| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
 Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 00:00:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by arry
I agree with you Wooly that WotC has devoted a lot of resources to the Virtual Gaming Table. I just don't think that they devoted enough. I think that the whole DDi is woefully under resourced and that, ultimately, is why I think it's going to fail.
I'm not really talking about the DDI in general. I'm talking about the Virtual Gaming Table, and nothing but the Table.
WoW and other MMOs are killing PnP games right now. And contrary to what some at Wizbro (to use someone else's term) seem to think, it has nothing to do with the game system itself. It's all about the convenience.
A lot of people have computers now, and computers are things that can be used by the whole family for a wide variety of reasons -- including multiple competing MMOs. And with the distractions of school, work, significant others, families, etc, it's easier to plant your tuchus in front of a computer for a few hours than it is to go somewhere else for that same span of time. Not only that, but with PnP games, everyone has to be geographically close and able to gather in one spot. With MMOs, anyone can play, anytime, and from just about anywhere in the world. You don't need to find a local gaming group or try to get your high school friends together -- you just need a group of people, anywhere in the world, that can all sit down in front of a computer, in the comfort and convenience of their own homes, at the same time.
That's why MMOs are killing PnP games. And if there was a good, reliable, and reasonably priced system that allowed people to play PnP games, but with all the benefits of MMOs, then you'd make a killing. Your customer base would dramatically increase.
You don't even need a lot in the system. The majority of the table could be a simple grid, with any of a variety of simple icons to represent PCs, NPCs, monsters, treasure, and objects. You'd also need a built-in dice-roller, and a built-in (or at the least, compatible with existing ones) voice chat system. The DM's side of the table would be more detailed, but essentially the same thing.
You don't even have to encode any rule systems into it. In fact, that could be a bonus: the table has no rule systems integrated into it, so any rule system can be used. You sell, for a small, one-time fee, virtual DM screens to go along with it -- lists of charts and tables that the DM can pull up with the click of a mouse. And you license this option out to other companies, who want to use it for their setting/game, too. Make the table cost like $15 a month, with support for up to 6 players, and sell the virtual DM screens for like $5 a pop.
So then, anyone could gather for a PnP game, at their own convenience, with anyone else, anywhere around the world, at any time. And they could use this system to play any game they want...
Doing just this one thing would make a lot of money for WotC, and it would revive the slowly sinking PnP market. Rule systems are a gimmick that will always be changing -- convenience will always sell. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
 |
|
|
arry
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
317 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 15:15:47
|
Ha! You can't get out of it that easily Wooly, I still agree with you.  Not only do I think that the DDi as a whole is under-resourced, I think that the Virtual Gaming Table is as well.
I agree with you that the Table could make WotC a lot of money and help the PnP RPG industry, I just don't think it will happen as WotC have not allocated enough resources to do the job properly. Once again, WotC have taken a golden opportunity and shot themselves in the foot.  |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 16:35:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by arry
Ha! You can't get out of it that easily Wooly, I still agree with you. Not only do I think that the DDi as a whole is under-resourced, I think that the Virtual Gaming Table is as well.
I agree with you that the Table could make WotC a lot of money and help the PnP RPG industry, I just don't think it will happen as WotC have not allocated enough resources to do the job properly. Once again, WotC have taken a golden opportunity and shot themselves in the foot.
The major downfall of the Virtual Gaming table is graphics, however. If you're trying to lure (especially new) people in to play virtually for $8 a month, it's hard to justify when for another $7 a month you can sign on to any MMORPG and get the same experience without needing somebody to set up and run the game for you. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 17:12:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by arry
Ha! You can't get out of it that easily Wooly, I still agree with you. Not only do I think that the DDi as a whole is under-resourced, I think that the Virtual Gaming Table is as well.
I agree with you that the Table could make WotC a lot of money and help the PnP RPG industry, I just don't think it will happen as WotC have not allocated enough resources to do the job properly. Once again, WotC have taken a golden opportunity and shot themselves in the foot.
The major downfall of the Virtual Gaming table is graphics, however. If you're trying to lure (especially new) people in to play virtually for $8 a month, it's hard to justify when for another $7 a month you can sign on to any MMORPG and get the same experience without needing somebody to set up and run the game for you.
Graphics isn't a factor. You don't have graphics in a PnP game, after all. MMOs are only dominant because of the convenience, so if that convenience could be brought to the game table, then MMOs would lose their appeal.
And a PnP is not the same experience as an MMO, even despite what's been done to D&D. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 17:31:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by arry
Ha! You can't get out of it that easily Wooly, I still agree with you. Not only do I think that the DDi as a whole is under-resourced, I think that the Virtual Gaming Table is as well.
I agree with you that the Table could make WotC a lot of money and help the PnP RPG industry, I just don't think it will happen as WotC have not allocated enough resources to do the job properly. Once again, WotC have taken a golden opportunity and shot themselves in the foot.
The major downfall of the Virtual Gaming table is graphics, however. If you're trying to lure (especially new) people in to play virtually for $8 a month, it's hard to justify when for another $7 a month you can sign on to any MMORPG and get the same experience without needing somebody to set up and run the game for you.
Graphics isn't a factor. You don't have graphics in a PnP game, after all. MMOs are only dominant because of the convenience, so if that convenience could be brought to the game table, then MMOs would lose their appeal.
And a PnP is not the same experience as an MMO, even despite what's been done to D&D.
The thing is, if you play PnP and an MMO, then the added monthly cost of something similar is hard to swallow. Especially if it is per player. Both my wife and I play WoW on and off. That is appx. $30/month. We also both PnP (I quite enjoy that she has some of the same gaming hobbies as me), even at only $5/month (for a yearly subscription) it increases that cost by 33.33% for both of us to subscribe to it.
EDIT: BTW, as interesting as this topic is, and I know it stemmed from the original topic, but maybe we should find another scroll for it (or maybe Wooly could move the relevant posts to a new scroll). |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
Edited by - Hawkins on 15 Oct 2008 17:37:11 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 17:44:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
The thing is, if you play PnP and an MMO, then the added monthly cost of something similar is hard to swallow. Especially if it is per player. Both my wife and I play WoW on and off. That is appx. $30/month. We also both PnP (I quite enjoy that she has some of the same gaming hobbies as me), even at only $5/month (for a yearly subscription) it increases that cost by 33.33% for both of us to subscribe to it.
My point is that the Virtual Gaming Table would, if properly done, cut into the MMO market. You'd still have people doing both, but you've already got some people playing multiple MMOs.
People aren't playing PnP games because it's not convenient -- making it convenient would pull them back to what they'd rather be doing. That's the beauty of my idea. No gimmicks, no need for constant grinding or nifty endgame content, no need for expansions, no need to soup up an older computer with expensive components (a lot of good video cards cost more than a good mother board would cost!), none of that stuff. Just a virtual meeting place for those who can't easily make it to a real world one.
And having one person pay for the table is quite cheap for a group; the DM could easily ask everyone to kick in just a couple bucks a month to help, or the cost could rotate amongst the players. That table could be used for any game system or any number of groups, too. A DM could conceivably run games every night, with different groups and different games each night.
And compared to shelling out money on a new gaming system and the constant flow of new stuff for that system, the Table would be cheap. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 19:33:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
Darkmeer, I think you said it perfectly. Paizo cares. Wizards used to care. Hasbro doesn't care, and won't allow Wizards to either now that they own them lock, stock, and cigar-smoking barrel. The bigger a company is, the smaller the amount of empathy they are capable of.
Companies aren't capable of any empathy, despite the invidious tendency to personalize them in language and their catastrophic legal redefinition to have the rights of immortal humans. People and like-minded groups have empathy, and those tend to be more prominent and coherent in smaller organizations.quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Graphics isn't a factor.
If it wasn't, the leading text MUDs would have as many subscribers as the most popular MMORPGs. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2008 : 19:37:59
|
Sorry, Wooly, I guess I should have been more clear on what I was getting at.
They are currently marketing D&D Virtual gaming to two groups: The old-timers that need the convenience to get together with their gaming group and the new players they are trying to get to buy into the product.
The Gaming table will grab some of the old-timers, but chances are these old-timers already have virtual table-tops set up (like OpenRPG or Fantasy Grounds). So Wasbro has to make their version better than those. So far, they seem to be off to a good start with the extras that are included, plus access to the compendium.
As for the new players, that's where we run into the graphics issue. Here's these people that have never played D&D before and they decide to try it and hear about the virtual gaming table. Now, some might sign on for convenience's sake, but my opinion is that they average player that falls into this group won't sign on for it since it's a less graphic/more work version of what they have been playing for years. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2008 : 16:40:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Graphics isn't a factor.
If it wasn't, the leading text MUDs would have as many subscribers as the most popular MMORPGs.
It's not a factor in what I'm talking about. People who have played PnP games but are now doing MMOs aren't being seduced away by graphics -- it's the convenience factor. I'm not talking about trying to take customers away from MMOs, I'm talking about trying to reclaim lost PnP customers. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2008 : 16:46:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Sorry, Wooly, I guess I should have been more clear on what I was getting at.
They are currently marketing D&D Virtual gaming to two groups: The old-timers that need the convenience to get together with their gaming group and the new players they are trying to get to buy into the product.
The Gaming table will grab some of the old-timers, but chances are these old-timers already have virtual table-tops set up (like OpenRPG or Fantasy Grounds). So Wasbro has to make their version better than those. So far, they seem to be off to a good start with the extras that are included, plus access to the compendium.
As for the new players, that's where we run into the graphics issue. Here's these people that have never played D&D before and they decide to try it and hear about the virtual gaming table. Now, some might sign on for convenience's sake, but my opinion is that they average player that falls into this group won't sign on for it since it's a less graphic/more work version of what they have been playing for years.
But most new players are intro'ed to the game by people around them. That demographic doesn't need a virtual table.
As for the other virtual tabletops you've mentioned... I had never heard of any virtual tables until WotC said they were going to do one. One of my old gaming buddies would love to have a virtual tabletop -- and he's never heard of any existing. The ones you name may be great, but without people knowing about them, it doesn't matter how great they are.
If WotC did a decent standalone one and advertised it, it would garner a larger number of users because a much larger number of people would know about it. WotC has the resources to do it right (if not the talent, then the money to buy/contract the talent) and to make sure the gaming world knows about it. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2008 : 17:36:22
|
...And we've been way off from the topic, which is mostly my fault. So I'm shutting up now.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2008 : 19:27:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
As for the other virtual tabletops you've mentioned... I had never heard of any virtual tables until WotC said they were going to do one. One of my old gaming buddies would love to have a virtual tabletop -- and he's never heard of any existing. The ones you name may be great, but without people knowing about them, it doesn't matter how great they are.
Well, before you shut up (), I'd like to point out that the virtual tabletops I've mentioned have been around for at least 3 years, if not more (I remember first looking at them three years ago). So, it's not a new idea, and they are pretty easy to find. The main thing is, a lot of gamers are willing to give up convenience for a real table whenever possible (heck, I drive an hour one way to my weekly game). No matter how good the table is, it doesn't replace you being able to roll your dice and threaten them with a hammer if they don't cooperate. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2008 : 22:11:57
|
Without airing old news and 'dirty laundry', I don't think all of WotC's digital problems are entirely their fault. I think they were being strung along by someone who was not quite in their right mind, and it was their trust in that individual that ultimately undid the DDi (and possibly Gleemax itself).
Thats why I backed-off tearing apart their digital under-takings awhile back.
Anyhow, it IS intersting to note that I had brought-up the 'Gaming-Table' concept over at the Paizo boards some time ago, saying how it would be good for them to come out with something like that for Golarion. I was laughed at, mostly by fans, but also 'poo-pooed' by the a couple of the staff as well.
Their answer to me was "Why should we spend money on developing something like that, when there are so many excellent FREE versions of that kind of software out there?"
Why, indeed...... |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 17 Oct 2008 22:14:17 |
|
|
|
Patrakis
Learned Scribe
Canada
256 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2008 : 04:21:11
|
I think size and dedication is the main difference.
Paizo is a small company dedicated and passionate about an idea and wanting to make a bit of money while exploiting that idea (roleplaying games). That is what will save D&D.
WotC is a corporation dedicated and passionate about making money and wanting to exploit the most people with the least work. That's what happend when they were bought by Hasbro and that is what destroyed D&D. |
Dancing is like standing still, but faster.
My site: http://www.patoumonde.com |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2008 : 22:39:41
|
I think you may have (unintentionally) twisted things around there, Patrakis (you made BOTH of them sound money-hungry).
The way I look at it, Paizo is a company of gamers who are lucky enough to be able to make some money off of something they feel passionate about.
WotC is about making money first, and EVERYTHING else becomes secondary - quality, keeping the fans happy, keeping their own staff happy, etc...
When it all starts to boil down to page-counts, over-sized Fonts, and re-used artwork, then gaming has just become a job to them - MAXIMUM profit for MINIMUM effort.
And we all know what happens when people start to feel "It's just a job..."  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Patrakis
Learned Scribe
Canada
256 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2008 : 02:34:43
|
Hmmm, well that was not my intention and i'm sorry if i did...All i wanted to say is...
WotC...Bad
Paizo...Good
:)
Pat |
Dancing is like standing still, but faster.
My site: http://www.patoumonde.com |
|
|
|
lowtech
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2008 : 06:46:31
|
| The difference is that Paizo has not screwed over the majority of their fanbase. |
|
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2008 : 11:44:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
My point is that the Virtual Gaming Table would, if properly done, cut into the MMO market. You'd still have people doing both, but you've already got some people playing multiple MMOs.
The big question is: Can you change the game so a virtual gaming table works while not loosing on the roleplaying aspect of it? IMO the answer is NO. You have to realize that the game would not be the same game anymore, but rather an underpowered MMORPG. The only advantage over WoW would be the ability to create your own dungeons, but these things would probably take A LOT more time than putting together something comparable on paper, simply because you have to fully equip and design an electronic adversary while you can 'fake it' and change it on a whim with a paper one. As a PnP-DM you can let your PCs survive if you screwed up the design of an encounter, thats probably a bit harder to do at an electronic gaming table. So IMO the attempt is doomed to fail before it starts.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
...And we've been way off from the topic, which is mostly my fault. So I'm shutting up now.
As explained above I think the virtual gaming table is a really bad concept, so it isnt that off topic for me. Paizo is simply the company that wants to stick to the tradition of people sitting around a table and sharing their fun, while WotC is the company which wants people sitting in front of a computer screen and sharing fun over a headset. I know which one I prefer ... vastly. |
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
Edited by - Pandora on 31 Oct 2008 11:45:00 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2008 : 12:27:43
|
| I never said that a virtual gaming table was better than a true PnP game. I said it was a better alternative than adding MMO rules to a PnP or losing PnP players to an MMO. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2008 : 13:14:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by lowtech
The difference is that Paizo has not screwed over the majority of their fanbase.
... yet.
Not saying that they are going to. There is no nefarious plot to screw over their customers. But as has been discussed on other threads regarding Wasbro's decisions, there's never a conscious action to do this, but a series of events and 'bad' personnel where it occurs. Even when it is occurring, those involved believe they are working to make the experience better for all. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Pandora
Learned Scribe
Germany
305 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2008 : 14:29:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I never said that a virtual gaming table was better than a true PnP game. I said it was a better alternative than adding MMO rules to a PnP or losing PnP players to an MMO.
And I am saying that thinking about MMO customers and getting envious and then trying to 'fix that' by changing rules is the wrong approach to a PnP game. As long as the game is making a profit it is ok and small changes and fixing mistakes is what is needed. Giving only the choices of "add MMO rules" or "add MMO elements" for a new edition isnt stating the whole list. The best choice is not really caring about the success of the others and thinking about your own problems and how to fix them. Sure you might take an idea from them, but changing the style to be more like them is like cheap fanboyism and dressing up like your idol to look like them. You arent him and youre only deluding yourself that way.
Simply making a profit isnt the way of todays managers. Those guys want MORE profit. I mean the stocks of a company go down severely if they announce they will make less profit than expected. Does that sound right? Not to me. It is these desires that are behind the stylistic change to D&D in 4e and which make WotC a bad company atm. More profit (=Greed) is bad as the basis of decisionmaking in a company that is in the entertainment & art business.
Paizo is heading down another road, one which makes it look more friendly to the customers, but it doesnt necessarily produce a 'more balanced' set of rules. I fear they are suffering from another set of delusions (more nifty powers = more fun = more balance). I hope I am wrong, but the final release of Pathfinder will be the deciding date for that.
The problem any company is facing is trust. It takes a lot to gain the trust of the customers, but it can be lost in an instant. Risking that is only really viable if the potential gain outweighs the risk. WotC risked that and lost it pretty clearly IMO (just check out the poll: Did you subscribe to DDI?). Well the poll isnt representing the majority of players, but a good lot of people who care about the system and the Realms. Economically DDI might become a success, but spiritually its a loss for me. |
If you cant say what youre meaning,
you can never mean what youre saying.
- Centauri Minister of Intelligence, Babylon 5 |
Edited by - Pandora on 31 Oct 2008 15:00:17 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2008 : 15:08:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pandora
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I never said that a virtual gaming table was better than a true PnP game. I said it was a better alternative than adding MMO rules to a PnP or losing PnP players to an MMO.
And I am saying that thinking about MMO customers and getting envious and then trying to 'fix that' by changing rules is the wrong approach to a PnP game. As long as the game is making a profit it is ok and small changes and fixing mistakes is what is needed. Giving only the choices of "add MMO rules" or "add MMO elements" for a new edition isnt stating the whole list. The best choice is not really caring about the success of the others and thinking about your own problems and how to fix them. Sure you might take an idea from them, but changing the style to be more like them is like cheap fanboyism and dressing up like your idol to look like them. You arent him and youre only deluding yourself that way.
Are you not reading what I'm saying? I am not saying that the game needs to be changed. In fact, in at least one of my earlier posts, I said that changing the game was the wrong approach. What I'm saying is that PnP games are losing players to MMOs simply because of convenience -- nothing else. I think the virtual gaming table -- which I also previously specified as being rule-neutral -- is a way to capture the convenience of MMOs, thus bringing back those PnP players who left only because of that convenience.
I'm not looking to grab MMO-only customers, and I'm not looking to change the game. I'm looking for a way to give the PnP players -- including those who have left because they can't get together with their old group any more -- a different way to gather around the table for some PnP fun. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 01 Nov 2008 : 23:09:14
|
| Pandora, I don't think it's fair to assume that WoTC has not profited from DDI, at least not based on a single poll here at Candlekeep. While it's true that most of the sages and scribes here do not particularly care for 4E FR (and 4E in general) and all that it entails, I'm sure that a similar poll conducted on the WoTC boards or EnWorld would yield a different result. My hunch is that DDI has most likely not been as successful as they hoped for, but the key question is: has it been succesful enough for Hasbro? |
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
Shemmy
Senior Scribe
USA
492 Posts |
Posted - 02 Nov 2008 : 05:13:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asgetrion
Pandora, I don't think it's fair to assume that WoTC has not profited from DDI, at least not based on a single poll here at Candlekeep. While it's true that most of the sages and scribes here do not particularly care for 4E FR (and 4E in general) and all that it entails, I'm sure that a similar poll conducted on the WoTC boards or EnWorld would yield a different result. My hunch is that DDI has most likely not been as successful as they hoped for, but the key question is: has it been succesful enough for Hasbro?
That's the big question. And regardless of the answer, it probably won't have any impact till we get near the end of the next financial year. Given the crash and burn of Gleemax, and what seems like a year of wasted coding with none of the major DDI projects ready, months after the intended rollout, things are assuredly under the hoped for levels. Things may get better, and if those DDI portions end up doing well, they might salvage the whole thing, but otherwise I foresee a slow crawl towards the project getting axed.
However if we wanted to speculate on DDI profit by looking at the web traffic to wizards.com over the past year, it's not a good pattern, and traffic has declined steadily since the initial boost at 4e (which was still below that of the pre-Gleemax levels during periods of 3e as I understand it).
That's just my questionably informed speculation. |
Shemeska the Marauder, King of the Crosstrade; voted #1 best Arcanaloth in Sigil two hundred years running by the people who know what's best for them; chant broker; prospective Sigil council member next election; and official travel agent for Chamada Holiday specials LLC.
|
|
|
|
Ayunken-vanzan
Senior Scribe
Germany
657 Posts |
Posted - 02 Nov 2008 : 08:22:41
|
And as someone at the Paizo messageboards has pointed out, the same is true for EnWorld: A poll on the EnWorld boards would undoubtedly show on overwhelming enthusiasm for 4e, but since 4e has been announced and EnWolrd has shown its support for the new edition, the traffic on EnWorld has declined dramatically. I am sorry, I can't find the post(s) now, but I will try to add it later.
€: Found it! (three cheers for Google's site search!). Scroll down, it's the post from BryonD, Mon, Oct 20, 2008, 05:24 PM.
quote:
Enworld's traffic is down 50% since 4E was released compared to the year leading up to the release.
His analysis of the traffic is based on the numbers from Alexa.com. The following posts on this and the next page dicuss his analysis closely. |
"What mattered our lives now? When our world had been torn from us? Folk wept, or drank, or stood staring out over the land, wondering what new horror each dawn would bring."
Elender Stormfall of Suzail
"Anyone can kill deities, cause plagues, or destroy organizations. It takes real skill to make them live on."
Varl
FR/D&D-Links • 2ed Downloads |
Edited by - Ayunken-vanzan on 02 Nov 2008 08:40:24 |
|
|
|
freyar
Learned Scribe
Canada
220 Posts |
Posted - 02 Nov 2008 : 13:56:18
|
| Regarding ENWorld, I don't think that traffic there is particularly slow now, though. It's just that it was extremely high during the lead-up to 4e because ENWorld was really the main news site for new D&D info. It's kind of natural that people aren't looking for "pre-release hints" any more. There's certainly just as vigorous a posting community there as there was, say, in the 1st half of 2007 (based on my personal experience). (And I say this as someone sticking with 3e.) |
My DnD Links and Creations |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 03 Nov 2008 : 15:32:32
|
| As always, it's not only important to have actual data, but to interpret it correctly... |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3254 Posts |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2008 : 19:13:02
|
I haven't been over to the Paizo boards in awhile, but IIRC there were at least two other 4e adventure releases that sounded exactly like stuff Paizo has released.
They are floundering for ideas, because they've run out of their own.
Anyhow, I have my own way of judging things - not only do I have a couple of sites of my own, but I am also constanatly contacted by sites (like the Wiki and others internationally) to ask permission to host my maps, or for special requests.
I have almost no requests for 4e maps, and what few I have done have garnered nearly zero interest (I can tell by my 'views' and 'downloads').
I have also noticed that the pages are not moving nearly as quickly as hey used to over at the WotC boards (whereas this place seems to have picked-up speed). It used to be when I logged on there threads would move off the page within a day, and I found I had to log-on several times a day just to keep up. Yesterday I went on there and a post made THREE DAYS AGO was about #7 from the top!
And that after reducing their FR boards to just three (which should have increased the traffic-jam, not eliminated it).
Now, I know 'protectors' (my opposite of 'detractors') will say that Internaet numbers are unreliable, and the data could be read differently, yada, yadda. In fact, someone above specifically defended WotC by stating that the numbers at Enworld were higher during the lead-up because more people wanted to know what was going on back then.
Doesn't that mean, in turn, that LESS people want to know what is still coming down-the-pipe from them, now that they have the rules/FR books in their hands? When a product is phenomenl, shouldn't every RPG site on the planet be buzzing with activity after it's release? 
To say that lower numbers now have no bearing is ludicrous - when Privateer Press announced their revised rules and new units their site was swamped with people wanting to get previews, and after the stuff came out trafic went UP, not DOWN, because were literally 'intoxicated' by the quality of the rules and minis, and were hungry to discuss them.
When you see a dramatic lack of interest in a prooduct following it's release, there is NO WAY that can be interpreted as a good thing, and I don't care HOW you personally spin it. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 11 Nov 2008 19:17:50 |
|
|
|
khorne
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1073 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2008 : 20:18:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Darkmeer
As has been said before, Paizo runs a clean operation in comparison to Wizards of the Coast, primarily because they had not sold out to a multinational company. Not sayin' that they are doing the right or wrong thing there, but they are beholden to someone else as far as profit margins and the rules thereof are concerned.
It's not just that, though... TSR was its own company. And while they did do a lot of great stuff, they're also the ones that decided to bolt everything they could on to the Realms and impose the sometimes silly Code of Ethics on the setting.
Why did they bother with that Ethics stuff in the first place? And by the way, I've heard that TSR went belly-up because a certain woman had control of the company. Is that true? |
If I were a ranger, I would pick NDA for my favorite enemy |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The main differences between Paizo and WoTC?
