D&D 5E What would success look like for Next?

[Gilbetron]

People have done a lot of experimentation with this. The number goes up when someone joins, and goes down when they cancel, by the correct amount. People watched from early on, and the counter started at or close to zero, grew continually for a few years, them tapered off to a level amount, then took a dip for a while, then flattened again. There is no way to opt into or out of it on your own. It seems pretty reliable. What's your evidence that it is not reliable?

I've seen the source for the "adding/removing a user" test, and for the totals, but not for the "from the beginning" or the "took a dip" data - have a source for those?

 

[Mistwell]

I've seen the source for the "adding/removing a user" test, and for the totals, but not for the "from the beginning" or the "took a dip" data - have a source for those?

This was on the WOTC boards, and frankly I have not been there for many months at this point so I don't even know where to find them. I am not even sure the "from the beginning" posts survived the board upgrade, but I know several people were commenting on it from very early on.

 

[adamc]

It appears that the costs associated with producing D&D Next appear to be significantly lower than the costs associated with producing 4th Edition (i.e. smaller staff, no DDi development, etc.).

Do you have a link? I hadn't read that, and it would surprise me. The online site looks like a profit center to me -- low operating costs and $75 a year per subscriber. The only way I could see it NOT being profitable would be if they didn't have enough subscribers to meet the base costs of developing it.

Likewise, I don't see why it would take a smaller staff.

 

[Jacob Marley]

Do you have a link? I hadn't read that, and it would surprise me. The online site looks like a profit center to me -- low operating costs and $75 a year per subscriber. The only way I could see it NOT being profitable would be if they didn't have enough subscribers to meet the base costs of developing it.

I am not claiming it isn't profitable. I am claiming that the costs associated with developing digital tools is higher than the costs associated with maintaining digital tools.

Likewise, I don't see why it would take a smaller staff.

I am basing my analysis off of Ryan Dancey's statement (here, paragraph 10) that circa 2005/06 D&D supported a staff of 50-75 people. WotC's annual layoffs have been pretty well documented here, here, and here (amongst others). And the only major hire I recall was Monte Cook (here), and even he went his separate way (here). It appears that D&D supported staff has decreased from 2008.

 

[dd.stevenson]

Question: does wotc claim that their DDI group numbers are representative of total DDI subscriptions?

(Just curious; I'm not per se interested in questioning the group numbers.)

 

[steeldragons]

Mid 80s D&D had a cartoon on tv, toys, miniatures, video games, multiple book lines....

And more obscure stuff.

There has always been that desire to extend the brand and go mass market. And a lot of failure along the way (...movie...) with some successes.

Thanks for the link!

I never had the wood burner...was probably deemed too potentially dangerous by my mother...

All of the toys/action figures though (except the Nightmare...dunno why I never got the nightmare)...and I don't recall my Fortress of Fangs having the big demon guy/statue[?] on the top.

But on the topic [from the link] of "brandification", one can never overstate the omnipotence of Colorforms and puffy stickers! COWER BEFORE THE UNDENIABLE MIGHT OF THEIR STICKY PUFFINESS!

http://www.toyarchive.com/Dungeons&Dragons/StickersPuffyPacks.html

 

[TerraDave]

But on the topic [from the link] of "brandification", one can never overstate the omnipotence of Colorforms and puffy stickers! COWER BEFORE THE UNDENIABLE MIGHT OF THEIR STICKY PUFFINESS!

http://www.toyarchive.com/Dungeons&Dragons/StickersPuffyPacks.html

Awesome.

 

[Gilbetron]

This was on the WOTC boards, and frankly I have not been there for many months at this point so I don't even know where to find them. I am not even sure the "from the beginning" posts survived the board upgrade, but I know several people were commenting on it from very early on.

Ah, I've read those threads as well, and I don't remember anything like you describe. I haven't seen any evidence (and I've looked) that the number is accurate other than relatively (it goes up when a person signs up, and goes down when they unsub), which is interesting, but not enough to prove that the total number is accurate.

Besides, that number doesn't represent people actively using 4E tools, as people can subscribe to just get access to dragon and dungeon.

I am basing my analysis off of Ryan Dancey's statement (here, paragraph 10) that circa 2005/06 D&D supported a staff of 50-75 people. WotC's annual layoffs have been pretty well documented here, here, and here (amongst others). And the only major hire I recall was Monte Cook (here), and even he went his separate way (here). It appears that D&D supported staff has decreased from 2008.

There has been plenty of job posting on WotC (you can see them on Wizard's site at any point in time), particularly while Next has been under development. So "I've read about layoffs but haven't heard about hires" is extremely weak evidence.

 

[Ryan Huffaker]

D&D Last

I was going to ask whether folks thought Next would be successful, and then I realized I wasn't sure what that would even mean...

Perhaps it would mean not having the trademark bought-out by Paizo?

 

[billd91]

Perhaps it would mean not having the trademark bought-out by Paizo?

People bring up the idea of Paizo buying the D&D trademark every once in a while and, based on what we know now, this is not going to happen in any predictable timeframe. Granted, back in 1985, my 11th grade history teacher predicted that the Germanys would never be allowed to reunite so it's certainly possible for the situation to radically change, but Hasbro isn't well known for selling off IP. They are known for shelving them for a number of years and then relaunching them. Plus, they wouldn't be investing in getting the D&D movie rights back if they were thinking of hiving off the D&D trademarks any time soon.

And given the potential value of the D&D trademarks (with good computer game and movie cross-promotion), I doubt Paizo is likely to have that kind of scratch laying around anytime soon. Pathfinder is doing well, exceeding initial expectations, even. But that's hardly license to print money.