log in or register to remove this ad

 

WotC WotC Gets A New Logo?

According to the Wall Street Journal's David Ewalt, Wizards of the Coast has a new logo. His article was the piece where we learned how Hasbro was restructuring.

Update - WotC just updated the logo on its social media accounts, so it's official!

wotc.jpeg


5C3273BE-77ED-4EC0-B93E-9B3A16CB889D.jpeg


Here's the old logo for comparison.

old_wotc.png


 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Russ Morrissey

Russ Morrissey

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
I'm not an expert on what a logo "should" look like nowadays unlike all of the logo consultants that have posted saying it's terrible*, I think it's fine. Obviously setting up for digital presentation. I mean, it could be worse.

y7EG8.jpg


* I kid, everyone's entitled to an opinion.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dausuul

Legend
As I said in a different thread, I don't like 3D effects in logos. So I wasn't a fan of the new logo--but I wasn't a fan of the old logo either. However, I came across a non-3D (well, less-3D) version of the new logo and I find I rather like it:

new logo.jpeg


Likewise, the old logo was fine before it went all bendy and swooshy (sorry for the low contrast, this was the best image I could find in a quick Google search):

Wizards_of_the_Coast_first_logo.png


There's also their really old logo, which has that TSR-era hobby shop vibe and gives me a nice little nostalgia glow, despite being total garbage:
Timeline2.jpg

I bet the creators felt so cool when they figured out they could use italic, outlined font and flip it vertically to suggest a reflection.

But I am endlessly fascinated by the white rectangle under the battlements of the tower. Were they trying to have a white space separating the battlement from the tower proper and couldn't figure out how to get rid of the black borders? Were they trying to do another black rectangle and forgot to set the fill? Or was there some actual purpose to it?
 





Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
That is terrible. It took me a solid 5-10 seconds to even figure out what was going on there.
Can you explain it? My ... ah friend ... doesn't really get what the heck they were thinking. Or wants whatever they were smoking. ;)
 

ART!

Hero
Can you explain it? My ... ah friend ... doesn't really get what the heck they were thinking. Or wants whatever they were smoking. ;)
I'll try:

There's two basketballs in this logo. WHY?!?

And then they felt they had to match other parts of the logo to the color of the basketball - which, I get you have to keep it to 2 or 3 colors, but...brown stars? Two of them?

That's just for starters.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
I'll try:

There's two basketballs in this logo. WHY?!?

And then they felt they had to match other parts of the logo to the color of the basketball - which, I get you have to keep it to 2 or 3 colors, but...brown stars? Two of them?

That's just for starters.

Don't get me wrong, it's a pretty awful logo. So over-busy. But doubling up (like "W" on the chest) seemed like a theme.

I guess you can go too far minimalist too (if that's the correct term) like Lucent's coffee mug stain logo. If your coffee mug was filled with blood.

On the other hand, everybody's a critic and there is no such thing as a perfect logo.
 

embee

Lawyer by day. Rules lawyer by night.
That is terrible. It took me a solid 5-10 seconds to even figure out what was going on there.
To be fair, this was because, in 1996, after over a decade of DC being the murder capital of America, the team owner decided that having his team be the Washington BULLETS was a little too... YIKES.

There was some complaints (with good reason) from the local chapter of the NAACP over the name and logo because Wizard is also a rank in the Klan and the logo was a bit close to being a pointy hood.

Keep in mind, our local American football team is officially called "The Washington Football Club." It had been the "Redskins" for decades but finally, after decades of complaints about "Hey guys, let's not have a slur for a team name," FedEx, the minority owner, threatened to pull their sponsorship money.
 

embee

Lawyer by day. Rules lawyer by night.
I'll try:

There's two basketballs in this logo. WHY?!?

And then they felt they had to match other parts of the logo to the color of the basketball - which, I get you have to keep it to 2 or 3 colors, but...brown stars? Two of them?

That's just for starters.
The reason for the colors is brand synergy with the Washington Capitals, whose colors at the time were also cerulean and bronze.
 

ART!

Hero
The reason for the colors is brand synergy with the Washington Capitals, whose colors at the time were also cerulean and bronze.
Fine - make the star in the hat white. Something. Anything. I really stinks of a logo-by-committee with no one on the committee knowing anything about design, and then handing their lists of corrections on to their design person who just did the best they could. I have been in this exact position as a design person, and the results were similar.
 

embee

Lawyer by day. Rules lawyer by night.
Fine - make the star in the hat white. Something. Anything. I really stinks of a logo-by-committee with no one on the committee knowing anything about design, and then handing their lists of corrections on to their design person who just did the best they could. I have been in this exact position as a design person, and the results were similar.
images.jpg

It's a moot point. They abandoned the Wizard logo a few years back for all the reasons that teams do. To sell merch. To stay relevant. And also to avoid problems that they didn't spot the first time. For example, this logo doesn't have a crescent and star, which the Wizard logo did, which should make the Islamophobia crowd happy.

Of course, this one has a whole lot of Freudian baggage to it.
 

ART!

Hero
View attachment 133641
It's a moot point. They abandoned the Wizard logo a few years back for all the reasons that teams do. To sell merch. To stay relevant. And also to avoid problems that they didn't spot the first time. For example, this logo doesn't have a crescent and star, which the Wizard logo did, which should make the Islamophobia crowd happy.

Of course, this one has a whole lot of Freudian baggage to it.
Why on Earth would they not put the white stars in the blue field, rather than in the red? Ridiculous. Also, the gray is kind of ruining this, although I get what they were thinking.

Anyway, this is minutiae mostly unrelated to the new WOTC logo, which I think is pretty good. The light from the A could be animated for tv/movie/videogame purposes, and it creates a sense of something inside ready to burst forth, or something mysterious inside, which is probably what they were after.
 

embee

Lawyer by day. Rules lawyer by night.
Why on Earth would they not put the white stars in the blue field, rather than in the red? Ridiculous. Also, the gray is kind of ruining this, although I get what they were thinking.

Anyway, this is minutiae mostly unrelated to the new WOTC logo, which I think is pretty good. The light from the A could be animated for tv/movie/videogame purposes, and it creates a sense of something inside ready to burst forth, or something mysterious inside, which is probably what they were after.
I've actually got no problem with the WOTC logo. Frankly, the "classic" logo was long in the tooth and needed a refresh.

This one is definitely made for film. The camera can either zoom into the A or pan down/zoom to the coast pictured below. In which case, the "Coast" goes from being the Pacific Northwest coast of the company's founding to being the Sword Coast.
 

I like the concept.

However, it's literally painful to my eyes. Something about the contrast coming to a head at the center focal point like that causes my eyes to hurt.


Edit - second thoughts:

Looking again, something about the lettering seems weird to me. It's not bad, but something about it doesn't seem quite right. I'm not entirely sure what the focal point of the image is supposed to be. The light from the A seems to be where my attention should go, but the slant of the letters also implies that they're point to something or intended to direct my eyes toward something, so there are at least two competing focal points. I think that may play into why (for me) the logo hurts my eyes a bit.

I still like the general idea because it reminds me of the Alan Wake logo, but -as is- it looks more like a prototype than a finished and polished design.
 
Last edited:

briggart

Explorer
This thread has made me realize that I readily associate TSR logo with D&D and AD&D2e, but I don't do the same with WotC logo and 3e and 5e products, so I don't really care too much for the logo. I'm not sure if it's because boxed sets had more real estate to prominently display TSR logos, or simply because TSR was in charge of D&D when I started playing.

Also, I can't find Wizards logo on my 5e PHB, DMG, and MM, while it's on most other 5e supplements I own (exceptions are those with alternate cover, so it's possible the regular cover version has it).
 

Also, I can't find Wizards logo on my 5e PHB, DMG, and MM, while it's on most other 5e supplements I own (exceptions are those with alternate cover, so it's possible the regular cover version has it).
That's a curious observation, you are correct. Most of the rulebooks have both D&D and WotC logos on the back, but the core rulebooks only have the D&D logo. Maybe it's something to do with having the same name as previous edition core rulebooks published by TSR? All the other 5e books have unique names.

MY SCAG has both the WotC and Green Ronin logos on the back.
 
Last edited:

briggart

Explorer
That's a curious observation, you are correct. Most of the rulebooks have both D&D and WotC logos on the back, but the core rulebooks only have the D&D logo. Maybe it's something to do with having the same name as previous edition core rulebooks published by TSR? All the other 5e books have unique names.

MY SCaG has both the WotC and Green Ronin logos on the back.
That sounds reasonable to me, there are likely some IP/copyright laws which are relevant here. But to add another curios bit to the story, the 3.5 PHB, DMG and MM have both the d20 and Wizards logo on the back cover, so it seems that something has changed in the way WotC brands the core rulebooks over the years. :)
 

Visit Our Sponsor

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top