WotC Hasbro Bets Big on D&D

During today's 'Hasbro Fireside Chat', Hasbro's Chris Cocks, chief executive officer, and Cynthia Williams, president of Wizards of the Coast and Digital Gaming mentioned D&D, and about betting big on its name. This was in addition to the Magic: The Gathering discussion they held on the same call.

The following are rough notes on what they said.

D&D Beyond

• Leaning heavily on D&D Beyond
• 13 million registered users
• Give them more ways to express their fandom
• Hired 350 people last year
• Low attrition

What’s next for D&D

• Never been more popular
• Brand under-monetized
• Excited about D&D Beyond possibilities
• Empower accessibility and development of the user base.
• Data driven insight
• Window into how players are playing
• Companion app on their phone
• Start future monetization starting with D&D Beyond
• DMs are 20% of the audience but lions share of purchases
• Digital game recurrent spending for post sale revenue.
• Speed of digital can expand, yearly book model to include current digital style models.
• Reach highly engaged multigenerational fans.
• Dungeons and Dragons has recognition, 10 out of 10
• Cultural phenomenon right now.
• DND strategy is a broad four quadrant strategy
• Like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings or Marvel
• New books and accessories, licensed game stuff, and D&D Beyond
• Huge hopes for D&D

What is success for the D&D Movie

• First big light up oppourtunity for 4th quadrant
• Significant marketing
• They think it’ll have significant box office
• It has second most viewed trailer at Paramount, only eclipsed by Transformers
• Will be licensed video games, some on movies
• Then follow up other media, TV, other movies, etc.
• Bullish on D&D.

 

[Malmuria]

I just wish people would stop with the whole "micro-transaction" stuff.

Yup, you'll have small priced items - individual tokens, maps, dice packs, that sort of thing. Exactly like you have right now.

Aren't those considered microtransactions?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Aren't those considered microtransactions?

Same as minis and stuff.

 

[Yaarel]

The part that caught my eye:

What’s next for D&D

• Excited about D&D Beyond possibilities

 

[Yaarel]

Already posted my prediction earlier. Books you own in beyond being added to the tabletop, and some original tile sets and Pre made content for sale.

I would be more comfortable spending money for digital offerings if buying a hardcopy book thru DnDBeyond also got its digital usage.

 

[Hussar]

Aren't those considered microtransactions?

But, if they are, then why haven't people been bitching about them for the past ten years? Why is it only a really bad thing when WotC does it?

 

[TheSword]

It might not work for you, but they're literally already doing it with the current DDB subscription model and it's not hard to figure out why: you lose all the bells and whistles you've gained over a multi-year subscription that gets harder and hard to let lapse for even a month if you lose everything you've built up. If I let my DDB subscription expire, I lose the dice sets and whatever else they've given me. Personally I couldn't care less about that stuff, but if I was heavily invested in a 3D VTT would I want to figure out what items were sub bonuses and what items came with books I've bought? Nope, so I'd keep my subscription going to avoid the risk of losing something I actually care about, same as my PlayStation network sub that I haven't used the online service in ages but do occasionally play a random game that might have been a PS Plus freebie. Again, I'm not arguing it doesn't suck for the consumer. I'm arguing big companies do things like that to make it harder to want to cancel. They want that regular annual subscription money.

I echo @Malmuria ’s sadness. You shouldn’t have to blackmail people into staying with a subscription service because you’ll lose what you paid for if you stop it. You should keep people because it’s value for money - and there are multiple ways to do that.

If D&D wants a subscription service that fans will get behind then it has to be value for money and not gimmick based. People are savvier than that. There is value to having access to all the rules D&D has produced for 5e available on subscription. There’s not value in having to buy rules individually on top of having to pay an inflated subscription for a VTT they don’t need in the first place.

 

[Velderan]

I echo @Malmuria ’s sadness. You shouldn’t have to blackmail people into staying with a subscription service because you’ll lose what you paid for if you stop it. You should keep people because it’s value for money - and there are multiple ways to do that.

If D&D wants a subscription service that fans will get behind then it has to be value for money and not gimmick based. People are savvier than that. There is value to having access to all the rules D&D has produced for 5e available on subscription. There’s not value in having to buy rules individually on top of having to pay an inflated subscription for a VTT they don’t need in the first place.

Well you tell that to the companies (including WotC) that currently have the model I've described as a subscription offering. I'm not saying it doesn't suck for consumers, but it absolutely can be effective if what is being offered is considered worth the downside and I think you're giving consumers far too much credit when you say they're too savvy for that sorta thing considering the number of large companies (again including WotC currently) that have this exact type of model in place.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Hasbro also could work for the reanimation of old franchises by other companies. Let's imagine for example an old cartoon "Pirates of the dark Waters", produced by Hanna Barbera. Today is a totally dead brand. Who would be interested into this? Then Hasbro talks with Warner-Discovery and this is the deal. WotC desings the lore and the background of the reimaginated version, and WarnerDiscovery creates the main (non-playable) characters and the plot of a new cartoon show. Hasbro sells the toys and TTRPG. Or to publish a mash-up mixing DC Universe (mainly Gotham city) and New Capena.

Or Hasbro could talk with Disney to add Marvel Superheroes and Star Wars in the One-D&D VTT, or One-D&D puslibhing a mash-up mixing Star Wars+Spelljammer.... or with a licence with Paramount to publish a mash-up mixing Spelljammer+Star Trek.

Jakandor could be the perfect setting if Paramount Pictures wanted to produce a mixture of Conan the Barbarian and Jurasik Park: Sword&Sorcery with dinosaurs and megafaun.

* Technically "Hero Quest" is not within D&D franchise. This means it could be linceced into other movie studio instead Paramount. And a future pack could be "Hero Quest: Companion of the Lance" with the heroes and monsters of Dragonlance.

* Is Konami the owner of the franchise "Duel Master/Kaijudo"?

* Could a "domain of delight" be inspired or based in Prety Cure: Glitter Force?

 

[MockingBird]

I'd love a reboot of Pirates of Dark Water

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Is there any real doubt that this will be a subscription service? The only question I really have is what comes with the subscription. That it will be a subscription is pretty obvious.

I just wish people would stop with the whole "micro-transaction" stuff. This ISN'T a video game. VTT's are a service - same as you Zoom subscription or your Microsoft 365. There is no game here. None at all. This is a totally different animal. Yup, you'll have small priced items - individual tokens, maps, dice packs, that sort of thing. Exactly like you have right now. But the whole notion of "loot boxes" or MMO comparisons is just not applicable at all.

Lets go in a slightly different direction with this discussion.

What do YOU think the 350+ new employees working on the digital footprint of DnD are going to be working on, and how do you think Hasbro/WotC is going to recoup the costs of exploding their paid workforce? What do YOU think it means that they want to focus on recurring post-purchase revenue? Do you believe their new focus is to just do whatever they are doing now without any significant changes?

I see you shooting down everyone elses idea of what WotC might mean, but I don't see you offering up your own opinion on the matter.

I have doubts a company is going to hire 350+ additional coders just to keep doing what they already are doing.