When did I stop being WotC's target audience?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Would be nice to have similar polls posted on other sites and compiled into the total. Probably would be alot of work though.

I claim no copyright to this poll.

But I plead laziness.

 

[jdsivyer]

We will know this in a year or two from now.

But as much as we'd like to believe this time its special, I suspect the customer retention for games is a constant. If more people buy 4E Core then 3E Core, this means it will lose more people and also retain more people then 3E Core. It will just be different people gained/lost/retained.

But we'll see this in a year or two from now. We can speculate as much as we want till then. For EN World, here is the poll I plan to re-use. If we're actually still interested in this matter in 1-2 years.

This will be interesting

 

[Rel]

I'd like to request that everybody remain mindful of keeping the conversation respectful. Thanks.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

My main problem is that a mere 3 years after 3.5 (which supposedly "fixed" 3.0) was produced, along came 4e. Even if 4e had a been a re-tooling of 3.5 (not an almost complete overhaul) then I would be less than happy still the same because it was only 3 years after the previous one. So what I'm saying is that I would like WOTC to explain why they needed a new edition 3 years after the "fixing" of the previous one - I am yet to hear a logical or reasonable explanation.

As far as customer only wanting continual support (and free of charge), I'm not too sure, to be honest. If the product is good, and justified, people will purchase it. I'm just not sure if 4e was justified at this time (2008) when 3.5 came out only a few years back.

Sure, people will buy it - but will enough people do so? A certain amount of product cost will be fixed since you invest X time and Y people for Z money (and print it for a relative fixed cost, too). If not enough people buy this, you no longer make enough money with it to justify the expenses. Especially if you know there is an alternative that will make you more money. (If a new edition couldn't sell, there wouldn't be one.)

I think someone has put up a list of "issues" with 3.x that seem to require fixing according to a large number of 3.x "users" (DMs and players). I wish I had the link... *wishes very hard*

And why dooes a business like WOTC only have two choices when re-launching a game? Why do they have to re-launch a new game in its own right? If they realised there were errors or glitches in 3.5 then they simply should have been fixed. I'm still not 100% sure of what the reason behind re-tooling 3.5 to what 4e has become is.

Because in the eyes of WotC, me (and people like me), the "errors and glitches" in 3.5 where to substantial to create yet another "hotfix". Either you used the system as it was, or start anew. At some point, trying to fix it just doesn't cut it any more.
And a 3.6, 3.75, 3.8 and 3.9 will only give you diminishing returns. Pathfinder works (at least I hope it does) because it doesn't have to make money for WotC, it "just" has to make money for Paizo.

Maybe it's just me, but the decision to bring out 4e still leaves me a little baffled. Whether the game is good, bad, great, or downright shocking, it doesn't matter. I'm just simply curious as to why they released it so quickly after "fixing" the previous edition, that's all.

They did all they could within the constraints of their business plans and their designer abilities.

 

[Psion]

Not necessarily (although that is certainly possible). Keep in mind, my point was that people claiming that there was nothing left to make in 3.5 is not valid. The game (3.5) was only in existance for 4.5 years. 1E had a 12 year run, and they didn't "run out of ideas" after only 4.5 years.

There's plenty out there that could have been done.

I'm dubious about that.

1e was a fledgling game, and there was a lot of undiscovered country then. New races, classes, proficiencies, and settings were all things that came out in those early years, and came out slowly.

3e did not start out from ground zero here. 3e was built on the shoulders of a giant. It incorporated many of the features that showed up in 1e supplements right out of the starting gate, and whereas it took years for FR and Dragonlance to come out for 1e, dozens of settings were available for 3e in the first year.

It seems that you demarcate 3.5 as a new starting point. It's even less so than 3.0 was. It was a refinement of 3.0. The resetting of the supplement curve would be even less drastic.

Perhaps there were more options that could have been tried, but fundamentally, each supplement sells less than the last. I can see there was a genuine economic need for a new edition to "reset" the game in the time frame it happened.

What I disagree with is the shape 4e took. A system could have been designed that addressed the tastes of a broader degree of the existing market.

 

[EATherrian]

In previous editions, there's no reason to look at a class unless you're playing that class, or if your class has abilities that are identical to that other class.

I have no reason to look at the Barbarian's Rage or the Bard's Bardic Music if I'm not playing a Barbarian or Bard, so I fail to see how this is unique to 4e.

I must be different, since I used to read all of the books from front to back and then re-read the parts I needed. The color-coded verbal vomit of the class section of 4E does not really work well with that.

 

[EATherrian]

Interesting. I find 4E inspires me to run it more than 3E did. I agree that the rules don't read as well in some cases, but I find that they play better, and--as others have said--the game is far easier to prep for.

Then again, I also find the 4E cosmology and flavor to be far stronger than 3E's, and I vastly prefer the new cosmology (Shadowfell, Feywild, etc.) to the old Great Wheel.

I've given up being a DM with 4th Edition. I've mostly been DM for 20+ years, but now that there is an implicit animosity to world builders I don't feel the desire any longer. As to the new Cosmology, it's badly conceived but with good writers could be ok; but if they start shoe-horning every old setting into it they will lose me completely. I bought the 4E FRCS and skimmed it once. I doubt I'll ever read it again. Even bad 3E books got a few reads from me, that's how bad I feel 4E is to read.

 

[rkwoodard]

no one is saying that

Actually, that is flat out absurd.
4E developers themselves have been up front with major design philosophy shifts. They made certain choices with their eyes wide open.
It may be 1% and it may be 50%, but a certain section of the fan base was intentionally moved away from.

If they gain for than they lose then that was the exactly right card to play.
So I'm not remotely claiming that it was wrong or bad for them to do it.

But do not tell me that they are not the ones who changed the game, and radically changed some key elements. Thats just dumb.

I don't think anybody said that the developers did not radically change the game. Nor, did they think that 100% of people would change over on day 1.

But they certainly did not pick a sub-section of gamers and say, Nay, we don't care what they want.

Now, that being said.

I am 41 have been gaming since 1980. I declare that I AM WOTC'S TARGET AUDIENCE.

However, they were only partially successful. I bought the core books, liked them, but decided that I wanted to play 3rd edition for a few more campaigns. So for now, I am buying 3edition books on the secondary market. And I am having a blast.

RK

 

[Mallus]

I've mostly been DM for 20+ years, but now that there is an implicit animosity to world builders I don't feel the desire any longer.

Out of curiosity, where do you find an implicit animosity toward world builders in 4e? The first thing my group did was design a setting for our new campaign and we found 4e offered a little inspiration and no significant impediment in that process. We're happy with the results -- to be honest, we think the world is pretty smashing.

If you're so inclined, you can read about in the second link in my .sig (and the Story Hour is coming soon, now that we've actually begun playing).

P.S I've been a "mostly DM" for approximately 18 years.

 

[Psion]

I've given up being a DM with 4th Edition. I've mostly been DM for 20+ years, but now that there is an implicit animosity to world builders I don't feel the desire any longer. As to the new Cosmology, it's badly conceived but with good writers could be ok; but if they start shoe-horning every old setting into it they will lose me completely. I bought the 4E FRCS and skimmed it once. I doubt I'll ever read it again. Even bad 3E books got a few reads from me, that's how bad I feel 4E is to read.

That matches my perception well. And you live in Southern MD. Why are we not gaming together?

Expect an email or PM.