None of these OSR games "capture the marketshare" Wizards enjoy but it's not impossible to imagine interest in what's new waning over time and that in old-school play blossoming and particularly if it is already attracting many younger than you and I.
Look at the passion for 80s music or for contemporary music inspired by that era. For films from that decade. For films and TV shows today that portray those days.
I would not underestimate the power of nostalgia among the old. Or the craving to get a taste of what one has missed among the young.
If people want to or need to use a VTT that's their business.
But much of the attraction of games like D&D is their being analog hobbies.
I think the VTT is fine and all, but personally, no online tabletop will be able to beat the experience of sitting down and enjoying a game with my friends face to face.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quokkas are objectively the best animal, anyone who disagrees needs a psychiatric evaluation
I assume that every player and the DM will have to purchase their own copy - unlike most other VTTs where only the DM has to pay?
My guess is you'll get the blandest of blandest UI, dice, and character representation for free. The whole point of this is to make players the 'minnows' of the new 'recurrent spending you see in digital games' eco system this VTT will create with the hope they'll be come "whales" that Hasbro can extract money from by hitting the right dopamine buttons (like ATMs) just like your favorite DLC and gatcha scams from video games espeically mobile games.
Now before anyone jumps down my throat for being an alarmist or a rabid hyena or whoever the bad guy in Harry Potter is, my statement is just a very rudely worded version of what Hasbro Cynthia Williams said, Cynthia Williams who spent years at Microsoft (which pushed the entire concept of 'Operating System As A Service') and their gaming division and her second in command, Chris Cocks CEO of Wizards of the Coast who also comes from a Microsoft gaming background. This isn't a conspiracy or a big secret plan or paranoia. They talked about it openly in an investor meeting. You can see how 'recurrent spending you see in digital games' works and how players feel about it to know how this is going to play out in D&D.
At the end of the day consumers vote with their wallets so if the service isn't good or doesn't carry the value vs. cost then it really won't matter what their plans are. That said, if they are successful in creating an eco-system and we consider the PC game model, than the VTT being successful won't be measured by volume or even popularity, but transactions.
If the PC market is a model, then making D&D for everyone and making D&D VTT popular isn't a goal. The PC market isn't based on volume or sales, it's based on high-roller transaction spending. I don't think most people realize that the highest-selling games in the PC market are not the highest-grossing games in the market. I mean Call of Duty Modern Warfare II sold something like 10 million copies in 2022, that is a popular high-volume selling game selling at 70 bucks a pop, that is 70 million dollars, they made. That is a lot of money, yet games like Fortnight makes between 1.5 to 2 million dollars a day and can make as much as 10-20 million dollars in a weekend and they have been doing this for years, all on micro-transactions. Candy Crush, a stupid mobile phone game earned over 600 million dollars in 2022 on Microtransaction. I have never met or even heard of a person who plays candy crush, yet it earns more money in a year than the top 100 PC games released last year combined.
The power of Microtransaction and whale spending is grossly underestimated. A D&D VTT can be universally despised by this community, rejected outright and it may still end up being the highest-grossing thing D&D has ever done in its entire combined history as a franchise.
That... is the scary thing about the direction D&D is going. What the community wants, what the community thinks is good, what this community thinks is worth it may end up not mattering at all. If there are whales willing to buy into the transaction model, they (wotch & the whaltes) can turn this into a profitable venture while simultaneously giving the rest of the D&D community the middle finger. This is how it goes down in PC gaming all the time.
Yeah I'm not even against the idea of a 3D VTT on paper although even then it has some serious problems (accessibility being a major one). However, we know quite clearly what Hasbro wants to use D&D for more than just spamming us with plushies, t-shirts, and movies. And make no mistake they're going to go full ham on this 3D VTT since they've invested so much money and leadership into it and I really fear that in 5-7 years kids will think of D&D as "that weird 3D game where you don't even fight anyone and it costs you $40 to make one character that looks cool with all those lootboxes and stuff" and be barely aware that a in person physical game exists.
The only glimmer of hope is that the crashing and burning of the 'metaverse' happens on a smaller scale with Hasbro and this virtual VTT and maybe even forces it to spin off WotC or at least replace the leadership with others.
If the PC market is a model, then making D&D for everyone and making D&D VTT popular isn't a goal.
I think you're failing to understand the PC market. Yes, the funding model of PC games is often focused on the whales, but the core motivation of the whales is being able to show off in front of everyone else playing the game, and that means you need a generally popular game to attract the whales. Attracting an audience for the whales is why the F2P business model exists. To put it in terms more relevant to a D&D VTT: are you really going to bother spending a bunch of money on models and cosmetics if you can't find anyone to play a game with?
I think you're failing to understand the PC market. Yes, the funding model of PC games is often focused on the whales, but the core motivation of the whales is being able to show off in front of everyone else playing the game, and that means you need a generally popular game to attract the whales. Attracting an audience for the whales is why the F2P business model exists. To put it in terms more relevant to a D&D VTT: are you really going to bother spending a bunch of money on models and cosmetics if you can't find anyone to play a game with?
Consumerism has a funny way of making people purchase things they don't need. There are people who buy and hoard Warhammer miniatures and Magic: the Gathering cards but don't play either game with anyone.
I don't particularly care if Wizards take D&D in a direction where it becomes more and more digitized. I will continue to play the game with friends. In person. Using physical books. Like I've done for the past forty years.
But there's something "off" about a hobby that requires a pencil, some paper, and some dice seeing its current custodian want people to play the game using most likely through-the-roof specced computers and at whatever further costs they'll charge for the privilege.
The VTT looks like and looks like it will feel like a video game. You are looking at avatars on a screen. With animations. With things that until now have been animated within our own minds. And pressing buttons to activate digital dice. To attack. To move.
If the PC market is a model, then making D&D for everyone and making D&D VTT popular isn't a goal.
I think you're failing to understand the PC market. Yes, the funding model of PC games is often focused on the whales, but the core motivation of the whales is being able to show off in front of everyone else playing the game, and that means you need a generally popular game to attract the whales. Attracting an audience for the whales is why the F2P business model exists. To put it in terms more relevant to a D&D VTT: are you really going to bother spending a bunch of money on models and cosmetics if you can't find anyone to play a game with?
That's what I'm hoping happens. The VTT is something they spend millions on, a bunch of whales make ridiculous characters by spending hundred+ dollars, but hardly any DMs want to use the damned thing and the whole scheme folds like superman on laundry day. And it would be one thing if this was just another thing that Hasbro was doing but it isn't. It's the core of the next generation of D&D, again this is not speculation this is from their own words.
But FYI, this model for video games is mostly tried and true and is still a mint for Blizzard who made the very controversial ATM disguised as a mobile video game, Diablo Immortal. Despite the whithering criticism from press and even streamers it's still chugging along getting players to cough up money just fine. That's not to mention the many other not as egregious but still awful microtransaction games.
That's what I'm hoping happens. The VTT is something they spend millions on, a bunch of whales make ridiculous characters by spending hundred+ dollars, but hardly any DMs want to use the damned thing and the whole scheme folds like superman on laundry day. And it would be one thing if this was just another thing that Hasbro was doing but it isn't. It's the core of the next generation of D&D, again this is not speculation this is from their own words.
But FYI, this model for video games is mostly tried and true and is still a mint for Blizzard who made the very controversial ATM disguised as a mobile video game, Diablo Immortal. Despite the whithering criticism from press and even streamers it's still chugging along getting players to cough up money just fine. That's not to mention the many other not as egregious but still awful microtransaction games.
What you're saying will be "doom-and-gloom alarmism" ... until it isn't.
Much like that whole business with the Open Game License was a rumor ... until it wasn't.
Been a bit of a trend for several years now for people to say things aren't happening or they ain't going to but then they are and some find themselves then defending what they'd moments ago claimed wasn't happening or wouldn't happen.
Some just find it too difficult to say three simple words: "I was wrong."
If the PC market is a model, then making D&D for everyone and making D&D VTT popular isn't a goal.
I think you're failing to understand the PC market. Yes, the funding model of PC games is often focused on the whales, but the core motivation of the whales is being able to show off in front of everyone else playing the game, and that means you need a generally popular game to attract the whales. Attracting an audience for the whales is why the F2P business model exists. To put it in terms more relevant to a D&D VTT: are you really going to bother spending a bunch of money on models and cosmetics if you can't find anyone to play a game with?
Short answer is.. yes.. Whales will. In fact, the highest-grossing micro-transaction games in the industry like SIMS for example are primarily played offline, alone. It would shock you to know the statistics and spending habits of the typical whale. I very reluctantly know more about the PC gaming market than I care to. All the people in my gaming group are executive producers and game developers for various PC gaming companies. These guys talk about this stuff all the time, in fact a couple of them know the executives running Wizards of the Coast personally because they have worked with them in the past.
Showing off is not the main motivation for whales or even a typical micro-transaction spender, the addictive nature of collecting is. The most viewed youtube channels in the world are of gamers, recording themselves collecting things in games. A guy doing nothing but spinning loot boxes on CS Go will get 1-5 million views on every video and have a few hundred thousand people watching him doing it live.
If the PC market is a model, then making D&D for everyone and making D&D VTT popular isn't a goal.
I think you're failing to understand the PC market. Yes, the funding model of PC games is often focused on the whales, but the core motivation of the whales is being able to show off in front of everyone else playing the game, and that means you need a generally popular game to attract the whales. Attracting an audience for the whales is why the F2P business model exists. To put it in terms more relevant to a D&D VTT: are you really going to bother spending a bunch of money on models and cosmetics if you can't find anyone to play a game with?
That's what I'm hoping happens. The VTT is something they spend millions on, a bunch of whales make ridiculous characters by spending hundred+ dollars, but hardly any DMs want to use the damned thing and the whole scheme folds like superman on laundry day. And it would be one thing if this was just another thing that Hasbro was doing but it isn't. It's the core of the next generation of D&D, again this is not speculation this is from their own words.
But FYI, this model for video games is mostly tried and true and is still a mint for Blizzard who made the very controversial ATM disguised as a mobile video game, Diablo Immortal. Despite the whithering criticism from press and even streamers it's still chugging along getting players to cough up money just fine. That's not to mention the many other not as egregious but still awful microtransaction games.
True. I have a friend who works at Blizzard and one of the things he pointed out is that Diablo players are not the audience for Immortal at all. It's an entirely different audience that plays the mobile version of Diablo and those mobile users don't play the PC game version. They are two distinctively different communities. Diablo Immortals has made over 300 million dollars and Diablo fans don't even play the game at all.
Where D&D is going with this VTT and the effects it will have on the game are difficult to predict, but one thing is clear, its definitely going to re-define what D&D is as a franchise and as a game if its successful and I'm not convinced actual fans of Dungeons and Dragons are going to be onboard with this new "look" and its unlikely if the VTT is successful as a micro-transaction game that the community, even if they boycott would be able to make a dent in the plans.
Only time will tell, but for me personally, if the VTT is a subscription-based model filled with Micro-transaction (which I think it will be), it's going to be a hard pass for me. If they sell it for a one time cost and fill it with good content.. maybe throw out an expansion once a year or whatever.. I might give it a go, but I'm not entering some new pay wall eco-system.
It's a glorified video game with slower inputs, this is highlighted by the fact that they are looking to make it run on gaming consoles. It looks slick but until we know the cost and specs it will take to run it there is no reason to get worked up over it. If the specs are such that you need alienware like they used in the demo, it will be a colossal failure. A big element of making a VTT successful is accessibility and ease. Assuming your want to play with a specific group of people, every online group is essentially throttled by the needs of the player with the most suboptimal setup. Which means the most advanced vtt you can use is the one that that is the high end for that player. In general, most will want or need it to run on at least one of the following PC, tablet, tablet, chromebook, or phone and if it doesn't then it will be a fancy thing that the majority of customers won't utilize.
Might I just add that all this talk about diversity and inclusivity doesn't mean jack squat when you're going to make sure that people playing your flagship product has to have very good (and expensive) PCs? And for the love of God don't give me the "IF yoU dOn'T likE iT theY woN't taKe AwaY yoUr booKs" BS. You don't invest tens of millions of dollars and years of effort and pitch your investors on something to NOT make it the centerpiece of your flagship product. And you don't get to call yourselves 'Stewards Of The Game" and declare yourself immune from ciriticisms of what you are doing to the game. The outlook is grim unless you like Candy Crush and Diablo Immortal and can't wait to see D&D go that road.
Short answer is.. yes.. Whales will. In fact, the highest-grossing micro-transaction games in the industry like SIMS for example are primarily played offline, alone.
A VTT is simply not a game that can be played offline, alone. There aren't any precisely similar games, but the closest models are other small team games; in the current top 20 that would be Overwatch, LoL, and CS:GO. All of which certainly have problematic microtransactions but are heavily dependent on having a large number of players to make sure that people can find games.
It'd be expensive for something like an MMO. But for a turn-based game where each instance is unlikely to have more than 8 players?
Also, again, Kale himself mentioned phones, and he's the lead dev. So if the rendering is local those would be out.
Lastly, as you mentioned, 3D D&D is nothing new. I haven't seen anyone bemoaning Talespire as the death of creativity etc.
Yes no one says that about talespire, however WOTC's VTT will probbaly have a lot more people play it because it will be advertised and talked about more and its likely to be free to use. ( except microtransactions and all that) So this is likely the death of creativity, considering people are already comparing it to Video Games ( i love video games, dont get me wrong but, i would prefer TTRPGs to be TTRPGs.) lamoon01 compared it to a video game.
I really don't understand where people think a VTT's popularity will be the "death of creativity". If anything, it's the complete opposite.
Designing/ executing maps that are both aesthetically pleasing AND keep in mind gameplay flow is a VERY intensive bit of work, both on the creative and technical side. Playing in such environments likewise does nothing to diminish player creativity, no more than the existence of official art and maps does. The big difference is that you can actually see where your pieces in play are, rather than relying on pure theatre of the mind, which is awful for combat anyhow.
I also feel that there seems to be a misunderstanding of what's being suggested when VTT's are compared to video games. I feel like the devs are referring to the ease of use, remote friendly and visual realization, none of which will kill your story telling ability as a DM or player. In fact, for a visually driven person like myself, I find it actually VERY helpful.
I don't know.... I feel like having trepidation about WOTC's take on VTT's is well and good, but this idea of VTT's being the death of creativity is bunk at best, and honestly a little insulting to those of us who actually do put a lot of energy towards building in them.
what about the micro transactions? what do you say to that? And i'm not against having battle maps. And im not at all saying All VTTs are creativity killers, im saying that 1 theres already VTTs 2 go play those other VTTs. I predict that once the VTT launches D&D players will likely split into 2 groups: VTT players And None VTT players. and the D&D community will be separated. " Oh but VTT players are already here" youll say, but never on a scale so large. talespire for one has 8 million out of 70 million D&D palyers. The Thing is: Most people Dont want to play on a VTT.
1. Just because there are other Virtual TableTops doesn't mean Wizards can't launch their own. Competition between VTT designers will hopefully make it so that we will get more cool and fun options in future as people keep improving and improving.
2. We actually don't know whether or not most people want to use a VTT. Regardless, if you aren't going to use a VTT, that's your choice. However, other people who want to use it have that right, and there is nothing bad about new ways for more people to have fun playing D&D.
What BoringBard said, yeah. And frankly, I don't know what "most people don't want to play on a VTT" is even based on. While I know that my personal experiences are not reflective of the whole world, I'll say this; almost every single DnD game I have ever played has been online, either via Roll20 or even just pure Discord without maps. Why? Because my friends and I are all on different corners of the Earth, or in different towns. It's been the case for nearly my entire life; people I know who share the hobby are generally not where I live. This was the case when I lived/ grew up in India, and remains the case here in the USA's Midwest. The few times I've managed to get into a real, face-face, on-the-table session have been REALLY small scale one shots... which became better when we decided to bust out our comps, fire up Talespire and hold the sessions there while chilling IRL.
Long way of saying; everyone I've ever played with has been just fine (and eager) doing so over VTT's, so while I'm sure there's plenty out there who prefer a more in-person approach... I do not know how we're quantifying this as "most people".
What BoringBard said, yeah. And frankly, I don't know what "most people don't want to play on a VTT" is even based on. While I know that my personal experiences are not reflective of the whole world, I'll say this; almost every single DnD game I have ever played has been online, either via Roll20 or even just pure Discord without maps. Why? Because my friends and I are all on different corners of the Earth, or in different towns. It's been the case for nearly my entire life; people I know who share the hobby are generally not where I live. This was the case when I lived/ grew up in India, and remains the case here in the USA's Midwest. The few times I've managed to get into a real, face-face, on-the-table session have been REALLY small scale one shots... which became better when we decided to bust out our comps, fire up Talespire and hold the sessions there while chilling IRL.
Long way of saying; everyone I've ever played with has been just fine (and eager) doing so over VTT's, so while I'm sure there's plenty out there who prefer a more in-person approach... I do not know how we're quantifying this as "most people".
Since the game is older than in home internet should not require a huge leap of logic to consider many current players have likely played more games with only pencil and paper than you have played online or otherwise combined.
VTT's hare very useful for some, others not so much. My thoughts on them are that they are not an enjoyable way to play. Others such as yourself feel they are.
You may also be surprised to know I have yet to play any TTRPG online and currently have no plans to do so. I have researched and played around with a few of the VTT options but for me and my friends they take more away from the game than they add. I do use many digital tools for my games, but all played to date have been with players sitting down face to face at the same physical IRL table.
What BoringBard said, yeah. And frankly, I don't know what "most people don't want to play on a VTT" is even based on. While I know that my personal experiences are not reflective of the whole world, I'll say this; almost every single DnD game I have ever played has been online, either via Roll20 or even just pure Discord without maps. Why? Because my friends and I are all on different corners of the Earth, or in different towns. It's been the case for nearly my entire life; people I know who share the hobby are generally not where I live. This was the case when I lived/ grew up in India, and remains the case here in the USA's Midwest. The few times I've managed to get into a real, face-face, on-the-table session have been REALLY small scale one shots... which became better when we decided to bust out our comps, fire up Talespire and hold the sessions there while chilling IRL.
Long way of saying; everyone I've ever played with has been just fine (and eager) doing so over VTT's, so while I'm sure there's plenty out there who prefer a more in-person approach... I do not know how we're quantifying this as "most people".
Since the game is older than in home internet should not require a huge leap of logic to consider many current players have likely played more games with only pencil and paper than you have played online or otherwise combined.
VTT's hare very useful for some, others not so much. My thoughts on them are that they are not an enjoyable way to play. Others such as yourself feel they are.
You may also be surprised to know I have yet to play any TTRPG online and currently have no plans to do so. I have researched and played around with a few of the VTT options but for me and my friends they take more away from the game than they add. I do use many digital tools for my games, but all played to date have been with players sitting down face to face at the same physical IRL table.
I am aware of all of that. Like I said, I know my experiences are only my own, as are my personal preferences. My point was that it was a strange thing to conclude so firmly that the majority want or do not want XYZ state of play.
And to clarify; I have no particular take on anyone who prefers playing pen and paper like. That's great! And hell, I might even be a little jealous that some of you grew up around people sharing the hobby enough to be introduced to it that way!
My rant was more in counter to the vehement smacking of the VTT style that I've been seeing a fair bit of, here and in other discussions elsewhere. Again; my experiences do not speak for everyone.... but that said, they are similar to many, many people. Many enough that VTT's as a concept have been getting so much attention by different companies, and in general they have not only been the gateway for many of us, but also added a lot of flair depending on what you're trying to do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
None of these OSR games "capture the marketshare" Wizards enjoy but it's not impossible to imagine interest in what's new waning over time and that in old-school play blossoming and particularly if it is already attracting many younger than you and I.
Look at the passion for 80s music or for contemporary music inspired by that era. For films from that decade. For films and TV shows today that portray those days.
I would not underestimate the power of nostalgia among the old. Or the craving to get a taste of what one has missed among the young.
If people want to or need to use a VTT that's their business.
But much of the attraction of games like D&D is their being analog hobbies.
I think the VTT is fine and all, but personally, no online tabletop will be able to beat the experience of sitting down and enjoying a game with my friends face to face.
Quokkas are objectively the best animal, anyone who disagrees needs a psychiatric evaluation
Has anything been said about the price?
I assume that every player and the DM will have to purchase their own copy - unlike most other VTTs where only the DM has to pay?
My guess is you'll get the blandest of blandest UI, dice, and character representation for free. The whole point of this is to make players the 'minnows' of the new 'recurrent spending you see in digital games' eco system this VTT will create with the hope they'll be come "whales" that Hasbro can extract money from by hitting the right dopamine buttons (like ATMs) just like your favorite DLC and gatcha scams from video games espeically mobile games.
Now before anyone jumps down my throat for being an alarmist or a rabid hyena or whoever the bad guy in Harry Potter is, my statement is just a very rudely worded version of what Hasbro Cynthia Williams said, Cynthia Williams who spent years at Microsoft (which pushed the entire concept of 'Operating System As A Service') and their gaming division and her second in command, Chris Cocks CEO of Wizards of the Coast who also comes from a Microsoft gaming background. This isn't a conspiracy or a big secret plan or paranoia. They talked about it openly in an investor meeting. You can see how 'recurrent spending you see in digital games' works and how players feel about it to know how this is going to play out in D&D.
At the end of the day consumers vote with their wallets so if the service isn't good or doesn't carry the value vs. cost then it really won't matter what their plans are. That said, if they are successful in creating an eco-system and we consider the PC game model, than the VTT being successful won't be measured by volume or even popularity, but transactions.
If the PC market is a model, then making D&D for everyone and making D&D VTT popular isn't a goal. The PC market isn't based on volume or sales, it's based on high-roller transaction spending. I don't think most people realize that the highest-selling games in the PC market are not the highest-grossing games in the market. I mean Call of Duty Modern Warfare II sold something like 10 million copies in 2022, that is a popular high-volume selling game selling at 70 bucks a pop, that is 70 million dollars, they made. That is a lot of money, yet games like Fortnight makes between 1.5 to 2 million dollars a day and can make as much as 10-20 million dollars in a weekend and they have been doing this for years, all on micro-transactions. Candy Crush, a stupid mobile phone game earned over 600 million dollars in 2022 on Microtransaction. I have never met or even heard of a person who plays candy crush, yet it earns more money in a year than the top 100 PC games released last year combined.
The power of Microtransaction and whale spending is grossly underestimated. A D&D VTT can be universally despised by this community, rejected outright and it may still end up being the highest-grossing thing D&D has ever done in its entire combined history as a franchise.
That... is the scary thing about the direction D&D is going. What the community wants, what the community thinks is good, what this community thinks is worth it may end up not mattering at all. If there are whales willing to buy into the transaction model, they (wotch & the whaltes) can turn this into a profitable venture while simultaneously giving the rest of the D&D community the middle finger. This is how it goes down in PC gaming all the time.
Yeah I'm not even against the idea of a 3D VTT on paper although even then it has some serious problems (accessibility being a major one). However, we know quite clearly what Hasbro wants to use D&D for more than just spamming us with plushies, t-shirts, and movies. And make no mistake they're going to go full ham on this 3D VTT since they've invested so much money and leadership into it and I really fear that in 5-7 years kids will think of D&D as "that weird 3D game where you don't even fight anyone and it costs you $40 to make one character that looks cool with all those lootboxes and stuff" and be barely aware that a in person physical game exists.
The only glimmer of hope is that the crashing and burning of the 'metaverse' happens on a smaller scale with Hasbro and this virtual VTT and maybe even forces it to spin off WotC or at least replace the leadership with others.
I think you're failing to understand the PC market. Yes, the funding model of PC games is often focused on the whales, but the core motivation of the whales is being able to show off in front of everyone else playing the game, and that means you need a generally popular game to attract the whales. Attracting an audience for the whales is why the F2P business model exists. To put it in terms more relevant to a D&D VTT: are you really going to bother spending a bunch of money on models and cosmetics if you can't find anyone to play a game with?
Consumerism has a funny way of making people purchase things they don't need. There are people who buy and hoard Warhammer miniatures and Magic: the Gathering cards but don't play either game with anyone.
I don't particularly care if Wizards take D&D in a direction where it becomes more and more digitized. I will continue to play the game with friends. In person. Using physical books. Like I've done for the past forty years.
But there's something "off" about a hobby that requires a pencil, some paper, and some dice seeing its current custodian want people to play the game using most likely through-the-roof specced computers and at whatever further costs they'll charge for the privilege.
The VTT looks like and looks like it will feel like a video game. You are looking at avatars on a screen. With animations. With things that until now have been animated within our own minds. And pressing buttons to activate digital dice. To attack. To move.
If people want to do that that's their business.
But D&D will always be an analog hobby to me.
That's what I'm hoping happens. The VTT is something they spend millions on, a bunch of whales make ridiculous characters by spending hundred+ dollars, but hardly any DMs want to use the damned thing and the whole scheme folds like superman on laundry day. And it would be one thing if this was just another thing that Hasbro was doing but it isn't. It's the core of the next generation of D&D, again this is not speculation this is from their own words.
But FYI, this model for video games is mostly tried and true and is still a mint for Blizzard who made the very controversial ATM disguised as a mobile video game, Diablo Immortal. Despite the whithering criticism from press and even streamers it's still chugging along getting players to cough up money just fine. That's not to mention the many other not as egregious but still awful microtransaction games.
What you're saying will be "doom-and-gloom alarmism" ... until it isn't.
Much like that whole business with the Open Game License was a rumor ... until it wasn't.
Been a bit of a trend for several years now for people to say things aren't happening or they ain't going to but then they are and some find themselves then defending what they'd moments ago claimed wasn't happening or wouldn't happen.
Some just find it too difficult to say three simple words: "I was wrong."
Short answer is.. yes.. Whales will. In fact, the highest-grossing micro-transaction games in the industry like SIMS for example are primarily played offline, alone. It would shock you to know the statistics and spending habits of the typical whale. I very reluctantly know more about the PC gaming market than I care to. All the people in my gaming group are executive producers and game developers for various PC gaming companies. These guys talk about this stuff all the time, in fact a couple of them know the executives running Wizards of the Coast personally because they have worked with them in the past.
Showing off is not the main motivation for whales or even a typical micro-transaction spender, the addictive nature of collecting is. The most viewed youtube channels in the world are of gamers, recording themselves collecting things in games. A guy doing nothing but spinning loot boxes on CS Go will get 1-5 million views on every video and have a few hundred thousand people watching him doing it live.
True. I have a friend who works at Blizzard and one of the things he pointed out is that Diablo players are not the audience for Immortal at all. It's an entirely different audience that plays the mobile version of Diablo and those mobile users don't play the PC game version. They are two distinctively different communities. Diablo Immortals has made over 300 million dollars and Diablo fans don't even play the game at all.
Where D&D is going with this VTT and the effects it will have on the game are difficult to predict, but one thing is clear, its definitely going to re-define what D&D is as a franchise and as a game if its successful and I'm not convinced actual fans of Dungeons and Dragons are going to be onboard with this new "look" and its unlikely if the VTT is successful as a micro-transaction game that the community, even if they boycott would be able to make a dent in the plans.
Only time will tell, but for me personally, if the VTT is a subscription-based model filled with Micro-transaction (which I think it will be), it's going to be a hard pass for me. If they sell it for a one time cost and fill it with good content.. maybe throw out an expansion once a year or whatever.. I might give it a go, but I'm not entering some new pay wall eco-system.
It's a glorified video game with slower inputs, this is highlighted by the fact that they are looking to make it run on gaming consoles. It looks slick but until we know the cost and specs it will take to run it there is no reason to get worked up over it. If the specs are such that you need alienware like they used in the demo, it will be a colossal failure. A big element of making a VTT successful is accessibility and ease. Assuming your want to play with a specific group of people, every online group is essentially throttled by the needs of the player with the most suboptimal setup. Which means the most advanced vtt you can use is the one that that is the high end for that player. In general, most will want or need it to run on at least one of the following PC, tablet, tablet, chromebook, or phone and if it doesn't then it will be a fancy thing that the majority of customers won't utilize.
Might I just add that all this talk about diversity and inclusivity doesn't mean jack squat when you're going to make sure that people playing your flagship product has to have very good (and expensive) PCs? And for the love of God don't give me the "IF yoU dOn'T likE iT theY woN't taKe AwaY yoUr booKs" BS. You don't invest tens of millions of dollars and years of effort and pitch your investors on something to NOT make it the centerpiece of your flagship product. And you don't get to call yourselves 'Stewards Of The Game" and declare yourself immune from ciriticisms of what you are doing to the game. The outlook is grim unless you like Candy Crush and Diablo Immortal and can't wait to see D&D go that road.
A VTT is simply not a game that can be played offline, alone. There aren't any precisely similar games, but the closest models are other small team games; in the current top 20 that would be Overwatch, LoL, and CS:GO. All of which certainly have problematic microtransactions but are heavily dependent on having a large number of players to make sure that people can find games.
I really don't understand where people think a VTT's popularity will be the "death of creativity". If anything, it's the complete opposite.
Designing/ executing maps that are both aesthetically pleasing AND keep in mind gameplay flow is a VERY intensive bit of work, both on the creative and technical side. Playing in such environments likewise does nothing to diminish player creativity, no more than the existence of official art and maps does. The big difference is that you can actually see where your pieces in play are, rather than relying on pure theatre of the mind, which is awful for combat anyhow.
I also feel that there seems to be a misunderstanding of what's being suggested when VTT's are compared to video games. I feel like the devs are referring to the ease of use, remote friendly and visual realization, none of which will kill your story telling ability as a DM or player. In fact, for a visually driven person like myself, I find it actually VERY helpful.
I don't know.... I feel like having trepidation about WOTC's take on VTT's is well and good, but this idea of VTT's being the death of creativity is bunk at best, and honestly a little insulting to those of us who actually do put a lot of energy towards building in them.
Explain how blind booster packs for miniatures differ from lootboxes, other than one being physical. Micro transactions are nothing new.
1. Just because there are other Virtual TableTops doesn't mean Wizards can't launch their own. Competition between VTT designers will hopefully make it so that we will get more cool and fun options in future as people keep improving and improving.
2. We actually don't know whether or not most people want to use a VTT. Regardless, if you aren't going to use a VTT, that's your choice. However, other people who want to use it have that right, and there is nothing bad about new ways for more people to have fun playing D&D.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.What BoringBard said, yeah. And frankly, I don't know what "most people don't want to play on a VTT" is even based on. While I know that my personal experiences are not reflective of the whole world, I'll say this; almost every single DnD game I have ever played has been online, either via Roll20 or even just pure Discord without maps. Why? Because my friends and I are all on different corners of the Earth, or in different towns. It's been the case for nearly my entire life; people I know who share the hobby are generally not where I live. This was the case when I lived/ grew up in India, and remains the case here in the USA's Midwest. The few times I've managed to get into a real, face-face, on-the-table session have been REALLY small scale one shots... which became better when we decided to bust out our comps, fire up Talespire and hold the sessions there while chilling IRL.
Long way of saying; everyone I've ever played with has been just fine (and eager) doing so over VTT's, so while I'm sure there's plenty out there who prefer a more in-person approach... I do not know how we're quantifying this as "most people".
Since the game is older than in home internet should not require a huge leap of logic to consider many current players have likely played more games with only pencil and paper than you have played online or otherwise combined.
VTT's hare very useful for some, others not so much. My thoughts on them are that they are not an enjoyable way to play. Others such as yourself feel they are.
You may also be surprised to know I have yet to play any TTRPG online and currently have no plans to do so. I have researched and played around with a few of the VTT options but for me and my friends they take more away from the game than they add. I do use many digital tools for my games, but all played to date have been with players sitting down face to face at the same physical IRL table.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
I am aware of all of that. Like I said, I know my experiences are only my own, as are my personal preferences. My point was that it was a strange thing to conclude so firmly that the majority want or do not want XYZ state of play.
And to clarify; I have no particular take on anyone who prefers playing pen and paper like. That's great! And hell, I might even be a little jealous that some of you grew up around people sharing the hobby enough to be introduced to it that way!
My rant was more in counter to the vehement smacking of the VTT style that I've been seeing a fair bit of, here and in other discussions elsewhere. Again; my experiences do not speak for everyone.... but that said, they are similar to many, many people. Many enough that VTT's as a concept have been getting so much attention by different companies, and in general they have not only been the gateway for many of us, but also added a lot of flair depending on what you're trying to do.