there was the copy/paste of some post on linkedin by Andy Collins, followed by articles based of that linkedin post, followed by articles based of that article, each seemingly more negative in the last
meanwhile there was also a copy/paste of some dev on discord saying "sigil is not shutting down"
going to take it all with a grain of salt
love how quickly things seem to escalate depending on how people interpret things, feels like that old childhood game "chinese whispers/telephone game"
Hard to believe that laying off 90% of a team working on what was going to be WOTC's flagship online service - one that was touted LOUDLY in the days leading up to the release of the 2024 rules - was planned.
Again, this is not out of the ordinary for software development. The devs working on the project likely didn't know (and that's sad) but the suits are a different story.
And again, there IS a solution - one that many industries have implemented, and that software developers need to follow suit on.
Whether or not Sigil will shut down or not as a result of these layoffs (regardless if they were planned or not) remains to be seen but, in its current state, Sigil is a long way off from being a usable product. It's not going to be made clear what their plan is going to be moving forward for a while I would imagine, but if you look at the big picture, the messaging from WotC about 2024 edition in general has been very misleading.
They proclaimed that 2024 is the best-selling edition of all time for example, but it's crystal clear at this point that there is absolutely no evidence anywhere to support that claim. Not in the Q4 reports, not in the bookscan reports, not in analytics data. Everything we do have available in regards to 2024 sales suggests that it borders on an abysmal failure, quite possibly sales worse than 4e and there is no logical reason at this stage to hide the fact that it's super successful if that was not the case, except one. While you can exaggerate success to customers you can't lie about the numbers to shareholders. The Q4 results had 2024 been as successful as WotC claims, would have the 2024 edition be a major contributor to the financial success of WotC, but D&D is not even mentioned in the Q4 report.... at all. As if 2024 wasn't even released.
It's all speculation of course, but if 2024 is successful, there is no evidence to that fact in hard data and a considerable amount of data to the contrary. These lay-offs may very well be the first in several cost-saving steps to recoup losses on the current edition of the game. It's very disconcerting to see the franchise on such an unstable footing. Some reassurance I think would be in order at this point.
The report seemed focused on explaining why it's appeared negative, talking particular about the divestiture of eOne and the lack of a comparable Holiday Set for Magic. It seemed to be focused on setting the narrative by explaining why the numbers being low don't mean doom for the future. If D&D were doing that poorly, it would have been natural, fitting and on theme for them to talk about that too, but they didn't. Especially with the bungled rollout of the books with orders being cancelled etc.
On the other hand, if D&D2024e really were the fastest selling edition ever, as Crawford repeatedly claimed, I'd have thought that they would have mentioned it. That would have been a very bright spot - most of the expenses are done, and now it's time to rake it. Except, they didn't. It's not even mentioned as a major driver for revenue - the one thing they did mention was Monopoly Go.
It's a difficult report to parse in context of comments made. I think trying to draw conclusions from it is rather more akin to divining through tea leaves than a science. We're trying to impose meaning on silence, which rarely tells us much about the silence.
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.
The report seemed focused on explaining why it's appeared negative, talking particular about the divestiture of eOne and the lack of a comparable Holiday Set for Magic. It seemed to be focused on setting the narrative by explaining why the numbers being low don't mean doom for the future. If D&D were doing that poorly, it would have been natural, fitting and on theme for them to talk about that too, but they didn't. Especially with the bungled rollout of the books with orders being cancelled etc.
On the other hand, if D&D2024e really were the fastest selling edition ever, as Crawford repeatedly claimed, I'd have thought that they would have mentioned it. That would have been a very bright spot - most of the expenses are done, and now it's time to rake it. Except, they didn't. It's not even mentioned as a major driver for revenue - the one thing they did mention was Monopoly Go.
It's a difficult report to parse in context of comments made. I think trying to draw conclusions from it is rather more akin to divining through tea leaves than a science. We're trying to impose meaning on silence, which rarely tells us much about the silence.
Well here is the thing about Quarterly reports like this. You're speaking directly to investors. You can't lie about anything, but there are no requirements to point out specifics in the business, you highlight the positive numbers and explain the negative numbers, but there is nothing holding you to explaining "how is X product doing". You would very naturally highlight products that are doing very well, as you point out, they mention Monopoly Go very specifically because it's raking in money like a slot machine, but they said absolutely nothing about D&D the supposed "best-selling D&D of all time". That omission doesn't require reading of tea leaves, if it was doing that well, they would have highlighted it. The only logical reason to omit it is if it's not worth mentioning.
I understand it's all speculation, but if you're trying to reassure investors that D&D is doing great and the investment in digitizing and monetizing the franchise is on track, that is something you would not simply choose not to include in the report.
“D&D released the first significant update the 5th Edition since 2014 and closed out the year strong with both the new Players Handbook and Dungeon Master’s Guide breaking records for the best-selling D&D books ever.”
The idea that they did not highlight this information in their Q4 2024 reporting to investors is a simply wrong - it is there in the plain text of their financial reporting information which, by law, is required to be truthful.
"D&D released the first significant update to 5th Edition since 2014 and closed out the year strong with both the new Players Handbook and Dungeon Master’s Guide breaking records for the best-selling D&D books ever."
"D&D is also set up to continue its recent momentum. This week we released the widely anticipated 2025 Monster Manual with strong initial orders. We’ll continue to build the D&D community leveraging D&D Beyond as a marketplace, with many third-party publishing releases set for the first half. And the future of D&D’s wider franchise ambitions is strong with all new video games and new entertainment on the horizon, including a new streaming series in development, The Forgotten Realms, from Netflix and executive producer Shawn Levy."
For those having trouble finding the information about D&D in that document or don't want to click the link.
“D&D released the first significant update the 5th Edition since 2014 and closed out the year strong with both the new Players Handbook and Dungeon Master’s Guide breaking records for the best-selling D&D books ever.”
The idea that they did not highlight this information in their Q4 2024 reporting to investors is a simply wrong - it is there in the plain text of their financial reporting information which, by law, is required to be truthful.
They're also independently audited. No Big 4 firm (KPMG in this particular case) is going to put their entire reputation on the line for a small fish like Hasbro that is barely cracking the F500.
Now to be fair, that's not the document I saw, although both are from that same date (20/2/25). The document I have doesn't even talk about D&D specifically.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Anyways, it seems Crawford was telling the truth.
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.
I'm convinced the anonymous quote in the Rascal article is true and Hasbro thought they were paying for a video game similar to BG3 and simply misunderstood what a VTT is which is why it's been quietly dumped. The second they realised they weren't going to be able to sell it for $60 a time to people who don't normally play D&D it became an albatross that was never going to make the money they were hoping for so they cut their losses
Which makes the shuttering of the VTT even more curious.
Not really. The VTT was a money pit that wasn't going to pay for itself. It was a pretty dubious investment from the start, and eventually someone realized it was dubious.
Which makes the shuttering of the VTT even more curious.
Not really. The VTT was a money pit that wasn't going to pay for itself. It was a pretty dubious investment from the start, and eventually someone realized it was dubious.
Also, those being let go are getting severance, bonuses, and other benefits. It isn't as doom and gloom as people want it to be.
As a D&D numbers nerd, those figures speak volumes about what is troubling the company, and anyone who actually follows the company that holds a brand you like, well it’s easy to say certain things, but the bigger picture paints a different story.
If Sigil has become a cost sink fallacy and the new company road map is to support brands that are profitably stable, then the love for the D&D brand is waning and that news is most definitely not good news, IMHO. 2024 rules love is low and it’s noticeable if you know where to look, the fog of war is lifting and the body count has begun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Which makes the shuttering of the VTT even more curious.
Not really. The VTT was a money pit that wasn't going to pay for itself. It was a pretty dubious investment from the start, and eventually someone realized it was dubious.
Also, those being let go are getting severance, bonuses, and other benefits. It isn't as doom and gloom as people want it to be.
First, I'm glad those let go weren't summarily just dropped. I hope the severance packages weren't measly (they often are these days).
Still strikes me as odd that WOTC had gone far enough in development to show it to a bunch of D&D YTers last year - later last year - but now it appears, as Tom would say on Parks & Rec, dunzo. Whatever the reasons, given what we DO know it feels like yet more signs of the contradictory and/or poorly-thought-through WOTC and Hasbro have been making for the past 18 months+.
Maps still works pretty well and I think it's a fine tool, so at least that's still in place.
As a D&D numbers nerd, those figures speak volumes about what is troubling the company, and anyone who actually follows the company that holds a brand you like, well it’s easy to say certain things, but the bigger picture paints a different story.
If Sigil has become a cost sink fallacy and the new company road map is to support brands that are profitably stable, then the love for the D&D brand is waning and that news is most definitely not good news, IMHO. 2024 rules love is low and it’s noticeable if you know where to look, the fog of war is lifting and the body count has begun.
This is bad analysis - and bad analysis that clearly belies a failure to read or comprehend the very document you link. D&D is specifically listed as one of the brands that they are confident in and intend to support. This is further supported by documentation and quotes provided on the very same page as your post whereby Hasbro confirms D&D 2024 is selling better than anything else in D&D’s history.
Cutting back on Sigil means they lost faith in Sigil. And there are a whole lot of reasons that might have happened - none of which involve a failing of D&D itself. It does not mean they lost faith in D&D as a whole - if they had, they would not be showcasing D&D and its current successes in their comments to investors.
Your unsubstantiated doomsaying simply does not reflect evidence-supported reality.
Frankly, Sigil was always a bit of a long shot; there’s already enough established VTTs and means of integrating Beyond content into them that it was going to be a fight to break into the market. I was interested to see how this 3D model approach played out, but not terribly invested.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
there was the copy/paste of some post on linkedin by Andy Collins, followed by articles based of that linkedin post, followed by articles based of that article, each seemingly more negative in the last
meanwhile there was also a copy/paste of some dev on discord saying "sigil is not shutting down"
going to take it all with a grain of salt
love how quickly things seem to escalate depending on how people interpret things, feels like that old childhood game "chinese whispers/telephone game"
Again, this is not out of the ordinary for software development. The devs working on the project likely didn't know (and that's sad) but the suits are a different story.
And again, there IS a solution - one that many industries have implemented, and that software developers need to follow suit on.
ai, ai is the solution!
Whether or not Sigil will shut down or not as a result of these layoffs (regardless if they were planned or not) remains to be seen but, in its current state, Sigil is a long way off from being a usable product. It's not going to be made clear what their plan is going to be moving forward for a while I would imagine, but if you look at the big picture, the messaging from WotC about 2024 edition in general has been very misleading.
They proclaimed that 2024 is the best-selling edition of all time for example, but it's crystal clear at this point that there is absolutely no evidence anywhere to support that claim. Not in the Q4 reports, not in the bookscan reports, not in analytics data. Everything we do have available in regards to 2024 sales suggests that it borders on an abysmal failure, quite possibly sales worse than 4e and there is no logical reason at this stage to hide the fact that it's super successful if that was not the case, except one. While you can exaggerate success to customers you can't lie about the numbers to shareholders. The Q4 results had 2024 been as successful as WotC claims, would have the 2024 edition be a major contributor to the financial success of WotC, but D&D is not even mentioned in the Q4 report.... at all. As if 2024 wasn't even released.
It's all speculation of course, but if 2024 is successful, there is no evidence to that fact in hard data and a considerable amount of data to the contrary. These lay-offs may very well be the first in several cost-saving steps to recoup losses on the current edition of the game. It's very disconcerting to see the franchise on such an unstable footing. Some reassurance I think would be in order at this point.
The report seemed focused on explaining why it's appeared negative, talking particular about the divestiture of eOne and the lack of a comparable Holiday Set for Magic. It seemed to be focused on setting the narrative by explaining why the numbers being low don't mean doom for the future. If D&D were doing that poorly, it would have been natural, fitting and on theme for them to talk about that too, but they didn't. Especially with the bungled rollout of the books with orders being cancelled etc.
On the other hand, if D&D2024e really were the fastest selling edition ever, as Crawford repeatedly claimed, I'd have thought that they would have mentioned it. That would have been a very bright spot - most of the expenses are done, and now it's time to rake it. Except, they didn't. It's not even mentioned as a major driver for revenue - the one thing they did mention was Monopoly Go.
It's a difficult report to parse in context of comments made. I think trying to draw conclusions from it is rather more akin to divining through tea leaves than a science. We're trying to impose meaning on silence, which rarely tells us much about the silence.
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.
Well here is the thing about Quarterly reports like this. You're speaking directly to investors. You can't lie about anything, but there are no requirements to point out specifics in the business, you highlight the positive numbers and explain the negative numbers, but there is nothing holding you to explaining "how is X product doing". You would very naturally highlight products that are doing very well, as you point out, they mention Monopoly Go very specifically because it's raking in money like a slot machine, but they said absolutely nothing about D&D the supposed "best-selling D&D of all time". That omission doesn't require reading of tea leaves, if it was doing that well, they would have highlighted it. The only logical reason to omit it is if it's not worth mentioning.
I understand it's all speculation, but if you're trying to reassure investors that D&D is doing great and the investment in digitizing and monetizing the franchise is on track, that is something you would not simply choose not to include in the report.
“D&D released the first significant update the 5th Edition since 2014 and closed out the year strong with both the new Players Handbook and Dungeon Master’s Guide breaking records for the best-selling D&D books ever.”
-Hasbro’s Fourth Quarter Financial Results Conference Call Management Remarks
The idea that they did not highlight this information in their Q4 2024 reporting to investors is a simply wrong - it is there in the plain text of their financial reporting information which, by law, is required to be truthful.
For those having trouble finding the information about D&D in that document or don't want to click the link.
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
They're also independently audited. No Big 4 firm (KPMG in this particular case) is going to put their entire reputation on the line for a small fish like Hasbro that is barely cracking the F500.
Now to be fair, that's not the document I saw, although both are from that same date (20/2/25). The document I have doesn't even talk about D&D specifically.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Anyways, it seems Crawford was telling the truth.
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.
Which makes the shuttering of the VTT even more curious.
I'm convinced the anonymous quote in the Rascal article is true and Hasbro thought they were paying for a video game similar to BG3 and simply misunderstood what a VTT is which is why it's been quietly dumped. The second they realised they weren't going to be able to sell it for $60 a time to people who don't normally play D&D it became an albatross that was never going to make the money they were hoping for so they cut their losses
Not really. The VTT was a money pit that wasn't going to pay for itself. It was a pretty dubious investment from the start, and eventually someone realized it was dubious.
Also, those being let go are getting severance, bonuses, and other benefits. It isn't as doom and gloom as people want it to be.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
"Shuttering?" It's on my hard drive just fine, when was it shuttered?
I read this after reading the Quarterly Transcripts of the Conference Call: Hasbro Q4-2024 Public Quarterly Disclosure.
As a D&D numbers nerd, those figures speak volumes about what is troubling the company, and anyone who actually follows the company that holds a brand you like, well it’s easy to say certain things, but the bigger picture paints a different story.
If Sigil has become a cost sink fallacy and the new company road map is to support brands that are profitably stable, then the love for the D&D brand is waning and that news is most definitely not good news, IMHO.
2024 rules love is low and it’s noticeable if you know where to look, the fog of war is lifting and the body count has begun.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
WOTC's VTT, Project Sigil.
First, I'm glad those let go weren't summarily just dropped. I hope the severance packages weren't measly (they often are these days).
Still strikes me as odd that WOTC had gone far enough in development to show it to a bunch of D&D YTers last year - later last year - but now it appears, as Tom would say on Parks & Rec, dunzo. Whatever the reasons, given what we DO know it feels like yet more signs of the contradictory and/or poorly-thought-through WOTC and Hasbro have been making for the past 18 months+.
Maps still works pretty well and I think it's a fine tool, so at least that's still in place.
This is bad analysis - and bad analysis that clearly belies a failure to read or comprehend the very document you link. D&D is specifically listed as one of the brands that they are confident in and intend to support. This is further supported by documentation and quotes provided on the very same page as your post whereby Hasbro confirms D&D 2024 is selling better than anything else in D&D’s history.
Cutting back on Sigil means they lost faith in Sigil. And there are a whole lot of reasons that might have happened - none of which involve a failing of D&D itself. It does not mean they lost faith in D&D as a whole - if they had, they would not be showcasing D&D and its current successes in their comments to investors.
Your unsubstantiated doomsaying simply does not reflect evidence-supported reality.
Frankly, Sigil was always a bit of a long shot; there’s already enough established VTTs and means of integrating Beyond content into them that it was going to be a fight to break into the market. I was interested to see how this 3D model approach played out, but not terribly invested.