WotC Replies: Statements by WotC employees regarding Dragon/Dungeon going online

[Maggan]

Would that get the hyperbole police off my case?

I think that was a very eloquent and funny way of expressing your feelings. You're free to go.



/M

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Plus WOTC better up thier building security for awhile. Just in case the myth that RPGers are mentally unstable sociopaths has some truth to it. IT would only take one, so I am not kidding about beefing up security and the strict enforcement of it.

I think it would be wise of WOTC to put forth a few pounds of prevention for awhile.

I definitely would if I were them.

Just to be clear, I am in no way implying a threat, just a very honest (and I think real) concern. Much better to be safe and alive.

That's actually decent advice. Although those incidents with some D&D nut going and killing coworkers with a self-made sword (actually happened a couple of years ago, though in that case it was because that coworker relentlessly harassed him about his obsession) are very rare, they do happen. As you said: It's enough for a single guy who was a fanatic collector of either Dragon or Dungeon and does think this is not just equal to losing a fellow human, but worse. If you consider how enraged the normal people here are, think about what such a fanatic's reaction will be. As much as I dislike Wizards right now, I don't wish them to become the stage for something along the lines of the Virginia Tech Massacre.

Just tell em they got the protection of Nightfall for the moment.

Real comforting: The self-proclaimed disciple of Orcus will protect them. That would make me sleep with a gun under my pillow - as a follower of the alleged creator of Undeath, that Nightfall person will probably think "If they're dead, nothing can happen to them any more" and will all slaughter them in their sleep to raise them as zombies.

And seriously, Nightfall, are you on WOTC's payroll?

Come on, that's not fair. While I don't like sycophants and hopeless fanboys, Nightfall is hardly one. His stuff does make sense: Quiet down so the WotC guys will set foot outside again, and maybe start talking.

Another (semi-)official reply from WotC, by Rich Baker:

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=702942&page=12

Yes, I read that (this happens to be the only thread on the Wizards boards that is really worthy of attention.)

Really, Rich gives a good example on how Wizards in general should handle things.(I'm speaking about FR here, not necessarily about his specific responses to the current situation): He (and a couple of other people, but mostly Rich) will answer Forgotten Realms related questions there. On Wizards own message boards. While others forsake the Wizards boards and go elsewhere, they take the time and answer our questions.

 

[Maggan]

If you consider how enraged the normal people here are

Who are these "normal" people you talk about?

/M

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Who are these "normal" people you talk about?

Those who don't resolve their disputes by taking out those who caused those disputes with selfmade swords, of course.

 

[Acid_crash]

Here's the thing about the whole situation as far as my opinion goes...

After hearing of the announcement, I was amazed and shocked. I had been purchasing these magazines off and on ever since 3e came out, and I am surprised that they are cancelling them.

I think going straight online is a bad idea. It could be good, but I know a whole lot of people in my area who purchase the magazines. They are a staple of what makes D&D the game it is. IMO they seem that way.

I know a whole lotta people who don't get online to look up any D&D information. They buy the books on the shelves, they skim or purchase the magazines, and that's what they use. Now I'm sure that WotC will have announcements leading up to the final magazine that will tell everyone what they have in store, but I don't think all that many people will go for it.

Well, as we can obviously tell, not initially.

So, yes I'm pissed off as all hell, but Paizo have already picked up their slack, they have a plan and they are executing it. WotC has something in store as well, and I'm sure it will be something cool, but only time will tell.

In the end, yes, I think this idea to cancel these magazines is just stupid. Plain ole stupid. I had to say it as calmly as I possibly could.

 

[daemonslye]

Don't know why I, a habitual ghost on these boards, am posting in this chaos. Must be late and my judgement poor.

But, the same thought had occurred to me. While I agree that it's unlikley to be an entirely selfless act (perhaps a deal of some kind?), it did occur to me that if Wizards had rolled out their full plan at the time of the announcement, it would have put Paizo's efforts a bit more in the shadows. This way Paizo gets a smooth transition and the opportunity to snag a bunch of customers. Erik did suggest somewhere in here that Wizards had allowed them to print more issues to allow them to finish up Savage Tide. Perhaps this is more of the same?

On the other hand, it strikes me that Wizards is just ending licenses as they come up (CMP's Etools license for instance). If that's the case, then the timing of the end of Dungeon and Dragon may have a lot less to do with the launch of the DI as it does the end of the license. Perhaps it's not worth the hassle to them to arrange interim licenses to fill the gap.

Of course, the fact is there's a lot we don't know. Certainly it seems a bit odd not to let Etools limp along until they have a replacement, cuz it seems pretty likely there won't be a replacement for it in the near future. I don't know.

Anyway. Just some thoughts.

Cheers,
AD

An interesting line of thinking but lets examine this.

If WOTC leadership were really that concerned for Paizo's well being they would have

1) Let Paizo keep the license for an "overlap" period with their "digital initiative" and/or
2) Enlisted their help in the new eWorld

Neither has happened so the conclusion I must draw is that this is a corporate manuever with little concern for Paizo or companies which relied on the magazines for advertising reach.

An interesting comment earlier from Rich Baker:

Trust me, our decision-makers are aware of the response and are keeping an eye on it (but sometimes the best thing to do is let folks get the emotional responses out of their systems before you try to say anything else).

In case anyone has any doubts. Customers *can* win. It takes a little effort and determination - not much really; Simply this, "Tell Your Friends - Stop purchasing WOTC products. Ban 4th Edition.". For every gaming group that bans WOTC products end to end, the message gets clearer.

As Rich says above "our decision-makers are aware of the response and are keeping an eye on it". They are currently betting this move will blow over. If we persist, those same "decision-makers" *will* find a way to satisfy their customers. Otherwise, Hasbro will find other decision-makers.

In the end, the real decision-makers are the customers (or, if you will, former customers).

Complacency will doom this industry - not save it. If you fight for the right decisions, they will be made - For example, continuing a set of print publications with online content until you prove the online model meets the customers wants/needs. If done right, an online, rich media, community-based experience has a bright future for this space - but it will grow organically and not as originally planned out. In the meantime, a customer-centric company would do well with complimentary print media. The guys at Paizo are talented and run, seemingly effortlessly, a high-touch, community-based dialog with their customers (it is, I believe, in their "DNA"). WOTC should have evolved the partnership rather than dissolve it. They obviously could have used the help.

~D

 

[kigmatzomat]

Amusing, but futile. No significant number of gamers are going to boycott 4e for the simple fact that they will want to see 4e before they make a judgement. I am personally expected to become a "d20" player (or whatever license-free name gets applied to R/SRD based games) after 4e comes out....but I'm still very likely to buy the 4e core books.

This is/was a huge PR gaffe. The worst part is that WotC has shown this is a consistent approach they take to handling the market. Look at E-Tools/PCgen. License canceled with finished product in the pipeline that could never be released. Plus, there's no official replacement product even now, several months later. Now they pull the license on D/D mags and again there is no replacement product.

I understand the logic: if the competing products are dead long enough, the general public will be so eager to see something official that they'll hail the e-mag and online chargen as being "eagerly awaited." The problem is that they've shot their existing client base in the foot. The people who would use the electronic chargens were E-Tools/PCGen users and will still be somewhat disenchanted with WotC. The people who are willing to shell out cash for steady streams of content (e.g. subscribers to Dungeon/Dragon) will likely be quite irked at WotC as well, since they were cut off for several months.

It's hard to say how many of these people will use the digital initiative because it all comes down to how many move on to other games or are thoroughly disenchanted. WotC either expects these people will get over it and buy what they've got or that new users will replace them, indicating some kind of deep tie-in with 4e or DDM.

And they are probably right. The facelessness of a corporation means a house-cleaning and a new product launch can often reinvigorate the line. I know i was highly dissatisfied with TSR during the "Player's Options" years but I came to the WotC fold.

It does mean that I probably won't buy many product lines that are licensed from WotC though, since I know that if the product turns out to be successful enough or provide some other marketing tie-in that WotC is likely to cancel them and move them in-house with no support.

Sorry 3rd parties, unless you get a 10-year contract WHasbrotC is just too likely to screw you.

 

[Maggan]

The problem is that they've shot their existing client base in the foot.

I see the words "client base" or "user base" thrown around a lot these days.

What does it really mean?

It seems to me it's used as a shorthand for "readers of Dragon and Dungeon", or "people who have played a long time".

It also seems it can mean "the majority of D&D players" or "the segment which spends the most money on D&D".

The definition seems to vary depending on the point the poster wants to make. So my question is, do we have a somewhat agreed upon definition of what constitutes the "user base" of D&D?

/M

 

[Mistwell]

Simply this, "Tell Your Friends - Stop purchasing WOTC products.

Not going to happen. Only 1% of D&D players bought these magazines to begin with, and a significant minority of even that 1% are somewhat okay with this decision. Boycotting won't work, because the overwhelming majority of players don't have the stake you have in those magazines. They just don't feel as strongly about it as you do.

Ban 4th Edition.". For every gaming group that bans WOTC products end to end, the message gets clearer.

There is no 4th edition, so what is there to ban? You expect your passion to carry through for everyone who likes the game for a year or more? Come on now...get some perspective.

 

[Mistwell]

I see the words "client base" or "user base" thrown around a lot these days.

What does it really mean?

It seems to me it's used as a shorthand for "readers of Dragon and Dungeon", or "people who have played a long time".

It also seems it can mean "the majority of D&D players" or "the segment which spends the most money on D&D".

The definition seems to vary depending on the point the poster wants to make. So my question is, do we have a somewhat agreed upon definition of what constitutes the "user base" of D&D?

/M

The user base of D&D is significantly different than the user base of these two magazines.

Their statement in Dragon #351 says:
41,772 (13,517 from subs) for the most recent issue.
47,220 (13,438 from subs) average for the last 12 months.

That's a bit less than 1% of the known D&D community (active player base of 5 million).

And while some purchases were passed from person to person accounting for more people than the purchases represent, a lot were also from people not really reading the magazines much at all, if at all. I know for myself, I stopped reading them even while my subscription continued, and the same happened with my DM (who let his subscription lapse). Which is why I feel the published numbers are the most accurate we are going to get as far as how many "users" were/are in the "userbase" of those magazines.