Good point. I didn't realize that WoW was released that long ago (2004). I thought it was more recent.Lago wrote:Depends on the computer game. Those 3D cRPGs like NWN and Fallout have a limited shelf-life of about 5-6 years. Stuff like Tetris, Super Mario World, Bejeweled, Starcraft, and WoW have about an unlimited shelf life.
See, to me that's sort of like saying that if you don't update your product, it will go out of style. Which is a no brainer. The thing is - D&D is one of those games that will go on forever provided that it adapts to its players, but WotC has really blown it in terms of updating its product.Lago wrote:If WotC decided to stick with 3rd Edition the sales of that product would probably be about as lackluster as it is right now as problems pile up and the clunkiness of playing a tabletop RPG becomes more intolerable to the public at large.
3.0 got off to a great start - the designers recognized what new people wanted. They recognized the value of the community and created the OGL. They had the right idea - they positioned their game so that it could have kept up.
To me, it seems like the problems with 3.0 began when a whole bunch of rules were made, but not fixed. There were adjudications that piled bandaids on top of broken bones because "I screwed that up" wasn't in the vocabulary of the peeps at WotC/designers. And so they fired a bunch of people, "fixed" the problems, called it 3.5, completely divided the community base, and continued on their merry way.
3.5 (the name even implies computer geekness) really comes off as the façade to cover for the behind-the-scenes development of the new WotC/4E rehaul... Which was masterminded by people too far inside to see what people outside wanted. It's the absent-minded "eh" tossed to the players to pacify them.
And then there's 4E. Which seems to me to have been made by taking a digital medium and spreading it out over pages and pages of pressed wood pulp. It would be like me responding to these threads by taking out a sheet of paper, writing out a response, scanning it in, translating with OCR, and attaching it to a reply window. Yeah, it works, but oh, the agony.
I guess I'm thinking that when/if something better than WoW comes along, the popularity of 4E is going to wane even more. By trying to translate a computer game into table top, they've not only narrowed their market to D&D players who like WoW (rather than expanding their market to WoW players), but they've tied the shelf life of the edition to something they don't have control over. Which is Stupid's stupid.Lago wrote:The other caveat is that while those above long-runners have lasted for a long time and people will still probably be playing all of them into the next decade (unless someone releases an awesome New Super Mario Bros. [Wii] hack), they're pretty much static games.
The problem is that WotC is in conservation mode. When life sucks, people (and living organisms) go into conservation mode to try to preserve whatever they have until things look better. The problem is that when you're in conservation mode, you tend to miss opportunities that might get you out (like investing in a more expensive game developer for your product, or giving away your product for free to a community of supporters) because you don't want to accept the loss for the risk.TheFlatline wrote:It's hardly such a serious layout of money. I've frankly seen people set up similar repositories as a hobby, and are maintained out of community devotion. Giving a devoted community the tools to enhance the community and quality of the hobby should be a no-brainer.
The problem is that unless there's a mystic revival of D&D - computers all over the world spontaneously combust causing Cheetos to fall from the sky and Mountain Dew to rain down upon us - there is nowhere to go but down. And when they get far enough down, someone who is willing to risk it will come along, pick up the pieces, and lay it out on the line. If WotC doesn't revise its thinking, they won't be thinking at all.