D&D: Insider Tools - will they succeed?

[AWizardInDallas]

Well, it worked for Magic Online, which accounts for 30-50% of their Magic business now. I think they know what they're doing far more than you do (or anyone else on this forum for that matter).

This is 100% correct, just as saying "Miramax Pictures has a poor track record for publishing successful books" is 100% correct. However, both are predicated upon the fallacy of judging a company's track record on products they don't produce.

Last time I checked, Fluid and Code Monkey were not a part of Wizards in any way, shape, or form. But hey, if you want to place the blame on Wizards for third-party developers failing, don't let things like logic stop you.

Are you honestly saying that Wizards, the number one publisher of RPG books and material, has been away from the publishing business? Did you fail to notice the large number of published books that they've put out?

Yeah, real short attention span. That's why they make stupid decisions like purchasing a needlepoint distributor or setting up a west coast office in a high-price castle... oh wait, that was TSR. For a company that supposed has the attention span of a 4-year-old with ADD, they've been going solid with the same strategy for Magic for almost 15 years now.

If my 9-year-old niece has no problem navigating Wizards' site, then I think the problem isn't with the site.

Oh really? What do you call Magic Online, then?

Oh wait, don't want any facts to interfere with your position, do we?

It amazes me how quickly people here turn to simply being rude and sarcastic. I'm entitled to my opinion regardless of how expert you believe Wizards to be. Just because they're in business doesn't mean every move they make is gold. I'm a consumer and consumers are also experts. Wizards partnered with and made the business decisions involving the third party companies you mention and failed, leaving gamers high and dry without an explanation much less a single decent tool for running their games.

As for the publishing business, I was referring to the magazine publishing business which is quite different due to the frequency of publication. By the time you've finished an issue it's time to work on the next. That's why they oursourced it to begin with.

I could care less about Magic the Gathering and I'm not the only one who finds the Wizards of the Coast website's navigation/organization dismal. Gleemax? ROFL

 

[cougent]

One wonders what you use to determine a website to be a failure? Statistics? Web traffic? Ranking? A point supported by facts?

But something tells me that some people here classify a failure as "I don't like it."

Well, yeah!
I mean do you go to the store and buy the "most popular" beverage, or do you buy what you like to drink?
Do you buy the "best selling" new car, or one that you like?
Do you buy "highest ranked" music, or what you like to hear?

I am sure that WotC sold more copies of Etools than all the other CG's since then combined, but it was still crap on toast. Statistics and rankings don't make a product good, being a good product makes a product good. If you like it, extol the virtues of Gleemax, don't just cop out to "Gleemax is ranked higher than EN World."

Last time I checked, Fluid and Code Monkey were not a part of Wizards in any way, shape, or form. But hey, if you want to place the blame on Wizards for third-party developers failing, don't let things like logic stop you.

Radiant Machine is not part of WotC either, so if the DI does tank or you going to use that same cop out to justify yet another WOTC failure?

 

[Hussar]

Well, yeah!
I mean do you go to the store and buy the "most popular" beverage, or do you buy what you like to drink?
Do you buy the "best selling" new car, or one that you like?
Do you buy "highest ranked" music, or what you like to hear?

The trick is, when something becomes the "best selling" it means that the most people liked it. If a song hits number 1, that means that the most number of people want to hear it.

If a website gets the most hits, then that website is the more successful than any other website.

Note, successful =/= better. McDonalds is far and away more successful than my local sushi bar, but, I know which one has higher quality food. But, on the metric of success, my local sushi place doesn't even rank.

Thus, based on the only metric that matters for websites - visitors, Gleemax is far more successful than En World. Is it better? That's subjective. Success, OTOH, is not.

 

[Maggan]

1. Wizards is assuming that most gamers are also computer geeks which isn't the case.

I think WotC is very much aware of the percentage of gamers with computer access, and who are willing to use a service such as the DI, and I'd even wager that they have a concrete number derived from market research.

I also believe that number to be a smaller number than what WotC expects to sell of the physical books, so I think the claim that WotC "is assuming that most gamers are also computer geeks" misses the target.

They are assuming "some" geeks are computer geeks and interested in using tools for gaming in their computer. At least that's what I believe the strategy to be.

/M

 

[AWizardInDallas]

I also believe that number to be a smaller number than what WotC expects to sell of the physical books, so I think the claim that WotC "is assuming that most gamers are also computer geeks" misses the target.

They are assuming "some" geeks are computer geeks and interested in using tools for gaming in their computer. At least that's what I believe the strategy to be./M

I hope you're right. It just seems like the biggest selling point touted with 4E is the virtual table top. I use a laptop to run my games but a virtual table top doesn't interest me personally. What does are design tools and I don't think I'm the only computerized game master on the planet that feels that way. If there is any one problem with D&D today it would be it's verbosity. Rewriting the books and selling them all over again won't solve that. Neither will providing a glut of online content.

 

[wedgeski]

I have no doubt that the tools which enhance the on-the-table experience (character builder and vault, encounter builder, on-line rules reference) will be the most popular of the DI's features, and I see no reason at all why they won't just look good and work. The VTT is likely, IMO, to turn into a niche corner of the offering and remain buggy and thinly-featured throughout its life. The 4e launch demo of the VTT just wasn't good enough for a product less than a year from launch.

I'm using Gleemax more heavily and getting used to its quirks. It needs work, but it's a good start, and being free, is excellent value for money.

 

[cougent]

I'm using Gleemax more heavily and getting used to its quirks. It needs work, but it's a good start, and being free, is excellent value for money.

And there is the rub.
Would you pay $10 a month for it? $15?, even $5?

Gleemax is a marketing tool to bring you in, a "loss leader" in retail terms, so if it is slow, cludgy, and irritating it is just not attracting as many people as it has the potential to attract.

The DI is a product being sold, well actually rented, and thus I (maybe the only one) have far higher expectations of it. I don't *pay* for things I don't like no matter how trendy, popular, rated, or whatever they are. Hussar is right that success is measured differently than quality. The DI will be a commercial success if it sells enough subscriptions to make a profit, huge profit = huge success. Huge success =/= great quality. Eventually that second metric will also affect the first as even consumers who initially buy less quality products eventually realize they are buying less quality and slow down or stop. His analogy to McDonald's being a good example as even they went through financial problems a few years back because of lack of quality after being very profitable for decades.

Don't confuse criticism of the DI for negativity of the DI. I *hope* it is great, I hope the Dragon and Dungeon content alone makes it worth the price of subscribing. I will be pleasantly shocked and surprised if the DI tools do as much as they claim they will. However based on the previous attempt at a CG program, and on the quality of Gleemax, my anticipation for it has become very low. Maybe they will surprise me, but I doubt it.

 

[Scribble]

I hope you're right. It just seems like the biggest selling point touted with 4E is the virtual table top. I use a laptop to run my games but a virtual table top doesn't interest me personally. What does are design tools and I don't think I'm the only computerized game master on the planet that feels that way. If there is any one problem with D&D today it would be it's verbosity. Rewriting the books and selling them all over again won't solve that. Neither will providing a glut of online content.

I think you're looking at that from the wrong side... I don't think they're pushing the tabletop because they think it's the thing most gamers will want to use. I think they're pushing it because it's the thing they WANT people to use, and they know it's not the biggest drawl.

The other stuff.... It's all cool useful stuff, but the table top is the only thing that has the potential to offer a completely NEW revenue source.

People who can't game because of location or whatever don't have a huge incentive to buy gaming stuff.

Giving them a way to game makes them have an incentive to buy gaming stuff.

 

[Arkham Angel]

I'm pretty much sold on 4e. From the few crunchy details we've seen, I know that I'll at least be buying the core books in June. The D&D Insider "content" that's supposed to replace Dungeon and Dragon magazines, I'm much more skeptical of, but there are several other threads discussing that.

I'm curious what everyone thinks of the D&D Insider Tools. (The character builder, the adventure builder, the digital tabletop, etc.)

From what I've seen so far of the D&D Insider Tools is that:

• (Edited) They're being designed by Radiant Machine, who's only other released product at this point is Gleemax.
• The trickle of details we have about the digital tabletop is that there are a lot of features that they have planned, but will not be available at release
• So far, the only thing they have to demo are static screenshots and pre-rendered video.
• I haven't seen any discussion of a pre-release beta test period

I think it's safe to say that the execs at Wizards think that the D&D digital tabletop and tools will draw a lot of people into paying monthly D&D Insider fees. But I wonder if they're underestimating how difficult it is to release a quality software product. Multi-user, online software isn't easy to develop. And it requires a lot of testing to release a product that won't alienate your customers. Yet, we don't see any of these playtest groups running their game with a test version of the online tools. And if the tools aren't ready for in-house testing now, I don't see how they'll be ready for large scale testing next spring. And I think that would be absolutely necessary if they plan to release their tools in parallel with the core rules in June.

Anyway, does anyone else suspect that the D&D Digital Initiative is headed for a rocky start?

It's all about the money IMO friend... all about the money. The WOTC needs to give Hasbro a reason to justify their existence.

 

[danbuter1]

I refuse to support the DI for two reasons:
1. They killed Dragon and Dungeon mags for it.
2. I don't pay for pdfs, or worse yet, html.