Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Disney probably has a greater profit margin, and definitly has job security. plus diversification like nobody else.

 ProtoClone wrote:
So, are we going to see a D&D-land soon?

Is the world ready for a LARP theme park?

Yes, yes it is. Although it would probably allow 18+ only.

LARP? What?

What we need to see is a NGE theme park, complete with life size Angels and Evangelions (come on, a giant Sachiel statue would rock), insane employees, and the ultimate family psychological trauma experience, the Hall of Mind Rape!

Yes, I am obsessed with Neon Genesis Evangelion. Damn you Hideaki Anno, you magnificent, magnificent bastard.

Do any of you really think a 90 billion dollar company is gonna really give 2 squirts about things like D&D and other low dollar value IP's?

I can only see them trying to max them out for profit, failing, then selling the rights years down the road.

Call me a pessimist but I just dont see Disney (or any huge corporation) giving 2 gaks about anything but profits. Look how GW treats their universe and fans. You think Disney is gonna be better?

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Do any of you really think a 90 billion dollar company is gonna really give 2 squirts about things like D&D and other low dollar value IP's?

I can only see them trying to max them out for profit, failing, then selling the rights years down the road.

Uhh, making every possible cent out of every possible venture related to everything we own is basically the Disney mission statement. And they're quite good at it.

Call me a pessimist but I just dont see Disney (or any huge corporation) giving 2 gaks about anything but profits. Look how GW treats their universe and fans. You think Disney is gonna be better?

The idea that caring about profits means bad things for the customer is just plain screwy. I mean, did you think Hasbro were stopping to say 'sure this might make money but some noisy nerds on the internet might not like it so we better not do it'?

Then there's the simple, obvious truth that making stuff customers want to buy is what business is. If Disney wants to maximise the value out of Hasbro, that means putting out good products in every line they've got.

If anything it might be GOOD for the IP. It seems to me that D&D has more or less been on the back slide with the same players who've always been playing it still playing it for the most part. Toss a decent D&D movie up on the big screen, follow it with a decent MtG movie and we could see some serious growth in both markets.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
If anything it might be GOOD for the IP. It seems to me that D&D has more or less been on the back slide with the same players who've always been playing it still playing it for the most part. Toss a decent D&D movie up on the big screen, follow it with a decent MtG movie and we could see some serious growth in both markets.

I'm not sure a movie is the answer, to be honest. I think, much like WHFB and 40K, the setting itself is basically a hodge podge of things that already exist in film and tv. The value is in putting those setting elements into a new medium - in miniature for 40K and WHFB, and in an rpg/combat system in D&D.

Put it back into the movies and you end up with just another movie. I mean, ignore the woeful fail that was the first D&D movie, but look at the one they made a while after that. Or look at the 40k movie. At their best moments they were just stuff aping stuff we've seen before.

I mean, it's like the original idea for the Punisher was to take all the 80s action movie tropes and put them into a comic book. Worked well, sold lots of comics. Then some genius thinks they've got a good commercial comic that'd be an easy switch into a movie... and then everyone's shocked that all we've got is just another movie about some guy killing drug dealers.

Same thing for Max Payne - the idea with the first game was to take a John Woo style movie and put it into a computer game. Putting it back onto the big screen and we're left watching a knock off of a John Woo movie.


I think maybe the best thing for D&D is to possibly open out the market. Move it from the nerd stores to the toy stores.

 sebster wrote:
Or look at the 40k movie.

To be fair, that seems to have more to do with the fact that GW decided to do a no-budget direct-to-dvd release with a no-name studio and then never bother marketing it to anyone but existing 40k players. It says a lot about the wisdom of GW's marketing department, but not much about the viability of a proper 40k movie.

Wasn't there a D&D movie a few years back?

I don't think it did well, which is why I probably don't remember it...

So far there have been 2 or 3 D&D movies. All pretty much sank without trace, and deservedly so, as they were dreadful.

Hasbro did actually pave its way for such impending takeover.

http://kukuspace.blogspot.com/2009/06/disney-label-transformer-mickey-mouse.html
And this thing actually exists too!



and it's not the last Disney X Transformers series

http://www.geeknative.com/34271/wizards-of-the-coasts-owners-hasbro-deny-disney-rumours/

After the news of Disney buying Lucasfilm and beginning work on three more Star Wars films there were whispers that Disney was also interested in buying Hasbro.

Buying Hasbro would make some sense for Disney because of the rights the toy company owns. For example, with Marvel on board Disney has a modern day Universe to film, with Lucasfilm they’ve Star Wars for sci-fi stuff and you could argue that perhaps Wizards of the Coast would give them a fantasy setting.

It’s Hasbro’s ownership of titles like Transformers and G.I. Joe that might be more tempting for Disney. Paramount currently hold the movie rights to both of those. You can see the complex web in this Who Owns What? infographic.

Hasbro’s ability to make toys would also be appealing to any company looking to cash in on Star Wars models again.

However, the timing of the rumour feels wrong. Disney spent $4bn on Lucasfilm. Just how much money does Disney have set aside for M&A activity?

According to The Providence Journal Hasbro have now denied the rumours. CNBC analyst David Faber was told by the company;

…absolutely nothing going on that they are aware of at all, in any way, shape or form…

Hasbro wouldn’t have found a buyout all that easy either. The company has partnerships with Disney’s rivals in order to ensure Transformer and G.I. Joe films happen. Without those partnerships the values of the toys is less. If Disney did buy them then, straight away, their value would drop. It would be a recovery mission from day one.

..so.. looks like the lawyers will win whatever then eh ?

They lawyers always win

 Peregrine wrote:

 Piston Honda wrote:
If this happens, I wonder what will become of D n D and Magic? Keep them? Sell them off eventually.

Nothing most likely. Hasbro has been smart enough to let WotC run Magic without interference and just collect a nice profit, and I can't imagine Disney would do anything stupid to change that policy when the game is amazingly successful as it is. Until/unless MTG starts failing to the point that significant changes are necessary the only difference is going to be an additional logo on the package.

Now, see, I hate the direction Magic has gone in (personal preference and all), and I'd be happy if Disney brought it back to its roots-4th edition, Sea Monster coming in as a 5/5 costing 6 mana, a strong creature, but no wacky abilities. Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that? Sadly, lots of people, or Magic would be in the tubes. Stupid people let games become bad...Richard Garfield must hate his brainchild...

Aaaaand: Looks to be a false alarm, people!

http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/hasbro-denies-rumor-that-they-are-in-negotiations-with-disney/26165/

Providence Journal wrote:
Hasbro declined comment, citing its policy of not talking about rumor or speculation. CNBC analyst David Faber reported that Hasbro's advisors told him there's "absolutely nothing going on that they are aware of at all, in any way, shape or form" involving Hasbro or Disney.

Wall Street analysts said a Disney acquisition didn't make much sense, just after Disney agreed to buy Lucasfilm Ltd. for $4.05 billion. And for any deal to happen, Hasbro would have to dissolve agreements with Disney's competitors.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Sea Monster coming in as a 5/5 costing 6 mana, a strong creature, but no wacky abilities.

Which nobody ever played because it was garbage.

Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that?

Nobody wants to play with it, but that's ok because it doesn't exist.

 Peregrine wrote:

Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that?

Nobody wants to play with it, but that's ok because it doesn't exist.

Sure it exists... it's my picture!

 Peregrine wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Sea Monster coming in as a 5/5 costing 6 mana, a strong creature, but no wacky abilities.

Which nobody ever played because it was garbage.

Now you have things like "super awesome colossus"-costs 1 generic, but you must sacrifice 15 power worth of creatures when he comes into play, he's indestructible, has trample, and is a 15/15 himself. Who wants to play with crap like that?

Nobody wants to play with it, but that's ok because it doesn't exist.

In my area, plenty of people had sea monsters when it came out-we also weren't power gamers. And I might be mixing up a couple cards, so sue me. But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him. And indestructible was the worst game mechanic ever created. Mirrodin destroyed Magic for me (darksteel can suck my ), as well as the Kamigawa block. Legends were supposed to be, you know...LEGENDARY, not every other card. Two stupid cycles, and I was done. I tried coming back, and they brought back Mirrodin. Stupid game.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
And I might be mixing up a couple cards, so sue me. But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him.

Phyrexian Dreadnought, from 16 years ago.

Personally, the biggest thing that bugs me about modern Magic is the Mythic Rare paywall. Making it so difficult to actually obtain the cards killed my interest in the game.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
In my area, plenty of people had sea monsters when it came out-we also weren't power gamers.

Exactly. You weren't power gamers, so the problem isn't MTG's design decisions, it's that you aren't very good at evaluating power level. Sea Monsters were garbage compared to other creatures that existed at the time they were printed, so it's not exactly surprising that you can find creatures in newer sets that are also better.

But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him.

It's also a terrible card. It's an amusing idea (have the cost of the card be the bloody sacrifices to summon it instead of the mana), but outside of the most casual games it was just another Sea Monster: a garbage card that never leaves the commons box.

And indestructible was the worst game mechanic ever created.

Hardly. There were plenty of counters to it (remove from game, return to hand, counterspells, etc), and thanks to WOTC being conservative in their use of the mechanic most of the cards with it weren't powerful enough to use. It's an interesting mechanic with the potential to make you think about your strategy, but not even close to game breaking.

And this is especially amusing considering the same block contained a REAL candidate for "worst game mechanic ever created" in Affinity. You know, the one that dominated the tournament environment and resulted in multiple cards being banned because it built brutally powerful and fast decks that were not even remotely fun to play against. Indestructible isn't even close to that level.

Legends were supposed to be, you know...LEGENDARY, not every other card.

Yeah, they weren't supposed to be every other card, which is why the very first set where they were first introduced (Legends, remember it?) made them pretty much every other card, including a giant pile of "legends" which were just generic (and garbage) creatures with no special abilities. I really have to wonder if you even played the same MTG as the rest of us.


(PS: the theme of the block was based around legendary characters, so it's not really a surprise that there would be more of them than usual.)

 Peregrine wrote:

But there is a 1 cost creature with a huge p/t that forces you to sac creatures to pay for him.

It's also a terrible card. It's an amusing idea (have the cost of the card be the bloody sacrifices to summon it instead of the mana), but outside of the most casual games it was just another Sea Monster: a garbage card that never leaves the commons box.

meh, I kind of remember it being at least somewhat good in the non-tier1 raffinity variant decks for a short while. yes, us casual players had fun with it

Bolognesus wrote:
meh, I kind of remember it being at least somewhat good in the non-tier1 raffinity variant decks for a short while. yes, us casual players had fun with it

Sure, but "somewhat good" and "us casual players had fun with it" doesn't make it bad game design.

gak. That means that Disney will have all the Dungeons and Dragons Princesses to ad to the Disney Princesses. I sure hope it doesn't happen.

If Arcee ends up as a Disney Princess I will be very very angry.

http://www.sfx.co.uk/2012/11/10/michael-arndt-confirmed-as-star-wars-episode-vii-scripter/

Finally, some definite news about Star Wars Episode VII, rather than all those “Mike Leigh/Nick Park/Lars Von Trier/Dan Harmon/Ronald McDonald Says He’s Not Interested In Directing Star Wars” stories that have been clogging up news feeds over the past few days.

Star Wars.com has now confirmed that – as rumours suggested yesterday – Michael Arndt will be scripting Star Wars Episode VII from an extensive treatment that he has already handed in.

A lot of fuss has already been made of Arndt’s Disney connection – he wrote Toy Story 3 – with certain internet pundits seemingly seeing this as proof that the Mouse House intends to kidify the series. That’s a very blinkered view on Arndt’s credentials, though.

He also won an Oscar for the brilliant Little Miss Sunshine, and has also scripted the upcoming Oblivion and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. He is also an out and proud Star Wars fan. And let’s be honest – Toy Story 3 was bloody brilliant and made grown men cry. He sounds like a pretty intelligent choice to us.

And while we await the next piece of solid news about Star Wars Episode VII, here’s a second video of George Lucas in conversation with the new overseer of the franchise, Kathleen Kennedy, talking about the future of the film series.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EBuOHM51YdI

Sounds like good news... Toy Story 3 was awesome, and I loved Little Miss Sunshine...

I'll be interested to see what Disney do with Star Wars TBH... Maybe I won't like it, but meh, I'm cautiously optimistic about it...

Is that not supposed to be in the other 'Disney buying things' thread?

Not my little pony!

Well, MLP couldn't possibly get any worse, even if it was owned by Disney...