NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="redrick" data-source="post: 7669061" data-attributes="member: 6777696">I jumped back about 20 pages to see how this whole conversation started. Here is what I found. [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] replied to a statement by [MENTION=6790888]HonorBoundSamurai632[/MENTION] about WoTC "punishing" consumers for supporting or not supporting a certain edition. He suggested that this line of thinking was akin to 4e players complaining about being punished by WoTC through the release of 5e. The statement of 4e "financing" the development of 5e was part of a throwaway statement dismissing the argument that 4e fans were somehow entitled to something, because they contributed to Wizards financially while Wizards went about developing a new, non-4e product. He wasn't building some grand thesis about the terrible injustice done to 4e fans by mean awful Wizards, who stole the 4e fans money and then spent it on a bunch of good-for-nothing grognards and 3e fans. He was saying, "that thesis is not valid!" (Or at least that was my takeaway. Correct me if I'm wrong here, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION].) [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] then responded, demanding that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] properly cite his "claim" that 4e financed 5e. Which isn't even a claim that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] exactly made, but he seems to believe that it is reasonable to assume that 4e's revenue during the public playtest of 5e helped contribute to the bottom line of the D&D division at Wizards, and allowed that department to spend 2 years and millions of dollars investing in the next edition. I agree with [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] — it is reasonable to assume that 4e's revenue (through DDI) was significant, and that the presence of some black on the ledgers could only have been a positive when the D&D department asked Wizards to pay for a lengthy and expensive public playtest. But he really is under no obligation to "prove" that to [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] or anybody else. He presented it as conjecture, and isn't using it as evidence for any broader statement about the success or failure of 4e.Why did I just waste the last 30 minutes of my life doing this little internet archival research?Quotes below.</blockquote>

Verification