D&D: Insider Tools - will they succeed?

[Imaro]

You know the one thing I can't wrap my head around is...why are they bundling the VTT with Dragon/Dungeon/DDI. I thought the VTT was suppose to be "rules independent". Let's say I play Runequest/C&C/Cadwallon or a multitude of other games that could benefit from the VTT...but I don't play D&D. Why on earth would I pay for aall this other stuff. They keep saying they want Gleemax to be the home of all games, but this sems like a step in the wrong direction.

 

[Cbas_10]

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

Fortunately, Hasbro and WotC have never lied to us by trying to convince us that they are Non-Profit Organizations. Once we digest that, we can relate this to the DDI: First, not every new product or concept succeeds, but enough of WotC's research and opinion thinks it is worth the investment of the company's resources to try it. Second, just because we are not seeing any playtest reports or other evidence that someone is taking the software seriously...does not mean that DDI is simply a casual effort that is only half-cocked. How many products in your home or business recieved the level of pre-release scrutiny that people are wanting from DDI?

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.

Point number one is something that I can identify with, and maybe even agree with. However, the second point....because this is EN World, will get more than a snarky comment. Websites, electronic media, and the like are actually created by people who do this sort of thing for a living (i.e. to earn money as a career). Everything (such as this forum, for example) must be paid for, but there are fortunately options in that area. In the case of DDI, we can:

• Pay for a subscription. Our money...WotC listens to US when we want something new or different.

• Have a DDI littered with advertising. An okay option for people who don't mind trading banners and splash screens for a more seamless experience. But, in general, think of where the dollars come from and who would have more immediate influence in getting WotC's ear for changes....

• Have the funding for the DDI come from another segment of WotC's income...drawing from a different bucket, if you will. Most likely, the dollars needed to fund the DDI would come from related products that are already generating revenue: books. We'd have an increase in the price of books to cover the DDI. Suddenly everyone pays a little bit for something they might not even care about or benefit from.

You know the one thing I can't wrap my head around is...why are they bundling the VTT with Dragon/Dungeon/DDI. I thought the VTT was suppose to be "rules independent". Let's say I play Runequest/C&C/Cadwallon or a multitude of other games that could benefit from the VTT...but I don't play D&D. Why on earth would I pay for aall this other stuff. They keep saying they want Gleemax to be the home of all games, but this sems like a step in the wrong direction.

I totally agree with you. We have had impact on some of the other game development decisions for 4e. Maybe more of us need to be more vocal (in a constructive manner) and show WotC what we really want: separate charges for the two widely different products instead of a forced bundle.

 

[AWizardInDallas]

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.

Here, here! I strongly agree with point #1. I'd pay for electronic books but not at the current prices. The best thing coming out of 4E is that 3E books will soon be cheeper.

 

[The Little Raven]

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.

It's amazing how few people actually grasp this concept.

 

[The Little Raven]

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 topic under discussion was "success." You can argue all the subjective "quality" issues you want, but it has nothing to do with my discussion of the objective nature of what comprises a success.

For example, you may consider the film Titanic to be a piece of , but that doesn't change the fact that it is the highest-grossing film (due to box office receipts) of all time, and that makes it a success.

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."

Again, you completely miss the entire point because you want you apply your subjective likes and dislikes as opposed to dealing with facts.

Fact: Website rankings determine how successful a website is.
Fact: Gleemax has a better ranking than ENWorld.
Fact: Gleemax is more successful than ENWorld.

Opinion: ENWorld is a better site than Gleemax.

Make a little more sense now?

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?

Depends on the reasons for the failure. With Master Tools, Fluid simply dropped the ball, which is why they had their license pulled and why Code Monkey took over. It wasn't because of anything Wizards did, it was because of what Fluid failed to do. Being in software myself, I understand the difference between the developer and the publisher, and exactly who is suppose to do what.