Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nothing to see here" data-source="post: 4308303" data-attributes="member: 16432">I don't agree with everyting Dannyalcatraz is saying, but I commend him for pushing some hard ideas out there/I see two mainstream celebities (Diesel and Colbert) on that list and three more niche celebrities (Posehn, Oswalt and Wheaton) on that list.  I wonder, if the psychographic profile of RPG buyers matches those of people who respond to celebrity endorsements.  I admit to having no primary data but I am suspicious it does not.The big question that EVERY version of D&D fudges is this.  Are we trying to take a 'geeky' 'niche' hobby into the mainstream, or are we trying to make a product that maximizing profitability and sustainability out of people who already fall into that niche.  Those are two totally different marketing proposptions -- I fear WOTC, by trying to do both, risks failing to do either.That makes sense.  You could argue that the D&D experience was intended to prompt a word-of-mouth marketing strategy, but it's timing and geographic focus handicapped it.  Word-of-mouth marketing is one of the hardest forms of marketing to pull off, though in an indentified niche market, it is fair to have expected WOTC to deliver something better.This I disagree with.  D&D is fun to play, but make no mistake, we all look like the dorkiest people in the world while playing it.  It's the same for video games -- notice how (with the Wii a notable exception) video game commercials almost never actually feature people PLAYING the game.  Because you look like a loser while doing so.  (That the Wii's innovative gameplay opens up wonderful marketing visuals is an underreported factor in its success) This I love.  Done well it could create wonderful word-of-mouth appeal.  There would be IP issues about giving people enough material to work with, but I think gamers would eat it up.I doubt WOTC saw it as leading with their negatives.  I would argue it was more about managing audience expectations.Yup.  If phase one was all about "player migration" as they now tell us, killing off the print magazines when they did was a questionable call.  PArticularly since D&D insider is currently not ready to go.  If there is a business reason to kill off hte print magainze I would have waited until A) after the 'player migration' phase was over and B) D&DI was actually ready for primetime.Damned if you do, damned if you don't.  They are also being beaten up for not producing enough content in their previews.  This let all kinds of conspiracy theories run amok -- not a big deal in the mass market but, then again, they're now telling us that 'player migration' was the first marketing goal.Don't know enough about DDM to make a call one way or another.The books are selling large, so I guess everybody's happy, but Danny is absolutely right that, in several ways they are selling well despite WOTC'sbest efforts.  Cheers.</blockquote>

Verification