Quote from: Wisithir on December 12, 2022, 09:49:54 PM
How is a make your-own-adventure-kit a brand anyways? The GM makes or breaks the game, so D&D lunch box makes as littles sense as a "insert 3d printer brand here" lunch box.

Just sell rules and art. Duh.

Quote from: Brad on December 12, 2022, 07:55:11 PM
Hmmm...now a tech recruiter contacting me about working for WotC is starting to make more sense. Honestly IDGAF if they want to make D&D lunchboxes and hoodies or whatever, that's what you do with successful brands. The issue is the MAIN PRODUCT is starting to suck royal ass. If they actually had a good version of the game I wanted to play, I'd probably be a lot more apt to get a t-shirt with the logo emblazoned on it, but I wouldn't be caught dead wearing that stuff now. I think this is just a last ditch to squeeze consumers for as much as they can get before people eventually stop caring about the brand entirely. Or maybe it turns simply into a brand, and the game disappears...there are a lot of people who are spending billions for what amounts to nostalgia with zero intention of ever actually using the product (a lot of retrogaming stuff, Star Wars figures, whatever).

Ding, ding, ding, ding, annnd we have a winner!!!

This is what Hasbro is trying to do with the whole 'lifestyle brand' nonsense.

Not they are not trying to make the game 'disappear', but if the D&D 'brand' gets put over like say, the pre-Endgame marvel films; the suits will not care.

RPG's are still a niche hobby, and as much as D&D has blown up, MtG still outsells it over 2:1 in cash money.

The Real money in the D&D brand isn't the game. It's the potential to leverage its place in popular culture into big money making items like toys, tv, AAA video games, and movies.

The whole 'microtransaction' One VTT stuff is a money squeezing sideshow to what WotC hopes will happen with the D&D brand...

Quote from: Brad on December 12, 2022, 08:59:57 PM

Quote from: Zelen on December 12, 2022, 08:52:52 PM
I did see some job postings with WotC recently. Jobs on what I can only assume is part of their digital strategy. I would never myself nor recommend anyone I know work with WotC, with how things have degenerated there -- Probably a good idea to shed that hostile corporate culture if you want meaningfully talented people to work for you.

The job I was approached with was a project management position for what I understood to be some sort of digital gaming platform. The pay was pathetic for the responsibilities and required experience/qualifications, so maybe they're just trying to appeal to gamers. I have heard places like EA also do not pay a decent wage when compared to industry-standards, so good luck to them trying to find someone competent I suppose. The guy from my PhD program I graduated with actually worked in the industry in Austin and he was banking, so there's money to be made, just not at WotC apparently.

Just as with jobs in the musical instrument and equipment industries, I'm sure WOTC thinks they can offer low pay and still attract people who have dreamed of having a cool job.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 12, 2022, 10:11:43 PM
RPG's are still a niche hobby, and as much as D&D has blown up, MtG still outsells it over 2:1 in cash money.

The Real money in the D&D brand isn't the game. It's the potential to leverage its place in popular culture into big money making items like toys, tv, AAA video games, and movies.

While I'm not saying you're wrong, this seems like a bet I'd rather be short than long on.

D&D's place in popular culture is nowhere near what Marvel comics had. Marvel arguably had a bigger presence in 1974 than D&D has today. DC comics had a bigger presence in 1974. While D&D hit regular bookstores, I don't remember Dragon having near the presence at newsstands that comics had into the 90s (I did buy a couple of issues at a news and book store, but never a newstand). Yet even those movie lines are boom and bust.

What art screams D&D a tenth as well as Batman, Superman, and Spiderman iconography?

A lifestyle brand needs more penetration for a longer time than D&D has ever had. If they can keep the current fad of playing going for another decade they might have the needed cultural background placement. Even then, they can't change iconic characters or trade dress. If they'd really wanted this the iconic characters from the 3e rule books, which seem to have had the most penetration, and art style should have continued until today.

Quote from: Brad on December 12, 2022, 08:59:57 PM
The job I was approached with was a project management position for what I understood to be some sort of digital gaming platform. The pay was pathetic for the responsibilities and required experience/qualifications, so maybe they're just trying to appeal to gamers. I have heard places like EA also do not pay a decent wage when compared to industry-standards, so good luck to them trying to find someone competent I suppose. The guy from my PhD program I graduated with actually worked in the industry in Austin and he was banking, so there's money to be made, just not at WotC apparently.

I'm in banking and from what I can see a programmer with a mathematical background and only a BS can do a lot better in certain types of banking than anything game related...or at least do just as well with less stress (be the back office, not the trade desk, however).

Quote from: PulpHerb on December 12, 2022, 11:47:28 PM
...
D&D's place in popular culture is nowhere near what Marvel comics had. Marvel arguably had a bigger presence in 1974 than D&D has today. DC comics had a bigger presence in 1974. While D&D hit regular bookstores, I don't remember Dragon having near the presence at newsstands that comics had into the 90s (I did buy a couple of issues at a news and book store, but never a newstand). Yet even those movie lines are boom and bust.

What art screams D&D a tenth as well as Batman, Superman, and Spiderman iconography?

A lifestyle brand needs more penetration for a longer time than D&D has ever had. If they can keep the current fad of playing going for another decade they might have the needed cultural background placement. Even then, they can't change iconic characters or trade dress. If they'd really wanted this the iconic characters from the 3e rule books, which seem to have had the most penetration, and art style should have continued until today.

True.

Which is why WotC is pouring a ton of money into into it to try and put it over.

The D&D 'brand' doesn't have to do crazy marvel movie money.

It just needs to get over enough that the toys, tv, AAA video games, and movies generate a decent ROI profit all on their own. Which when taken together should completely eclipse what the RPG pulls in.

In my opinion; The kicker for all this is that the movie really has to stick the landing...

If it just does ok, meh, current status quo. If it flops... that has big downstream implications for the toys, tv, and AAA video games.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 13, 2022, 03:47:18 AM
In my opinion; The kicker for all this is that the movie really has to stick the landing...

If it just does ok, meh, current status quo. If it flops... that has big downstream implications for the toys, tv, and AAA video games.

My money is on the movie face planting; the trailer has got the obvious "white males are buttmonkeys" elements, self-referetial irony and a rock music score that says the people involved don't really understand the source material and so are shooting for a satire.

Very few are going to be drawn into "I want to pay money to experience being a buttmonkey in a satirical setting." Frankly, the best marketing D&D ever got in terms of movies was The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

The ONLY way I see it possibly working is if they put a "Gamers" overlay onto it where the real story is about players around the table growing as people while playing this frankly ridiculous game.

Otherwise, I say it's destined for Flopville.

I think a TV show would work better for D&D because you'd have time and space to build up a setting.  I think the movie will be fun and brainless.  I don't think we'll get discussion between two fighters about the various advantages of the glaive-guisarme over the voulge so it will never truly speak to the true D&D fans.  Funny's fine if you're funny.  When I look at Disney's She Hulk tv show, it's greatest sin is that it's not very funny.  In a commedy there is no greater sin.  So if they're going to be funny, they really need to nail it because funny is one of the hardest things to do well.

Quote from: David Johansen on December 11, 2022, 08:48:20 PM
The thing is that the executives don't care about "roleplaying games" they care about brands and monetization.

It is worse than that. They are following whatever marketing tells them. Whatever marketing things is trending in the ad-wars. This is why outrage marketing is being pushed so hard. Its the new trend and it can be combined with the woke trend for exponentially more effect.

Piled on top of the garbage heap of so many other marketing obsessions.

I'm gonna play devils advocate here.

I think a lot of people (not necessarily anyone here) overlook the views of WotC's leaders.

So Hasbro/WotC has leaders that come from a specific paradigm. Each person in charge of WotC has slowly moved the needle away from what we generally agree is "Good D&D". Well if we're going to assume any honesty, these people have had very different gaming experiences and life experiences than us. D&D never required multi-level marketing in order to enjoy, but of course D&D is a corporate brand, now, that demands it because of their stakeholders.

It becomes easy to see how each succeeding leader of the D&D Brand has moved the needle into their area of expertise since 3e. And they're all hammers looking for nails to hit with that expertise. 3e became the era of System Mastery, which apotheosed into 4e under Rob Heinsoo, the implosion was what allowed Mike Mearls, who actually tried to reel it back in, but is still very much of the 3e era System Mastery crowd, but made 5e as an "apology edition" to everyone. And honestly I think only Mike could have done this. He's probably the least politicized of the then-WotC staff fit to make a stab at it. The results are... what they are.

But there are MUCH higher expectations of a corporate brand than what we are admitting we're willing to spend. We all know only GM's are the real whales. Because we want more content to use with our games. Players buy, generally, far less. So it makes perfect sense WotC is going to try and maximize monetization, who better than to get someone from Microsoft to turn the brand into a bloated hybrid Mobile App? Consider the fact that now Players will also *have* to spend gold to engage in what otherwise didn't require any investment at all?

Consider all the corollary items that will become virtualized? Your "mini" will be virtual. WotC can sell you customized appearances and other cosmetics. Why buy minis? Why learn how to paint? Why buy dice? WotC will likely have virtual dice-rollers and you can buy your own cosmetic virtual dice with effects!

And while some of you will sneer at it (I do). I'm honest enough to see that this might work for the new generation of gamers that are nose-in-phone. And to be honest, Mobile gaming is worth sneering at - yet, I am two-years into Marvel Strikeforce, and I tell myself I'm not going buy in-game currency, but I do on occasion. AND I HATE MOBILE GAMES. But yet... here is this game that scratches my long atrophied love for Magic the Gathering... and oh look! Classic Captain America costume! Neat I love how he bounces his shield off everyone's head... uhh...

And you bet your ass WotC is banking on this. Most of us, deservedly, will decry! "THIS IS NOT D&D"... and it isn't. But that's why its become so important for US to hold on to our traditionally played TTRPG's. Leave the beast. I'm SURE many people saying this will still dip their toes into the new D&D and find novelty. That's fine. But "Traditional D&D" will only survive with us - we need GM's to run them, we need players to step up and learn how to GM, we need veteran GM's to teach those players how to do it Old School.

I actually agree, after thinking about it, that D&D is undermonetized. BY THEIR STANDARDS. I have dropped a cent on Marvel Comics in any form since One More Day. Yet I've probably dropped at least $100 dollars over the last two years on a game I play casually and insist I don't spend money on intentionally... yet there it is. The same is true with D&D - I don't buy any WotC products. But I'm constantly looking at my old 1e/2e material for inspiration and general love. If I had to pay a dollar or two here and there to do so, I likely would.

WotC is banking on that.

Hasbro is publicly traded, so they are obliged to increase profits.  They need to sell to the largest available pool of people with money.  Their new former Microsoft staff know how to make money with online software subscriptions.  Micro-WOTC will go down that path with One End. 5e is player heavy with a DM shortage. One DnD will become the computer DM like other online games. 

Micro-WOTC wants to control all sales.  They see Micro-WOTC as competing with the current world of 3rd party 5e publishers. They will force 3rd parties to publish through One DnD.

In the end this will rip the heart out of official WOTC DnD, because DnD is a community hobby game where friends create their own adventures.  The OSR will remain as the heart and soul of DnD.

Quote from: engrgmr on December 14, 2022, 10:27:39 AM
Hasbro is publicly traded, so they are obliged to increase profits.  They need to sell to the largest available pool of people with money.  Their new former Microsoft staff know how to make money with online software subscriptions.  Micro-WOTC will go down that path with One End. 5e is player heavy with a DM shortage. One DnD will become the computer DM like other online games. 

Micro-WOTC wants to control all sales.  They see Micro-WOTC as competing with the current world of 3rd party 5e publishers. They will force 3rd parties to publish through One DnD.

In the end this will rip the heart out of official WOTC DnD, because DnD is a community hobby game where friends create their own adventures.  The OSR will remain as the heart and soul of DnD.

Yeah, agreed. The just don't understand, at a fundamental level, what ttrpgs are about. These business school, mba, execs, will tear it apart.

I think they should have had a few new and goo movies and a game under their belts before talking 'lifestyle brand'.

I was wondering earlier if the long term effect of D&D as a lifestyle brand will be there will always be a D&D ttrpg, probably a new version every 5 years ago...

Produced by a company that licenses the name. D&D becomes less the foundation stone game of the hobby, but a series of licensed games like all the Star Trek, Middle Earth, Conan, DC, and Marvel games we have had. The license would fail to renew for whatever reason only for another company to step and have their shot at D&D.

This seems like it would be the ideal setup for Hasbro.

Quote from: tenbones on December 14, 2022, 10:12:16 AMConsider all the corollary items that will become virtualized? Your "mini" will be virtual. WotC can sell you customized appearances and other cosmetics. Why buy minis? Why learn how to paint? Why buy dice? WotC will likely have virtual dice-rollers and you can buy your own cosmetic virtual dice with effects!And you bet your ass WotC is banking on this.

There is an entire generation gamers who are used to paying cash for cosmetics, for power-up, or to unlock new character types. Want to play a half-dragon, then just buy the "Legacy of Dragons" rulebook for $7.99 to unlock that species. Want to play a Dark Elf, buy the "Drizzt guide to the Underdark" book etc. Subscribe for a year and get a +2 item of your choice. Since it is all going through the app, it is a trivial feature to implement.

QuoteBut "Traditional D&D" will only survive with us - we need GM's to run them, we need players to step up and learn how to GM, we need veteran GM's to teach those players how to do it Old School.

Here's the thing. If Hasbro can create an app that allows Dungeon Masters to run games for money, then DMs will be readily available for the millions of people out there who want to play but don't have a group. If this can work, One D&D will be hugely successful and lucrative despite any protests against the monetization.