D&D 5E (2024) Is 5E better because of Crawford and Perkins leaving?

[Zardnaar]

Work should be developing the software but working with / licensing with software developers. It is about pushing the IP / brand not internal development

Even WoW was kind of an exception though. Its not like you can snap your fingers and crank out a WoW type game.

Because its a licensed product the peopke capable of producing a big hit will develop their own IP vs someone else's.

People here seriously overestimate D&Ds appeal to the mainstream.

 

[fettpett]

You're missing my point - D&D is the grandpappy of all CRPGs AND MMOs. They wouldn't exist without D&D. The fact that Warcraft made billions of dollars while D&D (at the time at least) remained relatively obscure is, IMO, a sign of short-sightedness when it comes to its potential. It has nothing to do with WotC being (or not being) a software developer. As everyone is well aware, the mismanagement of D&D predates WotC.

You're correct that D&D is the grandpappy, many universes wouldn't exist without it and most modern fantasy can trace it's roots directly to the influence of D&D, including Warcraft.

But what you're missing is TSR DID develop PC and console games, a LOT of them over the years and some sold well...others were just bad.

On top of that WotC has licensed out the D&D brand for PC and MMO's, the problem is they weren't good and since they farmed it out, they didn't have as much control over it. But the D&D MMO is still going.

 

[AlViking]

I think BG 3 proved a D&D could do a popular video game, not that I expect anything as popular any time soon.

But MMOs? The bit bin is filled with MMO flops. WoW and a mere handful of games have been successful.

 

[Maxperson]

And we should be glad that's the state of things. Otherwise, we'll have to exclude people from D&D, which seems to be an unpopular idea round these parts.

Nobody has to be excluded the other way. You'll just end up with folks who like specialized setting C, classes 1, 4, 5, 6, and 10, and races A, X and Y. And other folks will like specialized setting F and different classes and races. They'll still get to play and have fun, but they'll also get to enjoy a setting, race or class that isn't generic kitchen sink #547576202848732.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think BG 3 proved a D&D could do a popular video game, not that I expect anything as popular any time soon.

But MMOs? The bit bin is filled with MMO flops. WoW and a mere handful of games have been successful.

Yeah. It seems theres a finite amount of MMO players. Once you get to a certain size network effects kick in.

Hence lots of flops.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Even WoW was kind of an exception though. Its not like you can snap your fingers and crank out a WoW type game.

Because its a licensed product the peopke capable of producing a big hit will develop their own IP vs someone else's.

People here seriously overestimate D&Ds appeal to the mainstream.

The point is not to do it now, but to have done it instead of WoW. Now is to late

 

[FitzTheRuke]

You're correct that D&D is the grandpappy, many universes wouldn't exist without it and most modern fantasy can trace it's roots directly to the influence of D&D, including Warcraft.

But what you're missing is TSR DID develop PC and console games, a LOT of them over the years and some sold well...others were just bad.

On top of that WotC has licensed out the D&D brand for PC and MMO's, the problem is they weren't good and since they farmed it out, they didn't have as much control over it. But the D&D MMO is still going.

I'm not missing it - that was a solid part of my point.

Even BG3 shows short-sightedness in that area (and video games is only a small part of what I'm talking about when it comes to agreeing with the concept of "under-monetizing the D&D brand").

What did WotC do when BG3 was wildly successful? They fired everyone who was involved with it on their end.

The point is not to do it now, but to have done it instead of WoW. Now is to late

Yes, that was my point. D&D should have done it first. They had everything they needed, other than vision (and probably the money at the time, but I argue that the reason for that was also the lack of vision).

Heck, I thought about the basic idea of an MMO while playing 2e-era games. It's not like the idea was impossible for anyone to come up with who (unlike me) actually had the power to make it happen.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Nobody has to be excluded the other way. You'll just end up with folks who like specialized setting C, classes 1, 4, 5, 6, and 10, and races A, X and Y. And other folks will like specialized setting F and different classes and races. They'll still get to play and have fun, but they'll also get to enjoy a setting, race or class that isn't generic kitchen sink #547576202848732.

I agree. I don't see the problem with having settings that have small curated lists of what's available. You don't need to change "kitchen sink" settings like FR to achieve that. But Dragonlance, Dark Sun, and that sort of thing, ought to be extremely limited by comparison.

 

[tetrasodium]

I'm not missing it - that was a solid part of my point.

Even BG3 shows short-sightedness in that area (and video games is only a small part of what I'm talking about when it comes to agreeing with the concept of "under-monetizing the D&D brand").

What did WotC do when BG3 was wildly successful? They fired everyone who was involved with it on their end.



Yes, that was my point. D&D should have done it first. They had everything they needed, other than vision (and probably the money at the time, but I argue that the reason for that was also the lack of vision).

Heck, I thought about the basic idea of an MMO while playing 2e-era games. It's not like the idea was impossible for anyone to come up with who (unlike me) actually had the power to make it happen.

Mmos are decades behind doing online d&d on a computer. Muds like dikumud got that ball rolling way back when the Internet wasn't really even called that mmos like EverQuest that came after ultima online were pretty much extending that experience with graphics. Wow doubled down on the strategy with lessons learned.

Ironically there is a d&d online mmo but it breaks ranks with those three and halfasses the setting in the name of broadest possible appeal rather than developing its own engrossing timeline and lore and does so with multiple full on setting transplant adventures/major NPCs with no real effort to localize those the core concept to the setting chosen for the MMO

 

[Distracted DM]

Mmos are decades behind doing online d&d on a computer. Muds like dikumud got that hall rolling way back when the Internet wasn't really even called that mmos like EverQuest that came after ultima online were pretty much extending that experience with graphics. Wow doubled down on the strategy with lessons learned.

Ironically there is a d&d online mmo but it breaks ranks with those three and halfasses the setting in the name of broadest possible appeal rather than developing its own engrossing timeline and lore and does so with multiple full on setting transplant adventures/major NPCs with no real effort to localize those the core concept to the setting chosen for the MMO

Not only that, but unless one of them tanked recently, there are two DnD MMOs currently. Dungeons & Dragons Online, and Neverwinter.