D&D 3.x Will 4e last longer than 3e?

[MerricB]

Do you have a source for that? That's very much counter to my understanding that 1E was a whole order of magnitude higher sales than anything that came after it. I've always wished I had a source on specific 3.0 sales/profit figures.

Charles Ryan posted about that a year or two *after* he left Wizards. Someone with search ability should be able to pick up the post - it was here on EN World.

Cheers!

 

[Darrin Drader]

If a lot of people actually follow D&D to 4E, then it will be a short lived edition because the businessfolk will have learned that they can get away with hitting the reset button more often to "reinvigorate the brand" (on that note, I hate how corporatespeak sidesteps the fact that they're really just sticking it to the consumer). If 4E is a success, then 5E will be a success five years later, and 6E will be a success four years after that.

If 4E is not a huge success then it will probably be very long-lived. Support will dwindle and possibly vanish, as we've seen happen to numerous WotC brands in the past. Support products might get farmed out to third party companies operating under a license granting them the use of the logo. Eventually there will be the "Return of D&D" with edition 5, which will most likely be produced by whatever company with then owns it - or at least own the rights to publish it.

Anyone who doubts that the new edition is anything other than a grab for cash needs to think again. While 3.5 took an already good game and improved upon it by making a lot of excellent options part of the core game, I have no such hopes for 4E. So far it looks like a lot of change for change's sake while including fewer rules in the core products instead of more.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

4E has not yet begun, and 3E is not yet dead (and I'm not yet convinced it will die even after 4E DOES begin). I'm not that good at completely uninformed guesses.

 

[The Little Raven]

Charles Ryan posted about that a year or two *after* he left Wizards. Someone with search ability should be able to pick up the post - it was here on EN World.

My previous post has a link to the IGN article about it, but the parenthesis messed it up.

http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/540/540509p4.html

"I'm so tired of people thinking of Dungeons & Dragons as something that people did in the '80s and are shocked when it's still around. More people are playing the game today than at the height of its popularity then."

He was the Brand Manager when he said that, so I think he might have known a little bit about the subject.

 

[Veander]

Simplifying or getting rid of very confusing rules seems cool. Making halflings and elves taller seems not so cool. If there are enough of those not so cool rule changes for most people, I can see this turning into a Windows Vista kinda deal. Where you want to play it but when you do, it just doesn't feel right and doesn't work like the previous version.

 

[cougent]

To the original post: I think it's an easy bet on "shorter". I'd probably bet $50 or so that it would shorter and feel pretty safe about that.

And honestly that is what we are all doing, placing a bet...

I will put $50 on "4-6 years" to win, place, or show and another $50 on "5 years" to win.

 

[Bagpuss]

I think a new edition depends on the success of failure of the D&D Insider, if it takes off then they get a constant and more dependably revenue stream, that is closely tied in with the new 4E system.

 

[collin]

Agreed. That is the gamble Wotc is making. I'm betting Wotc's gamble that 4e will attract sufficiently more gamers than it looses to 3x will not pay off for their economics - 4e will succeed, yes, but will not succeed enough to satisfy Wotc's revenue needs. IMO, 4e is highly unlikely to top or equal 3x's number of players and will "fail" by this measure even as it succeeds more generally. Unlike smaller publishers, who can live well with more modest sales, Wotc needs BIG sales to live well. I don't think they will get those type of numbers and unfortunately good numbers are not good enough for Wotc's economics as they need GREAT numbers. My thought is that this dynanmic will help see 5e very much sooner - 4 to 6 years - than later.

The problem, as I see it, for Wotc is two fold.

First, table top gaming (increasingly) just can't be grown significantly. There are too many other, more readily accessible, as immersive (although differently) options, which the price of paper and thus Wotc's prices will also make even increasingly affordable as compared to D&D. The tide is running against table top paper and pencil games.

Second, Wotc's design of 4e, (a) coming quickly on the heels of the 3.0 and 3.5 editions, both of which were popular, (b) in a non-Grognard friendly, non backwards compatible fashion will see critical (even though well less than a majority) numbers of 3x players not convert, denying Wotc sales in an environment where they need every sale to succeed.

The first wound cannot be avoided; the second is self-inflicted.

I think eventually Hasbro will step in, either demanding 5e or shuttering D&D as a paper and pencil game. Matter of fact, it would not suprise me if 5e was the last paper and pencil version of D&D.

Well thought-out answer! I agree with practically everything you said, except for the last part. I think 4e will be the last paper-and-pencil edition of D&D.

My tendency is to think that 4e will burn brighter and faster than 3x, largely due to the balance of attracting some new players but losing even more of the long-time D&D afficionados. However, there are 1-2 factors involved with this edition which throw a wrench into the predictions, namely the internet subscription to D&D insider. That computer element will likely appeal to a lot players, particularly new ones. Depending on how WotC forecasts their revenue vs. expenses, I expect the books will not sell as well as predicted, but D&DI will generate more revenue that expected. That may offset things, and force WotC to move more towards computer-based and internet-based gaming, because the market will steer things that way. WotC is not catering to us old geezers who began playing D&D with 1st or 2nd edition. They want the big money: teen-agers and 20-somethings, who have more expendible income and time to play these games. These folks could get together to play as a live group more often than somebody like me, but they are so hooked into the computer age they will likely reject that option in favor of computer gaming. Heck, they'll probably all gather together in a room, but use their laptops to play D&D across from each other rather than roll dice. Sacrilige! It's the way of the future, and WotC must cater to it and embrace it or the whole line goes belly-up.

So in a nutshell, D&DI may allow 4e to hang around a while longer than even a realist like me expects because of the greater attraction and revenue it will generate, much like the unanticipated sales of D&D miniatures out-pacing any of the 3.5 supplemental books. A 5th edition, if published by WotC, will be all internet/computer based. :\

 

[ShadowDenizen]

My thoughts?

IF 4E takes off like WotC thinks it will (though it's not a sure bet, IMHO), I think that will give them the green light to think about 5E.

In other words?
I expect 4E to last for an shorter time than 3/3.5. (If 3E lasted roughly 8 years between 3/3.5, I expect 4E to last for 4-5 years. (Barring a revised "4.5E".)

but D&DI will generate more revenue that expected. That may offset things, and force WotC to move more towards computer-based and internet-based gaming, because the market will steer things that way.

Interesting thought; note that my predictions of a 5 year life-span for 4E doesn't take into account the DI, which I view as an entirely different entity and issue.

I think (pure speculation) that initially the DI may generate big revenue; but if the DI doesn't deliver the goods that people WON'T stick around for it. And given WotC's history, and the lackluster launch of the DI thus far, I'm not that confident.

Is this a foray into looking more at computer & internet-based gaming? Will the market drive things that way? Perhaps.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

My previous post has a link to the IGN article about it, but the parenthesis messed it up.

http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/540/540509p4.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Ryan
"I'm so tired of people thinking of Dungeons & Dragons as something that people did in the '80s and are shocked when it's still around. More people are playing the game today than at the height of its popularity then."

I sincerely doubt that. In the 80s and early 90s it was easier to find a pickup game of D&D than it was basketball. Today's kids have too much stuff competing for their dollar and their time. Pong was hardly a competitor to D&D. WoW is. I think Gary mentioned the numbers of AD&Din one of his threads, some enterprising person should look it up. I believe AD&D sold exponentially more than 3e. Of course, the game was still new then.