Hasbro CEO: "D&D is Really on a Tear"

Sorry, that laugh was a result of clumsy fingers on my phone.

 

[houser2112]

In the non-book-but-still-fantasy-related context, I would really like to see a Peter Jackson version of the Silmarillion, but it seems unlikely that I ever will. In all these cases, the cost of production is too great relative to the likely returns on the product.

From what I've read, cost is not a factor (at least, not the biggest factor). The big reason you likely won't see it is because the Tolkien estate won't license it, to the point that Jackson needed to be careful what non-Hobbit/LotR material he included in his movies.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Probably because it wasn't singled out by WotC with a comment during earnings call at the time. This time it was singled out, which could indicate a difference in performance.

/M

So just because it wasn't singled out it wasn't in a tear?

I'm seeing loads of wishful thinking here. I know some of you want this edition to be the best of the best but from these comments we really don't know the full monty.

He could have made that comment because they reached their targets even though they have such a small staff or maybe the CEO finally looked at D&D and decided to give it a mention.

Products do extremely well all the time without the CEO specifically mentioning them. Do we even know if he is talking about the tabletop game? He could be talking about the boardgames and MMO.

 

[Queer Venger]

Does it matter?? It was mentioned, for us fans of the tabletop hobby, and of D&D (any edition) this is good news. But I guess we all need our Cassandras.

 

[delericho]

He could have made that comment because they reached their targets even though they have such a small staff or maybe the CEO finally looked at D&D and decided to give it a mention.

Mistwell has already covered this. In an Earnings Call he can't mention it unless it is a significant earner for Hasbro as a whole. Simply exceeding internal numbers isn't enough.

It is, of course, possible that D&D has always been doing spectacularly well and he's just never noticed before. But I for one find that hard to believe.

Do we even know if he is talking about the tabletop game?

Not only do we not know that, I would be pretty sure he was talking about D&D as a whole - so the sum of the RPG, MMO, and anything else they've got going on.

 

[ExploderWizard]

But you would not actually use the shiny new Moldvays Basic or it would not be a collectible......well unless you had two shiny new Moldvays because then you have just increased the rarity by taking another out of circulation.

I do in fact have 5 Moldvay basic sets. One is referenced and played with and the others sit on the shelf in pristine condition.

D&D books aren't collectable like MtG cards are.

The natural order of the universe is restored.

Collectible? I do not think it means what you think it means. D&D books are collectible just like comic books. Comic books are for reading entertainment but once you have read them then you still keep them. If I buy a module and play with it then I'm not going to discard it when we are done playing it. I will keep it on the shelf and add it to my collection.

Magic cards aren't much different. You can buy them, play with them, and collect them.

Let's be honest though. DnD books are not intended to be collectables. Moldvay was publishing a game to be played, not displayed.

Yes, and I still like to play it. It is no longer being published in paper form and there is still a demand for it, so it is NOW a collectible even if it wasn't published with the intention of being one.

 

[Celtavian]

So just because it wasn't singled out it wasn't in a tear?

I'm seeing loads of wishful thinking here. I know some of you want this edition to be the best of the best but from these comments we really don't know the full monty.

He could have made that comment because they reached their targets even though they have such a small staff or maybe the CEO finally looked at D&D and decided to give it a mention.

Products do extremely well all the time without the CEO specifically mentioning them. Do we even know if he is talking about the tabletop game? He could be talking about the boardgames and MMO.

It's not going to be the best of the best. Too many other options that older editions didn't have to compete against. It should be a solid edition that brings a lot of gamers back that moved to Pathfinder or stayed with 3E.

 

[Maggan]

Products do extremely well all the time without the CEO specifically mentioning them.

Historically on EN World, when discussing how D&D is doing the fact that it almost never is mentioned in the financial reports (I think it has happened once in the last 15 years or so) is taken as an indication that D&D is small fry and not worth bothering with.

It has been used as "proof" that D&D is in jeopardy from mishandling by Hasbro, and much angst has been bandied about over that fact. Many hope that D&D will be a strong performer for WotC, which could ensure that it is continued to be published. Now D&D is mentioned and it is mentioned as a strong performer, which makes some people happy because they think it is fun if D&D is doing well.

Taken together with Amazon rankings, data on Internet play, stats on amount of online chatter, activity on EN World forums, a pronounced abscence of scathing edition warring and now a mention in the financial report, some people are interpreting that as signs that D&D is doing well and that the launch has been successful.

I don't see why that is a problem.

/M

 

[Halivar]

Historically on EN World, when discussing how D&D is doing the fact that it almost never is mentioned in the financial reports (I think it has happened once in the last 15 years or so) is taken as an indication that D&D is small fry and not worth bothering with.

It has been used as "proof" that D&D is in jeopardy from mishandling by Hasbro, and much angst has been bandied about over that fact.

Don't expect any retractions from the small number of posters who called 5E the "mothball" edition.

 

[Wicht]

I could see Spelljammer happening, maybe. Though with the failure of "John Carter", I think it's now even more unlikely than it was.

I see your "John Carter" and raise you one "Guardians of the Galaxy."

With a talking raccoon and tree no less.

 

[delericho]

I see your "John Carter" and raise you one "Guardians of the Galaxy."

I fold. Well played, sir.