Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tokyogriz

Is the Success of X-Wing Killing our beloved FFG?

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

 

When roughly 75% of the player base leaves a game after you change edition you know you screwed up.  So many players were pissed they created another game because of Hasbros idiotic decision making. 

 

They "Killed" what they had.  Funny thing was them reprinting old 3.5 books a few years later to try to get people back.  My local store had few if any 4.0 books but lots of Pathfinder and Reprinted 3.5 books. 

So they should have just kept the bloated mess going instead? I'm sure tons of people left when AD&D was replaced by 2nd Editiion, and again when that was replaced by 3rd, and yet again when that was largely replaced by 3.5. D&D has continued to be a financial juggernaut regardless. 

 

 

So they should have tried the same thing over and over and over? 4e needed to be something entirely new and I liked it. It wasn't traditional DnD and lacked any real social machanics, but the latter case was hardly ever in DnD to begin with and after the magical bloat that made mundanes as exciting to play as a dishwasher, it needed something entirely new. It was a breath of fresh air.

 

BUT OF COURSE THE FANS KNOW BEST SO I'M GOING TO TYPE IN CAPS AND EXPRESS MY RAGE UNTIL THEY REWRITE 4E INTO 3.5! BECAUSE BACKTRACKING A SYSTEM OR PLAYING DND NEXT WOULD BE COMPLETELY ILLOGICAL, **** YOU WIZARDS FOR TRYING SOMETHING WE DON'T LIKE!!! WARRRAGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHH*

 

*What I read whenever I enter a debate about anything on a forum

 

I liked 4E, that's the only version I've D&D I've actually played. I was saying that they were right to drop 3.5 and move on to a new edition. 

 

 

If you've never played anything but 4E then how could you possibly know if it was right for them to drop 3.5?

 

4E was terrible in my opinion, way too much focus on MMORPG style classes almost certainly due to the popularity of WoW. Pathfinder was a much better successor to 3.5

 

Because 3.5 had been out for ages and everyone else at the table had made the switch. They would often tell me about the balance issues that 3.5 had, which seemed considerably worse than 4E's balance issues. I'm not saying 3.5 was necessarily bad, but the longer a game is out the more balance issues will appear and the more you start seeing neglected classes or adventures that are just way too easy due to power creep. Inevitably, moving on to a new edition becomes a simpler and better suggestion than attempting to fix those problems. 

 

Games that don't get expansions or only get very few can be an exception, but 3.5 definitely didn't fit that criteria. Neither did 4E, of course. 

 

Personally I liked 4E but combat mechanics are how you get me to a table. Even when I did start roleplaying my characters more I tended to have one or two personality traits at most and were built to win fights first and do anything else second. From a hack and slash perspective I think 4E worked very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Personally I liked 4E but combat mechanics are how you get me to a table. Even when I did start roleplaying my characters more I tended to have one or two personality traits at most and were built to win fights first and do anything else second. From a hack and slash perspective I think 4E worked very well.

 

 

Definatly. Some would say 4th was a combat boardgame first and an rpg second.

 

Rogues were great for hack and slash in 4th (good memories)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a typical equity firm. They'll make a short term profit, ride the wave of geometric growth, and leave the company once the curve starts flattening out. Once this happens there will probably be an apologetic announcement from one of the CEOs, followed by a change of visual and corporate identity. Someone will probably leave his office to do the thing he or she always wanted, like starting a restaurant, big game fishing, or becoming a professional collector and reseller of anime girls.

 

As someone who just quit a once-great company that was purchased by an equity firm, this post is pure brilliance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 - FFG seems to be losing creativity.  Were are new creative games?  Last year we got star wars armada, star wars imperial assault, and a bunch of reprints.  Some have read the Asmodee moves as an effort to focus on big $ titles like X-Wing and drop other smaller titles.  This seems likely to me. 

 

Forbidden Stars and X-COM are reprints? And those are just the two I can think of off the top of my head from 2015 in addition to stuff like Armada and Imperial Assault, there are probably more. And I'm certainly not going to complain about new editions of games like Fury of Dracula and Mission Red Planet; Aside from being more than just reprinting an old version, I can actually buy and play those games that I wasn't around the hobby to grab the first time.

Edited by Otacon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...