DI and freedom from the revision cycle
- Thread starter 1Mac
- Start date
1Mac
First Post
Long time lurker, rare poster, but given these turbulent times, I am moved to speak! I ask for patience as you read this idyll of mine, for I make a lot of old points to lend context to my argument.
I think most reasonable people will agree that Wizards of the Coast (and their corporate masters Hasbro) are a business, and that businesses need to make money. A smaller outfit could conceivably operate on charity and goodwill, but for the scale that WotC is operating on, such a model would be inconceivable. Furthermore, that scale is ultimately good for the hobby; if WotC went under, the pool of players would decline dramatically, as would the successes of 3rd party publishers. The hobby would flounder either until it died or until some other corporate juggernaut thought that it could make money on DnD and take over.
This is one important motivation behind the revision cycle. Gamers, as has been pointed out many times before, rarely buy the same product twice, so large publishers need to come out with diverse supplements that customers are willing to continue buying. This is not entirely a bad thing: gamers will not buy products they are disinterested in, so WotC has an incentive to make reasonably useful or compelling products. There are two problems with this, however. One, I have found, is that many of WotC's products may have a pretty strong hook to them but are also padded with a lot of filler. Any time I see a product advertising "new feats, spells, monsters and prestige classes," I become a little wary. The incentive for WotC is obvious, because filler is easy to produce, but it is not desirable. The second is that eventually the seam runs out. You have explored every possible area in the game that you can imagine, and you can no longer create any more supplements. This is where revisions are helpful.
Now again, revisions are not bad things by themselves, if there are genuine grievances with the current rules. Everything I have read indicates that the shift from 2nd to 3rd edition was a great simplification, and I for one expect 4th edition to be a similar improvement. The problem this time is that for many players the investment in the the previous edition, with all of its supplements, is very dear. It is true that they do not have to make the transition, but if many players, including most new players, switch to the new edition, then it is also true that the old edition is much less valuable.
Still, this was the status quo. The only way for WotC to survive was to continue publishing product after product, first as supplements, then as new editions. Players went along with it, in part because they got some good rules along the way and in part because it was the only way to keep up with the hobby. It is a dissatisfying picture, one that, I would imagine, WotC and its customers rue alike. I imagine that WotC behaved in this way not because they are Nastian robber barons, but because they previously could not envision another business model to keep an enterprise at their scale afloat.
It is with this in mind, I there propose, that we consider the digital initiative and 4e in general. Imagine, harkening back to the glum scenario above, that all those supplements that WotC relied on did not have to exist as books, but could instead be assimilated piecemeal. Even better, imagine that they would never be outdated, because they would always be updated and refreshed. This would not only get rid of filler in supplements, it would also forestall, if not completely obviate, the need for complete revisions, as the rules would gradually be updated over time. Imagine if WotC could find a way to make this arrangement profitable. We would be free of ponderous, cluttered supplements, we would be spared the new edition crises, and WotC could still make enough money to support the hobby in its current mode, if not expand it with a greater player base.
This of course is what Digital Initiative promises to be. It is not something that is required for the basic DnD experience, any more than supplements are necessary to the average player who only owns the PHB. This would be suicide for WotC, as it would reduce the pool of players, something that is necessary both for the well-being of WotC and the hobby as a whole. It is rather a cunning and effective replacement for supplement glut. The fellow who spent hundreds of dollars in supplements each year will now only pay $9.95 a month, getting all the great material he wants, none of the chaff, and a host of very useful gaming utilities to boot. The typical player is content with the PHB. WotC makes money. Everyone is happy, and the hobby prospers.
Note that I am slightly less rosy than the above suggests, and we can get into the particulars in later posts. But if all goes well, this is how Digital Initiative will free us from the revision cycle.
I think most reasonable people will agree that Wizards of the Coast (and their corporate masters Hasbro) are a business, and that businesses need to make money. A smaller outfit could conceivably operate on charity and goodwill, but for the scale that WotC is operating on, such a model would be inconceivable. Furthermore, that scale is ultimately good for the hobby; if WotC went under, the pool of players would decline dramatically, as would the successes of 3rd party publishers. The hobby would flounder either until it died or until some other corporate juggernaut thought that it could make money on DnD and take over.
This is one important motivation behind the revision cycle. Gamers, as has been pointed out many times before, rarely buy the same product twice, so large publishers need to come out with diverse supplements that customers are willing to continue buying. This is not entirely a bad thing: gamers will not buy products they are disinterested in, so WotC has an incentive to make reasonably useful or compelling products. There are two problems with this, however. One, I have found, is that many of WotC's products may have a pretty strong hook to them but are also padded with a lot of filler. Any time I see a product advertising "new feats, spells, monsters and prestige classes," I become a little wary. The incentive for WotC is obvious, because filler is easy to produce, but it is not desirable. The second is that eventually the seam runs out. You have explored every possible area in the game that you can imagine, and you can no longer create any more supplements. This is where revisions are helpful.
Now again, revisions are not bad things by themselves, if there are genuine grievances with the current rules. Everything I have read indicates that the shift from 2nd to 3rd edition was a great simplification, and I for one expect 4th edition to be a similar improvement. The problem this time is that for many players the investment in the the previous edition, with all of its supplements, is very dear. It is true that they do not have to make the transition, but if many players, including most new players, switch to the new edition, then it is also true that the old edition is much less valuable.
Still, this was the status quo. The only way for WotC to survive was to continue publishing product after product, first as supplements, then as new editions. Players went along with it, in part because they got some good rules along the way and in part because it was the only way to keep up with the hobby. It is a dissatisfying picture, one that, I would imagine, WotC and its customers rue alike. I imagine that WotC behaved in this way not because they are Nastian robber barons, but because they previously could not envision another business model to keep an enterprise at their scale afloat.
It is with this in mind, I there propose, that we consider the digital initiative and 4e in general. Imagine, harkening back to the glum scenario above, that all those supplements that WotC relied on did not have to exist as books, but could instead be assimilated piecemeal. Even better, imagine that they would never be outdated, because they would always be updated and refreshed. This would not only get rid of filler in supplements, it would also forestall, if not completely obviate, the need for complete revisions, as the rules would gradually be updated over time. Imagine if WotC could find a way to make this arrangement profitable. We would be free of ponderous, cluttered supplements, we would be spared the new edition crises, and WotC could still make enough money to support the hobby in its current mode, if not expand it with a greater player base.
This of course is what Digital Initiative promises to be. It is not something that is required for the basic DnD experience, any more than supplements are necessary to the average player who only owns the PHB. This would be suicide for WotC, as it would reduce the pool of players, something that is necessary both for the well-being of WotC and the hobby as a whole. It is rather a cunning and effective replacement for supplement glut. The fellow who spent hundreds of dollars in supplements each year will now only pay $9.95 a month, getting all the great material he wants, none of the chaff, and a host of very useful gaming utilities to boot. The typical player is content with the PHB. WotC makes money. Everyone is happy, and the hobby prospers.
Note that I am slightly less rosy than the above suggests, and we can get into the particulars in later posts. But if all goes well, this is how Digital Initiative will free us from the revision cycle.
Baron Opal
First Post
An interesting point.
There have been many supplements that I have not purchased because I have only been interested in ~10-20% of the contents of the book. If that material was made available to me over the course of a year I might not mind that I paid $10 / month for a steady stream of material that I find useful rather than 3 books at $40 that I find marginally useful.
There have been many supplements that I have not purchased because I have only been interested in ~10-20% of the contents of the book. If that material was made available to me over the course of a year I might not mind that I paid $10 / month for a steady stream of material that I find useful rather than 3 books at $40 that I find marginally useful.
WhatGravitas
Explorer
Surely interesting. And if they make it workable, it may really free WotC of much pressure, allowing less filler, more quality books.
For Blizzard, this idea works out pretty well - Blizzard is funded for decades with WoW.
Additionally, it gives WotC an easy way to get player statistics: With hosted games and their many feedback things, they could really make muuuch betteer stuff.
However, even if it works out, they WILL do a 5th edition - because they'll need to dump all the feedback somewhere!
For Blizzard, this idea works out pretty well - Blizzard is funded for decades with WoW.
Additionally, it gives WotC an easy way to get player statistics: With hosted games and their many feedback things, they could really make muuuch betteer stuff.
However, even if it works out, they WILL do a 5th edition - because they'll need to dump all the feedback somewhere!
SHARK
First Post
Greetings!
That was an excellent, thorough, and well-reasoned article, sir. I enjoyed reading it, and you offer some good points to consider. I hope you are right, and I appreciate your acknowledgement of the vast expense that many of us have invested in the 3.5E game, and the frustrations involved with edition changes. Hopefully, the new changes with 4E and the Digital Initiative will create a new foundation from which such future changes can be made far more smoothly, and at the end of the day--cost us, the loyal and dedicated customers--less money.
Excellent!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
That was an excellent, thorough, and well-reasoned article, sir. I enjoyed reading it, and you offer some good points to consider. I hope you are right, and I appreciate your acknowledgement of the vast expense that many of us have invested in the 3.5E game, and the frustrations involved with edition changes. Hopefully, the new changes with 4E and the Digital Initiative will create a new foundation from which such future changes can be made far more smoothly, and at the end of the day--cost us, the loyal and dedicated customers--less money.
Excellent!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Thanael
Explorer
1Mac said:
Umm no? 2E was a lot simpler. 3E does make a lot more sense in some parts and has more options (finally monsters with class levels and npc classes), but it is also much more rules to keep track of. In 3E it takes a lot more time and effort to stat a character or monster or npc.
But still i think your point is valid, 4E claims to go for a simplification.
Friadoc
Explorer
Well said, 1Mac, excellent points, too.
Personally I think the idea of using the MMO/WoW model of funding development is an awesome idea.
It enhances the tabletop play with extra utilities and tools, but doesn't replaced one of the better aspects of tabletop RPGs, that can be lost to a degree in MMOs, which is socialization.
So now, WotC can fund books via a steady incoming, thusly answering to the Hasbro stockholders, but also have steady funds to poor right into development and keep those steady dollars.
I mean, seriously, if WotC can show the Hasbro BoD and Stockholders that they can sell the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of actions figures ever month, month after month, without the materials or shipping, then I couldn't see them disrupting the company in any way, shape, or form.
It's just an awesome idea that I hope they follow through on, because if they do it'll be an interesting time to be a dice/tabletop gamer.
It's not an MMO, it's a digital tabletop, pure and simple. An extension of our books, our tables, our dice, and our friends.
One of my hopeful thoughts is about the digital edition of the book(s) I just purchased, be it PDF (my dearest hope) or a similar facsimile, it'll cut down on the wear and tear of my back.
*chuckles*
Personally I think the idea of using the MMO/WoW model of funding development is an awesome idea.
It enhances the tabletop play with extra utilities and tools, but doesn't replaced one of the better aspects of tabletop RPGs, that can be lost to a degree in MMOs, which is socialization.
So now, WotC can fund books via a steady incoming, thusly answering to the Hasbro stockholders, but also have steady funds to poor right into development and keep those steady dollars.
I mean, seriously, if WotC can show the Hasbro BoD and Stockholders that they can sell the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of actions figures ever month, month after month, without the materials or shipping, then I couldn't see them disrupting the company in any way, shape, or form.
It's just an awesome idea that I hope they follow through on, because if they do it'll be an interesting time to be a dice/tabletop gamer.
It's not an MMO, it's a digital tabletop, pure and simple. An extension of our books, our tables, our dice, and our friends.
One of my hopeful thoughts is about the digital edition of the book(s) I just purchased, be it PDF (my dearest hope) or a similar facsimile, it'll cut down on the wear and tear of my back.
*chuckles*
Geron Raveneye
Explorer
1Mac said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not discounting your arguments, as they all make good sense, and it would indeed be a great chance for what you suggest to happen.
To my (slightly cynical) eye, though, this sounds like hoping that the constant updates and patches that are available online will finally free us from the revision cycle of MS Windows.
Kaodi
Legend
I think you are tripping on one important point: Just because Wizards makes money from the Digital Initiative and loads it with filler, that does not necessarily translate into supplements having substantially less filler. You already pointed out that, as a company (especially with a huge corporate master), they are going to continue to try and maximize profits no matter what. If putting filler in both DI and supplements makes them the most money, they will do it.
Similar Threads
