Is WotC innovative?

That's the thing: Innovation means introducing something new. I see that all the time from Wizards, but not on the "here's an entirely new game" level.

If you're looking for big "everything changes" innovations, that is something no company in their right minds will do more than once. Introducing 3e was a big innovation from 2e, and it was risky.

I consider the new stat block format to be a really significant innovation - it changes nothing except the ease of playing the game, but that's a pervasive change.

The level of innovation required by some people is of the level such that the only innovaters in RPGs were Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson. Everything else since then has been derivative: you have to come up with something that isn't a RPG to be innovative. I don't subscribe to that at all.

Let's turn this around: how often have you seen another company been innovative except for introducing a new game?

Cheers!
 

log in or register to remove this ad


MerricB said:
The level of innovation required by some people is of the level such that the only innovaters in RPGs were Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson. Everything else since then has been derivative: you have to come up with something that isn't a RPG to be innovative. I don't subscribe to that at all.

Let's turn this around: how often have you seen another company been innovative except for introducing a new game?
Right. Most of the things that Preston Tucker came up with in the automotive industry were not very sexy or exciting, and they didn't reinvent the wheel, but they most definitely WERE innovative. Innovative does not have to equal exciting, it just has to make things work better - even just slightly better.

I think WOTC has been very innovative. Their responsiveness to demand for product that meets the scale their company produces product on - DMG 2, Unearthed Arcana, and such - maybe not innovative from a general marketing perspective, but highly innovative for a company built in large part around TSR. And the OGL to allow companies that produce on smaller scales to meet smaller, more specific demands - for a company to admit they can't be everything to everyone and give up potential revenue streams to make their customers happier and their core products stronger is, to me, remarkably innovative. And again, maybe not very innovative when you realize that this had been done with software before. But still, the specific application to another type of product - innovation.

That said, I don't think they've been very innovative lately. I'm not sure that's a bad thing though - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. What could they do from here to innovate that wouldn't either risk breaking things (when they've already got a small number of people like Diaglo suggesting they've done just that) or just be flat-out gimmicky? I can only think of one thing right off the bat - take the next step on the aforementioned admission and carefully license the name out to other companies to market to the retro demand (like Diaglo) and to the test-bed next-gen 4th Edition demand (Which could be great, if done ight: Plausible deniability if it tanks - "That wasn't us, so of course it wasn't up to our standards. Maybe our next licensee will do better.". Reassimilation if it soars.) :)
 

MerricB said:
That's the thing: Innovation means introducing something new. I see that all the time from Wizards, but not on the "here's an entirely new game" level.

If you're looking for big "everything changes" innovations, that is something no company in their right minds will do more than once. Introducing 3e was a big innovation from 2e, and it was risky.

I consider the new stat block format to be a really significant innovation - it changes nothing except the ease of playing the game, but that's a pervasive change.

The level of innovation required by some people is of the level such that the only innovaters in RPGs were Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson. Everything else since then has been derivative: you have to come up with something that isn't a RPG to be innovative. I don't subscribe to that at all.

Let's turn this around: how often have you seen another company been innovative except for introducing a new game?

Cheers!

Well I think Iron Heros & Arcana Evolved from Malholvic are innovative. Conan in some ways was inovative. For me it really has to be a serious change of how the game is played. It just seems that the D20 market is so flooded now that short of publishing a variant PHB or a totaly new game it's going to be awfully hard for anyone to be innovative. If I were consider every new rule that I haven't seen yet for D20 innovative I would have an unending list of books (including WOTC). Paizo (sp?) publishing a complete campaign (in full color, I think) and their complete encounters are somewhat innovative.

I also have to say that I do not own Magic Incarnum or a couple other books by WOTC that people have said to innovative. Since I don't onw all the WOTC books I could have missed one or two, but from previous discussions they didn't sound liek they fit my definition.
 

Torm said:
the test-bed next-gen 4th Edition demand (Which could be great, if done ight: Plausible deniability if it tanks - "That wasn't us, so of course it wasn't up to our standards. Maybe our next licensee will do better.". Reassimilation if it soars.) :)
And, come to think of it, THIS is probably EXACTLY what WOTC is doing with the OGL - watching all these little OGL products to see what works and what doesn't, with the intention of harnassing all the best stuff for any future 4th Edition. If so, it's slow, and it's an innovation-by-plagerism of sorts, but it's still innovation. ;)
 

Torm said:
That said, I don't think they've been very innovative lately. I'm not sure that's a bad thing though - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. :)

I agree with this part 100%. products do not have to be innovative to be good and useful.

WOTC puts out the best d20 products, they are not what I would call innovative but they do add to your game.
 

mcrow said:
WOTC puts out the best d20 products, they are not what I would call innovative but they do add to your game.

If I would be a creative head honcho at WotC this sentence, if it would be the general opinion about my company, would give me quite a bit of a headache. It's like "We do good work whith a high standard of quality....but we do not do the cool stuff that gets people really excited."

I know, thats a bit exaggerated, but I would feel like that. And perhaps WotC is successfull because people actually do not want highly innovative, ground-breaking new content from WotC. They perhaps prefer to buy the freaky stuff from the third party companies and look for WotC books if it comes to standard fantasy content....Dunno...It's getting late and I already had a fair share of red wine :o
 

Jupp said:
If I would be a creative head honcho at WotC this sentence, if it would be the general opinion about my company, would give me quite a bit of a headache. It's like "We do good work whith a high standard of quality....but we do not do the cool stuff that gets people really excited."
You're right. And that's unfortunate. Companies that want to push the envelope at the expense of creating a quality product, combined with companies that can't see beyond this quarter's earnings to make a long term investment, make up a BIG problem right now. Kudos to WOTC for NOT being like that - or at least, not altogether like that. ;)
 

Torm said:
You're right. And that's unfortunate. Companies that want to push the envelope at the expense of creating a quality product, combined with companies that can't see beyond this quarter's earnings to make a long term investment, make up a BIG problem right now. Kudos to WOTC for NOT being like that - or at least, not altogether like that. ;)

*g* nice twist on my post. But I did not want to indicate that WotC should trade their level of quality with innovations. As a gamer I, naturally, would expect to get innovation AND the highest possible quality. We gamers are like that...always expecting the impossible ;)
 


Remove ads

Top