Irreconcilable differences(Forked Thread: When did I stop being WotC's...)

I do find it very interesting to see how peopel - myself very much included - tend to see threads and posts on these forums in completely opposing light. I've yet to see a single thread where Pathfinder is even mentioned where it isn't in some way attacked, snubbed, or looked down on, and I've seen numerous occasions where even the slightest criticism of 4e is responded to with RABIES. OH GOD RABIES.

Heh so so true.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Really? Where? I see more people saying that they prefer 3.x, not that they hated it and also hate 4E. Well, I suppose these people do exist, but they are not common on these boards.

...Eh? I'm saying that a lot of people who like 4e like it because they very specifically see it as being drastically different from 3e. Heck, we have a thread right now saying that 4e isn't different ENOUGH ;p
 

...Eh? I'm saying that a lot of people who like 4e like it because they very specifically see it as being drastically different from 3e. Heck, we have a thread right now saying that 4e isn't different ENOUGH ;p

It appears I didn't understand what you wanted to say.

I can't say I hated or hate 3E, but I am not a hater, I'm a liker...
 


What makes you say this? Are there other product categories that make more money for the D&D brand than RPGs? Is there a consumer segment that has greater brand loyalty toward D&D than roleplayers? Does Hasbro have a history of divorcing brands from their core categories?

Large companies with shareholders want the most that they can get out of an asset. The D&D name is an asset to Hasbro, nothing more. This doesn't mean that the people who develop and work on the game see it as that. If market research shows that collectible competitive games produce stronger revenues than roleplaying games, take a guess at where decision makers are going to market assets such as the D&D IP.

This is not sinister or evil. Its just business. Its employees at a company doing exactly what the shareholders pay them to do.
 

If market research shows that collectible competitive games produce stronger revenues than roleplaying games, take a guess at where decision makers are going to market assets such as the D&D IP.
This is a valid point. But considering the recent revelations about the status of DDM, I doubt the market research would show that in this case with respect to D&D. 4E is apparently selling well, while the skirmish game has been declining.
 

This is a valid point. But considering the recent revelations about the status of DDM, I doubt the market research would show that in this case with respect to D&D. 4E is apparently selling well, while the skirmish game has been declining.

It shows exactly that. Consumers are getting the skirmish game they want with 4E so they are not bothering to buy or play the same thing twice. Do you think the less random plastic minis would sell very well if the unique power cards were not part of the package? D&D minis have been out long enough that a lot of groups have more than enough to last them a lifetime. If the powers on a card are the same ones that come in a book then thats no real incentive to buy yet more minis.

The lure of new and cool ways to affect gameplay through the purchase of bundled cards and minis is what will drive these sales. The concept of a DM that decides what is permissible in a given game does not suit this marketing model and will have to be phased out shortly.
 




Remove ads

Top