Interesting statement from a WizO on the D&D forum:

[JVisgaitis]

You mean it hasn't found the bottom yet?

Hey, I'm sure we could do less then what we make now... Never underestimate the power of 2 cups of coffee at Star Bucks! The day I lose that, I don't know what I'll do.

 

[Mark CMG]

that's actually a pretty good point.

(. . .)

if there hasn't been such an animal yet, i don't think 4E is very far along in the planning stages.

I think they have tons more informal data to mine due to the proliferation of the Internet than they have ever received from past surveys. It might be that they feel the information is arguably more informative, too.

 

[RFisher]

There is one reason why they would hold that information secret: Profit.

If Wizards announced today that DnD 4.0 were to come out at Winter Fantasy 08 you can almost count on there being reduced sales on DnD supplements (especially class books) through out the 4th quarter (and maybe 3rd quarter) of 07. This would be because many players/dms would refuse to pay $30+ a month on rules that might become obsolete (especially if Wizards announces the end of the OGL and SRD).

Well, they could always take the tactics that's been used before: Announce that all products up to the 4e release will be compatible with both the new & old editions. Nobody will realize that it was just a bluff until after 4e is out & the only people upset enough to stop buying your products because of this will be substantially the same group that refuses to upgrade to 4e anyway.

(^_^)

 

[Cthulhudrew]

I think they have tons more informal data to mine due to the proliferation of the Internet than they have ever received from past surveys. It might be that they feel the information is arguably more informative, too.

I don't know that I would agree. For one thing, any information they may have gotten from, say, forums and the like (such as ENWorld) isn't in an easily palatable form like you would get from surveys. It's all bits and pieces scattered around all over, and not easily catalogued.

For another, the information is all over the place. You get everything from reasoned discussion about rules, to rants about rules, products, etc. There really isn't anything that would be quantifiable, measurable, or give you any pinpointable reference to relevance. Are person X's comments about iterative attacks more relevant than person Y's off-the-cuff remark about coup de grace attacks?

Considering the work that went into 3.0, and before that, 2E, not to mention just good market and demographic research in general, I would find it very hard to believe that it isn't like the rep implies, that there won't be a 4.0 before this sort of information is gathered in a formal manner. Given the size and nature of the big corporate giant Hasbro, I would think it even more likely to take place than it would have under TSR. The sheer amount of market research that they put into toys and things throughout all phases of production is probably even more than my mind builds it up to be. Anything less than thorough and structured demographic research at a corporation their size would be unheard of, IMO.

 

[Mark CMG]

(. . .) any information they may have gotten from, say, forums and the like (such as ENWorld) isn't in an easily palatable form like you would get from surveys. It's all bits and pieces scattered around all over, and not easily catalogued.

I don't think this is an argument against so much as a point made about how tough the job would be.

You get everything from reasoned discussion about rules, to rants about rules, products, etc. There really isn't anything that would be quantifiable, measurable, or give you any pinpointable reference to relevance.

That would depend on what you deem relevant. Survey data can be as suspect, for many reasons, as can off the cuff remarks. Likely some combination of both gleans the best results. However, I could easily see them approaching things differently this time around. Perhaps they avoid the "telling us what we want to hear" remarks and the "this is what I think despite what I have seen in play" answers you get from direct surveys. Maybe they just gather all of the information online that points up things that are seemingly problematic and prioritize what gets addressed and what hasn't been complained about enough to bother adjusting.

 

[Maggan]

I don't know that I would agree. For one thing, any information they may have gotten from, say, forums and the like (such as ENWorld) isn't in an easily palatable form like you would get from surveys. It's all bits and pieces scattered around all over, and not easily catalogued.

I would also hazard that the feedback is hugely contradictory. Just a few examples that comes to mind:

"The bard class sux!" vs"No it doesn't"

"The PHII is the suxxors!" vs"The PHII is the roxxors!"

And so on, so forth. There is no unified voice on the Internet where people agree about what's good for the game.

Getting market data from a bunch of people either raving or ranting and trying to find the real info that influences people's spending would be very difficult.

I'm sure the internet chatter plays a part in the market research of WotC. But I don't think it's any decisive part.

/M

 

[Cthulhudrew]

I don't think this is an argument against so much as a point made about how tough the job would be.

True, and that is pretty much the point I intended to make. I just can't imagine what it would take to have people scroll through the hundreds or thousands of threads on many different boards to try and piece together bits of information that might be consistent and useful. Doing that on ENWorld or the WotC forums alone would be difficult, not to mention all the other rpg sites. And again, how do you assess a level of importance to them? Is ENWorld more relevant than WotC? Or Dragonsfoot? (Of course, the answer is yes. )

Not to say that it isn't possible, but I just can't really envision it myself.

That would depend on what you deem relevant. Survey data can be as suspect, for many reasons, as can off the cuff remarks.

For sure- especially in the sense that they tend to reflect the bias of the surveyor.

Likely some combination of both gleans the best results.

Yes, I'd agree. I would think there would be some sort of comment box or something on any/all survey types of things they would do.

Heck, Dragon (when it was still run by TSR) ran questions soliciting opinions for 2E and 3E and had many issues' worth of reader commentary (which was in all likelihood merely a small sample of the feedback they got). I was just reading through some of those the other day and noting how many things in 3E were similar to suggestions made by those letters (same with 2E).

I'm sure that, as you suggest, they will be taking into account the additional information afforded by the internet now that wasn't available then, but I just can't see them randomly parsing through forums trying to find enough data to collate into some overall vision of what they will change/update without also having a more formal data gathering process.

Now, they do run a lot of polls periodically on the Wizards' site, and I'm certain that they keep that information somewhere. It may also contribute to whatever comes down the pike eventually, even if not intended to be used for those reasons (or, to jump into the conspiracy theory route for a minute, maybe these various polls are being collectively used to gather data without raising too many bells and whistles at once.)

In any event, I do feel pretty firmly that we will see more formal rumblings at WotC when/if 4E is in the planning stages than we have thus far. And thus my own bias rings clear.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Another conspiracy theory- all these polls that have been running on ENWorld recently. Maybe people here are in the pockets of (or aliases of) WotC employees???

(I'm looking at all you Class/Race Survivor threads!!!!)

 

[Firebeetle]

It's perfectly obvious what is going to happen. WotC has made far more money on CCGs like Magic than it ever has on D&D. The Fourth Edition will be run the same way, with rules on little cards that you collect in sets of nine to make a page. Rules for powerful things, like upper level spells and artifacts and high CR monsters will be the rares. Prestige classes, combat maneuvers, mid-CR creatures and mid-level spells and magic items will be uncommon. Everything else is common.

 

[JVisgaitis]

It's perfectly obvious what is going to happen...

I'd cut off my arm if you're even remotely close.