Chris Cocks says it makes sense to move D&D to a "live service" model, but Hasbro will always make physical books

Chris Cocks explicitly said that he wants to move D&D to a live service style of gaming.
dnd-players-handbook-1217740.jpeg

Chris Cocks isn't shy about plans to move Dungeons & Dragons to a more live service model of gaming. In a recent interview with GamesRadar, Cocks explicitly said that "it makes sense" for players to shift their mindset towards a live service due to the high amount of players using digital services, but assured the interviewer that books will still be produced by Hasbro. When asked if Wizards was moving away from books in favor of a more piecemeal release schedule, following the announcement of D&D Beyond's new Drops service. "Books will always be an important part of D&D," Cocks said. "It will always be kind of like a special totem that you can collect. I have a big bookshelf of D&D books myself."

"But we see what's happening – almost everyone who plays D&D uses D&D Beyond, like a super high percentage uses it," Cocks continued. "A very high percentage use Foundry VTT or Roll20, and so it just makes sense that you should start to migrate your thinking about the way you play to more of a live service where you don't have to wait 18 months for us to build a book. We can start to release components or aspects of that book over time, and you don't have to buy everything all at once. You can buy chapters or segments of it over time. That makes a ton of sense to me. That said we will still have big moments. We will still have like, 'hey, ta da, here's a huge campaign.' You can expect there'll be more around that, both from us and from all the creators in the world that can leverage a platform like D&D Beyond to share their content as well."

Broadly speaking, Dungeons & Dragons has always been a "live service" game, as the game's core business model involves continuously releasing new content in the form of new rulebooks or campaigns. However, it seems that Cocks is principally interested in shifting this model around more frequent releases. We'll note that the business model suggested by Cocks was already rolled out in a manner of speaking. The Dhampir species rules were released as a "digital DLC" for D&D Beyond subscribers who digitally ordered a Forgotten Realms book bundle, but a physical version of the rules are being released via the upcoming Ravenloft: The Horrors Within book. However, a la carte purchases were removed from D&D Beyond several years ago in order to force users to purchase entire books instead.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Christian Hoffer

Christian Hoffer


log in or register to remove this ad

Yes. It's interesting, though because it doubles down on the traditional model of "DMs purchase 90% of the content."

I don't think they have much of a choice.

Traditional games like D&D are based on a GM putting together a selection of content for the players, and curating what content player have access to in their characters. The asymmetrical roles make for asymmetrical relationships to the content.

WotC has pointedly, repeatedly declared that they need to do a better job of incentivizing non-DMs to buy stuff, but they continue to struggle with that.

As above. What, exactly, are you going to sell players that they really need?
 

I don't think they have much of a choice.

Traditional games like D&D are based on a GM putting together a selection of content for the players, and curating what content player have access to in their characters. The asymmetrical roles make for asymmetrical relationships to the content.



As above. What, exactly, are you going to sell players that they really need?
By observing products in the top ten at DriveThru and the DMsGuild over the past however many years, I've noticed solo-gaming products are popular. Filling a need, perhaps, for folks who want to play RPGs but don't have a group . . .

WotC needs to get on that and create some solo D&D products and somehow incentivize players to subscribe to DDB for some killer solo content . . . .

But preferably, without relying on generative AI . . .
 

I agree, but in this case I think that their strategy is "get them in the door," i.e. to get players using D&D Beyond in the first place (by making it free to sign up and let the DMs share purchased content), with the idea that once they're part of the system it's easier to start enticing them to subscribe/purchase things than if they hadn't signed up in the first place.

So the "problem" is that the people using the system for free find enough value in it to subscribe? How is that different from every other luxury item we purchase?
 

WotC needs to get on that and create some solo D&D products and somehow incentivize players to subscribe to DDB for some killer solo content . . . .

But preferably, without relying on generative AI . . .

The thing is on Drivethru, or DM's Guild, nobody is has the expectation of being able to find a constant line of content. Nobody has promised it to them, nobody's responsible for making it happen.

If WotC makes that as a product offering, a feature cornerstone to a subscription, they'd be setting the expectation that there will be a continuing stream of new solo content.

I don't know that they're up to that challenge, even if it were AI content.
 

By observing products in the top ten at DriveThru and the DMsGuild over the past however many years, I've noticed solo-gaming products are popular. Filling a need, perhaps, for folks who want to play RPGs but don't have a group . . .

WotC needs to get on that and create some solo D&D products and somehow incentivize players to subscribe to DDB for some killer solo content . . . .

That does seem like an option ... but when it comes to D&D doesn't that just mean publishing or licensing video games?

But preferably, without relying on generative AI . . .

Just to play devil's advocate here (and AI may actually be the devil :) ) as long as the AI is trained on WOTC products I'm not sure I see a problem with that. I could see an option where you purchase a module and an AI runs you through it - as long as the module was authored by a person I don't see a problem.
 


That you're using scare-quotes around a word I never used is pretty telling about where your head's at.

Hate on, dude. Hate on.

You're really putting way too much into scare-quotes and oddly taking it personally for some reason. I don't see a problem with this particular business model. Some people on this thread imply that it's the equivalent of a drug dealer.
 



Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top