Marketing criticisms miss the point

[Scribble]

And that's why you like 4e, and I don't.

Yeah could be... I'm willing to concede that it's not for everyone.

Although how can someone not have the same opinion I have??? HOW?!?!?!

 

[Zelligars Apprentice]

The reason people don't want to try Ars Magica, Pendragon, or Feng Shui isn't because those games use different systems. It's because those games aren't called "Dungeons & Dragons." If 4E had the exact same game mechanics as Pendragon--exact same--it'd blow Pendragon out of the water and be a huge success.

4E is a success because of the words in front of 4E: "Dungeons & Dragons." It's the new edition, everyone will buy it, and we'll come to love it.

I would hope that gamers are more thoughtful than this. Sadly, I fear that you are right, and they aren't.

 

[xechnao]

You know what I find hilarious about this... when has WotC ever used, outside of some one-shot product, the breadth and depth of the various mythologies that have been part of D&D (Planescape, Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Spelljammer, etc.). As I remembered it they claimed it would end up being a money loss if they were to have different settings. Yet now they kill the fluff (after alot of people wanted it for 3e) and decide to do exactly what they claimed helped kill D&D. IMHO this stuff would be brand new for most people who started with 3e.

Yep, it seems it is a zig zag game. Fashion business is like this, entertainment business is also like this.

 

[I'm A Banana]

All I've ever seen teh 4e crew say was: These are the problems we've uncovered in the past 8 or so years. These are the explanations for why they were problems, and how we intend to fix it.

They ran into issues because a lot of these "problems" were actually very subjective.

Some of the problems were problems for 99%+ of the 3e players. The necessity of magic items. The swinginess of high and low level combat. These things weren't actually beneficial to many campaigns.

Some of the problems were problems for 1%- of the 3e players. Barbarians. The Chaotic Good alignment. These things were beneficial to the vast majority of campaigns.

I'm exaggerating those percentages, but they get my point accross.

If they would've stopped at fixing the problems, they could justify a new edition (the Maths!) without necessarily alienating people. But when you've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and when you've got 4e and permission to tick off the trufans, you change things without really caring about the outliers.

 

[Daag]

I don't think the people who frequent the ENWorld forums are necessarily the demographic 4e is going after. A 50/50 spread on those staying and those converting might actually be a good split for our particular demographic.

Daag

 

[Gundark]

He's an industry insider.

And one like Sean K. Reynolds, his layoff made him very bitter towards Wizards.

I agree this part of his blog is telling
A lot of great game designers worked on 3E and 3.5, too--and the message coming out of Wizards often boils down to "3.X was deeply flawed." (You hear that a lot more from 4E's early adopters, so it may be an exaggeration to say it's coming directly from Wizards--but you can still find quotes from Wizards staffers that seem to imply that.) Sorry, but that doesn't fill me with confidence

 

[sjmiller]

Well, my response is, they did... They said: It's better for your game/ character to try to re-create the "feel" you were going for with the original.

And you know, in my opinion, that is where they dropped the ball. The players in my group will have a great deal of difficulty re-creating the "feel" of their 3.0 core-based characters because many aspects of their characters are not possible in core 4e. It's rather like telling someone to re-create the feel of this silk and velvet garment with this homespun cotton and burlap.
It wouldn't be nearly so bad if they actually made it possible to re-create things like a bard, or a sorcerer, or a necromancer, or any of a host of other things they threw out. It's awfully hard to tell someone that they can't play what they want because the game doesn't support it. Sure, some of it will come out later, but for now they just have to suck up and deal with it, I guess. It's that sort of thing that makes it hard for some people, like myself, to get behind 4e. It has been presented to us as the best thing since the creation of polyhedral dice. From all that I have read in the books so far, I think they missed the mark. I am glad I was given the books, because what they said we would get and what we got are not the same thing, and I would be really upset if I actually had to pay for it.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Well, my response is, they did... They said: It's better for your game/ character to try to re-create the "feel" you were going for with the original.

My gnome bard finds that of little comfort.

 

[Hussar]

Originally Posted by Scribble
Well, my response is, they did... They said: It's better for your game/ character to try to re-create the "feel" you were going for with the original.

There's a couple of things to remember here though. If you have a multi-year campaign on the go, you are automatically in the minority. We know that for a fact. WOTC's own market research and poll after poll on various sites show that the average campaign lasts about 1.5 to 2 years. That after the 2 year mark, the number of games tails off drastically.

So, telling people that they have to start a new campaign with a new edition isn't actually dropping the ball. From the time 4e was announced, to now, most people have had more than enough time to wrap up campaigns. Had 4e not been announced, I think that many campaigns would be finishing in any case.

The conversion doc's for 3e were less than optimal to say the least. They were outright crap for the most part. And that's going from similar to at least somewhat similar. Going from 3e to 4e would be extremely difficult. You're much better off simply trying to keep the feel without worrying overmuch about the mechanics.

But, in any case, there's one thing about the marketing criticisms that completely miss the point. The RPGA. You've got 150 000 RPGA members. These are your hard core fans. Not En Worlders. Not random poster on a forum. These are the guys and gals who participate in Living campaigns, go to tournaments and probably buy considerably more product than most of us.

You and me? We're not the target audience. It's those guys that are the core audience. Look at the mechanics of 4e and you'll see that appealing to tournament style play is one of the guiding principles. Add in the DDI, and the ability for RPGA members to game remotely over a VTT, and you've got your demographic right there.

If 100 000 RPGA members sign up for the DDI, 4e will be a massive success. If they can lock in those gamers, you, me and anyone else will not matter one whit.

 

[DaveMage]

My gnome bard finds that of little comfort.

We should have a tally of how much it will cost you to make your 3e character concept in 4e.

Let's see, maybe PHB 1, 2, & 3.

Uh, maybe DMG 1...

Etc...

*cha-ching!*