Title says it all, they've done some pretty darn bogus things before but this takes the cake for me. They've taken something we could get for free, because some of us (especially me) are poor and the only thing I can look forward to was the eventual art galleries of each book released. Now Wizards had the balls to take that away and say we have to pay for them now. Who the heck made that awful decision?
I hereby swear I will get an answer from an employee no matter how much spamming is needed.
edit: the phb, MM, and DMG are not subscriber only but everything else is... even the non-dragon/dungeon stuff like the "power" books :\ i'm so disgusted
Edit 2: It's funny it would say "FREE: Art gallery of revenge of the giants" and so forth... but now thats completely untrue XD
It's just art. You're not missing out on anything important.
They were a wonderful resource for people who are poor (like me) for using fantasy pictures for roleplay on the net. I got to look forward to only the releases of the art galleries.
i use the art for making tokens, and this is hard to do if the whole picture available is smaller than the token itself. i own most of the books, so is this really what wotc wants me to do? scan it myself, or buy into ddi? the whole DDI thing is getting more and more the only focus of the website. looking at the DM page made me cringe - all but one article was DDI only.
I'd like to put my voice in for free art galleries. I really like looking at the art in the books, both before I buy it, and after in digital format. Art has a big influence on me and my D&D. I would like to have the free galleries back, please. 
Are we seeing a pattern yet? Its called corporate greed.
Even worse, they did this with books that have NOTHING to do with DDI. Like the "power" books and such :\ i'm really ticked off. I used to be able to tell my friends to go the art galleries for rp material. NOT ANYMORE
Agreed!! If they want to make the art galleries for Dungeon, or Dragon magazine Insider Only I wouldn't really mind... but the art from the books... that's too much for me...
Befor the PDF ban I could get it straight from the PDF but now If I want the art on my pc I have to be an insider...
I know it's their site, their product, and well, their art... but come on guys, throw us a bone over here, I'm not going to use the "I am poor" car, cause technically my gaming group and I could pool in the money for an Insider account, but it saddens me that they made this move... now the only reason I will visit the site is for the Excerpts... unless they decide to make those Insider only, then all I'll have left is the community...
This is just SAD...
Agreed!! If they want to make the art galleries for Dungeon, or Dragon magazine Insider Only I wouldn't really mind... but the art from the books... that's too much for me...
Befor the PDF ban I could get it straight from the PDF but now If I want the art on my pc I have to be an insider...
I know it's their site, their product, and well, their art... but come on guys, throw us a bone over here, I'm not going to use the "I am poor" car, cause technically my gaming group and I could pool in the money for an Insider account, but it saddens me that they made this move... now the only reason I will visit the site is for the Excerpts... unless they decide to make those Insider only, then all I'll have left is the community...
This is just SAD...
seconded
It's just art. You're not missing out on anything important.
Wow, that might actually be THE MOST ignorant statement I have ever heard.
I got news for you, buddy, art is the only thing in D&D or Magic that is actually worth paying for. The rest is geeks playtesting the little maths they've brewed up to amuse themselves, and any bored college student could do the same. If you couldn't buy D&D rulebooks, you could just make everything up; only the art is irreplaceable, and nothing is more important.
Art is a very important draw to the WotC products. I even bought a book (FR Fallen Empire) based on one of the art pieces. (The one where the boat is floating over the sunken city.)
I'll make sure this thread is passed up, but I can't make any promises on any changes on policy.
I agree that restricting the art to DDI subscribers is a decidely poor step and removes yet another of the dwindling number of reasons for non-DDI subscribers to visit the site.
Looking at the art was probably my main reason for coming here occasionally.
I'm a DDI subscriber, but I too believe that non-DDI related art galleries should be made public.
Yeah, since the art is from books, and books can be bought without DDI subscription, I don't see any harm in letting people who don't have subscriptions download it.
Maybe just the Dungeon and Dragon art be only accessible to DDi subscribers, since that is only through DDi.
I'm all for giving more incentives for people to subscribe to DDi, but that one seems a bit tight.
I have also poked people at WotC to see if an official answer/reason can be given.
I'd like to put my voice in for free art galleries. I really like looking at the art in the books, both before I buy it, and after in digital format. Art has a big influence on me and my D&D. I would like to have the free galleries back, please.
Agreed. The art is a pretty important factor in whether I buy a book or not, and I used to love looking at the online galleries to find inspiration, or just to check the name of an artist. Pictures are also among the hardest things to discuss without visual representation.
I can see why WotC would want to limit art galleries to subscribers only - ironically Webster's comment above that he bought a book once just for the art tells the tale.
The art has value - and why not make that value an add-on "special" for Insider subscribers, people who are paying a monthly fee to WotC for bonus content.
That said, while I can understand it (and don't ascribe it to greed, personally) - I don't think I like the move. If only because much of that content has been free to date.
If WotC wants to make it subscriber only, well, that's up to them - but do it on a "going forward" basis. "As of October, we'll be putting new art galleries into the DDI subscriber section of the forums" - but leave what's been free to remain free.
Better still to not put up a paywall on that content, but as a compromise? Only do it going forward.
I can see why WotC would want to limit art galleries to subscribers only - ironically Webster's comment above that he bought a book once just for the art tells the tale.
The art has value - and why not make that value an add-on "special" for Insider subscribers, people who are paying a monthly fee to WotC for bonus content.
That said, while I can understand it (and don't ascribe it to greed, personally) - I don't think I like the move. If only because much of that content has been free to date.
If WotC wants to make it subscriber only, well, that's up to them - but do it on a "going forward" basis. "As of October, we'll be putting new art galleries into the DDI subscriber section of the forums" - but leave what's been free to remain free.
Better still to not put up a paywall on that content, but as a compromise? Only do it going forward.
The art does have value. But as you noted about one person buying a book based on art. I've looked through art galleries and purchased a book once or twice in my D&D career based on the art gallery after it came out.
But see now a non-subscriber only gets a tiny thumbnail of a tiny portion of the picture... thats no longer an incentive as we don't even know what the whole picture looks like since we can't click it to open it up
Again, I could understand their dragon/dungeon art galleries being DDI only (even though I don't like it and think it should serve as an incentive), I believe doing the same to the non-DDI books is going a bit too far.
I'll add one other point which is quite possibly an error even if this is the new policy - The galleries for the first four 4E Dungeon and Dragon magazines are subscriber only, while the issues themselves still seem to be free teasers as intended. I'm assuming that that's unintentional.
I look forward to WotC's response. I am hoping it was simply an oversight, as the art galleries are something that can be used for marketing better than for subscription incentive.
I just got the word that this is not a mistake...
The Official Answer: "The Dungeons & Dragons art gallery has recently changed. All of the artwork contained within the Player’s Handbook, Monster Manual and Dungeon Master’s Guide are still available at no charge, in the gallery. Artwork from all other D&D books will now be made available exclusively to D&D Insider subscribers as an added benefit to membership."
I'm continuing to question about this and see if I can get more information.
------------
Personally, I hope that public opinion can reverse this stance. I think its a huge mistake to take away something from your customers, who have been enjoying it all along. Putting the galleries behind the subscription paywall reminds me of how newspapers keep talking about doing the same sort of thing. Its a terrible idea, that won't help at all.
Personally, I hope that public opinion can reverse this stance. I think its a huge mistake to take away something from your customers, who have been enjoying it all along. Putting the galleries behind the subscription paywall reminds me of how newspapers keep talking about doing the same sort of thing. Its a terrible idea, that won't help at all.
I agree. Sure, put the stuff from dragon and dungeon in an subscription only gallery. But the rest?
Now, as a little bit of devils advocate, when it's all free, who to say that any one particular person actually bought the book? Should you have access to it for free when you never bought the book?
And then again, what if this is the first step towards moving the art into things like the compendium and monster builder, so that it comes up when you are looking for something?
I'm still in favor of making it free, because honestly, haven't they already gotten their investment in the art back with sales of the product?
As an Insider, I agree. I would like to see it free. I don't usually question marketing's decisions too deeply, since I assume they're working off of information that I just don't have. In this case, though, I don't think art and map galleries would be what would put over the edge in the decision to subscribe if I didn't already.
Sorry WotC. I was on the fence about DMG2 because there were good reports about GM tips and for the Sigil section even though I'm not a current player. You've decided me against it.
I used to buy the PDFs. They stopped selling them, so now I only buy the books I would have gotten in hard copy anyway. This year I bought only the Eberron books. A loss of roughly 90% of their annual income from me. I would have bought the Eberron books in PDF as well as physical copies.
Now they've stopped making the art visible, in a fashion that feels both greedy and underhanded thanks to the lack of announcement. That isn't incentive for me to sign up to DDi, it feels more like incentive for me to pirate their products to show what I think of their business tactics and treatment of (previously) paying customers. I'm not advocating piracy, but that's how I feel about their treatment of me as a customer over the past year or so.
Sorry WotC. I was on the fence about DMG2 because there were good reports about GM tips and for the Sigil section even though I'm not a current player. You've decided me against it.
I used to buy the PDFs. They stopped selling them, so now I only buy the books I would have gotten in hard copy anyway. This year I bought only the Eberron books. A loss of roughly 90% of their annual income from me. I would have bought the Eberron books in PDF as well as physical copies.
Now they've stopped making the art visible, in a fashion that feels both greedy and underhanded thanks to the lack of announcement. That isn't incentive for me to sign up to DDi, it feels more like incentive for me to pirate their products to show what I think of their business tactics and treatment of (previously) paying customers. I'm not advocating piracy, but that's how I feel about their treatment of me as a customer over the past year or so.
While I side on the, free art, I don't think it's underhanded or greedy. They are simply trying to find as many ways to make the digital aspect more attractive, an effort I agree with. However I don't think a blanket art for DDi only was the right way to go about it.
More reasons for people to get DDi is good, because it means it shows a bigger profit, which means we get closer to getting the VTT and CV, and more. Which frankly, I do want.
And also, no one needs the art to play. It's just a nice free bonus.
Not to ride off the subject but all these bad pr moves.... makes me wonder if that woman who worked for D&D in the 90s that nobody liked got rehired or something.
I can't remember her name, she is only referred to as "she who shall not be named"
I know art is just a bonus, and I don't believe either that "greed" is the reason for this move, but the art was really useful, it had marketing value, it sometimes motivated me to buy a book even more than an excerpt, art gives to the books the "Wow Factor", and when I showed to people who haven't played D&D they always asked me to teach them how to play; I remember that I really got pumped on playing D&D for the first time when I saw the art in the 3E Monster Manual and the Iconic characters from each class...
As I said before this just makes me sad... I feel more and more alienated from the community because I'm not an "Insider"... it even makes me feel as a "low class citizen" in the D&D community.
I wouldn't mind if just the art and maps of Dragon and Dungeon would be Insider only since well, I'm not an Insider, so I'm not really entitled to any of the content of Dragon/Dungeon.
And I was okay when the Insiders had the possibility to download the art packaged on a zip file, while I had to toil under the glare of my PC screen, saving them one by one on my hard drive.
At least we still have the excerpts... I hope they last...
Not to ride off the subject but all these bad pr moves.... makes me wonder if that woman who worked for D&D in the 90s that nobody liked got rehired or something.
I can't remember her name, she is only referred to as "she who shall not be named"
Lorraine Williams. She didn't work for D&D. She owned TSR until she drove it into the ground. And Lorraine Williams' mistakes are nothing like even the PR errors being made here. Lorraine Williams didn't believe in market research; WotC does. Lorraine Williams failed to monitor inventory; WotC does. Lorraine Williams used money earned from D&D to pay for games based on the IP she personally owned (Buck Rogers). Her mismangement singlehandedly drove TSR into insolvency.
Criticizing WotC is perfectly valid, but let's not whitewash the abject horror that was She-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named (whose name was Lorraine Williams).
While I side on the, free art, I don't think it's underhanded or greedy.
I agree with the majority of your response. My major problem though is not so much that they did something which I agree wasn't a great idea, but how they did it.
Firstly there wasn't any notice of this change. It was a nasty surprise sprung on the customers. Nobody likes that.
But the part which I feel is at best mean-spirited is the number of older galleries they uploaded on the first of last month, without notification. If you check the calender they're not listed. They didn't show up on the front page on the visits I paid either, though later articles might have pushed them off.
Instead they got put up without notice, then locked away without warning a month later. Legal, sure. Within their rights, yep. Good PR? Not by a long shot.
The problem with the way WotC handles PR is that they're breeding ill-will. Ignoring the question of legality, why do I head for e23 to buy whatever new GURPS PDF release has come out this Friday every week instead of waiting for the file to hit sharing sites? Because they treat their customers well and have good products.
Why am I a Paizo Superscriber? The same reason. Paizo picked up the money I had previously been spending on 4E PDFs before WotC stopped selling them.
What's stopping me downloading 4E PDFs? The legal issues of course. But the more they blunder in how they handle their PR, the more people who feel abused by their business tactics are likely to offer their expletive of choice, make some sort of obscene gesture to WotC, and begin downloading.
Don't get me wrong. If WotC offered their later PDFs for sale, I'd buy them. Not all at once, but as my budget permitted. I don't subscribe to DDi because I'm not playing 4E and therefore the tools are useless to me, and I feel the magazines don't warrant the price on their own, though I'd reconsider if I was playing. I'll still buy physical books, but only if I would have bought them along with the PDF. Three this year so far.
However if, as in the case of DMG2, I'm undecided, the way WotC conducts business becomes a factor. I'd have bought it today from my LGS where I took a look at it if it hadn't been for this decision with the art. So for me at least, their decisions and what looks IMO to be less than fair and upright behavior on their part have cost them sales.
It's just art. You're not missing out on anything important.
Wow, that might actually be THE MOST ignorant statement I have ever heard.I got news for you, buddy, art is the only thing in D&D or Magic that is actually worth paying for. The rest is geeks playtesting the little maths they've brewed up to amuse themselves, and any bored college student could do the same. If you couldn't buy D&D rulebooks, you could just make everything up; only the art is irreplaceable, and nothing is more important.
I'm not a game designer. I couldn't make stuff up that would actually work. I buy books for the mechanics, which I can't create, not art, which I can easily imagine. I would gladly pay less money for books without space used for unnecessary art (necessary art being things that directly pertain to gameplay, like the depictions of blasts and bursts in the PHB, mostly charts, maps, and graphs), or pay the same for books with more mechanics in place of the art.
The art is utterly ignorable.
I just got the word that this is not a mistake...
The Official Answer: "The Dungeons & Dragons art gallery has recently changed. All of the artwork contained within the Player’s Handbook, Monster Manual and Dungeon Master’s Guide are still available at no charge, in the gallery. Artwork from all other D&D books will now be made available exclusively to D&D Insider subscribers as an added benefit to membership."
I'm continuing to question about this and see if I can get more information.
------------
Personally, I hope that public opinion can reverse this stance. I think its a huge mistake to take away something from your customers, who have been enjoying it all along. Putting the galleries behind the subscription paywall reminds me of how newspapers keep talking about doing the same sort of thing. Its a terrible idea, that won't help at all.
I think that is one of the silliest answers they gave that I could have imagined.
Why should I feel that my DDI subscription is worth more now that I get something included with it that was free previously to everyone.
I used to get the art for free.
Then, I bought DDI with all that it offered.
Now, I get the art included in at no extra cost.
But wait, I used to get it at no extra cost before.
So, now my stuff is supposed to be more valuable because other people do not get what I get. But, you know what, I gained nothing from it because I already received this "gift" before it was a DDI gift. So, it is not an added benefit at all.
It just screws everyone else.
If they want to give me a benefit then give me something that I don't already have.
So, if I were to play in an online game or perhaps run one, would I be allowed to use that art for my game? Or, would I not be allowed to because I would be making it available to everyone who is not a DDI user? If I can't use it ten what the heck good does it do me to have access to it?
I would like to add to my distaste for this move by WotC... aside from the lack of notice, I too feel cheapened and (dare I say) unimportant to them as a customer. The artwork was one of the reasons for buying the books to me. This doesn't mean I'm not buying the books (because the artwork is still pretty nice to look at), but be able to see the artwork ahead of time served to heighten my anticipation. However, since I am one of those "poor gamers", not only am I buying the books less frequently, but now I won't be able to get the thrill of previewing the book because I can't afford the subscription. A real shame.
Please keep the artwork free to look at so as to maintain our enthusiasm for the D&D brand.
While I side on the, free art, I don't think it's underhanded or greedy.
I agree with the majority of your response. My major problem though is not so much that they did something which I agree wasn't a great idea, but how they did it.
Firstly there wasn't any notice of this change. It was a nasty surprise sprung on the customers. Nobody likes that.
But the part which I feel is at best mean-spirited is the number of older galleries they uploaded on the first of last month, without notification. If you check the calender they're not listed. They didn't show up on the front page on the visits I paid either, though later articles might have pushed them off.
Instead they got put up without notice, then locked away without warning a month later. Legal, sure. Within their rights, yep. Good PR? Not by a long shot.
The problem with the way WotC handles PR is that they're breeding ill-will. Ignoring the question of legality, why do I head for e23 to buy whatever new GURPS PDF release has come out this Friday every week instead of waiting for the file to hit sharing sites? Because they treat their customers well and have good products.
Why am I a Paizo Superscriber? The same reason. Paizo picked up the money I had previously been spending on 4E PDFs before WotC stopped selling them.
What's stopping me downloading 4E PDFs? The legal issues of course. But the more they blunder in how they handle their PR, the more people who feel abused by their business tactics are likely to offer their expletive of choice, make some sort of obscene gesture to WotC, and begin downloading.
Don't get me wrong. If WotC offered their later PDFs for sale, I'd buy them. Not all at once, but as my budget permitted. I don't subscribe to DDi because I'm not playing 4E and therefore the tools are useless to me, and I feel the magazines don't warrant the price on their own, though I'd reconsider if I was playing. I'll still buy physical books, but only if I would have bought them along with the PDF. Three this year so far.
However if, as in the case of DMG2, I'm undecided, the way WotC conducts business becomes a factor. I'd have bought it today from my LGS where I took a look at it if it hadn't been for this decision with the art. So for me at least, their decisions and what looks IMO to be less than fair and upright behavior on their part have cost them sales.
I agree, a notice would have been nice. But what we are talking about is something being given for free, to anyone, customer or not. So it's a bit hard to be to upset. While WoTC really should have said something before hand, the customers need to respond in a mature way.
Underhanded, greedy, nasty are all words that are meant to provoke a reaction. However when anyone, because a company is made up of people, are accused, rightly or not, of being those things, it puts up a wall, no matter how professional the person at the company is. The more professional they are, the less you will see it, but it will be there.
More so, when I hear any person use money as a threat because of the lose of something free, it makes them seem petty, to me. Note the to me part. The art isn't free to WoTC. Art is very expensive, and illustrators are getting screwed hard in this economy.
I agree with it should have been handled better, like you said, before hand. Not after. It does leave one feeling upset. But again, the response to having something for free taken away, is just as important. I'm not saying you in particular, but more anyone upset about this.
Also, how many of those sites you listed, have allowed players to download the art for free? I honestly don't know, which is why I ask. If you are going to compare those to WoTC, do they ever give anything away for free?
So, now my stuff is supposed to be more valuable because other people do not get what I get. But, you know what, I gained nothing from it because I already received this "gift" before it was a DDI gift. So, it is not an added benefit at all.It just screws everyone else.
If they want to give me a benefit then give me something that I don't already have.
Exactly. They shouldn't have to promote DDI by giving everybody else less of a service. It's their decision, or course, but it's not 'a benefit' in any sense of the word, and it shouldn't be presented like it.
WotC is well within their rights and can do what they like with the IP they own. However, I fail to see how this move incentives me to purchase a subscription; instead it de-incentives me to visit the website.
The website has slowly but surely become nothing more than a portal to DDI for me. The only offerings I now have access to are podcasts and Confessions articles. Since AsmodeusLore does a great job of linking those on the forums for me, I have no reason to visit the main website. The website used to the place I went to get interested in new products. If that's not what the website is supposed to do anymore, because they want to lock everything behind the DDI gate, thats Wotc's choice, but what is going to get me interested in new products now? As a non-subscriber what is my incentive to visit www.wizards.com/dnd/ ?
@celloshane
what before (besides the art galleries) were you coming to the website for? I cant really think of anything beyond the podcasts, Confessions articles and the Excerpts that were free in the last few months. (Which are still free now.)
WotC is well within their rights and can do what they like with the IP they own. However, I fail to see how this move incentives me to purchase a subscription; instead it de-incentives me to visit the website.
The website has slowly but surely become nothing more than a portal to DDI for me. The only offerings I now have access to are podcasts and Confessions articles. Since AsmodeusLore does a great job of linking those on the forums for me, I have no reason to visit the main website. The website used to the place I went to get interested in new products. If that's not what the website is supposed to do anymore, because they want to lock everything behind the DDI gate, thats Wotc's choice, but what is going to get me interested in new products now? As a non-subscriber what is my incentive to visit www.wizards.com/dnd/ ?
Well, most likely that is their plan, to move as much into DDI as possible. They really haven't made that some secret agenda. It's what's coming down the road, weather WoTC does it first or follows trends.
I work in publishing, and this is how it's going to be, because it's in response to what people want.
This is an interesting discussion.
A couple of months ago, there was a discussion in the DDI forums (and probably elsewhere as well) on whether a subscription to DDI was "worth it" or not.1 There were a number of people who felt that what they were getting was just not worth the cost.
I am fairly certain that this is a response to discussions of that nature.
1 - This decision is, as far as I am concerned, a completely personal decision.
This is an interesting discussion.
A couple of months ago, there was a discussion in the DDI forums (and probably elsewhere as well) on whether a subscription to DDI was "worth it" or not.1 There were a number of people who felt that what they were getting was just not worth the cost.
I am fairly certain that this is a response to discussions of that nature.
1 - This decision is, as far as I am concerned, a completely personal decision.
That is really insightful, MB. I had not considered this as a possible reason for this.
If its true (and I have no idea if it is or is not), its a horrible reason. There are some people who don't think the value from DDI is worth the price. So, the options are to increase the value, or decrease the price. Now, certainly, this will increase the value of a subscription. So there is a certain logic behind this move. But at what cost? Alienating the art-loving non-subscribers? Also alienating some subscribers, such as myself, who take an active interest in what is available to non-subscribers?
I'd be interested to see how the rate of increase in subscribers changes over the next month. If it goes up or down. And compare that to the traffic for the site overall. Doubtful we'll see that sort of detail, but still, it would be interesting.
I agre with those who believe the art should be free.
Wotc's PR department seems to be subpar these days.
This is an interesting discussion.
A couple of months ago, there was a discussion in the DDI forums (and probably elsewhere as well) on whether a subscription to DDI was "worth it" or not.1 There were a number of people who felt that what they were getting was just not worth the cost.
I am fairly certain that this is a response to discussions of that nature.
1 - This decision is, as far as I am concerned, a completely personal decision.
That is really insightful, MB. I had not considered this as a possible reason for this.
If its true (and I have no idea if it is or is not), its a horrible reason. There are some people who don't think the value from DDI is worth the price. So, the options are to increase the value, or decrease the price. Now, certainly, this will increase the value of a subscription. So there is a certain logic behind this move. But at what cost? Alienating the art-loving non-subscribers? Also alienating some subscribers, such as myself, who take an active interest in what is available to non-subscribers?
I'd be interested to see how the rate of increase in subscribers changes over the next month. If it goes up or down. And compare that to the traffic for the site overall. Doubtful we'll see that sort of detail, but still, it would be interesting.
Hmmm, I can see both your points, but to me, a choice like this feels like something marketing would pull off. It's sometimes interesting what marketing and sales can get away with. And generally they don't make announcements of intent, because they know when have made a choice that won't be liked.
I've got friends that make pitches to Marvel and DC all the time. I was shocked to learn that at Marvel, certain kinds of stories get approved or denied by sales only. They decide if something will get made and published. But not everything. They have no input on the X-men products, they just do the sales figures and such. But something like an graphic adaptation of "Whuthering Heights" ZZZZZZT! It goes past the senior editors and right to sales.
Marketing and sales tend to not like anything given away for free. But all companies know there is a certain amount of free on purchase, with products like these. Like the errata. Imagine if you had to be a DDi subscriber to get that?
Still, the art should be free, there has to be a better way to increase the value of DDi without doing something like this. Off the top of my head, I would imagine that emailing each article of dragon or dungeon to subscribers could be a auto feature. I certainly wouldn't mind getting it as an attachement, that I can then save to my computer.
I agre with those who believe the art should be free.
Wotc's PR department seems to be subpar these days.
The PR department? Why do you think they are involved? This seems more like a business decision to me.
Hmmm, I can see both your points, but to me, a choice like this feels like something marketing would pull off. It's sometimes interesting what marketing and sales can get away with. And generally they don't make announcements of intent, because they know when have made a choice that won't be liked.
I've got friends that make pitches to Marvel and DC all the time. I was shocked to learn that at Marvel, certain kinds of stories get approved or denied by sales only. They decide if something will get made and published. But not everything. They have no input on the X-men products, they just do the sales figures and such. But something like an graphic adaptation of "Whuthering Heights" ZZZZZZT! It goes past the senior editors and right to sales.
Marketing and sales tend to not like anything given away for free. But all companies know there is a certain amount of free on purchase, with products like these. Like the errata. Imagine if you had to be a DDi subscriber to get that?
Oh. Well, thats silly. They should have input, sure, but these departments should not be making Business Decisions.
It appears to me they are risking future D&DI customers to appease the current ones. Its no secret that people are wanting more for their subscription especially with what was proposed and then later discarded.
However if you remove too much of the free things then there is nothing left for potential customers to judge if they want to become a subscriber or not.
I won't be surprised when they make the forums subscriber only. Thats a trend thats becoming more popular and its an annoying one.
I won't be surprised when they make the forums subscriber only. Thats a trend thats becoming more popular and its an annoying one.
More popular? I've heard of some companies doing it, but none that have stayed that way longer than 6 months, after they found out how horrible of an idea it was.
I won't be surprised when they make the forums subscriber only. Thats a trend thats becoming more popular and its an annoying one.
Doubtful, there are a lot of other groups (Magic, Magic Online, Non-DDI D&D, Star Wars, Dream Blade, Avalon Hill board games) that also use these forums.
@celloshane
what before (besides the art galleries) were you coming to the website for? I cant really think of anything beyond the podcasts, Confessions articles and the Excerpts that were free in the last few months. (Which are still free now.)
a few more months back, you'd get free "web enhancements" for most products, and as another service, you'd get sometimes maps, or complete (very small) adventures. as it stands now, i have no incentive to visit the dnd webpage at all. i buy most of the physical products(collector) anyway, the excerpts are therefor not really of interest. i do not get anything free there anymore, and thus will not even notice that something changed in their service offered. since i can not notice that anymore, there's no way they'll ever get my money for something digital.
So, if I were to play in an online game or perhaps run one, would I be allowed to use that art for my game? Or, would I not be allowed to because I would be making it available to everyone who is not a DDI user? If I can't use it ten what the heck good does it do me to have access to it?
interesting question. i believe you would not be allowed to use it as this would be distribution. so, basically, all arts from all books is now having a content-ban unless you use it within the confines of the DDI groups forum.
A couple of months ago, there was a discussion in the DDI forums (and probably elsewhere as well) on whether a subscription to DDI was "worth it" or not.1 There were a number of people who felt that what they were getting was just not worth the cost.
I am fairly certain that this is a response to discussions of that nature.
to be blunt: removing something from others so you can say "hey, look, you got more in the process" never works out to feel it's a new extra. now i feel that ddi is even less worth the investment, mainly because it feels more and more like they just do DDI to make money, and not at all to support the community. if you don't support the part of the community who hardly ever buys a book or does not subscribe, you'll lose them to other companies that do exactly that. if this is what WOTC wanted, more power to them. but i really doubt they'd be willingly handing over their customers to their competitors.
i'd like to compare the art pull to watching football on free tv. imagine you'd have some private channel like espn, and they'd told you that they have just pulled every free video from the website, in order to give you more paid options. not only isn't it true that you got more content than you had before, you even feel forced to either rebuy the subs, or lose out on other stuff you'd have used before. same would apply if the NFL made the game summaries on their own page as "paid content". basically, both of them would lose out on more customers than they'd gain. the same holds true for this wotc move.
I won't be surprised when they make the forums subscriber only. Thats a trend thats becoming more popular and its an annoying one.Doubtful, there are a lot of other groups (Magic, Magic Online, Non-DDI D&D, Star Wars, Dream Blade, Avalon Hill board games) that also use these forums.
Well not the non D&D ones.
There are a lot of moves that wotc has done I would have previously said is doubtful. Given their track record from release of 4.0 to today, there is a continual pattern of removing what was once free and adding it to subscription only and the forums seem like a logical step in this pattern. However I have to wonder why give one demographic more value at the expense of another?
Funny thing is I spent a lot more $ on wotc products in the 3.0 days when they had near daily freebies and tidbits. And no its not because there was a lot more 3.0 products. I love 4.0 a lot more then I did 3.0 yet the way they have treated their customers has really turned me off.
As a subscriber, I'm against restricting the galleries to subscribers only. I will get all the art whether it's free or not. The reason I'm a subscriber is to get access to new classes, feats, paragon paths, epic destinies, powers, items, adventure paths, campaign ideas, and to get access to PH3, MP2, and DDI exclusive content like the revenant race and assassin class. These are all great incentives.
The art galleries are not a legitimate incentive for DDI subscription. Those who are considering subscriptions aren't likely to be pushed over the edge by the artwork. Those who aren't considering subscriptions won't have their minds changed by this move; as we've seen, many nonsubscribers are upset enough to stop visiting the site at all because of moves like this, and I'd be in the same boat if I wan't a subscriber. The people who just can't afford those few dollars each month aren't going to suddenly have more money in this broken economy now that they don't have access to the galleries.
There are a couple things this does. It gives a very minor additional incentive to purchase a DDI subscription, one that pales in comparison to the real incentives like those I mentioned above. It secures a small amount of bandwidth versus providing the artwork for free. It also serves to alienate nonsubscribers from subscribers and to cast Wizards of the Coast in an unflattering light to the casual D&D fans and browsing netizens. There's now that much greater a wall dividing subscribers like myself and the nonsubscribing majority of the population, and as someone giving Wizards of the Coast my money, I do not want that wall.
I don't know what the whole of the business dealings are. Does the company have to pay royalties for every place they publish a piece of artwork? In that case, I can certainly understand the incentive to lock the galleries. If they're actually purchasing the full rights to the artwork, to be published as many places as they please, then I have no comprehension as to what would make someone think this a good decision. It's a near-zero cost form of advertising, guys, and advertising is an important part of business. Remember?
I am a subscriber, but I don't think making the galleries DDI only was such a great Idea.
This is an interesting discussion.
A couple of months ago, there was a discussion in the DDI forums (and probably elsewhere as well) on whether a subscription to DDI was "worth it" or not.1 There were a number of people who felt that what they were getting was just not worth the cost.
I am fairly certain that this is a response to discussions of that nature.
1 - This decision is, as far as I am concerned, a completely personal decision.
I took part in those discussions and I specifically stated what would make DDI "worth it". This comes no where close. The only thing that would make DDI worth it to me would be something that I would use on an almost daily basis that I couldn't still use after I unsubscribe. Examples would be the GT (Game Table), or some other online only event that required me to be online to use and that involved other people.
Without proper notice, this does just look like a money grab to me.
This is an interesting discussion.
A couple of months ago, there was a discussion in the DDI forums (and probably elsewhere as well) on whether a subscription to DDI was "worth it" or not.1 There were a number of people who felt that what they were getting was just not worth the cost.
I am fairly certain that this is a response to discussions of that nature.
1 - This decision is, as far as I am concerned, a completely personal decision.
I took part in those discussions and I specifically stated what would make DDI "worth it". This comes no where close. The only thing that would make DDI worth it to me would be something that I would use on an almost daily basis that I couldn't still use after I unsubscribe. Examples would be the GT (Game Table), or some other online only event that required me to be online to use and that involved other people.
Without proper notice, this does just look like a money grab to me.
In those discussions was there any mention of making the art available to everyone only available to DDI as being something that people said they thought would make DDI better for them?
Was there such discussion that taking things away from everyone else so that only the DDI users could get them (them being stuff that DDI could get along with everyone else) as being something that DDI subscribers would want?
Was there such discussion that taking things away from everyone else so that only the DDI users could get them (them being stuff that DDI could get along with everyone else) as being something that DDI subscribers would want?
no, you'll have to search hard for subscribers who had that kind of suggestions - as usual, people want more from what they're already getting, more from what they still don't have - they usually don't want to change existing stuff to become even more excluisve.
If they keep pushing things into a "DDI ONLY" status, what's going to make ppl decide to hand over their hard earned money?
You have to have something to wet the appetite of potential customers, hell that's what made me decide to sign up.
I look forward to WotC's response. I am hoping it was simply an oversight, as the art galleries are something that can be used for marketing better than for subscription incentive.
Indeed.
Dude, not cool WOTC.
I'd like to have the free splatbook galleries back, the emag galleries can stay has pay to view, but then mind you you already have the art in the pdf file...
It's just art. You're not missing out on anything important.
Wow, that might actually be THE MOST ignorant statement I have ever heard.I got news for you, buddy, art is the only thing in D&D or Magic that is actually worth paying for. The rest is geeks playtesting the little maths they've brewed up to amuse themselves, and any bored college student could do the same.
I love how you followed up an incredibly narrow-minded statement with one that is equally - if not more - narrow-minded, and then had the gall to call the original statement ignorant.
I mean, really? You can sum up this exchange with,
"Art is unimportant."
"You're so ignorant! Art is all-important and everything else is unimportant!"
Just...wow.
As for the issue at hand, I'm ambivalent. If the move gets more people to subscribe, I think it's a great idea. Everyone playing the game should subscribe, as far as I'm concerned.
I think what we have here is WotC doing an out of house 'playtest' of a potential change. It's clearly stirred up a lot of commentary on both sides of the argument, replete with complex interesting arguments, and the bland bull I've come to expect from people with nothing better to do with their time.
But at the same time, I honestly don't see this as a permanent change- WotC got their outrage. They're going to be losing more customers then they'd have gianed by the change if they don't put the book galleries back to free.
That being said, art is unimportant to some... and important to others, and to be completely honest, the way I see it is just as has been said. The art serves as a lure, to whet the interests of potential buyers. Splat book art galleries should be free when the book is released, but personally I'd also like to see DDI art become free itself- albiet under certain conditions.
I'm all for subscriber only art- it's a nice little bonus, but personally I don't really think it should stay 'exclusive' for that long. Make it DDI exclusive for the month after it's released, and after that point open it up to the public.
Right now, DDi is a big wall that separates the subscribers and the nonsubscribers- they don't really know what's going on on the other side of that wall unless they have a friend to tell them, or they're doing the dirty with piracy. Article titles and flavourtext preludes aren't enough- so why not give them the art too?
The art gallery for a given mag goes up at the end of the month. Make the art susbscriber only for the following month, and then make it available to everyone as a 'free' thing. Now those people can go look at the art. Because when you get down to it, we're still mostly ruled by our hindbrain- and our hindbrain sees the art and goes "Oh, that looks awesome!" and then you want to subscribe. Not seeing it- and in fact, being told that you have to subscribe to see any of it makes our hindbrain go "Man, you guys are such fornicating mammals, I wipe my hands of you." and actually causes lost business.
The real secret to marketing, something I'm sure those of WotC in sales can tell you- is to make the consumer think that giving you their money was their idea.
And that's basically what releasing DDI exclusive art for free after a given period would help do. People would see it, and people would react to it. And at that point, people have already 'payed' for it. You won't get new business because of the art- unless you've got an art fanatic like up the page. Rather, you'll get the business because of what the art represents. And that's what you're really aiming for.
Snip
But at the same time, I honestly don't see this as a permanent change- WotC got their outrage. They're going to be losing more customers then they'd have gianed by the change if they don't put the book galleries back to free.
Snip
Right now, DDi is a big wall that separates the subscribers and the nonsubscribers- they don't really know what's going on on the other side of that wall unless they have a friend to tell them, or they're doing the dirty with piracy. Article titles and flavourtext preludes aren't enough- so why not give them the art too?
Snip
The real secret to marketing, something I'm sure those of WotC in sales can tell you- is to make the consumer think that giving you their money was their idea.
I want what you are smoking. What outrage? We have a 3-page thread with a few random people who say they think it should be free, and about 4 of those seem outraged (or should it be nerdraged)?
Seriously, one of the posters was even complaining that since he wasn't buying 4e stuff, he no longer had any reason to come here.. I mean, Quoi??? If you are not a customer, what do you expect? Why should WotC care what you think? It's not like the free galleries are going change the opinion of anything but a few people.
well, wotc should be trying to make non-customers customers, shouldn't they?
if people leave the site they'd been visiting for one or two editions, this is not good news in any way for the company - they might have lost a customer before, but when they lose this, they even lost a potentially returning customer. when this customer goes over to another site, where he gets what he wants, he'll likely buy their products in the future - and no amount of money put into advertising can fix that later.
so, even though it might look like those are "just leeches", I'd rather have them around as a company, than drive them off towards the competitors. as it stands, i have no reason to visit the dndinsider webpage. because a dnd webpage it ain't no more.
oh, and btw: it's funny to see that H1 - Keep on the Shadowfell can be downloaded complete with art for free, but it's map and art galleries are Insider only.
I'm sorry but I don't see the problem that has been highlighted in this thread. Personally I am a DDI subscriber and so am supposedly 'pampered' by WoTC. To see if this thread was correct, I opened up a new browser with no cookies whatsoever and tried the galleries.
I was still able to get to the galleries. I was still able to save the images one by one. True, they have a teaser that says 'For the Complete gallery', which makes me think that they cut out some pictures for free access, however, I was still able to get to the Monster Manual gallery and download all the images there via the download button. As for the latest image gallery, same thing. I was able to access it and download the images one by one. Wasn't this the same deal as what they offered before the site revamped?
The older articles I think, particularly those of 3 - 3.5E have been scrapped and hence are no longer on the website - which is a shame because I took a shining to those images from the galleries too, especially the Eberron ones.
Your random pick was one of the three 4e galleries that have been left open. Monster Manual, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Player's Handbook are left available for nonsubscribers. The others are DDi only.
The 3E galleries are here.
The rest of the 3E stuff is here.
WotC is well within their rights and can do what they like with the IP they own. However, I fail to see how this move incentives me to purchase a subscription; instead it de-incentives me to visit the website.
In a nutshell, this. The Art Gallery was one of my fave parts of the D&D website, but not enough to pay for it. And now that it is no longer available to us freeloading non-paying ghetto scrubs I've little incentive at all to venture beyond these forums, which I visit with increasing infrequency.
IMO the DDI has been - both in philosophy and implementation - has been a total fustercluck, a major wedge driven into the online D&D community that is cleaving away a large portion of it in favour of a much smaller - but paying - core.
I never thought it would happen but the new direction of the game, and the coporate philosophy and decisions surrounding it, is leaving me behind.
WotC is well within their rights and can do what they like with the IP they own. However, I fail to see how this move incentives me to purchase a subscription; instead it de-incentives me to visit the website.In a nutshell, this. The Art Gallery was one of my fave parts of the D&D website, but not enough to pay for it. And now that it is no longer available to us freeloading non-paying ghetto scrubs I've little incentive at all to venture beyond these forums, which I visit with increasing infrequency.
IMO the DDI has been - both in philosophy and implementation - has been a total fustercluck, a major wedge driven into the online D&D community that is cleaving away a large portion of it in favour of a much smaller - but paying - core.
I never thought it would happen but the new direction of the game, and the coporate philosophy and decisions surrounding it, is leaving me behind.
I agree.
I feel a little bad for people who got used to the free art, but WotC does still have some art for people to see for free. Even though it isn't something I spend much time browsing through, I can see how people love it so much. All of that affection is value, and subscription money pays for that value, sorry free users, in this case, you really are not the customer unless you are paying for it.
That said, I think WotC should probably tease a little bit more information so that non-subscribers can get a feel for what they are missing. I know I've seen places where anyone can get a low-res version of artwork, but only paid customers can get the full resolution. I think that might make for a really fair compromise. What I think would be even better, but a lot more work, is to let insiders select some art that non-insiders can see. I honestly feel that this should be done for articles, as well. If every Insider gets a vote on a piece of art and an article, then when the compiled issues come out, non-Insiders would get 1 article and 10% of the top-rated art work. This would give non-Insiders a really nice bit of teaser information and hopefully entice them to subscribe. In fact, with the transition to shorter articles coming, this would really work nicely.
I feel a little bad for people who got used to the free art, but WotC does still have some art for people to see for free. Even though it isn't something I spend much time browsing through, I can see how people love it so much. All of that affection is value, and subscription money pays for that value, sorry free users, in this case, you really are not the customer unless you are paying for it.
That said, I think WotC should probably tease a little bit more information so that non-subscribers can get a feel for what they are missing. I know I've seen places where anyone can get a low-res version of artwork, but only paid customers can get the full resolution. I think that might make for a really fair compromise. What I think would be even better, but a lot more work, is to let insiders select some art that non-insiders can see. I honestly feel that this should be done for articles, as well. If every Insider gets a vote on a piece of art and an article, then when the compiled issues come out, non-Insiders would get 1 article and 10% of the top-rated art work. This would give non-Insiders a really nice bit of teaser information and hopefully entice them to subscribe. In fact, with the transition to shorter articles coming, this would really work nicely.
How long you been on this website? <.< I don't know how you can call it getting used to the free art galleries... thats just how it's ALWAYS been done on this site since it's creation around 99-00 (if it was earlier, tell me because thats when i showed up abouts). This is about taking something we ALWAYS got for free and slapping on a price tag essentially. While I can understand this can happen with somethings. I don't understand why they wanna put something that has zero to do with DDI (the non-ddi content books for instance) and force you to get the ddi package to look at something you always got to look at.
I think it's been conceded they can do this with their magazine art galleries, but other books are going a bit too far. Infact I feel a bit appauled that you consider me no longer a customer when i've bought their books for years and years and faithfully switched to 4e and bought the whole core set and phb2 and more and yet I can't look at the art galleries anymore. How freakin sad is that?
I think it's been conceded they can do this with their magazine art galleries, but other books are going a bit too far. Infact I feel a bit appauled that you consider me no longer a customer when i've bought their books for years and years and faithfully switched to 4e and bought the whole core set and phb2 and more and yet I can't look at the art galleries anymore. How freakin sad is that?
Please understand that I am not a WotC employee, or a forum moderator or anything remotely official, so when I say that you (in the general sense) are not a customer, I am not denigrating your investment in the hobby - I am just saying that you are not paying for the resources to which you want access. Sorry about splitting hairs here, but the core books' art is still free, if I understand correctly.
I understand fully your frustation, I really do. But just because I bought the new Pearl Jam cd doesn't mean that I can download the MP3s from iTunes, or play the songs in Rock Band. If I want mp3s, I have to rip my disc. You have bought the books, so you do have full access to the art gallery when you want it. If you want computerized images of that art, you have to scan it in. I know this is a ton more work for you, especially for a resource that you are used to getting for free, but the simple fact is that the artists who draw these images get paid for it, and that money has to come from somewhere. WotC has now decided that part of that payment is coming from DDI subscriptions.
While I agree and I am on the "Free Art" side of the argument, the whole "It was free before, so should be free now" argument doesn't hold much weight.
The best reason, to me that the art should remain free is simply because it creates good will towards players, and every company should have a certain amount of free on purchase, and I don't think just the three main rule books are enough.
First you have to remember that the art isn't free for WoTC. And the art isn't cheap, and anyone that tries to disagree, just don't. Buying art for print and making art for print is part of what I do for a living, several of my friends are fantasy illustrators, so I know exactly what I'm talking about.
That said, WoTC would need the art, regardless of if they had never given it out for free before. It was always just a nice thing to do.
And a company like WoTC, should do something nice for it's customers, when the cost to do so is small. Because, yes getting the art into a format that is usable on the web site, cost time, and time in this case costs money to pay someone to do it.
So I understand why they would want to use something like this to add increased value to an existing product, but I think there could be a different way to do that.
What I think would be even better, but a lot more work, is to let insiders select some art that non-insiders can see. I honestly feel that this should be done for articles, as well. If every Insider gets a vote on a piece of art and an article, then when the compiled issues come out, non-Insiders would get 1 article and 10% of the top-rated art work. This would give non-Insiders a really nice bit of teaser information and hopefully entice them to subscribe. In fact, with the transition to shorter articles coming, this would really work nicely.
Yessuh, massah! Please get all yeh Insiduhs togethuh and find us non-Insiduhs some table scraps. We shore would be 'preciative of yo' genuhrosuhteh.
C'mon. People that are not Insiders still pay to play. We still buy books and, in the process, actually pay more for them than you Insiders do. That li'l badge that WotC has decided to give everyone that pays for DDI seems to have gone to some peoples' heads. And the idea it's 'earned' is ludicrous - you buy it (if you check people without forum bling, it states that the user has not earned any badges yet - implying that the DDI badge is earned). There is a slowly growing separation between the 'pays' and 'pays-nots' that WotC seems to be more than happy to assist with.
Content is what gets people interested in a product - not lack of it. Show us what we're missing, don't just tell us we're missing something and expect us to throw money at you.
The policy is meant to make DDI more appealing. Instead, it is alienating the people that did not already have it.
C'mon. People that are not Insiders still pay to play. We still buy books and, in the process, actually pay more for them than you Insiders do. That li'l badge that WotC has decided to give everyone that pays for DDI seems to have gone to some peoples' heads. And the idea it's 'earned' is ludicrous - you buy it (if you check people without forum bling, it states that the user has not earned any badges yet - implying that the DDI badge is earned). There is a slowly growing separation between the 'pays' and 'pays-nots' that WotC seems to be more than happy to assist with.
I'd argue that the rift is only there for people who are looking for it.
You seem to be taking exception that people who are subscribers are getting additional content for their subscription. Keep in mind that subscribers are buying that extra content.
Sure, you're paying for content - you're paying for the printed content of books you purchase.
I certainly, as a subscriber, don't think any less of people who opt not to subscribe, anymore than I think less of someone who chooses not to buy the PHB2 because I have a copy.
I am, however, well aware that I have more options for play than someone who hasn't purchased the content I've bought into (be it a DDI options, or a book I have that someone else doesn't).
Content is what gets people interested in a product - not lack of it. Show us what we're missing, don't just tell us we're missing something and expect us to throw money at you.
And yet, the person you're replying to suggested doing exactly that - giving a portion of each month's DDI content to people as a sample of what a subscriber could get. For that you derided them.
No. I derided them for the pompous attitude. An attitude that I believe demonstrates my assertion fairly well, too.
The people that are not DDI subscribers are not asking for anything extra. They're asking for something that they had all along and was taken away. It's WotC's right to do so, of course, but I and others do not believe it was a good idea.
If you bought the book, you already have the art, right? It's just more work if you want to use it outside the book, having to have to scan it, take a picture or copy it.
If you aren't a subscriber or didn't by the book, should you have access to the art for free?
Let's see if we can make this perfectly clear. The art was never before considered to be 'extra content'. WotC - fully within their right - has now changed the art's classification to 'extra content'. This has taken the art away from people that had, up until this point, been able to enjoy it. Again, something WotC has every right to do. And, again, not something a lot of us think was a good idea.
No. I derided them for the pompous attitude. An attitude that I believe demonstrates my assertion fairly well, too.
The people that are not DDI subscribers are not asking for anything extra. They're asking for something that they had all along and was taken away. It's WotC's right to do so, of course, but I and others do not believe it was a good idea.
I don't think "Let the subscribers decide to vote on great content that can become free for non subscribers" is pompous.
No. I derided them for the pompous attitude. An attitude that I believe demonstrates my assertion fairly well, too.
The people that are not DDI subscribers are not asking for anything extra. They're asking for something that they had all along and was taken away. It's WotC's right to do so, of course, but I and others do not believe it was a good idea.
Sounds like I really struck a nerve. I've apologized via PM to Fox_Reeveheart about the inferred tone of my "not a customer" comment, so I extend the same to others who took that statement as a derogatory comment on them personally. I truely do not hold ill will to those who are not paying for Insider - I just want them to understand that they are not paying for Insider content - content that (now) includes the art galleries.
With that in mind, you are asking for something extra, even though it is something that you had all along. I agree with you that too much is behind the pay-wall right now, I think it is in everyone's best interests to give some more content away as advertisment, but that is not my decision to make. Again, I'm sorry that you took my original comment so personally, and I hope I've explained my position better.
I don't think "Let the subscribers decide to vote on great content that can become free for non subscribers" is pompous.
Right. The idea that Insiders should be in charge of determining what table scraps from previously available material we non-Insiders should get isn't pompous at all.
I don't think "Let the subscribers decide to vote on great content that can become free for non subscribers" is pompous.
Right. The idea that Insiders should be in charge of determining what table scraps from previously available material we non-Insiders should get isn't pompous at all.
actually it seem quite self righteous for you to be demanding and whining about any and all proposals that do not include going back to how it was.
In fact the voting way would seem to be the best as it would give the non subscriber the best of the best. Not the Scraps as you so helpfully put it.
Sounds like I really struck a nerve. I've apologized via PM to Fox_Reeveheart about the inferred tone of my "not a customer" comment, so I extend the same to others who took that statement as a derogatory comment on them personally. I truely do not hold ill will to those who are not paying for Insider - I just want them to understand that they are not paying for Insider content - content that (now) includes the art galleries.
With that in mind, you are asking for something extra, even though it is something that you had all along. I agree with you that too much is behind the pay-wall right now, I think it is in everyone's best interests to give some more content away as advertisment, but that is not my decision to make. Again, I'm sorry that you took my original comment so personally, and I hope I've explained my position better.
It's all good. I honestly doubt you meant to bother anyone and you really didn't bother me. I just chose my form of response to highlight some issues I happened to see.
Are we asking for something extra? Yes. The issue at hand is that it was not always extra. There's no need to make it extra now. Tell me, would making the art free for all again cause you to cancel your subscription? What did making the art pay only accomplish?
actually it seem quite self righteous for you to be demanding and whining about any and all proposals that do not include going back to how it was.
In fact the voting way would seem to be the best as it would give the non subscriber the best of the best. Not the Scraps as you so helpfully put it.
Show me, if you would be so kind, where I have demanded or whined about anything. If you cannot, I ask that you please apologize and that you also cease your attempts at baiting me.
I said scraps for a reason. When you're initially allowed to eat the entire pot roast and then only given 'select' parts of it, you're being given scraps. The scraps may still be tasty, but they are by no means as filling as the entire roast.
Show me, if you would be so kind, where I have demanded or whined about anything. If you cannot, I ask that you please apologize and that you also cease your attempts at baiting me.
I said scraps for a reason. When you're initially allowed to eat the entire pot roast and then only given 'select' parts of it, you're being given scraps. The scraps may still be tasty, but they are by no means as filling as the entire roast.
"C'mon. People that are not Insiders still pay to play. We still buy books and, in the process, actually pay more for them than you Insiders do. That li'l badge that WotC has decided to give everyone that pays for DDI seems to have gone to some peoples' heads. And the idea it's 'earned' is ludicrous - you buy it (if you check people without forum bling, it states that the user has not earned any badges yet - implying that the DDI badge is earned). There is a slowly growing separation between the 'pays' and 'pays-nots' that WotC seems to be more than happy to assist with. "
Here it seem like you are whining that since you obviously pay more (unsupported), that the little bling makes you somewhat less of a person. I will day the demanding isnt direct but its what im gleaning off of your attitude, probably the same with you gleaning the "Pompousness" of the other guys attitude.
Are we asking for something extra? Yes. The issue at hand is that it was not always extra. There's no need to make it extra now. Tell me, would making the art free for all again cause you to cancel your subscription? What did making the art pay only accomplish?
This is a trend that really bothers me, and pointing it out tends to insult the people who are doing it, but this is the very definition of a false sense of entitlement. They were giving something away, and now that they don't want to do that anymore, it angers the people who enjoyed getting it for free. The long-term impact of this cycle is to prevent anything from being free in the future, because the negative press of removing it isn't worth the quiet approval they get while it is offered.
I think I have looked at the art galleries maybe twice, my Insider subscription will be renewed regardless of their inclusion in that subscription. The people who do care about the art gallery might subscribe now that the galleries are paid content, and if they do not subscribe now, it is neither a gain nor a loss for the content owner, WotC. What did making the art galleries pay-only accomplish? It angered some people who liked getting that content free, and maybe gave them incentive to pay. Does your anger cost them more subscriptions than it brings in? I doubt it, and as long as that is the case, they have no good reason to give the art away again. A compromise position could provide a way to keep enticing new subscribers and not angering non-subscribers as much, but all WotC gets out of any concession is a little good will.
With a mind towards WotC's position, what would you consider a fair compromise? Clearly your ideal is to make the galleries totally free again, and WotC seems to prefer to block all (non-Core) access without a subscription. What middle ground would you deem appropriate?
Let's see if we can make this perfectly clear. The art was never before considered to be 'extra content'. WotC - fully within their right - has now changed the art's classification to 'extra content'. This has taken the art away from people that had, up until this point, been able to enjoy it. Again, something WotC has every right to do. And, again, not something a lot of us think was a good idea.
I don't think many people are trying to make the case they don't have the right.
But it's not very customer friendly, since by letting the art be free, they aren't losing anything, save some good will with customers.
actually it seem quite self righteous for you to be demanding and whining about any and all proposals that do not include going back to how it was.
In fact the voting way would seem to be the best as it would give the non subscriber the best of the best. Not the Scraps as you so helpfully put it.
Show me, if you would be so kind, where I have demanded or whined about anything. If you cannot, I ask that you please apologize and that you also cease your attempts at baiting me.I said scraps for a reason. When you're initially allowed to eat the entire pot roast and then only given 'select' parts of it, you're being given scraps. The scraps may still be tasty, but they are by no means as filling as the entire roast.
Well, you are the one using words like, the table scraps Insiders decide to give us. I mean that wasn't even close to what the person said that set you off.
The words you chose to use were not at all in the spirit of what the person was trying to suggest, and were clearly picked to be derogatory. It came across as whiney and demanding in my view.
I agree with the topic creator. The change felt kinda scummy to me and left a bad taste in my mouth.
I agree with the topic creator. The change felt kinda scummy to me and left a bad taste in my mouth.
And this is probably the best reason for WoTC to reconsider this. It just looks bad. Even to someone like me, who doesn't need the art galleries, who seldom uses them, who is an insider that still gets them.
Here it seem like you are whining that since you obviously pay more (unsupported), that the little bling makes you somewhat less of a person. I will day the demanding isnt direct but its what im gleaning off of your attitude, probably the same with you gleaning the "Pompousness" of the other guys attitude.
We do pay more on a per-book basis. I don't know how that's unsupported. To buy every book an Insider has access to would cost more than what an Insider pays for a subscription. I also never once said anything about bling making me 'less of a person'. I never demanded anything, either. Not once did I say what I thought WotC should do. Not once did I ask for a change. All I've said is I do not think that making the art pay only was a good idea (well, I did say more but that's the main point). I cannot help what you choose to infer from my comments. I can, however, correct you when those assertions are wholly incorrect.
This is a trend that really bothers me, and pointing it out tends to insult the people who are doing it, but this is the very definition of a false sense of entitlement. They were giving something away, and now that they don't want to do that anymore, it angers the people who enjoyed getting it for free. The long-term impact of this cycle is to prevent anything from being free in the future, because the negative press of removing it isn't worth the quiet approval they get while it is offered.
I don't feel entitled to anything. I'm pretty confident I evidenced that by stating - repeatedly - that the decision to make the art pay only was fully within WotC's right. It's just not a good idea. If there was some real reason behind it that made sense, well, I'd have to re-assess my position.
What did making the art galleries pay-only accomplish? It angered some people who liked getting that content free, and maybe gave them incentive to pay. Does your anger cost them more subscriptions than it brings in? I doubt it, and as long as that is the case, they have no good reason to give the art away again. A compromise position could provide a way to keep enticing new subscribers and not angering non-subscribers as much, but all WotC gets out of any concession is a little good will.
How does angering someone make them want to give you money? I agree that the anger will not cost them much, however, I don't see what this policy has gained them.
With a mind towards WotC's position, what would you consider a fair compromise? Clearly your ideal is to make the galleries totally free again, and WotC seems to prefer to block all (non-Core) access without a subscription. What middle ground would you deem appropriate?
I'd really be happy (not that I'm terribly unhappy) with just being given a reason for the policy change that makes sense. I doubt that will happen, but whatever.
Well, you are the one using words like, the table scraps Insiders decide to give us. I mean that wasn't even close to what the person said that set you off.
The words you chose to use were not at all in the spirit of what the person was trying to suggest, and were clearly picked to be derogatory. It came across as whiney and demanding in my view.
I explained the use of 'scraps' in another post. IMO, it's pretty much in line with what was suggested.
I find it hard to believe anyone could see anything I've written as 'demanding'. Again, I have not once even asked for anything (well, until this post above and it was hardly a demand). What in god's name am I demanding, exactly?
I also disagree with the 'whining' accusation. I don't feel I whined about anything. The use of charged language may bother some people, but it's hardly whining. I've even gone so far as to address questions asked to me about my statements, too. I really don't see myself in this discussion falling into either category. If someone chooses to see what I've said in those ways, it's on them.
We do pay more on a per-book basis. I don't know how that's unsupported. To buy every book an Insider has access to would cost more than what an Insider pays for a subscription. I also never once said anything about bling making me 'less of a person'. I never demanded anything, either. Not once did I say what I thought WotC should do. Not once did I ask for a change. All I've said is I do not think that making the art pay only was a good idea (well, I did say more but that's the main point). I cannot help what you choose to infer from my comments. I can, however, correct you when those assertions are wholly incorrect.
You assume that Subscribers do not buy all the books as well. I buy my fair share of the books as well. im not "DUR I DONT BUYZ BOOKZ CAUSE I AM SCRIBERZ!!"
You assume that Subscribers do not buy all the books as well. I buy my fair share of the books as well. im not "DUR I DONT BUYZ BOOKZ CAUSE I AM SCRIBERZ!!"
Fair 'nuff. Though that is spending outside of the subscription. A per-book cost comparison between the subscription cost and the book cost is still in favor of the subscription. What I was trying to get at (poorly, it seems) is not that Insiders pay less for the hobby than non-Insiders but that non-Insiders pay more for the same information when it comes to specific books. Insiders that also buy books, though, are likely damned common.
I explained the use of 'scraps' in another post. IMO, it's pretty much in line with what was suggested.
I find it hard to believe anyone could see anything I've written as 'demanding'. Again, I have not once even asked for anything (well, until this post above and it was hardly a demand). What in god's name am I demanding, exactly?
I also disagree with the 'whining' accusation. I don't feel I whined about anything. The use of charged language may bother some people, but it's hardly whining. I've even gone so far as to address questions asked to me about my statements, too. I really don't see myself in this discussion falling into either category. If someone chooses to see what I've said in those ways, it's on them.
It's hard to take what you say seriously because of the double standards going on. You say it's ok for you to call his suggestion tossing scraps to none subscribers, which is your view, and expect people to accept that. But then when people say they find your choice of words demanding, refuse to accept that's how they see it.
So it's ok when you pick words, but not ok when others do the same. That's going to make anyone defensive.
I'm sorry to interrupt all the love that's going on here, but I couldn't help myself. This thread did not totally begin as a Insider vs 'Outsider' thread. Nor was it on the choice of language used in order to prove and bring across a point. We have detracted much.
This thread is about whether removing the Art Galleries from the Free zone was a good idea, and why people are pissed about WoTC's decision to label it as Insider content.
I for one think that it is wholly unnecessary. Art is something that draws people to the game, and many a friends I know grew up loving, admiring the art, which now, some of them are giving back to the society as fantasy artists. The art should be free. But should it all be free, that, I am undecided.
As Dane_McArdy has argued, art do not drop freely from the sky, as much as we like to think inspiration does. WoTC has to find a way to protect their interest as well as the interest of their artists. I do agree that a formal statement as to the change in policy for the art galleries would clear some misconceptions, but unless we provide something constructive and feasible, instead of bickering and nitpicking at each other's choice of words, we might not convince WoTC why the art, or at least, some of the art from each and every product should be made public.
I'd argue that the rift is only there for people who are looking for it.You seem to be taking exception that people who are subscribers are getting additional content for their subscription. Keep in mind that subscribers are buying that extra content.
I seriously doubt most people care about the subscribers, save when they act self-righteous. Sorry, but this topic isn't about you, or other people being envious about the awesome content you get. This is about WotC. And you aren't getting additional content for your subscription, everybody else just getting less than they used to. Let me sum it up for you:
The D&D homepage used to be awesome. It had interesting and funny articles, useful extra gaming content, previews that got you interested in future material, and inspirational art galleries. I wouldn't have begun posting on this forum if I hadn't frequented the webpage for quite a while first. If I'd visited it and found it boring, I would probably have left soon, but because there was stuff to read and stuff to look at, I started notice the subjects getting discussed on the forum, until my curiosity made me come here. At one time, I didn't play for 1.5 half year, and yet I still visited the D&D homepage because it was fun. It helped keep me up to date and interested, and kept D&D fresh in my mind (I bought a book just because it looked nice, despite not having anyone to play with). It's part of the reason I still thought of myself as a gamer, and perhaps even the reason I game today.
Now, the D&D webpage sucks. There's nothing on it, save 'Subscribe to D&D Insider and get much of the same stuff you used to get anyway'. I don't visit it any more, save as a gateway to the forums, and I'm not alone in this. If I was new to D&D, and was looking for inspiration, I'd leave right away. If I hadn't tried D&D before, and wanted to see what it was all about, I'd leave right away (and likely give up on D&D completely, believing it to be some sort of semi-MMORPG you had to subscribe to). The page has been significantly worsened, to an extent where I haven't met a single person thinking it worth visiting, in sharp contrast to before.
WotC is trying to present this as an advantage to DDI subscribers, and 'extra' benefit they're giving to people who pay for it. A more honest (but less flattering) way of saying it could be: "We're lowering the service, and taking away content we could afford to give for free before, unless people pay us". And again, they're entirely within their right. But as with every instance of worsened service, the customers aren't happy, and they're letting the company know, which they're within their right to. To me, it's beginning to look like:
DDI has been a failure, making it necessary to lower the quality of material available to everyone else to make DDI feel worth it, rather than, say, get the promised character visualiser working.
WotC don't care about the goodwill of their customers and potential customers, or getting people more interested in D&D via their website.
WotC doesn't care about building a community, unless they get immediate value for it in the form of money.
DDI customers actually feel they're getting more value for their money just because everyone is getting a crappier service.
D&D is dying, WotC desperately need more funding, and they can't afford to give the same service as they used to (which is quite strange, considering that a radical change to their forums must be costly).
Of course, I don't know what's really going on, I just know that the D&D webpage sucks, and I don't think it's fair to expect positive reactions after essentially telling people it's only going to stop sucking if they just pay money for the same stuff they used to be getting for free. Again, WotC is free to do it, but as with every decrease in quality (and that's what it is), people aren't going to like it. This has nothing to do with evil non-subscribers not wanting you to get value for your money, it's just people (subscribers and non-subscribers alike) thinking that trying to improve the value of DDI by taking away stuff that used to be free is a crappy move, that doesn't actually give the DDI subscribers any more value.
It's hard to take what you say seriously because of the double standards going on. You say it's ok for you to call his suggestion tossing scraps to none subscribers, which is your view, and expect people to accept that. But then when people say they find your choice of words demanding, refuse to accept that's how they see it.
So it's ok when you pick words, but not ok when others do the same. That's going to make anyone defensive.
Umm ... no. See, I explained what I meant when I used the word 'scraps'. As of yet, I've seen no evidence of me being demanding. In order to be demanding, you've go to, you know, make demands. I have not. Hell, I've never even gone so far as to say I 'expected' anything. It's no double standard. I defended my word choice, explained it and have not had my explanation questioned. I have, on the other hand, repeatedly questioned the 'whining' and 'demanding' assumptions made about me. In one case, I was responded to and replied in kind. It's not me 'picking words' and not appreciating it when others do the same to me. Again, I've defended my word choice and explained it. Other than one case (and an appreciated one), the same cannot be said of those 'picking words' about me.
The reason people are acting defensively is because I chose to enter the discussion with an aggressive style. Getting past that allows for conversation. And that, I believe, is something I've proven I'm more than ready to engage in.
@Erato
I love how you summarize it all with huge broad sweeping statements for us and then end it with "No I really dont know whats going on"
@EratoI love how you summarize it all with huge broad sweeping statements for us and then end it with "No I really dont know whats going on"
Have you actually read the post or did the size intimidate you? In case you hadn't noticed, I said 'to me, it's beginning to look like', and then ended by saying that I, naturally, didn't know what was really going on with WotC. I thought I made that clear with the 'beginning to look like', not to mention 'to me' (though I obviously overestimated the level of reading comprehension here).
And where did I generalise? The part that seems to have gotten you all huffy was exclusively about how things appeared to me, and as such, you have no way of telling if I'm generalising or not (though I'd love to hear to you explain how you know if I'm generalising my own feelings), and most of the other part was about my personal experiences. Yes the 'the webpage used to be awesome, now it sucks' is my own opinion, and if people think I'm generalising them, I apologise, and would like to ask how I can state my opinion to avoid offending them in the future.
I'm not sure why more subscribers aren't complaining about this decision as well.
If I were shelling out my hard-earned cash for a service I'd be pretty damend POed if their idea of value-added content was giving me something I was getting free the day before. It's marketing spin BS, kind of like those DVDs whose "special features" are nothing more than trailers for other films.
Demand more from your DDI, people, or you won't get it.
I'm not sure why more subscribers aren't complaining about this decision as well.
If I were shelling out my hard-earned cash for a service I'd be pretty damend POed if their idea of value-added content was giving me something I was getting free the day before. It's marketing spin BS, kind of like those DVDs whose "special features" are nothing more than trailers for other films.
Demand more from your DDI, people, or you won't get it.
I would say it isnt a big deal to me. I dont see it as cheapening my subscription. now going forward when there are galleries that were never free in the first place then we will stat getting true DDI only content.
Demand what? There is already a Monster builder in the works, and after that who knows? Encounter/adventure builder? Character Visualizer? or perhaps the VTT finally?
It will come in time. and the answer isnt "Stop subscribing" because then nothing would happen.
or perhaps the solution truly is stop subscribing period and it'll all go away.
Umm ... no. See, I explained what I meant when I used the word 'scraps'. As of yet, I've seen no evidence of me being demanding. In order to be demanding, you've go to, you know, make demands. I have not. Hell, I've never even gone so far as to say I 'expected' anything. It's no double standard. I defended my word choice, explained it and have not had my explanation questioned. I have, on the other hand, repeatedly questioned the 'whining' and 'demanding' assumptions made about me. In one case, I was responded to and replied in kind. It's not me 'picking words' and not appreciating it when others do the same to me. Again, I've defended my word choice and explained it. Other than one case (and an appreciated one), the same cannot be said of those 'picking words' about me.The reason people are acting defensively is because I chose to enter the discussion with an aggressive style. Getting past that allows for conversation. And that, I believe, is something I've proven I'm more than ready to engage in.
Your attitude makes me inclined to no longer care about the issue. In fact I almost want to support WoTC's choice, because posts like this.
Your attitude makes me inclined to no longer care about the issue. In fact I almost want to support WoTC's choice, because posts like this.
So because I disagree with you and also took the time to support my case and detail how you have not bothered to support yours, you're thinking about changing your position on the topic just to spite me? Let me save you the trouble of worrying over the issue: I'm done discussing it with you. That sort of attitude is exactly why so many conversations here devolve into nothing but petty bickering. If you don't want to take the time to read what I've written and comment on that seriously, why did you bother to speak to me in the first place?
I take exception to your attempt at making this look like I'm the cause of some problem. You are the one that has yet to support your claims about me. I've explained my position, answered questions and even conceded a point. If that's something you find abhorrent, I agree that we've wasted each others' time. See, I like people to actually address the points I bring up instead of glossing over them time and again so that they can continue to insult me.
Movin' on ...
Your attitude makes me inclined to no longer care about the issue. In fact I almost want to support WoTC's choice, because posts like this.
So because I disagree with you and also took the time to support my case and detail how you have not bothered to support yours, you're thinking about changing your position on the topic just to spite me? Let me save you the trouble of worrying over the issue: I'm done discussing it with you. That sort of attitude is exactly why so many conversations here devolve into nothing but petty bickering. If you don't want to take the time to read what I've written and comment on that seriously, why did you bother to speak to me in the first place?I take exception to your attempt at making this look like I'm the cause of some problem. You are the one that has yet to support your claims about me. I've explained my position, answered questions and even conceded a point. If that's something you find abhorrent, I agree that we've wated each others' time. See, I like people to actually address the points I bring up instead of glossing over them time and again so that they can continue to insult me.
Movin' on ...
Have a nice day on your way out.
I seriously doubt most people care about the subscribers, save when they act self-righteous. Sorry, but this topic isn't about you, or other people being envious about the awesome content you get. This is about WotC. And you aren't getting additional content for your subscription, everybody else just getting less than they used to. Let me sum it up for you:
Everyone else is getting less free/bonus/giveaway content, sure. As a subscriber I now get that content - content that's been shown to be of value (because, let's face it, if it weren't of value, would anyone care that's its in the paywall).
For what it's worth - I happen to agree that the old galleries, at the very least, should remain free.
The D&D homepage used to be awesome. It had interesting and funny articles, useful extra gaming content, previews that got you interested in future material, and inspirational art galleries. I wouldn't have begun posting on this forum if I hadn't frequented the webpage for quite a while first. If I'd visited it and found it boring, I would probably have left soon, but because there was stuff to read and stuff to look at, I started notice the subjects getting discussed on the forum, until my curiosity made me come here. At one time, I didn't play for 1.5 half year, and yet I still visited the D&D homepage because it was fun. It helped keep me up to date and interested, and kept D&D fresh in my mind (I bought a book just because it looked nice, despite not having anyone to play with). It's part of the reason I still thought of myself as a gamer, and perhaps even the reason I game today.Now, the D&D webpage sucks. There's nothing on it, save 'Subscribe to D&D Insider and get much of the same stuff you used to get anyway'. I don't visit it any more, save as a gateway to the forums, and I'm not alone in this. If I was new to D&D, and was looking for inspiration, I'd leave right away. If I hadn't tried D&D before, and wanted to see what it was all about, I'd leave right away (and likely give up on D&D completely, believing it to be some sort of semi-MMORPG you had to subscribe to). The page has been significantly worsened, to an extent where I haven't met a single person thinking it worth visiting, in sharp contrast to before.
If you were a new gamer you'd see the free character sheets, free quickplay rules and sample adventure, and, oh look! They still do free previews of upcoming books a couple times a week.
Sure, they're promoting the heck out of DDI - why shouldn't they? It's got the most "new" content on a regular basis. Let's take that away and put it in the corner and the complaints will be about how nobody can find the content they're paying for.
DDI has been a failure, making it necessary to lower the quality of material available to everyone else to make DDI feel worth it, rather than, say, get the promised character visualiser working.
A failure? At over 14,500 known subscribers - with the average monthly cost hovering around $8/month they're pulling in over 110k/month - and that's just with the KNOWN subscribers, by all reports this is only a fraction of the overall subscriber base.
I hope I can fail so miserably one day.
WotC doesn't care about building a community, unless they get immediate value for it in the form of money.
Really? Where's the payoff of this community site? What about the payoff of the RPGA? You're not required to own a single book to play in the RPGA (though it's really helpful to have at least the PHB, I'll confess). Or is that not a community?
DDI customers actually feel they're getting more value for their money just because everyone is getting a crappier service.
As a subscriber I'll speak for myself - I don't feel like I'm getting any more or less value because I don't really care about the art galleries. However, I do understand that as its valuable content why WotC would want to make it an "extended feature" of a DDI sub.
D&D is dying, WotC desperately need more funding,
With new books frequently appearing on national non-fiction bestseller lists, and the RPGA growing at a phenominal rate you'll excuse me if I disagree, and Magic picking up more and more players as well (thanks in part to the success of their Xbox game).
and they can't afford to give the same service as they used to (which is quite strange, considering that a radical change to their forums must be costly).
Ah, so you see there IS a flaw in your logic.
Of course, I don't know what's really going on, I just know that the D&D webpage sucks, and I don't think it's fair to expect positive reactions after essentially telling people it's only going to stop sucking if they just pay money for the same stuff they used to be getting for free. Again, WotC is free to do it, but as with every decrease in quality (and that's what it is), people aren't going to like it. This has nothing to do with evil non-subscribers not wanting you to get value for your money, it's just people (subscribers and non-subscribers alike) thinking that trying to improve the value of DDI by taking away stuff that used to be free is a crappy move, that doesn't actually give the DDI subscribers any more value.
But see, even if I don't use it, or don't care - by adding something as a DDI Exclusive it DOES add value to the subscription. In my case that value is very low - I won't likely notice it.
However, let's look to the trial issues of Dragon and Dungeon - for three months everyone got them, then they went behind the paywall. Does that mean that WotC was decreasing the value to everyone else? Or does it mean they really WERE adding value to the DDI subscription?
How is this really that much different?
Admittedly - it sucks to have soemthing you enjoy move from the arena of being free to costing money, I'm not going to claim otherwise.
The issue I have is when people try to claim it doesn't increase value of a subscription, yet campaign so hard to get that art moved back. I refer back to my original point - if it doesn't have value, why bother?
The galleries were put behind the virtual wall very abruptly, with no notice. It's no surprise then, that some people are shocked and upset (both non-subsribers and subscribers, interestingly enough). I can understand why it was done but can't say I agree with the decision. It was too abrupt and doesn't really add any value to DDI in my opinion (since the galleries were always free before).
Someone mentioned earlier in the thread about keeping recent product galleries behind the wall until at least a few months have passed, then opening them up for everyone. I think that's a reasonable compromise.
I think Insider is good stuff, the art, the emags, the Character Builder, the Rules Compendium. So, be proud of it, show this stuff off once in a while. Open the older galleries up, make the occassional Dragon/Dungeon article free for all to see (as an incentive). Loosen up I say; it's too easy to divide the community right now (non-subscriber/subscriber). We're all fans of the same game, aren't we?
A failure? At over 12,000 known subscribers - with the average monthly cost hovering around /month they're pulling in nearly 100k/month - and that's just with the KNOWN subscribers, by all reports this is only a fraction of the overall subscriber base.I hope I can fail so miserably one day.
Really? Where's the payoff of this community site? What about the payoff of the RPGA? You're not required to own a single book to play in the RPGA (though it's really helpful to have at least the PHB, I'll confess). Or is that not a community?
With new books frequently appearing on national non-fiction bestseller lists, and the RPGA growing at a phenominal rate you'll excuse me if I disagree, and Magic picking up more and more players as well (thanks in part to the success of their Xbox game).
Ah, so you see there IS a flaw in your logic.
I started on an actual answer to this, until I came to this. I think you need to read part of my post again. I'm quoting the relevant part here:
'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...' 'to me, it's beginning to look like...'
Did you get it? The 'to me' and 'look like'? And how that's different from 'in reality' and 'definitely is'? How it just means that this is the way it's coming across? How it's not an actual assertion of how things are? What is it with taking 'this is just how it appear to me' to be some challenge they need to disprove, to show you how wrong you are? And how many times is it necessary to stretch? I already mentioned it in the first post, and the post after that explaining the first post, and now I need to do it again.
Anyway, it's very simple: When a company decreases its usual service, and instead offer it only to people who pay extra, it can be for two reasons: Either things go bad and the company have act like it does to survive (e.g. the new product hasn't sold well and the company has little else to offer, so they try to lower the quality of service for everyone else, to make buyers believe they're gotten more, or they're just desperate for money, so they start charging for everything), or things go well, but the company figures it can make even more money by caring less about the customers.
I would say it isnt a big deal to me. I dont see it as cheapening my subscription. now going forward when there are galleries that were never free in the first place then we will stat getting true DDI only content.
well then, how do you feel about this: once the primal power gallery goes up, subscriber only. would you feel that this added value to your subscription? or would you just see it as continuation of whatever they did in the past?
also, don't expect your own private "new art" galleries for DDI. wotc is good at recycling art for newer products, and i don't expect them to buy art just for DDI, as it would never pay off for them. (they'd need to have like 50-100 pictures a month to call this a new feature, and this is expensive.)
this is also part of my gripe: I, as D&D book buyer, support and finance value the DDI subscribers get. It's not like they usually have to pay twice for the rights on a single picture, and nowadays everything has to be digital anyway. it's not like they'd need to scan the picture for usage in the galleries.
well then, how do you feel about this: once the primal power gallery goes up, subscriber only. would you feel that this added value to your subscription? or would you just see it as continuation of whatever they did in the past?
If it was up for only DDI I would see it as a DDI only thing. Not as you say "as a continuation of whatever they did in the past". If it ever was dropped back to free it wouldnt effect me. I got my Exclusive usage out of it.
In fact I support the idea that they are exclusive for a period of time and then after that goes to be free. It would be much like the PHB3 Previews.
I'd argue that the rift is only there for people who are looking for it.You seem to be taking exception that people who are subscribers are getting additional content for their subscription. Keep in mind that subscribers are buying that extra content.
I seriously doubt most people care about the subscribers, save when they act self-righteous. Sorry, but this topic isn't about you, or other people being envious about the awesome content you get. This is about WotC. And you aren't getting additional content for your subscription, everybody else just getting less than they used to. Let me sum it up for you:The D&D homepage used to be awesome. It had interesting and funny articles, useful extra gaming content, previews that got you interested in future material, and inspirational art galleries. I wouldn't have begun posting on this forum if I hadn't frequented the webpage for quite a while first. If I'd visited it and found it boring, I would probably have left soon, but because there was stuff to read and stuff to look at, I started notice the subjects getting discussed on the forum, until my curiosity made me come here. At one time, I didn't play for 1.5 half year, and yet I still visited the D&D homepage because it was fun. It helped keep me up to date and interested, and kept D&D fresh in my mind (I bought a book just because it looked nice, despite not having anyone to play with). It's part of the reason I still thought of myself as a gamer, and perhaps even the reason I game today.
Now, the D&D webpage sucks. There's nothing on it, save 'Subscribe to D&D Insider and get much of the same stuff you used to get anyway'. I don't visit it any more, save as a gateway to the forums, and I'm not alone in this. If I was new to D&D, and was looking for inspiration, I'd leave right away. If I hadn't tried D&D before, and wanted to see what it was all about, I'd leave right away (and likely give up on D&D completely, believing it to be some sort of semi-MMORPG you had to subscribe to). The page has been significantly worsened, to an extent where I haven't met a single person thinking it worth visiting, in sharp contrast to before.
WotC is trying to present this as an advantage to DDI subscribers, and 'extra' benefit they're giving to people who pay for it. A more honest (but less flattering) way of saying it could be: "We're lowering the service, and taking away content we could afford to give for free before, unless people pay us". And again, they're entirely within their right. But as with every instance of worsened service, the customers aren't happy, and they're letting the company know, which they're within their right to. To me, it's beginning to look like:
DDI has been a failure, making it necessary to lower the quality of material available to everyone else to make DDI feel worth it, rather than, say, get the promised character visualiser working.
WotC don't care about the goodwill of their customers and potential customers, or getting people more interested in D&D via their website.
WotC doesn't care about building a community, unless they get immediate value for it in the form of money.
DDI customers actually feel they're getting more value for their money just because everyone is getting a crappier service.
D&D is dying, WotC desperately need more funding, and they can't afford to give the same service as they used to (which is quite strange, considering that a radical change to their forums must be costly).
Of course, I don't know what's really going on, I just know that the D&D webpage sucks, and I don't think it's fair to expect positive reactions after essentially telling people it's only going to stop sucking if they just pay money for the same stuff they used to be getting for free. Again, WotC is free to do it, but as with every decrease in quality (and that's what it is), people aren't going to like it. This has nothing to do with evil non-subscribers not wanting you to get value for your money, it's just people (subscribers and non-subscribers alike) thinking that trying to improve the value of DDI by taking away stuff that used to be free is a crappy move, that doesn't actually give the DDI subscribers any more value.
+1
@EratoI love how you summarize it all with huge broad sweeping statements for us and then end it with "No I really dont know whats going on"
Have you actually read the post or did the size intimidate you? In case you hadn't noticed, I said 'to me, it's beginning to look like', and then ended by saying that I, naturally, didn't know what was really going on with WotC. I thought I made that clear with the 'beginning to look like', not to mention 'to me' (though I obviously overestimated the level of reading comprehension here).And where did I generalise? The part that seems to have gotten you all huffy was exclusively about how things appeared to me, and as such, you have no way of telling if I'm generalising or not (though I'd love to hear to you explain how you know if I'm generalising my own feelings), and most of the other part was about my personal experiences. Yes the 'the webpage used to be awesome, now it sucks' is my own opinion, and if people think I'm generalising them, I apologise, and would like to ask how I can state my opinion to avoid offending them in the future.
+1
I wish I had seen prior to moderation. 
I'm not sure why more subscribers aren't complaining about this decision as well.
If I were shelling out my hard-earned cash for a service I'd be pretty damend POed if their idea of value-added content was giving me something I was getting free the day before. It's marketing spin BS, kind of like those DVDs whose "special features" are nothing more than trailers for other films.
Demand more from your DDI, people, or you won't get it.
I would say it isnt a big deal to me. I dont see it as cheapening my subscription. now going forward when there are galleries that were never free in the first place then we will stat getting true DDI only content.
Demand what? There is already a Monster builder in the works, and after that who knows? Encounter/adventure builder? Character Visualizer? or perhaps the VTT finally?
It will come in time. and the answer isnt "Stop subscribing" because then nothing would happen.
or perhaps the solution truly is stop subscribing period and it'll all go away.
First strawman: No one said it was cheapening a DDI subscription
Second point: Demand what? That if they tell me I received an added bonus that I really do get one.
Second strawman: Way to include the fictional claims of "stop subscribing"
That is all for the above post.
I hate bad logic:
well then, how do you feel about this: once the primal power gallery goes up, subscriber only. would you feel that this added value to your subscription? or would you just see it as continuation of whatever they did in the past?
If it was up for only DDI I would see it as a DDI only thing. Not as you say "as a continuation of whatever they did in the past". If it ever was dropped back to free it wouldnt effect me. I got my Exclusive usage out of it.
In fact I support the idea that they are exclusive for a period of time and then after that goes to be free. It would be much like the PHB3 Previews.
The point is that new art on a regular basis was a feature of the web-site. So, saying that subscribers such as myself will really be gaining something new when art is finally released that wasn't before is hogwash. New art was a feature that was available everytime a new book came out. It was a feature of the web-site. Anyone who says differently is lying to falsely make their case.
So, when the new artwork comes out I and the other subscribers will not be getting something we did not already previously have access to. The new art was a feature.
I'm not responding to any of the other posters (sorry 
), but to just the policy change.
Lame.
But sadly not surprising. I'm just going to chalk the changes up to the continued push toward the D&D webage being only advertisements and Subscriber material. Which, hey, is cool for WOTC.
But it wasn't that long ago that I would actually visit the D&D webpage, looking for cool new information, web supplements, art galleries, etc. Now all of that is subscriber only.
So I guess I really will only be visiting the main page for the PA/PVP Podcasts now.
I'm not responding to any of the other posters (sorry ), but to just the policy change.
Lame.
But sadly not surprising. I'm just going to chalk the changes up to the continued push toward the D&D webage being only advertisements and Subscriber material. Which, hey, is cool for WOTC.
But it wasn't that long ago that I would actually visit the D&D webpage, looking for cool new information, web supplements, art galleries, etc. Now all of that is subscriber only.
So I guess I really will only be visiting the main page for the PA/PVP Podcasts now.
I stopped listening to the podcasts awhile ago when I found out the forums were more entertaining and enlightening.
I am disappointed by this move. As a subscriber, it's insulting that what I was getting free previously is now "a subscriber bonus." How is this a bonus? I was getting it before, and I'm still getting it now.
Meanwhile, the casual customers of WotC (buys books/other products, but not are not insiders) have lost access to things they had access to before.
Their choice, and I respect that. But I am still disappointed with the decision.
I'm not responding to any of the other posters (sorry ), but to just the policy change.
Lame.
But sadly not surprising. I'm just going to chalk the changes up to the continued push toward the D&D webage being only advertisements and Subscriber material. Which, hey, is cool for WOTC.
But it wasn't that long ago that I would actually visit the D&D webpage, looking for cool new information, web supplements, art galleries, etc. Now all of that is subscriber only.
So I guess I really will only be visiting the main page for the PA/PVP Podcasts now.
With the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised to find that the Podcasts are going to be targetted for a subscriber only content label as well.
I want to re-add my voice to the opposition of paywalled galleries.
I'm a DDI subscriber and I never looked at the galleries anyway, but I want to speak up and think that this is pretty weak move. I may not agree with the way that some people (in this thread and others) are making their voice heard on the subject, I'm in agreement with the general idea that WotC shouldn't have done this. At the very least, all the art galleries that used to be free should continue to be. Even if all art from here on out is behind a pay wall, what was free before should still be free. Much the same way that the free issues of Dungeon and Dragon are still available to everybody after the mags went to subscriber-only.
With the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised to find that the Podcasts are going to be targetted for a subscriber only content label as well.
It really wouldn't surprise me either, though I think that would be an even bigger mistake than the art galleries. The PA/PVP podcasts have gotten a lot of people I know either into DnD in the first place, or back into DnD after giving up on it for a long time.
Putting the podcasts (specifically the PA/PVP podcasts) behind a paywall would, to me, make exactly as much sense as putting the "Try 4th Edition For Free!" adventure download behind a paywall.
do you think the errata and stuff will be next??
Their choice, and I respect that. But I am still disappointed with the decision.
As am I. As another DDI subscriber I have to add my voice to this. In the long years before 4E (since about 99-00), and before I was lucky enough to track down a group to game with, I came to this site to browse the interesting articles (free) and the wonderful art galleries (free). These two things kept me coming back here, and got me into the novels, until I did find a group (only the last year or so). As such I cannot find myself agreeing with this decision.
I, personally, find value no value whatsoever in the exclusivity of any item that I am receiving. I find value in the item itself. The galleries have value because of the time, effort and skill of the artist not because I have to pay money to see them. I pay money for DDI products, after an initial sum that I consider paying for the item (CB, Dragon, Dungeon), because I would like to support the maintenance (CB) and development (CV, GT etc) of those products.
A final note; I am currently drafting an e-mail (or snail mail, I haven't decided yet) to custserv about my unhappiness on this issue. I strongly urge all of you other DDI subscribers who have spoken up to do the same.
I agree with the general consensus: It was a bad Idea.
I Love DDI. As a poor gamer, its oftentimes the only resource I have (which is why I don't understand why people say they don't have the money for the subscription). But giving me formerly free stuff and calling it exclusive, doesn't make sense.
Non subscribers shouldn't be left out to dry. I've been a subscriber since I started coming here, so I never really noticed, but several people raise a good point: Why would non subscribers come to the website now except to get to the forums? (and they even made that a pain in the ass.)
WotC needs to undo this move. Hell it probably cost them more to recode the galleries on the site then it will earn them in revenue. It fosters ill will among non subscribers (and even subscribers for that matter) and the large majority of people whom this supposedly benefits either a) doesn't care, or b) is angry that this is what WotC decided to do to 'increase' the value of our subscription.
Frankly They need to put the galleries back, increase the amount of free content on the website, and get the damned visualizer working. The worst part is that they promised to raise the subscriber price as new features are added, hence making no headway in adding value to the subscription. This cheapshot to the nonsubsribers is not adding value to my subscription.
Sooner of later, WotC is going to run out of feet to shoot at.
Your random pick was one of the three 4e galleries that have been left open. Monster Manual, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Player's Handbook are left available for nonsubscribers. The others are DDi only.
The 3E galleries are here.
The rest of the 3E stuff is here.
Thanks for the links.
To the original topic: I feel like I should care, but, for some reason, I don't. It's nice to have the artwork available online, but I usually tend to look at a book in person before buying it anyway. I'd rather support the local gaming store; this simply gives me more reason to appreciate the physical books.
If Errata becomes a DDI only part of D&D, then I'll be upset.
I can understand the business decision to make the artwork subscription only. However, I feel that a better option to increase to value of DDI would be to make DDI service better instead of making non-DDI service worse. I can understand why no warning was given too; a warning might have prompted mass last minute downloads of the material which they want to charge for.
I would understand the change, if it wasn't retroactive.
That is new art would be D&Di only and all the older art was free.
As it it, it seems a bad move to me.
taking the artwork behind the paywall is especially tragic for people like me, who use them for online play. If a DM, for example, wants to show the players a picture to set the mood, there are three options now:
1) post a link workable for subscribers only, or give a reference to the book it was from. As it should work the mood even when looking at the thread, both are not really viable.
(removed)
All in all, nothing of those is overly handy or nice, and every workaround you have to take drives you further away from the company, instead of in their grasp.
((Illegal Activities is a violation of the Code of Conduct:http://wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1916 ))
i'm nost sure that a lawyer would agree with your assessment of posting images, but it definitely is another shady area of the TOU.
i'm nost sure that a lawyer would agree with your assessment of posting images, but it definitely is another shady area of the TOU.
1. User Content
By posting or submitting any text, images, designs, video, sound, code, data, lists, or other materials or information (such User-submitted content, collectively, "User Content") to or through a Site, including without limitation on any User profile page, you hereby irrevocably grant to Wizards, its affiliates and sublicensees, a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive, and fully sub-licensable license, to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such User Content (in whole or in part) in any media and to incorporate the User Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such User Content, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.
You represent and warrant that: (i) you own or control all of the rights to the User Content that you post or you otherwise have the right to post such User Content to the Site, (ii) the User Content is accurate and not misleading, and (iii) use and posting of the User Content you supply does not violate these TOU and will not violate any rights of or cause injury to any person or entity, including without limitation the privacy rights, publicity rights, copyrights, contract rights or any other rights of any person.
The point is that you will be granting a right you probably do not have. I know that this ection is probably abused by a lot of threads anyway but in the case of game threads we are speaking of threads intimately tied to the purpose of WotC and this site. This will make it very difficult to run a game on a thread without violating the TOU.
So, although a lawyer may be able to keep WotC from using someone else's work that you (in the general sense) posted improperly, you have still violated the TOU. If you could post a pic from the WotC gallery of the monsters that your players were fighting this problemm would be avoided.
yeah, i reread that section before i made my post.
I highly doubt that if I don't upload stuff to their server, that they are entitled to any rights on material. basically, whether i link stuff or use the image tag, they never had any byte of the material in their grasp.
and yes, you'd always need to make sure that you have the rights to link something - which is often forgotten, or not cared for at all.
HA! WotC strikes again. I've been away from D&D for a while now, been enjoying Pathfinder since I have been gone. I left in disgust because of all of the BS associated with DDI. Just dropped by to check on things. I laugh because I actually saw this coming, and I can tell you a very good reason WotC probably made the galleries subscriber only.
You see, when WotC failed to deliver on it's advertisements regarding the VTT, (and let's be honest, it was the biggest draw to 4th edition and DDI) a lot of people became interested in D&D over the internet. WotC failed miserably but everyone was left hungry for a VTT....
People start looking around and low and behold found a handful of pretty good VTT's that already exist (MapTool, FG, OpenRpg). Now, a lot of people go to these new programs and begin playing online with their friends, many don't even convert to 4th Edition. So tons and tons of people who were going to be subscribers of DDI are now off getting their online D&D fix for free. But where do these people get their art for tokens and maps? See where this is going?
I think it is probably very likely that a lot of people jumped ship from WotC to play older editions or even 4th edition on free VTT's out there. WotC probably saw a huge jump in usage of the art galleries from people downloading images for online games and thought, "here's a way to get those people who don't need our crappy CB or Jokazines to subscribe."
A few months back, I had a feeling this was going to happen. So I spent a few hours one day and downloaded every piece of art in the gallery. It was free and available to the public when I downloaded it, I wonder if that means I can legally put it out there for anyone who wants it?
Anyway, I find it comical that WotC is still captaining the failboat. DDI is a joke and always will be. Maybe next year the "adventure tools" will be released. Then again, maybe not.
i'm nost sure that a lawyer would agree with your assessment of posting images, but it definitely is another shady area of the TOU.
1. User Content
By posting or submitting any text, images, designs, video, sound, code, data, lists, or other materials or information (such User-submitted content, collectively, "User Content") to or through a Site, including without limitation on any User profile page, you hereby irrevocably grant to Wizards, its affiliates and sublicensees, a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive, and fully sub-licensable license, to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such User Content (in whole or in part) in any media and to incorporate the User Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such User Content, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.
You represent and warrant that: (i) you own or control all of the rights to the User Content that you post or you otherwise have the right to post such User Content to the Site, (ii) the User Content is accurate and not misleading, and (iii) use and posting of the User Content you supply does not violate these TOU and will not violate any rights of or cause injury to any person or entity, including without limitation the privacy rights, publicity rights, copyrights, contract rights or any other rights of any person.
The point is that you will be granting a right you probably do not have. I know that this ection is probably abused by a lot of threads anyway but in the case of game threads we are speaking of threads intimately tied to the purpose of WotC and this site. This will make it very difficult to run a game on a thread without violating the TOU.
So, although a lawyer may be able to keep WotC from using someone else's work that you (in the general sense) posted improperly, you have still violated the TOU. If you could post a pic from the WotC gallery of the monsters that your players were fighting this problemm would be avoided.
This part of the TOU is one of the main reasons that I hardly ever post any of my artwork, writing, or much of anything else here. WoTC goes sue-happy (and rightfully so) chasing down people using their material, yet they claim the ability to use the material of others without needing to pay for it or even pay lip service to the fact that the material was created by someone else.
Hey folks. I've got some news for you.
I just spoke with WotC_Trevor, and this issue came up. Trevor submits a weekly report of all major things D&D Community related. In response to this thread, the topic of galleries going behind paywalls is going to come up for some discussion.
Now, this is by no means a guarantee that anything will be changed, but it is another good sign that we are being heard.
I'll update you with more information, as I get it.
Hey folks. I've got some news for you.
I just spoke with WotC_Trevor, and this issue came up. Trevor submits a weekly report of all major things D&D Community related. In response to this thread, the topic of galleries going behind paywalls is going to come up for some discussion.
Now, this is by no means a guarantee that anything will be changed, but it is another good sign that we are being heard.
I'll update you with more information, as I get it.
Much appreciated.
This is exactly my sort of arguement when it's said "and you can't do anything about it". I hope those naysayers feel rebuffed now. Make your voice heard long enough! Because if you do nothing then nothing will happen =p
Today has just been a good day for me, i don't get many of those anymore
well that s a little good news then.
Hey folks. I've got some news for you.
I just spoke with WotC_Trevor, and this issue came up. Trevor submits a weekly report of all major things D&D Community related. In response to this thread, the topic of galleries going behind paywalls is going to come up for some discussion.
Now, this is by no means a guarantee that anything will be changed, but it is another good sign that we are being heard.
I'll update you with more information, as I get it.
Thanks for the info. It is appreciated.
Hey folks. I've got some news for you.
I just spoke with WotC_Trevor, and this issue came up. Trevor submits a weekly report of all major things D&D Community related. In response to this thread, the topic of galleries going behind paywalls is going to come up for some discussion.
Now, this is by no means a guarantee that anything will be changed, but it is another good sign that we are being heard.
I'll update you with more information, as I get it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Be sure you guys thank Trevor as well. He's the guy who's actually going to bat for us.
thanks Trevor....
Thanks again, Trevor.
Indeed, thank you Trevor.
Thanks Trevor. Though I am not the most vocal on these boards, I do appreciate the effort.
Yes, thank you Trevor. Your assistance is appreciated.
Praise be to Trevor!
edit: psst.... who is trevor in relation to wotc anyways? O_o
Praise be to Trevor!
edit: psst.... who is trevor in relation to wotc anyways? O_o
Not to dash your hopes, but his job is to sate the masses. He's basically the community PR rep.
Praise be to Trevor!
edit: psst.... who is trevor in relation to wotc anyways? O_o
Trevor is the Community Manager (I forget his official title, to be honest).
In short, he's "the guy" when it comes to being a liason between the community (us here in the forums, for example) and Wizards of the Coast (primarily for the D&D side of things, WotC_Eric does much the same for the Magic side of the community).
Community Leaders (Guides, VCLs, and SVCLs) help him by alerting him to what the community is buzzing about (as AsmodeousLore did upthread), so that he can present issues (good, bad, or otherwise) to the insiders at WotC.
He also shares news and updates with us (both "us" the community at large - and often "us" the leaders so that we may break the good news as it comes along).
Hey there! I suppose I haven't done one of these in a while so now's as good a time as any.
I manage the Community Team here at Wizards and I'm also the CM for the D&D sections of our community. One of the most important things I do is to take what we're all talking about in our forums and other places on the interwebs and present it to the people who make the business decisions here at Wizards.
If something is a hot topic or important issue here, I have to make sure I give it as much importance in the office. Along with summarzing the basics of what we're talking about, I always try to give a suggestion based on what the community desires. I'm basicly your voice focused within the company walls. Of course another big part of the position is making sure that I'm coming back to you with whatever information I'm able to share about what's going on within these walls.
So a huge part of my job is both of those combined with me acting as a communication bridge. But saying or implying that I, or we as a community can't affect change is just disingenuous. I small recent example: I saw that some people wanted more information on the two weapon barbarian build and was able to make up a quick spoiler for the D&D group earlier this week. The bigger the change or request, probably the longer it's going to take to see a noticable request, but we definitely can change things.
And as to the PR bit - I suppose you have to have a little bit of that in CM. If we have something we want to say but the version I get has some corporate speak or isn't written really to us as an audience, I will change it to put my own voice in there and to make it more a message that relates to us as a community. But it also goes the other way, talking to others in the company in the best possible way in order to get what we as a community want.
Anyway, that's some of what I do and hopefully that answers the original question. As to praises, Asmo and everyeone else here can have all that I love D&D and I love what I do, but I also get paid for what I do. You guys are here, spending your free time discussing this stuff simply because you're passionate about D&D. It's clear that you guys win in that comparison.
As to the specific issue concerning the galleries behind the subscription wall, as soon as I have any new information to share I'll either be back here or pass the info through the Guides and VCLs.
-Trevor Kidd
Yeah, Community Management is a little bit of PR.
But trust me, I'm in Trevor's position daily and I know he will be passing this stuff on to the heads of the company and making your case for you.
Wizards is a company and a business and there are plenty of free sites for Fantasy artwork out there. The art galleries are previews of their future products, I don't blame them for making it Subscriber content given the amount of people who download PDFs of books or scam content in other ways.
Trevor is a solid CM guy so do go easy on him.
The art galleries are previews of their future products,
this is where you got it wrong. 95% of the art and map galleries usually come out after the book is available for sale, or at best at the same time. do i want them to give more preview content etc to subscribers? YES! but i really don't want to pay for content twice.
I'm going to be honet, I'm not upset about this change.
But that's because the change doesn't affect me at all - I'm a subscriber, so I see that things haven't changed.
If I weren't a subscriber, or I were going to let my subscription lapse, I would be mightily annoyed. I support returning the galleries to a free product.
It seems to me that Wizards now assumes that everyone is a DDI subscriber.
I use other sites (dungeonmastering.com, roleplayingtips.com, etc, etc) now more than I use the official D&D site.
I guess what bothers me most is not that what was once free is now not; the arguments regarding that have been well made on both sides already. What bugs me is that they believe this is added value for the subscribers. Its not as if we couldn't view the art before; it was free to all, including us subscribers. It gives us nothing; all it does is take away from everyone else. While I'm not personally too worried about everyone else, when I see a change that affects the thing I'm paying for, I'd like to see it be in my favor. This is good for no one, including me; its not bad for me, either, since I lose nothing. But that frees me up to feel bad for the non-subscribers, putting me in the "this was a bad decision" camp.
It feels as though, like many companies and many people, WotC is trying to do more with less. Subscribers want more articles, being the internet-savvy, microblogging people we are; WotC announces that they will be publishing smaller, more frequent articles. But the first example we get is Playing Vistani, which is one normal article published in smaller parts, with dividing points that don't really make sense and give us a first article with which we couldn't actually play Vistani, despite the title of the article. Subscribers want additional content, such as the tools we expected at 4E launch; WotC "adds" the art galleries to our subscriptions, which requires a minor website change and costs them goodwill, as opposed to the things we want, which cost lots of development money and require lots of work.
While I can't blame anyone for trying to cut back thanks to the financial situation these days, I can't help but feel there are better ways than this. I'd at least like some kind of statement, something not transparent and disingenuous, which is what we seem to get more often than not. WotC, if there are reasons for your decisions, tell us. Most of us are reasonable people, so we'll listen. If there aren't reasons, that's a problem, and you need to quit making decisions with no good reasons for them.
@MJ_the_Prophet
it has already been confirmed that the vistani article is not a sign of things to come, the new format will kick in next month.
it has already been confirmed that the vistani article is not a sign of things to come, the new format will kick in next month.
At least there's that; I'd heard that it was a bit of a shoehorn (written for old format, shoved into new) and that future articles would make more sense.
I can see that making the art galleries subscriber-only is not a change aimed at current customers; as I said, it has no impact on subscribers. Its aimed at new customers. They can now add "Exclusive Art Gallery Access!" to the list of bullet points of what you get with DDI. But how many people wanted that? They've increased the value of a subscription without actually adding anything of value; you technically get more for your money, but only if you're not currently paying any money. The benefit is entirely for WotC; they save on bandwidth, possibly get a few new customers (although how many is a good question), and it doesn't cost them anything extra. The problem is that consumers don't like actions that only benefit corporations and not themselves.
I had a bit of a realization, though. If our DDI subscription lets us view all the rules from the books (via character builder and the compendium), and all the art from the books, why don't we just get the books, in say a PDF format? We're paying for all the content already, and frankly I'd even be willing to pay a little bit more if this was a benefit of the subscription. It would be awfully convenient, and a true value-add.
Yes, I know the reasoning behind not doing this ("teh piratez"). Yes, I know the counters to that reasoning (people tend to prefer the legal option). I don't want to derail the thread, there are plenty of others on the PDF topic. I'm just saying that if they want to add something that people will actually like, and that won't really cost them anything because they already have what they'd be adding, there are better options.
I've removed content from this thread because baiting is a Code of Conduct violation. You can review the Code of Conduct here: wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg... I've removed other content to preseve continuity on the thread.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I am agreed with free art galleries, for example I am a player of dungeons and dragons miniatures and I live in colombia, and I dont play rolegames (but sometime I could play), and I like to see art galleries because the pictures are amazing, its glad to see amazing monsters figthing with heroes; I think the wizards painters are the best, and it could be amazing if you still put the art galleries free, I like to put this incredible images at mi desktop to see it, this reminds me the amazing of the game
As to the specific issue concerning the galleries behind the subscription wall, as soon as I have any new information to share I'll either be back here or pass the info through the Guides and VCLs.
-Trevor Kidd
I usually don't do this, but: *BUMP* - got any information yet?
I like to spice up my online games with images from the galleries, and even if I'd subscribe to DDI, I could not use them there. (as only one of 6 players is a sub, and i'd be using them outside of the paywall...)
The news is slim and grim.
Right now it looks like there is not going to be any change in how the gallery works. There is no real reason beyond those that were already given... WotC wants to add value to the Insider subscription, and sees this as a way to accomplish that.
Do they really think it's doing anything more than making them look bad? They didn't even do their customers the courtesy of making an announcement at the time, much less in advance as you'd expect out of common politeness.
Nobody denies that they've got the right to do this, but they should seriously start considering their PR handling skills. This is the sort of thing which drives customers away instead of attracting them. It's already cost them a purchase of DMG2 from me, let alone a DDi signup.
As any web search can tell them, it's easy to find pirate versions of their IP. They should be giving incentive for people to support Wizards, not doing their best to make customers say "*Expletive Of Choice* WotC" and head off to find a torrent.
Now I wonder who is in charge of making these decisions, I have never been to a convention before, but I made my mind up long ago that the day I do (I will sometime, I swear it on my life!) that I will ask the tough questions like a journalist when I buy an item from say mr. mearls booth or something Again I have zero clue how that stuff actually works =o But in that short time I know some people go to conventions and either sell and/or sign stuff I have a few moments of a window to ask a question.... and sometimes they even have seminars and stuff in which I can provide my questions and/or criticism on an open forum.
Why has this happened? You aren't necessarily ADDING value, you're just taking away from other people and making what was once for the masses become exclusive instead. Is it adding value? Technically yes but it's one of the worst PR moves you can make... and this doesn't even apply to just the galleries... if you did this with anything you're in for a s***storm. Since you actually haven't given the members anything new at all. Now you're just saying "Those people who don't give us money on a monthly basis can't use the galleries anymore, don't you guys who do feel priviledged now?"
Will there ever be a clarification for versatile so small characters can be 2-H barbarians with a weapon higher than a D8? (that one eberron polearm)
Etc.
I swear I will not let this die O_o Someone make the point to them they aren't really ADDING value.. it's like they are in some sick twisted way but yet they haven't given the members ANYTHING from this move unless you wanna call exclusive rights to something that used to be free "adding", it's becoming more of a punishment to lose your subscription. I don't wanna feel forced to keep my subscription so I have to raise a ruckus about it.
Oh sure some people will say "it's just art galleries, get over it." To that I say shut it (essentially), because if we do nothing and just let this slide without letting out disapproval be heard then this could move onto something else. So if you want to stop them from going further with these bad PR moves you have to put your foot down NOW and scream out NO MORE!
Cmon staff members... I know you're there somewhere, show yourself!
Edit: It seems my theory of them not having what they promised long ago and having to make a desperation move is seeming more and more true X3
My understanding, whether right or wrong, was that the paid for Dungeon and Dragon magazines were supposed to be in addition to the ongoing free content for non-subscribers.
I never really expected them to keep that up though. To quote the Tui ad, "Yeah, right."
If they're looking to increase subscribers and promote sales, they need to start looking at making some vacancies at the level of whoever is making these kinds of decisions. I don't think they've managed to handle anything they've done in a positive manner PRwise since at least the PDF debacle.
@fox
I'm happy. I'm a subscriber and I have access.... I'm happy.
So in addition to you not letting it die, I'm not going to let my happiness broadcast die either.
WotC wants to add value to the Insider subscription, and sees this as a way to accomplish that.
I'm surprised nobody at WotC realises how insulting this is. This move is only "added value" if one assumes we Insiders are motivated by spite (and I use that term in the formal sense). Since we already had access to the galleries, the only thing we've "gained" is the ability to point and laugh, Nelson Muntz-like, at non-subscribers who are now getting less than they were before.
Sorry, WotC, but I am not a spiteful person. Another's loss is not automatically my gain. And I feel genuinely insulted that you apparently feel that it is.
It is, however, added value to the new customer who can't otherwise get the galleries any more.
Still next to nothing added in exchange for shafting the masses. Not a worthwhile tradeoff. They should swallow thier pride and fix the issue. Its honestly not that big a deal, and it would earn them quite a bit of good faith.
WotC wants to add value to the Insider subscription, and sees this as a way to accomplish that.I'm surprised nobody at WotC realises how insulting this is. This move is only "added value" if one assumes we Insiders are motivated by spite (and I use that term in the formal sense). Since we already had access to the galleries, the only thing we've "gained" is the ability to point and laugh, Nelson Muntz-like, at non-subscribers who are now getting less than they were before.
Sorry, WotC, but I am not a spiteful person. Another's loss is not automatically my gain. And I feel genuinely insulted that you apparently feel that it is.
Amen, brother!
It is, however, added value to the new customer who can't otherwise get the galleries any more.
How did you reach that conclusion? I can't follow the logic.
We have group A (Existing Subscribers) Who get nothing more than we already had, except maybe some feelings of insult as we are expected to buy into a line about how we are getting more value now. I am not getting more value for my subscription. And its an utter lie to try and tell me that I am.
Then we have group B (Existing Non-Subscribers) Who get less than they had before. And Wizards expects people from Group B to suddenly feel compelled to buy in now that they've been shafted? That just doesn't seem to click to my way of thinking.
You need to look at it in terms of what you are getting, namely, the subscription.
The fact that the galleries are now behind the paywall *does* make a subscription have more value as compared to a non-subscription. Granted, it does so by reducing the "value" of a non-subscription.
Is it a smart idea? It all depends on your point of view. From a purely marketing point of view, it is a good idea. The value of what you get with a subscription, as compared to what you get without a subscription, has gone up. From a PR point of view, it was not a good decision, as has been pointed out many times in the thread.
You need to look at it in terms of what you are getting, namely, the subscription.
The fact that the galleries are now behind the paywall *does* make a subscription have more value as compared to a non-subscription. Granted, it does so by reducing the "value" of a non-subscription.
Is it a smart idea? It all depends on your point of view. From a purely marketing point of view, it is a good idea. The value of what you get with a subscription, as compared to what you get without a subscription, has gone up. From a PR point of view, it was not a good decision, as has been pointed out many times in the thread.
Its not even a good idea from a marketting decision. Marketting is about creating new potential customers by informing them about the existance of your product and why it would be worthwhile to purchase. The galleries were a better marketting tool when put out in the public, because it was a way for people to see what sort of things were available with a subscription. Now, you can't see that, so its even a loss from a marketting standpoint. You now have less free advertising.
I would call what you describe more advertising.
In either case, there is a balancing act that must be done.
On one side you have the desire to make a DDI subscription more valuable and/or attractive. Putting the galleries behind the paywall does increase the value of a subscription as compared to a non-subscription.
On the other side you have the value of having the galleries draw in people who will use the gallery to buy the book.
a) wotc rolled a natural one on that balance roll - repeatedly.
b) pushing something you got for free behind a paywall makes noone that knows about it being free previously in any good direction, as they feel slighted... same applies for current subscribers who are a bit more critical. sure, you can write it on your banners as "additional content", but probably noone will believe you. chances are, you'll lose subscribers over the long run over this more than you get new ones from it.
You need to look at it in terms of what you are getting, namely, the subscription.
The fact that the galleries are now behind the paywall *does* make a subscription have more value as compared to a non-subscription. Granted, it does so by reducing the "value" of a non-subscription.
Is it a smart idea? It all depends on your point of view. From a purely marketing point of view, it is a good idea. The value of what you get with a subscription, as compared to what you get without a subscription, has gone up. From a PR point of view, it was not a good decision, as has been pointed out many times in the thread.
...And there is an enormous problem with this explanation: "You need to look at it in terms of what you are getting," I am a subscriber. Do I get anything now that I did not get before? No. Something is simply on my list oif features that was not there before. Something that I did receive before without it being on my list of features. Therefore, it is not added value for me because nothing has been added to what I receive. It is a lure to hopefully draw in future subscribers and nothing more. It does not add value for those who already have subscriptions.
"Value" is a term that is different for different people even with respect to the same item. So, although non-subscribers may tell you that it might appear more valuable to them right now, I doubt that very many subscribers will feel that their subscription suddenly had "value" added to it. Add to this the fact that everyone knows that this is really about raising the value for future subscribers as opposed to adding value makes people with current subscriptions feel like their chain is being jerked when they are told that their subscription is suddenly has "added value".
I would call what you describe more advertising.
In either case, there is a balancing act that must be done.
On one side you have the desire to make a DDI subscription more valuable and/or attractive. Putting the galleries behind the paywall does increase the value of a subscription as compared to a non-subscription.
On the other side you have the value of having the galleries draw in people who will use the gallery to buy the book.
Myabe we have different definitions, but I consider Marketting and Advertising to be almost interchangable. Advertising is a subset of marketting at least.
If you want more subscribers, then give people a reason to buy. Add something new to the subscription. Add more Adventure Tools. Add the Character Visualizer. Add the Game Table. Get these products included as part of the subscription, and THAT will add value.
Moving something that we already had behind the paywall does not add value to the subscription. It just punishes the people who are not subscribers. Makes them feel like their patronage of your other products is not appreciated.
it would be nice if WOTC somehow answered to these complaints with more than the noble silence they got so used to...
The news is slim and grim.
Right now it looks like there is not going to be any change in how the gallery works. There is no real reason beyond those that were already given... WotC wants to add value to the Insider subscription, and sees this as a way to accomplish that.
@whitebaron - That is the official response for the moment.
And by filtering that response through you instead of giving a direct answer, and doing so only when the complaints got too hot on the forums, their PR people shot themselves in the foot. Again.
I'm not sure if I agree with you there. Part of my job as a News Guide is to relay information between the community and the folks at wotc. I don't think filtering it through me had any negative consequences. Though, if you feel strongly about it, I'd like to hear a more detailed explanation why.
As far as waiting for the complaints to get hot, I can tell you that they weren't sitting on this. There have been back-and-forth discussions between myself and Trevor, and between Trevor and his higher ups. As soon as the final word came back from the powers that be, Trevor told me, and I told you. PR hasn't been involved in this at all, as far as deciding when to give a response.
Come to think of it, this has actually been one of the most direct responses we've got. Management made a decision, Community reacted, News Guides and Community Management raised flags on the issue, Management debated, returned their reply, and it was presented to the community.
the way I see it, wotc has not answered yet - all opinions expressed by news guides, vcls etc have on various occasions been labelled "private opinions" - unless you want to change that official status for all vcls etc, that's the way i'll have to handle it. either that, or people like wolfstar, bunny, webster, yourself, will have to change their posting styles to reflect your now official wotc positions.
WOTC has not answered. AsmodeusLore has answered, and he is NOT a part of WOTC - the business, and thus has no final say in anything. WOTC is still silent on this issue.
That sounds like shooting themselves in the foot PRwise to me.
@whitebaron - Yea, we are usually good about making it clear when we are posting in our 'official' capacity. I've been a little bit lax lately about that. If you are confused about any of my posts in particular about when I've been posting as an individual, and when I've been posting as a News Guide, please let me know, and I'll clarify it. In the future, I'll work harder on making this distinction clear.
Fair enough. I've poked Trevor and asked him to make an official post. You should see him here shortly.
@whitebaron - Yea, we are usually good about making it clear when we are posting in our 'official' capacity. I've been a little bit lax lately about that. If you are confused about any of my posts in particular about when I've been posting as an individual, and when I've been posting as a News Guide, please let me know, and I'll clarify it. In the future, I'll work harder on making this distinction clear.
I think that whitebaron's response was in reference to the fact that VCls are volunteers and thus are not paid employees of WotC.
For clarity, is the DDI News Guide a paid or volunteer position? In other words, do you actually work for WotC as a paid employee? No snark is involved in this question. I am explicitly looking for clarity.
For what it's worth, I've had opportunity to talk with Trevor on this, and even overhear him explaining it to others.
Put simply, we don't work for WotC, that's true. I'm not paid by WotC, and I can enjoy my own personal opinions and discusion of whatever topics I want freely because of that.
However, it is Trevor's preferance that his Community Leaders be the ones to share news (good, bad, or otherwise - though he does *try* to give us more good news and takes more of the bad himself) with their communities - it's part and parcel of our jobs.
I'd ask you to consider (and we can start a new thread to discuss this if you want, but let's not derail this thread any further) if you'd feel WotC wasn't saying anything if it were good news.
If AsmodeusLore were spearheading the news that {New DDI Software} was going to be in beta testing next week, would you demand that it come from WotC? I doubt most people would - but I've been wrong before.
Regardless, Trevor's goal, as I understand it, is to make his Community Leads trusted sources of information. So while you may well get a reply from Trevor - it's likely going to be a summary that essentially says "What Asm says is correct, and that's all I have".
In short, he's likely going to confirm that he's given us the information and that if we tell you we're speaking officially on behalf of WotC, you can trust us in that. Helping communicate is what we do - and its a two-way street. Just as WotC takes information from us on what our communities are saying, WotC also wants our communities to trust us when we give official news.
There's very likely more we could do in this area to denote official news when it comes - though I think in this thread Asm has done a good job.
I heartily welcome a discussion thread on this topic if people disagree - I'm just relating what I've understood from Trevor (and because it's my understanding, and not news coming from WotC, I wouldn't go quite so far as to label this as official - yet. I'll see if I can get Trevor's stamp of approval on this post, however).
[EDIT]
Again - I don't want to derail this particular discussion, so if there's need to debate/discus this, then feel free to either start a thread or poke one of us if you'd rather we open it first.
At the moment I'm just trying to layout WotC's stance to try and nip the derailment in the bud.
I think that whitebaron's response was in reference to the fact that VCls are volunteers and thus are not paid employees of WotC.
For clarity, is the DDI News Guide a paid or volunteer position? In other words, do you actually work for WotC as a paid employee? No snark is involved in this question. I am explicitly looking for clarity.
DDI News Guide is basically a Forum Guide, who has the added responsibility of delivering News regarding the D&D Insider stuff. Forum Guides, like VCLs, are volunteers.
I think that whitebaron's response was in reference to the fact that VCls are volunteers and thus are not paid employees of WotC.
For clarity, is the DDI News Guide a paid or volunteer position? In other words, do you actually work for WotC as a paid employee? No snark is involved in this question. I am explicitly looking for clarity.
DDI News Guide is basically a Forum Guide, who has the added responsibility of delivering News regarding the D&D Insider stuff. Forum Guides, like VCLs, are volunteers.
Thanks.
So the question is, now that the community has spoken, been heard and been disagreed with... is there anything that can now be done? Or is this one effectively now a lost battle?
i still have not seen any official word on this.
even though news guides and vcls may be in contact with the powers that be (not all of them are, but many), they in no way represent "the company", as has been stated time and again. As such, I asked before for them to declare sides. As normal parts of the community with various special tasks on their hands, they still are just "users". No normal user can post anything even remotely binding to WOTC - and this means, their posts are just that: a nice piece of information, but not the final word. Let anyone with WOTC badge say this, and this is an entirely different kind of discussion - But WOTC did not even remotely care about discussing this with their userbase, how can I even expect them to give me FACE? ...
I don't disagree, but can I ask why you make this distinction? It seems a little like splitting hairs and I get the suspicion that you are doing it to make a point rather than for any practical reason.
Though I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by asking. 
The company WOTC has not yet told me why I can't access the images anymore.
The company WOTC and the NGs/VCLs have repeatedly told me that they are just liaison to WOTC, not part of the company.
=> thus, whatever the ngs or whatever write, has no official status unless they make that claim themselves. or else their status has just changed - from simply repeating news and making them more publicly known, to news-arbiters and creaters, which gives them a lot more authority and importance.
Volunteers (who are not paid and thus not really liable/bound to the company) can never make any public decisions for a company, because if they could, they would not be the same afterwards.
The company WOTC has not yet told me why I can't access the images anymore.
If you want a response from Wizards you should ask Customer Service. iirc the boards are not where the company offically responds. If you want to complain about the respons you receive from them you can post it in the forums.
If you want a response from Wizards you should ask Customer Service. iirc the boards are not where the company offically responds. If you want to complain about the respons you receive from them you can post it in the forums.
I know that i can get semi-official answers via CS. But that's also beside the point. This whole mess is part of a bad communications-structure on their side. It is not changed by the fact that you, as the customer can contact some administrative organ that works properly - They're still not communicating with us. Official complaints can be filed to the ORC, which usually (hail to paradox, tao, kirin, charles and whomever i forgot that answered my mails already) works fast and decent.
But this is customer service - we're talking about proactive stuff here, not reactions to complaints. And such actions simply can't be set by people like you and me - because we don't have the authority to decide anything. We can only wish for stuff and argue those - but actually, noone EVER asked the community about what they feel or think - they just decide and if it's a negative decision, almost NEVER post anything about it back. And that's bad marketing 101.
yes, I'm doing this to bring my point across:
The company WOTC has not yet told me why I can't access the images anymore.
Actually, WotC has. WotC has informed various NGs and VCLs that the purpose that the images have been brought behind the paywall is to increase the value of a DDI subscription. The NGs and VCLs have passed that information on to the community when asked. WotC (Through Trevor Kidd, an employee of WotC) has also said that further information on the topic (when available) will be posted by either Trevor or VCLs/guides (emphasis mine):
As to the specific issue concerning the galleries behind the subscription wall, as soon as I have any new information to share I'll either be back here or pass the info through the Guides and VCLs.-Trevor Kidd
The fact that you may not agree with the reason given (to increase value of DDI subscription) in no way means that an answer has not been given.
It's bad style to present good news themselves and distract or hide bad news totally. Without people asking questions, they would not even have mentioned it at all, that there's been a change.
"They'll find out eventually" seems to be their way-to-go currently - and we'll see what's the next thing to go. As it stands, there is NO D&D webpage left. I hope they're at least marginally aware of what they're doing to their own community.
It's clear that WotC wants to add value to DDI via art galleries, but those of us here generally don't feel that WotC has achieved that with the change. WotC isn't simply going to reverse course, so what alternative can we suggest (that can hopefully be passed up the chain) that would give us the feeling of added value without the feeling of something having been taken away?
My thought is this: public galleries of the art that's in the books act as a means of advertising, act as a resource to those who have the books and are using the content therein, and are something that people who have bought the books have already paid for - the last point is important, since putting this art behind the DDI pay wall gives the sense of paying for the content twice, which no one likes. So, put the art that actually makes it into the books out in a public art gallery that everyone can access.
The added value for the DDI subscribers would come in the form of a bonus art gallery for each book, one that contains the art that didn't make it into the book - cut for space reasons, superceded by other art, early concept sketches, and so on - and perhaps a few pieces that were created specifically for the bonus gallery.
I feel that this approach would address both concerns - WotC would have its added DDI value and the community (including DDI subscribers) wouldn't be left feeling that they'd lost something rather than gained it.
As to the images going behind the firewall and how this has affected us, I did give Asmo the go ahead to share what I had at that moment.
The long and short of it is that the decision to have the full images for books beyond the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual live in the DDI subscription area is going to stand.
I'm not really here to try counter anybody's opinion that this was a good or bad idea, and I don't have any new information to bring to the discussion except for the fact that this change is here for the foreseeable future.
I also want to thank everyone who contributed good, thoughtful feedback that I could use when sharing the communities opinions and ideas with the rest of the company - I'm pretty sure you know who are.
As to the side discussion of what VCLs are and what they should or shouldn't do, I'd be glad to have that in a different thread.
The long and short of it is that the decision to have the full images for books beyond the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual live in the DDI subscription area is going to stand.
I'm not really here to try counter anybody's opinion that this was a good or bad idea, and I don't have any new information to bring to the discussion except for the fact that this change is here for the foreseeable future.
No surprise there. But thanks for trying anyway. It's appreciated.