Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Schmoe" data-source="post: 4518150" data-attributes="member: 913">That's not a good reason for a dramatic shift in games, though.&nbsp; For example, I bought many, many 3.5 supplements.&nbsp; I think it's accepted that, perhaps, WotC needed to do something new with the game to continue to draw revenue from the people who have &quot;everything&quot;, and 4e was certainly warranted by those criteria.&nbsp; However, 4e marks a dramatic shift to the point where I'm not buying 4e.&nbsp; It's not that I'm not buying because I have everything.&nbsp; Actually, I'm looking at buying Pathfinder stuff.&nbsp; It's that I'm not buying because the direction of 4e is a direction I don't really like.&nbsp; And I think that is the heart of Jeff's question.&nbsp; Why did WotC choose a direction with 4e that was such a radical departure from previous versions, when they could have retained many buyers by building on previous versions instead?My guess is that WotC felt there was a large market of potential players that were put off by fundamental aspects of earlier versions of D&amp;D, and they felt that the potential market was greater than the market of loyal customers they already had.&nbsp; For the math inclined:(Potential market gained by dramatic shift - loss of current market due to dramatic shift) &gt; (Potential market gained by continuing current direction - loss of current market due to continuing current direction)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Schmoe, post: 4518150, member: 913"] That's not a good reason for a dramatic shift in games, though. For example, I bought many, many 3.5 supplements. I think it's accepted that, perhaps, WotC needed to do something new with the game to continue to draw revenue from the people who have "everything", and 4e was certainly warranted by those criteria. However, 4e marks a dramatic shift to the point where I'm not buying 4e. It's not that I'm not buying because I have everything. Actually, I'm looking at buying Pathfinder stuff. It's that I'm not buying because the direction of 4e is a direction I don't really like. And I think that is the heart of Jeff's question. Why did WotC choose a direction with 4e that was such a radical departure from previous versions, when they could have retained many buyers by building on previous versions instead? My guess is that WotC felt there was a large market of potential players that were put off by fundamental aspects of earlier versions of D&D, and they felt that the potential market was greater than the market of loyal customers they already had. For the math inclined: (Potential market gained by dramatic shift - loss of current market due to dramatic shift) > (Potential market gained by continuing current direction - loss of current market due to continuing current direction) [/QUOTE]

Verification