What happened to a 3d VTT?

[Stormonu]

Hadn't seen any one discussing this, but when I saw the front page news on the new Wizards VTT, I just had to wonder why they dropped their older work on the 3d version for this newer 2d version. The videos they had shown of the original VTT looked like they had it pretty close to complete. The new one almost looks like a prettied-up version of the web tool that let you plan maps with the dungeon tiles.

Also, has anyone whose been testing this compare it to the existing VTTs?

 

[OnlineDM]

1. I think it's pretty clear that they dropped the 3D version because they weren't able to deliver it. A 2D version is much easier to do (and has been done already with MapTool, GameTable/OSU-gt, etc.).

2. The Friends and Family beta doesn't start until November 22, so no one has had a chance to give it a whirl yet.

 

[Shemeska]

Gleemax ate it. It wasn't a realistic goal, it was badly managed, and the money to create it now probably wouldn't be forthcoming from Hasbro after the last couple tens of millions the first time around for the original DDI suite.

I'm surprised they went back and actually produced a VTT in any form, and it's going to be interesting this time around since it's a different team, seemingly some realistic expectations for what it'll do, but also now competition in the marketplace that sprung up since then. Shall be interesting to watch.

 

[blalien]

Development costs aside, a 3D game table would have been a pain in the ass for the players. It would be much more buggy, it would take the DM much longer to create dungeons and custom monsters, and the bandwidth would be horrendous. Assuming the game table is a web client and hosted by Wizards' servers, the program would be really laggy even for people with decent computers.

The 2D solution isn't as pretty, but its much more feasible and reliable. Nobody plays Dungeons and Dragons for the graphics, anyway.

 

[malraux]

In addition, generating 3d minis takes a lot more money than a 2d one. For the 2d one, you generally just use the MM artwork. For a 3d one, you have to get someone to build a 3d model.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

Far too expensive to make and maintain. They severely miscalculated the manpower this would need. Also, there is not that much value added by 3d - a VT (like maptool) should be a visualisation tool, not try to tell me how everything looks. We have the DM for that.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

...The videos they had shown of the original VTT looked like they had it pretty close to complete. ...
Also, has anyone whose been testing this compare it to the existing VTTs?

I believe that those videos were misleading and that WoTC were among those that were mislead.

According to the announcement that cancelled Gleemax and all its works and pomps, there were fundamental issues with the VTT.

Also IMHO, but playing around for a few hours in the level designer for Neverwinternights 2, 3d modelling is way more work than I want to put into dungeon building.

 

[IronWolf]

I don't think dropping the idea of a 3D VTT is a bad thing. As many have said there would be a lot of effort and resources both to develop and to run the thing. I'd rather see a strong focus put into a 2D one to make it as easy as possible to use than one with lots of eye candy.

 

[El Mahdi]

Far too expensive to make and maintain. They severely miscalculated the manpower this would need. Also, there is not that much value added by 3d - a VT (like maptool) should be a visualisation tool, not try to tell me how everything looks. We have the DM for that.

Except the advantage as far as I'm concerned isn't about cool effects or simply making it look better, it's about being able to make it more 1st person in view, thereby eliminating the gods-eye view and tactical advantage that comes with it. (By tactical advantage I mean the perfect spacial and situational awareness that comes with such a view.) Don't get me wrong, I use an erasable mat with miniatures in my games just like most groups. And it provides the same tactical advantage as a 2D lookdown VTT, and our games are just fine that way. But in real life, we don't walk around with a gods-eye view. In real combat you are limited by your field of vision and your other senses. A 3D, 1st person VTT could have accomplished that very thing and greatly enhanced (IMO) the play experience. YMMV though. But, that was the original concept and goal WotC was shooting for. I understand the reasons why they fell short, but I don't think it's inconcievable that someone could make a workable, non-buggy VTT of this sort...eventually...

 

[heruca]

I don't think it's inconcievable that someone could make a workable, non-buggy VTT of this sort...eventually...

Someone seems to be giving it a try. But do we really need 3D pog-style tokens?