Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Given WotC plans with the RPG will 5e always be the #1 seller?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Rygar" data-source="post: 6344679" data-attributes="member: 6756765"><p>Doesn't ir Morrus?</p><p></p><p>Consider some of the design facets of 4th edition...</p><p></p><p>-Everything is Core. By making everything Core, and by releasing a landslide of material, and by locking Dragon which was now part of Core behind DDI, it creates a strong encouragement to sign up for DDI and increase revenue. What drove that decision? Was it because WOTC felt it was better to deviate from their historical "Don't assume anyone has any specific supplement when writing another supplement"? Or was it because Hasbro gave them the target of "Make this much revenue"? </p><p></p><p>-Tactical combat such that it was very difficult to play the game without maps and miniatures, which WOTC sold in randomized packages. Was this design decision because WOTC felt that people purchasing randomized miniature packs made D&D a better game? Or was it because Hasbro gave them the target of "Make this much revenue"?</p><p></p><p>-Heavy deviation from the design of previous editions, which Heinsoo termed as "Rebranding" when discussing alignments recently. Was this because WOTC felt it made the game better to radically change the design, or was it because WOTC felt it was better to kill the OGL to regain control of the whole revenue stream in order to meet Hasbro's target?</p><p></p><p>Ryan Dancey already told us the sales pitch for 4th edition, which was approved by Hasbro, which informed the design of 4th edition, sometimes in very obvious ways. How is it possible to assert that Hasbro has no influence on the design process when it is apparent that the design process of 4th edition was influenced by Hasbro? You don't have to be in the trenches to influence the design, like any order of events, high level direction can have dramatic influence over low level implementation.</p><p></p><p>Quoting Ryan Dancey here on ENWorld...</p><p></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span>If WOTC has complete creative control, and Hasbro isn't involved, then why did WOTC need to make a big presentation to Hasbro senior management on the 4th edition project plan and receive their approval? WOTC had a creative direction informed by Hasbro's financial requirements that was then presented to senior management, who approved the creative direction and agreed it could meet their requirements. That is input into the creative process.</p><p></p><p>As such, since there hasn't been any change in corporate structure, we can assume that 5th edition also required Hasbro's approval on the project plan, which is the creative direction. </p><p></p><p>IMO this is a case where the people in the trenches don't recognize that the creative process was being influenced by high level decisions from Hasbro and assume that since Hasbro didn't dictate implementation of the process they approved then Hasbro wasn't involved in the process, but the moment anything needs to be approved by Hasbro at any level the creative process is influenced because the creative process is now focused on meeting Hasbro's expectations.</p><p></p><p>From that point we can think of any number of situations in which Hasbro influences the creative process, all we have to do is think of projects in which Hasbro would veto, and we arrive at an influenced creative process because all of those projects are off the table and cannot be implemented no matter how much the developer wants to create it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Rygar, post: 6344679, member: 6756765"] Doesn't ir Morrus? Consider some of the design facets of 4th edition... -Everything is Core. By making everything Core, and by releasing a landslide of material, and by locking Dragon which was now part of Core behind DDI, it creates a strong encouragement to sign up for DDI and increase revenue. What drove that decision? Was it because WOTC felt it was better to deviate from their historical "Don't assume anyone has any specific supplement when writing another supplement"? Or was it because Hasbro gave them the target of "Make this much revenue"? -Tactical combat such that it was very difficult to play the game without maps and miniatures, which WOTC sold in randomized packages. Was this design decision because WOTC felt that people purchasing randomized miniature packs made D&D a better game? Or was it because Hasbro gave them the target of "Make this much revenue"? -Heavy deviation from the design of previous editions, which Heinsoo termed as "Rebranding" when discussing alignments recently. Was this because WOTC felt it made the game better to radically change the design, or was it because WOTC felt it was better to kill the OGL to regain control of the whole revenue stream in order to meet Hasbro's target? Ryan Dancey already told us the sales pitch for 4th edition, which was approved by Hasbro, which informed the design of 4th edition, sometimes in very obvious ways. How is it possible to assert that Hasbro has no influence on the design process when it is apparent that the design process of 4th edition was influenced by Hasbro? You don't have to be in the trenches to influence the design, like any order of events, high level direction can have dramatic influence over low level implementation. Quoting Ryan Dancey here on ENWorld... [COLOR=#000000] [/COLOR]If WOTC has complete creative control, and Hasbro isn't involved, then why did WOTC need to make a big presentation to Hasbro senior management on the 4th edition project plan and receive their approval? WOTC had a creative direction informed by Hasbro's financial requirements that was then presented to senior management, who approved the creative direction and agreed it could meet their requirements. That is input into the creative process. As such, since there hasn't been any change in corporate structure, we can assume that 5th edition also required Hasbro's approval on the project plan, which is the creative direction. IMO this is a case where the people in the trenches don't recognize that the creative process was being influenced by high level decisions from Hasbro and assume that since Hasbro didn't dictate implementation of the process they approved then Hasbro wasn't involved in the process, but the moment anything needs to be approved by Hasbro at any level the creative process is influenced because the creative process is now focused on meeting Hasbro's expectations. From that point we can think of any number of situations in which Hasbro influences the creative process, all we have to do is think of projects in which Hasbro would veto, and we arrive at an influenced creative process because all of those projects are off the table and cannot be implemented no matter how much the developer wants to create it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Given WotC plans with the RPG will 5e always be the #1 seller?
Top