D&D 5E Why I Think D&DN is In Trouble

[Ulrick]

Yep. D&D Next is in trouble.

 

[Ichneumon]

Yep. D&D Next is in trouble.

Indeed. It needs to go straight to my game room.

 

[Hussar]

I'll have to support Mistwell on this. I'd say if Snow White is not traditional fantasy...WTH do you consider traditional fantasy???

I believe you misread that. Derren questioned Snow White not being traditional fantasy. I was being sarcastic.

 

[Hussar]

Derren, i'm still baffled as to why, A. a D&D movie has to do as well as something like the Hobbit to be considered a success, and B. why a D&D movie has to be a "traditional fantasy movie" and C. How, when you have a fantasy movie coming out every single month and , a very popular trad fantasy TV series on HBO "traditional" fantasy isn't very popular at the moment.

 

[GreyLord]

1. Do you agree that Gaming brings in more revenue now than Boys Toys, or another of the other divisions of the four divisions?
2. Do you agree that WOTC makes a plurality of the revenue for the Gaming division?

If you agree with both those, then what are you disputing? And if you disagree, show me how I am wrong.



1) Gaming now brings in the most revenue, of the four Hasbro divisions;
2) WOTC now brings in the most revenue for Gaming, of all the components that make up Gaming;
3) In terms of components of the various Hasbro divisions, WOTC brings in more revenue than any other particular component that makes up one of the four divisions of Hasbro.
4) Given the above, WOTC now has a lot more influence over what happens at Hasbro than they used to. More than any other particular component of, for example, Boys Toys (like "Marvel"). More influence than they had back when the old revenue goals were set for D&D that were discussed earlier in this thread. More influence, in fact, than they had when 4e was launched.

Is that clear now? I am not saying WOTC brings in the most revenue, nor that they are a majority of anything, nor that they are Hasbro, nor that they control Hasbro, nor that they are the only important component of Hasbro or Gaming, nor any of the stuff you claimed I said.

On the first two items

1) You are looking at last years fiscal report. ON that report, Gaming did have higher profits. No contest. However, whether it brings in more revenue is more subjective. There were substantial development costs tossed into Gaming last year, in particular, one of those areas was MtG, from what we can see. Looking at the trends, Boys Toys do bring in more than Gaming, and with that history, Boys Toys has been more reliable in the recent terms. It may be that we are seeing something switch around, or it could just be a momentary slump. We'll have to see if it continues in 2014 and 2015, OR, if with movie releases and other exciting items coming up, whether a new status has come, or not. Irregardless, as Hasbro has remained healthy, and Gaming is up, it would still be best if Boys Toys also went back up in profits rather than having it remain as it was in 2013. An increase of 200 million does not make up for a loss of 400 million. It's bad not just for Hasbro and Boys Toys, but also for gaming because as profits go down, they affect the entire company.

2) That's a difficult question to answer. Once again, there were substantial development costs sunk into MtG and WotC. However, in regards to being one of the biggest money making companies under the Hasbro umbrella in the gaming market, I might say you could perceive it as that way. In simple terms, I can see how it is viewed that way. In more complex terms...the best I could say is...that depends.


On the next four questions.

1) Last year, Gaming did make more money than any other single division, in regards to overall profits. I can agree with that from what I can see. However, once again, you are only looking at one year's worth of information instead of the whole picture. It currently has a slight edge over the next highest section of Hasbro. That's both good and bad. It shows a decrease in what has been traditionally one of the more profitable areas. It may need a look at Boys Toys. Crowing over a decrease so that a section you enjoy has higher profits may not be necessarily a good thing for the company as a whole. Gaming is doing well. That is good. It increased it's profits, that is good. I'm sure every effort will be made to ensure the Gaming section continues to do well, if not better, while at the same time improving Boys Toys to it's historic highs as well. Both doing and increasing profits is in the best interest of Hasbro.

2) For last year...looks like it.

3) I disagree. That would get into the more particulars of each brand and company under the umbrella.

4) I'd say that's pretty debatable. Do they have more representatives at the table all of a sudden? Do they have more votes all of a sudden? Are you suggesting that they will have more influence over monopoly, or the Transformers brand simply because they are doing well? What type of influence do you think has increased? Over whom and what? Perhaps they were already given somewhat autonomy...how do they get more influence than their own autonomy they already had? In what way do you think their influence has increased? Do you think it's going to mean that the board won't have a say anymore, or do you think it means that just because MtG is doing well, that if D&DN hits massive problems, the board won't be able to have a say into it?

 

[GreyLord]

I believe you misread that. Derren questioned Snow White not being traditional fantasy. I was being sarcastic.

In that case, I believe I misread. Sorry, I apologize.

 

[Derren]

I was being sarcastic.

And also blind because what I actually did was to question that Maleficent is a traditional fantasy which you strawmanned into Snow White.

 

[WizarDru]

Not that D&D Next needs such a thing, but what is the basis for a supposition that a D&D movie would not be a financial success? Such things are always anticipated as a failure until they actually succeed, then history gets rewritten and it was a fait accompli. Jackson's Rings Trilogy was originally assumed by many to be certain to be a disaster. Obviously, that wasn't the case. Pirates of the Carribean SHOULD have been a massive failure...it was not. The Lone Ranger, by the same director with one it's same stars (a hollywood 'A' lister) and a character with an 80 year history, flopped dramatically.

In a world where Iron Man is the most famous Marvel Superhero, the X-men have had not one but six movies (with a seventh inbound), where adaptions of Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit are international sensations, where Game of Thrones is one of the hottest properties on television...this is a world where D&D has no chance of success? I'm not really seeing that.

The success or failure of any one particular movie doesn't describe a trend, but effects-laden fantasies are fairly solid these days. A movie like 'I, Frankenstein' is pretty much a D&D movie already, just having some modern trappings so that they can have their cake and eat it, too. Practically from it's inception, D&D has never been about historical verisimilitude, just swords and sorcery. And a lot of films have that now, in varying focus. Have their been plenty of flops? No question. But the very fact that a film like "Jack the Giant Killer" can get made is testament to the fact that there is no longer a technical impetus to making such a movie and that hollywood thinks that audiences will watch what is, in effect, a D&D movie. You just need a GOOD one. Hollywood keeps trying (see 'Seventh Son', for example) and sooner or later, they'll get it. Likewise the success of shows like Agents of SHIELD, Once Upon a Time, Game of Thrones, Warehouse 13, and others show that effects-laden fantasy can work just fine, if presented correctly (make your own judgement about their respective quality).

Really, the only question will be whether the best D&D movie out there actually has the name on the label, IMHO.

 

[Halivar]

Really, the only question will be whether the best D&D movie out there actually has the name on the label, IMHO.

Ridiculous! The best possible D&D movie has already been made!

[video=youtube;rCel0TEV8QM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCel0TEV8QM[/video]

 

[billd91]

Really, the only question will be whether the best D&D movie out there actually has the name on the label, IMHO.

It doesn't. It is Hawk, the Slayer.