And if so, how will that affect what we see and play?
Lord Hobie
Quote from: Lord HobieAnd if so, how will that affect what we see and play?
Lord Hobie
IIRC, they have been working on 4E for over 2 years. I'm not sure I'd call that a rush job.
Well, as I was just saying in a thread at TBP, the (open, i.e., by the audience, not designers) playtest period, having just started, seems VERY short, and largely confined to a subset of the audience that is not purely representative of the whole. That in itself worries me.
In one big way, it is a rushjob. Its a rushjob in the sense that they didn't actually bring it out to the level of public consultation until very late in the game.
I'm betting they didn't playtest it outside of in-house at Wizards headquarters until rather late too.
The whole thing smacks of incestuous and lacking in consultation or outside objective looks.
Which is why it seems like there's so many things about it that should be done already and determined that they sound like they're not sure about, while there's other things that really don't sound very smart that they're boasting big about because they're all defensive about what they've done.
RPGPundit
I just don't get the big picture for 4e. Apart from moving to the online model, which I see as peripheral to the actual game and essentially business-driven, what is the VISION?? Maybe it's there, maybe there is indeed a clear direction, but I haven't seen it yet.
Quote from: The_ShadowI just don't get the big picture for 4e. Apart from moving to the online model, which I see as peripheral to the actual game and essentially business-driven, what is the VISION?? Maybe it's there, maybe there is indeed a clear direction, but I haven't seen it yet.
I worry that you haven't seen it yet because WOTC hasn't seen it yet. :(
Lord Hobie
Quote from: RPGPunditWhich is why it seems like there's so many things about it that should be done already and determined that they sound like they're not sure about, while there's other things that really don't sound very smart that they're boasting big about because they're all defensive about what they've done.
Having seen similar behavior in smaller RPG design houses, I'm getting a whiff of that too. Not that I couldn't be reading into it, but that's the way it looks to me.
I can agree that the playtesting maybe got off the ground later than we expected but i don't think the desing was rushed.
I'm sure in-house playtesting has been going on for several months now. They still have ~5 months of outside playtesting, so I'm not worried. They have a lot people playtesting.
Rushed wouldn't be the term I use. "Chaotic" would be better.
They seem very confused about certain things.
It isn't really surprising, when you look at this design team and compare it to the previous.
I think that the answer could be that "the latter stages of the development are being rushed."
I have no doubt that 4e has been developing since Mike Mearls came onboard with Wizards. But if you take all the blogs at face value, as well as the fact that playtests are still ongoing (or starting?), then unless they are feeding us stuff that is 6 months old, i would say that the latter parts of development are a bit rushed. This may be indicative of the announcment being brought forward (for whatever reason), meaning that the late stages of dev are being compressed. Although admittedly with a smaller company without the resources of Wizards, when one of my projects is done, after you've done playtesting, a round or two of edits, then the thing goes for layout about 5-6 months before you expect it to hit the shelves...
Quote from: McrowI can agree that the playtesting maybe got off the ground later than we expected but i don't think the desing was rushed.
I'm sure in-house playtesting has been going on for several months now. They still have ~5 months of outside playtesting, so I'm not worried. They have a lot people playtesting.
No, see, 3e had a LOT of people playtesting. If you were to tell me that there were that many people playtesting 4e (and that they weren't all Wizards employees and their gaming groups), I'd feel far more secure about all this.
The fact is that by any account, the number of people playtesting 4e is miniscule by comparison to the number of people who had input in the playtesting of 3e. And to me that's a huge mistake.
RPGPundit
Quote from: One Horse TownI think that the answer could be that "the latter stages of the development are being rushed."
I have no doubt that 4e has been developing since Mike Mearls came onboard with Wizards. But if you take all the blogs at face value, as well as the fact that playtests are still ongoing (or starting?), then unless they are feeding us stuff that is 6 months old, i would say that the latter parts of development are a bit rushed. This may be indicative of the announcment being brought forward (for whatever reason), meaning that the late stages of dev are being compressed. Although admittedly with a smaller company without the resources of Wizards, when one of my projects is done, after you've done playtesting, a round or two of edits, then the thing goes for layout about 5-6 months before you expect it to hit the shelves...
Yes, the evidence does seem to be mounting to the effect that they didn't so much lie to us about the release date, as they changed their mind and decided to release early.
But there can't possibly be a good reason for
rushing a project as important as a NEW fucking edition of D&D. So again, huge mistake.
RPGPundit
Well, if 4E is a rush job, then we look fucking forward to Mongoose Traveller, due out in FEBRUARY.
I don't know, Pundit. Perhaps there is a reason, and we just don't know it.
It does seem like someone suddenly lit a fire under someone's ass. But that happens all the time in companies. Slowly develop something over several months, and then suddenly a sales guy comes is and says he told the client it will be delivered next week. You shake your head and ask "WTF? our competition isn't coming to market for 1 year - we'll beat them by at least 6 months!" He says something about the Board pushing him.
You find out later that the competitor was also heavily courting your prized client and the Board felt the need to nip that before it had any traction.
Just as an example of not having all the information that went into a decision even when you are informed....
Quote from: RPGPunditBut there can't possibly be a good reason for rushing a project as important as a NEW fucking edition of D&D.
Sure there can. Market visibility.
Ask yourself: Who decided there was a need for a new edition? Wizards of the Coast themselves, or their corporate owners, Hasbro? Now ask them.
A new edition puts the brand name squarely in the eye of the consumer again. A new edition sells new books. Hasbro is in the business of making money, and they do so by selling you what they produce, not necessarily what you want.
!i!
Quote from: Pierce InverarityWell, if 4E is a rush job, then we look fucking forward to Mongoose Traveller, due out in FEBRUARY.
God damn, there's a true statement if ever there was one. Announcing the publication date before even starting a manuscript was a little hasty, wasn't it?
!i!
Quote from: Ian AbsentiaSure there can. Market visibility.
Ask yourself: Who decided there was a need for a new edition? Wizards of the Coast themselves, or their corporate owners, Hasbro? Now ask them.
A new edition puts the brand name squarely in the eye of the consumer again. A new edition sells new books. Hasbro is in the business of making money, and they do so by selling you what they produce, not necessarily what you want.
!i!
Precisely - but a new edition that suffers from being rushed out the door runs the risk of not selling as many new books, right?
Lord Hobie
Quote from: Lord HobiePrecisely - but a new edition that suffers from being rushed out the door runs the risk of not selling as many new books, right?
That depends on the goal. Big companies (and by "big" I mean really,
really big corporations) can often afford to rush a slipshod product out the door just to keep a brand name in people's faces. What they may lack in quality, they can make up for with aggressive marketing. I was reading an article just last night about how the Barbie division of Mattel (yes, the
division) has often done just that to undermine the launch of competing doll lines -- it didn't have to be good, it just needed to be out there
now. Now,
D&D ain't dolls, and I don't think they're rushing out a new product in direct competition with another game, but maybe WotC is desperate to capture more of the market share for other reasons (anyone else hear a corporate whip cracking?).
And back to your question, isn't this rather what happened with 3e? Everyone holding a copy of v3.
5 knows how that went down.
!i!
Quote from: Ian AbsentiaGod damn, there's a true statement if ever there was one. Announcing the publication date before even starting a manuscript was a little hasty, wasn't it?
!i!
Well, it is Mongoose, so what else can you expect?
And I would point out, in support of your post #18, that such is pretty much exactly how Electronic Arts does it's business these days.
Quote from: Ian AbsentiaThat depends on the goal. Big companies (and by "big" I mean really, really big corporations) can often afford to rush a slipshod product out the door just to keep a brand name in people's faces. What they may lack in quality, they can make up for with aggressive marketing. I was reading an article just last night about how the Barbie division of Mattel (yes, the division) has often done just that to undermine the launch of competing doll lines -- it didn't have to be good, it just needed to be out there now. Now, D&D ain't dolls, and I don't think they're rushing out a new product in direct competition with another game, but maybe WotC is desperate to capture more of the market share for other reasons (anyone else hear a corporate whip cracking?).
And back to your question, isn't this rather what happened with 3e? Everyone holding a copy of v3.5 knows how that went down.
!i!
Your point re: the corporate whip is well-taken.
One wonders, as far as the D&D brand is concerned, how many more times we'll hear Hasbro's whip crack before they decide to put the beast out to pasture (or unload at a fire sale)...
Lord Hobie
Quote from: Ian AbsentiaNow, D&D ain't dolls, and I don't think they're rushing out a new product in direct competition with another game, but maybe WotC is desperate to capture more of the market share for other reasons (anyone else hear a corporate whip cracking?).
The reason is pretty simple. Sales are down. They've been for quite a while.
It's a fact of the roleplaying industry that after corebooks, supplement sales slowly dwindle down until they are effectively not producing a good return.
So they're giving the brand a shot in the arm with a new edition.
And we have a winner, gentlemen.
!i!
Quote from: Consonant DudeThe reason is pretty simple. Sales are down. They've been for quite a while.
It's a fact of the roleplaying industry that after corebooks, supplement sales slowly dwindle down until they are effectively not producing a good return.
So they're giving the brand a shot in the arm with a new edition.
One has to wonder, though, how many more times they think that strategy will work. Particularly if 4e sells less than 3e, or even 3.5e (which is certainly a possibility).
Quote from: jgantsOne has to wonder, though, how many more times they think that strategy will work.
As many as they want, I imagine. I get the feeling that they're going after the
new roleplaying gamer market, not the crusty old establishment that's been through this wringer before.
!i!
Quote from: jgantsOne has to wonder, though, how many more times they think that strategy will work. Particularly if 4e sells less than 3e, or even 3.5e (which is certainly a possibility).
I've asked this here several times, no harm asknig again.
Is anyone in possession of relative figures for the sales of, say, PHB and DMG in 1st ed, 2nd ed and 3rd ed?
Quote from: jgantsOne has to wonder, though, how many more times they think that strategy will work.
Seeing as every industry people agree that this is the current state of affair, they will do that forever. It's how these things work, for most systems:
Core books sell the most, and then it's slow decline from there. It's inevitable and universal in every standard RPG company. So even if D&D was one day dislodged from being the number one RPG selling brand, it would still be the same model.
Quote from: jgantsParticularly if 4e sells less than 3e, or even 3.5e (which is certainly a possibility).
WEll, whether it sells less than 3e or not is not really the prime concern for them. The prime concern is whether they'd sell more D&D stuff in 2008, 2009, etc... by sticking with 3.5, or if they are better off switching to 4th. That's an easy answer. A no-brainer, 100% easy decision.
Of course they probably hope sales are comparable or superior. But what they did then (2000) is not really relevant. It's what they can do in 2008.
Quote from: jgantsOne has to wonder, though, how many more times they think that strategy will work. Particularly if 4e sells less than 3e, or even 3.5e (which is certainly a possibility).
4e could easily sell less that 3e. I wager it will.
I'll also wager that 4e will increase the total sales of the RPG division many-fold for some time.
And it looks... the way they seem to be parsing out core books across time... that they realize the folly of trying to live off supplements. Using this strategy, they can probably hope to keep healthier sales though the length of the edition.
Which still does nothing to interest me personally in moving forwards, but from a business standpoint, I can't fault them.
Well, remember that the plan is to apparently release new core books every year. I get the feeling this won't be like the 3.5 DMG II or PHB II were like; it'll be brand new "editions" of the existing books with new rules. This, apparently is Wizards' answer to the whole problem of declining post-corebook sales.
We'll have to see how that goes for them.
Also, suggesting that 4e will sell less than 3e just because there are less gamers now than there were back in 2000 is a faulty perspective on things.
3e was mostly about bringing back to the fold all the people who had abandoned RPGs because of Story-based gaming. Most of the "boost" in sales they got were not from NEW gamers, they were from people who were coming back into gaming after having left the hobby.
4e is different. Clearly, their goal is to appeal to the kids who are not current gamers, not just in the 3e sense of "let's make it for the existing fans and hope new people will like it too"; but in the sense of "Lets make it specifically FOR the kids, and hope the existing fans will stick to it as well".
This is always risky, but if it succeeds then 4e could VASTLY outsell 3e.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit4e is different. Clearly, their goal is to appeal to the kids who are not current gamers, not just in the 3e sense of "let's make it for the existing fans and hope new people will like it too"; but in the sense of "Lets make it specifically FOR the kids, and hope the existing fans will stick to it as well".
And that's a good thing, right?
As long as it's not
Narr. :heh:
!i!
Quote from: RPGPunditWell, remember that the plan is to apparently release new core books every year. I get the feeling this won't be like the 3.5 DMG II or PHB II were like; it'll be brand new "editions" of the existing books with new rules. This, apparently is Wizards' answer to the whole problem of declining post-corebook sales.
A new edition every year is as likely as you starting a gigantic WoD fan site. It is simply not going to happen. There are no ways such a model could be sustained and even less ways that it could be beneficial.
The ideal shelf life of a D&D edition, from a business standpoint, should be between 4 and 6 years. Less than that, you're starting to mess with loyalty and the staying power of the brand. More than that, you're just missing out on money. At less than three years, you'd be looking toward suicide. The game would still sell, but it would likely lose its prestige and eventually, its position as market leader.
The problem currently at WotC is that they fucked up. They know they fucked up. The 4th edition of D&D should have been released in 2006. And 3.5 should never have happened. A simple 3.0 revised, with very superficial cosmetic changes, is as far as they should have gone.
Now they're fucked. 3.0/3.5 overlap enough that there's basically no marketable content to write. But the memories of the last buy-in (3.5) are too fresh. Basically, players' imaginations feel like their game is old news (3.x) but their wallet feel like it's too early for a new edition (3.5).
think that order of the stick will change when 4e comes out?
Quote from: beeberthink that order of the stick will change when 4e comes out?
Possibly, but unless Rogues get more skills I think Belkar might be paying a visit to Wizards.
Quote from: RPGPunditWell, remember that the plan is to apparently release new core books every year. I get the feeling this won't be like the 3.5 DMG II or PHB II were like; it'll be brand new "editions" of the existing books with new rules. This, apparently is Wizards' answer to the whole problem of declining post-corebook sales.
I guess you are reading too much into this. That scenario is not going to happen.
PHB II (III, IV...) will be new classes, skills and options, but not in the haphazard way of putting them all over place (sourcebooks, adventure modules,...). Maybe they'll be collections of stuff that has been published during the year (even third party OGL stuff, edited to fit the balance of official 4e?), plus new material to lure buyers of said sourcebooks and modules.
MM II (et al) is a no brainer, even TSR has been publishing new monster collections periodically.
The DMG II (++) is the big question mark for me. Probably their nature will be clearer when we are seeing DMG I. (A yearly guide full of generic stuff like encounters, or encouter tables, or villages, cities, islands, dungeons, like a box of building blocks for adventure/campaign design? That would float
my boat.)
Quote4e is different. Clearly, their goal is to appeal to the kids who are not current gamers, not just in the 3e sense of "let's make it for the existing fans and hope new people will like it too"; but in the sense of "Lets make it specifically FOR the kids, and hope the existing fans will stick to it as well".
This is always risky, but if it succeeds then 4e could VASTLY outsell 3e.
Just like Pokemon VASTLY outsold Magic The Gathering...
...
(one man can dream...)
Quote from: Caesar SlaadWell, as I was just saying in a thread at TBP, the (open, i.e., by the audience, not designers) playtest period, having just started, seems VERY short, and largely confined to a subset of the audience that is not purely representative of the whole. That in itself worries me.
(Emphasis mine)
Yeah, using the RPG as a playtest platform has some advantages (they will be very good at finding and exploiting loopholes to make characters better), but whom do they represent? The hardest of the hardcore, people who are already sold on most design assumptions. But I wonder if WotC is also looking at new gamers, for example? Or people who like 3.X just fine, and don't see an overwhelming need to update? What do you tell
them?
There is a potential trap of preaching to the choir, and another one of selecting from playtest input to reinforce your agenda and rejecting contrarian perspectives as irrelevant.
People are overlooking something on the whole playtest issue. WotC have been playtesting elements of 4E for a number of years now; Bo9S and SWSE explicitly contain test material for the new edition. While they won't have feedback on some of the detailed work, they've been looking at the implications of per encounter powers, simplified skills, etc for a while.
All they need to do is ensure that the various parts mesh well together and with the number of playtesters that the RPGA can put together, they should be able to go through two rounds of that, fine tuning as they go, before publication.
Having raised my head above the parapet can I now just invoke social camoflage and say that Hasbro/WotC/Generic-Big-Business are in it for the money, 4E will suck arse, the glass is always half empty and the sky is falling. :D
Quote from: Trevelyan. . . and say that Hasbro/WotC/Generic-Big-Business are in it for the money, 4E will suck arse, the glass is always half empty and the sky is falling. :D
to reply in turn ( :D )
. . . absolutely, maybe, sometimes, HOLY SHIT WHERE'S THAT SILO ENTRANCE?!?
:haw:
Quote from: RPGPunditNo, see, 3e had a LOT of people playtesting. If you were to tell me that there were that many people playtesting 4e (and that they weren't all Wizards employees and their gaming groups), I'd feel far more secure about all this.
The fact is that by any account, the number of people playtesting 4e is miniscule by comparison to the number of people who had input in the playtesting of 3e. And to me that's a huge mistake.
RPGPundit
On one hand, the significantly shorter playtest period has me worried. It sounds to me as if the majority of playtesting is being done only by one or two small groups of people.
On the other hand, third edition had lots of playtesting and they still ended up needing a 3.5 to tweak several things.
I can't get over my intuition that more playtesting is better, and I hope this approach to limited in-house playtesting doesn't end up hurting fourth edition too much.
The worst thing about 4e is the PR "strategy". Not even Abyssal Maw can keep up enthusiasm with this dribble of underwhelming change announcements.
May I point you all to the fuck up that the DI/Gleemax PR is so far?
Still nobody knows what these things will actually be worth.
Please exite us!
Isn´t "awesome!" an American word?
Here we are now. Entertain us!
My speculation is pretty much this: by releasing the OGL, Wizards did themselves a huge favor, but created a particular kind of issue. They were able to populate the field with hundreds (if not thousands) of core-book-requiring options and issue plenty of splats, not to mention an issuing of 3.5, but that also cuts into the lifespan of printable 3.5 books.
Now, 3.5 is still selling, and it's still popular. I think Wizards has done a good job on the quality of their recent releases, too. (My next paycheck is investing in some of their wonderful looking adventure hard-backs.) But, OTOH, they're starting to issue books that alter core mechanics, and I think a lot of their field-testing was done with books like Tome of Magic and Tome of Battle - pictures of new magic and fighting systems.
Now they're releasing 4e. It caters to a different gaming and management system that sounds like a love-it-or-hate-it issue. Not that their won't be people who are just lukewarm, but it's really driving chatter. People who are turned off 3.5's hard-core resource management system are apt to buy the 4e books. Some people will buy both. But 3.5 is still covered under the OGL, which means I think we'll continue to see 3.5 purchases.
Perhaps even continued 3.5 releases, if not by Wizards, then by 3rd parties. But if that's the case, Wizards might continue to print 3.5 manuals in small quantities just to take advantage of the long-term benifits of the OGL.
Someone commented about how the 'new edition' model is simply 'how things are' in gaming, and the only successful model.
I counter that point by showing you Palladium Games, which has never, to my knowledged, released a 'new edition' that really earned the name, and yet happily stays profitable by simply continuing to keep all their books in print and in circulation. There is very little, or no, market for out of print palladium books for their core lines.
Obviously this is a slight exaggeration: Macross and the old TMNT books, for example, are Oop, sort of... I suspect liscensing issues more than a desire not to reprint them, and I do believe Palladium Fantasy IS on its second edition, though I also believe it is almost 100% compatable with 1st edition supplements.... thus not actually a true 'new edition'....
Quote from: RPGPunditClearly, their goal is to appeal to the kids who are not current gamers, not just in the 3e sense of "let's make it for the existing fans and hope new people will like it too"; but in the sense of "Lets make it specifically FOR the kids, and hope the existing fans will stick to it as well".
"Star Wars: The Phantom Menace" pops into my head about now..... ;)
Quote from: SpikeObviously this is a slight exaggeration: Macross and the old TMNT books, for example, are Oop, sort of...
How about their original mechanoids trilogy? That was classic stuff. Wish I had that again.
Quote from: SpikeSomeone commented about how the 'new edition' model is simply 'how things are' in gaming, and the only successful model.
I counter that point by showing you Palladium Games, which has never, to my knowledged, released a 'new edition' that really earned the name, and yet happily stays profitable by simply continuing to keep all their books in print and in circulation. There is very little, or no, market for out of print palladium books for their core lines.
Obviously this is a slight exaggeration: Macross and the old TMNT books, for example, are Oop, sort of... I suspect liscensing issues more than a desire not to reprint them, and I do believe Palladium Fantasy IS on its second edition, though I also believe it is almost 100% compatable with 1st edition supplements.... thus not actually a true 'new edition'....
I'm actually only in the Market for Palladium OOP stuff. I LOATHE Rifts. But I really like my newly purchased TMNT.
Quote from: SpikeSomeone commented about how the 'new edition' model is simply 'how things are' in gaming, and the only successful model.
I counter that point by showing you Palladium Games, which has never, to my knowledged, released a 'new edition' that really earned the name, and yet happily stays profitable by simply continuing to keep all their books in print and in circulation.
Palladium "happily" beg for money every so often. I wouldn't know how successful they are but they sure claim to be in deep shit. They might be profitable but that's not the impression they want to make.
Even if they are, it's a safe bet that they are the exception that confirms the rule. And at this point, it isn't clear whether they refuse to overhaul the line by choice or by default. They simply don't have the ressources to pull it off, seeing as they cancel and delay products constantly.
But this is still missing the point anyway. Of course, WotC could sit on their asses and live off 3.x for another 3, 6, perhaps 9 years. It still wouldn't make any sense because that would be flushing money away. All the 3.x books one might want are out there already. Not making a new edition is simply looking at an opportunity and not ceasing it. Much like Palladium.
Especially with the d20 license and the OGL (which Palladium doesn't have), the sweet spot to release a new edition is probably somewhere between 4 and 6 years.