Thank you to the OP for the update.
This thread seems to be going way off topic, in a not-nice way.
And it would imply that man actually landed on the moon. =80
|
CWM, whether anyone at WoTC is guilty of anything or not; it strikes me that you REALLY WANT WoTc to be "innocent" of the allegations being made against them. Why is that?
Because conspiracy theories and maguffin hunts are so very tedious and quite pointless. All they do is drag the discussion down to its lowest common denominator - which around here seems to be WotC=evil no matter what.
Frankly I don't want WotC to be innocent or guilty but if they lied i would like to have something more solid then "this guy said this thing this one time" type hearsay.
|
Okay Crosswiredmind, I've just read your most recent post, and I've come to the conclusion (and as a Licensed Quack Psychologist, I CAN do that:) that your most recent post was incredibly non-objective to the point of being sycophantish, in your defense for WoTC/4E. (or else you're incredibly naive).
Hardly. What I am saying is that a corporate misstep does not automatically equal some deep dark conspiracy to deceive the public. I am not saying that WotC is infallible. In fact it is my belief that they have made some incredibly boneheaded decisions over the years but I simply cannot stand the tinfoil hat brigade tromping out the "WotC is evil" dog and pony show.
Companies routinely regulate what information they make public and when. It would appear that the man in question clearly dodged the question. Politicians do this all the time. Merely listen to your two candidates for president and you'll hear it on a daily basis.No s&@&. But there is a difference between non-disclosure and deception.
I'm not say they are evil. Corporations lie all the time, either deliberately or in a round about way through corporate legal speak. Is it right? No! Unfortunately, there's not much we can do about it. The fact is that at the time this statement was made, they had been working on 4E for about two years. Rumors about 4E were rampant at the time. They knew someone was going to ask the question. They also had about a year's worth of 3.5 stuff still in the pipeline. What do you thing would have happened to the sales of those products if he gave the slightest hint that 4E was being announced soon? They've done some stupid things in the past 16 months and some things I believe are unethical , like what we are talking about now. It may be possible that 4E 's schedule was changed and rushed through and he may have been telling the truth, but I find that more difficult to believe. Anyway, this thread has gotten way off track. I'm done.
But there is a difference between non-disclosure and deception.
OK, they didn't deceive. But they certainly misled.
Reasons notwithstanding, that's not ethically and/or morally admirable behavior. Are you honestly trying to defend WotC's trustworthiness? That is ultimately the point being argued here by most posters.
Um, WOTC is a business.
If WOTC said 3 yeards ago, 4E is coming in 2008, that would screw over them as people would stop buying product.
Of course they wouldn't say 4E is coming....
Well they could have admitted that they were 'doing research and playtesting' for 4E and refused to speculate when they'd be ready to release the product. If the yhad said something like "When we are about a year away from releasing 4E we'll make an official announcement."
I don't think that would have much impact on sales since you know that even if they then went and announced the game tomorrow your purchase would still be good for at least a year.
I mean they have stated that there will eventually be a 5th edition - I don't see that having a negative impact on sales currently.
|
|
Well they could have admitted that they were 'doing research and playtesting' for 4E and refused to speculate when they'd be ready to release the product. If the yhad said something like "When we are about a year away from releasing 4E we'll make an official announcement."
I don't think that would have much impact on sales since you know that even if they then went and announced the game tomorrow your purchase would still be good for at least a year.
I mean they have stated that there will eventually be a 5th edition - I don't see that having a negative impact on sales currently.
Companies do not like to talk about their R&D pipeline. They never know what will make it through and what will not. If they talk about some new product and it never appears they risk being lambasted for marketing vaporware. If they don't say anything they are accused of deceptive practices. In some respects it is a no-win proposition.
|
|
But there is a difference between non-disclosure and deception.OK, they didn't deceive. But they certainly misled.
Reasons notwithstanding, that's not ethically and/or morally admirable behavior. Are you honestly trying to defend WotC's trustworthiness? That is ultimately the point being argued here by most posters.
Would you rather have them say that R&D is working on something that may or may not be published in the near or not so near future - or not at all - we just don't know.
Would you rather have them say that R&D is working on something that may or may not be published in the near or not so near future - or not at all - we just don't know.
No. They said exactly what I would have said in that situation.
But don't portray them as paragons of virtue and honesty -- they misled customers, and got caught at it. As customers, we can complain and criticize all we want.
CEO
|
Sooo...
How come no body ever mentions the fact that Paizo was taking Dragon and Dungeon subscriptions less than a year out from the secret cancellation?
Paizo didn't have any control over when we stopped taking subscriptions. Wizards of the Coast wanted to control the timing of the announcement and it had to be business as usual until the announcement was made. Not taking subscriptions would have given a pretty strong indication that something was up and thus wasn't allowed until after the announcement. If you made a high Perception check, you would have noticed that we stopped taking multi-year subscriptions months before the announcement, once it was clear that the magazines didn't have a long future. So that might have been an early indication. But the reality is that Wizards of the Coast, as the licensor for Dragon and Dungeon, had total control over what we did and when we did it.
-Lisa
But the reality is that Wizards of the Coast, as the licensor for Dragon and Dungeon, had total control over what we did and when we did it.
-Lisa
Now that you have the freedom you do, would you ever be willing to give up control like that again?
|
CEO
|
Now that you have the freedom you do, would you ever be willing to give up control like that again?But the reality is that Wizards of the Coast, as the licensor for Dragon and Dungeon, had total control over what we did and when we did it.
-Lisa
Not really. I don't like to say never, but it would have to be one hell of an opportunity for me to want to get into a situation again where I didn't have 100% control over all aspects of our products. The freedom we have with Pathfinder and its associated lines is amazing and you can see the results in the products we produce.
-Lisa
I'm not say they are evil. Corporations lie all the time, either deliberately or in a round about way through corporate legal speak.
I hear a lot of people who defend WoTC; talk about "corporations & business models" and the like, and compare what WoTC may or may not have done to them.
If I buy a 2008 Personal Computer or a Toyota Carolla, the future release of the 2009 models of each respective product does NOT reduce sales of the 2008 products. Everyone knows that future products will be released. No company I know of outside the d&d industry tries to conceal the fact that they will have newer, better products available in the future. If you want a product now, you buy it. If you prefer to wait for the future, you wait.For some reason the pro-WoTC crowd seems to think that this Shouldn't apply to this game. That R&D is somehow taboo and can't be made known to the mindless masses who then (they assume) won't buy the current product, because of the future product yet to be released. It seems that WotC wants to have the best of both worlds.
Well, if that's true, then I ask the question, is that ethical business practice?
[humour] Maybe WotC think 4E should have been selling even better, and are replacing some of the marketing executives that they consider failed to pull their weight.... [/humour]Oh give me a break... corporations NEVER replace executives. It is always the fault of the lowly grunt. Had the wageslave done his job properly, the executive's magnificient, wolrd shattering plan would have made quadrillions of money.
No, it is always the fault of the bottom of the rung.
Actually, corporations replace executives quite frequently. Particularly when the replaced ones do not agree with the new direction, or when their division is seen as needing new leadership (often meaning the same thing). Most executives, however, will acquiesce to the new direction and cascade the need for new leadership notion to the junior execs and mid-level managers. In general, grunt-level layoffs only happen when revenues are down considerably or growth misses projections by a wide margin, or when a line of business dries up, reducing the need for so many grunts for that line.
One is most likely to see executive layoffs when a significant line of business performs poorly over more than one year. A single year performance dive can usually be explained away and most corps will give the exec in charge a year to pull it out of the fire.
If an exec is fired, the same reorg under which this occurred may call for a few juniors and grunts to go as well.
What is least likely is that the execs at the holding company (Hasbro) would be fired. Only if a division they oversee does poorly for several years without any indication of successful remediation would they be threatened. Such firings at the holding company level are very seldom advertised, as such would be very bad PR. So, we generally never hear of such and therefore assume it does not happen. Even when it does happen, getting fired at that level often involves compensation most of us could use to completely fund our retirement.
What is noteworthy is that the financial impact to the individual grunt being laid off is much greater than the impact to an corporate leadership level executive, who most likely has a nice golden parachute.
Anyway you slice it and no matter who it affects, top-down reorgs almost always make life suck for the grunt and negatively impact company performance. If nothing else, it erodes loyalty and confidence to such an extent that it affects production. Most execs and holding companies do not understand this. They think that a reorg can create efficiencies. Such can, if handled very very carefully. But, most of the time they botch the job and everyone gets upset and things get worse and they try another reorg to fix it. Like sawing the legs off a table to balance it - pretty soon what you have is not a table.
The cause of this is planning for excessive growth beyond the optimum manning requirements for the production of sufficient product to supply the anticipated customer base. Most execs want to pad their pockets, so they talk and plan big, even though the market can't support the volume, and/or can't tolerate the lower quality produced by larger and less responsible staff.
So, yes. Execs do get fired. Not as often as grunts, but with greater indirect impact to performance. The cure is realistic goals, a smaller and more dedicated staff and relatively flat org chart.
This is where Paizo wins. Keeping the company intentionally small and focused will serve them better than trying to build an army of employees. A huge army can take over the world, but then it gets hungry and turns on you. A small, dedicated force will produce better products and higher sales (with reasonable growth) and can be rewarded more handsomely.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Not really. I don't like to say never, but it would have to be one hell of an opportunity for me to want to get into a situation again where I didn't have 100% control over all aspects of our products. The freedom we have with Pathfinder and its associated lines is amazing and you can see the results in the products we produce.
-Lisa
Yes, we can. Yes, we can!
If I buy a 2008 Personal Computer or a Toyota Carolla, the future release of the 2009 models of each respective product does NOT reduce sales of the 2008 products.
Yeah, but an impending 4e release will certainly impact sales of newly-released 3.5 books. 2008 cars will continue to have their full value, utility, and support -- not so for 3.5.
That notwithstanding, I agree -- the ethical implications of their actions do not paint a pretty picture. "It's only business" should be limited to Mafia-movies, not used as an excuse for shabby treatment of faithful, long-time customers.
Yeah, but an impending 4e release will certainly impact sales of newly-released 3.5 books. 2008 cars will continue to have their full value, utility, and support -- not so for 3.5.
That notwithstanding, I agree -- the ethical implications of their actions do not paint a pretty picture. "It's only business" should be limited to Mafia-movies, not used as an excuse for shabby treatment of faithful, long-time customers.
I've seen several sources indicate sales of 3.5 books plummeted after the announcement of 4E.
Cheers! :)
Now that you have the freedom you do, would you ever be willing to give up control like that again?
Not really. I don't like to say never, but it would have to be one hell of an opportunity for me to want to get into a situation again where I didn't have 100% control over all aspects of our products. The freedom we have with Pathfinder and its associated lines is amazing and you can see the results in the products we produce.
-Lisa
Amen. Freedom is a wonderful thing. Keep up the good work and I know as long as you keep up your level of quality products and excellent customer service I for one will keep buying everything you come out with! :)
|
CEO
|
I've seen several sources indicate sales of 3.5 books plummeted after the announcement of 4E.
Cheers! :)
Actually, I think that this depends on the retail outlet. Paizo.com has had very strong 3rd edition sales both of our own products and of other people's products since the announcement last year. I know of many other retailers who have continued to have strong 3e sales. Even our main distributor, Alliance, told me that 3e has remained surprisingly strong. I think that companies that quit making new products for 3e found their sales flagging, while those that continued to put out new product saw their sales stay pretty strong.
I actually know retailers that have mentioned that they are selling more 3e products right now than they are 4e products. So I wouldn't say that 3.5 books plummeting is a universal thing.
-Lisa
Actually, I think that this depends on the retail outlet. Paizo.com has had very strong 3rd edition sales both of our own products and of other people's products since the announcement last year. I know of many other retailers who have continued to have strong 3e sales. Even our main distributor, Alliance, told me that 3e has remained surprisingly strong. I think that companies that quit making new products for 3e found their sales flagging, while those that continued to put out new product saw their sales stay pretty strong.
I actually know retailers that have mentioned that they are selling more 3e products right now than they are 4e products. So I wouldn't say that 3.5 books plummeting is a universal thing.
-Lisa
Hey, hey! Lisa responded to a post by me! :)
Perhaps I was remiss in not saying that I had seen the opposite in some areas (Paizo being the only one of the top of my head, honestly), but I'm glad to hear things are still going good for you guys.
ENWorld, I know, said there store saw a huge loss in 3E book orders after the announcement, but of course that's only anecdotal. Sorry if that came across otherwise.
Cheers! :)
Fiscal years don't end in December. Weird accounting practices make fiscal years end sometime around September if I remember right.
It actually depends on what you decided when you setup the corporation. Its all based on when they wanted to file Federal Income Tax.
|
To insert an observation:
If you made a high Perception check, you would have noticed that we stopped taking multi-year subscriptions months before the announcement, once it was clear that the magazines didn't have a long future. So that might have been an early indication.
-Lisa
I think this is a key thing. People way too often fail to make those Perception checks, high or low, when listening to corporate statements, or watching product schedules and the like.
Anyone involved in LG should remember that from the beginning the regional coordinators were told to make a 5 year plan for the campaign, matching when they originally expected to release a new edition. In 2002, when 3.5 was pending, they were talking about cancelling the campaign early. In 2005, after the first 5 years had elapsed, they asked for only a 3 year plan, matching when 4E was due out. And yet nobody seemed to think there was any trend there.
Or looking at the release schedule from 2005-2007 and seeing the shift in products released, especially the ones presenting variant systems. Those were not filler and alpha testing at the time they were commented on, but suddenly became just that when WotC R&D admitted they were in later publicity releases.
And then of course there was DDXP '07 with the last minute cancellation of a major RPGA announcement, too obviously LFR once Gen Con '08 rolled around.
Yes, a lot of times it winds up all too obvious only in 20/20 hindsight. Just as often people simply do not pay attention to what is said or other changes that are made.
|
CEO
|
ENWorld, I know, said there store saw a huge loss in 3E book orders after the announcement, but of course that's only anecdotal. Sorry if that came across otherwise.
Cheers! :)
Yeah, I remember when Morrus posted that on ENWorld as a prelude to one of his support drives to keep the website open. I think a big part of the reason why the ENWorld PDFs lost their luster is the all-in mentality that ENWorld went into in regards to 4e. If Morrus could have kept things on a more neutral ground, providing an environment where pro-3e and pro-4e folks could have felt equally loved, his sales wouldn't have dropped off as much. But by pitching his tent so firmly in the 4e camp, he drove away the folks who would have bought his 3e PDFs in the last year.
-Lisa
Yeah, but an impending 4e release will certainly impact sales of newly-released 3.5 books. 2008 cars will continue to have their full value, utility, and support -- not so for 3.5.That notwithstanding, I agree -- the ethical implications of their actions do not paint a pretty picture. "It's only business" should be limited to Mafia-movies, not used as an excuse for shabby treatment of faithful, long-time customers.
We are in agreement Jack. My example was used to illustrate that the poster I was "debating" the issue with, was on the one hand stating that WoTC would never be deceptive on release dates, and he is equally stating that companies "never talk about Research & development" of new projects. Those positions are at odds with one another, and I was attempting to illustrate that (probably unsuccessfully), but alas...
I don't pretend to know if knowledge of an upcoming 4Ed. release would negatively impact 3.5Ed sales. My example of a PC or a Toyota was to illustrate that in most areas, it would not be affected. WoTC's refusal to talk about a pending R&D or release of 4Ed would suggest however that they felt otherwise. You tell me.
|
|
I hear a lot of people who defend WoTC; talk about "corporations & business models" and the like, and compare what WoTC may or may not have done to them.
If I buy a 2008 Personal Computer or a Toyota Carolla, the future release of the 2009 models of each respective product does NOT reduce sales of the 2008 products. Everyone knows that future products will be released. No company I know of outside the d&d industry tries to conceal the fact that they will have newer, better products available in the future. If you want a product now, you buy it. If you prefer to wait for the future, you wait.
It is true that we all know there will be new computers, cars, phones, games, etc. coming out every year. However you'll notice that the exact specs and details are usually kept closely guarded. In many industries the release dates of new products are also a carefully guarded secret.
I knew that a new iBook was going to come out within a year of the one I bought. I did not know that Apple was not only going to bring out a whole new laptop but it was going to sport a whole new type of processor and that all of my software was going to become obsolete. Should Apple have told the world that a deal with intel was in the works? Certainly not. They only announced it when the deal was sealed and the production plans were all in place.
I see a parallel with the switch from 3e to 4e. WotC had 3e product in the pipeline. They could not afford to risk the loss of sales - especially when the publication of 4e was not 100% certain in terms of timing. The announced 4e when they could announce it.
Sidebar: I don't care for the argument, but soon is a weasel word.
Effectively, he didn't say anything.
What I want to say is they should remove only the idea people who wanted to exclude everyone who didn't want to play in the POL campaign or sign up for 4.0 exclusively.
Also, I stopped posting on WOTC's forums when 3.5 was coming out and they called me a troll because I complained about their stupid rules about armor spikes.
Yeah, I remember when Morrus posted that on ENWorld as a prelude to one of his support drives to keep the website open. I think a bit part of the reason why the ENWorld PDFs lost their luster is the all-in mentality that ENWorld went into in regards to 4e. If Morrus could have kept things on a more neutral ground, providing an environment where pro-3e and pro-4e folks could have felt equally loved, his sales wouldn't have dropped off as much. But by pitching his tent so firmly in the 4e camp, he drove away the folks who would have bought his 3e PDFs in the last year.
-Lisa
The interesting thing about EN World is that the name has officially changed to "Morrus' 4th Edition D&D / d20 News and Reviews Site".
I wonder if WotC had a hand in that....
Either way, it does have an inherent bias with that name, IMO. However, it's his site, and he must feel there was a benefit to the new name or he wouldn't have changed it. He *has* said, though, that both 4E and 3E players are welcome, although I think the jury's still out on whether it works for players that favor 3E.
For me, it's a lot less fun going there today than it was about 13 months ago, but I still have hope. :)
He *has* said, though, that both 4E and 3E players are welcome, although I think the jury's still out on whether it works for players that favor 3E.
Of course 3Eers are still welcome there. And 4Eers are still welcome on Paizo. That doesn't mean that there is equal representation on both sites. Here the 4Eers are out numbered, there the 3Eers are outnumbered. Nothing wrong with that, just basic math.
Coincidentally, I visit ENWorld alot less now adays.
The interesting thing about EN World is that the name has officially changed to "Morrus' 4th Edition D&D / d20 News and Reviews Site".
Since posting this, it seems EN World has removed "4th Edition" from its name.
|
If Morrus could have kept things on a more neutral ground, providing an environment where pro-3e and pro-4e folks could have felt equally loved, his sales wouldn't have dropped off as much. But by pitching his tent so firmly in the 4e camp, he drove away the folks who would have bought his 3e PDFs in the last year.
-Lisa
Yes, I agree with this completely. I've never been vehemently anti-4e (although I'm definitely pro-Pathfinder), but I stopped going to ENWorld as a result of the overwhelmingly anti-3.5e sentiment there. I've not supported the site as a result, as it was no longer significantly supporting the game I wished to play.
I have not seen the same kind of bias here.
I have not even seen a real anti 4th edition bias over at Kenzer.
If it doesn't exist there, it doesn't exist at all.
Try to go over to Wizards and say 4th has a few problems that could be fixed.
DaveMage wrote: Since posting this, it seems EN World has removed "4th Edition" from its name.
This bodes well for the new GSL.
EN World no longer feels it has to choose.
Since posting this, it seems EN World has removed "4th Edition" from its name.
The interesting thing about EN World is that the name has officially changed to "Morrus' 4th Edition D&D / d20 News and Reviews Site".
It currently says "D&D/RPG News." Doesn't say anything about 4E or d20.
|
I find it amusing that people were caught so unaware that 4E was coming. Anyone who followed the industry and made their checks should have seen it coming. I started expecting 4E about 2 years before its announcement. I attended last year's GenCon just because I expected the announcement. No surprise at all.
I find it amusing that people were caught so unaware that 4E was coming. Anyone who followed the industry and made their checks should have seen it coming. I started expecting 4E about 2 years before its announcement. I attended last year's GenCon just because I expected the announcement. No surprise at all.
Same here. The minute I saw the "Rules Compendium" was announced, first words out of my mouth were, "4E's going to be announced right around that time."
|
I wish that forums would start turning over user info to policing authorities in the user's area when they admit doing electronically illegal actions. I get so sick of hearing the 'justified' thief extolling how he in the right and passing on that POV to the messageboards with pride. You wanna look at book to decide if you wish to buy it, then walk into a store and flip through it or look at the reviews of a product or read an excerpt provided by the manufacturer of the book. A person commits an illegal act then 'promises' that they delete the illegal product afterwards and expects to retain credibility.
How is it any different if he's not keeping or using it and doing exactly as he says, then you goingto your FLAGS and reading the copy there and putting it back and not buying it becuase you didnt liek what you see?
|
|
How is it any different if he's not keeping or using it and doing exactly as he says, then you goingto your FLAGS and reading the copy there and putting it back and not buying it becuase you didnt liek what you see?
Oh about a fine and possibly a couple months community service if he gets caught doing it if im not mistaken.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
How is it any different if he's not keeping or using it and doing exactly as he says, then you goingto your FLAGS and reading the copy there and putting it back and not buying it becuase you didnt liek what you see?
Can we please not go there again? All merit of your argument nonwithstanding, don't you consider it a bit rude to discuss the merits or demerits of copyright laws in the figurative back yard of people whose business depends in large parts on the existence of these laws?
Besides, I fail to see the connection to the layoffs at WotC, except maybe that WotC might have earned more money without unauthorized copies. I am not saying that this is the cause, but it might be. ;)
Back on topic: It is a sad fact that the higher you build the pyramid of a companies hierarchy, the better the bottom parts must perform to maintain the overall stability. Smaller businesses tend to be more agile, less demanding, and overall more able to maintain their profitability.
I do not know any internals of WotC, but they look like a bit of a mixed bag to me: Roleplaying games, Miniatures, Card games, Book Publishing, Digital Entertainment (MtGO, soon DDI Virtual Gametable). Sure, some are related (RPG and Books come to mind), but the range is still large. Maybe splitting these off into independent entities might actually be a good thing - if, and only if, each of these more or less manages its own checkbook, and Hasbro does not put too much pressure on them. Yeah, wishful thinking here.
Okay, not trying to be snarky or insulting or trollish, but at a time when 4e is apparently selling pretty well, why is it that WotC is eliminating jobs? Corporate America never did make much sense to me...Organizational Announcement
Wizards Announces New Organizational Alignment
Wizards of the Coast today announced new organizational alignment to focus on key growth strategies for core brands.
"As a company, we will continue to be the leader in entertaining the lifestyle gamer," said Greg Leeds, President of Wizards of the Coast. "Re-aligning resources ensures we achieve this goal for our most powerful brands."
While restructuring results in some job eliminations, Wizards of the Coast is actively recruiting to fill open positions in multiple areas of the company.
"Organizational change is always difficult on those impacted," said Leeds. "But we will take great care in the transition, and continue to invest in the growth of the business, specifically innovation for our Magic and Dungeons & Dragons fans."
The employees of WOTC deserve to get laid off due to the destruction of D&D. 4th Edition is not D&D, and I refuse to call it that. I will not waste money on it, and I will not play it. That is what I am calling 4e D&D: IT!
|
|
The employees of WOTC deserve to get laid off due to the destruction of D&D. 4th Edition is not D&D, and I refuse to call it that. I will not waste money on it, and I will not play it. That is what I am calling 4e D&D: IT!
Do the families of all those employees deserve not to know where the money to pay rent is coming from due to those layoffs you've decided are a proper measure of vengeance?
|
The employees of WOTC deserve to get laid off due to the destruction of D&D. 4th Edition is not D&D, and I refuse to call it that. I will not waste money on it, and I will not play it. That is what I am calling 4e D&D: IT!
A layoff at this level is unlikely to take out a single executive that drove the creation of 4E. The only people who are likely to be hurt by such a move are the everyday people ranging from clerical staff to content developers, artists, and even the guy down in the mailroom who delivered the mail to the now much smaller group. The only people harmed by layoffs are typically the average "worker" who likely has very little say in the overall direction of any given project. They now are going to be forced to find jobs in the already shaky economy and likely have families to support and mortgages to pay.
I hate 4E, and I can be cold and heartless at times, but even I feel for the people who are getting laid off. I'm actually at a loss for words over this one.