• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

No 5e threads for now, please

Harlekin

First Post
<Snipped most of a great post for brevity>

The edition treadmill is not a strong business model -- planned obsolescence never really is. I'd love to talk more about what the "final edition" could be in a thread, actually, but I think that would probably violate the 5e ban. ;)

I think you are on to something here. The main purpose of the DDi seems to be changing the business model of RPGs. And it seems to be working for many of us.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Cadfan

First Post
I don't think that WotC will ever move to a "final edition" model. Look at other game companies that have models similar to that, like Games Workshop. They still have to sell books, so even when they aren't changing the ruleset, they're slowly updating army books for each army one by one. And believe me, that doesn't create a less acrimonious atmosphere.

Personally, I think that a big part of the group of people who throw up their hands and scream and quit the game over edition wars are people who were going to quit anyways, simply because people grow, change, like new things, stop liking old things, and sometimes it takes a jolt to get them to actually move on. New editions can be that jolt.
 

ggroy

First Post
I don't think that WotC will ever move to a "final edition" model.

This would be the equivalent of WotC waving a white flag.

Though with that being said, I wouldn't be surprised if WotC releases a "4E Rules Compendium" book in the waning days of 4E, after 5E is announced.

WotC did released a 3.5E Rules Compendium book a few months after the Aug 2007 gencon announcement of 4E.
 

I'm A Banana

Potassium-Rich
Doug MacCrae said:
Selling dead tree rpgs isn't a strong business model, it never has been. Tying it to minis seems a good move though, from a business PoV.

Why bother with the plastic of the 20th century when you can have the bits and bytes of the 21st at your disposal?

Minis -- especially for the high-school-and-up crowd, are even more niche than pen-and-paper RPG's. There's no reason WotC can't also have a good minis line going, but D&D is bigger than minis, and to tie the two together would be to shrink D&D, tethering the success of D&D's medium-sized niche to the minis' itty-bitty niche.

I'd think that D&D's best bet is in lowering the barriers of entry until they're effectively 0, and selling the goods and services and subscriptions (the DDI!) to players. 95% of the game is free (95% of players play for free), 5% is paid convenience or customization, and that 5% is so big due to the low barrier of entry, that it can pay for the other 95%.

The place where that model works best is online, where Moore's Law kicks in and makes the cost of higher volume (storage, bandwidth, etc.) itty bitty.

Books have their own advantages, and D&D can (and, IMO, should) keep the book side, but there's no reason that the books have to be published in five-year product line increments that are inflexible within their lifespan. D&D is much better served by being flexible and amorphous enough to ooze into every niche it can, which is better represented by something like the Flat World Publishing model: arrange the rules you want into a custom campaign book for your game, and publish it via Print-on-Demand (or get it electronically via some DDI/virtual table top interface!).

Cadfan said:
They still have to sell books, so even when they aren't changing the ruleset, they're slowly updating army books for each army one by one.

Well, you don't need to sell books. You can sell print-on-demand luxury items. You can sell customizable online experiences. Heck, look at GaiaOnline, selling you friggin' bunny hats to wear on Easter. The DDI, I think, helps put the first chink in the concept that D&D is tied to books.

I think books are key to D&D, and that they shouldn't go away, but I also think that D&D isn't tied directly to book sales. If WotC stopped publishing books tomorrow, they'd still have monthly income from the DDI...heck, I'd bet a good chunk of people would keep the DDI, even if they didn't have any books to own. Not everybody, but probably enough to keep D&D profitable in that model, given the low cost of adding more stuff to the DDI.

Cadfan said:
I think that a big part of the group of people who throw up their hands and scream and quit the game over edition wars are people who were going to quit anyways, simply because people grow, change, like new things, stop liking old things, and sometimes it takes a jolt to get them to actually move on. New editions can be that jolt.

Why would OSRIC sell a single copy if people who gripe about edition changes just wanted to stop playing? Why would Pathfinder have a single subscriber? Why would any retroclone ever exist? Why would Necromancer games try for a "1e feel"?

No, there are plenty of folks out there who want to keep playing just fine, and find that the new changes don't groove with how they want things.

There should be no reason that D&D looses these customers to Pathfinder just because it can't simultaneously publish for two rule sets. If Capcom can make a new 8-bit Megaman game and give Nintendo profit from those who want it, a third party publisher should be able to make a new 3e adventure and sell it through WotC so that WotC gets a cut of those who want it.

The edition treadmill can't keep going forever (though it could probably go for another edition or two), especially given how each table ultimately plays it's own random D&D pastiche of house rules and homebrews in the end anyway. WotC would be much better served selling people what they want, rather than telling people that they should change their games every five years (which, if you're lucky, is two 1-30 level spreads, assuming you have a group that stays together for that long).
 

Cadfan

First Post
Why would OSRIC sell a single copy if people who gripe about edition changes just wanted to stop playing? Why would Pathfinder have a single subscriber? Why would any retroclone ever exist? Why would Necromancer games try for a "1e feel"?
I didn't say that ALL people who complain about edition changes are people who really have just outgrown playing D&D. But obviously you knew that because you are literate and my words were at best at a third grade reading level.

You just chose to pretend otherwise. Thanks.
 


I'm A Banana

Potassium-Rich
I didn't say that ALL people who complain about edition changes are people who really have just outgrown playing D&D. But obviously you knew that because you are literate and my words were at best at a third grade reading level.

You just chose to pretend otherwise. Thanks.

I did over-state the numbers ("a single copy" and stuff), and I'm sorry for that. I certainly don't have access to the number of people who play retroclones or pathfinder, or who just continue to play Edition X without ever changing over.

But I don't know why I should assume that people who just stop playing just 'cuz they're ready for a change are a "big part" or even significant minority of the people who don't switch. I don't know why you would assume that is true, and I haven't seen any non-anecdotal evidence to show that, either.

I mean, you obviously got that idea from somewhere -- why do you think that there is a significant number of people who just don't play anymore due to their own changing tastes when a new edition comes out?
 

This would be the equivalent of WotC waving a white flag.
They'd be surrendering to who or what exactly? Your business model can't remain static throughout the life of your company. You don't want to be in the buggy whip business when the motor car comes along.

Realizing that your market changes over time, and acting on that, is not tantamount to surrender.
 

They'd be surrendering to who or what exactly? Your business model can't remain static throughout the life of your company. You don't want to be in the buggy whip business when the motor car comes along.

Realizing that your market changes over time, and acting on that, is not tantamount to surrender.
I agree. I think that eventually, they can and will sort of stop moving the game ahead to new editions, and I'm imagining (hoping?) that at that point, they decide to go back and republish older editions, so that they can make money off of different kinds of D&D, and (re)attract older customers.

I'm not going to speculate how likely this scenario is, but following a revised Fifth Edition, it might be a cool thing to have happen.
 

Remove ads

Top