WotC Business Model

[virgil]

Is there actually any kind of unity in the company? It feels like everything they're doing is off-the-cuff ideas for mad grabs for money. It's almost like seeing the stereotypical gaming/comic store run by a nerd with no business sense but prideful and greedy.

Although, to try and put them in a better light (still pathetic), do you think this might be somewhat outside their control? Maybe Hasbro has been giving them orders counter to their own plans, and then gave them an ultimatum for profit or they'll shut down D&D and mothball the license (rather it do nothing than give profit to another).

[Cynic]

1201203077[/unixtime]]Is there actually any kind of unity in the company? It feels like everything they're doing is off-the-cuff ideas for mad grabs for money. It's almost like seeing the stereotypical gaming/comic store run by a nerd with no business sense but prideful and greedy.

Although, to try and put them in a better light (still pathetic), do you think this might be somewhat outside their control? Maybe Hasbro has been giving them orders counter to their own plans, and then gave them an ultimatum for profit or they'll shut down D&D and mothball the license (rather it do nothing than give profit to another).

Maybe I'm naive enough that I doubt Hasbro would threaten a do or die ultimatum at Wotc. But this is pretty much how most businesses work. An easy look would be M$. They release new OS's faster than they release service packs often. the next OS is coming out in '09 according to the latest bloomberg business reports. Between 1995 and 2002, they had almost 10 new windows come out. It's a sad but somewhat smart and, in my opinion, unethical business model.

They realize that they have a market out there that will devour the product. They have already released the product and since all there would be left if no new product was released is tech support, they release new products.

[Voss]

Oh, I expect they'll flog the license as soon as the price they expect to get is more than what they expect the division to make. It doesn't really compete with their other products, so wasting the resource by mothballing rather than selling it doesn't make much sense.

I also suspect at least some of the designers wouldn't mind being sold off like cattle.

[tzor]

It's not the "Business Model" it's the business structure, and actually it's a major problem across the board in many companies. The biggest problems are departmentalization and stove piping.

Stove piping actually isn't a problem for WoTC. Honestly, there is no synergy between MtG and D&D or any of the other products of WoTC. They all go on their merry way without the need for either coordination or interaction.

Departmentalization comes into play when you see what is happening online. The move of the WizOs to Tier 1 Customer Service put them in one department. The creation of Customer Management is another. Each department has their own divine managers (Like I have an Int of ZerO for CM) that refuse to speak with each other. The biggest problem is isolation and the breakdown of communications.

The divine right of managers (I do it my way) exends even to the 4E design team. Coupled with the general lack of cross communication in the company the result is that everything appears to be far worse than it probably is.

[cthulhu]

I suspect tzor is probably close to the mark on whats causing the problem(s). In terms of the business cycle in general, they clearly do have a business plan

<Release 'high value' corebooks> These are assured high print runs and probably produce alot of profit

<Release 'high value' splatbooks> Stuff like complete warrior or whatever that is still assured alot of units. At this point some of the design team is starting to be hived off to think about the next edition.

<Release 'low value' splatbooks> Stuff like .. the monsters of faerun that are not going to sell many units. At this point most of the design team is off beavering away on a new set of corebooks so the cycle can repeat.

Mtg and pokemen and whatever are running the same cyclical design cycle, the core designers are setting the 'vision' for the 'cycle' then progressively palming off more work so they can focus on the next cycle, then every second cycle they sit down and re-examine the core rules.

This is working pretty well in terms of a business model - they keep refreshing the market with what is effectively planned obsolescence.

Cross departmental communications are obviously a bit meh.

[Crissa]

Microsoft announces more operating systems than they release. Their date announced of a new operating system is generally three years before it actually gets released. And then, the system released usually isn't the one announced.

I have no idea what they're trying to do, aside from 'release a new system to give your brand a restart. The last new edition sold n books, we should be able to make 90% of n for this release.' And they're trying to do it with people who have no idea what they're doing.

-Crissa

[RandomCasualty]

1201214256[/unixtime]]I suspect tzor is probably close to the mark on whats causing the problem(s). In terms of the business cycle in general, they clearly do have a business plan

<Release 'high value' corebooks> These are assured high print runs and probably produce alot of profit

<Release 'high value' splatbooks> Stuff like complete warrior or whatever that is still assured alot of units. At this point some of the design team is starting to be hived off to think about the next edition.

<Release 'low value' splatbooks> Stuff like .. the monsters of faerun that are not going to sell many units. At this point most of the design team is off beavering away on a new set of corebooks so the cycle can repeat.

Sadly this is like the only real business model that works well for RPGs.

The thing is that RPGs are a diminishing returns endeavor. The more products you pump out for a system, the fewer people buy each individual product. Eventually people just realize their limit and realize "I already bought complete arcane, why buy complete mage?"

So the only way you can possibly keep selling books is to get people to start over again. So they redo the entire edition to get people to begin at ground level again, and start rebuilding. They just have to time the releases of new editions far apart enough that they don't piss people off, but close together enough such that they don't go bankrupt inbetween cash influx cycles.

My guess is probably when sales of the newest splatbooks go below a certain number of units, they start printing up a new edition.

[Crissa]

RC: That's not a bad model, though.

The problem is that instead of making some sort of advantage out of it, they're rather haphazard in their attempt here. That may be due to it being on the cheap...

-Crissa

[K]

The thing I don't get is that Paizo had a successful model with their "lets create more adventures, and it there is a new PrC or feat or item the its part of an adventure."

This model works. As long as freelancers keep pumping out good adventures, people pay for the adventures, even if they only cut out the maps and NPCs to transplant into their own adventures.

The model of "splat book of 99 PrCs and 200 magic items that won't ever be in your campaign" doesn't make any sense to me. I've used less than 1% of all the PrCs, items, feats, spells, and niche rules that I've read in splatbooks, so I don't really know why I need more splatbooks.

[Voss]

Because now the new splatbooks will be 33% new (revised) classes and races! And won't that be awesome! And also, new feats and powers for old classes, which will cause all sorts of class bloat and break the game. Or just suck.

Like the big ass book of magic items for 4e thats being released 3 months after the core rules...

[Username17]

The thing I don't get is that Paizo had a successful model with their "lets create more adventures, and it there is a new PrC or feat or item the its part of an adventure."

This model works. As long as freelancers keep pumping out good adventures, people pay for the adventures, even if they only cut out the maps and NPCs to transplant into their own adventures.

The best part of this model is that every year you can publish compendiums. The Spell Compendium went over pretty well. The magic item compendium less so, but if you put it up as a compendium of magic (items and spells), the magic item filler will get carried by the spells.

The 4e PHB III they are promising me doesn't hold my interest. But their PHB I doesn't hold my interest anymore either, so whatever.

-Username17

[Koumei]

Dungeon magazine had some seriously awesome adventures. Worth the purchase, even. WotC could make money by selling well made adventures like these.

Or they could do what they're doing now.

I actually use a lot of the stuff from recent splat books, though. Probably to justify the purchase *sigh*

Although some new spells actually are cool, so I often take them.

[Absentminded_Wizard]

I think WotC has been getting back into the adventure market recently for precisely this reason (albeit with retreads of classic 1e modules). Somebody realized you can string out an edition longer (profitably) with adventures than with rules supplements alone.

[Prak]

1201405835[/unixtime]]I think WotC has been getting back into the adventure market recently for precisely this reason (albeit with retreads of classic 1e modules). Somebody realized you can string out an edition longer (profitably) with adventures than with rules supplements alone.

What's wrong with retreads? I think Wizards could make a hell of a lot of money by putting out the classic 1e and 2e adventures rewritten for 4e(it'd be nice if they'd done it more for 3.5, for example, expedition to the barrier peaks, but... I digress...).

[Koumei]

Eye of the Beholder needs a re-release. If only because I remember playing that game a bit, and watching my dad play it, when I was very young.

[Leress]

1201409894[/unixtime]]Eye of the Beholder needs a re-release. If only because I remember playing that game a bit, and watching my dad play it, when I was very young.

It was re-release for the GBA with a pseudo-3.0 rule set. The rules didn't translate very well and it made a number of skills pointless to have (forgery, diplomacy, intimidation)

[Absentminded_Wizard]

1201409289[/unixtime]]

1201405835[/unixtime]]I think WotC has been getting back into the adventure market recently for precisely this reason (albeit with retreads of classic 1e modules). Somebody realized you can string out an edition longer (profitably) with adventures than with rules supplements alone.

What's wrong with retreads? I think Wizards could make a hell of a lot of money by putting out the classic 1e and 2e adventures rewritten for 4e(it'd be nice if they'd done it more for 3.5, for example, expedition to the barrier peaks, but... I digress...).

It's not a bad idea, per se. What worries me is that retreads seem to be all they want to do. That approach leads to stagnation and doesn't appreciably lengthen the lifetime of an edition ("OK, we've released all the high-selling core supplements, the two campaign settings, and all the rehashed adventures. Next stop, 5e.") As part of an extensive line of adventures, it's not a bad idea at all, since the rehashes have a built-in audience of old timers.

[RandomCasualty]

1201335512[/unixtime]]RC: That's not a bad model, though.

The problem is that instead of making some sort of advantage out of it, they're rather haphazard in their attempt here. That may be due to it being on the cheap...

It's a bad model as far as the game goes, and it's bad for the consumer, but it's actually a pretty effective model for the corporation.

Splatbooks generally sell a lot better than adventures.

[cthulhu]

Yeah, though the 1-20 adventures dungeon cranked out apparently sold quite well and where very good, though they did loose the plot a bit at higher levels.

[Koumei]

At higher levels, the plot won't survive contact with the PCs anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

[rapanui]

I stopped buying their books years ago, even before I stopped playing altogether. All in all, I think they managed to leech maybe ~$200 from me, which I view as a regrettable loss of money which could have been spent on something more fun or useful.

I'm also sticking with Windows XP until Microsoft creates an OS that doesn't suck. (I hate Vista)

[Crissa]

What I mean from on the cheap is that Wizards doesn't seem to understand that part of the reason rule books sell better is because they're assumed to have more development time in them.

This edition (and last years' books) seem to show that they're investing far less into each book, which should relate to far less repeat sales.

-Crissa

PS: What will you do when you have a hardware failure, or want one of the games built using their new dev tools which don't support the XP architecture?

[CatharzGodfoot]

1201489747[/unixtime]]

PS: What will you do when you have a hardware failure, or want one of the games built using their new dev tools which don't support the XP architecture?

It would be worth not having to deal with the multiple Dialogue Boxes that pop up whenever I try to copy a file or install a program. "Yes, please show me the dialogue box that will ask me if I Really want to copy the file."

[Crissa]

Press shift or ctrl while dragging or selecting menu items to auto accept the next dialog. (key depends on function you want to disable)

-Crissa

Why does a mac user have to tell you this?

[Count Arioch the 28th]

1201601272[/unixtime]]
Why does a mac user have to tell you this?

That's uncalled for.

If you're going to be a smart-ass about it, don't bother giving people unasked-for advice.