D&D (2024) D&D Pre-orders; this is sad

sure, it still results in a higher profit margin than books do


printing may be fairly cheap, but the $50 at the FLGS or bookstore, how much of that goes to the store and how much to WotC. The part going to WotC probably is already less than they get from digital


no one said the books are not profitable

Do you think WotC would rather sell you the PHB as a book or on DDB? If your answer is DDB, you know the direction WotC wants to steer customers in

First, it's an assumption with no evidence that they make more selling a book on DDB, not a fact. Unless you are privy to their books, of course. Running servers and keeping them online is not free.

Second, I would think that they want to sell you both a physical book and digital. Heck, they'd appreciate it if you bought a second physical copy with the special cover as well just to put on your shelf.

Third, profit is profit. There's very little extra overhead to setting up the books relatively speaking.

Fourth, we have no idea how many people would reject online only. People keep floating this hypothetical future where people won't care. Which, if they do, why would it matter? This is a confusing part of the whole argument. Online is going to be so amazing we'll not want books. So if no one wants books, which again I don't see happening, then no one is affected if books are unavailable.

Fifth, the assumption that they would not lose significant percentage of new and casual players. That if you cut off books, which many people love and prefer, that a competitor won't come in and fill the gap.

Last, but not least, with DDB you have far more resource sharing than you do with physical books. You still have the physical book setup overhead but it's much, much easier to share my DDB resources with my entire group. It's a worse model for them than selling books.

I currently share my DDB account with a dozen or so people at this point across 3 different groups. All those people have access to books that they now do not have to purchase for themselves. I'm not convinced that they would not be making more money if the option to ignore digital entirely was open to them.

The thing is that I think they are practically being forced into digital whether they like it or not just to stay relevant. This is not something they were at the forefront of, after Gleemax crashed and burned they were understandably reluctant to pursue a digital approach. Now that they finally are, they're being pilloried for ... wait for it ... pursuing a digital approach. They can't win.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I highly, highly doubt they actually have anywhere near those numbers working in a VTT. Not even close.
those are WotC numbers

You can keep parroting the same predictions that others have been stating for twenty years and then claiming that you haven't been wrong yet, but, you aren't really fooling anyone.
me making a prediction now is entirely unrelated to someone making a similar prediction in the past. I was not even aware of that.

I made it now, not even a week ago, so yes, it has not been wrong yet. I expect WotC to have made steps towards that in 10 years. More digital exclusive material, print contributing less to their overall profit. If they still print books for the mass market and not just collectors in 20 years, I’d say I was wrong
 

350 is WotC’s number from the fireside chat and they hired more since…

Do we know if that was for VTT or all digital? A lot of AAA video games have been developed using that many developers, but I can't imagine a VTT needing that many. Then again, I don't have access to their actual headcount any more than anyone else on this thread.
 

350 is WotC’s number from the fireside chat and they hired more since…
It is true:


However, I will point out that Mecel employs way, way more people in making movies, yet still publishes tons of books with no signs of stopping.
 

Do we know if that was for VTT or all digital? A lot of AAA video games have been developed using that many developers, but I can't imagine a VTT needing that many. Then again, I don't have access to their actual headcount any more than anyone else on this thread.
The new VTT is being developed as a AAA video game, no joke. They aren't making something like Fantasy Grounds or Roll20, they are aiming way higher.

Yet still they will make books. Hopefully at a nice, sedate pace.
 


The new VTT is being developed as a AAA video game, no joke. They aren't making something like Fantasy Grounds or Roll20, they are aiming way higher.

Yet still they will make books. Hopefully at a nice, sedate pace.

I don't blame them for jumping in, and if they can actually deliver on what the early demoes showed it could be pretty amazing. I'm still not going to do VTT unless I'm forced to do so but I understand why they're doing it. Even if I did have to go virtual, Maps works for what I want.

Makes you wonder if they aren't hoping to make the next Minecraft, i.e. a VTT engine that can be used for things other than D&D. While I don't totally get it, I could see people using it to build a virtual Waterdeep.

I was curious, thanks.

EDIT: there were 350 hired for DDB so we don't know what percentage are working on VTT or did I not re-read far enough?
 

I don't blame them for jumping in, and if they can actually deliver on what the early demoes showed it could be pretty amazing. I'm still not going to do VTT unless I'm forced to do so but I understand why they're doing it. Even if I did have to go virtual, Maps works for what I want.

Makes you wonder if they aren't hoping to make the next Minecraft, i.e. a VTT engine that can be used for things other than D&D. While I don't totally get it, I could see people using it to build a virtual Waterdeep.

I was curious, thanks.

EDIT: there were 350 hired for DDB so we don't know what percentage are working on VTT or did I not re-read far enough?
I am quite certain that this was before they announced the new 3D VTT formally, and it was later clarified that is whybtheybhired hundreds of software people.
 

First, it's an assumption with no evidence that they make more selling a book on DDB, not a fact.
it’s a fact but we do not have the numbers ;)

Second, I would think that they want to sell you both a physical book and digital.
sure, but if you only buy one of the two, they prefer digital…

Third, profit is profit. There's very little extra overhead to setting up the books relatively speaking.
if enough people buy one or the other, not both, then people buying books is less profit. Once they depressed the number of book buyers far enough, WotC is better off stopping them and getting some to digital while losing others.

For the last holdouts, have some expensive editions. I am not saying they will not print a single book any more, only that they are working towards leaving the mass market behind for digital

Fourth, we have no idea how many people would reject online only.
agreed, and we certainly have no idea how many will do so in, say, 15 years… so not much of an argument for either of us, unless you think I have to demonstrate that it is a large enough number, but you do not (ie you are not making the claim that they continue printing books)

Fifth, the assumption that they would not lose significant percentage of new and casual players.
same as the one above. I agree it is an assumption, I don’t see why it is not possible to get the market there.

We will have to see, it is a prediction, it can be wrong. If I had to bet on it today, I would not bet against it.
 

Remove ads

Top