Posted on Facebook by Rob Kuntz:



https://postimg.cc/2VrmW52p

Quote from: TheShadowSpawn on June 24, 2024, 01:27:32 PMPosted on Facebook by Rob Kuntz:



https://postimg.cc/2VrmW52p

Hell, yeah!  The problem with these inferior "designers" at WotC is that they are, in fact, inferior.  They will wilt in front of passion and truth the way they've wilted in front of everything else in their pathetic, info-bubbled lives.  If Rob wants to start a Crusade against WotC, I have only two words for him: "Deus vult!"

Make a new game to replace D&D or pick one from the OSR to succeed it. I'm tired of hearing about WotC.

Same for all the other hijacked IPs. Make new ones to replace them.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on June 24, 2024, 02:29:36 PMMake a new game to replace D&D or pick one from the OSR to succeed it. I'm tired of hearing about WotC.

Same for all the other hijacked IPs. Make new ones to replace them.

Well, BoxCrayonTales is tired of hearing about WotC, so we better stop talking about them! 

Uhhhh, no.

The French Collaborators were probably tired of talking about the German occupation, too.  But hey, no one expects you to do any heavy lifting.  So just sit in the corner with your whining, nihilism, and petulance.  The adults will be in charge here.

I'm not ready to give up D&D.  Neither is Ron Kuntz, apparently.  Nor am I ready to give up Battletech, WH40K, Star Wars, or anything else.  See, that's the beauty of ideas.  Governments can enforce commercial monopolies on ideas, but they can't keep us from using those ideas ourselves.  The story of Aladdin didn't suddenly become Disney's, and people will be telling their own versions of that story long after Disney is forgotten.  Same for Robin Hood, King Arthur, and Star Wars.  So, no, we're not going to roll over and surrender.  If you don't want to hear about it it, stop clicking on these threads...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 09:43:01 AMExcept that's too simplistic, especially when outrage marketing doesn't work, especially when it comes to sales and profits.  If sales were being boosted, even by some other factor that they could claim was because of the marketing, then the practice could survive.  But no one who does it sees increased sales!  Having a good excuse for failure doesn't help keep your job when all you do is fail.  Eventually, the boss wants success.

I've presented my theory above, and I don't think any explanation can be complete unless it addresses the business side (the consistent lost revenue) of the equation along with the marketing.  Outrage marketing is manifestly NOT working, especially to increase sales or grow brands.  So why allow your marketing dept. to keep doing it?  It's not like CEOs view marketing as some magic that they can't evaluate or speak to.  These are, for the most part, pretty business savvy people, who needed to understand business and marketing to get to where they are, right?

It does "work" short term, or at least did work at one time.  It's going to the same well over and over that makes it not work long term.  Though that's across companies and time.  That is, whoever did it first got the best short-term bang with the least long-term consequences.  Now, it's so common that the consequences come on the heels of benefits so quickly that the benefits get stepped on almost immediately.  But the marketing profession was overrun with lemmings almost as soon as it came into existence.  So nothing new there.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 24, 2024, 03:09:57 PMIt does "work" short term, or at least did work at one time.

Did it, though?  I can't think of any case where a product was made a gigantic hit based off of outrage marketing.  There are cases of small or niche projects that gain from group identification (like Thirsty Sword Lesbians or some other Kickstarter boondoggle), but even those cases are very small and more about, "Support us or be bad people!" and not, "Help us get rid of the old audience!" which is the core of every outrage marketing stunt.  I'm genuinely curious as to any example of it actually working, especially for a large corporation with an established base.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 02:46:06 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on June 24, 2024, 02:29:36 PMMake a new game to replace D&D or pick one from the OSR to succeed it. I'm tired of hearing about WotC.

Same for all the other hijacked IPs. Make new ones to replace them.

Well, BoxCrayonTales is tired of hearing about WotC, so we better stop talking about them!

Uhhhh, no.

The French Collaborators were probably tired of talking about the German occupation, too.  But hey, no one expects you to do any heavy lifting.  So just sit in the corner with your whining, nihilism, and petulance.  The adults will be in charge here.

I'm not ready to give up D&D.  Neither is Ron Kuntz, apparently.  Nor am I ready to give up Battletech, WH40K, Star Wars, or anything else.  See, that's the beauty of ideas.  Governments can enforce commercial monopolies on ideas, but they can't keep us from using those ideas ourselves.  The story of Aladdin didn't suddenly become Disney's, and people will be telling their own versions of that story long after Disney is forgotten.  Same for Robin Hood, King Arthur, and Star Wars.  So, no, we're not going to roll over and surrender.  If you don't want to hear about it it, stop clicking on these threads...

Great! Make your own versions and compete with them in the marketplace. You ain't getting far without money

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 03:23:48 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 24, 2024, 03:09:57 PMIt does "work" short term, or at least did work at one time.

Did it, though?  I can't think of any case where a product was made a gigantic hit based off of outrage marketing.  There are cases of small or niche projects that gain from group identification (like Thirsty Sword Lesbians or some other Kickstarter boondoggle), but even those cases are very small and more about, "Support us or be bad people!" and not, "Help us get rid of the old audience!" which is the core of every outrage marketing stunt.  I'm genuinely curious as to any example of it actually working, especially for a large corporation with an established base.

That's why "work" is in quotes.  As in, no, it's never a good idea for the long-term prospects of the company.  However, if the goal is to maximize short-term profits and the people who come out ahead in that respect, then it "works" the same as all the other tactics built along those lines.  Like laying off 20% of your critical work force to make next quarter's financials look leaner. 

For SJW, there another aspect of this.  A normal person wants something sustainable.  So these kinds of tactics are bad news.  A predatory capitalist wants deniability. They still will go after the short-term gain even if it kills the host, but killing the host is not seen as a positive.  It's just a sometimes necessary condition of the tactic.  An SJW, wants maximum short-term gain, deniability if they can get it, or a dead host that no one else can benefit from at the very least.  For an SJW, it does work, not just "work", because all the bugs in the process are features. 

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 24, 2024, 04:53:51 PMAn SJW, wants maximum short-term gain, deniability if they can get it, or a dead host that no one else can benefit from at the very least.  For an SJW, it does work, not just "work", because all the bugs in the process are features. 

OK, this part rings especially true to me.  It's like a losing baker in a contest destroying the winner's cake.  The woke are so talentless, so bereft of ideas and ability, that they can't stand to see better things survive.  If they can destroy D&D (the real spirit of it, which also lives on in the OSR movement), then there's nothing to compare their dreck to.  Jealousy really is the root of most of this.  They hate you for being better, not just because they can't, but because your very excellence proves they can't.  So, yeah, you hit the nail on the head there...

Do any of you actually work in corporate environments?  I can tell you exactly what's happening here.  Some middle-aged VP of something or another went out and proclaimed that all artwork and/or content must meet some minimum company standard so they can stick something in a powerpoint to show the board and get a raise for being such good company stooges.  This person has never in their life played an RPG and could not give the first fuck about it; if they feel anything about their customers it's probably a vague scorn for the nerds because they're too old to be part of the nerd culture being overrun by tourists generation.  The fact that the art is ridiculous by RPG art standards is not noticeable by them as they never read any RPGs, and even if they had they wouldn't care.  They have a checkbox to check, so they're going to check it and go back to cashing their six-figure paycheck for sitting around doing nothing all day.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 09:43:01 AMExcept that's too simplistic, especially when outrage marketing doesn't work, especially when it comes to sales and profits.  If sales were being boosted, even by some other factor that they could claim was because of the marketing, then the practice could survive. 

Marketing across the board has this one track mind mania that if something worked once. Then it MUST work again. They would not be seeding their previews with stuff tailor made to piss someone off otherwise. And look at all the videos already about the Mexican orcs and the wheelchair. It works! It gets eyes on the product.

Personally I do not believe it garners as much sales as they think. But as said. Its FREE advertising. They are already saving money just there probably.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on June 24, 2024, 03:23:48 PM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on June 24, 2024, 03:09:57 PMIt does "work" short term, or at least did work at one time.

Did it, though? 

Tes. There was an essay on what triggered this marketing craze. Some product was defective and someone made a rage video and that SPIKED sales as people bought one just to see for themselves.

Using Candlekeep and Pundit as the example again. Just from his outrage post and video people when out and bought it to see for themselves and surprise surprise. No wheelchair accessible dungeons and Im not sure theres a wheelchair in the whole thing? One?

Rinse-repeat.

Curiosity purchases are apparently a hellishly potent thing.

Quote from: Valatar on June 24, 2024, 07:00:13 PMDo any of you actually work in corporate environments?  I can tell you exactly what's happening here.  Some middle-aged VP of something or another went out and proclaimed that all artwork and/or content must meet some minimum company standard so they can stick something in a powerpoint to show the board and get a raise for being such good company stooges.  This person has never in their life played an RPG and could not give the first fuck about it; if they feel anything about their customers it's probably a vague scorn for the nerds because they're too old to be part of the nerd culture being overrun by tourists generation.  The fact that the art is ridiculous by RPG art standards is not noticeable by them as they never read any RPGs, and even if they had they wouldn't care.  They have a checkbox to check, so they're going to check it and go back to cashing their six-figure paycheck for sitting around doing nothing all day.

Exactly.

Quote from: Omega on June 24, 2024, 09:37:57 PMJust from his outrage post and video people when out and bought it to see for themselves...

Gonna need some numbers or documentation on that.  There may be a handful of who were curious and bought the module because of the outrage.  But most people don't see reviews like "This is crap!" and go "I need to buy this."  More people are likely to be scared off than buy from curiosity.  So I need some documentation for this assertion, because the actual sales numbers for Candlekeep are worse than Spelljammer (which was a huge under-seller)...

Quote from: Valatar on June 24, 2024, 07:00:13 PMSome middle-aged VP of something or another went out and proclaimed that all artwork and/or content must meet some minimum company standard...

More likely an executive decision designed to ensure no loss of investment capital from the major asset management firms out their who use DEI as a major risk category to drive corporate behavior.