Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last
  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    1,725
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by backwardoracle View Post
    With a lot of products I'd agree wholeheartedly, but think about it this way, old product line has 50 items to sell, new product line has 10, we are using a new format so the "old" established line will be familiar and sell again, to the same audience. So if there are more products to sell in a new format which will generate more revenue?
    Look at Wizards of the Coast. They've only licensed 5E because that's their current property, despite literal truckloads of books existing from previous editions which at this point is just free money for them. Doesn't matter. Publishers have to focus on the now, not the past. We're fortunate that Mongoose bothered to license 1E at all, because it's obvious (and flatly stated by MBM) that they want the focus to be on 2E.

  2. #22
    So your actually saying buy our shiny new product, because we we changed the old one a bit, rather than buy truckloads of old stuff because we have flogged the same stuff 3 times before, is a sound financial plan?, WOTC being the exception rather than the rule.

    Remember we are dealing with a totally different medium than hordes of rulebooks to carry round or players buying different third party sourcebooks

    Yes, reselling the truckloads of previous material works, is "free money" thats my point, 1E mongoose is "free money" bucketloads rather than truckloads perhaps, but free money is free money.

    I'm sure all the 1E. 2E, 3E DnD stuff available on sale now garners WOTC a sizeable paycheck, that they can use to pay new designers to produce new material for the current incarnation.

    Ok, imagine if all the Traveller career sourcebooks (for example) for 1E were available on FG, now, how much extra revenue would that make? the supplements, the race books, how much free money would that get the company?

    Yes Publishers have to look to future sales, but ignoring the recent (in game terms) material in favour of all new shiny stuff, seems a bit short sighted, as there is a lot of material that could be sold now, today, rather than down the line.

    So which would you prefer 10 bucks for the next 12 months or possibly 150 bucks next year?
    Ultimate License Holder,
    Currently Running Traveller, 5E Icewind Dale & 5E Curse of Strahd, 5E Moonshaes, 5E Storm Giants Thunder

  3. #23
    Actually what we are saying is that going the direction we are going we get both and not just one or the other. That seems better to me.

    The other thing to consider is at the moment the only thing we are getting is the core rules. The other books and supplements have not been discussed yet to my knowledge. With 1E and 2E on the table it is likely that we will see more adventure books that rulebook because modules are easier and faster to write than rulesets.

    As an FYI I recently read a post in another forum where a fairly well known FG developer stated a professional ruleset could eat up about 1,000 development hours and if that is the case I am certain that Mongoose would push for the current system hands down.
    Last edited by esmdev; December 4th, 2018 at 18:45.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    1,725
    Blog Entries
    7
    I'm simply stating reality. Most publishers (and authors, and designers, and...) don't know squat about the digital world and even less about virtual tabletops. They deal in paper (and PDFs).
    Yes, these things take a lot of development time. I've spent ~200 hours on certain DLC products I've done, and typically we just get the commission. If that "certain well-known developer" managed to convince his client to front him $75k to develop the 13th Age ruleset, good on him, because his client is likely to never to make that back. Rulesets are monsters, they easily take 1,000 hours to develop, and that's not counting playtesting and future support (SmiteWorks does require 12 months support for any product we develop).

    What Mongoose could have done is license only the 2E ruleset but license the 1E products and require the ruleset have backward-compatibility. So, again, we're very fortunate they allowed a 1E ruleset at all when they want the focus to be on the current property 2E.

  5. #25
    Well of course they want to push the latest, newest, shiny thats just common sense to the average bean counter, however selling something you have already paid for, and received an income, then have the opportunity to sell it again with no additional cost sounds like free money, looked at in the right light.

    As I said, not my decision, yes if they had said from the start, 2E and anything previously published make compatible would make a lot more sense, but then of course whoever they hand over the update to the printed material would that be compatible with a FG version produced in the meantime

    I am actually very impressed (not a word I throw around lightly) with the community builds & the loyalty of the community I've seen here.
    Ultimate License Holder,
    Currently Running Traveller, 5E Icewind Dale & 5E Curse of Strahd, 5E Moonshaes, 5E Storm Giants Thunder

  6. #26
    Mongoose does, what Mongoose does.

    Discussing about what Mongoose should do or might do is fruitless, if you are not the strategist of that company.

    Time will tell, what is done. We can just wait and see.
    Anybody liking 1e will always be able to play it, heck, you still can play classic Traveller if you like.

    If I understood MBM right, Mongoose urges him towards coding the 2e ruleset for FG. So I recon that will have to happen and we will help MBM to get the pest possible product. Focusing on this is more fruitful imho, than discussimg the ifs and maybes of MGs product strategy.

    My 2 cents

  7. #27
    agreed, getting the product to best options is the priority, speculation though, is a human trait
    Ultimate License Holder,
    Currently Running Traveller, 5E Icewind Dale & 5E Curse of Strahd, 5E Moonshaes, 5E Storm Giants Thunder

  8. #28
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, USA (for a bit)
    Posts
    23,314
    Quote Originally Posted by esmdev View Post
    Especially with what appears to be the plan which is to develop a core 2E ruleset that has a reverse option to 1E compatibility.
    That's not what MBM said in post #15. He said the plan is to be the same as CoC6e and CoC7e - which are completely separate rulesets. You can load CoC 6e material in the CoC 7e ruleset (and it does a quick conversion on the NPCs) but that's it. They're separate rulesets with no inter dependency (other than both running on top of CoreRPG).


    FG Product Development status: Pathfinder Playtest Ruleset and add-ons: In development. Pathfinder Bestiary, Pathfinder Bestiary 2, Pathfinder Bestiary 3 (in store).

    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Trenloe View Post
    That's not what MBM said in post #15. He said the plan is to be the same as CoC6e and CoC7e - which are completely separate rulesets. You can load CoC 6e material in the CoC 7e ruleset (and it does a quick conversion on the NPCs) but that's it. They're separate rulesets with no inter dependency (other than both running on top of CoreRPG).
    Um you just said exactly what I said in a different way. 2E as the core with a reverse option to 1E compatibility = You can load 1E material in the 2E ruleset. The specifics of how it is done doesn't change the fact that I was trying to point out to concerned people that they won't be left out in the cold because of a publisher requested emphasis on 2E development. I was simply trying to help others to see the roses rather than the thorns. I guess I won't bother in the future.

  10. #30
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Denver, Colorado, USA (for a bit)
    Posts
    23,314
    Quote Originally Posted by esmdev View Post
    Um you just said exactly what I said in a different way. 2E as the core with a reverse option to 1E compatibility = You can load 1E material in the 2E ruleset. The specifics of how it is done doesn't change the fact that I was trying to point out to concerned people that they won't be left out in the cold because of a publisher requested emphasis on 2E development. I was simply trying to help others to see the roses rather than the thorns. I guess I won't bother in the future.
    Sorry for the misunderstanding. It sounded like you were describing the way Savage Worlds Adventure Edition (SWADE) will work - 2 rulesets layered on top of each other, with the main development on SWADE and the legacy Savage Worlds being a ruleset layered on top of SWADE - this sounded like the "reverse option to 1E compatibility" you were mentioning. Others have mentioned SWADE in the thread and the wording you used led me to think you were referring to that. Again, sorry for the misunderstanding. Please continue to "bother in future".


    FG Product Development status: Pathfinder Playtest Ruleset and add-ons: In development. Pathfinder Bestiary, Pathfinder Bestiary 2, Pathfinder Bestiary 3 (in store).

    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in