Marketing: How would you have done it?

[Shemeska]

In addition to what others have said:

I wouldn't have mocked previous editions' fluff, and even more so I wouldn't have gotten my facts on those things wrong when I mocked them. Bytopia is not the the primary NG plane, nor were mezzoloths/mezzodaemons ever associated with demons or CE to justify making them CE in 4th. That just looks bad when you're paid to know those sort of things, and it doesn't bode well for public relations when a lot of people enjoyed the flavor you're 'putting a bullet in the head' of to replace with something new.

I would have handled the drama over on Gleemax better (it's difficult to see how it could be worse). For the past year things have gone steadily downhill, with tons of regulars dropping out, WizOs getting fired or leaving en masse over various issues, really ugly and petty politics in the VCL program, and people openly calling for the resignation of the Gleemax community liason who has become a polarizing figure to a large portion of that community. This isn't the sort of thing they want from their flagship/money pit website when they're trying to entice people with the promise of DDI.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Overuse of the word "cool" is a serious complaint for me, and which I would have done differently. It may be wishful thinking, but talking to your customers as if they were adults instead of trying to use teenage lingo would be something I'd do.

As the person who originated the thread complaining about the overuse of the word 'cool', I'm glad to hear that! I was really annoyed by early 4E marketing-speak. I do think it got better as things got closer to launch.

Ken

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Three things that I think would have helped:

1) Don't tear down 3rd edition to build up 4th edition.

2) Avoid redundancy in the marketing speak -- specifically, things like, "fun and fair," "X killed Y and took its stuff," and calling everything cool got annoying and also failed to really describe anything of value.

And while we're at it, I'm also sick of 'made of win'. Though, to be fair, it may be message board posters here who overuse that phrase, not WoTC marketing.

Ken

 

[Zaukrie]

Wow, where to start:

I think I'll work my way backward:

After launch - lots of on line support for new players. Now, there are rumors they are doing a major "new player" marketing effort later this year, so maybe we'll see some of this. I'd have had an example PC at 1st level for each class variant - on the "official" character sheet. I'd have released 2 easy to run, 1st levle dungeon crawls on line for new DMs to use (how is the first Dungeon adventure not a first level crawl?). I'd have a new power up EVERY DAY so that people are coming to my site every day. I'd release one classic monster every week (like, how about a centaur guys). Basically, my on line presence would all be about helping people play 4E, and give them a reason to keep coming back. I'd manage people's expectations better. My website would be completely re-done so that it looks like a new version. It still looks too much like the old site. All pre-4E stuff (rules anyway) would be linked to from an old version support page. I'd make sure you cannot get to old information from the main page (really, is this that hard?). My first adventure I release would be cheap, so that all DMs would just buy it, not $30. I'd not use re-cycled art in my first adventure either.

Around launch - I'd manage people's expectations about what to expect on line. WotC has admitted they are bad at this, and still has not fixed it. There is nothing on line about what to expect on line in terms of Dungeon and Dragon content - if there is, it is buried somewhere. My developers would be assigned to write blog updates every week/maybe every day. "I don't care how busy you are, we need everyone marketing/selling right now - yes, this is part of your day job." I like someone's idea of polls. Keep the excitement up.

Well befor launch - I'd manage people's expectations better. I'd have a great messageboard system up, one based on existing technology, not some gleemax thing. If I was launching gleemax, I certainly wouldn't send out the little green brains waaaaaay before the site goes up. I'd make sure the technology works better. I'd do the polls someone else suggested. I'd not rip 3E so much. I'd keep dragon around, if Paizo wanted to keep working on it. I'd get the GSL out so that 3rd party companies can launch with me and I get more excitement. I'd use every gaming website I could for advertising and interviews and what not.

there's a lot more, but I'm at work....

 

[FalcWP]

I like your movie ideas- definitely has a "Whats Up, Tiger Lilly" vibe- but licensing those movie clips would have been PRICEY!

Using the same tactic with lesser known fantasy movies- good, bad and indifferent- would have worked just about as well.

Heck, they could have even used the old D&D movies

Or the old series!

Ok, maybe not the old series- Bobby the Barbarian would have to be edited out...

Well, nobody gave me a budget to work with, so I went big .

And yes - any fantasy movie would work. I picked LotR 'cause:

Everyone here would know the scene I was talking about
I actually just watched all three movies again (personally, I think they'd work a lot better with 4E than they did with 3.5), so it was on my mind

But just pick an exciting scene to demonstrate combat or skill challenges or whatever you like - pause in the action for a player to roll - and back to the movie to see the conclusion. For a twist, take a couple times when people fail, have the player roll poorly, and see the failure. You could do an entire series of commercials.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What's the crossover audience between Colbert and DND.

Colbert has made several references to the game on his show, and is on record as being at least a former gamer...no word on if he currently games, though.

 

[Lizard]

In the run up to 4e, there was a lot of criticism about how the designers were talking about and marketing 4e. From the serious, to "They use cool too much".

So, we all have had the books for at least a week.

Looking at the material in the books, let's put you in the chair of the designers. How would you have marketed it to the internet audience? What would you have put in design & development articles and blog posts?

Well, for starters, I wouldn't have focused on the negatives of 3e, but the positives of 4e. Let the players decide for themselves why 4e was "better", instead of beating them over the head with "3e sucks!"

I'd have handed out copies of the in-design game to trusted third party developers -- free -- as of September '07. I'd encourage them to discuss things which excited them and the products they hoped to make. I'd make sure the current 3e gamers would be excited not just about 4e, but about all the Cool which would be coming out along with 4e -- stuff that they could only use if they "upgraded".

I'd have focused previews on crunch, not fluff, especially things with no equivalent in 3e, like skill challenges.

I'd have a series called "Evolution of a rule", which would take a single mechanic -- say, dying -- and show the iterations it went through and why it was changed into its final form.

I wouldn't have basically killed Dragon and Dungeon.

I would have had a regular series of "Getting ready for 4e", on incorporating 4e-ish mechanics in 3e, as much as possible.

In short, I would have focused on "transition and upgrade", not "The old system SUCKED! The new one ROCKS!" simplicity. I would have embraced the existing audience instead of alienating them.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'd have a series called "Evolution of a rule", which would take a single mechanic -- say, dying -- and show the iterations it went through and why it was changed into its final form.

I wish I had said that- that's pretty doggone smart!

 

[FalcWP]

I'll say in advance... this one is a tad long-winded. Sue me - I'm getting a degree in this sort of stuff, I like thinking about it.

Well, here's a question.

Are we looking at marketing as a 'What would have been best if you're marketing to people here at EN World'? Or 'What would have been best from a business standpoint'?

If we're focusing on EN World, or even on players of 3.5E as a whole, then improving the flow of information, shifting the emphasis from 3Es shortcomings to 4E's strengths, etc. is great. They really should have done that anyway - but I personally think those were relatively small mistakes.

Why? Because, while we are a vocal and certainly important part of the D&D/RPG community, there's a much broader and more lucrative market out there, particularly for a game like 4E. Also... a lot of folks had made up their mind about 4E before it was even announced. Personally, I was looking forward to a new addition. Other folks were determined to be pissed off at WotC no matter what the new system looked like. And, this is a part of your market that will educate itself on your product with very little from you - basically, doing things the way they did, though with a slightly different twist, was fine for marketing to the majority of 3.5 players.

I would have put a lot more focus on getting people who aren't 3E players to give the game a shot. This includes a lot of folks - people who played previous editions, or even 3.5, and stopped, and folks who have never picked up a d20, but play video games and MMOs. This is a huge market, and one that needs to be educated about 4E in order to give it a shot.

Another thing I'd try to target this market (in addition to my commercial ideas) would be to approach, say, the History Channel about doing a two hour D&D program. Cover the history of the game, inspirations, and then end with a look at 4E. History Channel does stuff like this with movies - they had a few interesting Indiana Jones bits right before Crystal Skull came out.

People watch the History Channel, a lot of times 'because nothing else is on', to quote my brother (who wouldn't be caught dead playing D&D). Anyone might end up watching it. Make the previews flashy, run some D&D commercials before it airs, and you'll get viewers. Particularly former players who have moved away from the game - its the sort of thing that could get them interested in coming back. It would also get the attention of folks who haven't played, and some of the 3.5 market that *isn't* big on going online to find out about 4E.

Just another couple thoughts that were rattling around in my head.