Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Entertainment Games

Gaming Portal Announced By Wizards of the Coast 53

1up has coverage of a strange development: a gaming portal focused on tabletop and strategy games. The site is slated to be a editorial/community site focusing on Avalon Hill and Wizards products, as well as potentially offering a venue for independent PC games. "Wizards of the Coast is eager to stress that Gleemax is not about pimping their own products, so much as it is about strengthening the overall culture of gaming as a whole. It's a husbandry approach; by creating a fertile ground where the various tribes of gaming can meet and greet, they hope to build interest (and presumably sales) through the basic principle of cultivating a strong player community." The whole thing is something of an odd move for the company, and for some insight into the launch Greg Kostikiyan at the Games*Design*Art*Culture blog clarifies the reality of Gleemax as an indie game publisher. You'd think he would look at the site as competition for his own Manifesto Games, but he seems fairly philosophical about it.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gaming Portal Announced By Wizards of the Coast

Comments Filter:
  • The slogan: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rob T Firefly ( 844560 ) on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @10:45AM (#19492121) Homepage Journal
    Gleemax makes you feel like it's 72 degrees in your head... all the time! [imdb.com]
    • Re:The slogan: (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Praedon ( 707326 ) on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @11:50AM (#19493183) Journal
      This whole Gleemax thing is a blatant rip-off of Geekalize.com [geekalize.com]. I am the president of Geekalize, and had a contract with them to advertise Regionals of Magic the Gathering. When they continued to press this whole Gleemax thing, they canceled the advertising contract, and made the announcement. When I had conference calls with them, I was sharing ideas of what I wanted to do with Geekalize, including the spots on profiles where they can share stories of their gaming experience and such. Obviously I won't go into detail, but rest assured this is going to make quite a stir from them violating confidential comments that I had shared with them to get them to advertise with Geekalize in the first place.

      I assume this will be marked as trolling or flaming but wait till I document everything that had happened between Geekalize and Wizards of the Coast, and I will challenge them to review all of it and try to prove they did not spy and steal my future plans for Geekalize. That is the problem, you can't trust anyone in the industry if you are the underdog. Lesson learned.
      • Or it was just an obvious idea that someone else thought was good as well.

      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Yes, a social networking and gaming portal is such a unique and non-obvious idea that you clearly are the only human being to ever have thought of and implemented one.
      • by mchale ( 104743 )
        If you really believe you can document everything and that they've violated confidentiality, you should probably get a lawyer, and almost definitely not post details on public forums like Slashdot. I think even posting as much as you have would give your hypothetical lawyer heartburn.

        That said, IANAL, nor do I play one on TV.
      • by CmdrSam ( 136754 )
        They've been working up to this for at least 6 months, if not more. I remember taking a survey on their web site back then about whether I would use a service such as this one.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by MaWeiTao ( 908546 )

        This whole Gleemax thing is a blatant rip-off of Geekalize.com

        Your claim is entirely possible. However, having browsed through Geekalize.com briefly I didn't really see anything I haven't seen on dozens of other sites already. It's entirely possible Wizards of the Coast had already been thinking of such a site; again, these kinds of sites are fairly common. They may have considered promoting themselves via existing sites, like Geekalize.com, perhaps even establishing a partnership. Ultimately, they conclude

        • by Praedon ( 707326 )
          For the most part you are correct, it is just sad how the world turns, when you are sharing a lot of information to a potential advertiser, and trying to earn a living, then 7 months after the first initial call sharing my demographics, along with my goals and some secret weapons (Orbiting Laser satellites not included), Gleemax makes a wonderful approach gloating all these fruitful services. And yes, to those who say "Oh wow, real original, etc etc." there are TONS of social networking sites out there, an
  • Redundant? (Score:5, Informative)

    by shoptroll ( 544006 ) on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @10:49AM (#19492205)
    But http://www.boardgamegeek.com/ [boardgamegeek.com] already exists!
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by H3lldr0p ( 40304 )
      No redundant, just not under their control.
    • The Internet is all about redundancy...starting with its TCP/IP roots. Think about it in terms of companies. If Yahoo or Google or MSN died today, would anyone really care? Probably not, because one of the "redundant" web sites (i.e., close competitors) out there would take its place. (e.g., remember Altavista?)
      • by SQLGuru ( 980662 )
        Altavista, Lycos, WebCrawler.

        Yep, used them all. At various times, I liked each one of those "best". Right now, I pretty much use Yahoo and MSN as a portal, nothing more, and Google as my search engine (and mail). Homepage is of course the about link.....nothing like near instantaneous retrieval of your homepage.

        Layne
    • by Kinwolf ( 945345 )
      Err, so strange to see this comment on a website mostly visited by Linux distros advocates...
    • C'mon - BGG is missing all the offerings of this exciting new website: a chance to browse only a fraction of games available to the general public, online play of inferior boardgames, and corporate censorship. But on the plus side, maybe Monopoly will finally get its fair shake on this site!
  • Hmm, this explains why WOTC mailed me a brain in the mail the other day.

    A lot of people in the RPGA have been puzzling over it... basically, it's a stress ball with gleemax@wizards.com written on it, backwards.

    Makes a lot more sense now...
  • Does this mean that they're going to being Twilight 2000 back?

    In all seriousness, and not to appear as a troll:

    For me the whole pen and paper thing is dying fast. I still play about week or so but more and more I'm starting to dread it. It's just so much easier for me to log into EQ2 and not have to quibble over rules and the like. Not having to own, carry or read 75 Wizard's books alone makes up for what I lose in the roleplaying aspect.

    I just wonder how many others have pretty much given up on pen and
    • by ExPacis ( 973499 )
      You could always just tell your players they can only use material from the core books, or core books + X others, to cut down on the amount of stuff you have to carry around. OR. eBooks. If you don't mind having a laptop at the table (or a desktop, YMMV), they work just as well. Just a few thoughts to keeping people with PnP.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cavtroop ( 859432 )
        Amen to this. For a while, our group let us use pretty much any splatbook you wanted. Now, we restrict mostly to the core books, and one or two chosen splatbooks.

        Most of the splatbooks are poorly written, unbalanced pieces of drivel. If you allow them in your game, the new rules/feats/etc. in the books are either way better, or way worse, than that in the core books, and you can get some seriously unbalanced characters.

        Our group is going to end its current campaign sometime over the next year, after which w
    • Does this mean that they're going to being Twilight 2000 back?

      Why yes, yes it does (not WotC, but 93 Games Studio is):

      Twilight 2003 forums [93gamesstudio.com]

      And to touch upon your point of PnP games dying - my GM and I have this discussion all the time. I don't think it's dying at all, but MMORPGs are definitely hurting the PnP industry. Both in terms of less players, and much less QUALITY players. We've tried to recruit several new people to our group over the last few years. Our core group is all mid to late 30-some

      • Both in terms of less players, and much less QUALITY players.

        I dunno about that. I've been GMing for 30 years and there are just as many min/maxers, loot chasers, and "roll-players" now as there ever was. That said, I tend to observe these traits more in younger gamers, where older gamers are more interested in story, character development, exploring the wonders of world, etc. In my experience, quality gamers do exist in the younger crowd; they are just less frequent. Also, keep in mind that your ta
      • Funny. That was rather my experience well before MMORPG's came along. It's a matter of mentality and maturity and imagination, and by and large "people don' got it."

        Certainly the WoW'ing of gamerdom isn't going to help, but it's least brought more attention to similar gaming IRL. Searching for diamonds--even ones in the rough--will pretty much be as difficult as always.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Aladrin ( 926209 )
      This true about a lot of things, and not just Pen & Paper RPGs. Consoles and PC Games have provided another avenue to get certain entertainment needs rather than the 'real thing'. RPGs, Wii Bowling, Strategy Games (replacing board games), the plethora of 'puzzle' games on Reflexive and Gamehouse... People used to have to go through a lot more hassle to sooth those urges.

      Now they can have a quick game with only a few minutes setup, instead of having to get people together and agree on a game, etc, etc
    • I have, pretty much. I don't have the income to fritter away on new sourcebooks of dubious value, or the latest point-release-cum-edition of entire rulesets anymore. It doesn't help that my tabletop group has pretty much collapsed, and our traditional GM has become obsessed enough with City of Heroes to two-box it. Not that I can point fingers-- I've got active CoH and WoW accounts (though only one of each), and I do most of my RPing in text format on MUX.

      I've come to the conclusion that I don't like to

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      That reminds me of the time in 1983 that someone told me pen-and-paper was dead while playing a D&D cartridge on a Mattel Aquarius. Or the late 1980s when MUDs and BBS games got popular. Or that time in 1993 when a bunch of us were playing Ultima 7 for DOS with the speech pack, and someone said it beat pen-and-paper. Or five years later when Ultima went online for the first time, ready to kill off tabletop gaming forever. Or that time in 1998 when Baldur's Gate came out and people declared it the de
    • It depends on what you want to get out of the game.

      If playing D&D is mostly about killing monsters, getting loot, and gaining levels, something like EQ is probably a pretty good substitute.

      I've played in games that were like that and had a good time doing it, but that's not so much what sitting down for a game is about for me anymore.

      It's part strategy game, part story/RP, part a game of plotting and intrigue. You're never going to see the kind of intra-party plotting and conflict in a MMORPG that is p
    • Two different beasts. If you can substitute EQ2 for a PnP game and not miss the latter, then you weren't doing it right. MMOs (and I've played em all) are a nice diversion, but the face-to-face socializing and wide-open gameplay of a good D&D game kick the snot out of killing the same mob for the 1000th time hoping for a good drop, or sitting around for 45 minutes waiting for the other 30 people in the raid to get thier shit together. And you can play a perfectly fun game of D&D without buying an
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by east coast ( 590680 )
        Two different beasts. If you can substitute EQ2 for a PnP game and not miss the latter, then you weren't doing it right.

        Oh, you mean I wasn't doing it your way? Not to get on you or anything but I always thought that there was more than one way to enjoy D&D. If I'm wrong just tell me.

        the face-to-face socializing and wide-open gameplay of a good D&D game kick the snot out of killing the same mob for the 1000th time hoping for a good drop, or sitting around for 45 minutes waiting for the other 30
        • by mcvos ( 645701 )

          And the "load and go" gameplay of MMO games kicks the snot out of trying to work around everyones private life in the hopes that an entire group can show up, especially at my age where many of my peers have new wives/husbands and young children to consider in the mix. Grinding can be a bore, no doubt, but how much different is it on the excitement scale then making 12 phone calls 3 days before a session, getting everyone together just to realize that you only got nearly everyone together. So you call up t

    • by Valdrax ( 32670 ) on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @01:32PM (#19494997)
      Not having to own, carry or read 75 Wizard's books alone makes up for what I lose in the roleplaying aspect.

      I would like to point out that there is a vast variety of perfectly fun games out there that have only one book or at the very least aren't part of a supplement factory product line like those that come out of WotC and White Wolf.

      I recommend checking out indie-rpgs.com for good discussion on what makes gaming fun. The forums there are heavily biased towards the semi-academic theory of how to design games, but the articles section there will make you think about what games are.

      Start with System Does Matter [indie-rpgs.com] in which Ron Edwards muses a bit over the three major different play goals of gamers and some very broad differences between systems. If some of this makes sense, move on to the much larger and more academic GNS and Other Matters of Role-playing Theory. [indie-rpgs.com]

      A brief excerpt from the second:

      My straightforward observation of the activity of role-playing is that many participants do not enjoy it very much. Most role-players I encounter are tired, bitter, and frustrated. My goal in this writing is to provide vocabulary and perspective that enable people to articulate what they want and like out of the activity, and to understand what to look for both in other people and in game design to achieve their goals. The person who is entirely satisfied with his or her role-playing experiences is not my target audience.

      If this sounds like you, then maybe the problem isn't that you're tired of gaming and that gaming sucks -- it's that you're not playing kind of games that reward what you want out of gaming. It sounds to me like you're getting burned out because you're not getting what you want out of a game, and you're just still doing it to hang out with friends who might not have much to talk about otherwise. I've been there. Read these essays, think about what it is that you like, and then poke around the Forge for info on good games that fit your style of play. You'll probably be surprised by the sheer variety that's out there beyond the stuff churned out by WotC. Far too many people check-out of gaming because they aren't aware that there's other stuff out there or because they're unwilling to try it.

      Try some new games. Maybe your friends will enjoy a one-shot or two as variety.

      Worst case scenario, find a new play group. Gaming is a lot like a relationship in that many people will claim that it's better to have bad gaming than none at all, but that's not true in the slightest. Like any social activity, if you're not getting what you really want out of it, it becomes an energy-draining obligation. Even so, there's no reason to give up on it entirely if better gaming is out there. Plus, just because you aren't spending every weekend with your friends doesn't mean that you won't see them ever again.
    • It doesn't sound like you're sick of tabletop gaming, it just sounds like you need a change. You've gotten into a rut of a single game (D&D from the sound of it) and simply accepting each additional book as an addition without further consideration. Break free and experiment!

      If you're tired of all the books, don't use them. I just finished playing in a D&D campaign that was almost exclusively run from the core three books (PHB, DMG, MM) and had a blast. Or try out games that are inherently les

    • by mcvos ( 645701 )

      Not having to own, carry or read 75 Wizard's books alone makes up for what I lose in the roleplaying aspect.

      Not to me. It's all about the roleplaying aspect to me, and since we play at the house of the guy who owns the books, nobody has to carry anything other than their own dice bag. (Although I'm actually one of the few people in the group who doesn't own the basic rule book of Earthdawn (the game we're currently playing), but even carrying a single book isn't so bad if you ask me.)

  • by ajs ( 35943 ) <ajs.ajs@com> on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @11:12AM (#19492583) Homepage Journal
    I never thought Wizards of the Coast would fall this far, but they actually killed the two most widely read and respected D&D publications for... THIS? Ugh.
    • by Reason58 ( 775044 ) on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @11:33AM (#19492883)
      MMO killed the PnP star.
      MMO killed the PnP star.

      In my mind and in my parent's basement,
      We can't hit res we've gone too far.
      Net tubes came and broke your heart,
      So put all the blame on Al Goooooore.
      • by ajs ( 35943 )
        You know that this is about tabletop roleplaying, right?
        • Ahem.

          You were complaining about the death of a PEN AND PAPER franchise, Dungeons and Dragons. I'm telling you WotC didn't kill D&D, computers and the explosive growth of MMORPGs did. WotC just happened to be the ones left holding the reins when that horse fell over dead.
          • by ajs ( 35943 )

            You were complaining about the death of a PEN AND PAPER franchise, Dungeons and Dragons.

            Nope. I was complaining about the fact that Wizards killed Dragon and Dungeon magazines in favor of this horrible abomination of a portal, both being oriented toward pen and paper, tabletop roleplaying.

            I'm telling you WotC didn't kill D&D, computers and the explosive growth of MMORPGs did.

            Not at all. D&D is still a popular game. I play both MMORPGs and tabletop games, D&D among them. Many others do as well. MMORPGs come and go, but D&D is what you come home to.

            WotC just happened to be the ones left holding the reins when that horse fell over dead.

            Wizards continues to see substantial revenue from D&D as a pen-and-paper game AND as an MMORPG. I don't see any dead

            • MMORPGs come and go, but D&D is what you come home to

              I dunno, I think I will take the wait and see attitude on this one.

              For me MMORPGs and CRPGs in general have brought me near the end of my P&P days. While TSR certainly isn't blameless, the fact that WotC is putting out so much material at such a fast rate and makes it all so intertwined outside of the core rules really bothers me. Wizards is treating our blessed love child like a cheap whore ala Magic CCG.

              This coupled with a waning interest in
              • I hate to point it out to you, but the only reason Magic can be as revitalized as it is is DUE to the "cheap whore"-dom qualities you seem to assign it. I take issue with other points of profiteering I see (mainly in card design, as they can most CERTAINLY tell what combos will arise when they release new sets, and surprise-surprise! 90% rares!), but not the rapidity at which they are designing in general.

                It makes it an expensive hobby to keep up, but not a STAGNANT one, which is by and large worse. Th
    • I wouldn't say killing as so much left it festering in the grave for a while longer.

      As much as I hate social websites this could be handy to people like me who have just relocated and are looking for a new group to join.
      BTW: Anyone need a level 20 mage?
    • I'm thinking they already have the business case for how long it will take the target market to switch to the online format. I assume that we'll be hearing a lot more about Gleemax....most likely in the form of free official content as a sampler.

      plus I bet there will be content that you can subscribe to for $. All it takes is one player in the group constantly bugging the DM to include the content and groups will convert.
      • by westyx ( 95706 )
        Well, this member of a D&D group won't be bugging his DM to get this stuff, and I don't think anyone else in our group will convert either. The DM was hooked on Dragon/Dungeon, and they're not going to make up those sales online.

        It remains to be seen wether they'll make enough money doing it this way; i doubt it.
  • Strange? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DragonWriter ( 970822 ) on Wednesday June 13, 2007 @11:26AM (#19492787)

    1up has coverage of a strange development: a gaming portal focused on tabletop and strategy games. The site is slated to be a editorial/community site focusing on Avalon Hill and Wizards products, as well as potentially offering a venue for independent PC games.
    Why is it a "strange development" that a manufacturer of various entertainment products would open up a portal devoted to that type of products, and particularly its own products (Avalon Hill is a division of Wizards)?
  • I know those new to the community won't recognize the description, espeically not with all the on-line trappings that are attached and blocking your view, but . . ..

    Wizards of the Coast is DECLARING that Gleemax is going to be ONLINE exactly what the RPGA TRIED to be in FtF gaming. The RPGA, for thos etoo young to remmeber, was started by a little company known as Tactical Studies Rules (or TSR) right about the switch into the 1980's. It was part of what WotC got when they purchased TSR.

    It is worth note t
    • Not precisely a big deal, IMHO. Every time I tried dipping my toes into the RPGA at cons or local sessions, I found it chock-a-block with idiots.

The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be correct. -- William of Occam

Working...