D&D to become entirely online?

[SavageRobby]

Outsource Dragon and Dungeon? No, they'd never do that.

Dump Greyhawk? No, never.

Lay off most of the people who made 3rd edition a success? Inconceivable!

Release a half edition just three years after the new edition's launch? What are you smoking?

Randomized miniatures? Who are you kidding?

Kill off the magazines entirely? No, they'd never do that.

Release 4th edition after just eight years after the last edition change? Forget it.

Effectively end open gaming? No way.

See where I'm going with this? No, I haven't heard any such plans, and I think that doing so would be bad for gaming, but never underestimate the short-sightedness of Hasbro.

This.

 

[xechnao]

That's happening everywhere...

...to a certain known degree. Video games are like watching TV. Internet communications are a very advanced form of the traditional mail ones. Humans are not going to change really due to digital technology. Just economy.

 

[jdrakeh]

Most of these things that looked like good business decisions at the time turned out to be anything but.

With respect, you appear to be exaggerating things wildly for effect.

Paizo, while it competes for a share of the overall hobby market, does not compete directly with WotC on the magazine front (because they no longer publish periodicals), nor with D&D 4e (because they don't publish 4e products). As an entity in the overall hobby market, they're part of the less than 10% market share demographic. Currently, it doesn't seem that they pose too much competition, either directly or indirectly. For the record, according to C&G retailer numbers, White Wolf still seems to be the biggest competitor for WotC.

Monte Cooke alone, of all the folks laid off by WotC, seems to have created a business that registers on consumer radar -- and even his products haven't generated any measure of noteworthy competition for WotC. Were Malhavoc products costing WotC sales? If they were, it doesn't appear to have been a significant amount based on the failure of Malhavoc to secure a sizeable portion of the consumer market as their own. Where are those other supposed threats to WotC market dominance composed of former WotC employees? I don't see them anywhere.

I get that you don't agree with the business decisions -- I just don't see any real evidence to suggest that they're the horrible, wrong, blunders you're making them out to be. Indeed, things like collectible minis that you earlier mention as being a colossal blunder have pretty clearly been a phenomenal success.

 

[Grazzt]

At the rate the DDI is progressing I'll be playing MMO's on my Wii-holodeck before D&D is wholly online!

Yeah. Agree with this.

 

[Grazzt]

I don't hate WotC, I just think that the business decisions they've been making with D&D have been very shortsighted and very much prompted by Hasbro meddling.If I don't like anybody, it's Hasbro.

Agree with this too, though who knows. Maybe it isn't Hasbro interfering. Maybe WotC is just that short-sighted, all by itself.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Paizo, while it competes for a share of the overall hobby market, does not compete directly with WotC on the magazine front (because they no longer publish periodicals), nor with D&D 4e (because they don't publish 4e products).

If Paizo is no longer publishing a magazine, the same is true for WotC. Online PDFs are just as much not a magazine as a monthly publication, even though they both bear striking similarities. They are also competing because they are both selling (or will be selling) an updated version of D&D. They'll just be different versions.

As an entity in the overall hobby market, they're part of the less than 10% market share demographic. Currently, it doesn't seem that they pose too much competition, either directly or indirectly. For the record, according to C&G retailer numbers, White Wolf still seems to be the biggest competitor for WotC.

Nuimbers are constantly in flux. To say that they aren't a signifficant portion of the market demographic today doesn't speak to what they'll be tomorrow. The last time that I saw a new gaming company with the momentum Paizo currently has was in the early '90s, the first time I'd ever heard of Wizards of the Coast. It should be no suprise that some of the same people who put WotC on the map to begin with are running Paizo.

Where are those other supposed threats to WotC market dominance composed of former WotC employees? I don't see them anywhere.

Three of the biggest players in the D20 market were ex-WotC: Paizo, Malhavoc, and Green Ronin, all of which rank at the top of the heap, all of which are poised to go on to do other ijmpressive things that have nothing to do with 4E.

I get that you don't agree with the business decisions -- I just don't see any real evidence to suggest that they're the horrible, wrong, blunders you're making them out to be. Indeed, things like collectible minis that you earlier mention as being a colossal blunder have pretty clearly been a phenomenal success.

I didn't actually say that collectible minis were a financial blunder. I said that it was something people once couldn't fathom and would be unpopular with a segment of their customer base. At any rate, any move they make that costs them even a small percentage of their sales is a bad move, and I'm fairly certain that the WotC spinoff companies have and will continue to cost them money. If it isn't enough for them to worry about, that's their decision, but some of the comments I've seen floating around by certain WotC staffers lately lead me to believe that they actually are concerned about their market positioning. But then again, to not be would be the type of arrogance that brought TSR down to begin with.

 

[Mark]

Computer mediated interpersonal interaction replacing real-world interaction, that's what.

I'm telling Cindy3000 what you said.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Monte Cooke alone, of all the folks laid off by WotC . . .

Monte was not laid off. He left WotC by choice.

 

[jdrakeh]

Monte was not laid off. He left WotC by choice.

Thanks for the clarification!

 

[CharlesRyan]

. . . he's a Hasbro shareholder (he's always complaining about how bad D&D is doing). . .

Draw your own conclusions about what this guy says, but if the above is supposed to lend him credibility, consider this: Being a shareholder in Hasbro doesn't give you one iota more inside information on how well or badly an individual brand like D&D is performing. So if he's claiming to know something special about "how bad" D&D is doing, based on the fact that he's a shareholder, well, like I said, draw your own conclusions.