While also admitting that the game is "under-monetized" and that they want to create a recurring spending environment, utilizing assets that are specific to their VTT (e.g. a virtual gold dragon mini) all in an effort to move people over to the digitized play area they're making, rather than the tabletop. That we know they want people to not only play digitally, but to do so using their platform, isn't in question; I really don't understand why people think they're going to try and encourage people to do that. Are you under the impression that WotC will finish designing the VTT and then sit back and not do anything to entice people into using it?
No one said it was "shocking." I'm not at all sure why you think there's some element of surprise to this (if there was, that was pretty much blown when they told us what they were planning to do).
I shouldn't have to point out that this is a strawman, since I'm not talking about "forcing" anything, and haven't throughout the course of this thread. Please try and answer the issues that I've raised, and not the caricature raised by some other posters.
No one has suggested otherwise.
Leaving aside the "relatively" cheap aspect, you're just reiterating things which aren't in contention, for reasons I'm not clear on.
See above. "Forcing" isn't an issue under discussion.
You're already closing in on using "force" a half-dozen times. How many times have I used that in previous posts? Because it's less than this.
Or a debate perspective, since "forcing" people isn't what's being discussed.
As long as we're unilaterally deciding what is and isn't an issue, I'll go ahead and say that something something naming what industry a company is part of is a non-issue.
Well, if you don't see it, then it clearly must be fine.
Especially if they try to make supplementary aspects of the game funnel people toward those tools, despite those tools not having the same scope of interface as imaginative play. Of course, not every other company deals in imaginative play, so that makes comparing it to every other company kind of pointless, but I suppose we can declare that a non-issue also.
No one suggested they wouldn't, the same way no one suggested anyone would be "forced" online. Given how you're replying to so many points I never raised, I'm curious if you meant to reply to someone else?
And I'm given to understand the acid in the paper is less than before, or so I heard, so clearly that drives a stake through the heart of their attempts to further monetize the game digitally. Because if we list a bunch of stuff WotC is doing that we like, it means that the stuff we don't is negated.
