Well, in addition to their shitty knockoff Legos, WotC has also had a series of D&D boardgames that have come out.  In addition to the three cooperative dungeon crawl boardgames they did, there's also Lords of Waterdeep, which as far as I know did very well and recently spawned an expansion.  With all that going on, I wouldn't be surprised to see another D&D boardgame coming out in the future.  (Actually, there was one that, like Risk, involved using your armies to take over the world. (Well, not using the Risk mechanics, as I know it.) Haven't heard much about that one.)

In fact, given the last year's paucity of releases, one could find that the D&D brand/world has been making Hasbro more money than the D&D rpg itself has made.

1) The chart is showing revenue, and the increase of revenue first half over first half (or first two quarters over first two quarters, as most companies track quarter over quarter performance). That is what the percentage is.

2) Monopoly is not just one board game. It's a brand. There are dozens or more licensed games, casino games, etc. Basically anything with that brand (the footnote even calls out that digital products for Monopoly and WOTC are included in their revenue).

I think from a tabletop industry perspective, this shows some good news. WOTC makes money! A significant proportion of overall revenue. As long as people play tabletop games, I feel there will always be an audience for RPGs. There's lots of crossover in the tabletop world, so keeping the hobby financially healthy via games *I* might not consider important is no less a good thing. I love GURPS. Munchkin pays for GURPS. Gods bless Munchkin.

I also applaud the efforts to reach a younger audience and to do so in a manner that appeals to young people today. This marketing approach is EXACTLY how I found the hobby (Toy's R Us commercial for the red box set). Maybe kids won't jump headlong into D&D in a classic sense, but will find their way there via "gateway" games. Instead of pitching an RPG, they pitch a KRE-O game. Later our adventurers get a little older and hear about this RPG thing (it's like KRE-O battles with more options for characters and more freedom in the adventures!). The RPG industry hasn't found an effective method for recruiting young people in the info age. This may not appeal to grognards who walked up hill both ways in the snow to hand-print adventure pamphlets for wide-distribution via carrier-pony but it's probably a sound idea from younger folks doing the research into reaching younger folks.

Also, I am SUPER excited to play some adventures with KRE-O minis and terrain... :-D

Hmm. Some of it rings true, some of it is marketroid bullet point powerpointery, like adding 'cloud services' to an IT presentation..

Quote#1: Gaming continues to become more consumable.

I'm not sure what this means - people are buying more games, throwing away more games to buy more games, or the components for games are becoming disposable? It's a weird thing to say however you look at it.

Quote#3: Adults prefer “friction-free” games. Hasbro’s research has found that adults think games take too long to learn, too much time to set up, and too long to play.

Again a largely meaningless statement. Adults include everyone aged 18 and up in the population, and it's flat out impossible to make a blanket statement about that many people, unless you're saying they have a hertbeat or something. Some people will want to put the effort in knowing they'll get back a concomitant result. Some won't. If this is all the market segmentation they've done I'd be worried.

Quote#4: The retail experience is important.

Again a swing and a miss, they should be focusing on taking advantage of online platforms. Shops are closing left and right, and while some things can't or won't really be webbed (grocery shopping, Walmart ain't going anywhere), discretionary entertainment products like board games really need to get on that train.

Quote#5: Personalization engages.

One area where RPGs shine above all else, by their very nature.

Quote#6: Mobile integration is an important feature in the current market.

Man, what? This is what I mean when I say marketroid bullet points. People don't want an app to track their monopoly score, they just want to play monopoly.

I think an important growth area is the generation who were abandoned to the tender mercies of a beige box or console from an early age, now all grown up with kids of their own. These people want to give their kids a different experience to the one they had growing up, as in hindsight it becomes apparent that it was all just a huge waste of time.

These are the ones buying board games so their families can sit down around a table and enjoy one anothers' company. That is what RPGs should be targeting.

Quote from: Piestrio;691068Oh we are WAY past that point:

Actually that's the product that let you cast real spells.

Like trech says, Monopoly is a brand.  That's why you've got World of Warcraft Monopoly alongside Disney Monopoly.

Even for boardgames, consumable is becoming more common.  Sites like BGG cater to the boardgame consumer, and there are folks there who have over 500 boardgames.  Sure, the boardgame market --the Euro market in particular-- is pretty small, but market penetration into the discount stores like Target has really helped visibility.  Just a month ago I was waiting to pick up my oldest from marching band practice and a fellow band parent was raving about this new game they've been playing they bought at the store recently:  Settlers of Catan.

While I doubt that D&D will make a return to the discount stores like they once did, it isn't completely out of the question.

But to make D&D "consumable", an easy way to accomplish it is to return to the old Moldvay or BECMI sets of years past.  Instead of the "holy trinity", create modular sets that have "Basic", "High Level", "Skills and Powers", etc. built in.  Green Ronin proved that you can still make a good RPG using a box set in their Dragon Age RPG, so why not Hasbro?

Quote from: jcfiala;691103In fact, given the last year's paucity of releases, one could find that the D&D brand/world has been making Hasbro more money than the D&D rpg itself has made.

Yep, everything WotC is doing right now looks far more like brand control than anything else.

Quote#4: The retail experience is important.

Quote from: The Traveller;691107Again a swing and a miss, they should be focusing on taking advantage of online platforms. Shops are closing left and right, and while some things can't or won't really be webbed (grocery shopping, Walmart ain't going anywhere), discretionary entertainment products like board games really need to get on that train.

Stating that the "retail experience is important" DOES NOT mean, nor does it imply, that they are going to ignore, or fail to take advantage of, online platforms. You read way more into that statement than was actually said.

Well, for ME at least, #3 is right on target.

That's one reason I still play OD&D; "just sit down and play, you don't need to know the rules" actually WORKS.

Quote from: Jacob Marley;691151Stating that the "retail experience is important" DOES NOT mean, nor does it imply, that they are going to ignore, or fail to take advantage of, online platforms. You read way more into that statement than was actually said.

If it just meant retail in general, including online platforms, one has to wonder how much money it cost them to reach that insightful conclusion.

I'm quite sure they have far, far more detailed internal documents, just saying that there's nothing really to critique in terms of strategy since they don't appear to be actually saying anything, although the revenue figures are interesting.

Quote from: The Traveller;691162If it just meant retail in general, including online platforms, one has to wonder how much money it cost them to reach that insightful conclusion.

I'm quite sure they have far, far more detailed internal documents, just saying that there's nothing really to critique in terms of strategy since they don't appear to be actually saying anything, although the revenue figures are interesting.

That statement can cover everything from online website presentation to retail employee training to store display/location.  Companies like Unilever, Apple, and P&G obsess over that stuff, because the better job they do of getting that part right the more likely it is you'll buy their stuff.

I look at that line as saying "Don't let Toys 'R Us or WalMart dump our product in a corner of the store that always looks like a sharknado hit it.  Be engaged with both the specialty store and the major discounter."

Quote from: flyerfan1991;691165That statement can cover everything from online website presentation to retail employee training to store display/location.  Companies like Unilever, Apple, and P&G obsess over that stuff, because the better job they do of getting that part right the more likely it is you'll buy their stuff.

I look at that line as saying "Don't let Toys 'R Us or WalMart dump our product in a corner of the store that always looks like a sharknado hit it.  Be engaged with both the specialty store and the major discounter."

Exactly, it doesn't give us any insights into their plans for D&D. This is standard issue press release fluff.

If they really wanted to take a page from Apple's book they should get that rumour mill grinding, that would be good marketing given the similar... levels of interest... visible when comparing the two fanbases.

Applying these points to rpgs, I would say that #1 and #5 are at odds.

The more readily consumable gaming product is, the less personalization is involved.

Interesting! Thanks for sharing!

Quote from: Old Geezer;691154Well, for ME at least, #3 is right on target.

That's one reason I still play OD&D; "just sit down and play, you don't need to know the rules" actually WORKS.

You bring up a good point in the hands of a skilled referee the player litterally  doesn't Ned to know much about the rules. Just focus on playing as if he really there as the character and act accordingly. That always been the core appeal of tabletop RPGs.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;691220Applying these points to rpgs, I would say that #1 and #5 are at odds.

The more readily consumable gaming product is, the less personalization is involved.

What if you could customize a consumable RPG item (an adventure) to suit your personal preference?

So you can go online, select Tower of the Warlock King, toggle whether you wanted high-lethality/low-lethality, lots of combat vs less combat, high-magic vs low magic, etc. and then your configuration generated a PDF of the adventure suited to your campaign preferences?