D&D (2024) PC Gamer: It's clear Hasbro, the custodians of D&D, have no idea what to do with Baldur's Gate 3's success

[Hussar]

There's literally no telling how much growth Sigil might have been able to add. But we'll never know.

No telling what might have happened if they'd tapped into the insane popularity of BG3, either. It's like Larian won the lottery on WotC's behalf, and then Wizards cashed that in by...doing what, exactly? Putting Astarion in the background of some paintings in the 2024 books? And that's pretty much it? I actually think Magic the Gathering did a better job of harvesting that groundswell than D&D did, which is just puzzling. So yeah, I'd call that squandering.

That's easy to say in vague, general terms. But, I'm asking specfically, what could they have done to grow the game more? The presumption here is that if WotC had just done some sort of magical tie in, then all those BG3 players would suddenly become tabletop gamers?

Why is there this presumption that people who enjoyed BG3 would have the slightest interest in TTRPG's? After all, they played a video game. Presumably, those that played it like video games. TTRPG's are not video games. There's no particular reason to think that there is any overlap between a video gamer and a TTRPG player. It's not like BG3 is the first time D&D has had a hit video game. There's been lots of really popular D&D video games over the years. And none of them have had the slightest impact on the number of gamers.

So, please. Be specific. What is the magical tie in that will hook video gamers who like BG3 into sitting down for three or four hours to play a TTRPG that they have, previously, shown zero interest in playing?

 

[tetrasodium]

There's literally no telling how much growth Sigil might have been able to add. But we'll never know.

Likely not much, they never seemed to show any indication that upper manavement in charge of its direction had any understanding of a vtt & any concern or criticism from VTT users over that fact tended to get dog piled & ratio'd with some flavor of " wotc smart trust them". Speaking as someone who has been using a VTT for in person play with a (touch enabled) tabletop display since before wotc first tghrew around terms like "hybrid digital" & spent hundreds on assets for that VTT I seriously doubt that wotc was ever going to see BG3 type income had that been different.

Heck, they practically treated the primary VTT user/customer (GMs) like an afterthought in both siogil & the 2024phb ruleset tweaks while thinking players were going to be a significant revenue source. It's hard to understate how colossal & obvious that epic blunder was when players often can't even be bothered to rise to the level of hurdles like "please go to tokenstamp & make a token using an image from google AI or whatever for your PC then send me the result" & instead choose to say "just use the old one/a generic token"

No telling what might have happened if they'd tapped into the insane popularity of BG3, either. It's like Larian won the lottery on WotC's behalf, and then Wizards cashed that in by...doing what, exactly? Putting Astarion in the background of some paintings in the 2024 books? And that's pretty much it? I actually think Magic the Gathering did a better job of harvesting that groundswell than D&D did, which is just puzzling. So yeah, I'd call that squandering.

this part I agree on & don't actually even play mtg

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Not all BG3 players will become TTRPG players but when somebody started to create amateur art or fanfiction with those characters, in certain way, I dare to say, they are also playing D&D.

The entertaiment industry should be ideologically neutral because nobody wants to earn her money to feel a title is more propaganda about what you should support or reject.

Don't say the succes of BG3 was only luck or enough brand power. The studio team was working during several years and they had enough experience.

Hasbro wants to earn money thanks videogames, but they are relatively rookies in this industry, and this isn't in its best time because lots of gamers are too happy with biggest companies.

My suggestion is different settings to be licenced to several videogame studios. One with FR, other with Greyhak, a third, maybe Capcom, with Mystara, etc..

And the amateur art and fancfiction by the players work like free advertising. Hasbro should promote this.

 

[mamba]

Why is there this presumption that people who enjoyed BG3 would have the slightest interest in TTRPG's? After all, they played a video game.

they played a video game version of D&D. Do you also assume that people playing a computer game Monopoly or Settlers do not care for the boardgames?

It's not like BG3 is the first time D&D has had a hit video game. There's been lots of really popular D&D video games over the years. And none of them have had the slightest impact on the number of gamers.

do we have any actual data on that? I get it that not everyone would be, but 0% could be convinced to give D&D a try?

 

[Hussar]

they played a video game version of D&D. Do you also assume that people playing a computer game Monopoly or Settlers do not care for the boardgames?


do we have any actual data on that? I get it that not everyone would be, but 0% could be convinced to give D&D a try?

The number of people who play Mario Kart is huge. Does that mean that people take up car racing as a hobby?

What evidence do you have that video games have any cross over with in person games? I don't have any. Do you? And, please, let's not start with the ridiculous, "Oh, well, if 1 person does it, it's not 0 per cent is it? Hur hur. I'm technically correct".

There have been very popular D&D video games for years. NWN sold two or three million copies. Is there any evidence that it drove the popularity of 3e? Did the original Baldur's Gate and BG II (and various others) drive 3e play? There's virtually no evidence of it.

You presume that there's crossover without any actual data.

 

[Misanthrope Prime]

BioWare's "failures" and Larian's success are the result of gaming being an utter cancer pit.

Veilguard, unlike BG3, was a finished and polished game that fully respected its own premise and setting and all of its characters regardless of how white and male they were or weren't. The difference between them and Larian is that BioWare didn't write a storyline about how all queer men are rapists, predators, and groomers.

Veilguard didn't respect it's own premise, the naughty word you talking about?

The previous entry in the series showed us that the global underclass of elves were going to rise up against their oppressors under the leadership of their trickster god. In veilguard, not a single elf is depicted as enslaved or oppressed, and in fact, there's an entire conversation about how we shouldn't associate the evil elven gods with the elven people because bigots might get the wrong idea.

Dragon age used to be a franchise that had political, philosophical and ethical quandaries, but Veilguard did not respect the player to be able to handle them and sanitized the game. Don't even get me started on its incredibly problematic depiction of non-binary people.

 

[mamba]

The number of people who play Mario Kart is huge. Does that mean that people take up car racing as a hobby?

there is quite a bit of difference between playing the computer version of a board game and race car driving or flying lessons instead of a flight simulator…

What evidence do you have that video games have any cross over with in person games?

most people I know that play board games also play computer games

You presume that there's crossover without any actual data.

and you presume that there isn’t without any actual data, that is not any better. If anything it is worse as you insist on 0% overlap, mine could be any number, 2% or 5% or whatever, it does not have to be 100%

 

[MothMayI]

Veilguard didn't respect it's own premise, the naughty word you talking about?

The previous entry in the series showed us that the global underclass of elves were going to rise up against their oppressors under the leadership of their trickster god. In veilguard, not a single elf is depicted as enslaved or oppressed, and in fact, there's an entire conversation about how we shouldn't associate the evil elven gods with the elven people because bigots might get the wrong idea.

Dragon age used to be a franchise that had political, philosophical and ethical quandaries, but Veilguard did not respect the player to be able to handle them and sanitized the game. Don't even get me started on its incredibly problematic depiction of non-binary people.

So you're offended by a storyline that doesn't depict an entire race as evil and the audacity to be respectful towards non-binary people. Good for you for proving the point.

 

[Nightfly]

So, please. Be specific. What is the magical tie in that will hook video gamers who like BG3 into sitting down for three or four hours to play a TTRPG that they have, previously, shown zero interest in playing?

New starter set where the pregens are all the BG3 NPCs. Includes a pre-painted miniature for each. There you go. If such a thing existed, there is zero chance I don't own it, in spite of my more-or-less personal boycott of WotC.

Would that bring gobs of newbies over to tabletop D&D? Well, it would surely bring in some. That product would sell to people who would not otherwise think of buying a D&D book. And while I'd love to believe that I'm some kind of marketing genius, this is all kind of basic and obvious.

 

[Stalker0]

It’s funny how we criticize Wotc and yet Bg3 is kind of the anomaly.

So the article mentions this, but its not the fact that BG3 was an anomaly, nor Critical Role for that matter. As you said, no one could have predicted them.

Its that Wotc as a business has failed to capitalize on two major sources of business for their product. Both of these entities have created incredible buzz and marketing opportunties for the dnd brand, but it doesn't appear that WOTC has been able to capitalize on them. Instead, it seems to have further alienated them.