D&D 5E How much money is D&D 5e actually making?

[Oofta]

I'd want to see substantiation of that news, primarily because it makes little sense given 1) Hasbro is not in the habit of selling off properties. If they are unsuccessful, they sit on them, rather than sell them off, and 2) the note above - a property is growing, increasing revenue, helping to offset other losses... and you prep to sell it off? What?

Wasn't there a thread about this a while back? How it was just one guy trying to start a rumor?

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I was talking about a D&D game. If they made a AAA title and sold 10 million they could lose money on it. The developers not WotC.

Games are costing north of 100 million to develop, they only get a small % of game sales so they try to make money off microtransactions or subscriptions and DLC.

It's why were never gonna get a great AAA D&D game anytime to soon. It's basically financially impossible.

At best you'll get a smaller scale game that's good and that's probably being optimistic.

Oh, I see. Yes, AAA video game titles have indeed become outrageously expensive to develop. As for the never being a great AAA title, it's unlikely, but not impossible for a couple reasons:

1. As this thread has suggested, this may not actually be an extraordinarily profitable era for the game, but the brand is very strong with near universal recognition, high goodwilll, and even the occasional free celebrity endorsement. Big publishers seek out such properties to license precisely because things with large built-in followings are the safest bets. They are not as safe as game sequels, which are most really big game investments these days as the big publishers become ever more risk averse, which is why I don't think this is a super likely possibility.

2. It's always possible that a smaller D&D video game could be a rampant success. It is then reasonably likely that someone will take the plunge on the more expensive sequel, which leads to the even more expensive sequel, which, providing there should be multiple successes. But this is unlikely because licensed properties more often than not produce lazy, underwhelming games, and I don't think much of what people enjoy about the tabletop game really translates to AAA video games as we know them today. And, of course, this scenario would hardly qualify as "anytime soon" as Untitled D&D Game 3, would be 10+ years of game development cycles down the road.

I'd definitely bet on your being correct that it won't happen.

 

[Zardnaar]

Oh, I see. Yes, AAA video game titles have indeed become outrageously expensive to develop. As for the never being a great AAA title, it's unlikely, but not impossible for a couple reasons:

1. As this thread has suggested, this may not actually be an extraordinarily profitable era for the game, but the brand is very strong with near universal recognition, high goodwilll, and even the occasional free celebrity endorsement. Big publishers seek out such properties to license precisely because things with large built-in followings are the safest bets. They are not as safe as game sequels, which are most really big game investments these days as the big publishers become ever more risk averse, which is why I don't think this is a super likely possibility.

2. It's always possible that a smaller D&D video game could be a rampant success. It is then reasonably likely that someone will take the plunge on the more expensive sequel, which leads to the even more expensive sequel, which, providing there should be multiple successes. But this is unlikely because licensed properties more often than not produce lazy, underwhelming games, and I don't think much of what people enjoy about the tabletop game really translates to AAA video games as we know them today. And, of course, this scenario would hardly qualify as "anytime soon" as Untitled D&D Game 3, would be 10+ years of game development cycles down the road.

I'd definitely bet on your being correct that it won't happen.

People on the forums over value the D&D brand.

For the amount of money to do a AAA+ title you could probably buy it.

Any company dropping that amount of money is doing their own IP. GTA, The Witcher (cheaper but made in Poland), Assassin's Creed.

In 10 years time games will cost even more.

For example I think Mass Effect is around 8GB, ME3 20GB.

Some of my new games are 100gb+.

It's why were getting games as service, less variety, less medium sized studios. Worse games even.

Lots of indie type games though. They'll keep trying low budget games that play like low budget games.
You can make good low budget games but it requires passion and vision, hard to do when a developer makes a licensed game.

Personally I would be willing to put up with 16 bit graphics in order to get a good game.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

People on the forums over value the D&D brand.

For the amount of money to do a AAA+ title you could probably buy it.

As per Wikipedia, D&D had moved a billion dollars in product by 2004, primarily in the form of books. The Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings fantasy brands each have about half that in book sales. As fantasy entertainment properties go outside of film it is almost certainly the most successful grossing brand of all time. Of course film properties (which it may be again soon) often have income and expenditures an order of magnitude higher than their underlying written media (the Aquaman movie took in about as much as the entire industry of actual comic books did that year, and it was only freaking Aquaman). Net profits are obviously a very different matter for all these things but so far as brand value it is pretty high up there for anything printed on pages.

Now, as for the costs of a AAA title "could probably buy it", yeah, probably. TSR in it's entirety was sold to Wizards of the Coast in 1997 for $25 million, about $40 mil in todays dollars, but then again that was a bankruptcy fire-sale and sales were in an ongoing decline at that point. Who knows what it would take to talk Hasbro into parting with the brand the now much healthier brand, but yes, I would guess probably not as much as the very most expensive games.

 

[Umbran]

Wasn't there a thread about this a while back?

Not that I recall, but then, I don't read, or remember, everything that goes on around here.

 

[Zardnaar]

As per Wikipedia, D&D had moved a billion dollars in product by 2004, primarily in the form of books. The Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings fantasy brands each have about half that in book sales. As fantasy entertainment properties go outside of film it is almost certainly the most successful grossing brand of all time. Of course film properties (which it may be again soon) often have income and expenditures an order of magnitude higher than their underlying written media (the Aquaman movie took in about as much as the entire industry of actual comic books did that year, and it was only freaking Aquaman). Net profits are obviously a very different matter for all these things but so far as brand value it is pretty high up there for anything printed on pages.

Now, as for the costs of a AAA title "could probably buy it", yeah, probably. TSR in it's entirety was sold to Wizards of the Coast in 1997 for $25 million, about $40 mil in todays dollars, but then again that was a bankruptcy fire-sale and sales were in an ongoing decline at that point. Who knows what it would take to talk Hasbro into parting with the brand the now much healthier brand, but yes, I would guess probably not as much as the very most expensive games.

1 billion 30 years.

It's only a bit over 33 million a year.

The entire RPG market per year revenue wont cover a single AAA game.

 

[dave2008]

Bump. I was hoping the OP would tell us.

@jasper and @mach1.9pants: A whale, in this context, refers to a big buyer/spender. Typical it is used to describe the 1% of the 1% who are buying 1/4 billion dollar yachts and such. I wouldn't have thought to use it to describe someone who buys a lot of RPG products - but there you go. I hadn't heard the term dolphin, but I assume it means a moderately large buyer?

EDIT: A little research and I see the term has migrated down to mean any type of absurd level of spending. In terms of RPGs I would guess this is someone who buys all the books, collector copies, dice, minis, and the platinum edition beadle & grim stuff.

 

[generic]

People on the forums over value the D&D brand.

For the amount of money to do a AAA+ title you could probably buy it.

Any company dropping that amount of money is doing their own IP. GTA, The Witcher (cheaper but made in Poland), Assassin's Creed.

In 10 years time games will cost even more.

For example I think Mass Effect is around 8GB, ME3 20GB.

Some of my new games are 100gb+.

It's why were getting games as service, less variety, less medium sized studios. Worse games even.

Lots of indie type games though. They'll keep trying low budget games that play like low budget games.
You can make good low budget games but it requires passion and vision, hard to do when a developer makes a licensed game.

Personally I would be willing to put up with 16 bit graphics in order to get a good game.

Agreed. I would prefer an indie title developed by a devoted team to a bad BBB (not a term, but whatever) imitation.

 

[mach1.9pants]

@jasper and @mach1.9pants: A whale, in this context, refers to a big buyer/spender. Typical it is used to describe the 1% of the 1% who are buying 1/4 billion dollar yachts and such. I wouldn't have thought to use it to describe someone who buys a lot of RPG products - but there you go. I hadn't heard the term dolphin, but I assume it means a moderately large buyer?

EDIT: A little research and I see the term has migrated down to mean any type of absurd level of spending. In terms of RPGs I would guess this is someone who buys all the books, collector copies, dice, minis, and the platinum edition beadle & grim stuff.

I'm a promiscuous whale, then. I spend a heap but on lots of different games!
Either way, not really a great way to describe RPG nerds

 

[Oofta]

Not that I recall, but then, I don't read, or remember, everything that goes on around here.

Whether or not it's relevant, the thread is over here.

So basically a rumor some guy was trying to start back then. I would assume it's the same now, simple unsubstantiated rumor.