Fracturing...or Diversification?

[GreyLord]

The bottom line: tabletop rpgs do not produce the kind of revenue a company the size of Hasbro demands of them.

Therefore the game must morph into a revenue producing stream (no longer being a tabletop rpg at that point) or get mothballed.

This is why D&D needs to be in the hands of a smaller company that could actually thrive on the level of rpg sales that D&D can realistically bring in.

Don't see Hasbro letting go of the IP anytime soon though.

It might not necessarily get mothballed. It may just get downsized...greatly downsized.

Take Clue for example...a boardgame that is sold by Hasbro. It has sales that could break a million (maybe even a couple mil), but not 50 million in most probabilities. Hence it is under the boardgame division. It has a few people to handle it along with other portions of their duties.

The same could be done for D&D. Some may even like that as the game would have a lot less releases at that point and be more static. It just would depend on if Hasbro wanted to take it that way. If there are still sales...could still use the money...but maximizing the profit for the amount of effort is the key.

Or, as some here fear...and probably less likely at first, they could retire it and hold it for re-release later. Treat it like a GI Joe or Transformer market where you just wait for the right time to release new material, or release the old material.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Or, as some here fear...and probably less likely at first, they could retire it and hold it for re-release later. Treat it like a GI Joe or Transformer market where you just wait for the right time to release new material, or release the old material.

This is what I was talking about when I mentioned mothballing.

 

[The Shaman]

The woodgrain box.

Holmes.

1e AD&D.

Moldvay.

Mentzer/BECMI/RC.

2e AD&D.

3e D&D.

3.5e D&D.

4e D&D.

Plus EofPT, HackMaster, C&C, the retro-clones, and Pathfinder.


Geebus friggin' Crisco, how many more versions do you need to be happy?

 

[GreyLord]

the woodgrain box.

Holmes.

1e ad&d.

Moldvay.

Mentzer/becmi/rc.

2e ad&d.

3e d&d.

3.5e d&d.

4e d&d.

Plus eofpt, hackmaster, c&c, the retro-clones, and pathfinder.


Geebus friggin' crisco, how many more versions do you need to be happy?

17.321973291

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Geebus friggin' crisco

Note to self: use G.F.C. as a PC name at some point.

 

[The Shaman]

Note to self: use G.F.C. as a PC name at some point.

Someone at Dragonsfoot made a trenchant observation: each successive edition of D&D is clamored for, and often written by, people who don't like the current iteration of the game.

In other words, every edition represents the interests of cranks.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think there is good and bad. Lately I've found it harder to get different types of gamers to play at the same table together. Personally I don't believe that is a good a thing. At the same time, there are more gaming options available to me than before. That is a good thing. One thing I've learned is the hobby never really stays the same over time and trends come and go. I'd like the diversity without as much of the divisiveness.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Good or bad, the diversification, fracturing, splintering, mangling, folding, and general battering--have always been there. Chances are, if you can't stand 4E, you wouldn't have liked the way I ran Basic, 1E, 3E, or even Arcana Evolved. (Or Fantasy Hero, or Runequest, etc.) And vice versa. Every edition, and increasing communcation options, merely makes all of us more aware of the differences that already existed.