Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="smug" data-source="post: 4752405" data-attributes="member: 80872">Particularly to run so relatively far behind schedule on promised products; that must have cost a bunch above what they'd planned. Are they still paying for the virtual tabletop development? Assuming they meant to bring it out earlier, all that overrun is presumably costing dollars to make it work right.In any case, I'm not sure what the point of the argument is; selling online services to users via subscription is an obvious thing to try to do if you have enough users and enough money to front development; subscriptions are guaranteed cash every month and the profit scales really agreeably with numbers of people signed up. WotC were the ones to try it because they have the user base and they have the financial backing. WW could presumably also do it; their parent company obviously has the expertise and they could probably deliver it in a more timely fashion, and perhaps better, than WotC have done. Even though WW itself is smaller, it is perhaps surprising that they weren't the first ones to do it, but for everyone else in the industry, I can't see it. Developing good software for that stuff is rather expensive.</blockquote>