D&D General Do you want a 3D vtt?

Do you want a 3D vtt?

  • Yes

    Votes: 34 14.8%
  • No

    Votes: 122 53.3%
  • Maybe? I could me convinced.

    Votes: 69 30.1%
  • Lemon

    Votes: 4 1.7%

Steel_Wind

Legend
If WotC is serious about this, they will have to create a toolset similar to the Aurora toolset for NWN1 -- and ideally, just as easy to use by Trent Oster's grandmother as the Aurora toolset was -- based on the Unreal 5 engine (their stated licensed game/lighting engine). And then, they have to provide a playspace for it in terms of connectivity and moderated gameplay.

They can't send assets of that size dynamically over IP. So it appears to me that there will be a player code and subscription for players to be able to use this. THAT is a revenue generator as there is NO WAY that be free for player use. Players must pay, too.

Make no mistake: this is a MAJOR undertaking. If they were smart, they would under-promise and over-deliver. I fear the opposite has already taken place.

We'll see!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

GreyLord

Legend
I don't need one personally, but I have no problem with it existing. I'd want one for those who want one, it personally is good to see others happy in that manner. I don't care either way, no strong feelings, but I always want to play in person if I can (though if another pandemic comes around or the pandemic gets really bad again, a VTT wouldn't be a bad thing to have on hand to use when we want to stay separated from each other physically).

So...I chose Lemon.
 


Stormonu

Legend
Video qued up to that point.
#1 - It's not going to look that good on release
#2 - It's going to crash every 5 minutes until it's 6 months or older

I mean, it's certainly eye-catching, but it isn't going to be working properly for a good long time. And it will never perform as well as in the video, ever. Especially not on some of these potato PCs a lot of folks have.
 

#1 - It's not going to look that good on release
#2 - It's going to crash every 5 minutes until it's 6 months or older

I mean, it's certainly eye-catching, but it isn't going to be working properly for a good long time. And it will never perform as well as in the video, ever. Especially not on some of these potato PCs a lot of folks have.
It’s going to be less intensive than many older video games, and there is going to be a beta for it.

Simply assuming stuff will suck is stupid when we have so little other than some stuff that looks good.
 

Steel_Wind

Legend
a VTT wouldn't be a bad thing to have on hand to use when we want to stay separated from each other physically).
My current gaming group's members (2 campaigns)

DM: Scarborough, ON: EST
1 Player: Saint John, N.B.: AST
2 Players: Vaughan ON: EST
1 Player: Penticton B.C.: PST
1 Player: Berkeley, CA: PST
1 Player: Oakland, CA: PST
1 Player: Fresno, CA: PST
1 Player: Los Angeles, CA: PST

We couldn't play together physically anymore if we tried. I've played face-to-face in the past with three of those players (for many years, one of them since 1980). I have played with most of those in California virtually since 2010.

Moral of the Story: VTTs are not just for pandemics. If there was a monthly fee for this promised VTT (of great quality) that each of us had to pay? WoW cost, @$15/month sort of thing? They would each pay, no question about it at all.
 




DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
People questioned who would spend the money for 3D tabletop terrain from companies like Dwarven Forge... too expensive, takes up too much space, have to pre-build everything, etc. And yet Dwarven Forge have been thriving. Mainly cause the terrain just looks darn cool and there are people who have the cash and are willing to spend it on their hobby. Yes, there are still plenty of people happy to still use dry-erase grid boards for their maps, but DF has its supporters.

I foresee WotC's 3D VTT to be the same sort of thing.

Won't be for everyone... but there will be enough people who find it fun and useful that it will probably work out.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
I don't think that the folks who have been doing it for years have gotten VTTs to the point where people don't curse at the software every session.

I don't expect that WotC will suddenly do better. Historically, experts in UX they ain't.

Also, I am at best a casual computer gamer, meaning that my machine isn't exactly top notch. If I have to upgrade my laptop to use it, I ain't using it. While my players do use D&DB character sheets, we don't use a VTT playing in-person. I have two remote games I play in, one of which is not even D&D, the other I wouldn't expect to still be active when this comes out.

So, I don't see as I need the thing.
 

I could be convinced and I think there might be benefits to 3D over 2D, but I'd really want something very simple, and it looks like WotC are headed very hard in the direction of glitzy and flashy rather than simple and effective, at some speed.

If it's not at least easier to use then current VTTs, then they've failed, frankly, because as Umbran says, even people who know what they're doing with the current ones tend to be rather vexed by them.
I don't expect that WotC will suddenly do better. Historically, experts in UX they ain't.
It would definitely be surprising if they did great here, but they have a lot of money, so maybe they hired someone competent to manage this? I mean I'm not saying I believe that but... it could happen??? Maybe? I dunno. I can't rule it out.
If I have to upgrade my laptop to use it, I ain't using it.
Yeah and this is another real issue.

Now, they are using UE5, which gives them a bit of edge here, because it's particularly good (I understand, but from a lot of good sources, like actual developers posting about it) at creating stuff that be exported to a bunch of platforms and deal with a lot of different performance situations.

Of course that's also going to create a massive disparity in how it looks/performs between those platforms. What they showed us is probably we'd get on a current-gen console, decent PC (with a Nvidia 20XX graphics card - or AMD equivalent - or better), or on a particularly high-end phone (using resolution scaling aggressively), which I suspect will be a minority of the platforms it's used on.

There's a gigantic question about voice and video, and whether WotC be handling that at all, or whether they should. If they want the seamless experience they seem to, they probably should, but Roll 20 and others have attempted it and it... didn't go great.
 

JoeyD473

Explorer
It depends on what they do with it. If it is made simple and not just flashy with concentration on effects it could be ok.

Me personally, I probably won't use a 3D VTT. using a VTT like Roll20 is a lot of prep work, a 3D one is probably going to be a lot more prep time with little reward. I also am not a fan of the videogamification of TTRPG D&D. When I want to play a video game I play Baulders Gate
 


There's apparently enough people interested that several 3d vtts are in development.
Or enough companies who think people will be interested.

I'm sure there are actually people who want it, but I think the push has more to do with predictions about the natural development of technology, and a bet on something that if it works will be profitable, than on actual consumer demand. Tech is often driven by predictions about future demand not observed current demand.
 


Azzy

ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
Or enough companies who think people will be interested.

I'm sure there are actually people who want it, but I think the push has more to do with predictions about the natural development of technology, and a bet on something that if it works will be profitable, than on actual consumer demand. Tech is often driven by predictions about future demand not observed current demand.
That's true, too, but I think a bit of both is happening in this particular instance.
 

Hussar

Legend
So who the heck was asking for a 3-d VTT in the first place?
Raises Hand

Why wouldn't you? Roll 20 and Fantasy Grounds haven't substantially changed over what I was using fifteen years ago with Maptools or OpenRPG. Sure, the GUI is prettier, and the automation is better, but, fundamentally, there's nothing I can do on Fantasy Grounds, that I have sunk hundreds of dollars into, that I couldn't do on OpenRPG in 2002 programed in Python.

A 3d play environment similar to Virtual Gametable? That's easy to use and is tied into D&D Beyond? Gimme more of that.

Good grief, Dungeon Alchemist | AI Fantasy Game Mapmaking Software Dungeon Alchemist does nearly everything they're talking about (at a lower level, sure) and that was made by a couple of guys in their basement.

Most of the complaints that I'm seeing about this are from people who really have very limited experience with VTT play.
 

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
I have to raise my eyebrows at the "who is asking for this" types of comments. We are talking about game geeks. There are people who sink great amounts of time and money into minis and physical terrain, costumes, luxury versions of adventures (Beadles and Grims), etc. VTTs are no different. The VTT itself is a hobby for many people. People put a great deal of time, and sometimes money, into foundry mods to run the game they want. I don't even think the 3D VTT has to be that easy to use to gain a sizable audience if it can provide tools for certain types of geeks to turn dungeon building into its own hobby.

Personally, as I said above, I'll likely only be attracted to it for official WotC content all fully prepped and, even then, only if they finally release a VTT that properly gets all the automations done right. If it does that and isn't too wonky to use in game, then I might even appreciate the 3D. Dealing with elevation in most current-generation VTTs is rather kludgy. Something that can represent actors on different levels in the 3D environment and flying could make running the game easier. If they get all this right AND have building tools that don't have too high of a learning curve--who knows, perhaps I would be convinced to use it to build my own encounters.

What makes me more skeptical, however, is that I need to see how they will handle fog of war, especially for large area exploration. The demos look like they could be nice for set-piece encounters, but I would like to see how they would handle, say, putting in the entire Dungeon of the Mad Mage. Which raises another potential concern: how are they going to price storage and how will performance be affected by large maps. One reason that I ditched Roll20 after testing it for several months is that even if I were willing to pay the highest subscription rate, I still didn't have enough storage for my current campaign. And a single-level map from the current mega dungeon I'm running would grind Roll20 to a halt.

So, I'm not very optimistic that WotC's VTT is going to be the correct tool to manage my entire campaign in and I don't see myself paying subscriptions for two VTTs (Foundry for most things and WotCs for set-piece combats). That leaves me with being cautiously optimistic at using it to run WotC official adventures, which will hopefully be built and well tested by professional developers and designers.

And who knows, if I ever get to run games in person again, I would happily go back to using the free Map Tool program with a horizontal display and minis. It is so much easier to run home-brew and sandboxy games in than any of the major VTTs--and much less expensive.
 
Last edited:

I have to raise my eyebrows at the "who is asking for this" types of comments. We are talking about game geeks. There are people who sink great amounts of time and money into minis and physical terrain, costumes, luxury versions of adventures (Beadles and Grims), etc. VTTs are no different. The VTT itself is a hobby for many people. People put a great deal of time, and sometimes money, into foundry mods to run the game they want. I don't even think the 3D VTT has to be that easy to use to gain a sizable audience if it can provide tools for certain types of geeks to turn dungeon building into its own hobby.

Personally, as I said above, I'll likely only be attracted to it for official WotC content all fully prepped and, even then, only if they finally release a VTT that properly gets all the automations done right. If it does that and isn't too wonky to use in game, then I might even appreciate the 3D. Dealing with elevation in most current-generation VTTs is rather kludgy. Something that can represent actors on different levels in the 3D environment and flying could make running the game easier. If they get all this right AND have building tools that don't have too high of a learning curve--who knows, perhaps I would be convinced to use it to build my own encounters.

What makes me more skeptical, however, is that I need to see how they will handle fog of war, especially for large area exploration. The demos look like they could be nice for set-piece encounters, but I would like to see how they would handle, say, putting in the entire Dungeon of the Mad Mage. Which raises another potential concern: how are they going to price storage and how will performance be affected by large maps. One reason that I ditched Roll20 after testing it for several months is that even if I were willing to pay the highest subscription rate, I still didn't have enough storage for my current campaign. And a single-level map from the current mega dungeon I'm running would grind Roll20 to a halt.

So, I'm not very optimistic that WotC's VTT is going to be the correct tool to manage my entire campaign in and I don't see myself paying subscriptions for two VTTs (Foundry for most things and WotCs for set-piece combats). That leaves me with being cautiously optimistic at using it to run WotC official adventures, which will hopefully be built and well tested by professional developers and designers.

And who knows, if I ever get to run games in person again, I would happily go back to using the free Map Tool program with a horizontal display and minis. It is so much easier to run home-brew and sandboxy games in than any of the major VTTs--and much less expensive.
Ideally visibility will work by the rules and reality. Players will be able to see what their token should see with a proper lighting engine.
 

Epic Threats

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top