Is WotC still the industry LEADER?

[pawsplay]

It's still a mystery to me why WotC didn't simply hire an existing virtual tabletop product and pay them to upgrade and customize it. That such a thing exists is far more valuable than trying to own something like that; there is only so much value you can add to what amounts to a variation of an online poker game interface.

 

[Hussar]

Umm, maybe because 'half a dozen' VTTs already exist and they don't feel the need to reinvent the wheel? Or they don't have the market penetration to compete against free (or low cost) VTTs like WotC could?

(edit: or as WotC poll results show, there really isn't much demand for it...)

I don't see co-opting ideas that already exist as 'leadership'. It may be good for business (MS makes it work pretty well), but it's not leadership.

I'm not sure that 2/3rds of respondents saying they want something equates with not much demand. Almost half of non-subscribers want it as well. I'd say that's pretty high in demand. Lower than others, but certainly not "not much demand".

Now, as for co-opting ideas, I strongly disagree. Just because someone else creates something doesn't mean that you cannot be the leader in an industry. Is the idea of a VTT new? Nope. But, considering no RPG publisher has anything to do with any of them (AFAIK), WOTC promoting online play would be a leadership position.

Pawsplay - totally agree. I think you are 100% right there.

 

[Dragon Snack]

Well, 2/3 of people who are already paying for the DDI want it - and they were told that the DDI would have a VTT.

The telling fact is that it comes in last in the voting. Of course people are going to say they want it. If 2/3 of people voted for the lowest ranked option, what does that tell you about the voting?

And yes, Microsoft is definitely an industry leader that has co-opted other peoples ideas, but doing so doesn't automatically make you an "industry leader".

 

[Dumnbunny]

If 2/3 of people voted for the lowest ranked option, what does that tell you about the voting?

It was multiple choice. They didn't have to vote for the VTT at all, but 2/3 did. If 2/3 of my clients want a certain service, that's a pretty good sign that I should provide it.

 

[Dragon Snack]

You don't think that many people just voted for everything? Of course they want it as part of a flat rate service, would they want it if they had to pay extra to use it?

 

[Dumnbunny]

You don't think that many people just voted for everything? Of course they want it as part of a flat rate service, would they want it if they had to pay extra to use it?

I think they voted for services they want, for those services on which they want Wizards to spend their resources developing, for those services they want to be part of what they pay for.