Forked Thread: Disappointed in 4e; 4e upgrade or new game??

[CleverNickName]

As long as a product contains the name "Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover, the consumer's immediate reaction is going to be "this is the same game that I know and love." And as long as there is an incremental number after the name...like most of our computer games and software...the assumption is going to be that it is an upgrade, an expansion, or improvement over the previous, lower number. These assumptions are relative and highly personal, and not everyone will agree, but still. The assumptions are there.

And they are there deliberately. I do not think WotC decided to keep the D&D name on the books by accident, or because they couldn't think of a different name. And it wasn't by accident that they named it "4th Edition" either, instead of "Retro Edition" or something of that sort. They want the consumer to draw these conclusions...in fact, they depend on it to promote the product.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Still like 4th edition does AD&D confused the hell of a lot of people, and still does to this day, as to what the word "advanced" means.

Advanced
1.placed ahead or forward: with one foot advanced. 2.ahead or far or further along in progress, complexity, knowledge, skill, etc.: an advanced class in Spanish; to take a course in advanced mathematics; Our plans are too advanced to make the change now. 3.pertaining to or embodying ideas, practices, attitudes, etc., taken as being more enlightened or liberal than the standardized, established, or traditional: advanced theories of child care; the more advanced members of the artistic community. 4.far along in time: the advanced age of most senators

I would say the intended meaning was # 2 and 3.

AD&D was certainly more complex. The value of this complexity is subjective.

 

[bagger245]

AD&D was complex COMPARED to 0D&D and BECMI... but not to 3e or 4e. Magic the
Gathering has beginner, intermediate and expert cards back in the days and now they just
make expert cards as the standard...
Yeap, as the edition number go higher and higher, people will assume that its
getting better and better..
I just hope 5th ed will be called something else. Keep the D&D name, yes, but add a sub-title.

 

[justanobody]

Actually "back in the day" Magic only had "cards". That other stuff is some new-age addition to it.

 

[RFisher]

How would the D&D fans have cried that their favorite game was no longer supported and dead?

That’s the thing. I know some people refuse to believe it, but Wizards could actually have more than one RPG in print. (Indeed, they do.) If 4e had been called “Foo”, they could have kept 3e around as “D&D”.

In fact, this is one of the many good answers to the supposed dilemma of the RPG business: Diversity.

 

[MichaelSomething]

That’s the thing. I know some people refuse to believe it, but Wizards could actually have more than one RPG in print. (Indeed, they do.) If 4e had been called “Foo”, they could have kept 3e around as “D&D”.

In fact, this is one of the many good answers to the supposed dilemma of the RPG business: Diversity.

If your looking for diversity, why look at only WOTC? There are like dozens of RPG games out there. GURPS, Pathfinder, Vampire, Spirit of the Century, Exalted, Mutants and Masterminds, and True20 are systems I can name off the top of my head, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[RFisher]

If your looking for diversity, why look at only WOTC? There are like dozens of RPG games out there. GURPS, Pathfinder, Vampire, Spirit of the Century, Exalted, Mutants and Masterminds, and True20 are systems I can name off the top of my head, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

The last three Wizards’ products I acquired: The 4e PHB, the 3.5 UA, the 3.0 D&DG. ^_^ I’ve acquired a lot of other RPG products in that time.

I’m not talking about diversity for me. I’m talking about it for publishers. The idea that Wizards would discontinue D&D because they published 4e under a different name seems like a strange assumption.

Likewise, the idea that Wizards needs to put out a D&D PHB, DMG, & MM every year or they’ll all be starving in the rain seems very strange. Wizards has other RPG products, could have more, and certainly does quite well on its non-RPG products.

That’s all I’m sayin’. ^_^

 

[Jhaelen]

That is the question isn't it? Did the success come form the game itself or the name put onto it?

I think it's obvious that part of 4E's success is because of the brand name. If WotC had called it differently it would still have profited (slightly less) from a brand because it would have been WotC's new rpg.
If a no-name newcomer company would have come up with the 4E ruleset as-is, they would either not have been successful at all or only after several years of word of mouth propaganda.

Then those fans of D&D that liked the game, not the name, would have been happy to continue playing D&D, and just as fine for those other people to enjoy their new game.

Here you're definitely wrong. Those fans ARE still playing old versions of D&D.
The big majority however is not satisfied with playing a 'dead' game. Continued support via supplements is crucial to keep a majority interested in the game. Otherwise they'll start to look elsewhere to 'get their fix'. It's not as if D&D was the only rpg system out there.

 

[justanobody]

Here you're definitely wrong. Those fans ARE still playing old versions of D&D.

The big majority however is not satisfied with playing a 'dead' game. Continued support via supplements is crucial to keep a majority interested in the game. Otherwise they'll start to look elsewhere to 'get their fix'. It's not as if D&D was the only rpg system out there.

The problem is, in the gaming world's eyes, D&D is not dead because 4th edition exists. Some will not accept that D&D is dead in many forms, that don't care to play 4th.

I fully understand wanting support for older editions. But would you rather the game be dead so you can vie for support for it, or be considered alive because some new game just happens to carry the same nomenclature?