Talk:TSR, Inc.

message: ANy chance someone could start making a list of tsr artists, for this article?
(especially for regular artists and artists doing cover artwork)
I could start with a few I already know , like:
clyde caldwell
jeff easley
...
hmm I thought I knew more but I don't, thats why we need a list in this article....  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gawdsmak (talk • contribs) 10:20, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there's a lot of them on the List of role-playing game artists, and in :Category:Dungeons & Dragons artists. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  list of TSR artists available? 

message: ok, so what the heck is a reliable source since no press release has really been given and all info is in the form of forums, blogs, facebook and websites bliacklsited by wikipedia in order to show that the previous edit of TSR trademark being let stagnate, and someone else buying it? reminds me of the days working with the wikiproject and reason i quit while gavin collins was still around. so if someone can find information that is from reliable sources when there is only 2 or 3 sources right now other than US trademark and patent office, then by all means check the edit i made earlier and fix the sources. im not playing the who's is bigger around here anymore so you all figure it out. shadzar-talk 05:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  reliable sources.... 

message: Some people seem to think it's impossible to confuse the two. I disagree with them... Palosirkka (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think people looking for TRSI, a demogroup, will happen upon this article on TSR, a game company, and start reading thinking they've happened upon the correct article. If it were me, I'd check to see if I had made a mistake, such as transposing some letters. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 15:08, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

text: This page is already disambiguated because of the "(company)" qualifier; previously the same thing was accomplished by having "Inc." in the page name. There is no need for further disambiguation; if you think that it should be associated somewhere, try just the TSR disambiguation page, although I think people would only find their way there due to a misspelling in the first place. 129.33.19.254 (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation: TRSI vs TSRI 

message: I'm not sure how to unlink the references to Jon Peterson to the Wikipedia page for former congressman Jon Peterson, as they are not the same person. Could someone please do that? :)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thejulyman (talk • contribs) 21:46, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, I fixed it easily enough. :) 68.57.233.34 (talk) 00:50, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Author Jon Peterson is not former Congressman Jon Peterson 

message: The text in the TSR History section suggesting that the Arduin Grimoire series pioneered two axis alignment is trivially false: the first Arduin Grimoire did not come out until 1977, and Gygax had written about two-axis alignment a full year earlier in Strategic Review #6 (Feb 1976). There were also numerous critical hit systems published before the Arduin Grimoire. Questionable NPOV when the text calls Arduin the "most popular" unofficial D&D supplement without a sales figure citation - Arduin was one of many such booklets. Replacing these claims with some text about TSR's cease-and-desist practices regarding these unofficial supplements.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deconject (talk • contribs) 03:16, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arduin Grimoire in TSR History 

message: The corporation known as TSR today (trademark registration number 4298789) is described at the bottom of the page. The trademark for TSR, Inc. (trademark registration number 1802041) was canceled December 29, 2000. This is all easily verifiable at http://www.uspto.gov . Given that there exists a current corporation with the same name in basically the same field, I think it behooves us to mention them and briefly state how they are distinct.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: And I think they should be given a separate article, to avoid the potential for confusion. It's not a continuation, so it shouldn't be on the same page. oknazevad (talk) 23:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Separate article or no, there has to be something on this page that says "by TSR (company), we don't mean TSR (modern company)." It can come in any number of forms, but as I don't feel the new company is worth its own article, the three sentences we have here seem fine. It's not legally a continuation, but it's some of the same people or relatives of the original people laying claim to the heritage of the original, so it's not thematically wrong.--Prosfilaes (talk) 12:45, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern TSR 

message: Hi. I need some help sorting out part of the lede section of the article. The third paragraph currently says this:
'TSR saw prosperity under Williams, but by 1995, had fallen behind their competitors in overall sales. A failed attempt in 1996 to tap into the collectible card game (CCG) market with Spellfire and later with Dragon Dice, coupled with slowing hard-cover fiction sales, left TSR unable to cover its publishing costs. Facing insolvency, TSR was purchased in 1997 by Wizards of the Coast (WotC).'
James M. Ward complained about this being inaccurate, back in September 2015 on his Facebook account. One of my friends on Facebook, drew my attention to this this morning. James has his privacy set to public, but here is what James said, for the benefit of anyone who has trouble reading Facebook:
:Wikepedia Irritates Me
:A failed attempt in 1996 to tap into the collectible card game (CCG) market with Spellfire and later with Dragon Dice, coupled with slowing hard-cover fiction sales, left TSR unable to cover its publishing costs.
:Spellfire was a huge success with sales larger than MAGIC and many successful expansions that sold out. To say it was a failed attempt is ignorant.
:Dragon Dice was another gigantic success with a world wide market. I think as I recall it made well over 10 million in profits for it's first release. It had many more successful releases and invented a new type of dice shape.
:The problem was never the quality products TSR was producing. The problem was upper management and it's ignorance of the product line.
:I don't think I can ever convince anyone of these facts. But I lived it and this is how I see things worked out.
:(James M. Ward on Facebook)
I can't see any citations backing up any claims that both Spellfire and Dragon Dice were failed attempts, and plenty of other TSR employees have backed up James's claim on Facebook.
I could just pull the incorrect sentence, but it would be nice to fix things and tell the true story of Spellfire, Dragon Dice and the end of TSR, rather than just not have anything to replace this apparently incorrect and uncitated opinion. I'm going to try to find some time to research this, but if anyone knows Spellfire or Dragon Dice better than me, I could use some help. Big Mac (talk) 12:22, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I heard that it wasn't so much that those products were failures, it's that TSR had ordered way more than they were able to sell. Not sure how much of a role that had in killing the company, though. Needs a source, either way. 73.168.15.161 (talk) 12:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

text: I am going to have to take a look, but I believe Designers & Dragons cited much of TSR's financial downfall to overproducing novels and having the bookdealers return them - leaving TSR on the hook for the cost.  I imagine Of Dice and Men may have something to say on the subject as well.  If I have time today I will look, otherwise I will get to it when I have the time, but soon. BOZ (talk) 14:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The original info citing Random House's unexpected year-end returns of unsold Dragon Dice and hardcover novels (representing "almost a third" of these products produced), and the related bill for "several million dollars", as the factor that drove TSR off the financial cliff comes from "30 Years of Adventure: A Celebration of Dungeon & Dragons", pp. 215-216. Spellfire is not mentioned in this source. If there is another reliable source that either contradicts this or adds detail to this (such as the inclusion of Spellfire), then heck yes, let's revise the wiki to reflect the new info.Guinness323 (talk) 17:45, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I finally had some free time to look at Designers & Dragons, and it echoes this. I will include some of this info in the article now. BOZ (talk) 18:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, David Shepheard, better now? :) BOZ (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Well played, sir. Guinness323 (talk) 20:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  James M. Ward disputing claims about Spellfire and Dragon Dice 

message: The citation at the end of the sentence that suggests that TSR UK was set up in response to merger talks breaking down is an archived WotC page that has no mention of Games Workshop. (Games Workshop should have been mentioned by WotC, as they did have an exclusive deal in the UK to print D&D books, but the bottom line is that this is an uncitated claim.)
This article: “It was the beginning of a gaming revolution”: Games Workshop co-founder Ian Livingstone talks fantasy, bringing D&D to the UK and the birth of Warhammer appears to work as a replacement citation, but I don't have the time to check it at the moment. I'm dropping this here in case someone else can follow this up, before I get time to do this myself. Big Mac (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Games Workshop merger talks with TSR 

message: There was already discussion of a company grabbing the name TSR and using it for a new company, called TSR, Inc. (See the Modern_TSR section).
Now we have a second company using the name TSR.
That first company used the website http://tsrgames.com/
The new company uses the website https://tsr.games/
The new company is also using the trademark that the original TSR used on their new website. They seem to have actually registered all of the TSR logos that WotC have abandoned. I don't think the previous company using the name TSR did that.
So, even though this second company is also not TSR, like the previous company was not TSR, I think there is a large enough possibility that some folks will think this second company is TSR, that it is possibly worth having a section to deal with other companies trading under the same name.
Here is a video on this: TSR is Back?!? | Nerd Immersion.
As the video says, there is not much on the website of the new company called TSR. I'm not sure they would be notable enough to warrant their own Wikipedia article, as they only have one product (called Giantlands) at the moment. But the similarity between TSR, the previous TSR and the original TSR probably makes the fact that other companies are using the name, to sell RPG products, notable.
I'm also not quite sure how to find the right words to discuss this, from a neutral point of view. Perhaps something like "Adoption of TSR name by unrelated companies" would sound neutral enough.  Big Mac (talk) 13:36, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean. I think we should be addressing this in some way, shape, or form, but like you I'm not quite sure where and how. BOZ (talk) 21:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

text: I was also unaware of the 2nd company. Seems like a court fight is coming. I like your idea about "Adoption" as a section heading. Ckruschke (talk) 14:01, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: More info about the "new" TSR entity (the third to own the trademark) here. Ernie Gygax (named in the article as "E. Gary Gygax Jr."), is mentioned as the Exec VP.Guinness323 (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

text: This has quickly turned into a real mess, if you have seen recent social media posts. 8.37.179.254 (talk) 20:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  We'll see if any of it ends up being covered anywhere. I tried to at least make it clear in the article that there are 2 separate companies using the TSR trademark. Sariel Xilo (talk) 20:30, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: And now the second TSR has decided to drop the name. From my understanding, the second company picked it up in 2011 (WOTC having let the trademark lapse in 2004), but missed a filing to re-register the name and the new company grabbed it, despite the second company having not stopped using it. The second company didn't feel it was worth the cost to fight for it, and was originally going to license it back from the new, third company, but following the controversy decided not to do any business with them at all and will adopt a to-be-announced new name (per their Twitter; see here). The second company, which denounced the controversial statements made by EGG Jr, is the publisher of the current version of the Top Secret: New World Order RPG, for the record. oknazevad (talk) 21:40, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  The second TSR hasn't decided if they're dropping the name (see here & here); they've just decided to not license it back from the third TSR and while they figure out what they're doing, they've switched over to the logo of their RPG game to differentiate themselves. So they may drop the name in the future or they may fight for it. Who knows. In the meantime, I've removed the bit about them licensing it back (which was the original statement). Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:12, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

text:  Side comment: While this Twitter thread could never be used as a RS, it is by someone in the industry and is a good basic explainer. At the very least it gave me a direction to google stuff. Also, there's this Bell of Souls article which is mostly just a screenshot roundup of the various social media posts by all involved but I try not to use them if I can get a better RS (ComicBook.com, Polygon, etc). Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:25, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems they may have edited the tweet, as it read more definitive about a name change when I first saw it earlier today. Honestly, WOTC probably has a good case for killing all of it as they may have let the registration lapse, but trademarks don't need to be registered, only continuously used to be maintained, and WOTC has pretty continuously published reprints of old TSP-vintage stuff. But I digress. oknazevad (talk) 22:35, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, what a mess. Hopefully this all gets sorted out. 207.229.139.154 (talk) 02:23, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

text: That was integrated already. But also yesterday the second. TSR announced their new name of Solarian Games. Added the tweet from the official account as a source, and updated the official website link. Also moved the list of ELs that were really further reading into such an appendix section. oknazevad (talk) 16:51, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

text: For what it’s worth, Wizards of the Coast still owns the copyrights of all of the old TSR products. Even corporate-own copyrights last for almost one hundred years. 209.54.4.42 (talk) 12:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A third company using the TSR name