Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Koloth" data-source="post: 9681846" data-attributes="member: 6706231">If you go back a bit farther, one of the reasons for the switch from D&amp;D 3.5 to 4 and the cancellation of most of the 3rd party licenses was Hasbro wanted to create something that would generate the cash flow of Blizzard's World of Warcraft.&nbsp; They thought they could do it with a staff of 10~20 developers, maybe less don't remember the exact number.&nbsp; What we got was the green glowing brain in a jar called Gleemax.&nbsp; And a virtual tabletop that mostly didn't work.&nbsp; Plus a TTRPG that was largely panned at the time.&nbsp; The VTT product has finally became useful but by now, there are many alternatives that are just as good or better.&nbsp; Not sure of the cash flow of WoW vs D&amp;D Beyond.&nbsp; The current TTRPG seems to be doing good.&nbsp; Agree with the 'Sensible company' thought on how to create the next BG3 type success.&nbsp; But I am not optimistic that Hasbro will be sensible.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Koloth, post: 9681846, member: 6706231"] If you go back a bit farther, one of the reasons for the switch from D&D 3.5 to 4 and the cancellation of most of the 3rd party licenses was Hasbro wanted to create something that would generate the cash flow of Blizzard's World of Warcraft. They thought they could do it with a staff of 10~20 developers, maybe less don't remember the exact number. What we got was the green glowing brain in a jar called Gleemax. And a virtual tabletop that mostly didn't work. Plus a TTRPG that was largely panned at the time. The VTT product has finally became useful but by now, there are many alternatives that are just as good or better. Not sure of the cash flow of WoW vs D&D Beyond. The current TTRPG seems to be doing good. Agree with the 'Sensible company' thought on how to create the next BG3 type success. But I am not optimistic that Hasbro will be sensible. [/QUOTE]

Verification