Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5949865" data-attributes="member: 59506">Wow!&nbsp;I think it would help if the assumptions made in the OP were first and foremost, correct...before drawing conclusions.&nbsp;Such as, the switch from 3.5E to 4E had a lot more to do with than just trying to &quot;fix the problems with 3.5E&quot;. There was the need to publish a new edition to generate sales. There was the goal of creating a non-OGL game so WotC would have more control over the game and 3pp products. There may even be more factors, but those two factors above were far more important in the decision to make a new edition than &quot;fixing&quot; the previous one. I can guarantee that if 3.5E had still been selling well, there would have been no 4E, and they certainly would have felt no motivation to &quot;fix&quot; 3.5.&nbsp;Secondly, there is no evidence that most of the D&amp;D fan base plays 3.5. One could probably actually make the argument that the largest portion of D&amp;D fans are playing Pathfinder (which is not 3.5E), but even then, data to back that up would be practically impossible to gather. Hopefully though you don't mean &quot;majority&quot; when you say &quot;most of us&quot;. As no edition of D&amp;D has a majority of players (a majority is greater than 50%). Even if you blanketed the world with &quot;official&quot; polls as to who plays what; on every game forum and site, in magazines, and even on TV...you still wouldn't reach every single person who plays some iteration of D&amp;D. The only people who have the information to make or not-make statements like &quot;most of us play 3.5E&quot;, are those working for the bigger game companies...in other words Paizo and WotC...and they ain't talking!&nbsp;Thirdly, ENWorld is not a &quot;3E&quot; forum. It has just as healthy Pathfinder, 4E, and pre-3E edition communities as it does 3.x. ENWorld also has a pretty healthy sampling of other game systems also, such as Savage Worlds and others. ENWorld didn't have to &quot;stick to their guns&quot; as far as 3E is concerned. ENWorld simply went where the fan-base went...period. And with the advent of 4E, that was a split between older editions, 3.x and 4E; and then a split between older editions, 3.x, 4E, and Pathfinder. ENWorld Publishing went with supporting 3.5E and 4E equally, and has since switched to Pathfinder and 4E.&nbsp; ENWorld didn't &quot;stick to their guns&quot; since there was no reason to do that.&nbsp;I also find it quite ironic how you wish for just one unifying edition, then complain that WotC is now trying to make a unifying edition!<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm&nbsp; &nbsp; :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> Which one do you want? Do you want WotC to make a unifying edition or not make one? Or do you simply want WotC to make &quot;your&quot; favorite edition the &quot;one&quot; edition? Especially as that's worked so well so far...<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm&nbsp; &nbsp; :-S" data-shortname=":-S" />&nbsp;Lastly, if WotC achieves the goals they are looking for design-wise with 5E, I think they will have an evergreen game that appeals to the majority of D&amp;D fans...across the spectrum of iteration preferences. It's a big gamble and an even bigger experiment though. However, I feel if it doesn't suffer from too much corporate pressure and goals, and the designers truly listen and incoroporate the feedback from fans, then it has the best chance of any previous edition of doing so...and if it fails, then it's likely proof that this is just an unachievable goal.&nbsp;<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses&nbsp; &nbsp; B-)" data-shortname="B-)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="El Mahdi, post: 5949865, member: 59506"] Wow! I think it would help if the assumptions made in the OP were first and foremost, correct...before drawing conclusions. Such as, the switch from 3.5E to 4E had a lot more to do with than just trying to "fix the problems with 3.5E". There was the need to publish a new edition to generate sales. There was the goal of creating a non-OGL game so WotC would have more control over the game and 3pp products. There may even be more factors, but those two factors above were far more important in the decision to make a new edition than "fixing" the previous one. I can guarantee that if 3.5E had still been selling well, there would have been no 4E, and they certainly would have felt no motivation to "fix" 3.5. Secondly, there is no evidence that most of the D&D fan base plays 3.5. One could probably actually make the argument that the largest portion of D&D fans are playing Pathfinder (which is [I]not[/I] 3.5E), but even then, data to back that up would be practically impossible to gather. Hopefully though you don't mean "majority" when you say "most of us". As no edition of D&D has a majority of players (a majority is greater than 50%). Even if you blanketed the world with "official" polls as to who plays what; on every game forum and site, in magazines, and even on TV...you still wouldn't reach every single person who plays some iteration of D&D. The only people who have the information to make or not-make statements like "most of us play 3.5E", are those working for the bigger game companies...in other words Paizo and WotC...and they ain't talking! Thirdly, ENWorld is not a "3E" forum. It has just as healthy Pathfinder, 4E, and pre-3E edition communities as it does 3.x. ENWorld also has a pretty healthy sampling of other game systems also, such as Savage Worlds and others. ENWorld didn't have to "stick to their guns" as far as 3E is concerned. ENWorld simply went where the fan-base went...period. And with the advent of 4E, that was a split between older editions, 3.x and 4E; and then a split between older editions, 3.x, 4E, and Pathfinder. ENWorld Publishing went with supporting 3.5E and 4E equally, and has since switched to Pathfinder and 4E. ENWorld didn't "stick to their guns" since there was no reason to do that. I also find it quite ironic how you wish for just one unifying edition, then complain that WotC is now trying to make a unifying edition!:erm: Which one do you want? Do you want WotC to make a unifying edition or not make one? Or do you simply want WotC to make "your" favorite edition the "one" edition? Especially as that's worked so well so far...:-S Lastly, if WotC achieves the goals they are looking for design-wise with 5E, I think they will have an evergreen game that appeals to the majority of D&D fans...across the spectrum of iteration preferences. It's a big gamble and an even bigger experiment though. However, I feel if it doesn't suffer from too much corporate pressure and goals, and the designers truly listen and incoroporate the feedback from fans, then it has the best chance of any previous edition of doing so...and if it fails, then it's likely proof that this is just an unachievable goal. B-) [/QUOTE]

Verification