D&D 4E The internet: 4E can't have it both ways

[broghammerj]

So there are two opposing viewpoints I see coming up on the boards which seem to be in direct conflict with one another:

Option 1. The internet message boards are a small fraction of the DnD players as a whole. As a result the wishes/complaints from this minority should be minimized and have little impact on WoTC's development/design of 4E.

Option 2. WoTC has embraced the internet and used it as a marketing machine with blogs, online magazines, previews, message boards, etc. As a result of reaching out to the internet community, the community should be invited to provide feedback to WoTC which may impact on design decisions of 4E.

I have my own opinions but will remain somewhat silent as to not bias polling. I am curious what the online community thinks on this matter.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Those aren't in direct conflict at all.

Forget about the Internet a moment. Make it GenCon.

People coming up to retailers at GenCon and expressing their opinions will, of course, be listened to. They may have valuable things to say and they're likely customers already.

That said, only a fraction of the gaming public has gone to ANY GenCon, let alone any given GenCon, so no publisher with an ounce of brains is going to take what's said at GenCon as the be-all and end-all of what their fans want.

Same thing with the Internet.

 

[broghammerj]

Those aren't in direct conflict at all.

Ok they may not be in "direct" conflict if you take me literally, but there are conflicting attitudes regarding internet feedback. This is what I am trying to flesh out.

I agree with the comparison to people at Cons being a minority, like people on the internet. My question is simply should feedback from the internet be used by WotC to make changes to 4E.

Another way to look at the question is the internet a representative enough sample of DnD players to provide representative feedback from the community?

The reason is many people are saying they hope WOTC does not take feedback from the internet. This thread has some examples:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=211215

 

[Mouseferatu]

Where's the "WotC should pay at least some attention, and if there's a huge outcry about something they should give it some further thought, but ultimately they should make what they think are the best decisions even if a lot of people are screaming about it" option?

IOW, it would be foolish to utterly ignore boards like this--but it would be even more foolish to base any decisions on the boards alone.

Or, in other other words... Yes, actually, WotC can have it both ways. In fact, it's the only logical way to go.

 

[Nifft]

WotC should listen to me.

Why isn't there an option for that in your poll?

Cheers, -- N

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So there are two opposing viewpoints I see coming up on the boards which seem to be in direct conflict with one another:

Option 1. The internet message boards are a small fraction of the DnD players as a whole. As a result the wishes/complaints from this minority should be minimized and have little impact on WoTC's development/design of 4E.

Option 2. WoTC has embraced the internet and used it as a marketing machine with blogs, online magazines, previews, message boards, etc. As a result of reaching out to the internet community, the community should be invited to provide feedback to WoTC which may impact on design decisions of 4E.

I have my own opinions but will remain somewhat silent as to not bias polling. I am curious what the online community thinks on this matter.

I think that feedback should influence then, but not neccessarily the feedback given to their current expositions. The feedback to 3rd edition and its suppements should inform their design of 4E. Feedback to the tidbits we know doesn't consider the full picture and thus can't really help that much.
Feedback that only says "I like it" or "I don't like it" is probably meaningless. Discussions about mechanical implications might be useful, but I doubt that they will give insights above the ones the designers already discussed. (But at least they could confirm the designer ideas.)

There are a few things they should/can listen too, though - if people are not happy about the marketing for D&D 4, they should probably listen into it and check if the criticismn might be valid on a larger scale.

So, I think the view points aren't neccessarily opposing. There are areas where it might be reasonable to listen, and there are areas where it isn't so.

 

[Hairfoot]

This thread has some examples

I mentioned it in that thread because some WotC staff post here in response to assertions or speculations on the boards here, which suggests they're keeping an eye on the reaction to the news they're releasing.

How much it affects their decisions is another matter. Opinion is usually divided on the goodness/badness of any tidbits they release, and I doubt the reaction here counts for anything when it comes to projected sales, but it would give them a fairly clear indication if some aspect of 4E met with overwhelming enthusiasm or condemnation.

I also wonder if ENworld, compared to the Gleemax boards, isn't frequented by an audience which is more...how can I say older, more thoughtful, and better-informed, without saying something as judgemental as "mature"? And if that's the case, it might only be giving them a profile of the audience they want to "fire"!

 

[med stud]

I think WotC should listen to feedback if traditional "enemies" team up; if pawsplay and MerricB both agree that something is wonky it's a pretty good sign that it is wonky . Also if someone on the internet makes them think about something obvious they missed when designing.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

12.) One of my advisors will be an average five-year-old child. Any flaws in my plan that he is able to spot will be corrected before implementation.

That's pretty much what I want the internet to be as far as 4E design goes.

 

[med stud]

I also wonder if ENworld, compared to the Gleemax boards, isn't frequented by an audience which is more...how can I say older, more thoughtful, and better-informed, without saying something as judgemental as "mature"? And if that's the case, it might only be giving them a profile of the audience they want to "fire"!

I don't think any company wants to fire a group of customers; if WotC got to chose them selves I think they would want everyone in the world to play D&D .