Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Upper_Krust" data-source="post: 3320884" data-attributes="member: 326">Hey crazy_cat! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I think you could easily put the idea into operation without calling it 4th Edition, which seems to be where a lot of the opposition lies. In doing so, you would therefore not be changing 3.5 into a boardgame so the rest of the doomsayers have no reason for complaint either.Its easy for you to gloss over the details of what I am saying with a blanket "Krust says 4E won't sell!", but thats not what I have been saying at all.Simple logic suggests repeating the same sales model with 4E won't be as successful as 3/3.5, because (1) It can only fragment existing gamers, (2) does nothing to create new gamers, (3) does nothing to attract people from other hobbies, (4) does nothing to placate casual gamers.It also throws up the additional problem in that 3.5 has already (and recently) released products catering to all the main themes. Therefore if your market is basically existing 3.5 gamers and all you can release are rehashes (even if well disguised rehashes) of 3.5 material there is going to be less incentive to buy those products.To me those (paragraphs in bold) seem like the solid facts of the matter. So a lot of people might disagree with my idea, but can they disagree with those 'facts'? If so, what the hell am I missing?  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification