DnD Shorts final video

[MonsterEnvy]

He was wrong once. And not even completely wrong, just wrong because his information came from someone with a skewed perspective of the internal situation.

Or are you talking about his prior content, which is just harmless white-room theorycrafting?

He was wrong several times not once.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Just to be clear: are you saying none of the information presented in the video is likely true?

Some of it might be, some of it might not. I think Shorts just has a grudge against Cao for some reason.

 

[Dustin Cooper]

Perhaps because there are multiple sources quoted, along with the verifiable information of our own two eyes with regards to what WotC has done over the last few years?

Why? Do YOU have any contrary sources? Or are you just here to bash on DnD Shorts again?

"We're planning to replace D&D's quarterly book output with opening a new medieval fantasy themed Chuck E Cheese every quarter." - A big important WotC guy.
"I don't know why they're this big on pizza, but that's what the execs want." - a mid level WotC employee.
"Honestly, pretty much everyone in the company wanted to either be a chef or work on animatronics. Morale has skyrocketed since the internal announcement." - a OneD&D designer.

Is that enough sources to convince you that's happening, or is this all really just one source saying he has multiple sources? I'm not saying that D&D Shorts definitely has no sources, but he's some guy on Youtube, not a journalist trained in this kind of thing working for a publication that could fire him if he gets it wrong. You need to judge what he says by how much we can verify to be accurate, and so far, he's been wrong about multiple things.

 

[Haplo781]

I've been using the #FireChrisCao hashtag on twitter. I wonder what it would take to make him Twitter's main character for a day.

Hey me too! Pretty much since DnD Shorts first mentioned him the other day.

 

[The Stray]

"We're planning to replace D&D's quarterly book output with opening a new medieval fantasy themed Chuck E Cheese every quarter." - A big important WotC guy.
"I don't know why they're this big on pizza, but that's what the execs want." - a mid level WotC employee.
"Honestly, pretty much everyone in the company wanted to either be a chef or work on animatronics. Morale has skyrocketed since the internal announcement." - a OneD&D designer.

Is that enough sources to convince you that's happening, or is this all really just one source saying he has multiple sources? I'm not saying that D&D Shorts definitely has no sources, but he's some guy on Youtube, not a journalist trained in this kind of thing working for a publication that could fire him if he gets it wrong. You need to judge what he says by how much we can verify to be accurate, and so far, he's been wrong about multiple things.

O rly?

- $30 subscription fees is definitely in the realm of possibility. Wotc can flat deny it all they want, but we have past experience with WotC saying one thing and doing another, and it's definitely the sort of brain-dead thing someone who won't bother to interact with the community because "gamers are all the same" to them might think is a reasonable swallow.

- Self-running modules sounds pretty much like what we'd expect AI DM's to be like.

- I can't think of anything else Shorts has been wrong on about this, and nothing says he's wrong on those things, either.

Tell me, why defend WotC? They've shown us who they are already, and none of this is out of line for what we know. Heck, the most surprising things in the vid are all the NICE things he says about some of the execs we've heard about.

 

[Malmuria]

Hasbro seems like a really dysfunctional place to work? Basic lack of communication between teams, in fighting, inability to collect feedback from team members, incoherent strategy. Or is this just par for the course for corporations?

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

D&D Shorts has been wrong several times. So I don't put stock in what he puts out.

I think this DnD Shorts guy got the message about his lack of credibility and integrity hurting his cause.

He's not a journalist, and he goofed by misquoting a source. It shows commendable self-awareness if he stops pretending to be a journalist now and goes back to being whatever he was before.

But his sources? I have no reason to question their legitimacy, even if they may not have perfect information about everything. They're people with opinions and a cause too, and that would figure into how they've chosen to frame this.

I do question their judgment in leaking anything to this guy of all people, but they may well have had their reasons for doing so too. He appears to be rather competent at generating controversy and outrage quickly, and this may well have been their main goal, not just getting the truth out there.

 

[Scribe]

Why are people treating this video as fact?

Why do people take Wizards at their word.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Some of it might be, some of it might not. I think Shorts just has a grudge against Cao for some reason.

Man, wonder what it is. The universe is truly a mysterious place...

 

[overgeeked]

Why do people take Wizards at their word.

Parasocial relationship? They like the game of D&D so they transfer that feeling to the corporation?

 

[Justice and Rule]

Parasocial relationship? They like the game of D&D so they transfer that feeling to the corporation?

BUT FRIEND WIZARD IS FRIEND
FRIEND IS RIGHT IN THE NAME

 

[Scribe]

D&D Shorts has been wrong several times. So I don't put stock in what he puts out.

Wizards has been openly destructive, deceptive, and disingenuous. So I dont put stock in what they put out.

"Wrong" would be the least of their sins.

 

[Clint_L]

Just to be clear: are you saying none of the information presented in the video is likely true?

Some of it is clearly true, like the stuff about Hasbro seeing D&D as under-monetized and pivoting towards new revenue streams with an emphasis on digital media. We also know that Hasbro had a rough year last year.

What I am skeptical about is the behind-the-scenes stuff from his sources. What he's doing there is essentially muckraking; he's relying on gossip from sources that have already been discredited by putting forth claims, that Will reported, which were subsequently shown to be false.

Had that happened to a legitimate reporter, they would have huge egg on their face, and have a lot of explaining to do to their bosses, because news media rely on their reputation. In fact, there's no way a regular news source would have got forward with the story about WotC not reading survey results, because it was just based on hearsay.

A reputable reporter would be extremely cautious about continuing to rely on those sources going forward, having been publicly burned once. Yet DnDShorts is acting like everything else that those sources claim is reliable. That's bad journalism. You have to take the rest of their claims with a huge grain of salt until you can get strong, independent verification (which should have been done before the first story).

 

[Dustin Cooper]

O rly?

- $30 subscription fees is definitely in the realm of possibility. Wotc can flat deny it all they want, but we have past experience with WotC saying one thing and doing another, and it's definitely the sort of brain-dead thing someone who won't bother to interact with the community because "gamers are all the same" to them might think is a reasonable swallow.

- Self-running modules sounds pretty much like what we'd expect AI DM's to be like.

- I can't think of anything else Shorts has been wrong on about this, and nothing says he's wrong on those things, either.

Tell me, why defend WotC? They've shown us who they are already, and none of this is out of line for what we know. Heck, the most surprising things in the vid are all the NICE things he says about some of the execs we've heard about.

Where has any of this been verified externally? And like the AI DM thing is something some people actually want. Why would WotC make a post saying "No, the cool thing you want won't be on the thing we're trying to build hype for and monetize" unless they actually weren't planning on it? Also, have you forgot the survey thing that multiple people currently and formerly involved directly called naughty word on? Those are the only things I'm aware of that have any outside verification (correct me if I'm wrong), and he's 0 for 2. I wouldn't trust a source with that track record no matter which "side" they were on.

And I'm also very unhappy with what WotC is doing with the OGL. My emotional reaction to this video before thinking about it was to feel anger at WotC. But people tend to fall for hoaxes and misinformation that matches their biases, so you need to be extra careful to think critically about those who tell you what you wanted to hear. So I stopped, thought about his record and thought about why anyone would risk their job to leak VTT price points to some youtuber. While I don't know if there really is any real leaked information in this video (keep in mind that there are people who would think it's fun to troll him for their own reasons and able to fake credentials enough to convince him, so he's not necessarily dishonest himself), but I think there's enough reason to be cautious of uncritically accepting this whole video on the face of it.

 

[Clint_L]

Why do people take Wizards at their word.

I'm not?

Two things can be true at once. WotC can be an unreliable source, and so can DnDShorts.

Just because we want to believe one side or the other, doesn't mean that we shouldn't hold both up to the same scrutiny.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Where has any of this been verified externally? And like the AI DM thing is something some people actually want. Why would WotC make a post saying "No, the cool thing you want won't be on the thing we're trying to build hype for and monetize" unless they actually weren't planning on it? Also, have you forgot the survey thing that multiple people currently and formerly involved directly called naughty word on? Those are the only things I'm aware of that have any outside verification (correct me if I'm wrong), and he's 0 for 2. I wouldn't trust a source with that track record no matter which "side" they were on.

The reason is given in @BrassDragon 's post: there may be internal bitterness regarding DDB coming under the Wizards umbrella and they may not be privy to that aspect.

Alternatively, they could just be lying, which would also sync with their current actions.

And I'm also very unhappy with what WotC is doing with the OGL. My emotional reaction to this video before thinking about it was to feel anger at WotC. But people tend to fall for hoaxes and misinformation that matches their biases, so you need to be extra careful to think critically about those who tell you what you wanted to hear. So I stopped, thought about his record and thought about why anyone would risk their job to leak VTT price points to some youtuber. While I don't know if there really is any real leaked information in this video (keep in mind that there are people who would think it's fun to troll him for their own reasons and able to fake credentials enough to convince him), but I think there's enough reason to be cautious of uncritically accepting this whole video on the face of it.

He's been right on things as well, and has openly admittedly where he got ahead of his own skis. Why leak to him? Well, maybe they just know him: that happens in the industry, where people cultivate contacts with influencers and such.

I'm not?

Two things can be true at once. WotC can be an unreliable source, and so can DnDShorts.

Just because we want to believe one side or the other, doesn't mean that we shouldn't hold both up to the same scrutiny.

Sure, but we have better reasons for trusting DnD Shorts, who has admitted when he's gotten it wrong and has gotten things right as well.

It's worth remembering that when he was wrong, there was a lot of pushback against it almost immediately. Are we seeing that now?

 

[niklinna]

The strategy is also weird in the sense that if I wanted to play a MMORPG, I could play one right now. World of Warcraft has certainly seen better times, but it's not like there is any risk they would turn off the servers tomorrow.

No, they'll just release a new expansion invalidating and obsoleting everything you've done in the current one.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

Where has any of this been verified externally? And like the AI DM thing is something some people actually want. Why would WotC make a post saying "No, the cool thing you want won't be on the thing we're trying to build hype for and monetize" unless they actually weren't planning on it? Also, have you forgot the survey thing that multiple people currently and formerly involved directly called naughty word on? Those are the only things I'm aware of that have any outside verification (correct me if I'm wrong), and he's 0 for 2. I wouldn't trust a source with that track record no matter which "side" they were on.

And I'm also very unhappy with what WotC is doing with the OGL. My emotional reaction to this video before thinking about it was to feel anger at WotC. But people tend to fall for hoaxes and misinformation that matches their biases, so you need to be extra careful to think critically about those who tell you what you wanted to hear. So I stopped, thought about his record and thought about why anyone would risk their job to leak VTT price points to some youtuber. While I don't know if there really is any real leaked information in this video (keep in mind that there are people who would think it's fun to troll him for their own reasons and able to fake credentials enough to convince him, so he's not necessarily dishonest himself), but I think there's enough reason to be cautious of uncritically accepting this whole video on the face of it.

I think it's exceedingly likely that some source inside WotC has second-hand knowledge about both the price point and the idea of an AI-driven experience being mentioned in some meeting at some point. Why wouldn't they have been?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

O rly?

- $30 subscription fees is definitely in the realm of possibility. Wotc can flat deny it all they want, but we have past experience with WotC saying one thing and doing another, and it's definitely the sort of brain-dead thing someone who won't bother to interact with the community because "gamers are all the same" to them might think is a reasonable swallow.

- Self-running modules sounds pretty much like what we'd expect AI DM's to be like.

- I can't think of anything else Shorts has been wrong on about this, and nothing says he's wrong on those things, either.

Tell me, why defend WotC? They've shown us who they are already, and none of this is out of line for what we know. Heck, the most surprising things in the vid are all the NICE things he says about some of the execs we've heard about.

I am rather skeptical towards both sides instead of trusting every "leak".

 

[Dustin Cooper]

The reason is given in @BrassDragon 's post: there may be internal bitterness regarding DDB coming under the Wizards umbrella and they may not be privy to that aspect.

Do you think that they're really going to be making public statements while in the middle of damage control that haven't gone through multiple people? It's not impossible they're doing it incompetently, but it's simpler that a higher up just decided to deny some things and send it through the same account that's otherwise been involved in the controversial stuff. And then why deny that their product is going to have a good feature.

Alternatively, they could just be lying, which would also sync with their current actions.

Companies lie to achieve a goal. WotC is lying about the intent of the OGL 1.0a in order to justify changes they want. Why would they lie about this instead of just not address it? Heck, why not just say "yes" and hype it up further?

He's been right on things as well, and has openly admittedly where he got ahead of his own skis. Why leak to him? Well, maybe they just know him: that happens in the industry, where people cultivate contacts with influencers and such.

What major things has he been right on, and do we know which sources in the video told him the right things vs. the wrong things?