Is WotC still the industry LEADER?

[billd91]

I think Stan! hits it out of the park. Exerting dominance and out-competing (having the "lead" in competition) aren't the the same as exercising leadership. Never have been.
People may tend to look to the one out in front for leadership, but I think it's become relatively clear that they no longer are. Steve Jackson Games, Paizo, Green Ronin, White Wolf - who of these has viewed the PDF decision as a leadership decision? None. They've done the opposite.

 

[Cadfan]

Personally, I think that Stan! has defined "leadership" to the point where no one in a competitive industry can actually achieve it.

 

[JVisgaitis]

The glut stopped at this time, but the products kept coming, even if it was at a significantly more conservative pace.

The glut stopped because the industry tanked. DoA was the first monster book out for 3.5. As a 3.0 product, we had 1,400 pre-orders. 2 months later when we revamped for 3.5 it dropped to 500. And I was told that those were very impressive numbers at the time.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I'm sure I'll surprise nobody when I say that I fully agree with Stan! In fact, I've said as much here in the past.

Here's what bothers me about this. When WotC was trying to be the good shepherd for the industry, they still dominated the market. The philosophy was that anything that was good for gaming was in turn good for D&D, which was also good for WotC. Sure, things slowed down towards the end of 3.5, which is to be expected (keeping in mind of course that D&D in its slowed down form still would have been considered a smashing success by any gaming company other than Hasbro).

As Stan! notes, somewhere the philosophy changed. I don't know exactly when it happened (probably shortly before I left), but the new WotC disturbs me. I still see many of the same creative people working on stuff, and I know they're good people, but the things that are being done of the business end show a disregard for the people who have come to rely on them for certain things. The GSL (particularly the first version), pulling the PDFs, cancelling Dragon and Dungeon out from under Paizo... these things affected people who in whole or in part based their businesses around WotC's responsible leadership.

Was WotC contractually oligated to keep doing these things? No, clearly not. They were within their rights to halt themagazines, pull the PDFs and make a new license for the new game. Is what they're doing substandard? Again, no. They can manage their content however they want.

Is what they're doing ethically wrong? You can make an argument either way on this. I'm not a fan of how they yanked the rug out from under Paizo, but again, the contract ran out and they made a decision. Paizo decided to soldier on and seems to be doing OK, maybe even great, but I'm sure that this was not an easy transition for them. Does WotC owe people unlimited access to unprotected PDFs? No, not really, but there are a number of people who took advantage of the format and have integrated it into their gaming experience. This is leaving them with one less tool to work with, which is a disappointment that is real.

The point here isn't that what WotC is doing is wrong, but that it's not as open and friendly as what we've become accustomed to. There are a number of companies that are still open and friendly, and I think that's what it means to be an industry leader. The leaders I see are Paizo, Mongoose, and Green Ronin, with an honorable mention going to Goodman Games.

Paizo is providing leadership by continuing to provide great game content for an edition that many people continue to embrace, and by offering a compatability license to anyone who wants to publish material for their new version of D&D.

Green Ronin is providing leadership by providing real feedback on what's happening in the industry that is only lightly filtered, making compatability licenses available for M&M and True20, and for modifying their catalog of truly awesome previously available titles so that people can still buy them.

Mongoose... what can I say about Mongoose? When they first appeared on the scene I was critical of them because of the sheer quantity of product they were producing. Despite my misgivings, I kept following their stuff and buying the occasional product, and coming away with the impression that it's not half bad. In the years since they've taken what was a small publishing company and done some really amazing and wonderful things. Babylon 5, Conan, Judge Dredd, Lone Wolf, and more, all great stuff. And, leadership wise, they're all about being an industry leader with their Flaming Cobra line. The sole intention of Flaming Cobra is to share resources with smaller publishers, elevating by a considerable amount what would be possible (but difficult) to achieve without their help.

These are strong examples of leadership.

The one area where I think WotC is still acting as a leader is appealing to the casual gamer, getting them into game stores and buying stuff, thereby increasing the overall health of the brick and mortar stores. For the longest time the reports I'd been hearing about 4E were negative. A lot of people weren't enjoying it, people weren't playing it, and it wasn't helping anyone. Recently I've been hearing reports that 4E is in fact drawing in new players and a lot of lapsed players. This may not benefit me directly since it isn't one of my games of choice, but anything that grows the hobby as a whole is positive.

 

[Pramas]

People may tend to look to the one out in front for leadership, but I think it's become relatively clear that they no longer are. Steve Jackson Games, Paizo, Green Ronin, White Wolf - who of these has viewed the PDF decision as a leadership decision? None. They've done the opposite.

I can't think of a good reason to follow their lead on that decision. If it's a precursor to WotC selling their own PDFs, all the companies you name have been doing that already for years so really WotC would be following our lead. If ceasing to sell PDFs is actually the entirety of their plan, said plan can't be taken seriously by anyone who understands the issues surrounding piracy.

 

[Korgoth]

I think that the leadership of this hobby is going back to the garage... where it came from in the first place.

 

[Treebore]

I think that the leadership of this hobby is going back to the garage... where it came from in the first place.

I thought Gary said he started out of his basement?

 

[wedgeski]

These are strong examples of leadership.

Nice post Darrin, but I think you've been unfairly selective here.

By all accounts Wizards didn't "pull the rug" from under Paizo, they extended the deal so that they could finish their current AP. Feedback from Paizo was always that the removal of the license was gutting, but amicable. Now if you're saying that pulling the license *at all* was equivalent to pulling the rug, I can't agree. That's a standard Wizards could never have achieved short of simply surrendering the license to Paizo in perpetuity. At some point, Paizo were going to have to give up that license. I think it *seemed* unfair at the time because of the quality they were pumping out, but Wizards wanted to try something new, so they did.

Paizo is providing leadership by continuing to provide great game content for an edition that many people continue to embrace, and by offering a compatability license to anyone who wants to publish material for their new version of D&D.

Equally the same could be said of Wizards. You could say the revised GSL was long overdue, but then Paizo's license only came out I believe at the beginning of March? Seems comparable. Plus Paizo are building their business on the back of a license already granted by Wizards... it's hard for me to see them as leaders when they're standing on the shoulders of other peoples' work. I know that's an unpopular opinion, but I can't help but think it.

Green Ronin is providing leadership by providing real feedback on what's happening in the industry that is only lightly filtered, making compatability licenses available for M&M and True20, and for modifying their catalog of truly awesome previously available titles so that people can still buy them.

Seems somewhat thin. GR have luxuries of size and independence that Wizards don't have. And which license are M&M and True20 based on again? Without doubt their products are top notch, though.

I have to agree that Mongoose are an excellent example of a company that formed during the OGL bubble and have asserted themselves all over the market. They're an inspiration, but I doubt even they would call themselves a market leader.

IMO Wizards exceeds all of these companies in the areas you cited, as well as leading in their own fields in the ways you described. A previous poster said that Stan! had raised the bar to a level that no-one in the industry could achieve, and I have to agree. They may not be leading in the ways that Adkison, Dancy, et al envisioned, but where they go, others follow.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

By leading, Stan! is really talking about helping and teaching, showing people a better way of doing things.

Well, I think the 4E PHB and particularly the DMG do a lot about this.

But it's not addressing their partners and competitors, it's addressing the players.

I also think their online initiative is also showing others the way. Look at Monte Cook and his DungeonADay project. Maybe he had it planned since 5 years, but maybe he did not and in fact the DDI project showed him it is possible. And other companies (Paizo, though they might have been doing it longer) also follow subscription models for their products.

I think their whole approach to market research (that they do it, how they do it) and play-testing is also still showing people how to do it.
Their OGL and their GSL are also something others start copying - Paizo is planning their own Pathfinder License so that others can imply compatibility.

So I am not sure - where exactly are they not leading and showing how stuff is done anymore? Maybe pulling PDFs from the market is the first - and it might be the only - example of them doing something companies won't follow. But even that just seems a temporary measure until WotC is convinced they have something more reliable - or they can be convinced the risk is still worth it.

Suing "fans" that pirate stuff and violate copyright or trademarks they hold is something others might either not need or afford to do. But it's certainly in their right to do, and I suppose if Goodman Games or Paizo had a lot of trouble with this, they would also use legal action. I think that they don't have to is a result of them not being that 800 lbs gorilla. Whatever pirates do to them, they don't hurt smaller companies enough to justify the cost of legal action (and possibly the good will it costs them in their fanbase). (Which is far from meaning it doesn't hurt them, but if the cure is as bad or worse as the disease...)

 

[Maggan]

it's hard for me to see them as leaders when they're standing on the shoulders of other peoples' work.

The thing is that WotC is also building on other people's work, at least in the case of D&D.

So IMO it is possible to become a leader in a field, while basing your business and strategy on those who came before.

/M