Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4928643" data-attributes="member: 18280">@ Hussar,While I do believe that the marketing failed, I will certainly admit that a "best reading" of what WotC was putting out was not nearly as insulting as the initial reading that I was doing at that time.  There were a couple of threads in the past where, when I re-examined the quotes, I have admitted as much.IMHO, the boondoggle with WotC was caused by an intersection of what they did with what they said.*  When 4e was outed prior to the announcement, they denied it, making for a great "...the huh?" moment when, not long after, they announced it......Especially since they were bringing out new 3.5 books in the gap between denial and announcement, it makes it seem as though the denial was to sucker people into buying those books.  (Keeping in mind the expectation at that time, which I also held until I began to read the snippets of 4e they were showing, that most people would switch to 4e.)*  The early marketing video on YouTube with grappling, which was overtly insulting both to prior editions, and to the players of prior editions (via portrayal).*  Pulling Dungeon & Dragon Magazines in order to create their own subscription service DDI cheesed a lot of people off.*  Statements that 4e would be OGL followed by retraction of same cheesed a lot of people off.These things, and things like them, made it difficult to give a "best reading" to the comments that WotC was making.  It very much felt like WotC had been given the benefit of the doubt already, and had taken royal advantage of it.IMHO, and IME, anyway.RC</blockquote>

Verification