D&D Insider - how many subscriptions? (and speculation on profitability)

[keterys]

I know several people who have DDI subscriptions and never setup a forum identity to go that way, so I personally would guess at least twice as many as the # listed.

 

[malraux]

I know several people who have DDI subscriptions and never setup a forum identity to go that way, so I personally would guess at least twice as many as the # listed.

Anecdotally I'd guess that at least 2x the DDI group is a low floor. In my group, currently everyone (but me as my subscription just lapsed and I'm not re-upping till there's a monster builder at least) is a subscriber, but only myself and one other player have setup the wotc community account. So somewhere between 1/4 and 2/5ths. That puts the number of total subscribers at around 200,000ish. I guess that's believable.

Now with those kind of numbers, I will agree that it's crazy that DDI is as bad as it is.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Moved to RPG Industry Forum

 

[mudbunny]

A quick thought before I run home...

But what is the chance that WotC/Hasbro is waiting to make sure that the subscriber count for DDI is somewhat constant/predictable before they start throwing more $$$ at the project(s)?

Pretty high IMO.

 

[malraux]

A quick thought before I run home...

But what is the chance that WotC/Hasbro is waiting to make sure that the subscriber count for DDI is somewhat constant/predictable before they start throwing more $$$ at the project(s)?

Pretty high IMO.

It's been two years. At this point, you're getting into a self-fulfilling prophesy. By waiting to commit resources, the number of subscribers is going to be affected by the lack of resources. Certainly the lack of resources (or at least ability to deliver) is why I'm not renewing currently.

 

[Mercurius]

I don't get it. If DDI has 100,000+ suscriptions, maybe many more, then it must be the most profitable portion of the D&D section of WotC, right? Then why is it so crappy? OK, it isn't simply and only "so crappy" but it is much less than it could be and, more so, hasn't really evolved in quite some time, except for the worst with online-reliance. Why has Adventure Tools been stalled out on Monster Builder for, what, over a year? Why isn't there a Dungeon Builder, an Adventure Builder, a World Builder, tools for house ruling and class making?

The obvious further question is that even with DDI so crappy and they still have 1-200,000 subscriptions, how well would it do if it was actually really good? I have an unfortunate speculative answer, and that is probably not much better. It might get some disenchanted former subscribers back, but how many would that account for? A 10% increase?

I am reminded of much of my high school experience where I quickly learned that if I put in about 50% effort I could get an A-, 70% effort an A, and 90% an A+...being of a somewhat unmotivated (lazy) temperament, I decided that I would rather put in 50% and get the easy A- than work a bit harder for the A or A+. I'm wondering if WotC is doing the same: they're going for the best ratio of time expenditure, effort and money spent vs. profit. If offering a truly excellent DDI was proportionally more lucrative than offering a crappy DDI, they'd do it. But my guess is that it just doesn't make enough difference.

This is not to say that they aren't working on improving DDI in some form or fashion (such as the potentially Frankensteinian Virtual Tabletop), but they haven't in a year or more so it is easier to be skeptical than hopeful. The above-mentioned Builders wouldn't be that hard, or time-consuming, to create. My point being, if they haven't already then they probably won't, not until they figure out something that they think has a huge profit potential, like VTT.

 

[malraux]

I suspect a lot of the problem is unfamiliarity with software design. WotC has a lot of experience as a book publisher, a fair amount in other forms of physical publishing (magic card, board games), but virtually none in the electronic area. Sure they could hire a contractor to do it, but that went horribly the first time.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

Just because DDi brings in tons of cash for WOTC doesnt mean WOTC is willing to turn around and put a ton of cash back into DDi.

If you havent been paying attention to the world around you companies all over are raking in record profits and banking the money not reinvesting it. They apparently are bankrolling the money for if/when another downturn hits us hard.

It is possible that this is what WOTC is doing as well.

 

[Wayside]

I don't get it. If DDI has 100,000+ suscriptions, maybe many more, then it must be the most profitable portion of the D&D section of WotC, right?

It probably is. That's one theory behind the recent print book cancellations and Slavicsek's comment that "we plan to deliver just as much great content for players this year through other formats, including board games, accessories, and digital offerings." They may be diverting this content into the DDI because it's just that much more profitable.

As for why the DDI tools are so middling, I'm sure malraux has it right. MTGO was never a particularly good piece of software either, although at least it worked. It's going to take time to get the tools up to snuff, assuming WotC really is refocusing their efforts on the DDI.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I suspect a lot of the problem is unfamiliarity with software design. WotC has a lot of experience as a book publisher, a fair amount in other forms of physical publishing (magic card, board games), but virtually none in the electronic area. Sure they could hire a contractor to do it, but that went horribly the first time.

I would agree with this and I also suspect that normal practice at WoTC when a publication was near the printing deadline was to ramp up the overtime to get it out. A practice that has proven to be disasterous in the software business but a very easy pattern for developers to fall into.