Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6534155" data-attributes="member: 5834">I agree with number three. I think the D&D group that surveyed the D&D population did so late in the product cycle and made a mistake when it comes to designing a release schedule. They claim D&D players want a slower release schedule. I think that is incorrect.I think how it really works is more like the following:1. New Edition Release: Massive interest and want for product.2. New Releases are strongly desired: Books snapped up and things flying off the shelf.3. Over-saturation after years of releases: The oversaturation that causes people to respond that they want fewer books kicks in...after literally hundreds of books. This should have been something that internal numbers should have told the D&D team. On initial release and for the first few years D&D should have a constant stream of books to maintain and build interest, cutting back once they've built strong interest and investment in the game. After they have heavy game investment, they should slow releases to maintain the longevity of the game. I think they're missing the mark a bit doing slow releases so early in the product cycle. They will lose customers based on a lack of new material to keep them interested.I still think Paizo's business model for RPG games is the better model. Monthly adventures or even bi-monthly with extra crunch and fluff is a superior model.</blockquote>