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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beginning of the End" data-source="post: 5344611" data-attributes="member: 55271">This is not actually true. The '91 Basic Set, at the very least, was still getting pushed into mainstream retail outlets.Like I said: You might be right. The fact that during its periods of greatest success D&D had a boxed set that wasn't pay-to-preview might be a total coincidence. And the fact that the game went into decline right around the time they switched to pay-to-preview boxed sets might also be a coincidence.There is, after all, a distinct lack of breadth in the empirical evidence to separate causation from correlation.But I'd love it if WotC would give that to us some day. Unfortunately, the Starter Set obviously delays that.I think you're misreading what he wrote: His first qualification is that a legitimate gateway game that isn't pay-to-preview needs to exist. Since he feels that the Starter Set is a pay-to-preview product, the fact that it's packaged in a box and sold through mainstream stores is irrelevant -- just like it was irrelevant with all the other boxed basic sets sold in the past 20 years (many of which were sold through mainstream stores).Notably, for example, you're misquoting him. He didn't say "there hasn't been a game packaged to look like a game to the average customer". He said "there hasn't been any legitimate version of the game packaged to look like a game to the average consumer" (emphasis added).You can't sell what you don't have. And WotC still doesn't have it.I'm not really sure what you think your point is. I think it's a great idea to offer free demos of your product. But that doesn't negate the fact that the Starter Set is a pay-to-preview product.I know fanboys can have a difficult time holding nuanced opinions. But it is, in fact, possible to say, "WotC made a smart decision over here." While simultaneously believing that they made a poor decision somewhere else.Similarly, I think it's quite possible that pre-existing "edition bias" is factoring into people's opinions here. But, frankly, I was saying the same thing about the 3E Basic Games when they were released. And the '91 Basic Set when it was released. My opinion that pay-to-preview products are not the best way to sell D&D is pretty much edition neutral.And the fact that the Starter Set isn't doing anything that hasn't been attempted by one of the half dozen or more basic games in the past 20 years isn't even a matter of opinion. I also believe that there's some legitimately great stuff happening with Essentials. I just wish they had put more of it in the Starter Set.</blockquote>

Verification