I have had players walk away when I tell them "No, I refuse to allow anything post Xanathar's nor Hexblade dips because the stuff is OP". Many a player always goes with the new hotness, especially when it is more powerful than the old product.
I only let players create core races PHB (but no Tieflings or Dragonborns, these are either NPC's or monsters).
From a DM perspective, we have to manage everything, from immersion to player's expectations to balancing game, including OP and skewed guidelines (not to mention all the other details). Here's a simple, generic example: Aarakocra can fly - you'd think, maybe glide 5 to 1, heck even 10 to 1, but no, straight up fly - movement in 3 dimensional space (exploration, scouting, evasion, stealth, transport, etc.), nope, no OP allowed - gotta earn your adventure, gotta earn those abilities.
DM's are the ones who put in 10 to 20 hours of work to create a single session adventure that players only need to show up for, and that's the luxury of writing lots of options and abilities for players.
I understand D&D wants to wow players with possibilities and abilities and make them superheroes by level 3, to get players interested, possibly entice them to stay interested, but it's actually a form of inflation - no worse than a DM giving away gold and magic items to pacify the players - like giving away cheat codes - and when cheat codes are given away, used, people become bored quickly, because the allure of a challenge has been lost.
I can see why there has been a huge drop in interest in D&D (I researched market trends, but the real eye opener is in my metropolitan city of 3+ million people, where we used to have dozens of D&D 5e groups, now there are only 6 - that's a huge contraction).
This is why I am struggling with the idea of buying the digital copies. Other companies that had digital copies of a thing only have gone "extinct" in terms of its service. I can buy a physical copy of the book and make my own digital copy legally, but I would feel bad not supporting a hobby in doing so. At the same time, if they aren't reasonable in pricing, access guarantees, or feature accommodations, why would I invest in a potentially doomed platform?
Bad business hasn't stopped businesses in the past. Companies have made mistakes that cost lives, this is less than that, so it's reasonable to be concerned about it.
@Boomgaarden your concern is genuine. It's not uncommon for such a scenario as losing access to purchased digital products vs physical products... .
Here are some examples.
A notable example from the past is when the eBookstore Fictionwise was acquired by Barnes & Noble and then shut down. Customers faced issues accessing books they had purchased because the DRM (Digital Rights Management) servers were taken offline.
Another example is the closure of Microsoft's eBook store, which led to customers losing access to their purchased eBooks once the DRM servers were discontinued.
Another example involved the digital music service provided by Microsoft, known as MSN Music. They announced back in 2008 that they would be shutting down their DRM servers. As a result, customers who purchased music from MSN Music were no longer able to authorize playback on new devices once the servers were shut down. This meant that any device failure or upgrade would render their purchased music files unusable.
Another example is the shutdown of Ultraviolet, a digital movie locker service. Ultraviolet allowed users to store digital copies of films and TV shows online, but it ceased operations in 2019. While they partnered with other retailers to ensure users could still access their content, the closure required users to actively link their libraries with other services, and some users experienced difficulties or lost access to certain titles.
Another example, Google’s Stadia, a cloud gaming service, also shut down, and while it didn’t involve downloadable products, it highlighted issues related to the permanence of digital services. Users lost access to games they had purchased.
Another example, Sony also closed its PlayStation Mobile platform, which affected users who had purchased games for PlayStation Vita or certain Android devices. When the platform closed, users lost the ability to re-download their purchased games, effectively losing access.
Alright, alright, one more example, I'm such a giver.
Adobe’s Fotolia, a stock photo website, which was acquired by Adobe and then transitioned to Adobe Stock. When Adobe decided to phase out Fotolia, users were encouraged to transition to Adobe Stock. However, not all Fotolia content was available on Adobe Stock, and some users found that they could no longer access certain images they had rights to use via Fotolia. Additionally, the licensing terms changed, which affected how some users could use the images they had previously purchased.
If Netflix goes out of business, I lose all my movies. If Facebook stops trading, I lose my posts and messages. If my telco goes under, I lose my phone calls. If my gym shuts is doors I lose my workouts. When Picasaweb shut down, I did lose a few photos and a lot of metadata. When Microsoft Games for WIndows stopped operating, I did lose the ability run run some of "my" games.
Nothing is owned. Everything is leased. The word "my" in the paragraph above indicates possession not ownership. "Owning" a book on dndbeyond.com is much the same as "owning" a machine at your gym.
Is everyone worried about it? Yes, but we accept it as the way that the world runs today. Even when it sucks (Microsoft, I'm still bitter about GFWL).
I only let players create core races PHB (but no Tieflings or Dragonborns, these are either NPC's or monsters).
...
I can see why there has been a huge drop in interest in D&D (I researched market trends, but the real eye opener is in my metropolitan city of 3+ million people, where we used to have dozens of D&D 5e groups, now there are only 6 - that's a huge contraction).
Let's assume you're right about this "contraction." Is your thesis that this wouldn't have happened if they'd only... stopped making new books after Xanathars? Does not seem to be much of a viable (or sensible) business strategy.
This is why I am struggling with the idea of buying the digital copies. Other companies that had digital copies of a thing only have gone "extinct" in terms of its service. I can buy a physical copy of the book and make my own digital copy legally, but I would feel bad not supporting a hobby in doing so. At the same time, if they aren't reasonable in pricing, access guarantees, or feature accommodations, why would I invest in a potentially doomed platform?
So don't? They are making printed versions of the new books; sticking to those is absolutely acceptable, and will support the hobby/company just as much as DDB (moreso if you buy one of the exclusive covers from your FLGS.)
@PsyrenXY The contraction is true. Making new books was not the issue - AD&D introduced Barbarians, Acrobats, etc.later after their initial launch, and game grew, created many modules too and other materials and accessories and the game growth did well - my discussion was that today's D&D 5e was catered to players so hard 1) turned off DM's who make the games possible for players to enjoy 2) they gave players so many powers and abilities the challenge of the adventure had been lost.
I think you gave Boomgaarden encouraging guidance, with "So don't."
@Greenstone_Walker you are correct, most things are provisional - especially digital i.e. purchase a movie on YouTube, read the underwriting, it explicitly states 5 years of ownership, if not available before 5 years is up from purchase date, you get a full refund...but 5 years is the shelf life for a YouTube purchased movie.
Even if the contraction is true, you realize that in terms of sample vs population this isn't anything close to a useful sample, right? And thus it's not particularly useful in and of itself for making anything like an informed position on the state of the game overall.
@Boomgaarden your concern is genuine. It's not uncommon for such a scenario as losing access to purchased digital products vs physical products... .
Here are some examples.
A notable example from the past is when the eBookstore Fictionwise was acquired by Barnes & Noble and then shut down. Customers faced issues accessing books they had purchased because the DRM (Digital Rights Management) servers were taken offline.
Another example is the closure of Microsoft's eBook store, which led to customers losing access to their purchased eBooks once the DRM servers were discontinued.
Another example involved the digital music service provided by Microsoft, known as MSN Music. They announced back in 2008 that they would be shutting down their DRM servers. As a result, customers who purchased music from MSN Music were no longer able to authorize playback on new devices once the servers were shut down. This meant that any device failure or upgrade would render their purchased music files unusable.
Another example is the shutdown of Ultraviolet, a digital movie locker service. Ultraviolet allowed users to store digital copies of films and TV shows online, but it ceased operations in 2019. While they partnered with other retailers to ensure users could still access their content, the closure required users to actively link their libraries with other services, and some users experienced difficulties or lost access to certain titles.
Another example, Google’s Stadia, a cloud gaming service, also shut down, and while it didn’t involve downloadable products, it highlighted issues related to the permanence of digital services. Users lost access to games they had purchased.
Another example, Sony also closed its PlayStation Mobile platform, which affected users who had purchased games for PlayStation Vita or certain Android devices. When the platform closed, users lost the ability to re-download their purchased games, effectively losing access.
Alright, alright, one more example, I'm such a giver.
Adobe’s Fotolia, a stock photo website, which was acquired by Adobe and then transitioned to Adobe Stock. When Adobe decided to phase out Fotolia, users were encouraged to transition to Adobe Stock. However, not all Fotolia content was available on Adobe Stock, and some users found that they could no longer access certain images they had rights to use via Fotolia. Additionally, the licensing terms changed, which affected how some users could use the images they had previously purchased.
And there many more instances.
So, your concerns are genuine.
I love validating my negative feelings! Honestly, when it comes to digital content, usually the terms of agreement aren't worth the digital lights used to read them, if the company goes under. I like digital books, because I am dyslexic and I find reading on a computer easier and faster. I can also take screenshots, highlight it, print it, and present it to the DM, instead of thumbing a book, reading it 15 times and not finding what I am looking for. But the risk is not worth it, especially for the price.
If Netflix goes out of business, I lose all my movies. If Facebook stops trading, I lose my posts and messages. If my telco goes under, I lose my phone calls. If my gym shuts is doors I lose my workouts. When Picasaweb shut down, I did lose a few photos and a lot of metadata. When Microsoft Games for WIndows stopped operating, I did lose the ability run run some of "my" games.
Nothing is owned. Everything is leased. The word "my" in the paragraph above indicates possession not ownership. "Owning" a book on dndbeyond.com is much the same as "owning" a machine at your gym.
Is everyone worried about it? Yes, but we accept it as the way that the world runs today. Even when it sucks (Microsoft, I'm still bitter about GFWL).
That is only normal because consumers allow it to be normal.
If Netflix goes out of business, I lose all my movies. If Facebook stops trading, I lose my posts and messages. If my telco goes under, I lose my phone calls. If my gym shuts is doors I lose my workouts. When Picasaweb shut down, I did lose a few photos and a lot of metadata. When Microsoft Games for WIndows stopped operating, I did lose the ability run run some of "my" games.
Nothing is owned. Everything is leased. The word "my" in the paragraph above indicates possession not ownership. "Owning" a book on dndbeyond.com is much the same as "owning" a machine at your gym.
Is everyone worried about it? Yes, but we accept it as the way that the world runs today. Even when it sucks (Microsoft, I'm still bitter about GFWL).
That is only normal because consumers allow it to be normal.
This is a common belief - if only we customers rose up, the evil corporations would change their ways. It is, however, a false belief - the reality of our existence, not customer apathy, is why these purchases are structured without ownership transference.
As many have noted on this thread, shutdowns are an inevitability. Eventually, the system will stop working and all the data on it will go away. If that content was owned outright by customers, guess what? The company would be financially liable for the items destruction, even though the server shutdown might be their only option. By leasing/licensing the content, they are only destroying their own property when that inevitable day comes.
One must also remember, buying a digital book is not only buying the book - you are also paying for a service. Instant access to that book from anywhere you have internet, availability on the digital building tools, search options (bad as Beyond’a may be), etc. It is not like your license only gives you temporary access to the content - it gives you temporary access to the content for the long-foreseeable future with some additional services thrown in for the life of the license.
Finally, there is no reason to believe this digital platform is going anywhere anytime soon - Wizards has invested $140+ million in the platform and increasingly pushed it as its main D&D website. Further, this year they are reaffirming their commitment to 5e for the foreseeable future. The chances they just shut everything down anytime soon? Pretty low - these digital licenses probably have a minimum of five years left in them, if not way longer. Plus, as Wizards has shown, they are pretty open and forthright about when their digital tools are going to change and folks might lose access to content, giving plenty of advance warning so people can take preparatory steps.
All told. Folks absolutely should buy paper if they want a permanent copy—but lack of ownership is not a reason to be scared to purchase something digitally. If the license to the digital content gives you value, then you have to decide if that value is worth the purchase price. For me, it absolutely is - ownership has less value to me than the convenience, so my preference is going to be digital over physical. Others might sit differently on that analysis - it is a choice everyone has to make for themselves.
If Netflix goes out of business, I lose all my movies. If Facebook stops trading, I lose my posts and messages. If my telco goes under, I lose my phone calls. If my gym shuts is doors I lose my workouts. When Picasaweb shut down, I did lose a few photos and a lot of metadata. When Microsoft Games for WIndows stopped operating, I did lose the ability run run some of "my" games.
Nothing is owned. Everything is leased. The word "my" in the paragraph above indicates possession not ownership. "Owning" a book on dndbeyond.com is much the same as "owning" a machine at your gym.
Is everyone worried about it? Yes, but we accept it as the way that the world runs today. Even when it sucks (Microsoft, I'm still bitter about GFWL).
That is only normal because consumers allow it to be normal.
This is a common belief - if only we customers rose up, the evil corporations would change their ways. It is, however, a false belief - the reality of our existence, not customer apathy, is why these purchases are structured without ownership transference.
As many have noted on this thread, shutdowns are an inevitability. Eventually, the system will stop working and all the data on it will go away. If that content was owned outright by customers, guess what? The company would be financially liable for the items destruction, even though the server shutdown might be their only option. By leasing/licensing the content, they are only destroying their own property when that inevitable day comes.
One must also remember, buying a digital book is not only buying the book - you are also paying for a service. Instant access to that book from anywhere you have internet, availability on the digital building tools, search options (bad as Beyond’a may be), etc. It is not like your license only gives you temporary access to the content - it gives you temporary access to the content for the long-foreseeable future with some additional services thrown in for the life of the license.
Finally, there is no reason to believe this digital platform is going anywhere anytime soon - Wizards has invested $140+ million in the platform and increasingly pushed it as its main D&D website. Further, this year they are reaffirming their commitment to 5e for the foreseeable future. The chances they just shut everything down anytime soon? Pretty low - these digital licenses probably have a minimum of five years left in them, if not way longer. Plus, as Wizards has shown, they are pretty open and forthright about when their digital tools are going to change and folks might lose access to content, giving plenty of advance warning so people can take preparatory steps.
All told. Folks absolutely should buy paper if they want a permanent copy—but lack of ownership is not a reason to be scared to purchase something digitally. If the license to the digital content gives you value, then you have to decide if that value is worth the purchase price. For me, it absolutely is - ownership has less value to me than the convenience, so my preference is going to be digital over physical. Others might sit differently on that analysis - it is a choice everyone has to make for themselves.
It's a temporary service, we only need to look at Xbox Live to see the truth of the matter. It's a fallacious argument to say that because an entity invested so much into a thing, that its going to stay. Stadia was like that, Google put tens of millions into Stadia, it did not stay. Lack of ownership is a valid argument to be afraid if they feel the investment will not yield a return. You said it yourself, this is a live service, buying into it means paying to get something in return. But that is not the end of it. Eventually the market maxes out, the good will might run out from bad choices, and the market demands impact the willingness to buy into this kind of entertainment. Neither you, nor I, can see the future. We can only see what we see, extinction of a digital product can happen and should be accounted for by consumers prior to purchasing a digital product. For me, I could live with that if the price is right since I have physical copies. But I don't want to buy the same thing twice, even with the service.
@PsyrenXY The contraction is true. Making new books was not the issue - AD&D introduced Barbarians, Acrobats, etc.later after their initial launch, and game grew, created many modules too and other materials and accessories and the game growth did well - my discussion was that today's D&D 5e was catered to players so hard 1) turned off DM's who make the games possible for players to enjoy 2) they gave players so many powers and abilities the challenge of the adventure had been lost.
Challenging PCs who have better abilities is not hard. If your last encounter was too easy, increase their APL for the next one, or use max values instead of average values on the monster statblocks, or both. Both of these work even if you're running a printed module. This grognard "back in my day" insistence that players have it easy now strikes me as little more than laziness.
If anything, upgrading makes things easier on the DM, because the power has been normalized to the more recent releases; you won't have to manage the power disparities of a 2017 Gloomstalker alongside a 2014 Beast Master/Champion Fighter, or a 2020 Mercy Monk alongside a 2014 Open Hand Monk/Thief Rogue etc.
It's a temporary service, we only need to look at Xbox Live to see the truth of the matter. It's a fallacious argument to say that because an entity invested so much into a thing, that its going to stay.'
Xbox live seems like a counterargument to me. It's a service that's been there since what, the early 2000s? Microsoft are, like wizards, heavily invested in the service. It's pretty clear it's not going anywhere as long as MS are in the video game business at all. (Yes, they renamed it, and remodeled it a bit into the bottom tier of game pass, but it's still there.)
Stadia was like that, Google put tens of millions into Stadia, it did not stay.
Google put relatively tiny amounts of money into Stadia. Google is also a business with the attention span of a magpie (or a PC) in a dragon horde (Shiny! Wait, over there, other shiny!), so people didn't trust them to be in it for the long haul. And they weren't. Maybe it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, but they could've known that, and stuck it out until customers decided they were serious. Instead, they pulled the plug before the game studios they bought could even finish a single release.
All the evidence suggests WotC are more like Microsoft than they are like Google here.
It's a temporary service, we only need to look at Xbox Live to see the truth of the matter. It's a fallacious argument to say that because an entity invested so much into a thing, that its going to stay. Stadia was like that, Google put tens of millions into Stadia, it did not stay. Lack of ownership is a valid argument to be afraid if they feel the investment will not yield a return. You said it yourself, this is a live service, buying into it means paying to get something in return. But that is not the end of it. Eventually the market maxes out, the good will might run out from bad choices, and the market demands impact the willingness to buy into this kind of entertainment. Neither you, nor I, can see the future. We can only see what we see, extinction of a digital product can happen and should be accounted for by consumers prior to purchasing a digital product. For me, I could live with that if the price is right since I have physical copies. But I don't want to buy the same thing twice, even with the service.
No one can see the future, but we can see the past. This is not some untested program like Stadia, which gambled unsuccessfully on creating a new market. D&D Beyond is the inheritor of a sixteen year legacy of Wizards’ online digital toolsets. It is a proven successful business model for a game that has been consistently showing growth (even during the OGL issue, Beyond gained more subscribers than it lost).
We know Wizards has a history of maintaining digital tools for the entire length of the edition, and even beyond (though with reduced support) - they kept their 4e tools running as long as the underlying Microsoft system allowed and give folks plenty of warning to archive their characters (and the entirety of 4e content, if they so chose).
So, while no one can accurately predict the future, when making predictions, you should use relevant data points. Trying to extrapolate a future for Beyond from Stadia is bad analytics - an unproven product for a market that does not exist, by a company that can throw huge piles of money at potential failures is a lot different from a product in a proven product in a growing market, by a cash-strapped company that can only afford big investments if they are committed to making them work. And, unlike Stadia, we have a general idea of when the ******** will receive lesser support - when 5e dies. Considering they are renewing their commitment to 5e this year, those books likely have at least 5-10 years, if past trends on editions hold true. Then, once the tools do die, folks will either be moving on to 6e, so the lease becomes less valuable to them, or they’ll almost certainly have enough warning to database their content.
Now, whether an expected 5-10+ year lease is worth it, that is something each player should decide. But, to me, Wizards has over a decade-and-a-half of proven commitment to their digital tools. That is more than enough to evidence long-term stability and make me comfortable with the digital release. Perhaps that metric is different from others (though, I would hope no one is avoiding digital purchases because of bad Stadia-based analysis).
You know, I would say that WotC should reassure potential buyers by promising them PDFs of any products they buy if and when DDB is shut down. That would go a long way to alleviating any legitimate fears of losing the product - at least you get the PDF at the end of it, and it's not like it would cost WotC anything more than pennies.
Then I remember how certain groups who would profit from D&D doing badly have reacted in the past, and I curse them for being the reason why we can't have nice things like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
For me it is the character builder and the digital books together is what makes my purchases worth the money. I have no need for anything "digital" without the builder, Legacy is fine so long as the builder continues to work with my Legacy content. When that stops I will go back to my physical books, or play something else.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
You know, I would say that WotC should reassure potential buyers by promising them PDFs of any products they buy if and when DDB is shut down. That would go a long way to alleviating any legitimate fears of losing the product - at least you get the PDF at the end of it, and it's not like it would cost WotC anything more than pennies.
Then I remember how certain groups who would profit from D&D doing badly have reacted in the past, and I curse them for being the reason why we can't have nice things like that.
Given that every edition of D&D prior to 5th now has PDFs legally available on DMs Guild, 5e PDFs will probably happen some time after we've all moved on to 6e another decade or so from now. To say nothing of the fact that the core rules engine is in Creative Commons now too and thus legally indestructible in a way that even the OGL is not. No matter what happens with D&D Beyond, 5e isn't going anywhere for as long as people are willing to play and/or design for it.
Or hey, maybe this whole "D&D" thing is a fad we'll all get bored with, and move on to the true pinnacle of leisure activity, Fortnite 3.
You know, I would say that WotC should reassure potential buyers by promising them PDFs of any products they buy if and when DDB is shut down. That would go a long way to alleviating any legitimate fears of losing the product - at least you get the PDF at the end of it, and it's not like it would cost WotC anything more than pennies.
Then I remember how certain groups who would profit from D&D doing badly have reacted in the past, and I curse them for being the reason why we can't have nice things like that.
Given that every edition of D&D prior to 5th now has PDFs legally available on DMs Guild, 5e PDFs will probably happen some time after we've all moved on to 6e another decade or so from now. To say nothing of the fact that the core rules engine is in Creative Commons now too and thus legally indestructible in a way that even the OGL is not. No matter what happens with D&D Beyond, 5e isn't going anywhere for as long as people are willing to play and/or design for it.
Or hey, maybe this whole "D&D" thing is a fad we'll all get bored with, and move on to the true pinnacle of leisure activity, Fortnite 3.
Sure, but I'd still have to pay for it again and what I've paid for it on DDB is gone. I'd be in the same situation as if I'd never bought it. What I'd like is "Unfortunately, at some point, it will no longer feasible to run the character creation tools, but seeing as you've bought Bigby's Glory of the Giants, you'll get a PDF at that point so at least you have the text and artwork you paid for".
I know that's not going to happen, in part because any kind of recognition that DDB will not last a thousand years will be seized upon by others, but still.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
@JustaFarmer I agree with your statement:
I only let players create core races PHB (but no Tieflings or Dragonborns, these are either NPC's or monsters).
From a DM perspective, we have to manage everything, from immersion to player's expectations to balancing game, including OP and skewed guidelines (not to mention all the other details). Here's a simple, generic example: Aarakocra can fly - you'd think, maybe glide 5 to 1, heck even 10 to 1, but no, straight up fly - movement in 3 dimensional space (exploration, scouting, evasion, stealth, transport, etc.), nope, no OP allowed - gotta earn your adventure, gotta earn those abilities.
DM's are the ones who put in 10 to 20 hours of work to create a single session adventure that players only need to show up for, and that's the luxury of writing lots of options and abilities for players.
I understand D&D wants to wow players with possibilities and abilities and make them superheroes by level 3, to get players interested, possibly entice them to stay interested, but it's actually a form of inflation - no worse than a DM giving away gold and magic items to pacify the players - like giving away cheat codes - and when cheat codes are given away, used, people become bored quickly, because the allure of a challenge has been lost.
I can see why there has been a huge drop in interest in D&D (I researched market trends, but the real eye opener is in my metropolitan city of 3+ million people, where we used to have dozens of D&D 5e groups, now there are only 6 - that's a huge contraction).
This is why I am struggling with the idea of buying the digital copies. Other companies that had digital copies of a thing only have gone "extinct" in terms of its service. I can buy a physical copy of the book and make my own digital copy legally, but I would feel bad not supporting a hobby in doing so. At the same time, if they aren't reasonable in pricing, access guarantees, or feature accommodations, why would I invest in a potentially doomed platform?
Bad business hasn't stopped businesses in the past. Companies have made mistakes that cost lives, this is less than that, so it's reasonable to be concerned about it.
@Boomgaarden your concern is genuine. It's not uncommon for such a scenario as losing access to purchased digital products vs physical products... .
Here are some examples.
A notable example from the past is when the eBookstore Fictionwise was acquired by Barnes & Noble and then shut down. Customers faced issues accessing books they had purchased because the DRM (Digital Rights Management) servers were taken offline.
Another example is the closure of Microsoft's eBook store, which led to customers losing access to their purchased eBooks once the DRM servers were discontinued.
Another example involved the digital music service provided by Microsoft, known as MSN Music. They announced back in 2008 that they would be shutting down their DRM servers. As a result, customers who purchased music from MSN Music were no longer able to authorize playback on new devices once the servers were shut down. This meant that any device failure or upgrade would render their purchased music files unusable.
Another example is the shutdown of Ultraviolet, a digital movie locker service. Ultraviolet allowed users to store digital copies of films and TV shows online, but it ceased operations in 2019. While they partnered with other retailers to ensure users could still access their content, the closure required users to actively link their libraries with other services, and some users experienced difficulties or lost access to certain titles.
Another example, Google’s Stadia, a cloud gaming service, also shut down, and while it didn’t involve downloadable products, it highlighted issues related to the permanence of digital services. Users lost access to games they had purchased.
Another example, Sony also closed its PlayStation Mobile platform, which affected users who had purchased games for PlayStation Vita or certain Android devices. When the platform closed, users lost the ability to re-download their purchased games, effectively losing access.
Alright, alright, one more example, I'm such a giver.
Adobe’s Fotolia, a stock photo website, which was acquired by Adobe and then transitioned to Adobe Stock. When Adobe decided to phase out Fotolia, users were encouraged to transition to Adobe Stock. However, not all Fotolia content was available on Adobe Stock, and some users found that they could no longer access certain images they had rights to use via Fotolia. Additionally, the licensing terms changed, which affected how some users could use the images they had previously purchased.
And there many more instances.
So, your concerns are genuine.
Welcome to the 21st century. :-)
If Netflix goes out of business, I lose all my movies. If Facebook stops trading, I lose my posts and messages. If my telco goes under, I lose my phone calls. If my gym shuts is doors I lose my workouts. When Picasaweb shut down, I did lose a few photos and a lot of metadata. When Microsoft Games for WIndows stopped operating, I did lose the ability run run some of "my" games.
Nothing is owned. Everything is leased. The word "my" in the paragraph above indicates possession not ownership. "Owning" a book on dndbeyond.com is much the same as "owning" a machine at your gym.
Is everyone worried about it? Yes, but we accept it as the way that the world runs today. Even when it sucks (Microsoft, I'm still bitter about GFWL).
Let's assume you're right about this "contraction." Is your thesis that this wouldn't have happened if they'd only... stopped making new books after Xanathars? Does not seem to be much of a viable (or sensible) business strategy.
So don't? They are making printed versions of the new books; sticking to those is absolutely acceptable, and will support the hobby/company just as much as DDB (moreso if you buy one of the exclusive covers from your FLGS.)
@PsyrenXY The contraction is true. Making new books was not the issue - AD&D introduced Barbarians, Acrobats, etc.later after their initial launch, and game grew, created many modules too and other materials and accessories and the game growth did well - my discussion was that today's D&D 5e was catered to players so hard 1) turned off DM's who make the games possible for players to enjoy 2) they gave players so many powers and abilities the challenge of the adventure had been lost.
I think you gave Boomgaarden encouraging guidance, with "So don't."
@Greenstone_Walker you are correct, most things are provisional - especially digital i.e. purchase a movie on YouTube, read the underwriting, it explicitly states 5 years of ownership, if not available before 5 years is up from purchase date, you get a full refund...but 5 years is the shelf life for a YouTube purchased movie.
Even if the contraction is true, you realize that in terms of sample vs population this isn't anything close to a useful sample, right? And thus it's not particularly useful in and of itself for making anything like an informed position on the state of the game overall.
I love validating my negative feelings! Honestly, when it comes to digital content, usually the terms of agreement aren't worth the digital lights used to read them, if the company goes under. I like digital books, because I am dyslexic and I find reading on a computer easier and faster. I can also take screenshots, highlight it, print it, and present it to the DM, instead of thumbing a book, reading it 15 times and not finding what I am looking for. But the risk is not worth it, especially for the price.
That is only normal because consumers allow it to be normal.
This is a common belief - if only we customers rose up, the evil corporations would change their ways. It is, however, a false belief - the reality of our existence, not customer apathy, is why these purchases are structured without ownership transference.
As many have noted on this thread, shutdowns are an inevitability. Eventually, the system will stop working and all the data on it will go away. If that content was owned outright by customers, guess what? The company would be financially liable for the items destruction, even though the server shutdown might be their only option. By leasing/licensing the content, they are only destroying their own property when that inevitable day comes.
One must also remember, buying a digital book is not only buying the book - you are also paying for a service. Instant access to that book from anywhere you have internet, availability on the digital building tools, search options (bad as Beyond’a may be), etc. It is not like your license only gives you temporary access to the content - it gives you temporary access to the content for the long-foreseeable future with some additional services thrown in for the life of the license.
Finally, there is no reason to believe this digital platform is going anywhere anytime soon - Wizards has invested $140+ million in the platform and increasingly pushed it as its main D&D website. Further, this year they are reaffirming their commitment to 5e for the foreseeable future. The chances they just shut everything down anytime soon? Pretty low - these digital licenses probably have a minimum of five years left in them, if not way longer. Plus, as Wizards has shown, they are pretty open and forthright about when their digital tools are going to change and folks might lose access to content, giving plenty of advance warning so people can take preparatory steps.
All told. Folks absolutely should buy paper if they want a permanent copy—but lack of ownership is not a reason to be scared to purchase something digitally. If the license to the digital content gives you value, then you have to decide if that value is worth the purchase price. For me, it absolutely is - ownership has less value to me than the convenience, so my preference is going to be digital over physical. Others might sit differently on that analysis - it is a choice everyone has to make for themselves.
It's a temporary service, we only need to look at Xbox Live to see the truth of the matter. It's a fallacious argument to say that because an entity invested so much into a thing, that its going to stay. Stadia was like that, Google put tens of millions into Stadia, it did not stay. Lack of ownership is a valid argument to be afraid if they feel the investment will not yield a return. You said it yourself, this is a live service, buying into it means paying to get something in return. But that is not the end of it. Eventually the market maxes out, the good will might run out from bad choices, and the market demands impact the willingness to buy into this kind of entertainment. Neither you, nor I, can see the future. We can only see what we see, extinction of a digital product can happen and should be accounted for by consumers prior to purchasing a digital product. For me, I could live with that if the price is right since I have physical copies. But I don't want to buy the same thing twice, even with the service.
Challenging PCs who have better abilities is not hard. If your last encounter was too easy, increase their APL for the next one, or use max values instead of average values on the monster statblocks, or both. Both of these work even if you're running a printed module. This grognard "back in my day" insistence that players have it easy now strikes me as little more than laziness.
If anything, upgrading makes things easier on the DM, because the power has been normalized to the more recent releases; you won't have to manage the power disparities of a 2017 Gloomstalker alongside a 2014 Beast Master/Champion Fighter, or a 2020 Mercy Monk alongside a 2014 Open Hand Monk/Thief Rogue etc.
Given your specific situation and the effectiveness of alternatives, this conclusion does not follow to me - but it's your decision.
Xbox live seems like a counterargument to me. It's a service that's been there since what, the early 2000s? Microsoft are, like wizards, heavily invested in the service. It's pretty clear it's not going anywhere as long as MS are in the video game business at all. (Yes, they renamed it, and remodeled it a bit into the bottom tier of game pass, but it's still there.)
Google put relatively tiny amounts of money into Stadia. Google is also a business with the attention span of a magpie (or a PC) in a dragon horde (Shiny! Wait, over there, other shiny!), so people didn't trust them to be in it for the long haul. And they weren't. Maybe it was a self-fulfilling prophecy, but they could've known that, and stuck it out until customers decided they were serious. Instead, they pulled the plug before the game studios they bought could even finish a single release.
All the evidence suggests WotC are more like Microsoft than they are like Google here.
No one can see the future, but we can see the past. This is not some untested program like Stadia, which gambled unsuccessfully on creating a new market. D&D Beyond is the inheritor of a sixteen year legacy of Wizards’ online digital toolsets. It is a proven successful business model for a game that has been consistently showing growth (even during the OGL issue, Beyond gained more subscribers than it lost).
We know Wizards has a history of maintaining digital tools for the entire length of the edition, and even beyond (though with reduced support) - they kept their 4e tools running as long as the underlying Microsoft system allowed and give folks plenty of warning to archive their characters (and the entirety of 4e content, if they so chose).
So, while no one can accurately predict the future, when making predictions, you should use relevant data points. Trying to extrapolate a future for Beyond from Stadia is bad analytics - an unproven product for a market that does not exist, by a company that can throw huge piles of money at potential failures is a lot different from a product in a proven product in a growing market, by a cash-strapped company that can only afford big investments if they are committed to making them work. And, unlike Stadia, we have a general idea of when the ******** will receive lesser support - when 5e dies. Considering they are renewing their commitment to 5e this year, those books likely have at least 5-10 years, if past trends on editions hold true. Then, once the tools do die, folks will either be moving on to 6e, so the lease becomes less valuable to them, or they’ll almost certainly have enough warning to database their content.
Now, whether an expected 5-10+ year lease is worth it, that is something each player should decide. But, to me, Wizards has over a decade-and-a-half of proven commitment to their digital tools. That is more than enough to evidence long-term stability and make me comfortable with the digital release. Perhaps that metric is different from others (though, I would hope no one is avoiding digital purchases because of bad Stadia-based analysis).
You know, I would say that WotC should reassure potential buyers by promising them PDFs of any products they buy if and when DDB is shut down. That would go a long way to alleviating any legitimate fears of losing the product - at least you get the PDF at the end of it, and it's not like it would cost WotC anything more than pennies.
Then I remember how certain groups who would profit from D&D doing badly have reacted in the past, and I curse them for being the reason why we can't have nice things like that.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
For me it is the character builder and the digital books together is what makes my purchases worth the money. I have no need for anything "digital" without the builder, Legacy is fine so long as the builder continues to work with my Legacy content. When that stops I will go back to my physical books, or play something else.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Given that every edition of D&D prior to 5th now has PDFs legally available on DMs Guild, 5e PDFs will probably happen some time after we've all moved on to 6e another decade or so from now. To say nothing of the fact that the core rules engine is in Creative Commons now too and thus legally indestructible in a way that even the OGL is not. No matter what happens with D&D Beyond, 5e isn't going anywhere for as long as people are willing to play and/or design for it.
Or hey, maybe this whole "D&D" thing is a fad we'll all get bored with, and move on to the true pinnacle of leisure activity, Fortnite 3.
D&D integration into Fortnite.
Sure, but I'd still have to pay for it again and what I've paid for it on DDB is gone. I'd be in the same situation as if I'd never bought it. What I'd like is "Unfortunately, at some point, it will no longer feasible to run the character creation tools, but seeing as you've bought Bigby's Glory of the Giants, you'll get a PDF at that point so at least you have the text and artwork you paid for".
I know that's not going to happen, in part because any kind of recognition that DDB will not last a thousand years will be seized upon by others, but still.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.