I was ranting to someone at my local hobby shop about 4th Edition (yeah, we sort of "jokingly" told the owner we'd picket his 4E products if he throws them on his shelf), when we came to a realization:
DDI provides online tools and e-books that you own and a program to allow you to build your own dungeons and quests, make characters, and run a D&D game online.
Basically, a mini-MMORPG.
So, what exactly is preventing them from going all the way and ditching the whole print product line? After all, you can get the e-book PDF of your book by punching in a code once you purchase it, you're subscribed to DDI to use the material for $10/month, you can play online with other 4E players...
Am I missing something here, or is D&D already halfway towards moving from the Tabletop game to the Online game? Are they only keeping the "Tabletop" feel so they don't alienate the people that still like Tabletop gaming? Soon they're going to die out, according to WotC.
I can see 5E being D&D online only. By then, DDO: Stormreach will be over, and many of us grognards have moved on.
Sad.
|
They have an online game already. I am sure they would like to keep both of them going.
I do not plan to play online. I am not sure about 4e but I will buy it and read it and make decisions about it later. The whole point of D&D for me is to sit down with some friends and enjoy a day of gaming togehter. Doing it through the computer is not what I am looking for. On the other hand I might play in a friend's game online who lives out of state but not as a rule.
IMO, they are just adding more options. They aren't taking away anything. Except for magazines of course...
I think that's the idea; they wanted a game that could easily cash in on the MMORPG market and designed it to be easily comparable to existing MMORPGs. I wouldn't be surprised to see 4th edition turned into a full-fledged MMO soon after its release. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing depends on your perspective. I think it's a smart business plan, to be entirely honest. Whether or not it's something I'll want to spend money on is another point, though.
Another reason to continue print: So people can actually play the game.
I don't have the ability to use DDI (or play the online MMO for that matter) because they've chosen not to make a Macintosh compatible version of it. So print is all I have.
People do enjoy congregating in person though. Feel's a bit more social. Though one could us conferencing software to import live digital images of five friends and then play a game of charades, the game is likely to maintain its place in the bored, liquored-up, living room parties of the world. That gives me hope to think that D&D will likely stay very much pen and paper for most of us, because if it isn't pen and paper, it isn't D&D.
Years ago I bought the 4 D&D videogames for my Playstation 2. They were fun. They weren't D&D though. They just work the mask.
|
|
They won't ditch the whole print product line because the game designers themselves enjoy playing tabletop rpgs too much.
I may or may not love 4e, I just can't say until I hold those books in my hands. But I rest sure the designers are trying to make the best tabletop rpg they can. They may want it to do other things too, like work well online, but that'll be in addition to working well on a kitchen table surrounded by Doritos and Mountain Dew, not instead of it.
|
|
There is such a pull toward "community" in people - at least in my generation - that there is still a group of between 6 and 10 of my friends who get together on occasion and all bring our computers to a single location to play LAN games. We could play them online, from our own computer rooms in our own homes which are, at the extreme, about 225 miles apart, but we prefer to actually be able to get together, have a few burgers, and socialize as well.
Equally with gaming... I drive 50 miles each way once a week to game with friends I've been gaming with for years. If it was *only* about gaming, I likely wouldn't go.
Hate to say this but in the near future (perhaps 10 or 15 years out) there is a good chance that pen and paper play will be an anachronism and nearly all play will be online.
Not true. Maybe the new generation will migrate that way but for many of us tabletop RPGs are not only tradition, but the only was to get the real face-to-face socialization and fun that brought us into the hobby...
Anachronism... maybe
All play online... not hardly
|
Hate to say this but in the near future (perhaps 10 or 15 years out) there is a good chance that pen and paper play will be an anachronism and nearly all play will be online.Not true. Maybe the new generation will migrate that way but for many of us tabletop RPGs are not only tradition, but the only was to get the real face-to-face socialization and fun that brought us into the hobby...
Anachronism... maybe
All play online... not hardly
I said nearly all.
|
|
They won't ditch the whole print product line because the game designers themselves enjoy playing tabletop rpgs too much.
I may or may not love 4e, I just can't say until I hold those books in my hands. But I rest sure the designers are trying to make the best tabletop rpg they can. They may want it to do other things too, like work well online, but that'll be in addition to working well on a kitchen table surrounded by Doritos and Mountain Dew, not instead of it.
I agree.
Trouble is that in 10 to 15 years people may not buy it and we will be a dwindling breed.
I sincerely hope that I am wrong.
I said nearly all.Hate to say this but in the near future (perhaps 10 or 15 years out) there is a good chance that pen and paper play will be an anachronism and nearly all play will be online.Not true. Maybe the new generation will migrate that way but for many of us tabletop RPGs are not only tradition, but the only was to get the real face-to-face socialization and fun that brought us into the hobby...
Anachronism... maybe
All play online... not hardly
True, you did. My apologies if I took you out of context.
I'm interested though. If you would, clarify where you stand on this topic. Your next two posts seemed to hold differing viewpoints. Is the move towards true online RPGs (not current video-game RPGs) a good thing, to be desired, or a bad thing, something to be resisted?
|
|
True, you did. My apologies if I took you out of context.
No problem.
I'm interested though. If you would, clarify where you stand on this topic. Your next two posts seemed to hold differing viewpoints. Is the move towards true online RPGs (not current video-game RPGs) a good thing, to be desired, or a bad thing, something to be resisted?
At DragonCon two summers ago I played at a table that used a virtual table top. It kept track of all the spells in play and all of the floating bonuses. It could roll the dice for us but we chose to do that ourselves since we were all sitting there.
Combat went so much quicker. We had a whole lot more time for roleplaying. That is part of the reason I am looking forward to WotC's efforts or the virtual table tops that others are building. If the computer can take the rote memory crap off of combat and let me actually play the character instead of the rules then i am all for it.
I do love face to face gaming. Nothing beats a room full of friends getting together to play. So my hope is that the two things blend and we can have electronically mediated combat and person to person roleplaying.
But the generations coming up will have a completely different set of expectations as well as dispersed social networks. They may need a game that is played entirely online. Another reason I like the virtual table top.
I like options and 4E seems to be providing them.
|
Hate to say this but in the near future (perhaps 10 or 15 years out) there is a good chance that pen and paper play will be an anachronism and nearly all play will be online.
That sounds an awful lot like all the overexcited guys who, at the beginning of the 90's, claimed that "print was dead" and that every document, memo, contracts, books etc would be in electronic format only in the next decade. Which you know... didn't happen.
I think that won't happen for the very same reason: because these two media (tabletop and electronic) are completely different in essence and feel. They make the activity itself (here, playing the game) "feel" completely different. Ergo, they just aren't the same thing. If they aren't the same thing, one doesn't replace the other, and the rise of one doesn't mean the elimination of the other. They can actually coexist without affecting one another, and they SURELY should NOT be considered as competing against one another (which makes all the attempts at making tabletop RPGs aesthetically more like MMOs abysmally stupid ideas at best, by the way).
Are they only keeping the "Tabletop" feel so they don't alienate the people that still like Tabletop gaming?
Can't be it. They're making a good effort at alienating people already. I also think it's because they want to keep selling their miniatures. Do you think it's pure coincidence that 4e's monsters all look different and that the lastest D&D minis set has those new monsters already? And that they also change the rules and won't redo all the old minis for the new rules? It's all done so people are forced to buy the new miniatures.
IMO, they are just adding more options. They aren't taking away anything. Except for magazines of course...
In 3e, I can play a gnome druid right out of the PHB. In 4e, I can't. I call that taking away an option. And for me, D&D is all about options. (Nor is that the only option that is taken away in 4e)
Simple - the Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures line. That is their current biggest cash cow. If people stop buying them (or begin buying "virtual miniatures") they will go this route, but until then they'll have a print product primarily to keep the miniatures players buying stuff.
It will serve as a "bridge" between them and the MMORPG players, and maybe lead to a merging in the future (probably 5E, which may well have no print rules unless you print out the PDF yourself).
I think that with making D&D so much like WoW, they might well have spelt their own doom. They won't draw anyone from WoW to D&D with it. But they will drive people away from D&D, and many of those might take up WoW.
|
|
I also think it's because they want to keep selling their miniatures. Do you think it's pure coincidence that 4e's monsters all look different and that the lastest D&D minis set has those new monsters already? And that they also change the rules and won't redo all the old minis for the new rules? It's all done so people are forced to buy the new miniatures.
As for the miniatures, I may be in the minority here... but I don't like the miniatures scheme. I like being able to know what I'm actually laying out cash for. I don't like the "trading card" method of selling things like that. So they'll neither gain nor lose my business in that area. :)
Of course we have hundreds of old lead/pewter minis from the three previous decades... if we don't have what we need we have something "close enough".
Can't be it. They're making a good effort at alienating people already. I also think it's because they want to keep selling their miniatures. Do you think it's pure coincidence that 4e's monsters all look different and that the lastest D&D minis set has those new monsters already? And that they also change the rules and won't redo all the old minis for the new rules? It's all done so people are forced to buy the new miniatures.
Are they only keeping the "Tabletop" feel so they don't alienate the people that still like Tabletop gaming?
No you're right. I agree that the more I look at the way 4E has been presented, the more it's resembling very close to the Miniatures game. It really looks like 4th Edition is just one, huge expanded version of the D&D Minis game, really.
It's like they're going to be selling D&D Minis and D&D Minis Plus!
|
|
They can actually coexist without affecting one another, and they SURELY should NOT be considered as competing against one another
They are competing against each other now.
I tried to get my cousin into D&D and he loved it - then he played WoW and now has no intention of rolling dice again.
The RPG market is shrinking and MMORPGs are growing. That is a fact.
|
|
They are competing against each other now.
I tried to get my cousin into D&D and he loved it - then he played WoW and now has no intention of rolling dice again.
The RPG market is shrinking and MMORPGs are growing. That is a fact.
"The price of the oil barrel is growing and the price of cigarettes is growing as well. There is thus a correlation between the price of the oil barrel and a pack of cigarettes."
Oh. Okay... Wait. WTF?!
One business growing and the other shrinking does not demonstrate any correlation between to two phenomena. You'll have to do better than that and better than sporadic observation to change an opinion into "fact", my friend.
|
|
One business growing and the other shrinking does not demonstrate any correlation between to two phenomena. You'll have to do better than that and better than sporadic observation to change an opinion into "fact", my friend.
Not a fact? When I was in grade school the kids that wanted to play a fantasy game played D&D. We had a game club. We ran a weekly game at the public library. Everyone was into it.
Today kids that want to play a fantasy game play WoW. Lots of them play it.
Some of them would play D&D if the game met their expectations. If that means changes to the game then so be it.
|
|
Sorry, but no, this still does not demonstrate the so-called "fact" you were originally talking about: It does not prove that there is a correlation between the MMOs market growing and RPG sales declining.
I cannot prove the absolute truth of my statements but clearly the fantasy gaming choice of the current generation of 10-18 year olds is WoW or games like it. In the 70s and early 80s it was D&D.
That, to me, is evidence enough - it is called trend analysis.
If you need to get absolute proof ... well ... that is not my problem.
|
|
If you need to get absolute proof ... well ... that is not my problem.
Yes, crosswiredmind can continue to quote as many facts as he likes, and if you don't believe him tough noogie. Go prove him wrong, I guess. ;)
Anyway, as much as I don't think you can call it a "fact", I think that there are a couple of points in favour of this seeming correlation and some against.
Points for: WoW is basically a FRPG that goes kind of light on the RPG part. But the basics are there: quests, experience, levels, more powers, ad nauseum. The genre could conceivably interest anyone into fantasy or RPGs.
Points against: I really don't see it as the same interests. There are people that play D&D who have never played a computer game. The (stereotypical) WoW player is indicative of the generation that is playing it - instant gratification, and reward for the least possible effort. I'm not saying this is bad, just my observation (and that of many of the people who look at how society exists). The reward is "good enough" without being totally fulfilling and that's all they need. People who play tabletop RPGs know that more work is required to get the full enjoyment out of the game, and those willing to put in the work get the most out of it. For them, the 60% satisfaction (a number I just pulled out of my ass for an example) that could be achieved by playing WoW is not interesting to them when, with some effort in a direction that they are already interested, they could achieve 90 - 100% satisfaction. It's kind of a cost-benefit-analysis.
Anyway, I don't think it matters a whole lot. I really don't think there is much that could be done to "lure" WoW (or other MMO games) players to a tabletop game - even with the DI. The interests of the two groups are too different, I think. Yes, there are some people who do both - but I bet if you ask them they will say they get something different out of each experience, and don't consider one a replacement for the other. I could be wrong, of course, as I refuse to play a game where I am basically just renting it by the month.
No you're right. I agree that the more I look at the way 4E has been presented, the more it's resembling very close to the Miniatures game. It really looks like 4th Edition is just one, huge expanded version of the D&D Minis game, really.
It's like they're going to be selling D&D Minis and D&D Minis Plus!
If I have a complaint with D&D 3.X, the miniatures’ mechanics is it. The game already focuses so much on mechanics - role-play elements are secondary to roll-play elements. While I do mean the game focuses too much on mechanics in general, the minis are an easy target for this attack as they make the game combat-centric and overly mechanical.
AAO, 5-foot steps, holding your quick swift free actions to gain flanking bonus damage dice
The fact that so many posters refer to D&D as ‘tabletop’ gaming and not ‘pen & paper’ role-playing tells me that as a ’I think we can do this without the battle map’ GM, I am in the minority.
In a perfect world, Wizards would have made money by selling Adventures, rather than rule books. Modules released in a timely manner containing an adventure, a couple of new monsters, and maybe a new mechanic would have interested me a lot more than a monthly release of an ill-thought-out source book, with a half a dozen overpowered prestige classes, feats that do nothing or make the original group of feats a joke in comparison, or weapons that are better left unmade (mercury filled two-handed sword?? WTF??).
After a year or two, they could collect the monsters or mechanics (i.e. Unearthed Arcana) and release a well thought out, balanced rule book that complements the existing rule set rather than piles more rules on top of rules without adding flavour.
Sorry about the length of this post (rant).
Sorry, but no, this still does not demonstrate the so-called "fact" you were originally talking about: It does not prove that there is a correlation between the MMOs market growing and RPG sales declining.I cannot prove the absolute truth of my statements but clearly the fantasy gaming choice of the current generation of 10-18 year olds is WoW or games like it. In the 70s and early 80s it was D&D.
That, to me, is evidence enough - it is called trend analysis.
If you need to get absolute proof ... well ... that is not my problem.
I'll have to agree with crosswiremind here. Today's gamers will jump from D&D to WoW in a heartbeat. The trick to keeping a gamer playing D&D these days is a highly sensitive method.
First of all, the DM has to present the game like he's practically advertising it. How do I get new players and get them to actually STAY playing D&D? First, I find out if the "newb" (we'll call him/her that for now) is even interested in fantasy gaming.
Second, I bring the "newb" to my gaming friends and I immediately start a conversation up on D&D and all the fun times we had. Most people get hooked at the sounds of "gathering together; take-out and refreshments; fantasy role-playing a warrior, rogue, wizard, whatever; killing monsters; the game is run by live, face-to-face, people; you play with others you personally know". I also try my best to hype up all the pros to the game compared to sitting at home playing an MMORPG. People usually get enticed by the story-telling aspect and the "anything can happen, it just depends on what is rolled and what YOU choose to do, and it can be whatever your character is capable of." This intrigues people as they see there's really no programming that limits what they can do, only their imagination limits to what they can do. But this takes time to settle in.
I try to go easy on the "newb". I don't want to introduce them to too much material at once (I own every single 3.0E/3.5E book, Forgotten Realms and Eberron included), but at the same time I want them to get their character to the way they want it. Once the character is made, we set up a group and time and place for the "newb" to play D&D.
Now you see, that's a hell of a lot of scenarios to set up JUST to get one player hooked to D&D. At least in my case.
What I find really turns most people off to D&D (and this is how I lost many players) is the "scheduling" aspect. Where you arrive at a specific time and day, play for a specific amount of hours, and God forbid you don't show up---you ruin the experience or delay the experience everyone else at the table has been itching to share.
WotC is trying to appeal to this same market as I am, but without all the technicalities. The problem is, you get something that's really not D&D anymore. You get a game that's been dumbed down to something as simple as Poker or Chutes&Ladders so that any group can just read the fast and simple rules to make a character, dive in, kill and loot, get XP and level up anytime they want for however long they want.
Whereas I try to attract "newbs" to the true D&D, WotC wants to warp D&D into an aspect that's easier for them to market and easier for them to attract these people to.
I think that's the idea; they wanted a game that could easily cash in on the MMORPG market and designed it to be easily comparable to existing MMORPGs.This is where they DOOM themselves : while WOW may be the fad now, it will not last forever. you do not want to ape today's MMO, which are already strongly obsolete from a technical POV.
You want to draw in the players of Tomorrow MMO (or whatever) if you want to cash in.
Which is World of StarCraft, by best guess, a type of game that fantasy-based D&D cannot really compete with.
They won't ditch the whole print product line because the game designers themselves enjoy playing tabletop rpgs too much.
It's a little creepy responding to someone with the same avatar...like talking to myself...
I'd like to point out that the designers of the game today are a very different breed from the designers 8 years ago. I think it is likely that the motives of the designers 8 years from now cannot be predicted based on the designers today.