The Gaming Den

https://twitter.com/CHofferCBus/status/ ... 0491932929

https://www.geekwire.com/2023/hasbro-la ... ain-drain/

The surprise is more that he managed to stay that long.

The GeekWire article is somewhat misleading. While Wizards of the Coast is very profitable, the D&D segment is not reported separately and therefore it is not clear that it is 'wildly successful'. It's also not clear that people choosing to leave Wizards of the Coast for other opportunities after being disillusioned by job cuts would constitute a 'brain drain'.

I think the majority opinion is that D&D has a bunch of chuckleheads in charge and it's really a question if they actually got rid of the right people.

Apparently there was a second post following the first, but I can't access it (I don't have a Twitter Account and Google isn't helping me enough.

Christian Hoffer wrote: Folks laid off at Wizards of the Coast include:
Dan Dillon, game designer
Mike Mearls,
Chris Lindsay, who helped architect the DMs Guild,
Liz Schuh, head of licensing and publishing for D&D
Bree Heiss, art director for D&D
Natalie Egan, product manager
(continued below)

Christian Hopper wrote: Anyone who claims this is about anything other than unchecked corporate greed and an indictment on a business model that prioritizes short-term profits over longterm equity for both employees and shareholders is a fool.

I do agree that Hasbro is focused on short-term profits rather than long-term success, so perhaps Mike Mearls was set up for failure, but I don't think he did an appreciably good job (at least not appreciably BETTER) compared to his predecessors. I wouldn't boycott WotC because of this decision, but if I did, they wouldn't notice anyway because I really don't buy anything they make.

Mike Mearls probably should have lost his job after 4th edition was released. I'm all for a better social net so losing your job isn't catastrophic and I hope he (and the others impacted) quickly find themselves in jobs that they enjoy and are personally rewarding. Fortunately, they will always have the option to continue producing D&D material because the attempt they made to revoke the OGL never succeeded. Having a recognizable name has always been and probably will always matter more than actual talent.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 18, 2023 6:56 pm

Apparently there was a second post following the first, but I can't access it (I don't have a Twitter Account and Google isn't helping me enough.

Nitter is your friend
https://nitter.net/CHofferCBus/status/1 ... 0491932929

Christian Hoffer wrote:Folks laid off at Wizards of the Coast include:
Dan Dillon, game designer
Mike Mearls,
Chris Lindsay, who helped architect the DMs Guild,
Liz Schuh, head of licensing and publishing for D&D
Bree Heiss, art director for D&D
Natalie Egan, product manager
(continued below)

---

Amy Dallen, D&D Beyond host/producer
Jesse Hill, community manager for Magic: The Gathering
Larry Frum, senior communications manager

These are just the folks who have publicly mentioned they were laid off.

---

Eytan Bernstein, Senior Development Editor was also laid off.

---

Deserae Dawn, Program Manager

Sorry - a lot of these are coming from LinkedIn. Also thanks to the folks who are flagging other layoff announcements that I might have missed.

---

Some more confirmed layoffs:
Vanessa Cuanan, Associate Systems Administrator
Michael Rexford, Senior Data Scientist
Ellie Lockhart, Analytics Engineer
Jana Hodgins, Technical Producer
Megan Galbraith Donahue, Director of MTG Universes Beyond Creative and Production

---

Another confirmed layoff:
Mike Vaillancourt, Art Director for Packaging and Product for Magic: The Gathering

---

Another confirmed layoff:

David McDarby, Game Designer for Magic: The Gathering

---

Just a heads up, I’ve been informed that at least one person on my list was a voluntary retirement. I’m double checking my list (a few names in the initial 2 tweets came from ENWorld) but all folks since then came from publicly available info. Just want to keep facts straight.

---

Talent Manager and Producer for MtG [Paul Cheon]

---

Robert Sather, Art Manage

Mearls had been already sacked years ago... he was only hired back by Winninger about a year or so ago, and put in a position where he could no longer do further damage, so it's not like he counts.

D&D, as a brand, has moved beyond outdated concepts like "having game designers" and "releasing content". By outsourcing the brand to other mediums as much as possible, WotC can actually try to make money off people who spend more than $100 every 5 years on their material. There is no need to really have a D&D tabletop anymore.

The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 10, 2024 7:31 pm

D&D, as a brand, has moved beyond outdated concepts like "having game designers" and "releasing content". By outsourcing the brand to other mediums as much as possible, WotC can actually try to make money off people who spend more than $100 every 5 years on their material. There is no need to really have a D&D tabletop anymore.

That's the gnome problem, restated. Even if you don't make money off the tabletop RPG, the existence supports the other revenue streams and makes the property more valuable. There may come a time when people really like D&D because of the cartoon or the movie or a computer-RPG that they played, but they're just as likely to fall in love with another property. Connection to the TTRPG makes the other things 'valuable' in the minds of the consuming public.

If you drop the TTRPG because that's the part that makes the least money, you actually impact everybody who likes the movies/shows/video games because of the game. Without the game to draw new fans, something like the 'God of War' franchise would eclipse D&D easily.

Edit - And it's been true for a long time that MERCHANDISING is more valuable than the product itself. Selling T-Shirts at $35 each is always going to make you more money in the long-run than a 1-time movie ticket sell of $15 or a physical book for $50. The goal from the corporate perspective is to associate the game with a lifestyle/fandom and drive the revenue from ongoing engagement.

deaddmwalking wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 11, 2024 3:45 pm

Edit - And it's been true for a long time that MERCHANDISING is more valuable than the product itself. Selling T-Shirts at $35 each is always going to make you more money in the long-run than a 1-time movie ticket sell of $15 or a physical book for $50. The goal from the corporate perspective is to associate the game with a lifestyle/fandom and drive the revenue from ongoing engagement.

Well, that totally works. Despite having never given WOTC a cent for 5e, due to it being easier to tell my family "I'm off to play D&D with my friends" instead of "I'm off to play pokemon tabletop with other manchildren" or "I'm going to '''play''' FATE today", they got me a bunch of D&D-branded shit for Christmas. Terrain and minis, I can work with. Socks with the D&D logo on it... less so. And yet the $100 they got from my mom this year is more money than they've EVER gotten from me. They probably couldn't care less if I died!

An idea that layoffs might be a prelude to D&D being sold to Tencent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3kLTJ7x4rw

It looks like TenCent is in the video game space/social media aspects rather than game publishing. Would a joint venture like they had with Lego (TenCent develops the video games, but Lego owns the IP) not be more likely?

It's fake (psyop? normal lying? You decide)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesfarre ... t-to-know/

I think it's most likely the result of a bad translation. TenCent was probably looking to license the D&D IP for a line of video games, not purchase the D&D brand out-right, but when it went from Chinese back to English instead of 'purchase rights' it came out as 'purchase'. Based on how TenCent does business, that seemed like what they would want - I don't think they care about making D&D socks.

Pandaily claims Hasbro offered the IP to Larian first, but the price was so unreasonably high that they passed the ball to Tencent, and Hasbro trying to bamboozle Tencent into buying a mid (at best) IP for a king's ransom is something I'd believe.