some reason you do not consider them as such, even though they have at least 200 employees from what I see) through license and contract. They have smaller companies contracting to make games.

This is yet another part of that multi-branch approach. This one has them acquiring a studio. Part of the reason they are doing this is because there may be a LOT of people who KNOW they don't know a ton of how to go about developing a game. The people in charge of Tuque made a good presentation that indicates that even if they don't have the funds, they have a better basic idea of how to go about what WotC wants with the game studio than others. That, backed up by the VP and others who have been involved with D&D games seem to indicate it is a decent calculated risk to accomplish what WotC has planned.

So may see this as a throw it at the wall and see what sticks type of strategy, though others could basically say it's hedging your bets. See which one is the most profitable in the long run.

2) Yes, it is empire building.

Edit: Why Tuque instead of someone else?

This IS about money to a degree. It's a calculated risk (something the goes with the territory). It would cost a LOT MORE money to acquire some of the other studios. This (in my take on the situation) is one where by their presentation (actually perhaps, multiple visits and presentations) showed that WotC could get the most of what it needed for the most affordable amount of money. If an AAA game is wanted (not that this is necessarily what is going to come next) there seem to be people who at least understand what needs to be done within Tuque to accomplish he goals desired...and what needs to be done.

Worth noting that Chris Cock and company do know things about Tuque that we do not. Might be a bad investment, but it may pan out. Time will tell.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So you consider Obsidian AAA by your standards? but not Larian???

They're both on the AA/AAA borderline. I don't know what's making you think I think one is and not the other.

So may see this as a throw it at the wall and see what sticks type of strategy

This is an awful lot of money to be doing that with. I mean, how much does it cost to create, print and distribute a sourcebook? Honest question, because I don't know. I'd guess it was a few million. And the return is likely to be pretty solid, particularly as you sell digital copies too which are near pure profit.

Here they're throwing at least, I would suggest, $30m against the wall, and it's not a very sticky thing they're throwing. How many books is that the equivalent of?

If Hasbro were doing this directly I'd be less concerned, but as it's WotC, and they will be the ones with the red balance sheet when it goes BELLY up, I am concerned.

I agree with your scenario re: Tuque (i.e. Tuque convincing WotC that they could do it), but historically that sort of thing has gone badly. WotC has been convinced to let a lot of incompetent and incapable companies create (or fail to create) products for them.

Oh well, I guess it can't be as bad as that time they licensed the whole flaming MESS which was the Interplay and Atari D&D licensing deal which blighted the the 3E and 4E era! They have learned to at least not license all their D&D stuff to one company, basically forever (WotC had to sue Atari to get the rights back because Atari, after bumfighting the D&D rights off Interplay, basically sat on them).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's actually pretty simple: it's about budget, not sales. AAA games are big budget games with flashy effects. Minecraft is not AAA, but the flashy big budget failure Mass Effect: Andromeda is AAA. It is cut and dry.

This. It's the equivalent of "Blockbuster" in cinema. "AAA" means big budget targeting a LCD market. It does not mean "good".

Now, if a small inexperienced developer where throwing around "quality" or "innovative" rather than "AAA" I might feel more optimistic about this project.

 

[GreyLord]

They're both on the AA/AAA borderline. I don't know what's making you think I think one is and not the other.



This is an awful lot of money to be doing that with. I mean, how much does it cost to create, print and distribute a sourcebook? Honest question, because I don't know. I'd guess it was a few million. And the return is likely to be pretty solid, particularly as you sell digital copies too which are near pure profit.

Here they're throwing at least, I would suggest, $30m against the wall, and it's not a very sticky thing they're throwing. How many books is that the equivalent of?

If Hasbro were doing this directly I'd be less concerned, but as it's WotC, and they will be the ones with the red balance sheet when it goes tits up, I am concerned.

I agree with your scenario re: Tuque (i.e. Tuque convincing WotC that they could do it), but historically that sort of thing has gone badly. WotC has been convinced to let a lot of incompetent and incapable companies create (or fail to create) products for them.

Oh well, I guess it can't be as bad as that time they licensed the whole flaming shitshow which was the Interplay and Atari D&D licensing deal which blighted the the 3E and 4E era! They have learned to at least not license all their D&D stuff to one company, basically forever (WotC had to sue Atari to get the rights back because Atari, after bumfighting the D&D rights off Interplay, basically sat on them).

Once again, my take on things...

They hired several individuals running the show on this for some very specific reasons.

One of those is that when you look at how much Video games make overall and compare it to how much games are making...it's enough to make almost any exec (much less some of the more enthusiastic stock holders) drool incessantly.

They see a BIG pot of money that they want part of.

I don't know how it will turn out...hopefully good. They have some pretty smart people working this at WotC, people who know a LOT more about this type of stuff than I do.

As many of those working this are at WotC, if it turns out REALLY badly, there probably will be some direct repercussions on WotC reflecting this.

I hope that does not happen and actually hope WotC makes a ton of money (for them and HASBRO) in their strategy for Video games.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

flashy big budget failure Mass Effect: Andromeda is AAA.

This is true - but I feel compelled to mention Andromeda is a weird example, because whilst they got a big budget, they eked it out over 5 years, instead of spending it quickly and making a good game! ME2, ME3, and ME:A all had budgets of around $40m. ME2 and ME3 developed in around 2 years. So they spent about $20m/year and produced two good games (let's not get into an ME3 ending/Kai Leng debate, trust me I agree with you!). ME:A on the other hand, took 5 years to spend that $40m, very slowly and ineptly describing a game which would have basically been "No Man's Sky by Mass Effect" (before NMS came out, note). Then they realized it was rubbish and tried to turn it around into a "normal" ME game and largely failed.

ME:A isn't quite as bad as people act like it is - but it is not a good game.

Worth noting that Chris Cock and company do know things about Tuque that we do not.

Definitely. But historically these sort of acquisitions have frequently gone south. Far south. Because whilst they do "know things we do not", that doesn't mean they have a clear vision of the issues.