Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 5278638" data-attributes="member: 32164">Emphasis mine. We're back to your opinion. Even acknowledging your experience in psychology, your assessment and predilections of the people you know don't change anything about what will appeal in Essentials IF the anecdotal experience of myself and others is accurate.What's been changed about Essentials is that SOME classes work differently than they used to. If you are willing to acknowledge that people exist (and I and many others are telling you they DO) who want classes that function differently than those in the PHB, then Essentials will broaden its appeal to include those people. Customers like you and your friends STILL have access (even in Essentials) to classes that meet the complexity demand you claim they want - in the form of Wizards and Clerics. The difference between it and baseline 4e are that players who want something simpler ALSO have it.Where I call BS is the claim by many that simplifying some specific classes will turn people off of Essentials. Or that the lack of uniform mechanics will turn people off of Essentials. The latter will only turn off people who are unintimidated by, and/or care a great deal about the mechanical side of the games they play. I submit that many, or even most, of the people in that category are already unintimidated by 4e, and ergo would not be the dominant market for Essentials. It stands to reason that less analytical people are the ones who might be intimidated, but that they are also far more likely to be turned off by variability in game mechanics. What those people care about is generally not how every class work, but how their character works.On your latter comment, have you ever hear of experiential market research? I took classes on it in business school. It's best understood as: "Recruit a bunch of people, hand them a product, and watch them play with it. Take notes. Lots of notes. Then ask questions. Lots of questions." This is market research the way it used to be done. And, done right, it generally works.You will learn WAY, way, more than you can from a simple survey. The only downside with this form of market research is that it's EXPENSIVE. Obviously, it's not perfect, but it's generally way more effective than just "going with your gut," which seems to be what most gamers do.</blockquote>

Verification