| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having the Biggest 4E Fansite Ever (formerly known as EnWorld) run threads titled "So that's it for 4th edition I guess?" that even don't get locked by the mods any more surely doesn't help :)
That thread is still going because it was started by a 4e fan, and because despite the efforts of a couple 4e haters, has been civil and positive overall.
Please don't feed the troll, guys.
|
DDI has any subscribers left? With no new content, VTT killed off and general "4E? We did publish any 4E?" attitude at WotC (The latest Next articles pretty much flat out go "So yeah X was terristupid in 4E, but we're here to make it right for the Next!") I'm pretty sure it's a waste of $$$ at this point.
Having the Biggest 4E Fansite Ever (formerly known as EnWorld) run threads titled "So that's it for 4th edition I guess?" that even don't get locked by the mods any more surely doesn't help :)
Admittedly, I don't play 4E or subscribe to DDI, but I do know people who do, and DDI is where the new content for 4E is coming, and it's been that way for at least a couple of years now. That's what I've been trying to explain...WotC's focus for 4E, at least for the past couple of years, was NOT on the print books, it was on the DDI releases.
Much like Jeb's CD emporium doesn't focus on selling digital music, but instead focuses on physical CDs. And iTunes focuses on selling digital music, not physical CDs.
Admittedly, I don't play 4E or subscribe to DDI, but I do know people who do, and DDI is where the new content for 4E is coming, and it's been that way for at least a couple of years now. That's what I've been trying to explain...WotC's focus for 4E, at least for the past couple of years, was NOT on the print books, it was on the DDI releases.
Much like Jeb's CD emporium doesn't focus on selling digital music, but instead focuses on physical CDs. And iTunes focuses on selling digital music, not physical CDs.
I have to wonder if that focus has actually helped them any, at least in the short term. I'm sure they have seen many benefits from it, but especially with the VTT falling through, I'm wondering if the overall price was worth it. By removing books, and consequently, the distributors and stores that sold the books, they also removed a large window shopping marketing opportunity for casual, spur of the moment purchases that they had had before, as well cutting off a large portion of the formalized portion of the word of mouth network that supported them in the past.
In the end, it seems to me that in almost completely trading the books for the DDI, they hurt themselves on the marketing aspect, even if they didn't lose their dedicated player base, and left the door open for other companies, like Paizo, to to seriously compete in an industry that is still very much based on books and small stores for support. Sometimes, it's not just how much content you create, but how accessible you make to a wider audience, and as great as being purely digital sounds, this country is still far from being that digitized. Even if it were more plugged in outside the cities, there's a lot of competition for attention on the internet, and the lack of the VTT doesn't really give WOTC much to work with in that sphere. Meanwhile, Paizo has shown that it is possible to find a balance between old and new, books and internet, that is able to utilize the strengths of both without hamstringing themselves in either area.
Oh there is no doubt in my mind that 4e has been leaking purchasers since late 2010/ early 2011, around when Pathfinder overtook them in the ICv2. That is also when essentials took over. A lot of people stopped buying books at that point. Before then D&D held a decent margin over Pathfinder, after that they didn't. It is a hard set of mental leaps to avoid the idea that Essentials isn't what is ultimately at fault here.
I think blaming it on Essentials is inaccurate. I think it's more that around the time Essentials came out, they refound their focus and rededicated their efforts on making DDI everything it had originally been promised to be. And Essentials didn't start the leaking of customers; that started almost immediately after 4E's release. If anything, Essentials provided an opportunity to fight back against the negativity surrounding the system, and it seems to have done so fairly well; it convinced people to at least not talk trash about the system as much. Unfortunately, the almost complete shift to DDI at the same time meant that getting anybody who wasn't already playing to talk about it at all got that much harder, counteracting many of the benefits they had gained.
|
|
Sometimes, it's not just how much content you create, but how accessible you make to a wider audience, and as great as being purely digital sounds, this country is still far from being that digitized. Even if it were more plugged in outside the cities, there's a lot of competition for attention on the internet, and the lack of the VTT doesn't really give WOTC much to work with in that sphere.
I'd actually think that it would be the opposite for urban areas vs rural areas. In the larger urban areas, it's a lot easier to find someplace that sells things for a niche market like RPG books. In more rural areas, that can be pretty hard to find without quite a drive involved. Assuming you the "this country" you are talking about is the USA, I'd have to say that in my experience, you really have to go pretty far out into the backwoods before you can manage to get beyond the ability to provide internet access. Now, for the smaller towns it may be the only game in town, and might charge a bit too much, but you seriously have to get down near the "village" level before it becomes completely unavailible.
I'm somewhat reminded of an old episode of the cheesy "Lois and Clark" Superman show where Lois tried to explain what a fax was to George and Martha Kent, and they told her she could use the one they had in their kitchen.
Sometimes, it's not just how much content you create, but how accessible you make to a wider audience, and as great as being purely digital sounds, this country is still far from being that digitized. Even if it were more plugged in outside the cities, there's a lot of competition for attention on the internet, and the lack of the VTT doesn't really give WOTC much to work with in that sphere.I'd actually think that it would be the opposite for urban areas vs rural areas. In the larger urban areas, it's a lot easier to find someplace that sells things for a niche market like RPG books. In more rural areas, that can be pretty hard to find without quite a drive involved. Assuming you the "this country" you are talking about is the USA, I'd have to say that in my experience, you really have to go pretty far out into the backwoods before you can manage to get beyond the ability to provide internet access. Now, for the smaller towns it may be the only game in town, and might charge a bit too much, but you seriously have to get down near the "village" level before it becomes completely unavailible.
I'm somewhat reminded of an old episode of the cheesy "Lois and Clark" Superman show where Lois tried to explain what a fax was to George and Martha Kent, and they told her she could use the one they had in their kitchen.
Getting internet of some kind is not particularly all that hard. Getting internet at a speed and a price that is going to make most people in rural areas see it as their primary source of entertainment is still a ways off. Reliance on the internet for day to day entertainment basics, such as what DDI was intended to provide, is still largely limited to the larger cities and major travel corridors. Just because the Kents had a fax machine didn't mean that they were constantly using it for pleasure; lots of folks have basic access to the tech, but not to a point that it has replaced books and other forms of entertainment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Getting internet of some kind is not particularly all that hard. Getting internet at a speed and a price that is going to make most people in rural areas see it as their primary source of entertainment is still a ways off. Reliance on the internet for day to day entertainment basics, such as what DDI was intended to provide, is still largely limited to the larger cities and major travel corridors. Just because the Kents had a fax machine didn't mean that they were constantly using it for pleasure; lots of folks have basic access to the tech, but not to a point that it has replaced books and other forms of entertainment.
Ah, I don't know how much time you've spent in rural areas, but I lived most of my life in very rural upstate NY. A real middle-of-nowhere kind of place, and most people I know in the area have high-speed internet. Because if you're not out hiking or camping or hunting, you're probably streaming Netlfix or playing WoW or Socom or whatever. And I'm not talking about an affluent backwater area like Long Island; this is a place with a relatively massive lower class.
There are no doubt pockets of "Eh, what's an internet?"...somewhere. But they're few and far between nowadays.
Ah, I don't know how much time you've spent in rural areas, but I lived most of my life in very rural upstate NY. A real middle-of-nowhere kind of place, and most people I know in the area have high-speed internet. Because if you're not out hiking or camping or hunting, you're probably streaming Netlfix or playing WoW or Socom or whatever. And I'm not talking about an affluent backwater area like Long Island; this is a place with a relatively massive lower class.
There are no doubt pockets of "Eh, what's an internet?"...somewhere. But they're few and far between nowadays.
I never said that there wasn't internet; I said internet of a sufficient speed and price to push it beyond being a tool to being a major outlet of entertainment. There are actually several places that lack that last part. The western US outside of cities still lacks the infrastructure, and will always to a certain extent, lack the infrastructure needed to truly make the internet more than a business tool and occasional entertainment. There's just not enough density of people or the amount of money in the region to make that kind of investment cost effective; Even the least dense areas of New York have the money base and/or the population density to make it a semi-reasonable venture. Also, people in the inner cities will frequently lack the resources to rely on the internet for anything beyond the basics and/or have to share a single connection with enough people that it is impractical for anything much beyond the basics. Also, people who travel a lot, or who are in the military may find it easy enough to get the access they need for work purposes, but at the same time find the costs for personal use and entertainment purposes to be high enough to make them think twice about it as a routine thing.
I didn't say utilizing the internet was a bad strategy, I said that utilizing only the internet was a bad strategy. There is enough reach that having an internet component is certainly an important aspect, but it does not have so much reach yet that it can serve as the only aspect and still have a brand like DnD be successful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who lives in Wyoming, I can certainly say that even the really small towns (which on a national level ARE really small) all have access to high speed internet...certainly all of my students are familiar with it. Odds are if your town is too small to have internet, it's going to be too small to stock DnD, so either way you are not getting exposed to role playing.
So, because Paizo has a sound strategy of actually producing product for sales and WotC's strategy is to not sell anything, it's disingenuous to say that Pathfinder is selling better than D&D (at least in the ICv2-surveyed markets)?WotC's primary focus is not on the physical books, which is the only thing that ICv2 is counting. Like I said, it's Jed's CD Emporium vs iTunes.
And since ICv2 isn't hiding that fact - on the contrary, they make it pretty clear that this is surveys of stores that sell real, tangible product - what's your point?
What exactly is disingenuous?
"It's not fair to say that Ford sells more cars than Chevy because Chevy stopped selling cars!"
"It's not fair to say that Ford sells more cars than Chevy because Chevy stopped selling cars!"
No, not really.
The analogy is more like saying that because Ford dealerships sell more cars than Chevy = Ford is more popular or sells more without taking into account that Chevy are selling their cars from one giant store by online purchases.
I know I bought a LOT of 4E stuff, but I also didn't buy a lot of stuff either because I was able to gain access to it via DDI. Why would I want to buy a MM3 when I can just go to the Monster Vault, copy/paste the monster to MSWord and print out the monsters I need that session? Or why would I need to buy the PHB 3 when I have an Applicaton on my phone that links straight to DDI Compendium AND a character builder? Essentially I could make 1,000 characters from my work without even touching a physical book.
As someone who lives in Wyoming, I can certainly say that even the really small towns (which on a national level ARE really small) all have access to high speed internet...certainly all of my students are familiar with it. Odds are if your town is too small to have internet, it's going to be too small to stock DnD, so either way you are not getting exposed to role playing.
Again, the base presence of the internet is not up for debate; we already firmly established that part. The part that is more in the air is how people use it. There are still a lot of people that don't see the internet as an entertainment venue, and many of them are the ones paying that would have to have to bills for it. A decade from now, there will probably be enough young people who never knew life without it out and on their own and in a position to consider their priorities when paying bills that will view it as more important in that regard, but even then, a purely internet driven market strategy will be stupid. There will still need to be some human somewhere pushing the product in order for it to be seen, and that process is aided greatly by giving those humans hard copies of what it is you are trying to sell.
"It's not fair to say that Ford sells more cars than Chevy because Chevy stopped selling cars!"
No, not really.
The analogy is more like saying that because Ford dealerships sell more cars than Chevy = Ford is more popular or sells more without taking into account that Chevy are selling their cars from one giant store by online purchases.
Except that whatever you're buying from Chevy (WotC) online, it's not a car (or book or other tangible product). It's bus fare.
And since sales of tangible products is what ICv2 is tracking, where's that leave us?
Oh, right - the goalposts back where they belong: Paizo/Pathfinder sells more books/tangible products than WotC/D&D.
On the other hand, why would I buy any Pathfinder rulebooks? The content is all available on the web through the SRD.You could make those 1000 characters without touching a physical book or spending a dime.
Good point, I don't buy the Pathfinder books either. Never have and I probably never will since it's all on the PFd20SRD site. But from what I've heard (can't tell you 1st hand) is that some of the information and what-not isn't all accessable on their SRD page. So if I buy it, I get ALL the content rather than what's chosen or picked from out of sourcebooks. Again, I don't know how vaild this is as I'm going off hear say.
I do admit that when I play Pathfinder, on those odd occasions, I do reference their online materials as well as my v3.5 collection to make astounding characters. I just find that I use 3E books more often and those sources aren't on the SRD. As for this comparions to D&D Insider, having a search engine like the Compendium is something I find just easier to use as well as the Monster designer programm. That is something I'd like to see Pathfinder come out with, something that I can tweak the monsters with and add cool elements to without having to do all the heavy math.
Oh, right - the goalposts back where they belong: Paizo/Pathfinder sells more books/tangible products than WotC/D&D.
Fair enougth, but a lot of people equate more sales = better product or stronger market, which isn't necessarily the case. And that's the point I'm making.
In the end, the entire industry suffers and so do the enthusiast if one left to wither. The hobby as a whole is at risk if a company does not attempt to embrace the medium through which the current demographic recieves its media. Given that you might as well punch a person in the face if you force them away from some sort of electronic connection these days, it stands to reason a company would want to market its products for use on said devices.
The SRD/PRD thing is cool, but I am torn. There was a time when I would have been super happy not to pay a dime for anything. These days I like the fact that Paizo offers the Pdf for a fraction the cost of the large hardbacks. $10 is not too much for most anyone.
Yeah the PDFs are awesome and I love having them on my IPad. That said I do spend a lot of time on the SRD website. The iPhone/iPad app is awesome too.
Which they never claimed, but some people take the claim out of context and read more into it than is justified.
Interestingly enough, those doing so seem to be doing it out of spite for the prevailing party, more often then not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ya know, I don't think I ever responded to the original post:
It's been (literally) years since I checked on this thread- is there a 4th edition moratorium thread in existence? Is it safe to say that 4th edition did not capture the "younger audience" or "new players" or whatever you care to call them? Seriously, I've been out of the loop for awhile, is 4th edition D&D even still something that people play?
I think that it's safe to say that perhaps the "younger audience" might not have been enough to maintain a longer edition than WotC initially thought. I've played D&D for the last 15 or so years, spanning 3 and 1/2 editions and 1 spin-off and I can say that I enjoy 4E the most out of all of them. My group seemed to enjoy 4E a great deal as well (except my wife, though I think that's more of a 'hate learning new editions' than specific issues with 4E) and while we switch it up every now and then, we generally go back to 4E. I should also note that the few local areas that I know of also play 4E as well, but whether this is because it's "current" or because people prefer it over other editions I'm not sure.
What gets me frustrated the most is that we all know D&D:Next is a LONG way off (I'm thinking spring '14) and yet we see relatively little as far as publishing goes for 4E material. I remember the switch from 3E to 4E and that was when we got a LOT of really interesting products which were fun (if perhaps a bit "broken"). I'd like to see a lot of support for 4E in these twilight days, perhaps a sourcebook on Returned Abeir (since it'll be leaving us apparently :rollseyes: ) and some additional support for the lesser liked classes such as the Runepriest, Seeker, Original Assassin, Vampire to try and shore up some things that aren't designed well and need perhaps a facelift. They have to produce stuff to get people to buy it, not just DDI articles.
|
|
Except that whatever you're buying from Chevy (WotC) online, it's not a car (or book or other tangible product). It's bus fare.
And since sales of tangible products is what ICv2 is tracking, where's that leave us?
Oh, right - the goalposts back where they belong: Paizo/Pathfinder sells more books/tangible products than WotC/D&D.
Which isn't necessarily the same thing as being more popular than WotC/D&D.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if DnD Next returns the focus to print books, I would not be surprised to see it kick Paizo down to the #2 position in the ICv2 rankings.
Interestingly enough, those doing so seem to be doing it out of spite for the prevailing party, more often then not.
*rolls eyes*
Yeah, because absolutely nobody on these forums could ever be accused of marginalizing and demonizing WotC out of spite, could they?
|
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if DnD Next returns the focus to print books, I would not be surprised to see it kick Paizo down to the #2 position in the ICv2 rankings.
And I'll say it again, too: I'm writing down statements like these just to make sure I can make their authors look silly if an opportunity presents itself. :)
Which isn't necessarily the same thing as being more popular than WotC/D&D.
Agreed. The two things are not necessarily the same thing.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if DnD Next returns the focus to print books, I would not be surprised to see it kick Paizo down to the #2 position in the ICv2 rankings.
I would not be surprised either. I would be equally unsurprised to see Paizo recover the #1 position after the new edition fervor wears off.
Yeah, because absolutely nobody on these forums could ever be accused of marginalizing and demonizing WotC out of spite, could they?
I won't disagree with this, but my statement stands.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At this point I'm not convinced D&D Next will actually see the light of day at all. The amount of publishing dead time is unprecedented.
Even if it does, Hasbro needs to allow WoTC to release Next under the OGL. Since I don't see them doing that, I don't think Next has much of a chance of regaining the #1 spot, at least not in the long term.
At this point I'm not convinced D&D Next will actually see the light of day at all. The amount of publishing dead time is unprecedented.
Thats an interesting perspective. I think the plan is to replace the revenue with nostalgic reprints (presumably cheaper, even if not free) and keep the release of 4E material to the DDI (I have no idea how much of a drop off there's been).
Of course, a couple of years is a long time in the corporate world - if a few key people switch positions who knows what the state of play will be come 2014..
Even if it does, Hasbro needs to allow WoTC to release Next under the OGL. Since I don't see them doing that, I don't think Next has much of a chance of regaining the #1 spot, at least not in the long term.
Except for the fact that I dont think the anti-OGL view came from Hasbro, I agree with this. The OGL proved damaging to WotC when they abandoned it, but it's hard to dismiss the anecdotal evidence that it's a boon for any game released which is supportive of 3PP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At this point I'm not convinced D&D Next will actually see the light of day at all. The amount of publishing dead time is unprecedented.
Even if it does, Hasbro needs to allow WoTC to release Next under the OGL. Since I don't see them doing that, I don't think Next has much of a chance of regaining the #1 spot, at least not in the long term.
Um, why do you believe this? While as a fan of RPGs I like getting and using free stuff.........from a company standpoint I can't see WotC going this direction again. I think the adage "Fool me once shame on me, fool me twice shame on you." could be applied. What works for Paizo isn't guaranteed to work for WotC. For example, I play Pathfinder every once in a while but I've never bought the books. I don't plan on buying the books either because they're all free to look at via the SRD. And the same thing goes for WotC as I'd rather just have a program to use (ie. Compendium, CB, Monster creator) than buy $250.00 worth of books. The difference is WotC still gets some money as my DDI subscription costs about $70 a year where as Paizo receives $0.
How good and popular D&D:Next will be depend greatly on their system design, production value, production usage, and scope of game. So far I feel System Design has been.......wishy-washy right now. They take a few good steps forward (wizard traditions, HD as healing, Expertise Die for the Fighter) then huge leaps backwards (emphasis on Vancian casting and limited spells, Alignment requirements, class-based attack progression, the Rogue). Production value remains to be seen, as it hasn't come out but I think the end of 4E's products were fairly well received for their value about book/page/writing/ink quality. The scope of the game has been.......well, not good. I for one don't like ANY of the advanced system elements they've discussed so far.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think license wise they need need to find a middle ground between the OGL and whatever they had for 4E. It doesn't need to give stuff away, but it needs to be open and supportive enough for those 3PPs that do wish to put out material for it.
4E has shown that having a quality system doesn't mean much unless its backed up by a quality program for marketing, promotion, and providing lots of quality content for said system, whether it be internal or external. Arguments about the design itself will always exist regardless of what production choices they make; 3.x had just as many detractors in that department as 4E did. The difference came in the fact that 3.x was generally supported enough that people were willing to adapt to the system as a whole and find a way to deal with what they didn't like. 4E didn't see much of that adaptation because WOTC never really pushed for it; those who prone to liking it from the start really liked it, but those with approached it with doubts and dislikes never really saw anything to change their minds in the system itself, and the lack of quality content killed the deal.
If they can learn from the places that 4E failed and find ways to both positively promote Next while providing quality content, Next will do fine; if not, it won't matter how good the system itself is, not enough people will pay attention to it for that quality to matter. After 4E, they aren't going to get another free pass to hang on until they can come up with something better.
I think license wise they need need to find a middle ground between the OGL and whatever they had for 4E. It doesn't need to give stuff away, but it needs to be open and supportive enough for those 3PPs that do wish to put out material for it.
4E has shown that having a quality system doesn't mean much unless its backed up by a quality program for marketing, promotion, and providing lots of quality content for said system, whether it be internal or external. Arguments about the design itself will always exist regardless of what production choices they make; 3.x had just as many detractors in that department as 4E did. The difference came in the fact that 3.x was generally supported enough that people were willing to adapt to the system as a whole and find a way to deal with what they didn't like. 4E didn't see much of that adaptation because WOTC never really pushed for it; those who prone to liking it from the start really liked it, but those with approached it with doubts and dislikes never really saw anything to change their minds in the system itself, and the lack of quality content killed the deal.
If they can learn from the places that 4E failed and find ways to both positively promote Next while providing quality content, Next will do fine; if not, it won't matter how good the system itself is, not enough people will pay attention to it for that quality to matter. After 4E, they aren't going to get another free pass to hang on until they can come up with something better.
Quality content is obviously very important and I certainly think they, by and larged missed the boat there with 4E. In fact I'd go so far as to say they often did not even seem to understand their own system - Its great for stuff like murder mysteries and investigative adventures of that ilk and yet they never put any effort into that at all. Its straight out weak for lots of smaller combats and yet they seemed fixated on creating that exact type of adventure.
All that said my impression was that by and large they felt that there was something to the idea of digital tools (though they sure liked to screw up with the implementation a lot) and we'll see some equivalent of the DDI with D&D Next. If that is the case then it pretty much does not matter how lenient the GSL is - there won't be significant 3PP participants.
At this point the vast majority of the 'deal breaker' elements of the GSL are gone and 3PPs can do a great deal with 4E but usually the 3PP notes that there is no money in making 4E product because few people buy anything since its not integrated with the Character Builder. Only adventures really work outside of the DDI and monster compendiums to a lesser extent (individual DMs can use the monster builder to add monsters they like to their DDI account).
I think they need to be very careful with how they implement the digital portion of Next. In concept DDI is not a bad idea, but it does two things that really hurt 4E (aside from the horrid implementation, which is another matter entirely). First, it cut off the vast majority of the content to those who wanted to see if the system had improved enough to make it worth their while. Books can be flipped through so that non active players can at least get a feel for the product, something that a few open articles from Dungeon and Dragon cannot replicate. Likewise, the exclusion of 3PPs from DDI entirely cut off that source of largely free advertisement. This left only those diehards already playing to spread word of the system and it's current state, and while certainly a devout crowd, that by itself isn't enough to sustain the level of attention that DnD has traditionally received. Having a digital presence should not have to completely cut off the traditional markets and supporters, but that is precisely with happened with the DDI. If they want Next to find more success, they are going to have to find a way to incorporate both into their strategy that lets them work together instead of competing with each other.
|
I think they need to be very careful with how they implement the digital portion of Next. In concept DDI is not a bad idea, but it does two things that really hurt 4E (aside from the horrid implementation, which is another matter entirely).
WotC has had problems with digital play / social media for a long time. The D&D Encounters program was largely promoted through twitter / facebook. That approach does no good when you are trying to attract a new audience. I think it also further deepens the divide between pre-4e gamers and WotC. I have had a facebook account for a few years, but that is the exception rather than the rule among the people I have gamed with over the past 10 years. I'm not aware of anyone in my gaming circles who has a twitter account.
So here's a question for you... If you believe the oft repeated phrase that 4th edition will "fire" D&D's current fan base in an attempt to capture a younger audience, how do you think that this will be accomplished?
What's going to be different about this incarnation of D&D that will send kids out in droves to buy it? Is there going to be a new cartoon show? Is it the new Minis game? Perhaps another attempt at making a good movie? A new MMORPG?
I'm not sure how successful it has been, but I'll speculate that it could happen in a few ways:
- Crossover: D&D 4e has a relatively easy system to pick-up, and many of the junior gamers have RPG experience on consoles and with card games like Pokemon or even comic books
- Legacy: we teach our kids and their friends - my current group is filled with players who had never done table-top games previously Zhalindor: Bold Beginnings
- Just pick it up: glossy covers and slick layouts help with this
Hope that makes sense.
In service,
Rich
Www.drgames.org
Um, why do you believe this? While as a fan of RPGs I like getting and using free stuff.........from a company standpoint I can't see WotC going this direction again.
I will always have a fondness in my heart for D&D. I'll buy Next (or whatever it is called; assuming it is actually released). But as far as the OGL, I believe that the genie is out of the bottle. The OGL changed the game for everyone, including WotC, because they effectively have to be "better enough" than Pathfinder (or 3.5) to compete with free.
Um, why do you believe this? While as a fan of RPGs I like getting and using free stuff.........from a company standpoint I can't see WotC going this direction again.I will always have a fondness in my heart for D&D. I'll buy Next (or whatever it is called; assuming it is actually released). But as far as the OGL, I believe that the genie is out of the bottle. The OGL changed the game for everyone, including WotC, because they effectively have to be "better enough" than Pathfinder (or 3.5) to compete with free.
Also, there is a significant proportion of the market who attach value to a system being "open". Many people cite the embrace of the OGL as being one of the things they like about Paizo and, by extension, Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And if you go beyond D&D and Pathfinder, then the next most popular game is the line of Warhammer 40K RPGs from Fantasy Flight Games...which have nothing that even vaguely resembles the OGL.
I don't see how that's relevant.
I'm not arguing that the OGL or something like it is the only way to succeed in general (in fact, I suspect WotC greatly regrets the OGL). I'm arguing that, in a market that already has something like the OGL (wherever it came from), and that is dominated by a game released under said license, ignoring that license is a losing strategy.
As a contrary opinion, other OGL systems exist without people citing it as a reason to love Mongoose Publishing, just for one example.
True -- but Mongoose, unlike Paizo, isn't the entrenched industry leader.
Look, I'd love to see D&D florish again -- I just don't think ignoring the OGL is the way to make that happen.
|
As to the main topic, I think 4e failed to bring in its own bumper crop of new players because of the BS betw Wizards and Atari over the video game license. Without cRPGs, 2e would not have been as popular. Word of mouth, even with social media, only goes so far when you still need to try/play the game itself.
I personally believe the problem was multi-fold:
1) Lack of outside-the-channels entry level product.
2) Lack of outside-the-channels advertising.
3) The most stupid, horrendous mistake a company could ever make, being dismissive of your current customer base. The transition from 3.5 to 4 was handled too sarcastically, too offensively that it really put a lot of people off. How does that affect new crop? If your product isn't showing up in print, on line, and in stores outside of the standard "gaming" channels, you are not going to get the word-of-mouth exposure from your current base who are all pissed off at you and swearing eternal emnity. In the end, Wizards sold 4E to a subset of its own customer base, which promises tepid growth at best because its an already established base!
4) As you point out, a lack of cross-market product (action figures, comics, computer games, etc.) that are getting into channels outside of gaming stores.
I personally hope they spend just a little more money this time and have entry level product available from the very beginning that is seen in stores outside of local gaming venues.
|
|
And I'll say it again, too: I'm writing down statements like these just to make sure I can make their authors look silly if an opportunity presents itself. :)
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if DnD Next returns the focus to print books, I would not be surprised to see it kick Paizo down to the #2 position in the ICv2 rankings.
Cast Thread Necromancy
Apparently the opportunity did not prevent itself.
Oh Kthulhu, you card ;)
More seriously, because I don't actually know. Has Pathfinder been knocked of the top of the rankings?
It's interesting that their estimate of the tabletop RPG market increased so much from 2013 to 2014. 15m to 25m. Presumably the absence and then reentry of D&D explains most of that.