3.5
- From: "Mattia Norando" <matnor@xxxxxx>
- To: "Lano666" <lano666@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 09:21:12 +0200
The Beginning of the Story
A few weeks ago, in an interview at gamingreport.com I said that 3.5 was
motivated by financial need rather than by design need -- in short, to make
money rather than because the game really needed an update. I said that I
had this information from a reliable source.
That source was me. I was there.
See, I'm going to let you in on a little secret, which might make you mad:
3.5 was planned from the beginning.
Even before 3.0 went to the printer, the business team overseeing D&D was
talking about 3.5. Not surprisingly, most of the designers -- particularly
the actual 3.0 team (Jonathan Tweet, Skip Williams, and I) thought this was
a poor idea. Also not surprisingly, our concerns were not enough to affect
the plan. The idea, they assured us, was to make a revised edition that was
nothing but a cleanup of any errata that might have been found after the
book's release, a clarification of issues that seemed to confuse large
numbers of players, and, most likely, all new art. [...]
The business team for 3.0 (and I'm talking about Ryan Dancey and Keith
Strohm here) are gone. Skip's gone. Jonathan's working on miniatures games.
I'm gone. It's an interesting truism that in the corporate world, where
long-term planning is a must but the length of time an employee stays in any
one position is short, business teams and design teams rarely last long
enough to see their plans come to fruition. Thus the people to propose
something are almost never the people who implement it.
So, one has to surmise that the new business team determined that sales were
slumping slightly earlier than predicted and needed 3.5 to come out earlier.
One also has to surmise that someone -- at some level -- decided that it was
to be a much, much more thorough revision than previously planned. Some of
this is probably just human nature (two of the 3.0 designers were out of the
way, and one would only work at Wizards of the Coast for about half the
design time) and some of it is probably the belief that more revenue would
be generated with more drastic changes.
The philosophy of 3.5 has changed from being a financial "shot in the arm"
into something with significant enough changes to make it a "must-buy."
Perhaps they thought to strive for the sales levels of 2000. Perhaps there
was corporate pressure to reach those sales levels again.
Questo è un estratto della recensione di D&D 3.5 scritta da Monte Cook...(il
testo completo lo trovate all'indirizzo:
http://www.montecook.com/review.html)
Personalmente non ho mai acquistato nemmeno la 3.0, dato che l'ho provata e
mi è sembrata eccessivamente macchinosa...certo che qui mi sembra si sia
giunti alla presa per il culo definitiva dell'acquirente...
Mi astengo da OGNI ulteriore commento...Wizard, Wizard...
Other related posts:
