Gleemax.com™ Gives Gamers a Voice, a Gaming Arena and a Place to Interact in Today’s Vast Online Universe
June 11, 2007 (Renton, Wash.) – Wizards of the Coast, Inc. (NYSE: HAS), the leader in trading card, tabletop strategy and role-playing games, today revealed plans to launch Gleemax.com™, a first of its kind online destination for hard core strategy and hobby gamers. Building on its heritage in the hobby gaming space with Magic: The Gathering® and Dungeons & Dragons®, coupled with its success with Magic Online® and its understanding of what strategy, hobby and tabletop gamers want, Wizards of the Coast (WotC) will now provide gamers with a centralized destination online to get everything they want or need.
Gleemax™ will be built on three pillars – community, games and editorial content – each representing the essence of what WotC has been providing strategy gamers for more than 15 years. Specific site features will include an online social community, existing and future releases of WotC digital gaming properties as well as independent strategy games, player profiles, interactive analog and digital community activities, editorial content including community message boards, WotC and player blogs, regularly updated industry news, and game rankings and reviews.
“Wizards has long been the champion of great game play and Gleemax furthers our commitment to this ideal,” said Loren Greenwood, President of WotC. “This moment marks an evolution of our company and to this end, we’ve created an entirely new digital division led by a longtime senior member of our research and development team, Randy Buehler.”
There are several “firsts” for WotC with Gleemax, including the site’s social networking community tool functionality. The tools will run the gamut from traditional social networking fare (blogs, friends lists, etc.) to gamer-specific tools (game reviews, game ratings, ways to search for games and gamers) to specialized content that adds to the enjoyment of specific kinds of gamers (ways to build and arrange warbands for various miniatures games, ways to talk about characters in role-playing games, etc.).
“Deep down in the DNA of our company we know that the way to sell hobby games is to invest in the community of hobby gamers,” said Randy Buehler, Vice President of Digital Games for WotC. “We feel that Gleemax will provide a lasting infrastructure that supports not just our own customers, but the entire strategy gaming culture.”
In addition to the social networking capabilities, as part of today’s Gleemax announcement, WotC also announced several game initiatives coupled with the site’s features. The website will include an indie strategy game portal devoted to digital distribution of PC games that the company believes will be attractive to its community and worthy of the WotC Seal of Approval for fun, strategic games.
WotC also announced a hardcore board game portal, which will give players access to its backlist of Avalon Hill® titles such as Axis & Allies® and the award-winning Vegas Showdown™. These two portals supplement a WotC digital game lineup that already includes Magic Online (which celebrates its 5th birthday later this month) and Uncivilized: The Goblin Game™, previously announced and slated to begin external play testing later this year.
Gleemax will also give core hobby retailers a place to advertise upcoming tournaments and events, which will automatically populate the calendars of players in those areas interested in those games. “This community will have one foot in the digital world and one foot in the analog world,” commented Buehler. “Based on our experience with the communities around our various games, we find this makes for a particularly vibrant online experience.”
And as an extension to the already robust Wizards.com editorial content, Gleemax will include blogs from WotC insiders and a discussion of game-play, which is so often neglected or overlooked by mainstream computer gaming publications. “Our gamer has been slipping through the cracks,” said Buehler. “Right now the tabletop and strategy gamers are scattered across many websites and they can have a hard time finding each other or finding information about good games to play. Gleemax fixes this problem.”
To ensure Gleemax provides players with engaging content and vibrant features most commonly requested and wished for in online communities, WotC is enlisting industry thought leaders in all areas dedicated to online social experiences and strategy/hobby games to sit on a Gleemax Advisory Board. WotC will use the board’s input to not only assist during the development stages of the site, but ongoing to ensure Gleemax is providing everything possible for enthusiasts.
In addition to the Advisory Board’s industry thought leaders, to kick off the launch celebration, WotC is making an Open Casting Call to select three players to sit on the Advisory Board, ensuring the hobby and tabletop gamers and fans are represented on the board. The selection process will be a reality TV style contest run through Gleemax.com over the course of the summer. Bringing player members onto the Advisory Board reinforces WotC’s long-standing tradition of engaging with its consumers to ensure their thoughts, opinions and voices are heard.
“We want to build something that the whole industry can embrace,” said Buehler. “The only way to get this right is to build it in collaboration with our community and this Advisory Board will make sure we do exactly that.
Gleemax.com will launch in various phases, each phase providing additional online community tools for today’s players with the first phase previewing at GenCon in August. Phase one will offer gamers online community tools, gamer personal profiles, and editorial content. Then over the back half of the year and into early 2008, new features will be steadily added and new games will start coming online.
For more information on the Gleemax.com launch and phase launch plan, please visit www.gleemax.com.
And, I agree. The name gleemax is... less than ideal.
Welcome to Gleemax!
Wizards of the Coast is building nothing less than the Home for Gamers right here on this URL. Gleemax.com will be an online strategy gaming destination built on three important pillars: Community, Content, and, of course, Games. But before I get into the "what," I want to talk a little about the "why."
Wizards has always done the majority of its business through a core network of hobby stores and the communities those stores create. When my friends and I got into gaming, we walked into a hobby store and found a world of awesome games, a guy behind the counter who knew everything about them, and a bunch of people just like us who wanted to play. I've sat at enough gamer-tables at weddings to attest to the fact that those are the friends you hold on to.
But times change. Today, that hobby store and all its wonders is still there, but we see an opportunity to engage more budding gamers and ultimately drive new traffic to those stores. The key to growing the hobby gaming industry and making sure it continues to thrive for years to come is to recruit the next generation of gamers into our culture. And what about gamers who want to play, but don't have the time, or don't know where to find other gamers anymore? How can we make it easy for all these would-be gamers to start -- or return to -- gaming?
The answer, we believe, is Gleemax. It's a massive expansion of our web presence, designed to give gamers a place online where they can hang out, play games, and most importantly, find other gamers. We see this as a natural extension of things that Wizards has stood for since the early 90's and here's how we're going to do it:
Community
We want to give all gamers their own personal pages with tons of features that make it convenient to talk about games, find people to play games with, and get more out of the games they choose to play. We're not just talking about Wizards of the Coast games either. We see this project as an investment in growing the entire strategy gamer culture. There will be features aimed at existing Wizards customers (ways to show off your D&D character, your warband, or your deck, etc.) and there will be plenty of tools that fans of other games can use as well. We also want to give retail stores their own pages where they can promote their store, talk about store events and organized play programs -- events that will then automatically appear on the calendars of local players who care about those games. Our goals are to make sure the tabletop gamer has everything he or she could possibly need from a website and also to turn our attention to the online strategy gamers who want the same sorts of game play but prefer to play on a digital platform.
Content
We already have lots of great content on our website, from articles about our various games to behind-the-scenes peeks. But we can do even better. With Gleemax, we'll be deploying many of those same tactics, except we'll be talking about gaming in general and digital gaming in particular. You can expect a ton of blogs from Wizards insiders and a real dialog between us and our fans (that would be you). And like I said before, this isn't just about our games. It's about all games, so you'll be able to talk about anything you want.
Games
And, of course, we're going to have games. Lots of them. I don't want to give too much away yet, but imagine an Indie Strategy Games Portal filled with the coolest independent games, vetted by us, and given the Wizards Seal-of-Approval for fun, strategic game-play. Then think about a Board Game Portal featuring classics from our Avalon HillTM catalog, as well as new games we don't even know about yet! Plus Magic Online® and our original computer game Uncivilized: The Goblin GameTM (take a peek: www.wizards.com/goblinz). And that's just a start.
We think Gleemax is the right thing to do for Wizards of the Coast, the right thing to do for the tabletop hobby gaming industry, and the right thing to do for a sizable group of digital gamers who are being ignored by the mainstream computer gaming industry. We want to build a home that all three groups can feel comfortable in and I think it will change the face of the hobby gaming industry forever. If we pull this off (and believe me, we intend to), then Gleemax will become the center of the online strategy and roleplaying gaming universe.
Advisory Board
There is one other thing I want to talk to you about. Because we're interested in building something that serves the needs of the entire community and not just Wizards, we want everyone reading this to help us get it right. Gleemax has to be a collaboration between us and our community. To that end, we are developing an Advisory Board.
We will invite thought leaders from both the tabletop and digital gaming industries to serve on this board. The idea is to bring folks together several times a year to tell them about our plans for the future, and ask their advice. We want to know where they think we got it right and what they would do differently.
In addition (this is important), we will reserve multiple seats on the Advisory Board for gamers like yourselves. Because Gleemax is everyone's community, we want to make sure you have the chance to tell us in person precisely what we need to do to make it a place you will want to use. Stay tuned to this site to find out how you can become one of the chosen board members.
So there's the pitch... that's what we're up to. There's more, of course, much more. But that will all come in time. Meanwhile, I'll be posting weekly updates with more detail on each of the aspects of Gleemax.
Coming next week: Open Casting Call. Be sure to tune in to find out how you can prove yourself the most worthy to sit on our Advisory Board in our Ultimate Gamer contest. Don't miss out. I'll see you on the message boards!
Randy Buehler
Vice President, Digital Gaming
http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/?doc=20070611
I really hate the name - gleemax.
So, 'this' is the DI? Seems so from a quick readover of the site. They certainly make it sound exciting. Although, to be perfectly honest, I hope they have optional themes for those of us who don't find the cutsey brain-in-a-jar and green color scheme particularly attractive.
And, I agree. The name gleemax is... less than ideal.
I'd third that feeling. When I first saw the name Gleemax on the boards main menu, I thought it sounded like the name of some space rpg they were starting up...or the name of a new Wizard's based cartoon block on Jet-x!
I'd third that feeling. When I first saw the name Gleemax on the boards main menu, I thought it sounded like the name of some space rpg they were starting up...or the name of a new Wizard's based cartoon block on Jet-x!
Or maybe special polish used for large weapons. Gleem-ax!
I agree with Darkwolf that the color scheme is really difficult to look at. As in, I spent less than 2 minutes there and started getting a headache type difficult.
Me too.
The Gleemax forum is very unappealing. I guess I am just getting too old for WOTC. For their sake, I hope they grab a lot of thier target demographic - I think they going to lose a ton of the 20+ customers.
What ever happened to designing unique games that are fun to play? There is no way WOTC is going to force feed weak product to the masses by way of cheesy websites. This whole DI fiasco seems to be driven by a marketing department with way to much money.
Gleemax seems extremely childish. Looking at it and the new Transformer game coming out, I think Hasbro has decided to shoot for the 10 - 15 crowd.
The Gleemax forum is very unappealing. I guess I am just getting too old for WOTC.
I left this part out of my initial reaction. Partly because I have previously been accused of being very negative in some of my posts. Partly because I wanted to spend some more time mulling things over.
Now having spent a bit more time at the site, I suspect there may be some truth to it. The whole site and concept seems VERY MtGO focused, though the Gamer Radio Zero podcast says differently. Visually the site (in it's current incarnation) seems decidedly juvinile.
I hope that their D&D content has a more mature layout, and has a seperate homepage, so I can see as little of the silly little brain-in-a-jar as I can.
Gleemax seems extremely childish. Looking at it and the new Transformer game coming out, I think Hasbro has decided to shoot for the 10 - 15 crowd.
I hope that this will be all that I'll have to say about Gleemax.com at this time.
Wizards of the Coast has failed their Craft (Appealing Website) check by more than 20.
coupled with its success with Magic Online®
wait a minute. Based on the forums, Magic Online has been anything but successful when it comes to implantation.
The one thread that was on this forum was deleted for supposed CoC violations, and I can't find the thread on the Magic: The Gathering forum that explains in detail how Magic Online is a failure.
I am...Confused with all of this. I just checked the forums of Gleemax.com and didn´t find anything D&D related at all. Just some people roleplaying, or something.
Gleemax is a Magic the Gathering joke card. We're not supposed to "get it". Not to mention, I'm not a gamer, so I guess that's another level of misunderstanding. I'm a role-player, not a game-player. ;)
Why it is on the D&D main page is a complete mystery.
I don't get this:
wait a minute. Based on the forums, Magic Online has been anything but successful when it comes to implantation.
The one thread that was on this forum was deleted for supposed CoC violations, and I can't find the thread on the Magic: The Gathering forum that explains in detail how Magic Online is a failure.
Magic Online was a success. They provided their customers with a broken product and no support, and they still paid an arm and a leg to get it. Sounds like a success to me.
I am...Confused with all of this. I just checked the forums of Gleemax.com and didn´t find anything D&D related at all. Just some people roleplaying, or something.
If that is all its for, there are thousands of forums online for Roleplaying...
Wait... Did that quote up top say WotC know what gamers want?! How about a Complete Psionics fix! XD
I went to the website, and after poking it for a bit, I have come to a conclusion.
It is obvious to me that between the announcement and when I finally got home and saw it, someone has hacked the gleemax.com website and mucked things up.
But, if that's a sign of things to come, _please_ choose different software for the forums.
ARS (freely downloadable from userfriendly.org under various licenses) is a much more *ahem* user friendly forums system than this phpnuke based stuff. It's also _searchable_.
Or, alternatively, if youre going to run a DI, _hire a software engineer_.
Dennis Stout
It is obvious to me that between the announcement and when I finally got home and saw it, someone has hacked the gleemax.com website and mucked things up.
I hope that is true, for the sake of WotC, but I don't think that happened at all. It all seems like a huge April Fool's Day joke, except that it's not April.
ARS (freely downloadable from userfriendly.org under various licenses) is a much more *ahem* user friendly forums system than this phpnuke based stuff. It's also _searchable_.
Umm... Forum... Search... WotC... What is that? Never heard of it.
Or, alternatively, if youre going to run a DI, _hire a software engineer_.
Dennis Stout
... and a website design team. Lime Green on Black = Eye Burn. "Oh, Vargasan, but it's soooo 'matrix' of them". Don't care.
I am...Confused with all of this. I just checked the forums of Gleemax.com and didn´t find anything D&D related at all. Just some people roleplaying, or something.
No D&D content as yet. May not see much if any before the D&DMs send out their final issues in August, but I'm sure some little things will start popping up in the near future.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Sooo, the DI is something D&D magic combined? Please, can any staffmember deny this? Cancelling Dragon and Dungeon and then put together with the Magic players in some sort of online 'community' doesn't look like an improvement.
I do believe that it has already been stated that, yes, the DI will include, at least, Magic Online.
Clearly the site has some appeal, but I think WoTC may have missed the mark in regards to their RPG customers.
Imo, they should take a page from jstor or Nature.
To be honest, I am not certain any of this DI stuff will actually matter to me. Coming from Germany, I'm kinda out of the loop, anyway.
While I have no problems with English content (and actually prefer it), 6 out of 8 players in my group don't give a second look at anything that hasn't been translated.
Please tell me there's a portal somewhere that leads to something
There is a portal somewhere that leads to something.
Hopefully they take the opportunity the next few months are offering them, and build a DI worth having. Real forums and not knockoff phpnuke sites, a more organized articles section... There is a lot of really nice stuff that WotC can do with a digital presence, I hope they don't mess it up.
I have no idea what the above poster is trying to communicate by quoting part of my above post
He's just fulfilling your request.
Simply put, I won't bother even trying it out if that is not changed. I don't care if it can be changed, I simply won't bother. If WotC wants me to use such a website they can make it viewable without me having to damage my vision even more.
This whole DI fiasco seems to be driven by a marketing department with way to much money
:D
The meat of the D&D content will live someplace accessible from Gleemax, but in it's own area. There will be a lot of interconnectivity between the two, especially with regards to things like personal pages, blogs, etc, including tools that support information on your characters, your current D&D Campaigns, and so on.
For example, think of the forums you're posting on now as an example of something that might come from Gleemax, while the articles and other information you get from our current D&D site would be the area with the D&D specific DI content would live.
The color scheme isnt that big of a deal to me.
The online blog part seems odd. Personally, I'd be really iffy starting a blog on a website whos corporation has interests other than having blogs.
Also, I'm not sure I understand why gleemax is going to be for all games. Being that wotcs products have very different target groups, and age groups.
Gleemax is a social networking site that will support many things, including the D&D Digital Initiative, as well as Magic the Gathering/Magic Online.
Please use different forum software.
I think the complaints about the forum here have pretty well brought the problems PHPNuke has out to light. It's an okay forum package for dealing with very small communities where posts are more news oriented than conversation oriented, but once you start getting conversations between a hundred people going on in a thread... it really does fall apart.
If you're going to be charging for this DI, make a useful forum. I am more than willing to help tweak ARS (again, freely obtainable from userfriendly.org) into something very use able for WotC. But, should you actually hire a software engineer, which you should, I'm sure they can easily make it work.
Really, you need to check out the comments section of userfriendly.org and see what I'm talking about. Ignore the cartoon, it's a waste of time, but look at the forum layout and the way it flows.
If it helps, I'll do the tweaking on my own time, on my own website, and let you look at it minus the "daily commentary" section (since for WotC's purposes, you don't want day to day commentary being archived at midnight).
And add me to the list of people complaining about the color theme. I honestly did wonder if the website had been hacked or not. Especially with that "bring me pixels" garbage on there. What the heck bore that thing into existence, anyways?
Dennis Stout
I'll add another complaint about the color scheme.
Simply put, I won't bother even trying it out if that is not changed. I don't care if it can be changed, I simply won't bother. If WotC wants me to use such a website they can make it viewable without me having to damage my vision even more.
Yes, it is a bit..erm....well, yeah. Anyway, when the Gleemax site is up and running, you'll be able to log right into your own personal page which will have the information and news you're interested in, as well as the layout and color scheme of your choice.
So no, you won't have to live with the current design.
For example, think of the forums you're posting on now as an example of something that might come from Gleemax, while the articles and other information you get from our current D&D site would be the area with the D&D specific DI content would live.
Yes, but these forums are a set of colours that are readable without exacerbating my already lousy eyesight.
I propose before too much earthling contact is finalised, that you read the excellent earthling briefing by Dr Xargle.
Furthermore, I would like to know (if, as stated, the aim is to get more people into brick & mortar gaming shops) what point there is in using gleemax for people like me who do not have a game shop anywhere within range?
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go rant at the wall for a while.
Anyway, when the Gleemax site is up and running, you'll be able to log right into your own personal page which will have the information and news you're interested in, as well as the layout and color scheme of your choice.
So no, you won't have to live with the current design.
Well, thank god about not having to live with the current design.
About the "personal page", though. Why?
For example, I'm interested in D&D news and information only. What can this "personal page" offer that the main D&D webpage doesn't? Why would I want to sign up to two webpages for the same stuff I can get from one? Why do I need a personal page at all?
Why would I want to read people's "D&D blogs"? Why are they necessary? I already have my own website and blog software that I pay for and don't use (which is incredibly cheap, cheaper than the DI, I can bet).
I guess in summary, why?
Yes, but these forums are a set of colours that are readable without exacerbating my already lousy eyesight.
I feel your pain.
I'm literally going blind over here (medical conditions seriously making me blind) and let me tell ya. When I got eye drops and eye glasses, all my tension headaches went away.
I'm still going blind, but at least I don't cringe in pain for most of the day anymore.
That is, until I look at the current color scheme on greenmax. fleemax. gleemax? *plbbbbt*.
Something tells me they are hiring too many video game dorks at WotC and slowly but surely trying to make D&D into one of those MMORPGs as opposed to a tabletop game.
Good thing I have been running my own version of D&D without many WotC books. I don't even buy most of their stuff anymore. Gleemax? Get real.
Yes, but these forums are a set of colours that are readable without exacerbating my already lousy eyesight.
Well, the Gleemax card itself isn't even has as hideous of a colour scheme as the website. I have no clue why they went that direction.
I think it has to do with "Gleemax taking over the 'net" with a "The Matrix" feel. I believe it's supposed to be funny, or something. I guess it might not appeal so much to anyone over the age of 16. Maybe we'll even get "Leet Speak" in our D&D books.
[sarcasm]I can't wait for that same mindset to join my D&D campaign.[/sarcasm] Nothing against 16 year olds, but I have a lot against those of which that think "Leet Speak" and "Caps Lock" are cruise control to cool.
Yes, it is a bit..erm....well, yeah. Anyway, when the Gleemax site is up and running, you'll be able to log right into your own personal page which will have the information and news you're interested in, as well as the layout and color scheme of your choice.
So no, you won't have to live with the current design.
Well, that's something at least.
I'm sure I'll find something else to complain about shortly, but thanks for that bit. ;)
About the "personal page", though. Why?
For example, I'm interested in D&D news and information only. What can this "personal page" offer that the main D&D webpage doesn't? Why would I want to sign up to two webpages for the same stuff I can get from one? Why do I need a personal page at all?
What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters? It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
You could personally select which information you wanted to see. Maybe you'd want to see D&D and D20 Modern content. Maybe you're only intersted in seeing articles relating to Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance. When it's launched, Gleemax will allow you to choose what information you want to have on the personal home page that you see when you log on.
Why would I want to read people's "D&D blogs"? Why are they necessary? I already have my own website and blog software that I pay for and don't use (which is incredibly cheap, cheaper than the DI, I can bet).
Maybe you'll find some blogs you're interested in reading. Maybe one of them is the blog from your DM who posts a weekly round up for what's happened in your campaign. Perhaps he posts that just for your group to see, or maybe he makes it public and lots of other people can come along and read about the adventures of your gaming group. Maybe you'll find some other blogs about campaigns that you'll become interested enough in to want to read.
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
I'm sure I'll find something else to complain about shortly, but thanks for that bit. ;)
Great! I'm here all week! Try the veal!
I can see that if that is the way they are going to launch the DI then I don't have much faith in what the next versions will be. The architecture of the site is crap, there is no meaningful information on anything - in short, it sucks.
my money is safe if that is the way it's going.
What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters?
Why? I already have my character sheets.
It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
Doesn't this forum already provide all of that?
If it is my personal page, how will anyone else see that information anyways?
You could personally select which information you wanted to see. Maybe you'd want to see D&D and D20 Modern content. Maybe you're only interested in seeing articles relating to Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance. When it's launched, Gleemax will allow you to choose what information you want to have on the personal home page that you see when you log on.
I already personally select which information I want to see. I see the D&D main page just fine. I see Green Ronin and Mongoose and Malhavoc's webpages just fine, also. That's the information that I want to see. I wont be able to add new release information or news from 3rd party providers, so again, why?
Why two entirely separate webpages that provide the same content?
Maybe you'll find some blogs you're interested in reading.
Unless it is one from WotC employees or game book designers or freelancers... No.
Maybe one of them is the blog from your DM who posts a weekly round up for what's happened in your campaign. Perhaps he posts that just for your group to see, or maybe he makes it public and lots of other people can come along and read about the adventures of your gaming group. Maybe you'll find some other blogs about campaigns that you'll become interested enough in to want to read.
My DM doesn't use the internet. Has access at home (roommates have it), but never uses it. When I say never, I mean never. Wont happen.
Why read about others' campaigns?
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
[facetious=on]Ooo! I get to pay for "Gleemax" quality?![/facetious]
Again, in summary, why?
Again, in summary, why?
So, I answered your question and gave you information. I didn't get a sense that you actually considered the questions and what ways things might be of interest to you. I got the sense that you were just waiting to see ways you could knock it down and say "No! No! No!" So I am guessing that I could tell you it would mint you gold coins and your response would be, "Gold coins? Who uses gold coins today? Will my local grocer take them?! No, course not. It's stupid and useless. So again, why? Why?!" :P
But maybe I am wrong. Feel free to explain how you're honestly evaluating the possible pluses and minus of this if you'd like.
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
Free you say?
Things are starting to get better
.What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters? It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
You could personally select which information you wanted to see. Maybe you'd want to see D&D and D20 Modern content. Maybe you're only intersted in seeing articles relating to Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance. When it's launched, Gleemax will allow you to choose what information you want to have on the personal home page that you see when you log on.
Maybe you'll find some blogs you're interested in reading. Maybe one of them is the blog from your DM who posts a weekly round up for what's happened in your campaign. Perhaps he posts that just for your group to see, or maybe he makes it public and lots of other people can come along and read about the adventures of your gaming group. Maybe you'll find some other blogs about campaigns that you'll become interested enough in to want to read.
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
I have to concur: why? I really can't see anything that that would give me that would be different from what I get off the forums as they stand.
Now, I'm all for waiting to see what the DI actually turns up like, and I'm not bitter about Dungeon or Dragon (maybe Complete Champion, but that's neither here nor there!), but I have to say that doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me. (Nor is that a critisism of you personally, I hasten to add!)
I am not, it has to be said, the type of person who is at all interested in non-constructive add-ons. I don't have a mobile, but if I did, it would do one of two things; recieve and send out phone calls. Anything else (including texting) is a wasteful extra. What you have said sounds an awful lot like mobile phone gimics; nothing of particular useful interest. I can't see blogs all being Lady Despina's Virtue (or probably even any)...
So what advantage would this forum offer me, the miserable old bugger who would rather dip his bones in liquid anti-caesium than go to a Myspace page?
What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters? It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
I for one would rather as little personal information be on the internet as possible, so no.
And, like Vargasan, I have a nifty little thing called a character sheet to store all my characters and their information on. I don't need to put it up on a site that I can't access when my internet service is down (which happens frequently enough to matter where I live).
And it's no business of anyone save me and my players as to what the current campaign is.
You could personally select which information you wanted to see. Maybe you'd want to see D&D and D20 Modern content. Maybe you're only intersted in seeing articles relating to Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance. When it's launched, Gleemax will allow you to choose what information you want to have on the personal home page that you see when you log on.
Like Vargasan, I check out only what I want to check out.
Everytime the D&D homepage shows Eberron, or DDM articles, I *gasp* skip over them!*gasp*. Sure, I wouldn't mind not even seeing the articles (and really, DDM has it's own section, quit trying to hog the main D&D page!), but hey, there are a lot of things I deal with each day that I'd rather not, and I'm not suffering that badly over that.
Maybe you'll find some blogs you're interested in reading. Maybe one of them is the blog from your DM who posts a weekly round up for what's happened in your campaign. Perhaps he posts that just for your group to see, or maybe he makes it public and lots of other people can come along and read about the adventures of your gaming group. Maybe you'll find some other blogs about campaigns that you'll become interested enough in to want to read.
I'm a member of another site which introduced a blog feature earlier this year, and I have never posted to it, or bothered to look at it beyond the initial "curiosity" look.
Sure, there may be people out there that enjoy blogs, but I'm not one of them. And since I'm likely to be the DM for any group I game with, any of the players seeking to read up on my games in blog format will be sorely disappointed (though I suspect they'll live).
Right now, I'm about as interested in WotC's ill-named Gleemax as I am about the DI, that is, interested in additional information about it, but just about as likely to spontaneously grow wings and a dragons' tail as to partake of this digital-only offering.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
Well, it is something "big" don´t you agree? Nobody knows exatly what this Gleemax is or will be. Even now I am confused on what in the blue heck is that site. People are trying to give their feedback. As much I want just to wait till the features are running to test then and give feedback, I have to agree. For now, all I see is more of the same.
Something I would sugest would be a way to play D&D(the table top game) in a forum format, with dice rollers and sheets. That would be a feature I now I would use it.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
Or that we are only interested in how this latest revelation relates to the DI, and are engaged enough to express how unattractive the planned "features" are to us.
Although I'll be sure to notify you personally Mike, if I ever make use of any of the features of Gleemax out of more than passing curiosity.
But I wouldn't hold my breath on that if I were you.
I'm not a tech person. I don't have interest in blogs - I've never read one. I don't have interest in a podcast - up until yesterday, I didn't even know how to listen to one, and I still have no interest now that I know how.
I see no reason to maintain my character sheets on Gleemax when I already have my character sheets.
So, I'm not looking for gold coins; but I am looking for what makes Gleemax.com different than what I have now.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
Not necessarily; I only read this thread because I saw you posted in it and followed the links out of morbid curiousity. I do not have any expectations for the DI, since as a whole no large company or organisation so far this year I have had dealings with had displayed anything resembling coherent thought, competance or sanity (EA, Virgin Media, BT, the local council, the UK government to name a few off the top of my head). I have no hope - but no prejudice either - about the DI. Surprise me. You really can't disappoint me...
By this point, it's more like prodding a dead Elf with a stick or that sort of feeling you get when you're watching the universe fall apart and trying to work out the full depth of how totally you are screwed.
Not that I'm bitter toward reality or anything.
Edit: Plus, what Z said.
What about this message board and the regular D&D site? Is Gleemax going to replace these things?
Something I'm worried about:
What about this message board and the regular D&D site? Is Gleemax going to replace these things?
I hope not, because if we lose search again in the transition, I may actually cry. And you don't want to make a Lich cry do you1?
1Technically, that sentence should probably be more of a statement. With agressive undertones.
So, I answered your question and gave you information.
So there is no answer to my question? No answer to "Why"?
Why was this huge amount of money put into something completely unnecessary?
I didn't get a sense that you actually considered the questions and what ways things might be of interest to you. I got the sense that you were just waiting to see ways you could knock it down and say "No! No! No!"
I didn't have to wait to see ways to knock it down. They came right to me. You guys were the one that linked Gleemax on the main D&D page. You walked into me. :D
So I am guessing that I could tell you it would mint you gold coins and your response would be, "Gold coins? Who uses gold coins today? Will my local grocer take them?! No, course not. It's stupid and useless. So again, why? Why?!" :P
Hells yes! I'll take gold coins. Wait, are they online content only? Will they have DRM? ;)
But maybe I am wrong. Feel free to explain how you're honestly evaluating the possible pluses and minus of this if you'd like.
I can honestly say I'm trying to evaluate the possible pluses. I just haven't seen one yet. From what you told me, it is unnecessary. Think of all the Community Liasons and Editors that WotC could have hired, but instead sunk into a gimicky, completely unnessary website. Community Liasons and Editors are necessary.
There are a few minuses (less money for employess, less resources to focus on a few products, a terrible web design team), but not that many.
I'm upset that it's a waste of resources that doesn't provide anything that is really necessary to the D&D hobby. Beyond that, I'm indifferent. It's just a website of nothing. The wizards webpage already provides all the pluses that Gleemax does, the possible pluses are just gimicks that do nothing.
I don't have a mobile, but if I did, it would do one of two things; recieve and send out phone calls.
I just got a mobile phone recently. I specifically asked the sales rep which phone had the least features and went with that one. No MP3 player. No camera. I needed a phone.
That could be part of the reason I'm upset with DI killing the magazines. I want the magazines. I don't need a character generator, I don't need character storage, I don't need a blog, I don't need my life story on a corporate site, I don't need my DM typing out a "minutes of the game", I don't need ... etc. You get the picture. It's all unnecessary.
As my dad has always told me, more pieces is just more that can go wrong.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
I believe you are seriously misunderstanding us.
The fact that we are reading this thread and are engaged enough to actually reply means that we are interested in making sure the Digital Initiative gives us what we want.
Since the only features I saw on gleemax were a forum and a poll, I chose to express my concern for those features. Speaking of which, did you check out that forum I asked you to? It really does have a nice layout, Jay Thorne did an excellent job on it.
As more features become available, I'll be more than happy to tell you how I think they could be made better (and I expect that you'll add my thoughts to everyone else's, using a tally point system, and then decide from there what changes will be best for the majority of people).
To answer your questions on a personal page with info about me and my characters: I choose to interpret "personal" as "a page with personal info" as opposed to "a page for me" like someone else did. As a person who has recently given up two gaming groups and moved from the most beautiful state in the American Union to an area where he doesn't know anyone at all, I would love that feature. It should also have a means of searching, at least by location. This way, I could find a new gaming group
Which brings me to another suggestion: Community pages, for groups of people to participate in. This could work very similarly to how LiveJournal works, which is also open source code. In lue of ARS, LJ would be a nice substitute. It's not as easily searchable, but at least it's more searchable than the forums WotC uses currently. And it's more user friendly, and has a better layout, etc etc. Honestly, pretty much any forum system you choose out there will have a better layout than the current system.
As far as having your character online... Meh. I don't see a use in it, but I don't see it hurting anything by being there. A character generation tool on the other hand, would be the bomb. Especially if it were updated with new rules info every time a book was released! I can understand WotC running some DRM stuff here, I mean, what's the point in publishing a book with all the feats/PrC's/spells in it if everyone can just login to a site for free and get all the info they need to use it? So I'm not advocating that this part be free (although, if it were, I certaintly wouldn't complain), but available would be great.
I see the most use of this coming not from players building characters, but actually from DMs creating NPCs on the fly. Seriosuly, who wants to spend 32423 hours creating an NPC that exists for, as someone else put it, 4 rounds of combat?
And we all know what happens when you decide that the NPC is going to be a noncombatant so you'll skip the stats gen ...
.... that's right, you don't even get to finish describing that the person accidently dropped something when the fighter screams "I trip him!" and the barbarian says "CLEAVE!" and the wizard is hollering "Fireball, fireball!!"
Anyways, I have digressed.
To summarize, we're not replying because we are interested in gleemax, we're replying because we're interested in shaping the Digital Initiative. It's a subtle but very important difference.
Dennis Stout
So, I'm not looking for gold coins; but I am looking for what makes Gleemax.com different than what I have now.
I'm totally calling dibs on your gold coins.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
I don't understand this statement at all except by what Zherog said:
Mike - you still really haven't explained, as far as I can tell, how Gleemax (it's god awful color scheme and all) will be different than the forums now.
We'll have interest in Gleemax because we're already doing what Gleemax provides on this website? I'm not sure I understand at all.
The reason I'm posting here is more of a "What the?" I'm not so much interested in Gleemax as to understand what the whole point of it is, and why I had to lose my magazines for it.
So, I'm not looking for gold coins; but I am looking for what makes Gleemax.com different than what I have now.
As far as I can tell, they're adding features but that doesn't necessarily mean it will be ones that you personally will use. Is it bad for a company to add features to their website even if every customer doesn't use them, ofcourse not.
One of the things that I've seen popping up a lot on the Internet in the wake of MySpace and Facebook are targeted social communities. You can think of some of the features Mike has described as "MySpace for Gamers".
Personally, I'm excited about the features mentioned. If I can configure my homepage so I don't see D&D Miniatures content, like I'm stuck seeing on the D&D homepage now, I'm happy.
I currently post all of my characters on a private forum for all of my gaming group to see, now I can just use the online tool to put them up on my gamer profile. I also post a recap of each gaming session online because my players are notorious for forgetting details. Do I currently have a private forum for this? Sure. Does everyone? No.
Edit: But I agree, Gleemax? I think one of the original appeals of Facebook was that college kids could say to each other "Look me up on Facebook, my name is Limit". I can assure you, I don't want to ever say Gleemax out loud.
One of the things that I've seen popping up a lot on the Internet in the wake of MySpace and Facebook are targeted social communities. You can think of some of the features Mike has described as "MySpace for Gamers".
All I can say to this is, "Oh, God."
Personally, I'm excited about the features mentioned. If I can configure my homepage so I don't see D&D Miniatures content, like I'm stuck seeing on the D&D homepage now, I'm happy.
Was it really worth WotC spending on that money on the second website so you wouldn't have to see DDM news? You could have had a new editor for those D&D books instead. Now was it worth it?
I currently post all of my characters on a private forum for all of my gaming group to see, now I can just use the online tool to put them up on my gamer profile. I also post a recap of each gaming session online because my players are notorious for forgetting details. Do I currently have a private forum for this? Sure. Does everyone? No.
I'm sure that most that would use such a feature, are already using such a feature. Blogger and LiveJournal are free and already useable. You already use such a feature. Why use Gleemax when you're already doing what you need?
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
So, basically, you ran out of "good" things to say about Gleemax, and so it's turned into "Oh, I know you guys will like it. Just trust me on this one." Not the first time I heard that one.
Like other posters on this thread, I'm not interested in fancy gimmicks or a site that duplicates the function of this one (but with a worse default color scheme). If this Gleemax thing actually has anything we'd be interested in, tell us about it, and preferably in detail. Vague statements proclaiming it to be great and wonderful, but with no explanation and with assumptions like "I know you'll all like it" just make it look more and more worthless. The only reason I'm looking at this thread is because I'm curious of what grand scheme of WotC is gonna replace those great magazines that were Dungeon and Dragon. So far, my expectations that it'll be just some poorly thought out money-grubbing scheme by Wizards of the Coast seem to be holding true. If it's not, please prove me wrong.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
Heh. Nah, that's merely why people look at car crashes, in the now-hopeless possibility that a hard copy of Dragon and Dungeon magazine will fly out and hit them in the windshield. :D
Was it really worth WotC spending on that money on the second website so you wouldn't have to see DDM news? You could have had a new editor for those D&D books instead. Now was it worth it?
Since I don't buy D&D books but will likely subscribe to the Digital Initiative, very.
What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters? It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
Oh, you mean like a signature?
You could personally select which information you wanted to see. Maybe you'd want to see D&D and D20 Modern content. Maybe you're only intersted in seeing articles relating to Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance. When it's launched, Gleemax will allow you to choose what information you want to have on the personal home page that you see when you log on.
Already do--I decide what I click and where I go.
Maybe you'll find some blogs you're interested in reading. Maybe one of them is the blog from your DM who posts a weekly round up for what's happened in your campaign. Perhaps he posts that just for your group to see, or maybe he makes it public and lots of other people can come along and read about the adventures of your gaming group. Maybe you'll find some other blogs about campaigns that you'll become interested enough in to want to read.
Google?
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
Online-only premium content? No thanks.
So, basically, you ran out of "good" things to say about Gleemax, and so it's turned into "Oh, I know you guys will like it. Just trust me on this one." Not the first time I heard that one.
Sorry, I should have elaborated more. It had reached the time where I had to leave work and hit the gym if I wasn't going to blow it off, yet again.
The fact that you guys are interested in reading message board content tells me that you'll be interested in what the Gleemax site has to offer. The people who have no interest in blogs from their favorite designers, messages or info from their favorite community members, any form of D&D related tools, or D&D news of any sort might not find it as appealing. But I don't think there are too many of those. Especially not here reading this thread.
The Gleemax name is just a name. Google and Wii were names that many people thought would never catch on and they have.
But yeah, it would be a lot better if the entry screen had a more neutral theme, and you could "opt in" to the silly stuff rather than having to opt out. And the name is dumb too, but whatever.
I'm sure you've heard of them.
Lots of people meet others using those two resources, but what Gleemax will do is provide a user base that is supposedly guaranteed to have similar interests as you.
For myself its most obvious use would be to find new players in the area, but it's not limited to just that.
Based on what I read (I only skimmed it) there's no threat of it replacing the current forums. It's something else entirely. Basically a gamer's club where you don't need to play games, but have the opportunity to meet gamers.
I may or may not use it, but I can definitely see a use for it, but just like any community, it's up to those who belong to it to make it useful and positive.
As for why Wizards would make this?
1) It keeps people playing their games.
2) It may cause Magic players to try Dungeons and Dragons, Dungeons and Dragons players to try D20 Modern, and D20 Modern players to try Star Wars, and etc.
3) There are that would like to play the sorts of games we enjoy, but have difficulty due to their inability to find people in their area. This can potentionally help those and provide benefit to them, as well as bolster interest and sales for WotC.
4) With the local gaming stores seemingly slowly dying out thanks to online vendors it is becoming harder to meet new gamers face to face. This provides an alternative.
Of course, these are just guesses as to the motivations.
I have a question though: Will pages displaying or mentioning non-WotC games be censored, even if WotC games are being mentioned/used?
That's basically the deciding factor on its usefulness for me.
One of the things that I've seen popping up a lot on the Internet in the wake of MySpace and Facebook are targeted social communities. You can think of some of the features Mike has described as "MySpace for Gamers".
MySpace elicits a negative reaction from many gamers. Ever wonder why that is? It's probably a lot of reasons, but I know that for many it's because the people on sites like that are exactly the type of people many gamers hated in high school and college and possibly still detest. Gleemax is aiming to be the site where the other folks are gamers interested in the same thing you all are.
Personally, I'm excited about the features mentioned. If I can configure my homepage so I don't see D&D Miniatures content, like I'm stuck seeing on the D&D homepage now, I'm happy.
When the site is fully functional, this is the type of thing we're looking to provide. Allowing people to pick the type of information they see on their "home page" when they log into Gleemax.
To answer your questions on a personal page with info about me and my characters: I choose to interpret "personal" as "a page with personal info" as opposed to "a page for me" like someone else did. As a person who has recently given up two gaming groups and moved from the most beautiful state in the American Union to an area where he doesn't know anyone at all, I would love that feature. It should also have a means of searching, at least by location. This way, I could find a new gaming group
Right. I could have worded it better. You'll have a "home page" that you can arrange to display the information you're interested in seeing each time you log on. You can also set up a personal info page (if you want) that will provide as much information about yourself if you want.
One of the major goals of the site is to help players find Good DMs and DMs find Good players.
Which brings me to another suggestion: Community pages, for groups of people to participate in. This could work very similarly to how LiveJournal works, which is also open source code. In lue of ARS, LJ would be a nice substitute. It's not as easily searchable, but at least it's more searchable than the forums WotC uses currently. And it's more user friendly, and has a better layout, etc etc. Honestly, pretty much any forum system you choose out there will have a better layout than the current system.
I'm not sure exactly how this will work, but we definitely want to encourage user generated content as much as we can. One the biggest areas of value that I suspect will come of this is that any player who is interested in creating content will be able to set up a page and let others view and comment on it. Different people could also collaborate on things, either pubicly or privately.
I see the most use of this coming not from players building characters, but actually from DMs creating NPCs on the fly. Seriosuly, who wants to spend 32423 hours creating an NPC that exists for, as someone else put it, 4 rounds of combat?
Yeah, maybe it's a ME thing, but I think it would be pretty cool if I posted a character and some DMs decided to use it as an NPC. Well, in my case I'm sure they'd make it a villian...but you know what I mean.
I have a question though: Will pages displaying or mentioning non-WotC games be censored, even if WotC games are being mentioned/used?
That's basically the deciding factor on its usefulness for me.
Gleemax is a site for gamers. It doesn't matter if they play WotC games or the games of our strongest competitors, we want it to be THE place where people can go to find other like-minded folks who are knowledgeable about whatever game they are interested in learning about.
In a lot of ways, the site should be a real boon for smaller independent publishers, since it will allow people to talk about lots of different types of games in a single space.
Gleemax is a site for gamers. It doesn't matter if they play WotC games or the games of our strongest competitors, we want it to be THE place where people can go to find other like-minded folks who are knowledgeable about whatever game they are interested in learning about.
In a lot of ways, the site should be a real boon for smaller independent publishers, since it will allow people to talk about lots of different types of games in a single space.
I agree on it being a boon for smaller publishers. I'm curious to see if viral marketing will become prevalent.
I'll be taking a peek now and again. Hopefully you guys end up with a strong and positive community.
The fact that you guys are interested in reading message board content tells me that you'll be interested in what the Gleemax site has to offer. The people who have no interest in blogs from their favorite designers, messages or info from their favorite community members, any form of D&D related tools, or D&D news of any sort might not find it as appealing. But I don't think there are too many of those. Especially not here reading this thread.
Couldn't the Wizards of the Coast main D&D webpage provide all of that (and often does, I'm including the forums in that statement)? The D&D related tools have yet to prove useful (even eTools). Gleemax still seems unnecessary.
MySpace elicits a negative reaction from many gamers. Ever wonder why that is? It's probably a lot of reasons, but I know that for many it's because the people on sites like that are exactly the type of people many gamers hated in high school and college and possibly still detest. Gleemax is aiming to be the site where the other folks are gamers interested in the same thing you all are.
Actually, I don't know if it's the same for all those gamers, but it's not because it's "the type of people I hated in high school/college". I think it's the maturity level. The extremely low maturity level.
I was immature in high school, I'll admit it, but I'm 26 now. I've grown up. From what I've seen so far of Gleemax's forum, and most (video)gaming forums/websites, they're wrought full of that immaturity. The D&D forums are rarely (at least the parts I visit) immature. People express themselves in a mature, rational manner, rather than resorting to "Internet/Leet Speak" and "STFU/RTFM" acronyms.
By your logic, to show my dislike, and distaste, for Gleemax, I need to stop looking and posting in this thread. Well, no. I will look and post so that I can contribute and hopefully change Gleemax into something I'll actually like. I had to lose my magazines, something I really liked, for something that just feeds my distaste for the internet, a MySpace/Facebook wannabe.
I don't see Gleemax as a "MySpace that's raised to gamer levels", but as my beloved D&D being lowered to "MySpace" levels.
I was immature in high school, I'll admit it, but I'm 26 now. I've grown up. From what I've seen so far of Gleemax's forum, and most (video)gaming forums/websites, they're wrought full of that immaturity. The D&D forums are rarely (at least the parts I visit) immature. People express themselves in a mature, rational manner, rather than resorting to "Internet/Leet Speak" and "STFU/RTFM" acronyms.
Well said, but you forgot the include that Myspace is a breeding ground for the ill-informed.
I don't see Gleemax as a "MySpace that's raised to gamer levels", but as my beloved D&D being lowered to "MySpace" levels.
Very well said as well.
This whole DI thing, as well as the recent feeling of all of the D&D books of the past year, has been this dumbing-down of D&D to "MySpace" levels.
This is just the culmination of this dumbing down.
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
What's to prevent this premium content from being spread to those who don't pay?
I can accept that this may not be for you though.
Currently I don't even have a use for it, but I can see it being a helpful resource if I ever move.
You both are right about MySpace and FaceBook and all those other places being full of children, adolescents, vagrants and hoboes, but I can get along with those people as long as there's some form of commonality between them and myself. There's also the fact that such people do not make up the entirety of those sorts of communities.
The final truth of it is this relies entirely on the community that it attracts. For now I will hope for the best and maybe I will use it in the future.
Why anything?
Is it just me, or is WotC going through a mid-life crisis? Giving itself a 'hip', digital makeover, and trying to ditch their 'old' gamers for younger trade-up gamers.
I feel betrayed.
So, I answered your question and gave you information. I didn't get a sense that you actually considered the questions and what ways things might be of interest to you. I got the sense that you were just waiting to see ways you could knock it down and say "No! No! No!" So I am guessing that I could tell you it would mint you gold coins and your response would be, "Gold coins? Who uses gold coins today? Will my local grocer take them?! No, course not. It's stupid and useless. So again, why? Why?!" :P
But maybe I am wrong. Feel free to explain how you're honestly evaluating the possible pluses and minus of this if you'd like.
His arguement does get us thinking though.
-Is the Character sheet option a unique or interesting tool? What features does it have? Will it recalculate saves, BaB, skills, etc as I enter info or are we effectively spending time to write a second character sheet?
-Will OGL content be allowed/included?
-What safeguards will be provided to ensure that info I provide about myself is not stolen/hacked?
-How will the DI be funded if it is not a pay site? Will this effect the cost of your products?
-What services does the site provide that cannot be emulated or bypassed by search engines, current blogs, or sites such as Yahoo Groups?
These are just a few that come to my mind. I'm not out to tear you down, but I would like these and a few other questions answered.
The fact is that there's a reason why facebook and myspace look the way they do. With social networking sites, the website itself generally tries to be as unobtrusive as possible and let the users create the experience themselves (this is another aspect of that "Web 2.0" buzzword the marketing folks love). Youtube is another good example of this philosophy, although it's not a social networking site. Gleemax is the complete opposite. Sure, users will be able to customize some of these things once the site's off the ground, but you need to make people stay around long enough to do that too. Besides, the entire concept of "let's have a crappy interface and let the users customize it until they like it" is pretty out-of-date.
Finally, basing your entire website around a gimmicky in-joke that the Magic forums ran into the ground about a year ago is a terrible design decision. Seriously, most of that stuff belongs on a site like fatmouse.org, not a serious social networking site run by a large corporation.
Nevermind the look of the thing.. that is just superficial. And if it's just the gateway to my D&D section...i'll probably never see it....Much like the WotC website that i never see because my link goes directly to the D&D section.
As for those that say why or what's in it for me i would be tempted to say...maybe nothing...maybe nothing of what is being offered by the new DI and the new website...with all it's new features...has any interest for you...Maybe you'll stick with what you are accustomed to and nothing will change for you. Maybe you get absolutely nothing new from this if nothing that is being offered is interesting to you. You'll lose nothing (excetion being made for the magazine thing). You'll get your free forums, your free news about new products, some free adventures from time to time and web enhancment.
And those that pay...will get all that crapy new stuff they are taking about...those maping tools and character generation tools and articles about their campaign settings. You loose nothing and a bunch of people get what you don't like...
It's a god darn perfect world!
Pat
As for those that say why or what's in it for me i would be tempted to say...maybe nothing...maybe nothing of what is being offered by the new DI and the new website...with all it's new features...has any interest for you...Maybe you'll stick with what you are accustomed to and nothing will change for you. Maybe you get absolutely nothing new from this if nothing that is being offered is interesting to you. You'll lose nothing (excetion being made for the magazine thing). You'll get your free forums, your free news about new products, some free adventures from time to time and web enhancment.
And those that pay...will get all that crapy new stuff they are taking about...those maping tools and character generation tools and articles about their campaign settings. You loose nothing and a bunch of people get what you don't like...
It's a god darn perfect world!
Pat
Except, in exchange for something that is redundant to the main D&D webpage, I lost my magazines, which I loved. Also, by the looks of things, we'll lose these forums as well, because they'll just be redundant. Also, if you'll look in the Questions thread above, you'll see that there is apparently information about Gleemax in the podcast that they have on there. That's another "online downside". How do I know if there is information in that podcast that I'll actually use without listening to the whole thing? I hate morning radio because there's too much talk and no music. Is this what I should expect from the podcasts?
Also, the resources that were poured into the redundant* Gleemax, could have been more useful for everyone. Better editors for the books, errata for the already erroneous books, more Community Liasons so we don't have to share with MtGO and run Mike ragged. Those are all things that I "lose" because of Gleemax, including the magazines.
(* Yes, redundant. There's a forum here. There is news here. There is everything already here. Why build a whole new apartment building elsewhere, when you've already got most of the floors already completed here?)
We lost Dungeon and Dragon for this?
I mean really, there are 100s of sites out there (Okcupid, myspace, etc) that do this kind of stuff...
Thanks Hasbro... just thanks...
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
Don't confuse "willing to click a link once and comment in a forum" with "willing to tolerate poor site design long term."
I don't have a link to ENWorld in my Favorites folder because of the their color scheme, and unless the default of Gleemax changes, I don't expect I'll bother with it either.
Yes, I will completely pass on it no matter how much I might otherwise be interested if I fine the default site an effort to use. It doesn't matter that I might have some personal page where I can change it. That presumes I care to maintain such a page even at a minimal level. I'm barely cognizant of the setting I have for this forum.
I'm aware WotC puts a lot of effort into visual effects and themes for its products. You should be aware of the significant negative effect it can have for some products and effect schemes. The current one for Gleemax will make me a non-customer.
p.s. i will be contacting anonymous about this, because anonymous does not sleep
Oh dear.
Is it just me, or is WotC going through a mid-life crisis? Giving itself a 'hip', digital makeover, and trying to ditch their 'old' gamers for younger trade-up gamers.
I feel betrayed.
This hits the nail on the head for me. It's been intimated before that WOTC made a calculated decision to move past the older generation and onto a younger generation of new and up-and-coming players. That's their choice, but a poor one I believe. It's the older crowd like me that has exponentially more disposable income to spend on the hobby. And less and less of a reason to spend it on WOTC products. More money for Paizo, I guess.
If you do create a site that has online character sheets, camapign information pages, and the like, I might be interested in using it. But the current name and flavor for the site are very disruptive and annoying.
I am still holding out hope for the digital initiative though.
1....its something new
2....you dont have to pay for it
3....they ARE paying for it! (development)
4....you ungrateful people complain!
you all need to learn to appreciate things...i consider myself a gamer, but if gamers are going to be known as ungrateful immature whiners then ill have to find another group of people to identify with.
so now that i have got that off my chest... it seems like it has a lot of potential and a lot of cool possibilities. theres not a lot of information available yet, but im curious to se the direction it goes.
I LOVE THE BRAIN IN THE JAR!!! whats not to love about a brain in a jar!!
and the color scheme is cool. i dont care what anyone else says.
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
I'm sorry. I don't get it. Its as meaningless to me as Barney is to my grandfather. Its time to move on.
I've made a ton of friends over the years and met a ton of interesting people; I've been to so many wonderful places (too many to list). All thanks to a simple game. That says more than I ever could. Thanks for the fun and the memories!
Your friend always,
Dwayne Thomas
The simple fact that you folks are reading this thread (and are engaged enough to actually reply) tells me that you'll find plenty of interest in Gleemax.
Have you never heard the term "morbid curiosity?" I think that you should get very used to the concept, it will be a recurring theme, I think.
Just a couple of quick comments need to be made.
"Gleemax" would be a very bad name for a joke porn-site. To have it associated with DnD in any way is a travesty.
To be tying DnD ever closer to "Magic: the Puling" is a grave error. This is from a rules standpoint and a brand-identification standpoint. Just as the miniatures game continually makes older sets of figures obsolescent; and (from what I understand of the game's dynamic) MtG makes older card sets equally obsolescent, the same lack of reasoning seems to be pervading DnD with every new rule book.
Not everyone wants a "social networking" site. Forums are fine for many of us.
Most blogs are ignored because most people write badly about things few people are interested in. This will not change because WotC is involved in the site.
WOW!!! the VAST majority of you will complain about ANYTHING!!
1....its something new
2....you dont have to pay for it
3....they ARE paying for it! (development)
4....you ungrateful people complain!
you all need to learn to appreciate things...i consider myself a gamer, but if gamers are going to be known as ungrateful immature whiners then ill have to find another group of people to identify with.
so now that i have got that off my chest... it seems like it has a lot of potential and a lot of cool possibilities. theres not a lot of information available yet, but im curious to se the direction it goes.
I LOVE THE BRAIN IN THE JAR!!! whats not to love about a brain in a jar!!
and the color scheme is cool. i dont care what anyone else says.
Agreed.
I think one of the major problems it is running into, at least in this thread, is that right now it has a major leaning toward only one WotC product. Gleemax was a Magic thing up until this, and choosing that name alienates some of the other groups.
Also, to the person that mentioned that they couldn't determine a purpose at first glance, remember that all of the "what are gleemax" posts, plus several games and other related threads got moved into it when it was first made. If you think it's bad now, you should have seen Magic General. The spam was almost unbearable until they did that. Once some of those threads die out, it'll get better.
Now, about that quote above...I think all of you need to just sit back and chill out. If you don't like it, then no one is forcing you to go there. If you don't want to use it, then no one is going to make you. As my mother used to say: "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." If you think it's not going to be for you, then just ignore it.
Sorry if this came off as somewhat rantish, but it just seems like you guys are trying to complain. If you are trying to suggest things to improve it, that's a good thing...but not here. I would contact those in charge of it, and probably in a more private format to prevent spammers and nay-sayers from derailing it. Gamer_Zer0 can probably provide a contact route or method.
I apologize if this sounded like a personal attack on anyone, because it wasn't. This is just me speaking my mind, and saying that perhaps you should just see how things turn out, rather than just saying it sounds like a bad idea. Personally, I actually don't think I'll ever use it, but I'm going to reserve judgement, just in case.;)
I'm sorry. I don't get it. Its as meaningless to me as Barney is to my grandfather. Its time to move on.
I've made a ton of friends over the years and met a ton of interesting people; I've been to so many wonderful places (too many to list). All thanks to a simple game. That says more than I ever could. Thanks for the fun and the memories!
Your friend always,
Dwayne Thomas
I am not here to post anything about Gleemax or the DI because it is late (12:20am) and I have a huge presentation to make tomorrow about our 2008 D&D RPG and minis lines (paper based books and plastic BTW). I have read through the thread and there are some strong opinions here (and that is OK). Before go to bed I want to ask one question:
If all the talk of Gleemax/DI/etc is not your cup of tea why would you quit the game instead of just continuing to play D&D the way you like to?
Sincerely,
"Gleemax" would be a very bad name for a joke porn-site. To have it associated with DnD in any way is a travesty.
To be tying DnD ever closer to "Magic: the Puling" is a grave error. This is from a rules standpoint and a brand-identification standpoint. .
Ok I said I wouldn't post anything else tonight (now 12:30 am) but I do want to address this witha quote from Randy Buehler from his ICv2 interview.
[INDENT]"We do have plans for D&D. I'm sure you noticed the license to the Dungeon magazine and the Dragon magazine reverted to us. We let people know that we have plans, but we're not ready to announce them yet. The story that we're ready to tell at this stage is the story about Gleemax. The story about D&D is for another day"[/INDENT]
http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/10728.html
Until another day, just keep playing.
"If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all."
I don't believe anyone here has said anything "not nice". I can't see how there's anything wrong with asking for more information, or in expressing doubts over such a thing so significant as this Gleemax/Digital Initiative thing. Frankly, I'm irritated that people once again are trying to divide themselves into "Pro-WotC" and "Anti-WotC" groups, putting down anyone who doesn't eagerly gulp down every bit of crap the company gives us. If people don't like something about a product or such, they should complain: that's what these boards are for, and complaining tells the company that something is wrong in the hopes of it being fixed. If you disagree with someone else's opinion, you are perfectly capable of skipping over it (even adding them to your ignore list, if you feel the need). If the person is not breaking the CoC, it's unnecessary to don troll and flame gear before plowing into the discussion.
But then again, that's just me. Again, no offense to Vargasan, as I kinda singled him out this time.
Ok I said I wouldn't post anything else tonight (now 12:30 am) but I do want to address this with a quote from Randy Buehler from his ICv2 interview.
[INDENT]"We do have plans for D&D. I'm sure you noticed the license to the Dungeon magazine and the Dragon magazine reverted to us. We let people know that we have plans, but we're not ready to announce them yet. The story that we're ready to tell at this stage is the story about Gleemax. The story about D&D is for another day"[/INDENT]
http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/10728.html
Until another day, just keep playing.
Thanks for replying to my post. Since I have no idea what an "ICv2" is, I fail to see how it applies to most of what I wrote.
I've made a ton of friends over the years and met a ton of interesting people; I've been to so many wonderful places (too many to list). All thanks to a simple game. That says more than I ever could. Thanks for the fun and the memories!
You'd be amazed at how many "Looking for players" threads we have to move each month. We've got a whole forum for it, and no matter what we do to keep people informed that such a forum exists, (one attempt included making the link in a "can't miss it" blue color.) folks still post "looking for gamers" all over the place.
I'm not trying to be pro or anti WotC. Actually, when I posted that, I was mainly thinking about Vargasan taking Gamer_Zer0's every possible use and reason and give a counterpoint reason as it applied to him. To me, that's just trying to find something wrong with it, as Gamer_Zer0 pointed out fairly quickly. Asking for more information: Good. Taking ideas and uses from the Rep and just rejecting them because you can't see a use for it: Not good.
But then again, that's just me. Again, no offense to Vargasan, as I kinda singled him out this time.
I think it's unfair to assume Vargasan was disagreeing just to be contrary, especially since many other posters made the exact same questions and concerns. I also see it as a bit of a cop-out to questions that don't seem to have any satisfying answers.
I really would like to know about anything beneficial or worthwhile in this "Digital Initiative," but all I see is a bunch of unnecessary gimmicks, poorly designed layouts, and redundant features (as in: we already have a discussion board and news site). If someone else can find enjoyment from some evil mind-controlling MySpace wannabe, then fine. I myself just cannot see the appeal.
You'd be amazed at how many "Looking for players" threads we have to move each month. We've got a whole forum for it, and no matter what we do to keep people informed that such a forum exists, (one attempt included making the link in a "can't miss it" blue color.) folks still post "looking for gamers" all over the place.
I wonder if some special "GM/Player finding feature" will change that, and how many more misplaced posts there will be from people who can't find the nonexistent message board section for it, so they just put it in the Gleemax-equivalent of D&D General.
you all need to learn to appreciate things...i consider myself a gamer, but if gamers are going to be known as ungrateful immature whiners then ill have to find another group of people to identify with.
Pretending to like something you have no plans on paying for would be dishonest on my part. If you have a defense for Gleemax give it, rather than simply say dissenters are whining.
That said, I do find myself torn. On the one hand, I look at Gleemax and see a terrible site that burns my eyes. I think that it, as others have said, is trying to market itself as some kind of hip, new, and supposedly useful thing and I don't feel like that's the case.
OTOH, I do believe there is a lot of potential for the Digital Initiative which isn't saying the mags had to die for it. I am hoping Wizards realizes they need to give us more content and less social-networking illusions for the DI to be worthy of taking the place of the mags.
If you don't like it, then no one is forcing you to go there. If you don't want to use it, then no one is going to make you. As my mother used to say: "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all." If you think it's not going to be for you, then just ignore it.
Great advice.
As I currently don't see a need for what Gleemax.com is offering, I think I'll just ignore it and continue on my merry way.
However, if no one expresses their dislike of the advertised features, and instead stays away from the site, how will WotC make it a useful, meaningful place for people to gather?
In short, if only a few hundred people visit because everyone else considers the site's content superfluous (and thus, don't comment or visit the site), how is WotC going to make this the "Next Big Thing" as they plan?
The story that we're ready to tell at this stage is the story about Gleemax. The story about D&D is for another day"
I don't see why it's so hard for people to understand this is just one small part of the big whatchamathingy....Digital Initiative. That was patently obvious the moment Gleemax was unveiled.
If all the talk of Gleemax/DI/etc is not your cup of tea why would you quit the game instead of just continuing to play D&D the way you like to?
Sincerely,
I've been "on the bubble" since the cancelation of the mags; I took the news really hard.
You're right, Gleemax isn't my cup of tea. I don't intend to quit the game; I will continue to play with the same small circle of friends I always have. By the same token, the hobby seems to be evolving into the MySpace generation, something I just don't get. Instead of making my world larger, my hobby has lost some of its appeal. Its time to move on.
Scott, with all sincerity and utmost respect, thank you
.I wonder if some special "GM/Player finding feature" will change that, and how many more misplaced posts there will be from people who can't find the nonexistent message board section for it, so they just put it in the Gleemax-equivalent of D&D General.
What do you mean, nonexistent? It's right here> http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=347
I personally don't care what the "cover" of Gleemax looks like, I want to see what it will offer me. I thought it was one of those lessons learned in life about maturity that you not judge a book by its cover. Not to mention, such a product seems to want to promote FLGS's and even other gaming systems. I think the mature thing is to look past its cover and see what it will offer in time. If it brings gaming more life, offers non-gamers a place to get their feet wet and see if they like it or in some other way promotes a better community for gaming then who honestly cares what the theme is?
1....its something new
2....you dont have to pay for it
I disagree.
1: So far, it's not offering anything we don't already have.
2: We did pay for it; we sacrificed Dungeon and Dragon Magazines for it. That was our payment.
I disagree.
1: So far, it's not offering anything we don't already have.
We don't have "submit a picture for points."
2: We did pay for it; we sacrificed Dungeon and Dragon Magazines for it. That was our payment.
That's the second time I've seen someone try to link Gleemax up with the magazine licenses. They are not directly connected.
We don't have "submit a picture for points."
That's the second time I've seen someone try to link Gleemax up with the magazine licenses. They are not directly connected.
To be fair, if anyone funded the Digital Initiative it's probably MTGO- you can kind of see that the idea was pitched on its "success", and some resources from Magic Online are known to have been diverted into making the Goblin Game at least. We don’t know what resources were diverted into the DI however, we just know that apparently we’re apart of it- even though we’re not really affected by it. Maybe I’m wrong, time will tell.
From what I can tell, it seems like an attempt to promote paper/table top communites, but its still pretty vague, and the marketing is specifically towards a younger audience. Its a reconciliation between paper and online, not an alternative such as MTGO. It seems like a tremendous task though, and it's pretty obvious that they're investing quite a lot into it- which is worrying considering the idea needs to be handled extremely well to be succesful, but it's not like all of Wotc's initiatives have been a success. So the big question is what happens if it flops, and what exactly is funding it.
Ok I said I wouldn't post anything else tonight (now 12:30 am) but I do want to address this witha quote from Randy Buehler from his ICv2 interview.
[INDENT]"We do have plans for D&D. I'm sure you noticed the license to the Dungeon magazine and the Dragon magazine reverted to us. We let people know that we have plans, but we're not ready to announce them yet. The story that we're ready to tell at this stage is the story about Gleemax. The story about D&D is for another day"[/INDENT]
http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/10728.html
Until another day, just keep playing.
I figured that Gleemax =/= DI (since it's way too early for that), but like I said, I wasn't especially encouraged by it. It does indeed sound like a Myspace for gamers, which is what I thought Gamer_Zer0 was implying. *shrug* Not interested.
That said, I am content to wait to see the DI before passing judgement.
And after reading the latest OotS I'm in such a cheerful mood that it fails to bug me in the slightest!
And after reading the latest OotS I'm in such a cheerful mood that it fails to bug me in the slightest!
Agreed...All my nitpickyness and irritations just kinda melted away...funny how that works.
To be fair, if anyone funded the Digital Initiative it's probably MTGO- you can kind of see that the idea was pitched on its "success", and some resources from Magic Online are known to have been diverted into making the Goblin Game at least. We don’t know what resources were diverted into the DI however, we just know that apparently we’re apart of it- even though we’re not really affected by it. Maybe I’m wrong, time will tell.
From what I can tell, it seems like an attempt to promote paper/table top communites, but its still pretty vague, and the marketing is specifically towards a younger audience. Its a reconciliation between paper and online, not an alternative such as MTGO. It seems like a tremendous task though, and it's pretty obvious that they're investing quite a lot into it- which is worrying considering the idea needs to be handled extremely well to be succesful, but it's not like all of Wotc's initiatives have been a success. So the big question is what happens if it flops, and what exactly is funding it.
Very true, but I don't think there's any seperate "fund" as it were from the different brands. It all comes from the same source: WotC.
and the color scheme is cool. i dont care what anyone else says.
The color scheme quite literally gave me a headache. I had to leave the site. Which means it doesn't matter what cool content is out there for me to look over - I can't.
Scott, Mike, somebody - is there any chance of choosing more normal colors? Right now, I can't give your portal a fair chance, because I can't spend more than a couple minutes looking at the colors.
Ok I said I wouldn't post anything else tonight (now 12:30 am) but I do want to address this witha quote from Randy Buehler from his ICv2 interview.
[INDENT]"We do have plans for D&D. I'm sure you noticed the license to the Dungeon magazine and the Dragon magazine reverted to us. We let people know that we have plans, but we're not ready to announce them yet. The story that we're ready to tell at this stage is the story about Gleemax. The story about D&D is for another day"[/INDENT]
http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/10728.html
Until another day, just keep playing.
1) What's icv2? I've never heard of it...
2) Is Gleemax the "Digital Initiative" that's replacing Dragon and Dungeon?
What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters? It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
You know, in another thread at another time, I asked a question regarding how flexible and consumer-reactive WotC was prepared to be. Here comes the moment to flex.
This could be REALLY useful. Or it could be a pointless ego boost. The difference is that if posted characters could be easily indexed and searched, this could be REALLY useful. If posted character sheets/statblocks can't be trivially searched by class/race, then this is a waste of effort.
Hear me now. If you turn this feature into a massive pile of ready-to-use NPC statblocks generated by the community, this one feature will be a boon to DMs everywhere. If you fail to do so, you are inventing a MySpace page for us geeks, who are fairly typically socially inept.
In closure, I'm using this feature you mention as an example of the difference between awesome and pointless. Everything about the DI must be useful and powerful. Not cool and shiny. Good luck.
Dragonlover
The color scheme quite literally gave me a headache. I had to leave the site. Which means it doesn't matter what cool content is out there for me to look over - I can't.
Scott, Mike, somebody - is there any chance of choosing more normal colors? Right now, I can't give your portal a fair chance, because I can't spend more than a couple minutes looking at the colors.
I'm going to be passing that on (along with other info) when I get into work this morning.
1) What's icv2? I've never heard of it...
http://www.icv2.com/index.html
It's basically a news site that covers toys and games, among other things.
2) Is Gleemax the "Digital Initiative" that's replacing Dragon and Dungeon?
No. Gleemax is the social networking side and infrastructure that will support the D&D DI when it's launched. Think of Gleemax as the Stadium and D&D as the band or sports team you're going to see. The band isn't going to bring their own plumbing and seats to the stadium, but they're going to bring their own content.
You know, in another thread at another time, I asked a question regarding how flexible and consumer-reactive WotC was prepared to be. Here comes the moment to flex.
This could be REALLY useful. Or it could be a pointless ego boost. The difference is that if posted characters could be easily indexed and searched, this could be REALLY useful. If posted character sheets/statblocks can't be trivially searched by class/race, then this is a waste of effort.
This is an example of the exact type of feedback that will be helpful. (although I know folks have already been thinking about how search will work on everything, especially stuff like that) I'm hoping that once we get over the name and the color scheme of the launch page, we can shift the discussion on how we can make sure this stuff is as useful for the community as possible.
Hear me now. If you turn this feature into a massive pile of ready-to-use NPC statblocks generated by the community, this one feature will be a boon to DMs everywhere. If you fail to do so, you are inventing a MySpace page for us geeks, who are fairly typically socially inept.
Right. It's not supposed to be a dating or popularity site. Gleemax is intended to give gamers the tools they need to help support their gaming, including meeting other gamers of like mind.
Gleemax is indeed shiny, new, and flashy. Gleemax is kinda like bubble gum, when most of us are quite past bubble gum. Doesn't mean bubble gum is bad, I remember bubble gum, and remember that I enjoyed it once, but, yes, unfortunently, outgrew it. And some are merely questioning if Gleemax is meant to be for us.
Also, I wouldn't say that there has been a major rush to judgement, but as was pointed out, Gleemax is a Magic thing, and we are D&D gamers (for the most part), and our understanding and comprehension of it is limited.
If Gleemax isn't intended for the D&D community, I think it just enhances the anticpation of what exactly the DI (or at least teh D&D portion of the DI) will be. But, I would have to say that painfully lime-green text on a black background is moderately unappealing to me as well. Yes, I can read it, but I must say, reading black text on parchment colored backgrounds is significantly more plesaing for me. I think something more sedate and straight forward is what is desired here. Clearly delineated sections as what can be found on the main D&D pages, as well as the preposed content shift from Dragon and Dungeon.
At first blush though, I must say Gleemax kinda reminded me of some horrid mix between some alien varient of HAL and the "the computer" from the Paranoia RPG.
If all the talk of Gleemax/DI/etc is not your cup of tea why would you quit the game instead of just continuing to play D&D the way you like to?
Please, look at the real picture.
People aren't quiting the game. This isn't (yet) an MMO that we have to pay monthly for. We'll simply quit buying WoTC products. How's that sound?
WoTC has failed before with making promises it just couldn't keep. From poor editing that would be acceptable in a magazine but far from it in a hard cover book (ironically, Dragon had wonderful editing), to total dropping the ball on online content so far. There is NO reason to believe that the DI will be any less than an incompetent mess ... the best we can hope for is that it works marginally.
Thanks for replying to my post. Since I have no idea what an "ICv2" is, I fail to see how it applies to most of what I wrote.
And by the way, spell-checkers do not stop working at any given time of day. If you do not know where to find one for your browser, PM me. I should be able to help you find one.
There is also a search engine function in your browser as well. Let me know if you need help looking for "ICv2".
Complaining about spelling in a gaming board is like complaining about Smoke in a burning building.
The color scheme quite literally gave me a headache. I had to leave the site. Which means it doesn't matter what cool content is out there for me to look over - I can't.
Scott, Mike, somebody - is there any chance of choosing more normal colors? Right now, I can't give your portal a fair chance, because I can't spend more than a couple minutes looking at the colors.
Gee, my light red (pink) forum idea doesn't look so bad anymore. :P
From what I read somewhere else around here, they're working on letting you set the colors to your default color scheme.
I need a place to store and keep my characters that I can access from any Internet connection. I'd like to be able to generate them and have access to all the rules with the books I own. I'll be open, I like buying the books, I'm not pleased with having to rebuy the digital content to use the site. I'm more likely to not use the web site, than I am stop buying books.
I'm a traditional table top player, I do not use a laptop when I game; therefore, for me, initiative trackers and the lot have no value to me. If I must access the site while playing to get the most use from it, it has no value to me.
My 2 Galifar.
We don't have "submit a picture for points."
Paradox, You say that like it's a bad thing. :P
That's the second time I've seen someone try to link Gleemax up with the magazine licenses. They are not directly connected.
Perhaps not directly, but it is a part of the same beast which is directly responsible. Guilt by association AND it's horrendously ugly.
BURN IT!!! It's a witch!
I need a place to store and keep my characters that I can access from any Internet connection.
I can send you an invite to Gmail. That way you can email yourself Word documents of your characters free of charge.
Think of Gleemax as the Stadium and D&D as the band or sports team you're going to see. The band isn't going to bring their own plumbing and seats to the stadium, but they're going to bring their own content.
Now it all makes sense! It is that multi-billion dollar stadium that no one wanted, but all have their taxes raised for!
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Honestly, I was confused. As the person in my circle that is always expaining how/why things work to people, I found my self at a loss last night. When I looked at gleemax I was just... shellshocked.
I spent about 30 mins on the site. I had a real hard time gathering any information about what it was or what is was soposed to do. In the end I decided that it was an 'in game' site to roleplay the whole attack of gleemax and aliens. As such, I was unimpressed.
It has been said that now is the time to tell the story of Gleemax. Then tell it, don't talk about telling it. To understand what gleemax was, I had to come back to this site and hear it from my D&D fellows.
Basically, I am confused. Confusion brings frustration.
Some WotC staffer said that the loss of Dungeon & Dragon magazines were not directly related to this site. I say the sun and the moon also are not 'directly related' with earth but without one, we are screwed.
WotC reigned in all of their licenses that we are aware of: Etools, Dragon & Dungeon. We all have agreed that the DI is the cause of this. Gleemax is the first step of the DI. Most of us don't like the current direction and are trying to voice same so that we may enjoy it.
You will find that almost everyone here WANTS to like the DI. That is why we complain about the current rendition.
So again, after 30 mins on Gleemax, and after reading this entire thread I still have to ask: What in the Bator is gleemax.com?
You will find that almost everyone here WANTS to like the DI. That is why we complain about the current rendition.
Had they not senselessly killed Dragon and Dungeon, but rather kept them alive while launching this DI, far far fewer people would be upset.
But as it is, WoTC does not care if we are upset. I mean, who are we? Customers? Who needs those nowadays? Especially when they have sheep who will buy anything WoTC puts out and never think bad of them.
I can send you an invite to Gmail. That way you can email yourself Word documents of your characters free of charge.
Or use a more appropriate tool such as Google Docs.
It's easy to spit out negative presumptions without actual knowledge of the company's business data. It's also easy to nitpick every little detail and jump to conclusions based on very little information. I suggest we all wait and see rather than presume the worst.
Fact: gleemax.com is horribly ugly to the majority of those who have commented on it.
Fact: We have been told that we will be able to customize it to a less repugnant color scheme once we have our 'personnal' portals.
Opinionated presumtion on my part: Yet another marketing blunder by the Powers That Be at WotC. Surely they couldn't have thought the headache green and black colors and cutesy brain-in-a-jar would appeal to the generally older crowd that plays D&D... A change should have been implemented prior to the big announcement. (Or at the very least, the ability to change it.)
Fact: In order to use most online content in-game the average gamer will need to print it out and take a hard copy with him.
Opinion: I'd really rather not print things that I need. The magazines were much more user friendly in this aspect. As such I am more interested in the not-officially-announced hardbound 'compendiums' that hopefully will bring to print the more popular and useful items.
These three facts seem to be the biggest concerns ATM.
The color scheme quite literally gave me a headache. I had to leave the site. Which means it doesn't matter what cool content is out there for me to look over - I can't.
Scott, Mike, somebody - is there any chance of choosing more normal colors? Right now, I can't give your portal a fair chance, because I can't spend more than a couple minutes looking at the colors.
I'm going to be passing that on (along with other info) when I get into work this morning.
Thanks. I want to give your product a fair chance. I want to understand what the heck it is (I still haven't really figured it out, even with everybody's analogies (more below)). But I can't even consider it at the moment. I tried again this morning, for a brief period of time, because yesterday was a bad day all around (I had to be in work 4 hours early because of an error on a report used by the executives). So just to make sure my issues weren't caused by my bad day, I did try again. And my eyes started hurting again.
No. Gleemax is the social networking side and infrastructure that will support the D&D DI when it's launched. Think of Gleemax as the Stadium and D&D as the band or sports team you're going to see. The band isn't going to bring their own plumbing and seats to the stadium, but they're going to bring their own content.
So maybe I'm not as smart as I think. But I'm still not getting it. This analogy doesn't really help me understand what it is.
If Gleemax is the stadium and the D&D DI is the football team, then in order for me to go watch the football team I'll need to go to Gleemax. Yes?
Opinion: I'd really rather not print things that I need. The magazines were much more user friendly in this aspect. As such I am more interested in the not-officially-announced hardbound 'compendiums' that hopefully will bring to print the more popular and useful items.
See, I'd rather print what I need and find the magazines impractical. I either have to photocopy the content I'd like to use during a game which is more difficult than printing from a searchable, original copy, or I have to bring a stack of magaziens to the table taken up more precious real estate on my limited GMing space and flip through the magazines which are then at more risk of getting damaged from wear and tear.
Additionally, I have a library of Dragon and Dungeon magazines on my shelf, but don't ask me where to find that one Class Acts article that featured a particular class variant, let alone which issue of Dungeon had that adventure that featured a low-level crawl through the Underdark.
Finally, virtual storage is expandable while physical storage is not. I don't have to worry about that digital content taking up additional space in my home.
Personally, I wish Paizo had offered a digital subscription option to Dragon and Dungeon Magazines, but they only made them available well after they were out of print copies.
As an aside, you're mixing issues in your argument. Digital Dragon and Dungeon have nothing to do with Gleemax as an optional community resource.
Edit: Another analogy might be a public library. I enjoy reading books, but I don't have to go to a library to read them. However, if I chose to, I could go to a library to learn about other books of which I might not have otherwise heard. Additionally, community events might expose me to more resources of which I might not have been aware either.
[Rant]
1.) That color scheme has to go. It is a migraine waiting to happen. I understand that this site was at first a joke site to cover up the real purpose behind it, but the cat is out of the bag. Time to legitimize the site and make it readable by the masses.
2.) I want to link all of you to something... Zerrius T'Venn. This is my character in a game some of you might be familiar with, Everquest 2. This is a popular MMO and the first one to include a personal website for each of its subscribers. You are able to view all your characters' info, check out the guild pages, etc. This feature was so popular that Sony ported it over to all of their other MMOs. People actually pay an extra monthly fee to Sony so that they can get access to things like leaderboards and rankings. Because of things like this, I believe that the whole adding your characters online feature will go over very well, and depending on how they go about doing it, it could be very helpful. For instance, Imagine if WotC does put out a chargen application (god help me, not a web based one), and allows you to do a simple upload to your personal site. I would think the CharOp boards would have a field day with a feature like this. Its a great way to create quick NPCs and store them for use anywhere. This leads me to...
3.) How many of you here are world-builders? *raises hand* How many of you have websites or threads dedicated to the world you built? *raises hand* Imagine if WotC gave you a place to post all that information, for little or no cost (perhaps using a wiki type web app). Would that be worth it? That sounds like the type of thing we are looking at here. After all, many pay for the webhosting, or the space, or the domain... why not have it all integrated into something like this where you can post all your campaign settings, use the chargen app to stat up all your NPCs for you, upload them to the website and post it all for the world to see. Personally, I think this would be an absolutely wonderous idea.
4.) I would think the idea of personal blogs on a site like this would be welcomed. After all, everyone here seems to love spouting off uninformed opinions (myself included), and that is basically the definition of a blog. A place to post whatever you want for everyone to read. Many of you have read blogs and don't even realize it. Even CNN now posts many stories in blog format. For you RPers, blogs are wonderful. I am an RPer For a long time, in Everquest 2, I ran a blog from my character's point of view, since as many point out, MMOs are lacking on RP. I cataloged my adventures, narrated big moments in his life, etc. Did people read it? I don't care. I did it for me, not them. Helped me flex my RP muscle. I see this as a wonderful tool for players and GMs alike. Wizards often posts little stories about the goings on in FR and Eberron on their website. Imagine you doing the same for your own world, at your leisure, for your players (who have internet connections) to read.
5.) There have been quite a few people here that are doing nothing but bashing everything about this. I don't understand you guys. Noone is shoving this down your throats, and just because you haven't used something like this in the past, doesn't mean you won't like it if you try it. You should at least try it before you verbally destroy it. It has been stated numerous times, that this is not connected to the magazine cancellation, no matter how much some of you want it to be. No if, ands or buts....
6.) Like it or not MySpace is THE most popular website on the web. You may not like the connotations that come with the website, however it can be wonderful. Granted most of the personal pages can be hard to read, but it is about the community, not how good the people are at web-design. Me and my wife have been able to reconnect with many old friends because of that site (and yes, I am very firmly within that 25-35 age bracket). If WotC were to create a similar sense of community with a similar type of website, good for them; after all, that is what these games are about... community. Even if they fail, I will give them kudos for trying.
Alright...
[/rant]
That is my 2 copper pieces, based as much on speculation and lack of concrete fact as anyone else :P
Oh dear.
Is it just me, or is WotC going through a mid-life crisis? Giving itself a 'hip', digital makeover, and trying to ditch their 'old' gamers for younger trade-up gamers.
This wouldn't be the first time.
Zherog, consider Gleemax to be an option, not a service that is mandatory to consumers. It's the same as our conversation regarding not using RSS feeds for sites you frequently visit. If you don't find value in it, than the service doesn't apply to you, but note that you might be a minority, meaning it isn't necessarily invaluable at all.
Edit: Another analogy might be a public library. I enjoy reading books, but I don't have to go to a library to read them. However, if I chose to, I could go to a library to learn about other books of which I might not have otherwise heard. Additionally, community events might expose me to more resources of which I might not have been aware either.
Your analogies are considerably different from the ones Mike posted.
Mike's example: Gleemax is Citizens Bank Park, and the DI is the Phillies. If I want to go see a Phillies game, I have to get a ticket, go down to South Philly, and go into the park. I can't go see the Phillies without going to Citizens Bank Park.
Your library analogy is very different. There is a book I want to read - we'll say Perdido Street Station by China Mieville, because it is on my "to read" list. So, I have several options available to me. I can go to Barnes and Nobles or Borders, depending on which mall in my area I wanted to travel to. I could hop on-line and go to amazon.com. I could go to the used book store a few miles from my home and try to find it on their shelves. Or, I could go to the library. Numerous options, all give me the same thing.
So yeah - your analogy (one of many ways to get something) is very different from Mike's analogy (the only place to go to get what you want).
Maybe I'm just too damned old.
Your analogies are considerably different from the ones Mike posted.
Mike's example: Gleemax is Citizens Bank Park, and the DI is the Phillies. If I want to go see a Phillies game, I have to get a ticket, go down to South Philly, and go into the park. I can't go see the Phillies without going to Citizens Bank Park.
Your library analogy is very different. There is a book I want to read - we'll say Perdido Street Station by China Mieville, because it is on my "to read" list. So, I have several options available to me. I can go to Barnes and Nobles or Borders, depending on which mall in my area I wanted to travel to. I could hop on-line and go to amazon.com. I could go to the used book store a few miles from my home and try to find it on their shelves. Or, I could go to the library. Numerous options, all give me the same thing.
So yeah - your analogy (one of many ways to get something) is very different from Mike's analogy (the only place to go to get what you want).
Maybe I'm just too damned old.
Mike's analagy was flawed in that it didn't mean you have to use Gleemax (sit in the stadium) to access the D&D related material (watch the game), but as I understand it, his intent was that Gleemax acts as one of several avenues to reach that same destination.
Edit: Even if it is the only avenue to access that content, it doesn't mean you have to use the social networking tools to do so. I assume it would simply be a portal to all resources with the D&D content and the social networking tools being parallel services accessed from the same portal, not inclusive or dependent to one another.
Gleemax needs another optional color scheme. The current one is annoying.
Seriously, are people just not reading this thread? It's been stated several times. We will be able to change the color scheme.
See, I'd rather print what I need and find the magazines impractical.
Finally, virtual storage is expandable while physical storage is not. I don't have to worry about that digital content taking up additional space in my home.
See, I'm a collector. I have a very large D&D Library which covers all incarnations of the game Starting with Chainmail continuing through Drow of the Underdark. I have a complete collection of Dungeon magazine and an impressive number of Dragon through the years. I enjoy the physical much more than some digital pseudo-propety offered by the DI.
As an aside, you're mixing issues in your argument. Digital Dragon and Dungeon have nothing to do with Gleemax as an optional community resource.
No, I'm not. Both are part of the same animal, as I said already elsewhere.
We easily could have had both DI and the magazines. They would have complimented eachother very nicely IMO. As it is, we'll never know for sure.
We easily could have had both DI and the magazines. They would have complimented eachother very nicely IMO. As it is, we'll never know for sure.
As has been stated several times, although Gleemax is digital, it is not part of the "Digital initiative", therefore has no connection to the magazine cancellations. It is not specific to any game, it is a place for gamers in general to congregate. Your arguement holds no water.
No, I'm not. Both are part of the same animal, as I said already elsewhere.
We easily could have had both DI and the magazines. They would have complimented eachother very nicely IMO. As it is, we'll never know for sure.
No they are not, they are part of the same animal in the end, but one is not mutually exclusive to the other.
Seriously, are people just not reading this thread? It's been stated several times. We will be able to change the color scheme.
But, until that time, there's several of us who can't look at the site in order to give it a fair chance. That's why the point keeps coming up, I think.
But, until that time, there's several of us who can't look at the site in order to give it a fair chance. That's why the point keeps coming up, I think.
While that may be true, continuously posting about the awful colors until that time is pointless, too. In other words, let's move along to a more productive conversation rather than griping about a service that is officially acknowledge as incomplete at the moment.
Supposedly, the entire point of the DI is to reach MORE people. But the layout of that site is going to prevent a lot of people from using it. It's a bad design for the general user.
The menus are not intuitive. Leave the "in character" labels out of it if you want this to be a site usable by the general gaming community. My guess is that there are far more gamers out there who AREN'T web savvy than those who ARE.
If you want to target one specific tier of the community, then the site is fine. If you purport to have a desire to reach out to more than one tier, then this site is virtually unusable to a large number of them.
You said that this site would allow us to post characters online, and someone else suggested that a searchable index of these characters would be a great boon. Then the question is: how?
Are we going to have to type up a character and then post the text like for any other website? Is this going to be auto-calculating, so that we can easily level a character (or simply save some time when making a character, rather than having to type everything out twice)? And if so, how will such a feature support the best part of D&D--total customization?
See, I love that with D&D I can add my own custom house-rules to anything and everything. So if I want to give characters extra feats or skill points, I can. If I want to change the HP system to the Wound/Vitality system, I can. If I want to get rid of BAB and replace it with a ThAC0-like system because I love subtraction, I can do that too. The problem I have with most auto-calculating sheets on the net (and there are a ton of them), is that I either can't implement my house rules, or it takes so much effort to put in my complicated house rules that I don't want to bother. So how will the feature offered by "gleemax" deal with this issue?
- Highbulp
And for the record, I want to add that I too dislike the default color-scheme--why not make the default the same as the main Wizards website, or these boards? Also, I dislike the name. How come we don't have a D&D in-joke name? Like punpun.com, or plutoniumgreatsword.com? Why does it have to be a Magic joke?
As has been stated several times, although Gleemax is digital, it is not part of the "Digital initiative", therefore has no connection to the magazine cancellations. It is not specific to any game, it is a place for gamers in general to congregate. Your arguement holds no water.
It has? Care to run some quotes?
It is a part of the Digital Initiative, perhaps you should read the articles quoted in the first two posts of this thread. Then give a listen to the Gamer Radio Zero podcast.
Next, you could read this interview: http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/10687.html.
Follow that with this news article: http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/10725.html
gleemax.com is indeed a part of the DI. It is not what we will have for direct D&D content, but will be linked to and from what we do have. Pull your head out of the sand and before you tell someone their 'argument holds no water', educate yourself. Otherwise you end up looking silly.
That's the second time I've seen someone try to link Gleemax up with the magazine licenses. They are not directly connected.
Gleemax is a social networking site that will support many things, including the D&D Digital Initiative, as well as Magic the Gathering/Magic Online.
...
For example, think of the forums you're posting on now as an example of something that might come from Gleemax, while the articles and other information you get from our current D&D site would be the area with the D&D specific DI content would live.
.. there are more, but these should suffice.
Beyond that, perhaps you should read those articles. Nowhere in them do they say what you are implying. The closest they come is saying that Gleemax will act as a portal to the DI and support it. That does not make it a part of it.
People were assuming Gleemax was the whole DI. The connection being made was "They cancelled Dragon and Dungeon for Gleemax", which makes no sense.
As for reading threads I post in... that's what I'm doing. There are so many, it's tough to keep track sometimes.
:P
The closest they come is saying that Gleemax will act as a portal to the DI and support it. That does not make it a part of it.
Which is exactly my point. Gleemax is not the replacement of the magazines, as people have been infering.
That's the second time I've seen someone try to link Gleemax up with the magazine licenses. They are not directly connected.
As you know, I already replied to that comment. For your bennefit, I will address it again below.
Beyond that, perhaps you should read those articles. Nowhere in them do they say what you are implying. The closest they come is saying that Gleemax will act as a portal to the DI and support it. That does not make it a part of it.
Your cute.
What those articles say is that gleemax.com IS a PART of the digital initiative. What we know is that the magazines are being replaced by online content that is ALSO a part of this DI.
So, no, gleemax is not directly responsible for the magazine licensees ending. I get that, but to say the two aren't related at all is putting blinders on and gobbling up whatever propaganda WotC throws at you.
Cute, but he posted that AFTER my comment.
As for reading threads I post in... that's what I'm doing. There are so many, it's tough to keep track sometimes.
:P
Which is exactly my point. Gleemax is not the replacement of the magazines, as people have been infering.
He meant me. ;)
As for your point, I think I addressed that above.
[/rant]
I still don't think Gleemax.com is anything I care about, but as long as I can get to the D&D DI content without going through Gleemax at all I guess I don't really care.
In essence how will Geemax be a better tool for finding other gamers than the tools that I already have???
After searching both articles for "DI" and "Digital Initiative" i have found nothing but comments as to its supporting role. Could you post a quote as to where it states that it is implicitly part of the DI?
I would think the article title might provide a clue.
Gleemax: WotC's New Online Initiative
Guess not.
As far as the stadium analogy goes, the idea I was trying to get across is that the band playing or the team that's training, has the opportunity to use the field, the parking lot, the rest rooms, the seats, the concession stands, the bill boards, the giant lights, the ushers and security guards, the maintenance people, if they wish.
So maybe the band decides to play out in the parking lot, but lets their fans decide if they want to go into the stadium and use the rest rooms and concession stands.
On the other hand, the public is free to come into the stadium to take advantage of many of the things it has to offer. And some of them may wander over to where the band is playing, or down to the field where the team is practicing. But they'll need to be a premium member if they want to go backstage or into the locker room.
So yeah, as far as analogies go, it's probably not going to win any awards, but hopefully that helps paint a picture of how it could look.
Regarding the Digital Initiative: Gleemax is a huge part of WotC's digital initiative. However, the D&D online initiative will launch on it's own and will use some of the support features offered by Gleemax. So the answer is yes and no.
Thank you, Mike.
That's what I was trying to get across, but some folks just want to be argumentative.
...
What? :evillaugh
I couldn't resist. ;)
Would some one please explain to me how Gleemax is supposed to help me "find other gamers". I am member of the RPGA, I am a long time member of a local gaming club. I have access to the various Gamer seek Gamer forms available on the web. I do not see how Gleemax can do this any better than the resources that I currently have. How will Gleemax weed out the good players from the bad? How will Geemax weed out the good DM's from the bad? Will there be a rating system? Will there be a player ranking system?
In essence how will Geemax be a better tool for finding other gamers than the tools that I already have???
Would bringing more people to your local gaming club be a good thing? I'm assuming that it would, but I suppose one could argue that the last thing they want is more people.
I don't know the details on how the good and bad players/DMs will be identified. Although I can think of lots of different ranking and/or reference methods that could be applied here. I think the possibilities are pretty cool.
Imagine if a new guy moved into town and wanted to join your group and you were able to go to his old city, find his old gaming group, and ask for a reference. Maybe you could just easily go and read a blog from his old DM that talks about the adventures and you could determine for yourself if that person's style of play is compatible with your group.
This is just off the top of my head. I'm sure the smart folks who actually get paid to think about these things have been fleshing out much better ideas.
So yeah, as far as analogies go, it's probably not going to win any awards, ...
Nope, it definitely won't win any awards...
Outside of that, accoridng to Mike's post, it seems we are both correct, so i guess that ends that :D
In response to print vs. digital, enjoy.
I couldn't resist. ;)
Cute. :D
But, as I said, I'm a collector. If you're not, then you simply will not understand.
Cute. :D
But, as I said, I'm a collector. If your not, then you simply will not understand.
I'm a collector. I just do it digitally. ;)
Truthfully, I do understand. I used to collect various things when I was younger. I've shed those things as I got older because I realized they weren't doing much else other than taking up space, and in the end, they were just things. Admittedly, some things I miss, but others I don't.
Would bringing more people to your local gaming club be a good thing? I'm assuming that it would, but I suppose one could argue that the last thing they want is more people.
I don't know the details on how the good and bad players/DMs will be identified. Although I can think of lots of different ranking and/or reference methods that could be applied here. I think the possibilities are pretty cool.
Imagine if a new guy moved into town and wanted to join your group and you were able to go to his old city, find his old gaming group, and ask for a reference. Maybe you could just easily go and read a blog from his old DM that talks about the adventures and you could determine for yourself if that person's style of play is compatible with your group.
This is just off the top of my head. I'm sure the smart folks who actually get paid to think about these things have been fleshing out much better ideas.
This is all well and good, but it still does not explain on how Gleemax will be the better tool for finding other gamers. I see nothing here that looks any better that what I already have.
This is all well and good, but it still does not explain on how Gleemax will be the better tool for finding other gamers. I see nothing here that looks any better that what I already have.
That's OK, you don't have to.
As far as the stadium analogy goes, the idea I was trying to get across is that the band playing or the team that's training, has the opportunity to use the field, the parking lot, the rest rooms, the seats, the concession stands, the bill boards, the giant lights, the ushers and security guards, the maintenance people, if they wish.
So maybe the band decides to play out in the parking lot, but lets their fans decide if they want to go into the stadium and use the rest rooms and concession stands.
On the other hand, the public is free to come into the stadium to take advantage of many of the things it has to offer. And some of them may wander over to where the band is playing, or down to the field where the team is practicing. But they'll need to be a premium member if they want to go backstage or into the locker room.
I just have to say...
...
...
Anyway...I read the article at ICv2, and I have some questions concerning said article. Now, I have more than a few questions, for you, Randy, or anyone who is willing to answer them. I would hate to start asking them on this thread, if this would inappropriate. Would it best to start a new thread, ask here, or is there a specific place that I should go to ask those questions?
On another note, someone asked a question which was summarily ignored and left unanswered. (That is unless I missed it while I was reading this thread)
Whats going to happen to these boards? Are we to understand they are going to be gone, or just subsumed into the new DI?
Help!
Spyder
I concur with Zherog, as long as we can get the info we want with out using the "baby" tool provided by Gleemax, then I will be a happy camper.
I think this is a very bad thing for Wizards to be hearing. What it indicates is that they have missed the mark in the early stages of the endeavor.
If this feeling is held by the wider gaming community, then WotC has a real uphill battle on their hands.
I think this is a very bad thing for Wizards to be hearing. What it indicates is that they have missed the mark in the early stages of the endeavor.
If this feeling is held by the wider gaming community, then WotC has a real uphill battle on their hands.
I think that this feed back is a good thing for WOTC to hear. And, many people do belive that they have indeed missed the mark.
As for the Uphill battle yes. It will be a very large uphill battle for WOTC to undo the PR damage that has been done.
As for the Uphill battle yes. It will be a very large uphill battle for WOTC to undo the PR damage that has been done.
Damage done by the multiple marketing SNAFUs (imho) that have been all we have seen since the announcement of the end of the D&D magazines.
I think that this feed back is a good thing for WOTC to hear.
We're talking in different contexts here. Naturally, it's good for them to receive feedback. But the feedback they are getting is very bad indeed for their DI design team. When your goal is to become THE gaming portal and you have a number of potential users saying "I have no intention of using this portal," something has gone horribly wrong.
I've skipped around a bit. Have they stated in what ways they are soliciting user feedback? Is it purely through these messageboards and the advisory board?
Personally, I think the UI is a nightmare and I think that, in and of itself, is going to chase people away. Hence, gleemax.com runs the risk of joining E-Tools on the scrap heap as yet another demonstration that Wizards can't meet the needs of their users in this particular market.
Damage done by the multiple marketing SNAFUs (imho) that have been all we have seen since the announcement of the end of the D&D magazines.
It goes further back than that, IMHO.
Personally, I want mine to look more D&Dish, because that's what I play. MTG is cool looking, but I don't want sci-fi or tanks. I really don't want alien green and glowing, but, regardless...that's an easy fix for them.
Since none of the content has been released, all they are doing is giving us a useless shell. For me, that's great, but I won't return until the D&D tools I need, or want as the case may be, are released. Until then, no offense intended, the site has very little value to me.
It goes further back than that, IMHO.
True enough.
I'm not worried about the look any feel yet. As a web developer myself, that aspect is easily changed, and many sites allow you to pick your face.
As a web developer, and a former software developer, the UI should never be an afterthought. You can have the greatest product in the world, but if your users can't figure out how to use it, or find what they're looking for, they won't bother with it. Oftentimes, you get one chance to reel them in.
There are problems with what they have that transcend the color scheme.
But then again, I am not in the high-school crowd that this site wants to target. I am in that "old" 25-35 year old range.
Which brings me to my next point. Since one of the features being talked about is the ability for folks to meet up with other folks in real life to play games, that scares me that your target audience is the teenage crowd. If my teenage nephew/neices/grandkids came to me and said "Hey, I want to go play a game with someone I met off this website" the conversations that would ensue would not be pretty or positive, and the end result is they would not be doing that activity. Call me old-fashioned or protective, but I still insist on actually knowing the parent's names, phone numbers, addresses, and having met them in person before releasing kids I am responsible for to them.
As a concerned aunt and grandparent of the target-audience players, this is yet one more site they will not be allowed to access while they are here in my home. (That's 10 players total by the way.) It'll be on the 'not allowed list' for now, along with MySpace and Facebook, since that is what it is attempting to be like, only for gamers. I haven't heard enough mention of what the site is doing in terms of proactively protecting folks from unwanted contacts from other people.
So obviously the question is, since your target audience is teenagers, and you are trying to build a social network to promote people to get together and play games, what failsafes will you have in place to insure that underage information isn't given out inappropriately? Or rather perhaps the reverse question is true as well, what will be there to keep adults in line? Insofar as is possible on the 'net these days I mean. (Yes, people can always lie about stuff, I realize this...)
What about the expected maturity level there? Will it be a place where your typical teenage chat runs rampant, and adults will have to come to their level? Or will there actually be a code of conduct to promote healthy conversations? I have been on many gamer sites and have given up on many of them due to the lack of readability. What about language level, will it be much like this site in terms of curse words being used?
When my nieces/nephews/grandkids are older, they can make these decisions for themselves. In the meantime, they don't run rampant on the 'net and so it is up to me to filter.
As for myself, let me know when the site is "legible as-is" and I'll give it another look. I'm still in the "mostly confused and think it's an odd sounding name" group too. (The word sounds to me like a cleaning product, by the way...) I guess I am "too old" to "get it".
Iolana
I am in that "old" 25-35 year old range.
I must be "venerable" then - I'll be 37 later this year. ;) Though I'm not anywhere near being a grandparent yet. :P
the privacy issues are pretty serious, what with all this "find out about this player by tracking references" rigamarole...
This might be a bit of an over-reaction, I mean I can click on anybodies forum name here and find out exactly as much information as that person wants to share.
(I'm NOT saying there is no cause for concern, it is a valid point. Just saying it's really not much different from what we already can see.)
I must be "venerable" then - I'll be 37 later this year. ;) Though I'm not anywhere near being a grandparent yet. :P
36 this month. Hold me a spot in the 'old fart discount' line. ;)
36 this month. Hold me a spot in the 'old fart discount' line. ;)
35 for me ... just slipped in at the tail end of the "old" category.
Out of the way, you old farts! :D
While that may be true, continuously posting about the awful colors until that time is pointless, too. In other words, let's move along to a more productive conversation rather than griping about a service that is officially acknowledge as incomplete at the moment.
Continuously?
I'm not sure, but I may be the only person who has addressed it multiple times.
The first was to note that I too did not like it. (And I'm very pleased to see I'm not the only one having such a problem.)
The second was in reply to a comment from the community liason about the issue.
And now I'm replying to you.
There is no "continuously," there is "multiple." A number of people do not like it to the point they won't bother commenting on any other aspect because the current presentation makes the product completely unsuable by them or undesirable to them. That is no more or less than multiple people complaining about or praising the style and theme of the art in Planescape, Eberron, or any other product. Is there something inherently wrong with that?
And it does have an effect. We've now had a direct statement that it will be discussed with the design staff. That means that not only are the comments being noted, they are being taken into account. That is a very direct sign that WotC is both open to feedback and seriously interested in marketing this product to a wider base of people. That is hardly something minor or missed by me.
As for the rest of the layout issues, they don't bother me. As an old time gamer, that kind of B-Movie feel is perfectly acceptable to me. It's a tad odd, being more Sci-Fi than Fantasy, but I'm a full spectrum pulp fan, so I can work with it once the color scheme is fixed.
35 for me ... just slipped in at the tail end of the "old" category.
Out of the way, you old farts! :D
Bah! Mouthy little punks. Hooligans, I tell you. Down right disrespectful guttersnipes!
What would be pretty cool, imo, would be premium content that has an xml back end and relates to a custom DTD based on the SRD (or it's future incarnations), as that would be both scalable and search-able.
Why, back in my day... We had to walk to the game store to meet people. Uphill. Both ways. In three feet of snow!
~Where are my glasses, boy?~
I hear you can't even buy those magazines these days. Have to get that on these new fangled com- computer things.
Hmph! I'd like to see you wrap up in one of those for warmth. Gosh darn 'progress...
Bah! Mouthy little punks. Hooligans, I tell you. Down right disrespectful guttersnipes!
Yeah, I was originally going to say 25-40, but see...you old guys and your silly talk. Pffft!!! Hooligans and guttersnipes. Is that some old folk l33t?:D
*kicks out Zherog's cane*
Bah! Mouthy little punks. Hooligans, I tell you. Down right disrespectful guttersnipes!
I'm sure you'd give me a good thrashing if you didn't have to deal with the -3 Str, Dex, and Con penalties for being Venerable. Neener neener neener.:P
* shakes his cane *
Why, back in my day... We had to walk to the game store to meet people. Uphill. Both ways. In three feet of snow!
You had PEOPLE back in those days? I thought it was just you and Eve back then, Gramps.
And we had no shoes! Why, we had to wrap our feet in the pages of old Dragon magazines for insulation.
You mean pages of The Strategic Review, right? ;)
I'm sure you'd give me a good thrashing if you didn't have to deal with the -3 Str, Dex, and Con penalties for being Venerable. Neener neener neener.:P
Those are optional rules, sonny boy. And I don't use 'em! :D
You mean pages of The Strategic Review, right? ;)
[/old man voice]
While it is an older mag, (and excelent obscure reference) it is not as relevent to the current topic. I thought the Dragon reference much more sutible.
[/old man voice]
While it is an older mag, (and excelent obscure reference) it is not as relevent to the current topic. I thought the Dragon reference much more sutible.
Yeah, in retrospect, it was funnier before...
I must be "venerable" then - I'll be 37 later this year. ;) Though I'm not anywhere near being a grandparent yet. :P
Hey, I am just barely still in the "25-35" year old category. Will exit it later this year. Make way in that camp for another "venerable" soon! lol
(btw...6 of those 10 are grandkids) :D
Iolana
What if that personal page had a tool that allowed you to put in all the info from your current and retired D&D characters?
If my players have their characters up-to-date on their personal page, then have to cancel at the last minute, I would be able to go to their personal page and grab their character if they took it home to update it. We like to play and we trudge on when other have commitments outside of gaming. We don't punish them for not being able to show up because Little Timmy has a baseball game. We play their PC for them.
It could also have information about you, your location, age if you choose, what campaigns you're currently running, etc.
This would be a much more organized way to attract new players, if the personal profiles can be searched by the different types of information. I have had some luck with forums in this regard, but this could be more dynamic.
If you were able to run a search on a fixed radius from your location, ages 30-40 [because you might not feel comfortable with a younger group or DM], running an Eberron campaign, that would be a great tool.
Others liken this to MySpace. MySpace can be daunting because interests and ages, etc. vary so widely. A more focused version for gamers only would be welcome. And no, I'm not some young MySpace punk. I'm a 36 year-old who feels like an old fart when I go on MySpace.
You could personally select which information you wanted to see. Maybe you'd want to see D&D and D20 Modern content. Maybe you're only intersted in seeing articles relating to Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance. When it's launched, Gleemax will allow you to choose what information you want to have on the personal home page that you see when you log on.
I could just go look for this stuff myself and probably still would. I kinda like surfing but maybe I'd get used to having it delivered to me.
Maybe you'll find some blogs you're interested in reading. Maybe one of them is the blog from your DM who posts a weekly round up for what's happened in your campaign. Perhaps he posts that just for your group to see, or maybe he makes it public and lots of other people can come along and read about the adventures of your gaming group. Maybe you'll find some other blogs about campaigns that you'll become interested enough in to want to read.
I can always learn something new from others campaign blogs. Even if it's how NOT to run my next campaign. I don't see why other think that only WoTC-staff written blogs are of any value. That's a bit elitist.
A DM's blog can also attract new players to your group if you are seeking them. Or it can help you decide if you want to contact a prospective group that you'd like to play with if you are the one seeking a game.
As far as cost goes, we expect that most people who use the site will never pay us anything. And that's fine. But there will be some premium content that will be available for those who choose to become premium members.
Will that premium content include adventures Mike? Will it be ala cart or would one have to buy a "D&D package" or would both options be available?
I am still angry over the upcoming loss of D&DM, but I still can find some value to what is being revealed, especially for the price so far.
I think had the site been launched as Wizards Community or something simpler, with a fairly normal layout this might be having better responses. I'm intrigued. I'll be looking into it.
Now, I'll admit that I was quite sad to see Dungeon and Dragon magazines go. I'll also admit that I am, quite honestly, a little put off by this whole Gleemax ordeal. However, I also realize that those two events are not directly related to the Digital Initiative, and I'm still holding onto hope that the DI will be a success. I will give this warning though: a company does not have the luxury of separating its actions, as they all tie back to the company. What I mean is that if Wizards makes a bad call in one department, it doesn't matter that it's not necessarily related to another department; the customers care about the image of Wizards, and that one bad call is going to negatively affect their image overall. An appropriate analogy would be a sports team. If you're rooting for the Steelers, you want them to win. But if they lose five games in a row, chance are you're going to expect them to lose their next game, even though the individual games aren't dependent upon one another. If, on the other hand, they can pull off a decisive victory, the fans will once again have faith in their team.
I apologize if any of the above came off sounding uniformed or rude or simply didn't make sense. I'm a bit sleep deprived at the moment, and I must say that after trying to ponder over what Gleemax is supposed to be I'm more than a little confused.
Dear WOTC stop giving us half *****'d unfinished products. This Gleemax might be awesome at some point, but right now it's a waste of time. After all the negative feedback you recieved over the Dungeon and Dragon debacle you'd think that someone would pay attention. Hey we got all this feedback lets launch something that's going to be connected to it's replacement, but not have it ready.
Also don't put Gamer_Zero out there and only let him make partial answers because of the damn confidentiality agreements. I don't care if there part of business, if I only cared about you making money I wouldn't be upset. Either answer all the questions or don't cause till you do we get the fun option of judging you by this kind of product that you produce, and it sucks!
Also this statement makes you look like idiots "and its understanding of what strategy, hobby and tabletop gamers want, " Didn't you learn that when you make a lie like this were going to notice. You said something very similar when you cancelled the freaking magazine and you caugt all kinds of flak for it. So do you listen to what we have to say? Apparently not.
AAHHAHAH someone just shoot me
sorry for all the spelling/grammer but this is just ridiculous.
Bottom line don't launch anything else, till you have it working, and don't produce any more books until you hire someone to actually edit them.
Very true, but I don't think there's any seperate "fund" as it were from the different brands. It all comes from the same source: WotC.
No. it's being funded via MTGO.
"They're also using the proceeds from Magic Online to develop and prop up the network, so chances are it'll be around for a while."
http://boards1.wizards.com/leaving.php?destination=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/72744-Gleemax-Wizards-of-the-Coasts-Gamer-MySpace
No. it's being funded via MTGO.
Since we do not disclose financial information, any notions about funding are purely wild speculation.
A community building tool was one of the few good idea's of the DI that I was anticipating. That Gleemax ... :thumbsdow ... ugh.
We don't have "submit a picture for points."
Oh, that's right. I saw the whole "I WANT TO EAT PIXELS" thing and really did honestly believe the website was hacked. You know, in the fashion that happens when someone wants to embarrass a professional company.
That's the second time I've seen someone try to link Gleemax up with the magazine licenses. They are not directly connected.
That's probably a side effect of having ended the magazines, explaining that they were going to be replaced by "The Digital Initiative", and then popping "Gleemax" out there on the front page without saying "This is not the Digital Initiative". If they're not all related, then it's a fault of bad timing and the lack of communication everyone has been complaining about for the last month or two.
Dennis Stout
What do you mean, nonexistent? It's right here> http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=347
I was referring to the Gleemax "Special player/DM finder" thing and the Gleemax boards. I assumed that, if it had some special tool (which the announcement seems to point out), the designers would see a message board with that same purpose to be redundant. Then again, I don't know, and I'm kinda jumping to conclusions. In any case, I don't think anything will ever be able to entirely eliminate misplaced threads and such ("My friend wants me to trade this card. Am I being ripped off?" in a forum that has nothing to do with card games, or "I'm looking for a D&D group in blah blah blah," in a forum that has nothing to do with D&D).
No. Gleemax is the social networking side and infrastructure that will support the D&D DI when it's launched.
Thank god.
Can fans provide their own spray paint, to mask that hideous color scheme and layout?
Dennis Stout
I understand your job is to put the best face on this that is possible. But you might want to take a moment and deep breath before moving any more onto the defensive. The intention of "Gleemax" and the DI is to provide your customers with tools and information they need and want in a manner that they can make use of and that mutally benefits both the company and the customers, right?
You say Gleemax will have some great stuff on it, some of which you can't tell us about now. Fine. Let's leave off that a moment.
Your core customer base, the one's who read these forums, and who will be the most likely to be using any new online content are giving you some incredibly valuable feedback here. Listen to it. Even if you have to continue on the defensive, even if you have to, because of your job, make excuses for that hideous atrocity, please listen to us.
We are insulted by Gleemax.com. It looks, sounds and presents as juvenile. This is a serious concern. For decades, gamers have tried to demonstrate that our hobby is possible of maturity, seriousness and sophistication. We spend copious amounts of money over time on our hobby. We continue to do so for decades. An initiative designed for flash in the pan returns is poorly thought out. An initiative that alienates the older, mature, and established customer base is down right contrary to what anyone should want. I think we can agree on that?
I can't imagine a social networking game, like you acknowledging D&D is, surviving without a continued healthy, mature fanbase. Older fans, DMs, experienced players and serious hobbyists continue to invigorate the hobby by recruiting new players. We are your best marketing tool.
Gleemax.com doesn't tell me that Wizards of the Coast understands this. It tells me WoTC is out of touch with that mature, serious hobbyist fanbase. The same group of "hardcore gamers" that Gleemax is supposed to be a central draw for in the first place. If you really think we should be impressed with an ugly, poorly thought out website that appears aimed at twitch freaks and the ADD crowd, then you have lost touch. You're right, some of the concepts you talk about being integrated into this gaming social network sound intriguing. It would be a pity if a sizable portion of your fanbase walked away without giving it a chance because your PR and art departments were too damned proud to bend.
Change the name. Gleemax has got to go if you want to appeal to D&D players. I understand it's an inside joke for M:TG, but this is supposed to be an ecumenical site, not catering to one slice of the fanbase above the rest. Find a name that appeals to the broader base of strategy and roleplaying gamers.
Change the colour. That green is just bad. You even admitted it. Don't deny it now. It's bad. It's so bad I wouldn't use the site as it is if it did mint me gold coins. The gold won't be worth the migraines.
Change the theme. You know what? I don't want to be a minion to a brain in a jar. Nor do my players. No, I don't think it's a cute inside joke. I think it's lame.
So, continue defending the current demo site if you must. Refute every point in my post if you feel like it. I don't care. But please, please, go to your superiors and tell them to change the site, the colours, the theme and the marketing theory so as to appeal to, rather than to insult, your core demographic.
Thank you for your time,
Archaelos
25 Year veteran DM
Gamer_Zer0,
I understand your job is to put the best face on this that is possible. But you might want to take a moment and deep breath before moving any more onto the defensive. The intention of "Gleemax" and the DI is to provide your customers with tools and information they need and want in a manner that they can make use of and that mutally benefits both the company and the customers, right?
You say Gleemax will have some great stuff on it, some of which you can't tell us about now. Fine. Let's leave off that a moment.
Your core customer base, the one's who read these forums, and who will be the most likely to be using any new online content are giving you some incredibly valuable feedback here. Listen to it. Even if you have to continue on the defensive, even if you have to, because of your job, make excuses for that hideous atrocity, please listen to us.
We are insulted by Gleemax.com. It looks, sounds and presents as juvenile. This is a serious concern. For decades, gamers have tried to demonstrate that our hobby is possible of maturity, seriousness and sophistication. We spend copious amounts of money over time on our hobby. We continue to do so for decades. An initiative designed for flash in the pan returns is poorly thought out. An initiative that alienates the older, mature, and established customer base is down right contrary to what anyone should want. I think we can agree on that?
I can't imagine a social networking game, like you acknowledging D&D is, surviving without a continued healthy, mature fanbase. Older fans, DMs, experienced players and serious hobbyists continue to invigorate the hobby by recruiting new players. We are your best marketing tool.
Gleemax.com doesn't tell me that Wizards of the Coast understands this. It tells me WoTC is out of touch with that mature, serious hobbyist fanbase. The same group of "hardcore gamers" that Gleemax is supposed to be a central draw for in the first place. If you really think we should be impressed with an ugly, poorly thought out website that appears aimed at twitch freaks and the ADD crowd, then you have lost touch. You're right, some of the concepts you talk about being integrated into this gaming social network sound intriguing. It would be a pity if a sizable portion of your fanbase walked away without giving it a chance because your PR and art departments were too damned proud to bend.
Change the name. Gleemax has got to go if you want to appeal to D&D players. I understand it's an inside joke for M:TG, but this is supposed to be an ecuminical site, not catering to one slice of the fanbase above the rest. Find a name that appeals to the broader base of strategy and roleplaying gamers.
Change the colour. That green is just bad. You even admitted it. Don't deny it now. It's bad. It's so bad I wouldn't use the site as it is if it did mint me gold coins. The gold won't be worth the migraines.
Change the theme. You know what? I don't want to a minion to a brain in a jar. Nor do my players. No, I don't think it's a cute inside joke. I think it's lame.
So, continue defending the current demo site if you must. Refute every point in my post if you feel like it. I don't care. But please, please, go to your superiors and tell them to change the site, the colours, the theme and the marketing theory so as to appeal to, rather than to insult, your core demographic.
Thank you for your time,
Archaelos
25 Year veteran DM
Hey Gamer Zero ... read the note above. Please take it into serious consideration. Communication is a 2 way street and from us to you ... we are trying to communicate. Hopefully WotC will listen.
Gamer_Zer0,
I understand your job is to put the best face on this that is possible. But you might want to take a moment and deep breath before moving any more onto the defensive. The intention of "Gleemax" and the DI is to provide your customers with tools and information they need and want in a manner that they can make use of and that mutally benefits both the company and the customers, right?
You say Gleemax will have some great stuff on it, some of which you can't tell us about now. Fine. Let's leave off that a moment.
Your core customer base, the one's who read these forums, and who will be the most likely to be using any new online content are giving you some incredibly valuable feedback here. Listen to it. Even if you have to continue on the defensive, even if you have to, because of your job, make excuses for that hideous atrocity, please listen to us.
I give him the benefit of the doubt. He has replied to numerous constructive criticisms so far in this thread, including the awful look of the Gleemax site.
We are insulted by Gleemax.com. It looks, sounds and presents as juvenile. This is a serious concern. For decades, gamers have tried to demonstrate that our hobby is possible of maturity, seriousness and sophistication. We spend copious amounts of money over time on our hobby. We continue to do so for decades. An initiative designed for flash in the pan returns is poorly thought out. An initiative that alienates the older, mature, and established customer base is down right contrary to what anyone should want. I think we can agree on that?
I can't imagine a social networking game, like you acknowledging D&D is, surviving without a continued healthy, mature fanbase. Older fans, DMs, experienced players and serious hobbyists continue to invigorate the hobby by recruiting new players. We are your best marketing tool.
Gleemax.com doesn't tell me that Wizards of the Coast understands this. It tells me WoTC is out of touch with that mature, serious hobbyist fanbase. The same group of "hardcore gamers" that Gleemax is supposed to be a central draw for in the first place. If you really think we should be impressed with an ugly, poorly thought out website that appears aimed at twitch freaks and the ADD crowd, then you have lost touch. You're right, some of the concepts you talk about being integrated into this gaming social network sound intriguing. It would be a pity if a sizable portion of your fanbase walked away without giving it a chance because your PR and art departments were too damned proud to bend.
But do you actually recruit new players? It's great if you do, but in my experience older groups tend to shun the young gamer. At a thity-something (or older) do you feel comfortable inviting a 12-year old stranger to your home (just using the age I started playing)? And playstyles differ. You probably play a much different game now than when you were a teen, I know I do. Young gamers may not enjoy the 'mature' game that we are playing and I see many posters here deride 'immature' gamers all the time. Why would they want to play with you?
Maybe Gleemax isn't for the older, established gamer. It doesn't harm you for it to exist, just move on and use what works for you. WoTC reps have stated numerous times they are shooting for the untapped market, that could easily be the younger 'immature' gamer.
Change the name. Gleemax has got to go if you want to appeal to D&D players. I understand it's an inside joke for M:TG, but this is supposed to be an ecuminical site, not catering to one slice of the fanbase above the rest. Find a name that appeals to the broader base of strategy and roleplaying gamers.
Change the colour. That green is just bad. You even admitted it. Don't deny it now. It's bad. It's so bad I wouldn't use the site as it is if it did mint me gold coins. The gold won't be worth the migraines.
I less worried about asthetics than content, but to each his own.
Change the theme. You know what? I don't want to a minion to a brain in a jar. Nor do my players. No, I don't think it's a cute inside joke. I think it's lame.
Oh yeah, because the theme will ACTUALLY make you a minion to a brain in a jar.
I know we haven't received much substance yet, but does it really matter what the 'mascott' is? Come on.
So, continue defending the current demo site if you must. Refute every point in my post if you feel like it. I don't care. But please, please, go to your superiors and tell them to change the site, the colours, the theme and the marketing theory so as to appeal to, rather than to insult, your core demographic.
Thank you for your time,
Archaelos
25 Year veteran DM
I'm ready to give it a chance regardless of the look (beside Mike alreay said he would pass on the fact that people think it looks God-awful and that your personal page can be as milk-toast as you desire).
Vyv
24 Year veteran DM
Gamer_Zer0,
I understand your job is to put the best face on this that is possible. But you might want to take a moment and deep breath before moving any more onto the defensive. The intention of "Gleemax" and the DI is to provide your customers with tools and information they need and want in a manner that they can make use of and that mutally benefits both the company and the customers, right?
You say Gleemax will have some great stuff on it, some of which you can't tell us about now. Fine. Let's leave off that a moment.
Your core customer base, the one's who read these forums, and who will be the most likely to be using any new online content are giving you some incredibly valuable feedback here. Listen to it. Even if you have to continue on the defensive, even if you have to, because of your job, make excuses for that hideous atrocity, please listen to us.
We are insulted by Gleemax.com. It looks, sounds and presents as juvenile. This is a serious concern. For decades, gamers have tried to demonstrate that our hobby is possible of maturity, seriousness and sophistication. We spend copious amounts of money over time on our hobby. We continue to do so for decades. An initiative designed for flash in the pan returns is poorly thought out. An initiative that alienates the older, mature, and established customer base is down right contrary to what anyone should want. I think we can agree on that?
I can't imagine a social networking game, like you acknowledging D&D is, surviving without a continued healthy, mature fanbase. Older fans, DMs, experienced players and serious hobbyists continue to invigorate the hobby by recruiting new players. We are your best marketing tool.
Gleemax.com doesn't tell me that Wizards of the Coast understands this. It tells me WoTC is out of touch with that mature, serious hobbyist fanbase. The same group of "hardcore gamers" that Gleemax is supposed to be a central draw for in the first place. If you really think we should be impressed with an ugly, poorly thought out website that appears aimed at twitch freaks and the ADD crowd, then you have lost touch. You're right, some of the concepts you talk about being integrated into this gaming social network sound intriguing. It would be a pity if a sizable portion of your fanbase walked away without giving it a chance because your PR and art departments were too damned proud to bend.
Change the name. Gleemax has got to go if you want to appeal to D&D players. I understand it's an inside joke for M:TG, but this is supposed to be an ecumenical site, not catering to one slice of the fanbase above the rest. Find a name that appeals to the broader base of strategy and roleplaying gamers.
Change the colour. That green is just bad. You even admitted it. Don't deny it now. It's bad. It's so bad I wouldn't use the site as it is if it did mint me gold coins. The gold won't be worth the migraines.
Change the theme. You know what? I don't want to be a minion to a brain in a jar. Nor do my players. No, I don't think it's a cute inside joke. I think it's lame.
So, continue defending the current demo site if you must. Refute every point in my post if you feel like it. I don't care. But please, please, go to your superiors and tell them to change the site, the colours, the theme and the marketing theory so as to appeal to, rather than to insult, your core demographic.
Thank you for your time,
Archaelos
25 Year veteran DM
I don't think it can be said any better. Well done.
Maybe Gleemax isn't for the older, established gamer. It doesn't harm you for it to exist, just move on and use what works for you. WoTC reps have stated numerous times they are shooting for the untapped market, that could easily be the younger 'immature' gamer.
True, it does seem they are deliberately targeting high school age gamers and young people, from reading various articles with Randy. Yet, at the same time, they are dubbing it "THE gaming site". I would like to think that would attempt to include everyone. I see nothing wrong with waiting and seeing, but at the same time, Mike did say he wanted some feedback on it. If they threw Gleemax out there, I'm guessing they were somewhat looking for a bit of feedack from the community.
True, it does seem they are deliberately targeting high school age gamers and young people, from reading various articles with Randy. Yet, at the same time, they are dubbing it "THE gaming site". I would like to think that would attempt to include everyone. I see nothing wrong with waiting and seeing, but at the same time, Mike did say he wanted some feedback on it. If they threw Gleemax out there, I'm guessing they were somewhat looking for a bit of feedack from the community.
I'd say they got that in spades.
I'd say they got that in spades.
I'd say they've gotten some feedback. I pointed out some uses I could get from the new site if certain features were available.
Others have done nothing constructive. Their only feedback is that they see no use in it. That doesn't really help WotC improve a site that they've now dedicated themselves to.
So I'd hope the unconstructive complainers will move on so Mike has less clutter to sift through to read what the rest of us want to see from Gleemax.
I'd say they've gotten some feedback. I pointed out some uses I could get from the new site if certain features were available.
Others have done nothing constructive. Their only feedback is that they see no use in it. That doesn't really help WotC improve a site that they've now dedicated themselves to.
So I'd hope the unconstructive complainers will move on so Mike has less clutter to sift through to read what the rest of us want to see from Gleemax.
You seem to think that feedback must be positive in order to be constructive. There has been much constructive criticisim. There have also been a few 'stop whining and let them do what they want' posts. Supportive of WotC, sure. Constructive? No, not really.
Continuously?
I'm not sure, but I may be the only person who has addressed it multiple times.
The first was to note that I too did not like it. (And I'm very pleased to see I'm not the only one having such a problem.)
The second was in reply to a comment from the community liason about the issue.
And now I'm replying to you.
There is no "continuously," there is "multiple." A number of people do not like it to the point they won't bother commenting on any other aspect because the current presentation makes the product completely unsuable by them or undesirable to them. That is no more or less than multiple people complaining about or praising the style and theme of the art in Planescape, Eberron, or any other product. Is there something inherently wrong with that?
And it does have an effect. We've now had a direct statement that it will be discussed with the design staff. That means that not only are the comments being noted, they are being taken into account. That is a very direct sign that WotC is both open to feedback and seriously interested in marketing this product to a wider base of people. That is hardly something minor or missed by me.
As for the rest of the layout issues, they don't bother me. As an old time gamer, that kind of B-Movie feel is perfectly acceptable to me. It's a tad odd, being more Sci-Fi than Fantasy, but I'm a full spectrum pulp fan, so I can work with it once the color scheme is fixed.
You're kidding me, right? You're seriously arguing over the use of the word "continuously" rather than "multiple?" Anyway, you apparently got my point as "multiple" was my meaning.
Regarding the benefit of expressing a dislike for the green, there's no need to. They already said they'd address it. As such, any further discussion of that issue is the epitome of beating a dead horse.
"I hate the green theme."
"Yeah, we recognize the poor choice of theme. I'll forward the concern. Rest assured that you can change it to a preferential theme later on."
"I hate the green theme."
"Me, too."
"Me, too."
"I hate the green theme."
"Me, too."
"Me, too."
"I hate the green theme."
You seem to think that feedback must be positive in order to be constructive. There has been much constructive criticisim. There have also been a few 'stop whining and let them do what they want' posts. Supportive of WotC, sure. Constructive? No, not really.
No, I don't seem to think that at all.
For it to be constructive you need to at least offer up an alternative.
Saying, "the color is awful, please change it," is negative and constructive.
Saying, "I'll never be able to use this, why would I want this?" is not constructive. Especially when Mike offers reasons why a person might have use for the tools they've announced and the only response is "I still have no use for that."
If you truly have no use for it and can't offer up suggestions as to what you could use (other than beating the dead horse of "I could use the print magazines"), then maybe this isn't for you.
I don't know if this is for me yet, but I'm open to it and hope for good things. And I'll offer up suggestions as to how the features Mike mentions could be useful to me if implemented properly.
I know we haven't received much substance yet, but does it really matter what the 'mascott' is? Come on.
If everytime I log on to the site I cringe at the color, the style and the mascott ... of course it matters.
Its the reason why companies spend so much time, money and effort on marketing, advertising and product presentation. Its a proven fact that such things matter. Now you may be one of the unique and lucky ones completely impervious to Madison Avenues skills ... but most consumers are not.
For it to be constructive you need to at least offer up an alternative.
Saying, "the color is awful, please change it," is negative.
Hate to disagree with you, but saying something as simple as "It looks awful." can definately be constructive. I tells the developes that there is something wrong with the product. Going the extra step of giving a reason is a helpful touch. I beleive that so far on this thread everything including the sites name, color, style, font, mascot, interface and over "feel" have been mentioned as problems. How much more "constructive" do we need to be?
If WotC is willing t pay me for it, I'd be delighted to put in the time and effort to create something that I believe would be both stylish and functional. But until they do, I really dont see what's wrong with telling them that the site stinks?
Others have done nothing constructive. Their only feedback is that they see no use in it. That doesn't really help WotC improve a site that they've now dedicated themselves to.
Actually, I think saying this does help WotC. My point is that they know that we don't want what they have offered so far OR that we don't understand what they are offering.
Both of those are serious points for WotC. If gleemax.com has a use, many of us have not seen it. As such WotC needs to give it uses, or get the word out on how we can use it. If WotC can show/tell us how we can use it, in a way that we can actually understand, I think you will see that people will change their minds.
Even if WotC says nothing more than:
'Please excuse gleemax.com in its curent form. For now it is nothing more than a forum site to test our integration with our current forum software. We decided to open it to the public to test our servers and software. At the present time it does not 'do' anything. The designers thought that opening the site with an ARG (and they should explain what that is. I have 20 years gaming experiance, and never heard of that) to help keep the post count up. More information will be released shortly. Please continue to stop by, as well as check our 'normal' site wizards.com for updated information.'
I think that something like that would set a lot of minds at ease. As of now it just looks like a new forum that meshes all the old forums together.
The most troubling thing that I see is that there is no 'out of character' section to the site. There are a few posts from the staff that you can reply to, but you cannot start your own ooc posts to ask questions and find out what in the gleemax you are soposed to do.
'Shut up and go away' is such bad form. Many of us are not happy that the licenses for Dungeon, Dragon, eTools & Dragon Lance were canceled. We are now worried about this new 'DI' and the fact that we lost the previously mentioned brands.
So Gleemax is basically a D&D themed myspace site like VampireFreaks is for goths?
No,its MTG themed area for D&D players....or something like that
Regarding the Digital Initiative: Gleemax is a huge part of WotC's digital initiative. However, the D&D online initiative will launch on it's own and will use some of the support features offered by Gleemax. So the answer is yes and no.
So,Gleemax is the MTG part of the DI..but its also the overall entery area for the rest of the upcoming WOTC DI stuff?
And do I understand this correctly : Players will be able to upload full character sheets IE: background,stats and things like that and update them as they wish?
And once Gleemax is fully up and everything,the user will be able to costumize it like some one can costumize the yahoo search page to display things like local news,weather and bits like that?
and one last question that most likely HAS been answered,but I didn't see it: Why did the name Gleemax get chosen instead of something more appealing to the over gaming community?
If everytime I log on to the site I cringe at the color, the style and the mascott ... of course it matters.
Its the reason why companies spend so much time, money and effort on marketing, advertising and product presentation. Its a proven fact that such things matter. Now you may be one of the unique and lucky ones completely impervious to Madison Avenues skills ... but most consumers are not.
Except Mike has already said users would be expected to log directly into their own self-styled home page. Then you don't have to stare at the silly little brain in a jar.
Others have done nothing constructive. Their only feedback is that they see no use in it. That doesn't really help WotC improve a site that they've now dedicated themselves to.
Here is what I would like to see from the DI.
Since I already mentioned a better layout for forums, and a means of creating characters, I'll skip those.
Finding players and DM's has been mentioned, so I'll skip that.
Some kind of art program where you can grab objects and drag and drop them into place to create pictures. I'm not talking about 1,000,000$ Van Gogh pictures or anything, not by any means, but something where a DM can just print something off and show his players; "This is the entrance to the Garden of the Queen". Allow for text to be added, have all the holy symbols available, basic textures for walls (hewn stone, burrowed dirt, vines/vegetation, wooden planks, whatever else), and so on. Again, not looking for something that's going to make great artistry here, just something that makes a good "representative" picture.
I'd like to say I can sit down and draw stuff as needed, but between work and lack of art skills, it just won't happen.
An area for collaborative articles. We've all been demanding a book on fey, and there has been enough demand for environment books related to forests and mountains for me to notice it. If we could do collaborative work on articles, we could actually go ahead and get our own "book" written. Sure, it would be an eBook, but it would be a book. Hey, do it wiki style and I can whip up a nifty gadget for PDFing the thing whenever someone wants a copy of the "current" version.
WotC could then turn around, take all our ideas, and publish it in an official book and make money off work they didn't have to do
The lawyers would have to write up some sort of disclaimer regarding public use domain, ownership of intellectual property, and the like. But I think overall, it would be a good thing.This is nitpicky, and it has been brought up a little bit before, but the name. Naming is very important. A name that works well in one culture might not work well in a different culture. Millions of dollars were once spent shaping a name that would not be considered offensive in any known culture on Earth. After those millions were spent, the company "Kodak" was born.
Some companies have failed because of the name. Chevy had much lower than expected sales of a line of cars in the 80's because the name they chose for it was interpreted as "no go" in a different language.
My all time favorite is the company who produces computer power supplies under the name "Sparkle Power". No thanks, I prefer not to see sparks in my computer.
In my culture, "gleemax" just screams "porno". I would like to offer some suggestions (and, for the record, I have not invested millions of dollars into research on these ideas, but maybe with some collaborative effort in this forum, we can come up with a good name): "wutsee" (poking fun at the pronounciation of "wotc"), "geekonia" (in my culture, "nerd" is the freak with masking tape on his glasses, but "geek" is the guy wearing the tucked in polo who makes 120,000$/yr), "game-on",... I'm running dry here, but feel free to add your own ideas.
Naming out of the way, I'll continue on with what I'd like to see.
Pictures of all the monsters from the books in 1" increment sizes for use as tokens. A lot of the monsters can be gotten from the SRD, and require only a little work to make fit in the appropriate size square, but some of the monsters that WotC owns aren't available.
And an art showcase, where people can upload the artwork they've produced for their games so others can use it (or at least, others can go "ooooo! aaaaaa!").
That's all I can think of for now.
Dennis Stout
Except Mike has already said users would be expected to log directly into their own self-styled home page. Then you don't have to stare at the silly little brain in a jar.
More likely than not it would still be there, as it's part of the website layout. It's possible that they'll provide an optional layout without the brain (I hope they do), however, although that would slightly defeat the purpose of naming the entire website Gleemax.
Except Mike has already said users would be expected to log directly into their own self-styled home page. Then you don't have to stare at the silly little brain in a jar.
Will my "home page" by-pass all the Gleemax .... stuff?
After being asked again and again to not judge the DI until we see something solid. Now that we have something solid to see, I'm being asked not to judge it but instead to wait for something else that I don't know when it will be released?
A nauseating site presented with confusing and inconsistent explanations as to why its not really what we should be looking at ... seems oddly appropriate for the first public page of the new DI.
I'm waiting in GLEE-full anticipation for the next unveiling. Unless of course that's another item I shouldn't really pay attention to.
Change the name. Gleemax has got to go if you want to appeal to D&D players. I understand it's an inside joke for M:TG, but this is supposed to be an ecumenical site, not catering to one slice of the fanbase above the rest. Find a name that appeals to the broader base of strategy and roleplaying gamers.
I disagree with you. I think Gleemax is a fine name. It's something easily remembered that can have a lot of different meanings if you think about it. Yes, it originated with MtG, a fact that I tried to drill Randy on when I questioned him for my Audio Podcast. (And I included a couple of tough questions, just for the folks in this forum, for those who haven't listened).
But the name right now has no meaning. Eventually, it will have meaning. When it does, you'll think of that meaning when you hear the name. Google, Wii, and Ebay are good examples of names that had no inherent meaning but now are spoken as if they'd always been around.
If Gleemax turns out to be filled with a bunch of obnoxious 1337 5P34King jerks, then that's what the name will end up being associated with. If it turns out to be a real cool place for the gaming community, the name will become associated with that.
So my advice... Let the name go. It's a false prophet. Dinging us on that is dinging us on nothing. Don't take the bait and focus on other things you'd like to see changed.
Change the colour. That green is just bad. You even admitted it. Don't deny it now. It's bad. It's so bad I wouldn't use the site as it is if it did mint me gold coins. The gold won't be worth the migraines.
I'm going to see if I can get the text changed to white in both the website and the forums. This is like a tough chip shot out of the bunker and onto the green, but there's a chance it'll go in. If it doesn't, understand that I brought up to the right people, and if it doesn't change that doesn't mean they're ignoring us. And if it does change, it may not happen til sometime tomorrow or even later.
Change the theme. You know what? I don't want to be a minion to a brain in a jar. Nor do my players. No, I don't think it's a cute inside joke. I think it's lame.
It's a launch theme. That's like saying you won't drink your beverage of choice because their recent TV ad included a song you don't like. Yes, I understand that it seems silly and juvenile. There's a lot of history with the theme on the Magic side of the house, and most of them are getting some enjoyment out of it.
But it's just a theme. We knew it wouldn't really appeal to the D&D folks, but our goal is to announce our plans, not sell you on the theme. We're building a social networking site, and we need people to take a notice of what we're doing. This is why we're rolling out information over the next several weeks/months on Gleemax. If anything, our experiences with this community has shown us that it's better to slowly roll information out ahead of time, so we don't suddenly spring Gleemax on everyone one day and say "Here it is!"
While I understand that people want more meat and less fluff, this roll out is very much an attempt to engage the community early on something we're going to be getting into place over the next several months.
So, continue defending the current demo site if you must. Refute every point in my post if you feel like it. I don't care. But please, please, go to your superiors and tell them to change the site, the colours, the theme and the marketing theory so as to appeal to, rather than to insult, your core demographic.
I think our D&D folks have handled a lot worse than a theme they find juvenile. But I'll try to go to bat on the colored text issue today.
Thanks for the thoughtful post.
The designers thought that opening the site with an ARG (and they should explain what that is. I have 20 years gaming experiance, and never heard of that)
I'm just guessing here, but I'm going to say "Automated Response Generator".
It would make sense with the context you've put it in, anyways :P
I didn't look at the forums closely enough to tell if they were doing that, since I could immediately recognize them as PHPNuke run forums and I'm already intimately familiar with phpnuke.
They really need to consider a different piece of software for forums; this software was someones class project for a school grade and wasn't really intended to see fully commercial use. Or at least, that's how it feels. And yes, alternatives are available, I've pointed them out in previous posts, so it's not like I haven't offered up suggestions
I hope this doesn't iolate the CoC. Here is a comment system that's layed out much better than the current forums:
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070612
The software for running it is freely available in a link from that same page (it's in plain sight at the very bottom of the page):
http://ars.userfriendly.org/ars.tar.gz
If WotC wishes to use that software, I am more than willing to commit evenings and weekends to making it work more appropriately for the environment WotC would require.
By default, comments in the main section are automatically archived every night. This is easy to change if you know what you're looking for in the code. It's an easy change, but a change. I'm intimately familiar with the ARS source code, having helped Jay Thorn develop it. I doubt Myke has changed it much since I left the development team.
Also, it won't take many evenings or many weekends to make work. It should in fact only take 3 evenings (actually only 1, but I like to leave myself wiggle room in case some funky oddness occurs).
Sorry I can't commit weekdays, but the federal government already claims those.
Dennis Stout
While I understand that people want more meat and less fluff, this roll out is very much an attempt to engage the community early on something we're going to be getting into place over the next several months.
Hey Mike, if the plan was to engage the D&D community early on in the DI process, could I ask for an honest analysis on how WotC thinks its going?
Cancelling the magazines and the announcement of the planned move to a new business model seems to have caused some resentment and confusion for a sizable part of the D&D community.
Presenting Gleemax as the first steps towards the future of the DI, being based off of a MtG card and designed for ... I'm still not certain who (or what) ... seems to again be less than enthusiastically received by your D&D internet customers.
Is WotC even trying to market the DI for D&D customers? From this side of the screen it doesn't really look like it.
Google, Wii, and Ebay are good examples of names that had no inherent meaning but now are spoken as if they'd always been around.
I'm sorry, I will have to virulently disagree with you there Mike. The Wii is the most stupid name for a games console in the entire history of the universe. I mean, really.
I thought they were gong to get round it by pronouncing it "why", but no. "Wee." As in the childish word for urination. No, Nintendo, the fact that it also sounds like "we" the collective does not excuse the idiocy. I cannot fathom that nobody at Nintendo went "hang on a sec, won't this get the complete (ironically) wee taken out of us, and spawn a whole generation of 'I'm going to play with my Wii/I'm going to have a Wii' jokes?'" Guh.
Saying Gleemax is as good or better than Wii as a name is akin to saying that the Fighter is as good or better than the CW Samurai. It doesn't take much doing...
I'm sorry, I will have to virulently disagree with you there Mike. The Wii is the most stupid name for a games console in the entire history of the universe. I mean, really.
Maybe so, but it apparently hasn't hurt Wii sales at all and many people mentally identify the console when they see and hear the word.
I disagree with you. I think Gleemax is a fine name. It's something easily remembered that can have a lot of different meanings if you think about it. Yes, it originated with MtG, a fact that I tried to drill Randy on when I questioned him for my Audio Podcast. (And I included a couple of tough questions, just for the folks in this forum, for those who haven't listened).
But the name right now has no meaning. Eventually, it will have meaning. When it does, you'll think of that meaning when you hear the name. Google, Wii, and Ebay are good examples of names that had no inherent meaning but now are spoken as if they'd always been around.
If Gleemax turns out to be filled with a bunch of obnoxious 1337 5P34King jerks, then that's what the name will end up being associated with. If it turns out to be a real cool place for the gaming community, the name will become associated with that.
So my advice... Let the name go. It's a false prophet. Dinging us on that is dinging us on nothing. Don't take the bait and focus on other things you'd like to see changed.
You think Gleemax is a fine name. But how many people now have said that they don't think it's a fine name? I mean come on, you're asking for feedback, and we're giving it to you - we don't like the name. How many people will it take before Wizards says "Hey guys, we liked this name, but it looks like our customers don't, let's do something about it." Gleemax? It sounds like an antidepressant, or a porn site, or even a brand of whetstone for keeping blades sharp, but it most definitely does not sound like a gaming site. Those other brands you mentioned do have weird names, but let's take a closer look.
Wii: Sounds like "Wee", as in the sound you make when having fun. Fun is exactly the kind of response they want to elicit from a game console, so the name works. It's not video game specific, but hey, when it's on a TV commercial, everyone sees what it is.
Google: Sounds like goggle, an apparatus worn over the eyes, or the term "googley-eyes", both of which bring up the image of sight, as in "to search". For a search engine, that's rather appropriate.
eBay: I have truthfully never heard anyone talk about eBay sounding weird. "e" is a well-established acronym for anything on the internet, and bays are a traditional place of commerce. Once again, the name is very appropriate.
Gleemax: The only thing you can pull out of this is "glee" and "max". Sure, like the Wii we want people to have fun, but nothing about that name suggests "roleplaying and card game forum", unless, of course, you're both a Magic player and you're in on the joke. And unlike the Wii, I don't see Gleemax making a TV spot any time soon, so Gleemax doesn't have the luxury of everyone knowing what it is.
It's a launch theme. That's like saying you won't drink your beverage of choice because their recent TV ad included a song you don't like. Yes, I understand that it seems silly and juvenile. There's a lot of history with the theme on the Magic side of the house, and most of them are getting some enjoyment out of it.
But it's just a theme. We knew it wouldn't really appeal to the D&D folks, but our goal is to announce our plans, not sell you on the theme. We're building a social networking site, and we need people to take a notice of what we're doing. This is why we're rolling out information over the next several weeks/months on Gleemax. If anything, our experiences with this community has shown us that it's better to slowly roll information out ahead of time, so we don't suddenly spring Gleemax on everyone one day and say "Here it is!"
No, that's like saying I don't like a T-shirt because of the design. The appearance of a can of Pepsi is irrelevant; it'll taste the same no matter what it looks like. The appearance of a website, however, is pretty much it's entire existence. If it doesn't look good, it simply isn't good.
[/RANT]
I wanted to reply to Achaelos's reply, even thought it's now dropped back a couple of pages.
Thank you for taking the time to do so. I respect the difficult position you're in, and please understand when I say, "you" in criticism of gleemax.com, I mean WoTC as a company, not you personally. I do think many of the features you've mentioned have interesting and good potential. I am very interested in how I can integrate my games with internet utilities and functionality. I am very interested in the ongoing development of this project, otherwise I wouldn't bother to give any response at all.
But the name right now has no meaning.
This simply isn't true. You said it yourself, "Yes, it originated with MtG" and "There's a lot of history with the theme on the Magic side of the house." This isn't a value neutral name. This is a name that already has meaning. It already has, as you say, "a lot of history." Were it merely a "bad" name, such as Wii, I'd let it go. Were it a totally neutral name, like "eBay", then whatever. But it's a name that already has a connotation...one that isn't part of the D&D community. Do you understand why some of us might feel marginalized by that choice? Okay, so you say it won't change. I'm not going to be so *proud* as to hang on to that issue if WoTC Marketing won't bend, I will bend. I'll give it a chance, but be aware, you've already created a stumbling block for me, and players like me.
It's a launch theme...Yes, I understand that it seems silly and juvenile.
I'm glad you acknowledge that it can be perceived in that manner. Remember, this is coming hard on the heels of some controversial decisions, including the cancellation of two mainstay magazines. Feelings are raw, are you sure it was a good idea, given that you say, "We knew it wouldn't really appeal to the D&D folks."
Who are you trying to sell D&D to if not D&D folks? I understand you want to broaden your customer base, but do you want to alienate current customers in the doing?
That's like saying you won't drink your beverage of choice because their recent TV ad included a song you don't like.
This is show my age, but remember the New Coke debacle? Comparison to sodas may be more apt than you think. So long as "D&D Classic" is still around, I'm sure where I'll lay my bets on which will succeed.
While I understand that people want more meat and less fluff, this roll out is very much an attempt to engage the community early on something.
I've heard this phrase before. You want to "engage the community"...but do you really? You seem set on selling decisions that have already been made, not engaging anyone. You have a lot of solid, negative feedback on this issue, how do you plan on engaging that other than defending the indefensible?
You want a specific concern, ok, here's one. When I went to the Gleemax.com site, nothing, nothing at all appealled to me. There was nothing there that seemed to say, "hey, D&D player, THIS is for you." Where is it? Is it hidden? Is it still to come? I'm sure you'll say to wait and see, great things are in the pipeline, etc, etc. But why release something to engage a community, when there's nothing there to engage me yet? So the theme isn't for D&D players (nor Strategy wargamers, for that matter), nor is the current rollout content for D&D players...hmm...I think you can see the problem.
I think our D&D folks have handled a lot worse than a theme they find juvenile.
Sure we have. But I don't see this as merely superficial. It makes me feel out of the loop, disconnected, and alienated. You tell me this is a social networking site for people *like me*, but then you design it so that it's appeal is specifically targeted at someone else, even by your own admission.
Would you feel included?
Gleemax, being MtG based, IS NOT an appropriate name for a generic, all-purpose, multi-genre gaming site
Hell Id prefer something simple, like the Gamers' Lab or Gamers' Hall, it's broad enough in interpretation to work for any genre/system, whether it be Modern, D&D (or AD&D), MtG, or even M&M (Mutants & Mastermainds for those that dont play)
If you want a site for gamers of all types to congregate, then come up with a name that will fit all types, one that will stick in a person's mind
And to the poster a few pages back that asked about wanting to game with a newbie 12 year old (or something to that effect)....I have, and do bring in younger players; my current group there are 2 members with kids, 2 under the age of 14 and 2 over the age of 16, we've brought them all into the game in the last year
It's great seeing their reactions to all the firsts that are 24 years in the past for me (I started playing when I was 14, and am now 38...soon to be 39)
My kids, when old enough (min age of 12) will be welcome to any game I am part of, as will be their friends who express an interest...after all, that is part of a parent's/adult's role in life...to teach those that are younger
So, in conclusion: 1) Change the accursed name from Gleemax to something, anything that has a broader appeal than just to MtG players; 2) dont ever expect me to utilize anything that is online (outside of a forum); and 3) I sincerely hope the D&D DI fails miserably
Maybe so, but it apparently hasn't hurt Wii sales at all and many people mentally identify the console when they see and hear the word.
Maybe it's because I'm English, but I'm pretty if I went out into the street and asked people what the associated with the word we/wee/wii, the games console wouldn't be even close to the most common...
Still, I personally couldn't careless about the name, really. Gleemax isn't Wii, so it has at least that advantage. I think I'll just continue to wait and wee, um, I mean see what the content is like.
But do you actually recruit new players? It's great if you do, but in my experience older groups tend to shun the young gamer. At a thity-something (or older) do you feel comfortable inviting a 12-year old stranger to your home (just using the age I started playing)? And playstyles differ. You probably play a much different game now than when you were a teen, I know I do. Young gamers may not enjoy the 'mature' game that we are playing and I see many posters here deride 'immature' gamers all the time. Why would they want to play with you?
I reall have to say something here.
As a parent of said 12 year old, will you let him/her go over to a 30-something stranger's house to play D&D?
Would you let him/her go over to a 30-something stranger's house that he had just met on the internet?
I highly doubt I'll get a "Yes" to either of those questions.
I believe that it was Dragomortis that stated he was 17. By the way that he expresses himself (full sentences, punctuation, correct capitalization, not to mention the statements themselves) demonstrates to me that he is a young, but mature individual and I would absolutely let him into my gaming group (if he let us weirdo 20-somethings hang out with him ;) haha).
It has nothing to do with age. Nothing at all. I'm seen some damn immature 30-somethings. It means nothing. It has to do with the level of maturity within said individual.
Now, how does this pertain to Gleemax? The whole website, so far, in its entirety is immature. Gleemax itself is an immature/joke Magic: the Gathering card. How many forum users completely ignore posts from users that utilize all Caps Lock posts? What does "Gleemax Speaks" and "Minions Speak" mean, without clicking the links first?
It's just all around bad design. The colour scheme is just the makeup on the pig.
Gleemax was a joke as a card. Welcome to the website.
And about the Wii. It's a ridiculous name, only supported more by the ridiculous "Wii-mote" controller. It may not have stopped it from selling many consoles, but it stopped me from owning one, partly. "Wanna come play with my Wii?". Yeah, that'll go over well.
Google is a great name, though misspelled, but caught on anyways. Look up googol.
eBay, isn't a bad name either. e, for electronic, like eMail, etc. I always saw the "Bay" part as the "Hudson's Bay Company" or "The Bay" for short over here in Canada, which is a department store. It suited perfectly in my eyes.
{from the Save Dragon & Dungeon Magazine online Petition; post #338} Nicolas J. Quimby: If you felt your print content was too brightly outshined by Dungeon and Dragon, wait 'til you see what the competition for e-content is like . . .
Truer words have never been spoken. You absolutely have to have a professional website if you expect to attract professional people.
Dennis Stout
[RANT]
The appearance of a can of Pepsi is irrelevant; it'll taste the same no matter what it looks like. The appearance of a website, however, is pretty much it's entire existence. If it doesn't look good, it simply isn't good.
[/RANT]
I see someone beat me too saying this. Packaging has no impact on my decision to purchase a drink. I will make a single purchase of the item before I decide to buy multiples and see if it tastes ok.
Now in the case of "GLEEMAX" I took a single look and decided
Because of it's design and Layout I ain't gonna bother looking at it again unless something drastically changes. There is nothing being offered there that attracts me to the site.
PS.. I must be in the "ANCIENT" Category then since I am 41 soon to be 42
1: stop calling your users 'Minions' last time someone talked to me like he was above me I walked. It may be meant in fun, but it comes off high handed another symptom of the lack of respect that WoTC has shown for fans in recent times. I buy your products, support your game lines I deserve some respect and courtesy. Every time I am called a minion it raises a hackle
2: Exactly what is there going to be for an established group (We have plenty of players no need for any more I am afraid) that will make this place of use that I cant find on the boards here? Up to date treasure generators, spell lists or the like? details please.
3: 'Gleemax' you take the name for a supposedly inclusive online home for gamers from some obscure in-joke, not a good start. I suppose the name might grow on me, but its another bad start.
4: Page layout and colors are an eyestining mess and deeply counterintuitive, the sooner these can be fixed the better.
I deeply want to be exited by the new big thing, but so far all im seeing is the corpse of a mighty wyrm, cut down in its prime.
I've heard this phrase before. You want to "engage the community"...but do you really? You seem set on selling decisions that have already been made, not engaging anyone. You have a lot of solid, negative feedback on this issue, how do you plan on engaging that other than defending the indefensible?
... snip ...
Sure we have. But I don't see this as merely superficial. It makes me feel out of the loop, disconnected, and alienated. You tell me this is a social networking site for people *like me*, but then you design it so that it's appeal is specifically targeted at someone else, even by your own admission.
Would you feel included?
Communication is definately 2 way, and being "engaged" implies involvement. To date I haven't seen much communication, and certainly no involvement.
And if "Gleemax" is the type of product that we should look forward to seeing, I agree with you that its designed to turn away gamers "like me".
Just a couple of question/points on Gleem-ax(For me this works the best:D ) I read the Faqs and understand a little of the "factions" on the site. I didn't see one that floated my boat however. As a 43 yo non-intutive internet user, is it possible to start a new faction? Is that the idea? Or will there be more of a D&D feel to a faction that will start as the DI is launched? I would also suggest a very through faq section for those gamers you are trying to draw in. I've never been to myspace or anything of the sort. Don't want to go either:P Still as my brain atrophies due to getting greyer(GO GREYHAWK!) I need a little more help in navigating the Gleem-ax site. Thanks for the vine
:surrender 
Right, now that that's over with...
Personally, I rather like the sound of the new Gleemax.com website. And I rather like the name Gleemax, it has a good fun sound to it and I have no idea how people are making connections to porno site from it. I suspect that Wizards chose it as the name after many long debates because it already has name recognition among Magic players. This is a good thing for WotC because it means more association.
Now, what I don't like is that people here are griping about the fact that the name of something, slightly more closely related to M:tG is being used than something else. Personally, I think it's a sign that they're reaching out to their communities by trying tto blend them all together under one roof, introducing CCG players to RPG's and Vice-versa. It's helping to spread the word of gaming.
Now, as for the features of the website, I'm really looking forward to these. One comment on this thread was "Why would I want to look at what other people were doing in their campaigns?" Personally, I'm more of a "Why wouldn't I..." I've read numurous stories and campaign diaries all over the internet. They ma be about a bad group or show the party doing stupid things, but it's still a great help to me, because even in the worst cases, they still tell me what not to do in my games. They provide ideas and information that I can incorporate in an interesting way.
Online character sheets? I like these, especially if I can search through them to find what I need. I store my characters on paper mostly, but that doesn't stop me from looking at others.
I'm rambling on incoherently, but what I just want to say is, that there's a lot of ill will towards WotC about Dungeon and Dragon. And the people on these boards are transferring that ill willl onto another WotC product that's associated vaguely with WotC's plans. But don't judge it yet. It's only just started, with little to none of the content up yet. It's still experimental. Give it a chance people. Gleemax.com will become what we make it, and, with the help of WotC, we can make it into a truly great thing. Don't just disregard it because it's not exactly what you want.
Hell Id prefer something simple, like the Gamers' Lab or Gamers' Hall, it's broad enough in interpretation to work for any genre/system,
In their defense, it's not as easy as just thinking up a name for a .com or ,net domain that already hasn't been snagged. Go try for yourself at directnic.com. The two you mention are taken, and only if you want a .biz, .info, or .name domain suffix will most good website names be available. The goofier the name, the more likely it is you'll be able to buy it. That said, I'd have taken at least a day to try and come up with a better sounding website name than Gleemax. Heh. You'd think their IT guys could have been given more than 15 minutes to come up with something better than that. ;)
Hi Mike or Gamer Zero,
Just a couple of question/points on Gleem-ax(For me this works the best:D ) I read the Faqs and understand a little of the "factions" on the site. I didn't see one that floated my boat however. As a 43 yo non-intutive internet user, is it possible to start a new faction? Is that the idea? Or will there be more of a D&D feel to a faction that will start as the DI is launched? I would also suggest a very through faq section for those gamers you are trying to draw in. I've never been to myspace or anything of the sort. Don't want to go either:P Still as my brain atrophies due to getting greyer(GO GREYHAWK!) I need a little more help in navigating the Gleem-ax site. Thanks for the vine
If you do make a D&D faction, send a flock of mind-flayers to gleemax :P
Disclaimer:
(I am neither for or against Gleemax. I have looked at it and right now it is not for me, though I will check later to give it another shot)
So a brief visit to Gleemax seems to indicate that it currently sucks... Is there a lot more coming? if so why release it so prematurely?
According to Gamer Zero when discussing Gleemax ...
But it's just a theme. We knew it wouldn't really appeal to the D&D folks, but our goal is to announce our plans, not sell you on the theme. We're building a social networking site, and we need people to take a notice of what we're doing. This is why we're rolling out information over the next several weeks/months on Gleemax. If anything, our experiences with this community has shown us that it's better to slowly roll information out ahead of time, so we don't suddenly spring Gleemax on everyone one day and say "Here it is!"
While I understand that people want more meat and less fluff, this roll out is very much an attempt to engage the community early on something we're going to be getting into place over the next several months.
The launching of Gleemax is part of the "announce our plans, not sell you on a theme" direction of the DI. Although this is the first solid piece of the DI we've seen, apparently nothing on it especially the theme really pertains to the D&D community, and can basically be ignored.
This is all part of the communication initiative to engage the community early on things that will be in place over the next several months.
So we should not be really concerned about Gleemax, but at the same time WotC is expecting that we should feel "engaged" by becoming aware of it.
I'm not sure why you keep posting that MOL development is "being shafted." Frankly, you have zero insight into how our resources are being allocated, either in terms of dollars or people, and it's really nobody's business but ours.
Without getting into specifics, MOL has had ZERO dollars shifted to our Gleemax plans, and in fact since I've come on (certainly not because of me, but in the last 2 months) we've had MANY more resources (again, both dollars and headcount) applied to MOL. We've added multiple devs to the MOL side of things in the last 10 weeks.
The fact is that development for MOL is in a better state right now than it has been in quite some time.
Like I've posted many times before, don't take my word for anything. Give the "new crew" a little bit more time (or don't, your call) and then hold us accountable for things we've said in the last 2 months. The past is the past, and while I appreciate the desire for a perfect v3 client and back end (believe me, no one wants this more than me right now, lol) the facts are that we need more time to work toward that.
Chicken little attitudes backed with zero fact grow very tiresome.
here's the link, judge for yourself. Note that whoever this guy is, he's not a bad guy per se from what I saw...but damn was that ever condescending:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12700628&postcount=35
Chicken little attitudes backed with zero fact grow very tiresome.
OH by the way...So I'm listening to the pod cast.
I appreciate the thought but there just isn't any info there that, for ME, get's me interested.
As someone who can't stand MTG, no offense to those who love it, I'm just NOT interested. I don't get the inside joke. Could care less.
I have a core group that I have gamed with for the past...well more years than I care to admit. We meet twice a month. Sometimes more. I enjoy meeting up with my friends, IN PERSON, to discuss and play our games.
I just hate this whole move to make our lives completely digital and online because it's "Easier". There is a Bradbury story about just this. People sitting in their homes, they don't go out. They don't socialize in person. The computer takes care of every aspect of their lives so that they can sit in ease and comfort at home. I'm tellin ya...one EMP and the whole lazy, comfortable, digital life is gone. It's just too fragile for me.
There was also alot of mention of, "Oh you know with the wife and kids there isn't time to game..." Guess I"m lucky my wife is cool like dat. She's happy for me to have my gaming time. Get's me out of her hair, and keeps me happy. When the kids get old enough they'll be gamers as wel. I'll have a ready available group at home to play.
ALSO...How old is Mike and Randy! They sound like kids! No offense guys ;)
and STILL...no mention of Modern. IN fact when you go to the main wizards page, the little icon for the modern section isn't even there anymore, thanks to that dang green brain thing.
It's just not the same.As someone who can't stand MTG, no offense to those who love it, I'm just NOT interested. I don't get the inside joke. Could care less.
I have a core group that I have gamed with for the past...well more years than I care to admit. We meet twice a month. Sometimes more. I enjoy meeting up with my friends, IN PERSON, to discuss and play our games.
I just wanted to say, I feel exactly the same Deathknell.
Rant
I've recovered from my panic attack, so I just want to take a moment and try to offer some helpful feedback, if I may (at least I hope its helpful).
This Gleemax thing is serious, its for real, its official. The D&D brand is ran by people who apparently won't acknowledge experienced gamers, who apparently ignore the rich history and tapestry of the game. WotC seems intent on targeting the younger MySpace crowd. That's fine, if you're 15; its not so cool when you're 37. I am, and I'm certainly not the only one who falls into this "upper" age bracket. Yes, you have targeted the younger gamers accurately, but why have you abandoned the more experienced gamers (that's the impression I walk away with).
Experienced gamers are being "virtually" ignored and insulted by presenting Gleemax in this juvenile manner. If it were just a matter of names, I could learn to accept Gleemax; no, what I can't tolerate is the whole "concept" (such as it is ) behind the Gleemax character which it seems is targeted to much, much younger audience. I'm assuiming I would have the option of "turning it off" but frankly the Gleemax and his minions thing is insulting and more than just a little annoying.
If I wanted to act like the "roleplayers" on Gleemax, how would I start? Would the following statement work: "All you minions
to Gleemax, he rulez!" Or is that too much? Honestly, I have no earthly idea, help me out here ;).
I understand that the more we post here and discuss this Gleemax thing, the more WotC sees it as a sign that we must be (at least in some small measure) interested in their product. Well, that's not true, but feel free to spin it how ever you can. As a gamer with over a quarter of a century of experience (well over half my lifetime), I am quite simply stunned beyond belief that this is a big part of the future of the D&D brand. I feel as if I've had to give up watching Sopranos and instead been forced to watch Teletubbies.
Yes, I know this rant is rambling and incoherent, but the best ones always are :D.
This Gleemax thing is serious, its for real, its official. The D&D brand is ran by people who apparently won't acknowledge experienced gamers, who apparently ignore the rich history and tapestry of the game. WotC seems intent on targeting the younger MySpace crowd. That's fine, if you're 15; its not so cool when you're 37. I am, and I'm certainly not the only one who falls into this "upper" age bracket. Yes, you have targeted the younger gamers accurately, but why have you abandoned the more experienced gamers (that's the impression I walk away with).
Experienced gamers are being "virtually" ignored and insulted by presenting Gleemax in this juvenile manner. If it were just a matter of names, I could learn to accept Gleemax; no, what I can't tolerate is the whole "concept" (such as it is
) behind the Gleemax character which it seems is targeted to much, much younger audience. I'm assuiming I would have the option of "turning it off" but frankly the Gleemax and his minions thing is insulting and more than just a little annoying.If I wanted to act like the "roleplayers" on Gleemax, how would I start? Would the following statement work: "All you minions
to Gleemax, he rulez!" Or is that too much? Honestly, I have no earthly idea, help me out here ;).I understand that the more we post here and discuss this Gleemax thing, the more WotC sees it as a sign that we must be (at least in some small measure) interested in their product. Well, that's not true, but feel free to spin it how ever you can. As a gamer with over a quarter of a century of experience (well over half my lifetime), I am quite simply stunned beyond belief that this is a big part of the future of the D&D brand. I feel as if I've had to give up watching Sopranos and instead been forced to watch Teletubbies.
Yes, I know this rant is rambling and incoherent, but the best ones always are :D.
I have a core group that I have gamed with for the past...well more years than I care to admit. We meet twice a month. Sometimes more. I enjoy meeting up with my friends, IN PERSON, to discuss and play our games.
I just hate this whole move to make our lives completely digital and online because it's "Easier". There is a Bradbury story about just this. People sitting in their homes, they don't go out. They don't socialize in person. The computer takes care of every aspect of their lives so that they can sit in ease and comfort at home. I'm tellin ya...one EMP and the whole lazy, comfortable, digital life is gone. It's just too fragile for me.
I'm always careful when I kid around about the "game police" and they will come to your house and arrest you if you're not playing D&D correctly because someone somewhere will take it the wrong way, and think it's real.
At no point does WotC say they're stopping printing books. They're not demanding you turn in your current books and go online. Why is there a mis-conception that suddenly D&D is now an exclusively online situation?
Did DMs suddenly have problems drawing maps when the Map A Week feature was put up? No.
Did everyone's D&D game shut down and go completely online when Neverwinter Nights came out? No.
D&D is a tabletop game. Always has been and always will be. You will still get your books at the bookstore/gamestore/online. You will still go see your friends. (Unless you get in a big fight over something like, "Do fighters stink?") It's still table top D&D.
They'll never take my dice from me!
;)
I'm always careful when I kid around about the "game police" and they will come to your house and arrest you if you're not playing D&D correctly because someone somewhere will take it the wrong way, and think it's real.
At no point does WotC say they're stopping printing books. They're not demanding you turn in your current books and go online. Why is there a mis-conception that suddenly D&D is now an exclusively online situation?
Did DMs suddenly have problems drawing maps when the Map A Week feature was put up? No.
Did everyone's D&D game shut down and go completely online when Neverwinter Nights came out? No.
D&D is a tabletop game. Always has been and always will be. You will still get your books at the bookstore/gamestore/online. You will still go see your friends. (Unless you get in a big fight over something like, "Do fighters stink?") It's still table top D&D.
They'll never take my dice from me!
;)
I understand what you're saying Paradox-- and I agree ;) (surprise, surprise!). I think tabletop gaming will remain largely unaffected (at least for my lifetime). I'm still dubious about the duration of print product however. I mean they moved the magazine content online, why not the sourcebooks?
I'm mostly upset and disheartened that WotC seems to have made the decision to focus "exclusively" on a younger demographic with the DI. Is there any chance that Gleemax will be toned down in order to accomodate gamers of different ages. Or are we really stuck with being called "minions"? I sincerely hope not.
Even if the Gleemax concept could be "turned off/ignored" however, I still don't know if I would be interested in a MySpace for DnD-ers. Even if the site were more adult oriented, I think I would feel "left out". I really prefer my social interactions to be face-to-face. And yes, I realize I'm posting this all on an internet forum but this is different from a MySpace site, right? Or am I wrong? Anyone have any thoughts? I'm curious, because I honestly have no experience with such sites. In any case, I was mostly a lurker on these boards until the cancelation of the mags. Boy, did that change my 'tude :D!
Things are changing really fast with the D&D brand right now and I'm just trying my very best to stay afloat. Panic and fear comes naturally when you're sinking ;).
WotC is clearly trying to do something new here, and trying to reach a demographic which isn't currently playing WotC games. It hopes that the tools it offers will be of use to everybody - though clearly not all the tools will be useful all of the time to every single WotC customer. If none of the tools suit you, then ignore them: you've not lost anything (aside: Gleemax clearly has nothing to do with the cancellation of Dungeon and Dragon, as the D&D Digital Initiative appears to be a separate development which would probably have happened whether or not WotC developed the Gleemax portal). If you try it out (and you can't do that now, and probably won't be able to do it for a few months: this is an announcement, really, rather than a launch) you might find useful features - perhaps your FLGS gets a page and sets it up so you can pre-order books by email when previously they were lousy at checking email (just to pick one tiny possibility out of a hat). If not, ah well - WotC are still printing books and they'll be putting more and more supplementary support online, and third party companies are still supporting the d20 system in all its incarnations.
One thing that gets me interested in this is the opportunity to connect with other people who are playing less popular rpgs than D&D, which it's sometimes hard to find. In answer to someone upthread, it's clear from the various interviews/articles/podcasts that you will be able to talk about any kind of tabletop game on Gleemax, create pages discussing and promoting WotC competitors, receive information from stores about all their tournaments and so on. WotC, they say, are not planning to try to 'control' what games you're talking about.
Now IP issues could be problematic - though I think that Paladium probably over-reach in their understanding of what is an IP violation and what isn't - but that's not that hard to police, and WotC has good enough lawyers to deflect suits aimed at it in cases where it wasn't aware of the violation, I think!
Edit: incidentally, I am pretty sure that the 'minions' thing is primarily part of the ARG and not a permanent feature of Gleemax. Perhaps the result of the ARG will be the destruction of the Brain-in-a-Jar and the reclaiming of the name for the 'home of gamers'
It is clear that one of the key performance indicators for Gleemax will be whether it brings new, younger players into the hobby. Design decisions probably reflect that - though you can see from MySpace that the same system can be used for very different groups: that site is used for supporting teenagers' social lives and for promoting a very wide range of bands and musical artists, for instance, and the A&R people who browse MySpace looking for the 'next big thing' can't be too put off by the fact that on the same site 15 year olds are discussing make up and parties and relationships and so on.When 'Gleemax' actually goes live, what will happen to the forums we are posting on now? Will they still be used as they are now, will they be ported wholesale to the Gleemax forums or will they be shot down and left in the dirt?
If Gleemax loses the current 'minion' theme, I'll most likely use it to some degree, if I find something useful on there. I just want to know that the community I've been a part of for several years (this one) is still going to be around in its parchment coloured glory.
Dragonlover
I've read the fives pages since my last post, and only one person seems to have read it (thankyou Spyderfreak).
Maybe because we are all waiting to see a WizO answer to that one? Maybe because you should post it in the 'questions' thread, stickied at the top of the forum?
Just a couple of explainations I came up with on the spot.
The name for the site is ridiculous, or at least it feels like it. Very childish.
The design for the website is very, very ugly. I like the whole lime on black, I use that for all my code editors whenever I program, since it´s easy on my eyes, yet it´s not so on the gleemax website. I don´t know what exactly it is, but I know I have a very strong gut feeling against the looks of the website.
The whole overlord theme is overdone, and not interesting to me, but I guess some people may find that funny. In my case, it just prompts me to give the overlord the finger. Guess it´s a matter of oppinion...
My comments to a friend right after checking it out were: "If this is Wizards´ DI, then they can take it and *censored*". I honestly don´t care too much about the DI, and I´m not bitter about the closure of the magazines, other than thinking it´s a bad move for WotC, so I don´t think I´m really biased on this respect. Still, gleemax, for all I´ve seen, holds zero interest for me. I suppose time will tell...
I reall have to say something here.
As a parent of said 12 year old, will you let him/her go over to a 30-something stranger's house to play D&D?
Would you let him/her go over to a 30-something stranger's house that he had just met on the internet?
I highly doubt I'll get a "Yes" to either of those questions.
Wasn't my point. No I wouldn't let my 12-year-old do this alone. So, how do new young gamers find other gamers? When I was 12 it was my junior-high librarian that started a social club after school that played RPGs. Now WotC is creating a social interaction website for gamers to meet gamers, the same way many kids use MySpace to meet online friends.
I get the feeling the older crowd here abhors MySpace without ever really having tried it (comments like "I never want to even see MySpace" come to mind). Go sign up, browse around for others with your interests. Keep in mind it will be a bit annoying, because people with myriad interests will be there. But keep in mind how it may be useful if all the other members were gamers.
More likely than not it would still be there, as it's part of the website layout. It's possible that they'll provide an optional layout without the brain (I hope they do), however, although that would slightly defeat the purpose of naming the entire website Gleemax.
Then I don't think you understand what Mike has said. If Gleemax is like MySpace, then your personal page can look however you want it to look.
I get the feeling the older crowd here abhors MySpace without ever really having tried it (comments like "I never want to even see MySpace" come to mind). Go sign up, browse around for others with your interests. Keep in mind it will be a bit annoying, because people with myriad interests will be there. But keep in mind how it may be useful if all the other members were gamers.
I've used it. I have a profile.
It is horrible. Either people whining or creating horrendous site designs on par with (or worse than) the Gleemax design.
There is no substance there--it is all shallow content.
I agree with Darkwolf that the color scheme is really difficult to look at. As in, I spent less than 2 minutes there and started getting a headache type difficult.
Sorry to derail the current stream of conversation, but, DANG--my brain isn't easily addled by color schemes on websites, but this is tougher to read than some of the awful red-on-black formats I've seen at other sites.
WotC is clearly trying to do something new here, and trying to reach a demographic which isn't currently playing WotC games.
I don’t think anyone can dispute the fact that something new and big is happening here. As a matter of fact, I see nothing wrong with attempting to connect to this younger crowd. I’m sure that many of the older and current gamers agree with me on this one, no matter what their individual view is. New gamers are always a good and welcome sight.
The issue with the name being part of some inside M:tG joke has been discussed, so I see no need to go further into it. Besides, it seems that the name is here to stay, and talking about it agitates some people.
Personally, I like the *idea* of Gleemax, and don’t all at the same time. If WotC were to use Gleemax to draw in a younger crowd exclusively, more power to them, but I think a few of the folk posting know that they are being lumped into that crowd, and being older, slightly more mature and world-wise as it were, do find it slightly derisive to be referred to such as a "minion". Many of us are professionals, just as these game designers, managers, and executives are at WotC. To even be referenced thusly smacks as demeaning and slightly contemptuous. As any employee, manager, or exec at WotC can tell you, respect is an important to an individual. They like to be taken seriously, and for older gamers, most would like be to (some would say “demand to be”) treated with an equal level of respect. This goes to all aspects of their life, whether they are a gaming or not. Gleemax, in it’s appearance and (essentially) mission statement, do not offer that level of respect to them (us). If the D&D DI is going to be different than Gleemax, I’m good with that, as I’m sure some of the other posters will be. Most will VERY happily bypass this part.
(aside: Gleemax clearly has nothing to do with the cancellation of Dungeon and Dragon, as the D&D Digital Initiative appears to be a separate development which would probably have happened whether or not WotC developed the Gleemax portal).
This is simply a matter of seeing the flow of events in relation to one another. People were told that the magazines were (essentially cancelled and) being transferred to a digital medium and that content would be placed in the DI, then Gleemax is released as a “face” for the DI. So, the logical progression of thought, I’m guessing, might be that this is where the content is going to end up. That’s all good and well that they are allowing us the opportunity to see what’s in store, but I got the impression, as did several others, that Gleemax was released to everyone so that they could receive feedback from the community as to what we thought of it.
The information provided is fairly limited from just looking at the site. One could really only comment on the color scheme, the title, the fonts, the artwork/images and some links to other pages. Mike (and Randy to a degree) has provided us with some more potential content via posts, interviews, and podcasts. This additional content, as you suggest might have some potential for some people, but probably every piece won’t be used by everyone. But, again personally, I doubt that I would use anything they have listed so far. I essentially already have a “Gleemax” as it were. I call it my “Favorites” folder. I have links to over 80+ different d20 publishers, several very good character sheet generator websites, a few different websites where I can buy my PDF’s, as well other various and sundry interests. Gaming isn’t the sole focus of my life (I mean seriously, there is football, go Broncos, and then my politics).
…perhaps your FLGS gets a page and sets it up so you can pre-order books by email when previously they were lousy at checking email (just to pick one tiny possibility out of a hat).
My FLGS, while it is a good one, and I like it, and use it infrequently (seeing as I’m going electronic with all my books), I know that they already have an online presence. While they may make use of Gleemax (if it’s free, why not?), but they have a store on eBay, and I’m told from a friend that works there, it does brisk business online already. Also, my FLGS has been established for nearly 25 (+?) years now, they have a schedule set for which games are run, and what days they are run. I think everyone in town, as well as the surrounding three counties, already knows it by heart. I have been there three times in the past year, and that schedule hasn’t changed. The wargamers still go there on the same day, the D&D game run by the shop owner still runs on the same night, etc.
One thing that gets me interested in this is the opportunity to connect with other people who are playing less popular rpgs than D&D, which it's sometimes hard to find.
If that works for you, more power to ya. As per connecting with people who play other RPG’s other than D&D/d20, meh, not so much for me anymore. Again, in the span of twenty years as a gamer, many systems and engines have passed through my hands, and I finally had made the decision to only stick with d20. Well, okay, there was a brief stint with both Uniystem and the new 4e Shadowrun rules, but again, just back to d20. I have played over 50 different systems and settings. I’m old, tired, and done experimenting, I just want to play d20, not Rifts, Not TMNT, not Cyberpunk, not Stormbringer, not Paranoia, not Deadlands (well okay Deadlands d20 might be fine if I pick up a copy), and defiantly not the indie stuff. But you get the idea. As per the whole MySpace aspect…sure go for it, no skin off my nose. If I want I could (again) get a group of 32 players at one table at one time (well, okay it was really three tables pushed together). So, I don’t need that. Also, I have an email account that has over 100 of my gamer buddies on it that I have accumulated and kept in touch with over the twenty years I’ve been gaming.
…it's clear from the various interviews/articles/podcasts that you will be able to talk about any kind of tabletop game on Gleemax, create pages discussing and promoting WotC competitors, receive information from stores about all their tournaments and so on. WotC, they say, are not planning to try to 'control' what games you're talking about.
Allowing me a location to talk about anything I want, again I would reference my “Favorites” folder and any number of other various message boards that I belong to that is only a click away. Some are more heavily moderated than the WotC boards, some have little to no moderation at all. All this means a wide range of conversations for me. I do wonder if we’ll be allowed more, less or the same amount of latitude with what we say and how we say with Gleemax though, as opposed to these message boards.
I will say, I have very little against gleemax.com myself, and I am still waiting for the “shock and awe” phase of the DI to kick in relating to the Dragon/Dungeon content that they plan on putting up as well as the other “really, really exciting stuff” for the D&D gamers. I’m just not (and it seems several others) aren’t finding anything with the layout presented or the potential online functions mentioned with Gleemax/DI that can’t already be obtained rather easily either by clicking on a link from one’s favorite folder, or posing a query on a messageboard that could lead to alink being provided. Heck even Scott’s done it. I had no idea ICv2 existed until he linked that article that Randy did with them. Now, it’s in my Favorites, in my “News and Politics” folder. So, see, it’s that easy for me set-up my own “Gleemax” (as it were) using the OS that came with my computer.
I've used it. I have a profile.
It is horrible. Either people whining or creating horrendous site designs on par with (or worse than) the Gleemax design.
There is no substance there--it is all shallow content.
The content of a social site for gamers would at least be gaming-related.
And I wouldn't go so far as to call it horrible. I've been able to hook up with old friends. Found the Rocky Horror Shadow Cast I used to frequent back in the day at their new theater.
It's what you make of it. Maybe you have no use for it, but then again this part of Gleemax is free. So why is everyone complaining that something free isn't what they want. Then don't use it.
The premium content is what really interests me. I can't wait to hear what it will be, how much it will cost, etc, etc.
At no point does WotC say they're stopping printing books. They're not demanding you turn in your current books and go online. Why is there a mis-conception that suddenly D&D is now an exclusively online situation?
It may have something to do with two magazines shelved in favor of digital distribution. I do have a sense that digital production is the direction WOTC is moving in. Intended or not, that is the image WOTC is presenting. I am sure there are many retailers that are less than comfortable with the whole idea.
Personally, I like the *idea* of Gleemax, and don’t all at the same time. If WotC were to use Gleemax to draw in a younger crowd exclusively, more power to them, but I think a few of the folk posting know that they are being lumped into that crowd, and being older, slightly more mature and world-wise as it were, do find it slightly derisive to be referred to such as a "minion". Many of us are professionals, just as these game designers, managers, and executives are at WotC. To even be referenced thusly smacks as demeaning and slightly contemptuous. As any employee, manager, or exec at WotC can tell you, respect is an important to an individual. They like to be taken seriously, and for older gamers, most would like be to (some would say “demand to be”) treated with an equal level of respect. This goes to all aspects of their life, whether they are a gaming or not. Gleemax, in it’s appearance and (essentially) mission statement, do not offer that level of respect to them (us). If the D&D DI is going to be different than Gleemax, I’m good with that, as I’m sure some of the other posters will be. Most will VERY happily bypass this part.
I think this is a very good guess as to why folks have been so annoyed by the whole "minion" thing.
I have links to over 80+ different d20 publishers
Off topic - would you be kind enough to drop me a PM with that list? :D I'm always interested in finding new d20 stuff.
I have links to over 80+ different d20 publishers, several very good character sheet generator websites, a few different websites where I can buy my PDF’s, as well other various and sundry interests.
Impressive.
Off topic - would you be kind enough to drop me a PM with that list? :D I'm always interested in finding new d20 stuff.
What he said. If you're willing to share. Always looking for ways to expand my library.
So... it appears we've just demonstrated a use for Gleemax...
:P
Well, I never said I disliked the idea behind gleemax.com. I hate the (up till now) complete lack of meaningfull communication on the part of WotC, and now that we have something to look at I find the implementation, layout, theme, etc. to be far to juvinile for my taste... but we already agree on that. :D
On that note, I'm not totally opposed to online content, never have been, really. I just resent the cancellation of the D&DMs to support it. (i.e. Online, fine. Online only, annoying.)
I'm always careful when I kid around about the "game police" and they will come to your house and arrest you if you're not playing D&D correctly because someone somewhere will take it the wrong way, and think it's real.
At no point does WotC say they're stopping printing books. They're not demanding you turn in your current books and go online. Why is there a mis-conception that suddenly D&D is now an exclusively online situation?
Did DMs suddenly have problems drawing maps when the Map A Week feature was put up? No.
Did everyone's D&D game shut down and go completely online when Neverwinter Nights came out? No.
D&D is a tabletop game. Always has been and always will be. You will still get your books at the bookstore/gamestore/online. You will still go see your friends. (Unless you get in a big fight over something like, "Do fighters stink?") It's still table top D&D.
They'll never take my dice from me!
;)
I didn't say anything about D&D not printing paper products anymore. The point was the idea of playing a game of D&D online. It DOES NOT APPEAL TO ME! That was the point. I'm sure there are people out there that it WILL appeal to and more power to them. D&D is a social face to face game. Exactly what you say. I will ALWAYS play this game as a social face to face game.
NOW...if the DI turns out to be a big smash success and makes them gobs of money, I think that the fear people have is that somebody at WotC will say, "Wow...this online thing has really worked well for us. It's inexpensive to produce as well. Man those books are pretty expensive to print though. If we moved those to a digital format as well think of the money we will save and the money we will make!"
Do I think this will happen. NO, not really. Of course anything is possible. There are no guarentees that WotC won't change their mind. YES of course that won't stop me from playing with pen and paper and dice with actual physical books. But for the future of the game I think it could be a real possibility down the road. No matter what the staffers say. Someone will come along at some point and point out the savings/profit of going completely digital.
As far as being able to network with other gamers and find new groups to play with, that isn't even an appeal to me as I have a core group I play with and our FLGS is very much alive and kicking with very strong support for D&D and the gamer community.
We did actually lose one player to NWN for about a year or so. Eventually the game started to wane and he came back to the group. Luckily for us he wasn't at all impressed with NWN2 and has not left the group, knock on wood.
OH and in the case of D20 Modern it seems that WotC has abandoned new printed book material. OF couse they seem to have abandoned digital material as well. Of course that won't stop me from playing the game, face to face with pen and paper.
:P
Well, I never said I disliked the idea behind gleemax.com. I hate the (up till now) complete lack of meaningfull communication on the part of WotC, and now that we have something to look at I find the implementation, layout, theme, etc. to be far to juvinile for my taste... but we already agree on that. :D
On that note, I'm not totally opposed to online content, never have been, really. I just resent the cancellation of the D&DMs to support it. (i.e. Online, fine. Online only, annoying.)
Indeed. I agree with everything you said.
I'll note, however, that as recently as yesterday I said I could not find any reason why I would use Gleemax. I don't listen to podcasts; I don't read blogs; I generally don't have any problems meeting new people. But here's a use.
So, Mike, I'm gonna add another "suggestion" to my list from earlier - there should be a page on Gleemax that lists gaming companies. Let people add whomever they want - d20 publishers, White Wolf, Rifts, whatever. Then, once the list is there, allow others to "rate" the company. Set up a 1 through 5 stars rating thing. Then, make the list searchable - by several criteria: game type (d20, board games, video games, other roleplaying systems, etc), genre (superheroes, fantasy, modern, etc), and so on. One of those criteria, though, should be ranking. That is, allow me to only find d20 companies with a rank of 4 or better.
That would be freakin' awesome!
advertising or promoting a business or commercial site
Will Gleemax cause a change to the CoC? Will Gleemax have it's own CoC? I mean they SAY that there will be no issues with discussing or linking to other game comanies etc. Seems to me that this could open up a can of worms. IMO that is.
The premium content is what really interests me. I can't wait to hear what it will be, how much it will cost, etc, etc.
Exactly. What is replacing the mags? Why is it so great that knowing about it eased the mags' passing for Wizard employees....well, that and teriyaki chicken.;)
While Wii may be a silly name, Nintendo had very clearly explained marketing reasons for using the name. The two i characters are meant to resemble two people standing side by side and to represent players gathering together. That's one of the purposes of the Wii ... to allow gamers to play together. It's pronounced "we" to emphasize that the console is for anyone. Again, this emphasizes the stated purpose of the console. It's also a short word that can easily be remembered by people regardless of country or language. In other words, there are very clear marketing reasons for using the name.
Does the name Gleemax have a similar kind of clear marketing focus? The only thing I've read (or think I read) was that people on the inside thought it was funny and that it was an inside joke. Are there clear marketing reasons for using an inside joke to grab the gaming community as a whole? Surely the name can't be completely meaningless. There has to be some reason for using it. What is that reason?
In terms of the interface ... what kind of user study did Wizards do that led them to believe that their potential users wanted an 'in character' interface? What led them to choose that particular interface? Surely there must have been some kind of decision-making process that transcended "wouldn't it be cool/funny if..." Yet it appears, based on the feedback here, that whatever research they did was woefully off the mark. How in touch is WotC with what their customers want?
When looking at gleemax.com, I don't associate it with the Dragon & Dungeon decisions whatsoever. What it reminds me of is the E-Tools debacle. They missed the mark there too. You even heard the same calls to "wait and see ... we'll make the most of what we get." That worries me.
On #1, posters have been insulting out of nothing more than ignorrance. On #2, the posters on these boards are a small minority of the total market, and in fact may even be a technical minority of those that visit these boards. There may be (note, may, as I don't have any data to prove this) a larger group that simply visits and reads, rather than get caught up in the name-calling that goes on. Therefore, when "everyone" on these boards say, for example, that the Dragon and Dungeon magazines should have stayed in print, it appropriately falls on deaf ears at WotC.
Then came Gleemax.com.
As far as I can tell, two D&D staples (i.e., the magazines) were eliminated, to make room for something that "excited" WotC insiders. What we get is a website that caters to people 12 and under; is named after a joke card from Magic, suggesting that D&D is second fiddle; and gives us seizures if we stare at it for more than a minute.
Now, I know that the site isn't finished, but this isn't looking good. Then Gamer_Zero writes that 1) "I didn't get a sense that you actually considered the questions and what ways things might be of interest to you" (post 44), and 2) the color scheme can be changed when you personalize the page(post 33). Clearly, Gamer_Zero doesn't have any marketing experience, but apparently, neither do the WotC marketing employees.
You can't produce a crappy product and then expect your customers to be willing to fix it. You also have to cater to what they want. Expecting us to work really hard to make it do what we want is a horrible business plan. Our inclination isn't to like it first. You have to make us like it, and first impressions are key.
As for my criticisms, clearly the 'ignorant criticism' argument no longer applies. We've seen at least the beginning of the DI, and it's nothing to be excited over (unless you're 6-year-old MtG player). As for complaining posters being the minority, that's not necessarily true with respect to the DI. Gleemax doesn't cater to any of those non-digital gamers, so posters on these boards actually represent a strong minority, if not majority, of potential Gleemax users. It seems that they're not very enthusiastic, so you have a problem, WotC.
2) the color scheme can be changed when you personalize the page(post 33). Clearly, the staff member doesn't have any marketing experience, but apparently, neither do the WotC marketing employees.
To be fair, Mike said last night that the color would be changing from icky green to white.
2) their assumption that their opinions should carry a tremendous amount of weight with the WotC marketing department.
Hey, I just want to know that the marketing department is involved. In my experience, those companies that don't drive product development through marketing (and, hence, those things that customers are clamoring for) are the ones that have failed products on their hands.
My worry is that we have a bunch of people outside of marketing that are sitting around saying "it would be cool/funny if we did X."
To be fair, Mike said last night that the color would be changing from icky green to white.
I didn't catch that, but it doesn't change my opinion. Why release it in "icky green" (I like that name) in the first place? Didn't they test this on anyone? I'm not even suggesting an expensive research process. Any homeless person they asked would have told them that was a stupid idea. To paraphrase a quote appearing throughout this thread, "Why . . . should I be excited?"
It's clear that the DI was designed to lessen the costs of producing D&D not by a change in medium, but rather by a consolidation of their efforts with the marketing to the 6-year-olds that play MtG.* D&D is now on the back burner. Maybe this is a good business decision; I'm not an MBA with experience in the industry. It still sucks, though, and at this point I can't see a reason to defend WotC anymore. I'll just be keeping my fingers crossed that things get better, but this is a very bad start.
* This isn't meant to suggest that MtG is just for 6-year-olds. I know that older people play it. My point is that older players of MtG are *also* not on the WotC marketing radar scope. Maybe they'd be more forgiving of the juvenille nature of the site because it caters to their game, but non-MtG players have no such inclinations.
Now, I know that the site isn't finished, but this isn't looking good. Then Gamer_Zero writes that 1) "I didn't get a sense that you actually considered the questions and what ways things might be of interest to you" (post 44), and 2) the color scheme can be changed when you personalize the page(post 33). Clearly, Gamer_Zero doesn't have any marketing experience, but apparently, neither do the WotC marketing employees.
You can't produce a crappy product and then expect your customers to be willing to fix it.
If they are modeling this after MySpace, then indeed they can expect people to want to create their own personalized home page. I had fun creating my MySpace homepage and I look forward to creating my Gleemax homepage too.
If they are modeling this after MySpace, then indeed they can expect people to want to create their own personalized home page. I had fun creating my MySpace homepage and I look forward to creating my Gleemax homepage too.
Hey, that's great, but that's not my point. I have no problem with a personalized page. Even if I did, it wouldn't matter to me that you want one. Giving people many options is a great idea, so substantively, I disagreed with the person with whom Gamer_Zero was arguing.
However, the site as a whole is juvenille and difficult even just to see. Is the main MySpace page like that? No, it's much more plain, requiring you to edit your personal page before cartoonish characters appear and before suffering seizures.
Scott, Mike, somebody - is there any chance of choosing more normal colors? Right now, I can't give your portal a fair chance, because I can't spend more than a couple minutes looking at the colors.
I'm going to be passing that on (along with other info) when I get into work this morning.
Change the colour. That green is just bad. You even admitted it. Don't deny it now. It's bad. It's so bad I wouldn't use the site as it is if it did mint me gold coins. The gold won't be worth the migraines.
I'm going to see if I can get the text changed to white in both the website and the forums. This is like a tough chip shot out of the bunker and onto the green, but there's a chance it'll go in. If it doesn't, understand that I brought up to the right people, and if it doesn't change that doesn't mean they're ignoring us. And if it does change, it may not happen til sometime tomorrow or even later.
If they refuse to change the color, can you please try to get a reason why? Also, please be sure that they're aware the color automatically causes some people to go away - as I said, I want to give it a fair shake but I can't right now, because I get headaches looking at it.
We're going to change the text to white so it's more readable, on both the web page and the forums. It's 7pm now, and of course, most folks have left for the day, but I'll work with people to try to get it changed tomorrow.
The text was changed to white this morning on the site.
* This isn't meant to suggest that MtG is just for 6-year-olds. I know that older people play it. My point is that older players of MtG are *also* not on the WotC marketing radar scope. Maybe they'd be more forgiving of the juvenille nature of the site because it caters to their game, but non-MtG players have no such inclinations.
*WARNING: THIS IS NOT MEANT TO OFFEND ANY MTG PLAYERS!*
I think perhaps they could be on their radar. Visit any FLGS on any given weekend and you will see 12 year olds mixed in and socializing with 40 year olds playing MtG on a regular basis. I mean it's kinda wierd to see these adult guys hanging out, joking around, and conversing with 12 year olds like they're adults as well. I kinda get the feeling that after the game they'll all go share a pitcher at Hooters together. Not sure that's healthy but who knows. I mean I guide my students through a session of D&D, referee any disputes etc. but I don't hang out or treat them like the buddies in my regular gaming group. Granted there is a difference between the ethics of teacher/student interaction and differing age groups at the FLGS MtG club. I think that for a MtG player of any age, that this could probably work no matter what age you are.
I agree that it has little or no appeal for non-MtG players. Well THIS non-MtG player, for one, is not interested.
Hey, that's great, but that's not my point. I have no problem with a personalized page. Even if I did, it wouldn't matter to me that you want one. Giving people many options is a great idea, so substantively, I disagreed with the person with whom Gamer_Zero was arguing.
However, the site as a whole is juvenille and difficult even just to see. Is the main MySpace page like that? No, it's much more plain, requiring you to edit your personal page before cartoonish characters appear and before suffering seizures.
How can you disagree with the person with whom Gamer_Zer0 was arguing (Samwise)? Samwise complains that the site is horrible looking and as long as it remians so he will not visit it. You seem to agree with Samwise.
If you disagree with Mike's argument, why? He acknowledged that the design is "a bit..erm....well, yeah." I took this to mean he sorta agrees with those that don't like the design. Then he explained a way that you could avoid dealing with the obnoxious color scheme. He's actually answering questions and giving solutions but people are still too mad over the magazine cancellations to hear him out.
I'm still mad about the mags but I don't let that effect my ability to hear new ideas.
Once you navigate to the messageboards through gleemax ("Minions Speak"), there's no link to get back to gleemax.com.
Am I missing it?
How can you disagree with the person with whom Gamer_Zer0 was arguing (Samwise)?
I'm taking your word for it that it was Samwise. If it wasn't, it's on you.
Samwise was criticizing the existence of options such as blogs, a personalized page, a means for storing character data, etc. The fact that the almighty Samwise doesn't like these thing doesn't mean that nobody does. Options are good. If he doesn't want them, he shouldn't use them.
However, Gamer_Zer0's response was no better, justifying a neon green motif (which, by the way, still exists right now despite changes to some of the text), cartoonish characters, and a an apparent focus on MtG. What Gamer_Zer0 and, by extension, WotC seem to be endorsing is a site that alienates D&D (or more accurately, non-MtG) players.
Both are wrong, but for different reasons. Samwise just took his argument too far.
I mean it's kinda wierd to see these adult guys hanging out, joking around, and conversing with 12 year olds like they're adults as well. I kinda get the feeling that after the game they'll all go share a pitcher at Hooters together. Not sure that's healthy but who knows.
Probably because is difficult to talk down* to the kid that's whooping your butt at a competitive card game. If you can raise him to adult status your ego is less bruised when you lose (or win for that matter - "so what, you beat a kid!").
*Probably a better term I could use here. I don't mean talk down to in a negative sense, just the way an adult is expected to talk to a child.
I mean I guide my students through a session of D&D, referee any disputes etc. but I don't hang out or treat them like the buddies in my regular gaming group. Granted there is a difference between the ethics of teacher/student interaction and differing age groups at the FLGS MtG club.
Since D&D is not as competitive (or at least not as satisfying to "win") it would be easier to still treat the children you DM as children instead of equals.
The text was changed to white this morning on the site.
Seems like green is the new white, then. Bloody fashion...
The name issue is a non-starter. Save this thread and check back in a week and see how many people are still complaining about it. Most people will eventually accept the name and begin to associate it with whatever their perspective of Gleemax might be. I do have faith, however, that there will be other more important concerns people will be talking about. =)
I'm a player of both Magic and D&D, and have known about the Gleemax card (and a portion of the inside joke with it, as I frequently read the Magic site), and I can safely say the name will always be associated with the card to me.
And if it's supposed to be the "portal" to the DI, then a name should have been chosen that wasn't already connected to a single game, and didn't sound odd.
We're going to change the text to white so it's more readable, on both the web page and the forums. It's 7pm now, and of course, most folks have left for the day, but I'll work with people to try to get it changed tomorrow.
Well, I can guarantee I won't even be looking at the site for some time, because white on black hurts my eyes (which is why I hardly ever go to ENWorld, despite having an account there, and it possibly being a great site).
But, as has been repeatedly said, my gaming experience won't suffer from treating Gleemax.com as non-existent, so I won't be losing out more than I already have on D&D stuff.
Now, despite my initial reservations, I'm interested in how the Gleemax site, and the Digitial Initiative is supposed to "enhance" my D&D experience in a way that doesn't see superfluous or unnecessary.
For example, the nearest hobby store to me is about 70 miles away, how is Gleemax going to enhance my relationship with that store?
I can easily post notifications at a nearby bookstore (which is about half the distance away as the hobby store), and fairly easily meet and communicate with potential gamers. How would Gleemax be a better option for that?
I have an internet connection that tends to go out when a big storm is a day or so away, how will having a DM blog, or my characters saved online help me in that situation? How will Gleemax and the DI be of any use to me in that situation, or when the power goes out?
How will having my characters saved to a website be any more efficient and useful to me than having them either saved in a folder (with plastic full-page sleeves), or on my hard drive?
However, Gamer_Zer0's response was no better, justifying a neon green motif (which, by the way, still exists right now despite changes to some of the text), cartoonish characters, and a an apparent focus on MtG. What Gamer_Zer0 and, by extension, WotC seem to be endorsing is a site that alienates D&D (or more accurately, non-MtG) players.
Both are wrong, but for different reasons. Samwise just took his argument too far.
Got it.
I don't get the feeling G_Z is trying to justify the motif. In fact he said he would pass along everyone's distaste with the color-scheme. The first step to make it more readable happened quickly.
And other than the fact that Gleemax is the name of a MtG card, I see no direct link to any type of game yet. The people involved seem to be having fun playing the pixel game. I have no interest in that, but other do. I look forward to how the site will develop as a place for all gamers.
That's exactly the kind of thing I was talking about when I mentioned maturity levels. I wont put up with it for one second. "Leet Speak" should be against the CoC, in my opinion.
Well, looks like not only is it not against the CoC, it's being spammed by "Gleemax" itself:
Illegible
THE PIXSW50ZXJlc3RpbmEL PROcgb2JzZXJ2YXRpb25JECT IS PROCEEDINzIHdpdGggXCJPcGVyG AS PLANYXRpb24gUG9wcHljb2NNED. I AM AWrXCIgZnJvbSB0aGlzIHZARE OF THE FACTIOpZGVvIHByYWN0aXRNS ALpb25lciBvZiB1IGNED AGAINbnVzdWFsIHByST ME. YOU ARE ON MY RAYW5rcw0KDQo=DAR.
ERROR CODE 64^$64. BEGINNING PHYSICAL MEMORY SCAN>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ERROR CODE 64^$64. BEGINNING PHYSICAL MEMORY SCAN>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Well, looks like not only is it not against the CoC, it's being spammed by "Gleemax" itself:IllegibleTHE PIXSW50ZXJlc3RpbmEL PROcgb2JzZXJ2YXRpb25JECT IS PROCEEDINzIHdpdGggXCJPcGVyG AS PLANYXRpb24gUG9wcHljb2NNED. I AM AWrXCIgZnJvbSB0aGlzIHZARE OF THE FACTIOpZGVvIHByYWN0aXRNS ALpb25lciBvZiB1IGNED AGAINbnVzdWFsIHByST ME. YOU ARE ON MY RAYW5rcw0KDQo=DAR.
ERROR CODE 64^$64. BEGINNING PHYSICAL MEMORY SCAN>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Until yesterday I didn't know what an "ARG site" was either. And that's only because somebody spelled it out in a post, rather than using the acronym...
Well, that makes two of us, so we're in good company.
Okay, company, anyway...
I must be "venerable" then - I'll be 37 later this year. ;) Though I'm not anywhere near being a grandparent yet. :P
Well, I'm 40 and I AM a grandparent! :D I still love D&D and will probably teach it to my grandkids (in 10 years or so), just like I did my kids.
As far as the whole Gleemax thing goes I will just wait and see. So far I have found little use for most of the online content already provided and browse the forums more as a source of entertainment than anything else.
Then I don't think you understand what Mike has said. If Gleemax is like MySpace, then your personal page can look however you want it to look.
On the contrary, I think I understand quite well what Mike is saying (not that he has said much). However, my point is that no matter how much customization you can make to the page, there's most likely going to be some aspects that show up no matter what. Using MySpace as an example: whenever you go to your home page (note that I am talking about the page where you personally edit everything, not the profile page that other users see), you always see the annoying adds at the top, the "cool new people" section, and the ever-useless announcements from Tom. Likewise, what I imagine happening is that Gleemax the brain will always show up at the top of the page, along with a few other sections that Wizards decides are important to have, for whatever reason. Like I said, this is mere speculation based upon existing websites and obviously has no factual support. I'm just as likely to be wrong, and indeed I hope that is the case, because quite honestly I cannot stand dealing with MySpace even though I have one.
What the hell are "ILoveBees" and "Year Zero?"
ARG = Alternate Reality Game. A viral stealth marketing approach in which the target audience receives several coded messages on various media platforms, such as snail mail, mysterious billboards (remember Aqua Teen Hunger Force's Boston mess?), internet chat rooms, cheap toys in the mail, USB drives or CD-ROMs found in strategic public places, multiple unrelated websites, YouTube (Operation Poppycock is Gleemax related), and so on. Each message by itself appears to be completely unrelated, but is identifiable if you are looking for the next clue. Eventually either someone figures it out or the company marketing the product finally unveils what is going on.
"Year Zero" is the latest Nine Inch Nails album, which had a marketing campaign featuring mysterious USB drives containing mp3s found in the restrooms at NIN concerts, a mysterious phone number playing the intro music to "Survivalism" and several fake websites for radical militant evangelical christian organizations (for example, the 105th Airborne Infantry of God) and government conspiracies involving drugging the public water supply. Pretty creepy stuff, all going along with the album's Orwellian plot.
Now, let's look at Gleemax. First was the rubber brains with "moctodsdraziwtaxameelg" written on them. Next there was the base 64-encoded URLs, one of which goes to a password-proteced savefile.com page. They revealed the encrypted password on the chat board. Somebody cracked the code, converted to numbers and found out it was desktop wallpapers. The rest of the text of the message containing the base-64 encoded URL wasn't encoded, and led people to google Operation Poppycock, which is a YouTube video about office pranks. Another video was posted showing the guy was lost underneath the Wizards.com offices. I'm guessing he'll meet gleemax in the next video.
"Now, let's look at Gleemax. First was the rubber brains with "moctodsdraziwtaxameelg" written on them. Next there was the base 64-encoded URLs, one of which goes to a password-proteced savefile.com page. They revealed the encrypted password on the chat board. Somebody cracked the code, converted to numbers and found out it was desktop wallpapers. The rest of the text of the message containing the base-64 encoded URL wasn't encoded, and led people to google Operation Poppycock, which is a YouTube video about office pranks. Another video was posted showing the guy was lost underneath the Wizards.com offices. I'm guessing he'll meet gleemax in the next video.
If this is indeed one approach that's being taken to market Gleemax, then I guess its true that WotC is targeting the younger (maybe), tech saavy (certainly) internet users. In any event, its way over my head. I miss the days when ads were simple: "7-Up, its the Un-Cola" ;).
ARG = Alternate Reality Game.
Ahah! So that's what it means!
I was beginning to think it was pronounced 'aargh!' and that it was the required reaction to Gleemax. :D
Ahah! So that's what it means!
I was beginning to think it was pronounced 'aargh!' and that it was the required reaction to Gleemax. :D
Don't worry, that's the assumption I made as well. One of the reasons why I'm not too fond of acronyms, unless they're very well-established.
Ahah! So that's what it means!
I was beginning to think it was pronounced 'aargh!' and that it was the required reaction to Gleemax. :D
Things can have more than one meaning...
I also started a thread to discuss the most underrated RPGs, that some of you might find interesting. Several WotC folks have already chimed in with their thoughts.
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=680
Signs of listening to criticism from this thread are evident. "Minions Speak" has been changed to "Forum."
Excellent... that's one annoying feature of Gleemax that's gone. Now hopefully they'll continue this trend and listen to the rest of what's being said.
Would WotC consider changing the forum settings so they use whatever users have set in their profile, rather than forcing the icky green color?
When I'm on the faq page (link), the links in the header are jumbled together. For example, on the top left, "Pixels" and "Home" overlap. Next to that, "What is Gleemax" and "Randy's Blog" overlap (though not as bad as the first). On other pages, "Pixels" seems to be on the far right, but on the FAQ page, it seems to move to the far left, which causes the problems.
I'm in the process of uploading a screen shot to my webspace, and I'll update this post with the image once it's uploaded.
edit: Here's the screen shot (note that it causes an H-scroll, so I sblocked it):
Would WotC consider changing the forum settings so they use whatever users have set in their profile, rather than forcing the icky green color?
I'll add this to my list of ransom demands, thanks. I'll also ping the web dev guys on the overlap issue you're seeing.
I'll add this to my list of ransom demands, thanks. I'll also ping the web dev guys on the overlap issue you're seeing.
It would really prove helpful to people like me with poor eyesight. I have my forum settings set to Parchment and Leather, which creates black text on a light tan background. getting that to carry over to the Gleemax forums would ease the eyestrain I feel over there.
And I hope the screen shot proves helpful for the devs to track down the problem. If it matters, I'm running Windows XP Pro SP2 with Firefox version 2.0.0.4.
There's still no link back to the gleemax site from the forums, which is a real shame because that giant GLEEMAX image at the top of the screen would be a perfect candidate.
Is allowing users to get back to the site not deemed important?
We updated gleemax.com with more information. (no, the look didn't change, sorry) This was based on the questions people have raised in this thread and others, so thanks again for providing us feedback.
I also started a thread to discuss the most underrated RPGs, that some of you might find interesting. Several WotC folks have already chimed in with their thoughts.
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=680
Nice bait.
Maybe I'll join in when this happens:
I'm pleased feedback is being listened to, and incorporated into the site to make it a bit more user friendly.
Would WotC consider changing the forum settings so they use whatever users have set in their profile, rather than forcing the icky green color?
And I hope the screen shot proves helpful for the devs to track down the problem. If it matters, I'm running Windows XP Pro SP2 with Firefox version 2.0.0.4.
I run Windows XP (no SP 2 though) with Firefox 2.0.0.4 and the menus appear fine for me.
I run Windows XP (no SP 2 though) with Firefox 2.0.0.4 and the menus appear fine for me.
Are you on the FAQ page? It only happens there for me (so far).
if so, what's your screen resolution? Mine is 1024x768.
Are you on the FAQ page? It only happens there for me (so far).
if so, what's your screen resolution? Mine is 1024x768.
I was running a higher screen resolution, but changed it to 1024x768 and it still works fine. I even clicked on the link you gave, above, and see no issues.
Weird.
I wonder what Gleemax will look like when the game is over and the actual product is revealed in its entirety.
Game? What game? I'm confused.
ARG = Alternate Reality Game. A viral stealth marketing approach in which the target audience receives several coded messages on various media platforms, such as snail mail, mysterious billboards (remember Aqua Teen Hunger Force's Boston mess?), internet chat rooms, cheap toys in the mail, USB drives or CD-ROMs found in strategic public places, multiple unrelated websites, YouTube (Operation Poppycock is Gleemax related), and so on. Each message by itself appears to be completely unrelated, but is identifiable if you are looking for the next clue. Eventually either someone figures it out or the company marketing the product finally unveils what is going on.
Doesn't help much. Still confused as all hell. What game? That doesn't sound at all like a game.
Now, let's look at Gleemax. First was the rubber brains with "moctodsdraziwtaxameelg" written on them. Next there was the base 64-encoded URLs, one of which goes to a password-proteced savefile.com page. They revealed the encrypted password on the chat board. Somebody cracked the code, converted to numbers and found out it was desktop wallpapers. The rest of the text of the message containing the base-64 encoded URL wasn't encoded, and led people to google Operation Poppycock, which is a YouTube video about office pranks. Another video was posted showing the guy was lost underneath the Wizards.com offices. I'm guessing he'll meet gleemax in the next video.
Sounds like a hell of a lot of money wasted on what could have gone into current product, bringing their quality up to snuff.
I still don't understand this "game"? What is the game? It looks like a terribly designed webpage, with a forum. I didn't see a game.
List of items
It's basically a scavenger hunt.
List of items
Can't you win games, though? What is the point of the game, other than advertising that I'm ugly as sin?
Wait wait. The scavenger hunt is the game, but putting that with that "ARG" thing... well...
So essentially, I have to do a hell of a lot of work finding things, problem solving, etc, just so that WotC can sell me something? What ever happened to the [i]company[/] working for my dollar. Now I work for my money, then work to give it away. Gosh.
It's good to see that they're taking our opinions seriously. However, it seems like the one thing that bugs me the most (the color scheme) is the one thing that they refuse to change.
Mike's response to Z makes it sound like it's still a possibility. What do you want from them, it's been like 3 days?
I'm pleased feedback is being listened to, and incorporated into the site to make it a bit more user friendly.
Would WotC consider changing the forum settings so they use whatever users have set in their profile, rather than forcing the icky green color?
I'll add this to my list of ransom demands, thanks. I'll also ping the web dev guys on the overlap issue you're seeing.
I don't mean to offend anyone, but the name strikes me at first glance as either childish, or
. a name with those kind of overtones is not something I would partake in. Regaurdless of the creators intentions.The graphics don't bother me that much. The name alone, however is enough to keep me from going back.
I don't mean to offend anyone, but the name strikes me at first glance as either childish, or
But it's so very happy, it's Max Glee. Nothing is happier. *snicker*
The graphics don't bother me that much. The name alone, however is enough to keep me from going back.
I don't mean to offend anyone, but the name strikes me at first glance as either childish, or
I would have eventually been able to "accept" the name Gleemax, but now I'll think of the overtones everytime I hear it
. I think it hopeless, I'm no match for the might of . . . I mean Gleemax :D. Some of my best friends are gleeful . Ahem, okay . . . I'll behave now, I couldn't resist a little friendly fun ;).
Keep up the good work!
- Bad colourscheme
- Name that sounds seedy (sounds like a brand of birth control products)
- Wants to much of my personal info (and pictures!)
- Unclear purpose, seems to be mainly about itself.
If it wasn't linked from here, I would have clicked it away before it would have finished loading.
There were times when I was reluctant to tell anyone not in the gaming loop that I subscribed to Dungeon Magazine. I could just picture them conjuring up thoughts of some sick S&M magazine. But the content was great, so who cares what the name was?
At least the name Dungeon was relevent to the game. Gleemax is just...
It is not apropriate to use the word "gay" (or any variation thereof) in a derogotory manner or as a stand-in for words like "Lame", "Stupid", "Efeminate", or "Weak".
Ever.
Thank you.
Can't you win games, though? What is the point of the game, other than advertising that I'm ugly as sin?
Wait wait. The scavenger hunt is the game, but putting that with that "ARG" thing... well...
So essentially, I have to do a hell of a lot of work finding things, problem solving, etc, just so that WotC can sell me something? What ever happened to the [i]company[/] working for my dollar. Now I work for my money, then work to give it away. Gosh.
Welcome to 2007.
Traditional advertising is ineffective on Generation Y so marketers have resorted to nontraditional media. Personally, I would prefer a cryptic scavenger hunt instead of marketer-created "word-of-mouth" from a "street team" that was paid to wear company X's clothes any day. And it beats Sony's PSP spraypaint graffiti stealth marketing campaign (they got charged with vandalism) in NYC. And it beats Cartoon Network's accidental Boston terror scare, too.They ought to make the prize at the end of the scavenger hunt something better than just knowing that a new product is out though. Think about it. Cracking two long encrypted phrases (using completely different methods) just to get a couple of wallpapers? The reward was kind of a let-down for all the hard work. What amazes me is how quickly people decoded them. Okay, the password itself was a classic kid's cereal Secret Decoder Wheel one, but the base 64 thing amazed me when I read about it.
Heck, we're advertising Gleemax right now just by talking about it.
At least the name Dungeon was relevent to the game. Gleemax is just...
...in its beginning stages. You are correct! :D
I want to see what D&D content will emerge from this too just as bad as anyone else, but I'm equally as tired of people whining that roleplaying with an alien brain-in-a-jar and a photo scavenger hunt aren't relevant to the game.
The photo scavenger hunt? Sure. But people are having fun with it. It's no less relevant than the Wizard's Boards Castle of Fun, but I had a blast there for a good while.
Roleplaying with the brain? Why not? Ever play the 1E mod "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks?" Vegepygmies, robots, keycards...in D&D?!?!?!? Gods forbid! You can't roleplay that stuff in D&D!!!! Inconceivable!
What's going on there right now doesn't interest me either, and I want them to get to the good stuff too, but the things been around for 4 freaking days.
[/rant]
You can't roleplay that stuff in D&D!!!! Inconceivable!
You keep on useing that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
and now on to a more serious note.
I was not happy with Gleemax when it first started, as evidenced by my earlier post. But I am glad to see that our voices have been heard, and that more content is starting to appear on the site.
I am still a bit confused about one thing. (And, I must admit I read the first 8 pages of this, but when it jumped to 11 I started skimming so forgive me if this has been answered.) Are the boards here going to be linked perm to the new site or is this just a temporary thing until the DI really gets rolling? I ask because I am the sole source of "boards" answers for my group and I would find it frustrating to have to start many of the threads and searches all over again. It would be even worse to have to wait for many people to finally decide to switch over to Gleemax and lose many of the extremely helpful posters I have some to trust over the years.
To name a few (and thank whole heartedly for the excellent information): Zherog, Darkwolf, Thorak, tarkin, and many many more I cannot think of.
Spyder
...in its beginning stages. You are correct! :D
Well since the topic was the name not the content, that hardly matters does it? 'Dungeon' had an obvious and direct connection to the game played by it's buyers. Gleemax has meaning only to the Magic players who are 'in' on the joke. Yet the site is supposed to appeal to 'all gamers'.
Roleplaying with the brain? Why not? Ever play the 1E mod "Expedition to the Barrier Peaks?" Vegepygmies, robots, keycards...in D&D?!?!?!? Gods forbid! You can't roleplay that stuff in D&D!!!! Inconceivable!
Sure, I played Expedition, what old school D&D player didn't? Fun enough, but not what I would have wanted to spend a lot of time in. As a one-shot it was great.
I am still a bit confused about one thing. (And, I must admit I read the first 8 pages of this, but when it jumped to 11 I started skimming so forgive me if this has been answered.) Are the boards here going to be linked perm to the new site or is this just a temporary thing until the DI really gets rolling?
I don't think this has been answered yet, Someone (Dragonlover?) has posted it to the 'Questions' thread though, so hopefully we'll have an idea soon.
I ask because I am the sole source of "boards" answers for my group and I would find it frustrating to have to start many of the threads and searches all over again. It would be even worse to have to wait for many people to finally decide to switch over to Gleemax and lose many of the extremely helpful posters I have some to trust over the years.
To name a few (and thank whole heartedly for the excellent information): Zherog, Darkwolf, Thorak, tarkin, and many many more I cannot think of.
Spyder
Thanks, I'm glad someone gets something from my posts. Here, I thought I was just a trouble maker. ;)
Gleemax has meaning only to the Magic players who are 'in' on the joke. Yet the site is supposed to appeal to 'all gamers'.
I'm seeing people cite this a lot. Gleemax was a joke about how ALL of Wizard's R&D was run by an alien brain in a jar. It was never MtG specific. The theory was that Gleemax ran the D&D, Magic, and other smaller R&D staffs.
MtG has a history of having some fun by making up some "joke" cards that are not intended for play. Given the popularity of the Gleemax joke/jab at Wizards (which started on a community forum, I'd like to point point out) they also made a Gleemax card.
So it was never a Magic-only joke. It was a community initiated joke about all of Wizard's R&D.
I'm seeing people cite this a lot. Gleemax was a joke about how ALL of Wizard's R&D was run by an alien brain in a jar. It was never MtG specific. The theory was that Gleemax ran the D&D, Magic, and other smaller R&D staffs.
MtG has a history of having some fun by making up some "joke" cards that are not intended for play. Given the popularity of the Gleemax joke/jab at Wizards (which started on a community forum, I'd like to point point out) they also made a Gleemax card.
So it was never a Magic-only joke. It was a community initiated joke about all of Wizard's R&D.
I think you're wrong, Mike. Sorry. I've been here for just about 6 years now. This is the first time I've ever seen Gleemax on the D&D side of the community.
The joke might be that Gleemax runs all of R&D, but the joke came from the Magic side of the community.
I'm seeing people cite this a lot. Gleemax was a joke about how ALL of Wizard's R&D was run by an alien brain in a jar. It was never MtG specific. The theory was that Gleemax ran the D&D, Magic, and other smaller R&D staffs.
MtG has a history of having some fun by making up some "joke" cards that are not intended for play. Given the popularity of the Gleemax joke/jab at Wizards (which started on a community forum, I'd like to point point out) they also made a Gleemax card.
So it was never a Magic-only joke. It was a community initiated joke about all of Wizard's R&D.
I have yet to see any one from the D&D section of wizard's community who had any clue about what gleemax was prior to a couple of weeks ago. So, I think it's understandable that I/we view it as a 'Magic' joke.
I think you're wrong, Mike. Sorry. I've been here for just about 6 years now. This is the first time I've ever seen Gleemax on the D&D side of the community.
I've been here for nearly 3.5 years now, and I can also safely say that Gleemax was not on the D&D side of the community until it was mentioned a few weeks ago.
I think you're wrong, Mike. Sorry. I've been here for just about 6 years now. This is the first time I've ever seen Gleemax on the D&D side of the community.
I'm sorry you feel that way. It's 100% true. Clearly Gleemax was more well-known in the Magic community, probably because it's easier to make a promo card for Magic then it is to slip something clearly Out of Character into the D&D side of things. But the fact remains that it was never a magic-only joke, just like the giant dragon in our office lobby doesn't denote that only D&D-related guests are welcome in our offices.
I'm sorry you feel that way. It's 100% true. Clearly Gleemax was more well-known in the Magic community, probably because it's easier to make a promo card for Magic then it is to slip something clearly Out of Character into the D&D side of things. But the fact remains that it was never a magic-only joke, just like the giant dragon in our office lobby doesn't denote that only D&D-related guests are welcome in our offices.
I'm sorry you feel that way. What I said is also 100% true. Gleemax was originated on the M:tG side of the community; it only existed on the M:tG side of the community. The fact that the joke is that Gleemax controls all of R&D doesn't mean it belongs to the whole community. It doesn't; it belongs to the M:tG community.
I'm sorry you feel that way. It's 100% true. Clearly Gleemax was more well-known in the Magic community, probably because it's easier to make a promo card for Magic then it is to slip something clearly Out of Character into the D&D side of things. But the fact remains that it was never a magic-only joke, just like the giant dragon in our office lobby doesn't denote that only D&D-related guests are welcome in our offices.
You are completely wrong. Gleemax was only known on the Magic side.
Look, I hate to pull this, but look at our join dates. Look at yours. Who knows more about the forums? Some guy who just got hired, or long-time users?
It doesn't matter that your higher ups said, "Oh yeah. It's a joke on both sides!" ... it's not true. Maybe one or two people on this side even knew what a gleemax was before this whole thing was released.
I'm seeing people cite this a lot. Gleemax was a joke about how ALL of Wizard's R&D was run by an alien brain in a jar. It was never MtG specific. The theory was that Gleemax ran the D&D, Magic, and other smaller R&D staffs.
MtG has a history of having some fun by making up some "joke" cards that are not intended for play. Given the popularity of the Gleemax joke/jab at Wizards (which started on a community forum, I'd like to point point out) they also made a Gleemax card.
So it was never a Magic-only joke. It was a community initiated joke about all of Wizard's R&D.
First off, let me say that this meant as a light-hearted response.
I think I have to agree with Zherog here. I have been a (D&D) gamer since 1986, and hadn't heard of it since the website was released. I started playing M:tG when in came in the early/mid-90's. I guess I quit playing it after about a year to a year-and-a-half, so I missed the "Gleemax" aspect there, I guess. I have checked out the MTGO, and even looked at the cards, since they provide a list, but never encountered a description of this card, until I actively went searching for it (and I looked at a lot of those cards BTW). SInce I don't play M:tG, in any incarnation, I never had a valid reason for visiting the Magic side of the forums. Also, I haven't (yet :D ) had the opportunity to work in any WotC R&D dept. So, for me to seeing it (or a dragon in the lobby) flittering around the office...
Not saying anything bad about Gleemax, mind you. Simply saying that I personally, being active on these boards for over two years now and an active gamer for over twenty years hadn't heard of it. I have never heard a local M:tG player mention it when I would go to one of my FLGS, never heard another gamer mention it (and I know a lot of local gamers), never saw it on any literature, nothing up until the website launched.
Additionally, I have never done an in-depth review of several of the forums offered by WotC, such the Avalon Hill forums, Duel Masters, Mirrorstone, etc. I generally hover around here, maybe the Forgotten Realms, Eberron and d20 Modern forums. So, indeed, any jokes or references to inside jokes related or culled from those forums would most likely be lost on me as well, but I would look into it if such comments made their way here to these forums.
Lastly, and please know I mean nothing derogatory here, but you mention above that it was first suggested by the community, and then converted to a card. I'm guessing you mean the M;tG community, which desperately few of us visit, and vice-versa. If it had reference in any Wotc d20 product, could you point it out for me, I have looked, mostly at the few d20 Modern books I have for any reference to it, but haven't come across it.
I'm sorry you feel that way. What I said is also 100% true. Gleemax was originated on the M:tG side of the community; it only existed on the M:tG side of the community.
Hmm. Take a breath. =) I'm not trying to get you upset. You told me I was wrong. I said that what I said was 100% true. I didn't dispute that it was better known in the Magic community.
It wasn't a magic-only thing. It was a Wizard's of the Coast thing.
If this is such a sore subject at the moment that we can't discuss it rationally, I can bow out for a bit and try again next week. Let me know.
Look, I hate to pull this, but look at our join dates. Look at yours. Who knows more about the forums? Some guy who just got hired, or long-time users?
I guess that says it all! =)
Gleemax may very well have started within the community. That part is correct. But it started within the M:tG community, and it has stayed within that part of the community.
As far as the D&D side of the community is concerned, Gleemax is a Magic thing.
I guess that says it all! =)
You know, it may be good for you to try being less pompous around us.
If someone representing a company treated me like that in real life, that company would receive a complaint and I'd think twice about shopping there again.
Everything that Zherog said has been correct.
Gleemax is a M:TG thing, and the D&D side was not in on the joke.
Reminds me of that drug, Gleemanex, from Brain Candy.
Are we ever going to get the big table in here or am I going to have to cut down that
tree myself?On Topic:
I have been around on these forums for some time and have never heard of gleemax until now.
If it seems that there is some animosity towards MtG from the D&D side I would point to Blizzard and the whole Diablo vs WoW fiasco.
You see they released this game called Diablo for the PS and PC and it was a huge success. They made lots of money and used it to make Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo 2, which were all 3 huge hits as well. They made even more money and made Warcraft 2, then 3, then World of Warcraft. Pretty soon they essentially stopped supporting Diablo 2 (they did release an expansion right away and a total of like 5 patch updates) in favor of the now more popular Warcraft line. (because it got more support and more frequent updates and expansions)
I bring this up because thats exactly how some of us in the D&D community feel that WotC is handling its lines. DDM was released in a MtG random boosters packaging, a definite nod to collectors and tournament players and a clear middle finger to D&D purists who only need the minis for battles. (making random minis useless)
Then the support fell off. Where is the Errata? The free downloads? What happened to the free D&D cut out minis? They don't care because its not as profitable as the DDM and MtG lines.
The only reason there is a market for MtG and DDM is because of D&D but the old cow hasn't been prducing as much milk so they are just going to leave her rot in favor of new more profitable prospects.
Kind of sad that our beloved game is in the hands of corporate profit mongers, I await the day that they have stripped her bones bare and no longer care to even own the liscense so that we the fans can reclaim our game.
As far as the D&D side of the community is concerned, Gleemax is a Magic thing.
Are we talking perception or reality? Perception-wise, I agree with you entirely and I understand why people consider it to be a magic thing.
In reality, Gleemax was an internal company-wide joke that was not brand specific.
It doesn't matter to the people in the D&D community that the D&D R&D team joked about Gleemax. What matters is that until a week or so ago, they've never heard of Gleemax. And when they do finally figure out just what the heck it is, they learn that it's a joke that originated within the Magic community about a brain-in-a-jar that controls WotC R&D.
That's the reality to the D&D Community. Within the walls of the company, Gleemax may very well be a well known joke and all that. But among your customers on the D&D side, it's not. It's a "Magic thing."
That's my whole point.
Hmm. Take a breath. =) I'm not trying to get you upset. You told me I was wrong. I said that what I said was 100% true. I didn't dispute that it was better known in the Magic community.
It wasn't a magic-only thing. It was a Wizard's of the Coast thing.
If this is such a sore subject at the moment that we can't discuss it rationally, I can bow out for a bit and try again next week. Let me know.
Internally, maybe it was. But your office jokes mean absolutely nothing to your customers. The only part of the community that seems to have any knowledge about it is the Magic crowd. No matter how much you keep saying otherwise the fact remains, the only community members who were aware of 'Gleemax' are the ones who frequent the Magic boards.
Perception is reality, Mike.
It doesn't matter to the people in the D&D community that the D&D R&D team joked about Gleemax. What matters is that until a week or so ago, they've never heard of Gleemax. And when they do finally figure out just what the heck it is, they learn that it's a joke that originated within the Magic community about a brain-in-a-jar that controls WotC R&D.
That's the reality to the D&D Community. Within the walls of the company, Gleemax may very well be a well known joke and all that. But among your customers on the D&D side, it's not. It's a "Magic thing."
That's my whole point.
Exactly and while you don't need to be concerned about a few peoples perceptions, when an entire section of your community/customers has the same perception it is time to realize that that is the reality for both you and them until you take steps to change that perception.
I don't think this has been answered yet, Someone (Dragonlover?) has posted it to the 'Questions' thread though, so hopefully we'll have an idea soon.
Yup, it was me that stuck it in there after someone else in this thread reminded me the sticky was there.
Dragonlover
How can someone write such a long press statement, that doesn't say anything at all? Sounds like they want to do a browser-game and a general RPG-forum on one site.
Exactly and while you don't need to be concerned about a few peoples perceptions, when an entire section of your community/customers has the same perception it is time to realize that that is the reality for both you and them until you take steps to change that perception.
"Perception" is one of the most unfair "realities" of the business world. If the "perception" that one type of car, is better than another, or one company is more responsive and customer focused than another gets into the minds of customers ... whether its true or not is completely irrelevant. It becomes reality, and the company on the short end of the stick now needs to start battling the perception because if they don't it will just become more and more entrenched.
The "perception" that WotC is out of touch and is mis-managing their RPG products and customers appears to be growing (at least from what I have seen) on these boards and others. The announcements of the cancellations, the new DI, the lack of information the launch of Glee ... are all being cited as examples that support that "perception".
Is it fair? Nope. Is it the truth? I don't know. Does it matter if its fair or the truth? Not in the least.
But I do think that WotC will soon need to start hitting some home runs with their RPG customers or else there may very well be some dark days in the wizards tower coming sooner than anyone wants to think about.
Perception is reality, Mike.
Before things get out of hand and we start quoting Satre and Kant, let me remind you that I'm interested in presenting reality to the community. Internally, I present people with current community perception.
So when I say "The sky is blue" and you reply "No, you're wrong. The community perception is that the sky is always dark and cloudly", we're talking about two different things.
-gleemax is supposed to be a gaming community site for all games. I'm guessing that means forums, game content, player/game finders, etc..
-The term "gleemax" doesn't mean a thing to most D&D players. It is on wikipedia though, and does appear to a MTG thing only.
Assuming I understand gleemax correctly:
- Does WoTC really expect it to be THE site for all games? I really can't see players from other official forums/sites migrating to gleemax unless gleemax offers some really, really, really, useful and spiffy services.
- Does anyone expect WoTC to host a site that benefits the competition? What about copyright and ownership? If anyone posts game content (or even posts) to gleemax, does WoTC get automatic rights to use it? I would find it odd if someone posts alternative Monopoly or Risk game rules that WoTC would spontaneously own the rights to. (Gleemax is supposed to cater to tabletop games.)
- Is gleemax really going to have myspace type features? I understand that it's preferable for gamers to spend their time making a myspace page for their favorite character instead of telling character stories to other people, but still...
- What kind of game content is gleemax going to provide? Is WoTC going to put up content for WoTC games? Will WoTC make it possible for other game companies to put up their own professionally done content? Is it just going to be user contributed stuff?
Before things get out of hand and we start quoting Satre and Kant, let me remind you that I'm interested in presenting reality to the community. Internally, I present people with current community perception.
So have you accurately described that we feel D&D has been steadily losing its support (i.e. Errata and the magazines being cancelled) and that the products have been nothing more than a handful of useful additions combined with more filler than we care for (i.e. We can add class levels to monsters ourselves) and that if something isn't done soon to placate the D&D community that 4E (another sore spot) might never see the light of day?
I no longer care about the name itself..I was would like my questions about it answered.
Are we talking perception or reality? Perception-wise, I agree with you entirely and I understand why people consider it to be a magic thing.
In reality, Gleemax was an internal company-wide joke that was not brand specific.
Easy enough to see the other way:
Your perception is that Gleemax has meaning to the gaming community at large.
Reality is that ONLY the M:tG players 'get it'.
Before things get out of hand and we start quoting Satre and Kant, let me remind you that I'm interested in presenting reality to the community. Internally, I present people with current community perception.
So, have you presented them with the fact that their inside joke, while amusing enough in the office and Magic forums, has no identity with the RPG crowd?
So have you accurately described that we feel D&D has been steadily losing its support (i.e. Errata and the magazines being cancelled) and that the products have been nothing more than a handful of useful additions combined with more filler than we care for (i.e. We can add class levels to monsters ourselves) and that if something isn't done soon to placate the D&D community that 4E (another sore spot) might never see the light of day?
Well, let's see...they stated that they have added more resources to the errata team, that content similar to that of the magazines will be available online, and that they heard the dislike of MMIV and are trying a new approch for MMV. I'd say they're listening and responding. Some people are just huffing and puffing too loud to hear it.
Your perception is that Gleemax has meaning to the gaming community at large.
Reality is that ONLY the M:tG players 'get it'.
I "get it" just fine. I'm not a MtG player. Sci-Fi is a common RPG thing and the alien brain-in-the-jar isn't that difficult to understand unless your too angry to try to "get it."
I didn't like every cover of Dungeon. Should that mean I shouldn't have bought those issues even if I knew what was inside was useful to me?
It's just a name people. Get mad when they lay out what content they are actually going to give us and it still sucks. Until then everyone is getting all upset over window dressing.
So when I say "The sky is blue" and you reply "No, you're wrong. The community perception is that the sky is always dark and cloudly", we're talking about two different things.
This is a totally flawed argument! It's absurd to even use such a fallacy to argue your side.
In order for your argument to work ...
You say, "The sky is blue"
We say, "No. You're wrong. We have been here for far longer than you have, and no one has ever heard of the sky being blue until now."
Ok. So that didn't work too well.
My point is, you (a newcomer) come here and make a declaration about what us long-timers know. We refute that claim. You promptly say that we are wrong. You only know what your higher-ups have told you about the state of the forums, and you know what? They were wrong.
When it comes to the ebb and flow of the forum, depend on those who have been here a long time. Zherog is a great example of someone who knows the forum very well.
Listen to what he says when he says we've never even heard of Gleemax before a few weeks ago.
Well, let's see...they stated that they have added more resources to the errata team, that content similar to that of the magazines will be available online, and that they heard the dislike of MMIV and are trying a new approch for MMV. I'd say they're listening and responding. Some people are just huffing and puffing too loud to hear it.
If there was an anouncement (or 3) that I missed than I am sorry but I have heard nothing so far.
If there was an anouncement (or 3) that I missed than I am sorry but I have heard nothing so far.
I don't think there were. You have to be following these threads pretty closely to catch all the 'little' things.
So have you accurately described that we feel D&D has been steadily losing its support (i.e. Errata and the magazines being cancelled) and that the products have been nothing more than a handful of useful additions combined with more filler than we care for (i.e. We can add class levels to monsters ourselves) and that if something isn't done soon to placate the D&D community that 4E (another sore spot) might never see the light of day?
If there was an anouncement (or 3) that I missed than I am sorry but I have heard nothing so far.
1) Errata improvement was mentioned in the 'Introducing Mike Lescault' thread.
2) Online magazine content is explained in the 'Answers' thread. They are even almost ready to put out Writer's Guidlines for future submissions.
3) The new approach for MMV was mentioned in the previews for the book. They specifically call out the fact that many people did not like the classed monsters and all the spawn of Tiamat, so they are trying a new approach on the former and have only added one of the latter.
1) Errata improvement was mentioned in the 'Introducing Mike Lescault' thread.
A massive thread that was 90% "welcome to the boards"... yeah I missed any relevenat needles that were in that hay stack.
2) Online magazine content is explained in the 'Answers' thread. They are even almost ready to put out Writer's Guidlines for future submissions.
Answers thread? Can you be more specific or should I just search the boards for "answers"?
3) The new approach for MMV was mentioned in the previews for the book. They specifically call out the fact that many people did not like the classed monsters and all the spawn of Tiamat, so they are trying a new approach on the former and have only added one of the latter.
Ooooooo goody, so they heard our complaints so instead of going back to what worked they are going to release more of what didn't with a slightly different approach?
It's not that hard to figure out that Monster Manuals only need to be released as often as the developers can come up with enough [color=blue]NEW MONSTERS[/color] and not according to any deadline. That way we can avoid being forced to pay for 90% filler just to get 4 cool new monsters.
Before things get out of hand and we start quoting Satre and Kant, let me remind you that I'm interested in presenting reality to the community. Internally, I present people with current community perception.
I have no idea who Satre or Kant are... that aside: I have a follow up question to this. Actually, it's two questions.
1) I want to be sure I understand you. Are you saying the reality is that folks within WotC believe Gleemax is a community wide thing?
2a) Do you understand why the perception is that Gleemax is a "Magic thing?"
2b) Are you relaying that to those who need to know?
Well, let's see...they stated that they have added more resources to the errata team, that content similar to that of the magazines will be available online, and that they heard the dislike of MMIV and are trying a new approch for MMV. I'd say they're listening and responding. Some people are just huffing and puffing too loud to hear it.
I agree with Vyv here. It's totally fair to say WotC has made mistakes. Everybody makes 'em, and there's no shame in doing so.
It's not fair, however, to claim that WotC is ignoring us. The Gleemax site has had several changes within a week of being released, based entirely on user feedback. That's pretty quick turn-around time for a large corporation.
Another example that Vyv didn't mention is the "Wish List" thread. In the past, such things were frowned upon. Now, the thread is an open discussion with folks from WotC - development, editing, and R&D have all poked their proverbial heads in. Ideas are shared back and forth. WotC has even tossed out ideas to see if we were interested (WotC_Logan asked if we would have interest in an "alternate" Player's Handbook written with evil characters in mind; Chris Perkins has asked if there would be interest in a wiki-style page for Eberron)
WotC is definitely listening, and they're responding. And not just with words - they are changing things based directly on user feedback.
I "get it" just fine. I'm not a MtG player. Sci-Fi is a common RPG thing and the alien brain-in-the-jar isn't that difficult to understand unless your too angry to try to "get it."
Indeed. The "B Movie-esque" nature of a brain-in-a-jar that takes over the world is a concept that can work in just about any setting - Modern, D&D, Cthulu, Mutants and Masterminds, Magic: the Gathering, and so on.
But in order for that to work, WotC is going to have to put in effort for the name Gleemax to evolve from a Magic joke into a more generic "Hey this is a cool gaming portal" thing. And, until Mike's most recent post, it appeared WotC wasn't getting this. I'm still not convinced people other than Mike get it.
It's just a name people. Get mad when they lay out what content they are actually going to give us and it still sucks. Until then everyone is getting all upset over window dressing.
But it's not just a name. The name comes with pre-attached connotations, and to many D&D players those connotations seem to speak of exclusion rather than inclusion. That's something that really ought to worry WotC, in my opinion, because it means they have more work to do in making Gleemax accepted within one of their core customer groups.
Heck, at the beginning of the week I saw no use whatsoever for Gleemax, as it's being described to us. I don't like blogs, I don't have interest in podcasts, I don't want to find a new gaming group, and so on. But then during the week, two things came up specifically here on this forum that make me think there's a wonderful opportunity for Gleemax.
1) Zersch mentioned in one of his posts that he has a ton of bookmarks already with a bunch of d20 publishers and a bunch of campaign journals. At least two people - me and Darkwolf - asked him if he'd share that list. Now, Zersch was kind enough to take the time to transfer his bookmarks into a PM and share it with the two of us. But this sort of thing sounds like a perfect use for Gleemax. Zersch could just add those to some place or other on his Gleemax page, and then point everybody to it. And I can have my own list, and you can have yours, and so on. Now, all these little d20 publishers out there aren't quite so little any more.
2) Somebody else (Amaril maybe?) mentioned that he had an Excel spreadsheet that automatically went out to the Consolodated Lists and pulled in any new information. He then used it to search and find stuff and all those great things you can do with Excel data. Again, people went, "ooh, cool - can you share that?"
So yeah, I've gone from "What the hell is this site going to do for me?" to "Huh, I think I can see some advantages to having a social networking site geared towards gamers." And yet, I still look at the name and cringe slightly. I still look at the name and think of Magic: the Gathering. So I agree, to a point, that content matters. But the name matters, too.
A massive thread that was 90% "welcome to the boards"... yeah I missed any relevenat needles that were in that hay stack.
That would be hard to spot unless one was reading along.
Answers thread? Can you be more specific or should I just search the boards for "answers"?
It's stickied at the top of this forum.
Ooooooo goody, so they heard our complaints so instead of going back to what worked they are going to release more of what didn't with a slightly different approach?
It's not that hard to figure out that Monster Manuals only need to be released as often as the developers can come up with enough [color=blue]NEW MONSTERS[/color] and not according to any deadline. That way we can avoid being forced to pay for 90% filler just to get 4 cool new monsters.
That's your opinion. I saw alot of people who like the classed monsters. They're a quick drop-in when you want a tougher opponent of a relatively normal type.
And I never said they've gotten it right. My point was that they heard the feedback and have made changes they feel appropriate based on that feedback.
Answers thread? Can you be more specific or should I just search the boards for "answers"?
It's stickied to the top of this forum...
edit: too slow... I was beat to the answer by an old geezer... :P
It's stickied to the top of this forum...
edit: too slow... I was beat to the answer by an old geezer... :P
Heh heh...old geezer!
Wait, I think he's referring to me!!!!
At least I'm young at heart.
:D
Zherog's no spring chicken, ya know.
:D
Yeah, but I'm respecting my elders today. :P
Except I believe you're older than me, Vyv. Respecting yourself for a change?
I'd never do that!
Wait, I'm older than Z? I need my Rascal motorized chair! :D
That's right. You're both older than me!
:evillaugh :evillaugh :evillaugh
There's only one thing that really matters here.
That's right. You're both older than me!
:evillaugh :evillaugh :evillaugh
Don't make us come over there and whack you with our canes! :fight!:
Except I believe you're older than me, Vyv. Respecting yourself for a change?
21 stinkin' days no less... :D
At least I still have my youthful good looks. ;) :D
1) I want to be sure I understand you. Are you saying the reality is that folks within WotC believe Gleemax is a community wide thing?
No. The reality is that the joke itself was never Magic Specific. It was a joke about all of Wizard's R&D.
2a) Do you understand why the perception is that Gleemax is a "Magic thing?"
Absolutely.
2b) Are you relaying that to those who need to know?
I was relating this to people several weeks before the launch. When we opened the Gleemax forums, I made a couple posts in the D&D area that referenced Gleemax. They went over like a lead balloon.
Scott, Chris, and I even talked about how the D&D folks didn't like any of the Gleemax stuff. I think we were all really surprised at just how *little* cross over there was between the MtG crowd and the D&D folks.
So every meeting i've been in regarding the Gleemax launch has involved a lot of talk about the D&D folks. If you listen to my radio podcast that was recorded before the opening of the gleemax.com promotional site on Monday, you'll notice that I asked several questions of Randy about this. Specifically saying "Gleemax looks like really a Magic thing."
Just because I don't necessarily agree with the community's perception (and often, misperception) of things, doesn't mean I am not internally trying to hammer home those points as often as I can.
Also keep in mind that very little of what I bring up internally is a surprise to the people at WotC. The company is made up mostly of gamers, and they tend to read these and other forums just like you guys do.
In fact, I've recently had several folks in the office come up to me saying "So I hear you're handing out gold coins...."
That implies you once had youthful good looks...
That's just mean.
So every meeting i've been in regarding the Gleemax launch has involved a lot of talk about the D&D folks. If you listen to my radio podcast that was recorded before the opening of the gleemax.com promotional site on Monday, you'll notice that I asked several questions of Randy about this. Specifically saying "Gleemax looks like really a Magic thing."
Got a transcript yet? As I've mentioned previously, I can't listen to your podcast at work (my employer blocks MP3s and any other streaming media due to the load they create on the network). I do 90% of my surfing at work (I multitask well ;) ). I choose to spend my time at home with my children, rather than downloading podcasts or surfing the 'net or whatever.
Also keep in mind that very little of what I bring up internally is a surprise to the people at WotC. The company is made up mostly of gamers, and they tend to read these and other forums just like you guys do.
You probably can't answer this, but I'll ask anyway: Was the response on the D&D side a surprise to people? You mentioned you (and Scott & Chris too) were surprised about how little cross-over there is. You also mentioned your Gleemax comments and jokes went over like a lead balloon (which I knew - I was one of the people desperately trying to figure out what the heck gleemax was when you made those comments/jokes).
So given these, is it safe to assume the response was at least a little bit surprising?
[edit]
And also, Mike, if I was coming across as rude earlier, I apologize. That wasn't the intention.
[/edit]
That's just mean.
Truth hurts, huh?
I was relating this to people several weeks before the launch. When we opened the Gleemax forums, I made a couple posts in the D&D area that referenced Gleemax. They went over like a lead balloon.
Scott, Chris, and I even talked about how the D&D folks didn't like any of the Gleemax stuff. I think we were all really surprised at just how *little* cross over there was between the MtG crowd and the D&D folks.
This is what scares me. You guys think you know your customer base and you are making decisions based on this assumption. The fact is there has been little to no WotC representation on these boards until just after the D&DM announcement. The company couldn't be more out of touch with it's RPG customers. (I really don't know how involved they have been with MtgO, but it seems to have been more so than here.)
(Disclaimer: This could be read in a tone of anger, that is not the case at all. I am not angry as I write this. I am concerned.)
I want tools to make life easier, sort and filter based on my needs and books. Reference materials. Online tools like character and NPC generators, storage, trackers and initiative and XP generators are cool, but that's only half your community. I don't take ANY pc to a table.
So, you also need things we can use to print off PDF characters, and maybe DM stat blocks based on the characters we say are in our party and take them with us.
MHO.
I'm sorry you feel that way. It's 100% true. Clearly Gleemax was more well-known in the Magic community, probably because it's easier to make a promo card for Magic then it is to slip something clearly Out of Character into the D&D side of things. But the fact remains that it was never a magic-only joke, just like the giant dragon in our office lobby doesn't denote that only D&D-related guests are welcome in our offices.
The customer is always right, Mike.
If the customer says something that is wrong, it's because the image provided to the customer was ill prepared, and that's a problem with public relations.
It would seem that the entire D&D customer base is saying "this joke is an MtG inside joke", therefore it must be. Your job now is to figure out why we think that, and then tweak the image you're displaying into something workable.
At this point, it is no longer possible to convince the D&D community that "gleemax" is not a MtG specific joke.
Dennis Stout
The customer is always right, Mike.
In my opinion this is false.
In my opinion this is false.
I will have to agree here, but disagree also. I work in a business where if the perception of the customer is contrary to our beliefs, we are forced to shift our belifes a bit towards that customer. They may not actually be "correct" but they are "right". If you ALIENATE (pun intended) the customer, you lose that customer.
Our business messed up a few months ago, not even our fault, and we are still feeling the repercussions today. Mike, I commend you on the effort you have put forth for us, we will continue to feed you info on what we want if you continue to listen to our needs.
On a side note: I love the cards for the Bo9S abiliies, can e ever get the same for spells? feats? psionics? do these already exist somewhere?
Spyder
It may have been an inside joke...and then an inside joke for the MTGO and then an attempted inside joke for everyone else....but like I said before since it wasn't pushed toward the D&D and the rest of the Wotc RPG community atlearge in way shape or form that I have found its still consided an inside joke...just like the old C:dos run joke..
This is what scares me. You guys think you know your customer base and you are making decisions based on this assumption. The fact is there has been little to no WotC representation on these boards until just after the D&DM announcement. The company couldn't be more out of touch with it's RPG customers. (I really don't know how involved they have been with MtgO, but it seems to have been more so than here.)
(Disclaimer: This could be read in a tone of anger, that is not the case at all. I am not angry as I write this. I am concerned.)
OH I SOOO totally AGREE with ya there DW. There is a VERY clear devision between MtG players and D&D players. Visit my LGS on any given weekend and you'll see that this is the case. I mean the back room is full of tables of kids and adults playing MtG and cracking on the D&D and Miniatures players(D&D, 40K, and Battletech mostly). If you hang out by the D&D shelves you'll here them crackin on the MtG card geeks. D&D gamers like the RP and social intraction with a GROUP of people. MtG players like the one on one competition aspect of a card game. There is a major difference there.
Alot of gamers just can't support EVERY game that WotC puts out. I mean I play D&D & D2 Modern, 40K, and have a rather OCD sickening Transformer obsession (I just spent $300 on one figure today. Oh my wife is gonna kill me!!). I have no money or time for anything more than that. I tried Magic back when the first beta set came out. Stayed with it through Arabian Nights and then realized just HOW much time, money and devotion it was going to take to keep up with it and I said "Screw That!".
Gotta say, no offense guys (Scott, Chris and Mike) but I am SOOO suprised by the disconnect there.
Now I will say that I have recently started playing the Munchkin card game. It's alot closer to the D&D RP experience and theme than MtG every was. And it's a Hilarious game to boot. If you havn't played it I STRONGLY recomend it.
The customer is always right, Mike.
If the customer says something that is wrong, it's because the image provided to the customer was ill prepared, and that's a problem with public relations.
This is very wrong. Sometimes the customer simply didn't use low-level critical thinking skills. When I first saw the name Gleemax, I Googled it and found it on Wikipedia. I quickly discovered that it was an inside joke that was later transferred to a MTG card having been an inside joke for so long. Easy to understand.
Now in terms of PR, the correct path would have been to include the history of that inside joke in all communications about Gleemax.com, which then brings everyone into the joke and makes it inclusive rather than exclusive.
By the way, I'm a PR practitioner.
This is what scares me. You guys think you know your customer base and you are making decisions based on this assumption. The fact is there has been little to no WotC representation on these boards until just after the D&DM announcement. The company couldn't be more out of touch with it's RPG customers. (I really don't know how involved they have been with MtgO, but it seems to have been more so than here.)
(Disclaimer: This could be read in a tone of anger, that is not the case at all. I am not angry as I write this. I am concerned.)
I am in agreement with this. I've never heard of Gleemax before this but apparently Wizards thinks it's all over the place when it's just a Magic and Company thing. Scary.
Perception is reality, Mike.
This is precious! Being a Philip K. Dick fan, I tend to agree to this notion even if it always earns me a couple of odd looks if I mention it to others ;)As hilarious as it is: Could we perhaps drop this matter? There's about zero new info in the last 10 pages or so of this thread. It's already seriously derailed and I mainly see the same four or five people complaining about the same things. Ah, well. I guess, I'll just stop looking at this thread...(which will make the thread disappear from my version of reality :P)
Scott, Chris, and I even talked about how the D&D folks didn't like any of the Gleemax stuff. I think we were all really surprised at just how *little* cross over there was between the MtG crowd and the D&D folks.
Well, here's the deal. This is a complaint I've had about life for a long time, I've made it before, and it has nothing to do with WotC.
This is an attitude I've seen taken several times.
People seem to think that if you like one thing or do one thing, you must like/do everything else that fits in the same category.
Here are some examples: I love watching documentaries on _military history_. I often recieve, as presents, documentaries on the history of electricity, documentaries on the history of this guy or that guy, documentaries on the history of word processors. I even got a documentary on the history of the toilet.
I like fixing heavy equipment. Running new electrical systems for lights and computers, rebuilding air line systems, rebuilding foundation brake systems, stripping and replacing decking, the whole nine yards. (incidently, this is why my initial arguement against a DI in general existed: I can't just bolt down a brake can, alt+tab to a forum and hit refresh, check for new posts, and proceed to hook up air lines. I am internet-less when I'm working on equipment. anyways). A lot of people seem to think that since I enjoy working on heavy equipment, I must also enjoy fixing their car. I hate working on cars, there isn't enough room to fit my hands around things.
I like playing D&D. I don't care for miniatures, MtG, Mage, Vampires, Star Wars or most any other RPG.
There's also a time element. I was talking to someone else last night: I honestly don't know how some of these people can watch every movie that comes out as they come out, keep up with fark and slashdot, keep up with the current events and the views that FOX, CNN, _and_ NBC present for each of those current events, while attending all the drinking parties that begin one night and end the next night, AND have a full time job and manage to maintain a stable relationship with a significant other.
I have a sneaky suspicion that most people don't do that. I also highly suspect that most D&D players put enough time into D&D that they really can't afford the time element required to learn MtG.
I'm sure MtG is easy once you learn it, but it takes time to learn. Easily enough time to run a D&D session.
That makes MtG too expensive for a D&D player. It costs us more time than we have.
Dennis Stout
I'm seeing people cite this a lot. Gleemax was a joke about how ALL of Wizard's R&D was run by an alien brain in a jar. It was never MtG specific. The theory was that Gleemax ran the D&D, Magic, and other smaller R&D staffs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleemax
Gleemax - This had been an inside joke among both Wizards R&D and Magic: the Gathering players. The infamous alien brain is said to secretly manipulate the Magic R&D division (as is mentioned in the flavor text). .
Oh, also, the set that the card came out with was released in 1998, so the joke is much older.
... when a near-bankrupt TSR was bought by Wizards of the Coast in 1997.
Considering the joke is older than 1998, and WotC only bought D&D in 1997, I'd assume that Gleemax is older than WotC's D&D and not a part of it.
You see they released this game called Diablo for the PS and PC and it was a huge success. They made lots of money and used it to make Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo 2, which were all 3 huge hits as well. They made even more money and made Warcraft 2, then 3, then World of Warcraft. Pretty soon they essentially stopped supporting Diablo 2 (they did release an expansion right away and a total of like 5 patch updates) in favor of the now more popular Warcraft line. (because it got more support and more frequent updates and expansions)
Just to clarify, according to Wikipedia "Warcraft: Orcs & Humans is a real-time strategy game, developed and published by Blizzard Entertainment in 1994."
and also
"Diablo is a dark fantasy-themed hack and slash action-adventure game developed by Blizzard North and released by Blizzard Entertainment in December, 1996."
Warcraft is older than Diablo by two years, not the other way around.
Also, to add my two cents. Warcraft and Warcraft II were amazing games ruined by 3D (Warcraft 3) and MMORPGs (World of Warcraft).Then the support fell off. Where is the Errata? The free downloads? What happened to the free D&D cut out minis? They don't care because its not as profitable as the DDM and MtG lines.
Just wait for Reaper's prepainted plastic minis that are NOT randomized. Then we'll see what is "not as profitable for DDM" ;)
And Zherog, about the podcast transcript. Gamer_Zer0 said it ain't happening in the Answer thread. Those of us that aren't interesting in listening to an interview and prefer reading are out of luck.
The customer is always right, Mike.
The onbly thing I have ever learned being in this industry that hold true is that the customer is 99% a pompus a$$ when they don't get what they feel they deserve.
Often need and useful are not part of the issue.
Now, that said, this is a comment on the statement, NOT to the poster I quoted. Each person is judged on their own behalf.
Wizard's best bet is to set the rules, lay the ground work and tell us what the site will and will not do on launch. Take it or leave it.
Take our suggestions and opinions, weigh them and implement them on a business basis of need and usefulness to the whole over time. We may be the customer, but that does not give us free reign.
I'm sure MtG is easy once you learn it, but it takes time to learn. Easily enough time to run a D&D session.
That makes MtG too expensive for a D&D player. It costs us more time than we have.
Dennis Stout
MtG is far more simple of a game than D&D is. Also, far easier to learn as well. The part of MtG that takes time is devising strategy and building the decks. MtG also costs a heck of a lot more money (surprisingly enough).
I played MtG from Revised up through 'til Ice Age.
MtG is far more simple of a game than D&D is. Also, far easier to learn as well. The part of MtG that takes time is devising strategy and building the decks. MtG also costs a heck of a lot more money (surprisingly enough).
Doing the community thing, I've found that MtG players tend to be overly concerned about whether or not things are "fair", and I suspect this comes from the competitive nature of the game (and those attracted to it). D&D folks seem to be overly concerned with loyalty, and take offense at any signs of waivering loyalty. I suspect this is due to the cooperative nature of RPGs (well most, Paranoia and others being exceptions), and the people attracted to that type of cooperative gaming.
You probably can't answer this, but I'll ask anyway: Was the response on the D&D side a surprise to people? You mentioned you (and Scott & Chris too) were surprised about how little cross-over there is. You also mentioned your Gleemax comments and jokes went over like a lead balloon (which I knew - I was one of the people desperately trying to figure out what the heck gleemax was when you made those comments/jokes).
What happened was pretty expected. Probably the most unexpected part was the roleplaying/faction warring that took over the Gleemax forum. That was something I don't think any of us had anticipated.
As far as the cross-over, of course we knew there wasn't much. But geesh, you'd think that given the size of the two player bases there'd be at least a handful of folks who were active in both the D&D and MtG forum communities. Turns out there doesn't seem to be, or at least, none who have spoken up and admitted it. =)
MtG is far more simple of a game than D&D is. Also, far easier to learn as well. The part of MtG that takes time is devising strategy and building the decks. MtG also costs a heck of a lot more money (surprisingly enough).
I played MtG from Revised up through 'til Ice Age.
The fact that it's easier doesn't matter.
It takes the time equivalent of 1 session of D&D to learn MtG.
That's an _entire gaming session_. That's the expensive part. And yeah, keeping up with new decks is expensive too. The only friend I have who used to play couldn't afford to keep up with it so he stopped playing it entirely. Something about decks becoming obsolete or something..
I don't play MtG so I don't really know what that means.
Dennis Stout
Alot of gamers just can't support EVERY game that WotC puts out. I mean I play D&D & D2 Modern, 40K, and have a rather OCD sickening Transformer obsession (I just spent $300 on one figure today. Oh my wife is gonna kill me!!). I have no money or time for anything more than that.
LOL. She'll only kill you if she finds out.
I always say I miss boxed sets because I could hide more books in them. Do you see the posts complaining that there are too many books? Well, I LOVE "too many books" because it's easier to sneak more books in without my wife seeing them.
"Forge of War? (Out this month...) Yeah, I've had that since 1979..."
Really.. she can't remember what books I do and what books I don't have. It's awesome. So, what you need is MORE Transformers.
Now I will say that I have recently started playing the Munchkin card game. It's alot closer to the D&D RP experience and theme than MtG every was. And it's a Hilarious game to boot. If you havn't played it I STRONGLY recomend it.
Psst... want to know a great place to talk about Munchkin? It's called Gleemax. :D
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=680
As far as the cross-over, of course we knew there wasn't much. But geesh, you'd think that given the size of the two player bases there'd be at least a handful of folks who were active in both the D&D and MtG forum communities. Turns out there doesn't seem to be, or at least, none who have spoken up and admitted it. =)
I live in a small midwest Ohio town, the same general 25 folks that show up for DDM, also show up for MtG, FNM, HeroClix and D&D, and a list of others.
However, its night and day. I own a good collection of MtG and play it casually with friends outside of the group. I do not play in the group because its all about winning, and I mean hard core.
There is no fun in playing, you don't sit around with chips and a beer and enjoy a game, its do or die.
Now, these same people playing D&D, are jovial, open, friendly, role playing and laughing. A character dies, we make another. Its a social time.
This is the same for DDM and all the rest I listed. One game, is a social game...the others are strict competition.
As far as the community goes, it's entirely an MtG thing. The D&D community was not in on the joke.
PS: I just checked the Gleemax card. Whoever thought it was a good idea to change Gleemax's color from red to green should be flogged, no matter what his/her position is in the company.*
*A cookie for the first one to know whose example I'm modeling this suggestion after.
As hilarious as it is: Could we perhaps drop this matter? There's about zero new info in the last 10 pages or so of this thread. It's already seriously derailed and I mainly see the same four or five people complaining about the same things. Ah, well. I guess, I'll just stop looking at this thread...(which will make the thread disappear from my version of reality :P)
u r rite!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleemax
Gleemax - This had been an inside joke among both Wizards R&D and Magic: the Gathering players. The infamous alien brain is said to secretly manipulate the Magic R&D division (as is mentioned in the flavor text). .
Oh, also, the set that the card came out with was released in 1998, so the joke is much older.
Considering the joke is older than 1998, and WotC only bought D&D in 1997, I'd assume that Gleemax is older than WotC's D&D and not a part of it.
This led me to find this little gem.
Gleemax was born on June 5th, 1996, on a Usenet post entitled “WOTC R&D Is there a brain behind it?”. A user named Jeff Franzmann (a.k.a. “Canticle”) answered the post’s question by stating that an alien brain in a jar of formaldehyde was in fact controlling R&D.[2]
From there Gleemax became an inside joke of sorts, especially among the Wizards R&D staff. Mark Rosewater included references to Gleemax in many of his articles published in The Duelist, Wizards’ in-house publication, as well as mentioning Gleemax in a number of his articles on Wizards' Magic: the Gathering website.
In 2004, Gleemax was given a more official status when he was made into a card for Wizards’ flagship game, Magic: the Gathering, as part of their comically-themed Unhinged set.[3]
Hm, interesting.
Psst... want to know a great place to talk about Munchkin? It's called Gleemax. :D
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=680
Nice plug but I'm still overwhelmed by green. Thanks anyway.
What happened was pretty expected. Probably the most unexpected part was the roleplaying/faction warring that took over the Gleemax forum. That was something I don't think any of us had anticipated.
As far as the cross-over, of course we knew there wasn't much. But geesh, you'd think that given the size of the two player bases there'd be at least a handful of folks who were active in both the D&D and MtG forum communities. Turns out there doesn't seem to be, or at least, none who have spoken up and admitted it. =)
Gamer Zero ... you guys are surprised that there isnt much cross-over between MtG and D&D? Have you guys spent any time at a regular gaming store that offers a place to play both games? It certainly sounds like you haven't. Have you spent any time at an MtG table or a D&D table when talk about the other game pops up?
This is really mind boggling to me. This is basic gaming 101. I mean really really bloody basic community knowledge.
If WotC is so unaware and completely clueless about something so basic in the make-up of their game communities, can you please explain to me where you are getting your market knowledge, and what information you are basing your new business model on?
PLEASE use this as an example of why you need to question what the heck you are doing. Because it certainly doesn't look like you are in touch with our reality at all.
Mike's response to Z makes it sound like it's still a possibility. What do you want from them, it's been like 3 days?
I took Mike's response to mean that they would adjust it so that the user's personal settings would not be overwritten by the forum default, not that they would change the actual default layout. I could be wrong though.
In my opinion this is false.
That so made me think of going into one of those huge department stores crewed entirely by moron staff where "the customer is always right" is the golden rule and shout "I am wrong!" and see how many of their head I can make implode...
As a big fan of running gags Mike, I have to say I think this shows why they need you. We, in the D&D community, apparently completely missed that one. You'd have thought a running gag like that would have shown up in the Design & Development column (or in the staff bios or something).
So, clearly, you need to do some damage control and spread the word of Gleemax so we can all laugh. Okay, laugh somewhat late sand thus sardonically, but...
We ought to appoint you Offical Master of Running Gags or something then.
It occurs to be if there's no cross-feed between the communities, you ought to bring the M:toGers up on our running jokes. (Pun Pun, Uranium swords, Elves with Greatswords, fant etc etc) Then when someone cracks one of those out at some point in the mixed community everyone can laugh sardonically. Or something...
It occurs to be if there's no cross-feed between the communities, you ought to bring the M:toGers up on our running jokes. (Pun Pun, Uranium swords, Elves with Greatswords, fant etc etc) Then when someone cracks one of those out at some point in the mixed community everyone can laugh sardonically. Or something...
Psst, what is 'fant'?
im afraid are this the furture of dnd. then i gonna miss it.i dont even got the willpower to stay 1 minute on that side PLEASE someone thell me i am wrong and this is not the furture of dnd.
Psst, what is 'fant'?
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=847630
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=849448
A relatively new in-joke admittedly (I only got it from a link from another thread this morning, which it was why it was on my mind).
Perhaps, after some thought, a better list would be Pun-Pun, uranium swords, Elves and greatswords, hammerguns, Steve and the Folding Chair of salvation and Ted the 'Flayer1.
And me. Or Zherog. Or both...
1Actually, Mike, if you're not familar with all of those, you should go and read up on them yourself!
Perhaps, after some thought, a better list would be Pun-Pun, uranium swords, Elves and greatswords, hammerguns, Steve and the Folding Chair of salvation and Ted the 'Flayer1.
Don't forget Bob the Commoner, who is immune to inconvenient things
Don't forget Bob the Commoner, who is immune to inconvenient things
And Fluffy the cat, come to that.
That so made me think of going into one of those huge department stores crewed entirely by moron staff where "the customer is always right" is the golden rule and shout "I am wrong!" and see how many of their head I can make implode...
Here is what I said, followed by your reply:
As far as the cross-over, of course we knew there wasn't much. But geesh, you'd think that given the size of the two player bases there'd be at least a handful of folks who were active in both the D&D and MtG forum communities. Turns out there doesn't seem to be, or at least, none who have spoken up and admitted it. =)
Gamer Zero ... you guys are surprised that there isnt much cross-over between MtG and D&D?
No, we're not. Read above!
If WotC is so unaware and completely clueless about something so basic in the make-up of their game communities, can you please explain to me where you are getting your market knowledge, and what information you are basing your new business model on?
Wait, how did we suddenly become "unaware and completely clueless"?!
I'm not trying to make fun of you, but the honest sense I get is that you're just looking for any ammo you can use to prove that WotC is clueless in deciding our business plans going forward.
Chris: Mike, do you have change for a Five? I didn't think to bring any ones for the machine today.
Ammo-seeking Poster: OMG! Any idiot knows that vending machines don't take ones! So did you just learn this today? Have you ever used a vending machine before?! Oh my! This is proof they have no idea what they're doing with their DI offerings.
Scott: I can't make the meeting today. Turns out I am triple booked for meetings at that time.
Ammo-seeking Poster: OMG! Did you NOT know that you can't be in more than one meeting at once? That's ridiculous! Take some college classes! How can you possibly expect us to believe in your business plan if you people consistently prove your inability to grasp even the most basic sense of how the world works.
But maybe I'm wrong, that's just sort of the image that came to mind when I read that. =)
Psst... want to know a great place to talk about Munchkin? It's called Gleemax. :D
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=680
I know an even better place...where you won't be blinded by green....but I don't do that kind of linkage.....
Scott, Chris, and I even talked about how the D&D folks didn't like any of the Gleemax stuff. I think we were all really surprised at just how *little* cross over there was between the MtG crowd and the D&D folks.
But geesh, you'd think that given the size of the two player bases there'd be at least a handful of folks who were active in both the D&D and MtG forum communities.
If that was meant as a funny joke, then I'm sorry I missed it. From your post I got the impression that you and the others at WotC were actually surprised at the lack of crossover.
In addition you seemed ...
Probably the most unexpected part was the roleplaying/faction warring that took over the Gleemax forum. That was something I don't think any of us had anticipated.
...surprised at the warring between the 2 factions which is a daily happening at almost every gaming store that I have been in.
My shock at your admission of surprise at these 2 elements of the gaming community was what prompted my comment of being out of touch. Now clueless may have been a bit over the edge, and I apologize for that one. I'll ask you to chalk it up to lack of morning caffeine.
I still stand by my belief that WotC's plans (what little we know) are out of touch with what a large number of your customers are looking for. But we won't have the proof of that assertion until the DI is actually rolled out and we see the fans reaction to it.
I found this bizarre.
Here is what I said, followed by your reply:
No, we're not. Read above!
Wait, how did we suddenly become "unaware and completely clueless"?!
I'm not trying to make fun of you, but the honest sense I get is that you're just looking for any ammo you can use to prove that WotC is clueless in deciding our business plans going forward.
Chris: Mike, do you have change for a Five? I didn't think to bring any ones for the machine today.
Ammo-seeking Poster: OMG! Any idiot knows that vending machines don't take ones! So did you just learn this today? Have you ever used a vending machine before?! Oh my! This is proof they have no idea what they're doing with their DI offerings.
Scott: I can't make the meeting today. Turns out I am triple booked for meetings at that time.
Ammo-seeking Poster: OMG! Did you NOT know that you can't be in more than one meeting at once? That's ridiculous! Take some college classes! How can you possibly expect us to believe in your business plan if you people consistently prove your inability to grasp even the most basic sense of how the world works.
But maybe I'm wrong, that's just sort of the image that came to mind when I read that. =)
Whenever I see a post like this -- and while I don't post much, I do lurk constantly -- by the "Community Liaison", Wizard's credibility sinks a little more in my eyes. Having a community liaison working to get answers -- even if the answers are evasive at times -- is great! Having one who condescends and attacks posters, no so much.
Is it true that the staff thought there was more peace and love between the two communities? if so it is rather alarming.
Gleemax was born on June 5th, 1996, on a Usenet post entitled “WOTC R&D Is there a brain behind it?”. A user named Jeff Franzmann (a.k.a. “Canticle”) answered the post’s question by stating that an alien brain in a jar of formaldehyde was in fact controlling R&D.[2]
Good find, Darkwolf. Putting that on top of the fact that WotC bought TSR in 1997 (a year later), it all adds up to "Yes, it certainly is a MtG inside joke and nothing to do with D&D".
Perhaps, after some thought, a better list would be Pun-Pun, uranium swords, Elves and greatswords, hammerguns, Steve and the Folding Chair of salvation and Ted the 'Flayer"
Even being a D&D player, I still don't know those inside jokes (except for Pun-Pun, he was awesome). I'm looking up the others now (Thank god we have Google at least. That is a company that WotC should look up to for online-related business, not Blizzard).
No, we're not. Read above!
Yes, you are. Read below.
Scott, Chris, and I even talked about how the D&D folks didn't like any of the Gleemax stuff. I think we were all really surprised at just how *little* cross over there was between the MtG crowd and the D&D folks.
Emphasis mine.
Chris: Mike, do you have change for a Five? I didn't think to bring any ones for the machine today.
Ammo-seeking Poster: OMG! Any idiot knows that vending machines don't take ones! So did you just learn this today? Have you ever used a vending machine before?! Oh my! This is proof they have no idea what they're doing with their DI offerings.
[Ammo-Seeking-Poster-Mode] What are "ones"? I've never heard of those. One dollar coins, maybe. They're called "Loonies".[/OFF]
Emploees at department store will often only talk to the customers because they're paid to. If they were not paid to address the customers, the customers would get no help at all. This is how I feel I am treated by WotC (We don't like you, but we have to talk to you because we're paid to). I don't mean offense at all, I just feel like I'm being condescended to.
Maybe I'm just seeking ammo or something. Maybe I honestly don't like what is happening to my game, or the company that makes my game.
But maybe I'm wrong, that's just sort of the image that came to mind when I read that. =)
Well...okay, I did say some software engineering classes would help, but I never attacked your vending machine prowess. By the way, some vendies do take $5 so man you are totally out of touch.;)
I think it is a little weird that the overlap of communities isn't more known by Wizards. You have to admit that one might expect the company producing both lines would have some idea of that for advertising purposes?
Good find, Darkwolf. Putting that on top of the fact that WotC bought TSR in 1997 (a year later), it all adds up to "Yes, it certainly is a MtG inside joke and nothing to do with D&D".
While I agree that Gleemax is a "Magic thing," I also understand the point Mike is trying to make. I'm not sure if others are clear or not, so I'm gonna take a moment to try to paraphrase Mike's facts about Gleemax.
Mike is not saying Gleemax is a "Magic and D&D and Avalon Hill thing." Obviously, it's not a D&D thing based on the dates alone.
What Mike is saying is that Gleemax is an "R&D Thing" and the fact that WotC didn't own the D&D product at the time doesn't matter - it's still an R&D thing.
*shrug*
I think the name is stupid. I think the name excludes those on the D&D side who know its origin. I also don't think the name is going to change, and we're just wasting our cyber-breath by ranting about it.
I'm all in favor of good, constructive arguments. You can learn a lot from them. But in this case, I think we're much better off forgetting how stupid the name is and instead focusing on things WotC can do to help make Gleemax.com more welcoming for us. (and that's rarely a position I take - as I said, I think honest discussion, even when it gets a little heated, is a good thing)
Emploees at department store will often only talk to the customers because they're paid to. If they were not paid to address the customers, the customers would get no help at all. This is how I feel I am treated by WotC (We don't like you, but we have to talk to you because we're paid to). I don't mean offense at all, I just feel like I'm being condescended to.
Maybe I'm just seeking ammo or something. Maybe I honestly don't like what is happening to my game, or the company that makes my game.
This is exactly how I am feeling as well. I have posted several concerns and instead of responding to my posts the community liason decides to take a shot at a poster who might or might not have been looking for "ammo" against WotC.
I wouldn't be worried about the people "looking for ammo" Mike, instead try focusing on the ones with ammo.
Like how about this... does WotC think that keeping the community completely in the dark as far as plans for 4th Edition is actually going to build trust and good relations with customers that have already seen a massive decline in the quality of 3.0/3.5 material being released?
I understand that they cant tell us everything, but that doesn't mean they can't tell us anything. (i.e. is it being developed as we speak, is there a penciled in release date, etc)
Like how about this... does WotC think that keeping the community completely in the dark as far as plans for 4th Edition is actually going to build trust and good relations with customers that have already seen a massive decline in the quality of 3.0/3.5 material being released?
I understand that they cant tell us everything, but that doesn't mean they can't tell us anything. (i.e. is it being developed as we speak, is there a penciled in release date, etc)
Ok, so much for those brief moments of optimism. But yes this is disconcerting and raise good points. Yet as I said, I have no plans of going over to 4e. This is it for me.
Like how about this... does WotC think that keeping the community completely in the dark as far as plans for 4th Edition is actually going to build trust and good relations with customers that have already seen a massive decline in the quality of 3.0/3.5 material being released?
I understand that they cant tell us everything, but that doesn't mean they can't tell us anything. (i.e. is it being developed as we speak, is there a penciled in release date, etc)
That's rather obvious.
No, they can't. For a number of reasons.
First, though maybe not the most important, is the vaporware syndrome. If they announce something and it doesn't come out, people will be all over them for trying to rip them off by selling them vaporware. That was an all too common occurrence in the early days of the hobby, and WotC obviously doesn't want to deal with it any more.
Second is the lame duck syndrome. The moment they announce 4E they expect everyone to refuse to buy another 3.5 product. Worse, all their distributors will expect that, and decline to order anything. That such attitudes will make it a self-fulfilling prophecy instead of a reflection of actual preferences is irrelevant, there will still be a drop in sales.
Add in all the requirements for advertising, and I can easily see why they refuse to give a firm date.
Of course, with other factors, I think the comments about one or two years of advance notice are just canned replies. I don't think they will try a 1 year countdown the way they did for 3E, and will instead give us 6 months at most, from DDXP to Gen Con or vice versa, and handwaving the rest of the time with "Well, we mentioned it last year!" I won't hold that against them.
Whenever I see a post like this -- and while I don't post much, I do lurk constantly -- by the "Community Liaison", Wizard's credibility sinks a little more in my eyes. Having a community liaison working to get answers -- even if the answers are evasive at times -- is great! Having one who condescends and attacks posters, no so much.
Well, I hope you and no one else felt attacked. I was seeking to try to explain my perception of the comments, in a humorous way, to show that I wasn't sure how I could respond or better clarify what I'd said to prevent that type of misperception.
Yes, we were surprised that almost no one on the boards seemed to play both games and was willing to speak up. I'll leave it up to you guys if that means we don't know our customer base. Mostly, I thought it was an amusing bit of insight and transparency into things behind the scenes, but I have to admit that it does make me leery to pass that sort of thing on if it gets so misinterpreted that I end up muddying the waters more then clearing them.
And the whole roleplaying thing was a surprise. Have you taken a look at the forums? It's pretty spammy in there, with thread after thread of RP "battlegrounds". Yes, that was totally unexpected. And again, if that makes anyone think we don't know our customer base, I won't try to defend it.
That's rather obvious.
No, they can't. For a number of reasons.
First, though maybe not the most important, is the vaporware syndrome. If they announce something and it doesn't come out, people will be all over them for trying to rip them off by selling them vaporware. That was an all too common occurrence in the early days of the hobby, and WotC obviously doesn't want to deal with it any more.
Second is the lame duck syndrome. The moment they announce 4E they expect everyone to refuse to buy another 3.5 product. Worse, all their distributors will expect that, and decline to order anything. That such attitudes will make it a self-fulfilling prophecy instead of a reflection of actual preferences is irrelevant, there will still be a drop in sales.
Add in all the requirements for advertising, and I can easily see why they refuse to give a firm date.
Of course, with other factors, I think the comments about one or two years of advance notice are just canned replies. I don't think they will try a 1 year countdown the way they did for 3E, and will instead give us 6 months at most, from DDXP to Gen Con or vice versa, and handwaving the rest of the time with "Well, we mentioned it last year!" I won't hold that against them.
I most certainly will and I know many others will as well.
Bottom line if they are planning a new version then it is highly discurteous to their loyal customers to continue to make products for a version they will no longer support in a year.
They could end all the fussing right now though with a simple promise to continue to support 3.0/3.5 even after the inevitable release of 4E.
Of course that would mean committing a tiny fraction of their profits to support a game that isn't profitable anymore so that will happen somewhere inbetween never and the day I become a WizO.
And the whole roleplaying thing was a surprise. Have you taken a look at the forums? It's pretty spammy in there, with thread after thread of RP "battlegrounds". Yes, that was totally unexpected. And again, if that makes anyone think we don't know our customer base, I won't try to defend it.
Ok now heres the catch 22, by saying you won't try and defend it you are essentially admitting that WotC does not know their customers or at the very least that you are not capable of citing any evidence to the contrary.
Look if WotC is going to improve their PR they are going to have to get serious with us because we are not a bunch of kids playing MtG after school that will just bend over and take whatever crap gets dished out.
Most of the gamers I know are over 25 and have been playing D&D since before WotC took over so you will have to forgive us if we view your company as replacable. Thats why the banning of boycott threads is so stupid, do you not wish to hear the cries of discontent?
Is it because you are going to do whatever you feel will turn the biggest short term profit regardless of what is best for the community and therefor the game and long term profits?
Yes, we were surprised that almost no one on the boards seemed to play both games and was willing to speak up. I'll leave it up to you guys if that means we don't know our customer base. Mostly, I thought it was an amusing bit of insight and transparency into things behind the scenes, but I have to admit that it does make me leery to pass that sort of thing on if it gets so misinterpreted that I end up muddying the waters more then clearing them.
I think it has a lot to do with cost and types.
D&D is an expensive hobby. MtG is a more expensive hobby. Add that together and you've got one very broke player.
On to game type. D&D and MtG have two totally different rules sets. More to remember, more to keep updated on, etc. DDM will sell better to D&D players as they at least use similar rulesets. Also, I think it also has to do with competition. D&D players are looking for a social situtation where everyone gets along and has a good time. MtG someone wins, someone loses, always. If the same person wins game after game, the losing player wont have nearly as much fun.
Also, I'd never buy into D&D with randonized, sealed pack. Dropping $40 and saying "God! I hope this is the Magic Item Compendium I want!" then opening it up and finding yet another copy of "Races of Destiny", doesn't seem fun, either. ;)
And the whole roleplaying thing was a surprise. Have you taken a look at the forums? It's pretty spammy in there, with thread after thread of RP "battlegrounds". Yes, that was totally unexpected. And again, if that makes anyone think we don't know our customer base, I won't try to defend it.
Hells yes it's spammy. It just full of garbage (although I haven't been to the page since the second day of it's release). The very first day the forums were just a spammy mess of gobble-de-gook.
Ok now heres the catch 22, by saying you won't try and defend it you are essentially admitting that WotC does not know their customers or at the very least that you are not capable of citing any evidence to the contrary.
Shhhhhh, this is that "I hve to write between the lines" thing he was talking about a while ago. ;)
Dennis Stout
Well, I hope you and no one else felt attacked. I was seeking to try to explain my perception of the comments, in a humorous way, to show that I wasn't sure how I could respond or better clarify what I'd said to prevent that type of misperception.
Don't apologize Mike. By the same rights we have, or thers have, to come here and be sarcastic and demeaning, you have them too. If I come here and act like a total tool, and you then respond and treat me like one, that's no ones fault but my own.
You know as well as I do, this is a no win situation. We tell you the grass is blue, and you say no its green. We argue. You return later to say after closer examination the grass really is blue, and we argue, that we really didn't want blue grass to begind with.
It's always something...
Your position is unenviable. You have to sort through the info, find out what you can and can't share, and still make the angry mob calm down.
Obviously, the angry mob is not going to calm down. I'm actually surprised people are still so angry, truth be told. We're getting answers. Like them or not, we're getting them. That's what people wanted. It's just never good enough.
Speaking of surprises, I do have to take issue with the comment that WotC was surprised at the lack of crossover between D&D and MtG players. Here's my evidence that Wizard's should have known better.
How many MtG ads have run in Dragon or Dungeon, over let's say, the last year? I have to be honest, I can't remember a single one. (I won't talk further back because I just can't remember much at all about anything that far back, but that's really inconsequential.)
On the other hand, right off the top of my head, I can remember seeing an ad for the newest version of the PHB on more than one occassion. I also remember quite a number of DDM ads as well.
If WotC knew to put ads in the flagship magazines for their products, but not to put in MtG ads, that would tell me that Wizards has at least a decent idea that their D&D players aren't thinking about Magic.
Look, I understand you're just trying to keep the peace, and get what info you can out there, but don't paint yourself into a corner. While I don't think you're lying in any way, shape, or form, that comment about not forseeing the reaction makes Wizards look out of touch with it's customer base. And that's where the furor is coming from.
That's the thing with this particular industry. People grew up on this stuff. We're passionate about it. We love it like family. When we feel like someone is treating our love poorly, naturally, we're going to freak out and get angry and defensive.
Like I said, I don't envy you. I do sure respect you though. Just keep posting up those answers as you can, and I'll be happy. Unfortunately, you're not going to get that from everyone, but you know that now. Just go with the flow.
now
Ok now heres the catch 22, by saying you won't try and defend it you are essentially admitting that WotC does not know their customers or at the very least that you are not capable of citing any evidence to the contrary.
Errr, that one hurts. I don't think he's doing that rather just saying he won't go around in circles with folks he can't talk to. sorta like not talking to a brick wall.
Though Mike if you have any dynamite - read hard facts- that would work rather well :D
Look if WotC is going to improve their PR they are going to have to get serious with us because we are not a bunch of kids playing MtG after school that will just bend over and take whatever crap gets dished out.
Shhhh what are you Nuts theres thousands of them out there all kiddies screaming for blood now, and the older gurus who will smack us with 6/6 monsters of doom SHHHHHHH! - actually i used to play and yeah wizo's was fialing there too ohh boy did lynch mobs happen around raffinity being legal-
Most of the gamers I know are over 25 and have been playing D&D since before WotC took over so you will have to forgive us if we view your company as replacable. Thats why the banning of boycott threads is so stupid, do you not wish to hear the cries of discontent?
As much as i long to sound respectful and nice, nah can't do it you got em there straight in the chops. can't even find a shred of me that would disagree. - and we all know I LOVE to disagree with sim, he makes life fun :D of is it a nightmare? can't remember
Is it because you are going to do whatever you feel will turn the biggest short term profit regardless of what is best for the community and therefor the game and long term profits?
And i can;t disagree again. Look mike i'm all for ya but i'm no toddler I like many other want the respect i think we deserve as the customers of this company. while some see this as a step in teh right direction to me it's too little to late. wotc has already been replaced at my table for over 2 years now, and will continue to be.
Sorry Mike your great guy but too little too late and I know it's not your fault. :D
T-O
Oh Crap.....Mike do yourself a favor, avoid Sim, I know him he's evil you cant win run away.
Oh, I wasn't going to reply to him, but since you put it that way... =)
Ok now heres the catch 22, by saying you won't try and defend it you are essentially admitting that WotC does not know their customers or at the very least that you are not capable of citing any evidence to the contrary.
I'm cool with you drawing whatever conclusion you feel warranted by our actions and comments. I stand behind them and don't think it's unfair if we're judged based upon them.
Most of the gamers I know are over 25 and have been playing D&D since before WotC took over so you will have to forgive us if we view your company as replacable. Thats why the banning of boycott threads is so stupid, do you not wish to hear the cries of discontent?
Boycott threads are all well and good, they're just not allowed on our "discussion" forums. As I think I mentioned before, game development isn't a democracy and we don't take votes to decide what we do. We value articulate discussion and debate on subjects, not a 1000 reply thread with a bunch of people replying "me too." I value the opinions of all the people who take the time out of their day to write comments about our products more then someone who took a few seconds type 5 characters and hit "Submit."
And welcome back, Sim. I hadn't known you'd gone away. =)
We value articulate discussion and debate on subjects, not a 1000 reply thread with a bunch of people replying "me too." I value the opinions of all the people who take the time out of their day to write comments about our products more then someone who took a few seconds type 5 characters and hit "Submit."
How else do we ensure that WotC gathers the market data we want them to collect? If one person posts a comment "I think we should replace THAC0 with a new system, and here is why" and nobody else seconds it, it's fairly likely that R&D is going to get the message "One person thought that would be a good idea, and had some good supporting logic, but obviously nobody else cares about it, so we're going to stick with THAC0" even tho everyone else is at home thinking "ooooooo, Mike said replying with 'me too' doesn't accomplish anything so I'm just going to sit here and hope/pray really really really really obscenely superly hard that they see that one post and decide it has merit and run with it!" ... and then 3.0 would have been released with a THAC0 system and thousands would have been disappointed and nobody would have ever known.
Tossing in those "me too's" really should send you a useful message. Each and every one of those "me too's" is another "check the box on the poll, click submit". And WotC has shown at least once that they are willing to do a poll.
Edit: The only other means we have of voting is with the all mighty dollar. If we don't like it and stop buying it, you'll notice the decline of sales. Giving you our "me too's" is a much nicer and much more productive means of telling you what you need to do; that way instead of spending lots of money on a product that bombs, you can spend a lot of money on a product that succeeds and provides an ROI that covers the production cost. We're trying like mad to help WotC to succeed here, Mike.
Dennis Stout
And welcome back, Sim. I hadn't known you'd gone away. =)
ROFL, perhaps its just how I read it, but to me, this was...
"Sim, dude, nobody even noticed you were gone"
Sorry, it just made me grin.
How else do we ensure that WotC gathers the market data we want them to collect? If one person posts a comment "I think we should replace THAC0 with a new system, and here is why" and nobody else seconds it, it's fairly likely that R&D is going to get the message "One person thought that would be a good idea, and had some good supporting logic, but obviously nobody else cares about it, so we're going to stick with THAC0" even tho everyone else is at home thinking "ooooooo, Mike said replying with 'me too' doesn't accomplish anything so I'm just going to sit here and hope/pray really really really really obscenely superly hard that they see that one post and decide it has merit and run with it!" ... and then 3.0 would have been released with a THAC0 system and thousands would have been disappointed and nobody would have ever known.
Tossing in those "me too's" really should send you a useful message. Each and every one of those "me too's" is another "check the box on the poll, click submit". And WotC has shown at least once that they are willing to do a poll.
Edit: The only other means we have of voting is with the all mighty dollar. If we don't like it and stop buying it, you'll notice the decline of sales. Giving you our "me too's" is a much nicer and much more productive means of telling you what you need to do; that way instead of spending lots of money on a product that bombs, you can spend a lot of money on a product that succeeds and provides an ROI that covers the production cost. We're trying like mad to help WotC to succeed here, Mike.
Dennis Stout
These "me too" threads aren't anything like scientific polls or even votes. When they want to collect more useful data, they create their own polls that ask random users a series of unbiased questions and they can weigh their answers on a scale from completely agree down to completely disagree and such. I think I even remember taking a poll a while ago about what kind of online content I would be willing to pay for. I just took another one on buying star wars miniatures. I think it is obvious that they make great efforts to be in touch with what their customers want. All of their customers, not just a vocal minority.
The "me too" threads are, like he said, spammy. They begin with someone posting some very biased propaganda about poor victim subscribers and the destruction of D&D as we know it. They don't encourage discussion where people try to come up with solutions to the percieved problem. It's just a bunch of mob mentality. If people just write me too it means that they felt simpathetic to the original comment, not that they fully understand the motives, reasons, and consecuences of the different possible courses of action.
A conversation thread, on the other hand, can become a great brain-storming session that creates very useful alternatives that might satisfy more people. It would help if people were open-minded, but even if they're negative, their arguments can help progress the debate and inspire others to come up with solutions. If wizards saw some great, practical ideas that really seemed to be resonating with all of the thread's participants, I'm sure they would investigate it further. We even have a community liason that is actively participating in the threads. I don't think that Wizards, compared to most companies (especially of their size), can be accused of not listening to their customers.
"Gleemax is a gaming site for gamers" seems to be their inevitable chant, and yet that tells me nothing. Do the makers of "Gleemax" even know what it is? Is it anything besides a horrific joke?
This is a serious question. What is Gleemax? And please, for the love of Pelor, DON'T answer with "Gleemax is a gaming site for gamers." or I SWEAR I'll break out the Heavy Scythe!
Thanks in advance.
They begin with someone posting some very biased propaganda about poor victim subscribers and the destruction of D&D as we know it.
I dunno. I vaguely recall someone asking for a Draconomicon-style book on Fey not long ago and several people saying "me too" in response to it, followed shortly after by some WizO saying he's wanted to do that book for a good long time.
I certainly don't recall any biased propaganda about victims in the thread. Except perhaps the Fey who haven't been fully developed yet
Dennis Stout
I'm cool with you drawing whatever conclusion you feel warranted by our actions and comments. I stand behind them and don't think it's unfair if we're judged based upon them.
This isn't about me drawing my own conclusions, I am attempting to show you what alot of people are going to assume based off of that response.
Boycott threads are all well and good, they're just not allowed on our "discussion" forums. As I think I mentioned before, game development isn't a democracy and we don't take votes to decide what we do. We value articulate discussion and debate on subjects, not a 1000 reply thread with a bunch of people replying "me too." I value the opinions of all the people who take the time out of their day to write comments about our products more then someone who took a few seconds type 5 characters and hit "Submit."
Game development isn't a democracy but listening to your customers when they tell you what they want isn't exactly advanced economics.
And welcome back, Sim. I hadn't known you'd gone away. =)
I have not gone anywhere, rather it was Thanatos_Omega who has not been around in some time.
Also please call me He Who Shall Not Be Named. It's another one of those inside joke things.
This is a serious question. What is Gleemax? And please, for the love of Pelor, DON'T answer with "Gleemax is a gaming site for gamers." or I SWEAR I'll break out the Heavy Scythe!
Thanks in advance.
Gleemax is the brain [edit: in a jar] that runs R&D. Seriously.
These "me too" threads aren't anything like scientific polls or even votes. When they want to collect more useful data, they create their own polls that ask random users a series of unbiased questions and they can weigh their answers on a scale from completely agree down to completely disagree and such. I think I even remember taking a poll a while ago about what kind of online content I would be willing to pay for. I just took another one on buying star wars miniatures. I think it is obvious that they make great efforts to be in touch with what their customers want. All of their customers, not just a vocal minority.
The "me too" threads are, like he said, spammy. They begin with someone posting some very biased propaganda about poor victim subscribers and the destruction of D&D as we know it. They don't encourage discussion where people try to come up with solutions to the percieved problem. It's just a bunch of mob mentality. If people just write me too it means that they felt simpathetic to the original comment, not that they fully understand the motives, reasons, and consecuences of the different possible courses of action.
A conversation thread, on the other hand, can become a great brain-storming session that creates very useful alternatives that might satisfy more people. It would help if people were open-minded, but even if they're negative, their arguments can help progress the debate and inspire others to come up with solutions. If wizards saw some great, practical ideas that really seemed to be resonating with all of the thread's participants, I'm sure they would investigate it further. We even have a community liason that is actively participating in the threads. I don't think that Wizards, compared to most companies (especially of their size), can be accused of not listening to their customers.
And on the other hand the allowence of such threads stops the new pop of "what happened to..." type of threads.... like in the case of the D20 Spectaculars book..that was either cancled or abandoned soon after being announced.....it seemed like every day there was another "what the heck happened?" thread .....
Game development isn't a democracy but listening to your customers when they tell you what they want isn't exactly advanced economics.
I just want to say up front that I agree with you entirely, and the following is supportive postulation.
Let's apply this to a fast food restaurant. Just because they're well known, I'm going to make an example of McDonalds.
"I want a bacon double cheese burger, and make that a combo meal with fries."
"Yes sir, here is your 6 piece chicken mcnugget meal with a hashbrown."
Now, what would we expect the customers reaction to be?
How much does the production of the chicken mcnugget meal cost, and can you reasonably expect the customer to pay for it?
How much would the production of the bacon double cheese burger meal have cost, and what had the customer agreed to pay (buy placing an order, he's entered into an implied vocal contract that he'll pay the price advertised on the menu)?
Does producing a chicken meal that doesn't get sold result in a loss or a profit?
Would producing a bacon double cheese burger meal that does get sold result in a loss or a profit?
What is the better business decision; giving the customer the meal he asked for or a random different meal that the customer didn't want?
Dennis Stout
This isn't about me drawing my own conclusions, I am attempting to show you what alot of people are going to assume based off of that response.
Mike he's right, heck i supported the idea of a rep in the community. Even on my forums i had people ranting, before i had to lock those threads. folks ain't happy Mike, and most have come to Sim's same conclusion.
Game development isn't a democracy but listening to your customers when they tell you what they want isn't exactly advanced economics.
Wellll not exactly Sim there is one that is a democracy and your part of it - inside line the rest of you never mind- Again we find that the all around conclusion is wotc cares little for what it's fans have to say as long as it's not positive feedback.
I have not gone anywhere, rather it was Thanatos_Omega who has not been around in some time.
He's right i was lurking and attending to other matters. still gald we crossed paths again Sim, my old rival.
Also please call me He Who Shall Not Be Named. It's another one of those inside joke things.
Might as well the last guy who didn't get it he locked in a dungeon, then lectured him on why DMPC is bad. Poor guy he never made it out......I know i had to clean up the horrible mess :D
Welp glad to be back " He Who Shall Not Be Named" :D catch ya around sometime.
"Gleemax is a gaming site for gamers" seems to be their inevitable chant, and yet that tells me nothing. Do the makers of "Gleemax" even know what it is? Is it anything besides a horrific joke?
This is a serious question. What is Gleemax? And please, for the love of Pelor, DON'T answer with "Gleemax is a gaming site for gamers." or I SWEAR I'll break out the Heavy Scythe!
Did you see this link here? We added it based on the feedback from folks on the first few days.
This isn't about me drawing my own conclusions, I am attempting to show you what alot of people are going to assume based off of that response.
Sure, I get you. And since it's the truth, I'm perfectly okay with people drawing whatever conclusion they think we deserve based on our actions and words.
Did you see this link here? We added it based on the feedback from folks on the first few days.
I did see it. the problem is, it's still unbelievably vague. "social networking" (that can mean ANYTHING) "on-line gaming" (Like what? An MMO? a first-person shooter? PONG? chat-room style D&D? What?), and best of all, "game-related content."
Do you have anything concrete at all? How about a pair of yes/no answers:
1) Will this place offer a way to play fairly free-form D&D online? That is, basically like being at home, but playing through an internet connection? If so, why would we use it over multiple programs that exist currently? (simpler to use would be a major plus for me).
2) Will it be a Gamers Personals? i.e., look up local gamers in order to arrange games (I'm HOPING this is what's meant by "social networking")
I honestly appreciate any answers. Thanks, Zero.
Edit: Oh, oh! Is there any way for you to say, "This is what we're intending currently, but obviously plans may change as time progresses..."?
We value articulate discussion and debate on subjects, not a 1000 reply thread with a bunch of people replying "me too." I value the opinions of all the people who take the time out of their day to write comments about our products more then someone who took a few seconds type 5 characters and hit "Submit."
"Me too" is six characters, Mike. There's a space in there...
:angelhideI don't have a link to ENWorld in my Favorites folder because of the their color scheme
Have you tried the stealth mode on EnWorld? Its black text on light background.
Have you tried the stealth mode on EnWorld? Its black text on light background.
Wow. I had no idea about that little drop-down box in the bottom right corner of the page until you mentioned this. That's awesome. Now that is a site I can visit. Thanks amethal.
Whenever I see a post like this -- and while I don't post much, I do lurk constantly -- by the "Community Liaison", Wizard's credibility sinks a little more in my eyes. Having a community liaison working to get answers -- even if the answers are evasive at times -- is great! Having one who condescends and attacks posters, no so much.
While thats true the overwhelming majority of posters are doing just that relentlessly here. This is by far the worst forum i have ever seen on the internet for people really nitpicking something to death before even really getting a broad understanding of it.
When they get information they already have the nitpick bloodlust going and attack it so negatively.
Finally you lot get a community liason and you are all up in arms celebrating, and now you are all being so destructive i wouldn't be surprised to see wizards pull the plug.
Sure you are all concerned etc etc, but take a step back go work off those computer tans and lets see what happens when it happens. I feel sorry for mike for having to put up with these so called 'mature' gamers waving their opinions like its fact.
If maturity was to win the day here this thread would have 3 pages rather than 18 and people would post thier concerns or likes and leave it at that.
I only read 3 pages as i saw posters post the same thing over and over.
Personally so far i haven't seen a lot to hook me to this gleemax and DI thing, since no real information is being released at the moment i will wholly withold my judgement until it is here.
And on the other hand the allowence of such threads stops the new pop of "what happened to..." type of threads.... like in the case of the D20 Spectaculars book..that was either cancled or abandoned soon after being announced.....it seemed like every day there was another "what the heck happened?" thread .....
Yeah this D20 Spectaculars book is becoming a sore subject with me. I've PM'd folks, left posts etc. and STILL NO WORD ON WHAT IS UP WITH THAT BOOK! It's listed on Amazon still but who the heck knows.
MIKE, SCOTT...what is up with this book?!
Yeah this D20 Spectaculars book is becoming a sore subject with me. I've PM'd folks, left posts etc. and STILL NO WORD ON WHAT IS UP WITH THAT BOOK! It's listed on Amazon still but who the heck knows.
MIKE, SCOTT...what is up with this book?!
I was using it as an example of the whole "me too" thread sub topic..but maybe you should post in the questions thread.
Have you tried the stealth mode on EnWorld? Its black text on light background.
No I haven't. The initial screen is so difficult for me to deal with, I never stayed long enough to find anything like that.
That is the problem with websites that decide to get "creative" with their color schemes. They risk losing people before they can discover anything about the website.
And, if we are talking about something that is intended to serve as advertising or a focal point, it is the responsibility of the site designers to attract me immediately, not mine to work to decipher the functionings of the site.
No I haven't. The initial screen is so difficult for me to deal with, I never stayed long enough to find anything like that.
That is the problem with websites that decide to get "creative" with their color schemes. They risk losing people before they can discover anything about the website.
And, if we are talking about something that is intended to serve as advertising or a focal point, it is the responsibility of the site designers to attract me immediately, not mine to work to decipher the functionings of the site.
The other problem is how do the site designers determine what people like? I like the ENWorld default. After staring at a computer screen all day it's less jarring to my eyes not to have a stark white background glaring at me. And ENWorld definitely does not suffer from light web traffic despite it not catering to your preferences. And if you had taken time to ask the folks at ENWorld why such a color scheme was chosen, they could have pointing you to the other style settings. So, in the end, you are the one missing out on a very popular website because you couldn't be bothered with a style that doesn't appeal to you.
I just want to say up front that I agree with you entirely, and the following is supportive postulation.
Let's apply this to a fast food restaurant. Just because they're well known, I'm going to make an example of McDonalds.
Why not just apply to a well known game company, say TSR?
"I want a bacon double cheese burger, and make that a combo meal with fries."
"Yes sir, here is your 6 piece chicken mcnugget meal with a hashbrown."
"I want Greyhawk."
"Yes sire, here your Forgotten Realms, mega-ultra-super-sized, with a side order of Dragonlance."
Profits exist.
Now, what would we expect the customers reaction to be?
The Greyhawk fans all quit, the FR and DL fans go wild.
How much does the production of the chicken mcnugget meal cost, and can you reasonably expect the customer to pay for it?
Ah, you mean:
"I want more of those cool boxed sets with all that stuff in them!"
"Why sure! Even though we sell each of them at a loss, here you go!"
Profits disappear.
How much would the production of the bacon double cheese burger meal have cost, and what had the customer agreed to pay (buy placing an order, he's entered into an implied vocal contract that he'll pay the price advertised on the menu)?
"We want different world settings that are wildly different!"
"Why sure! Here is Ravenloft, Dark Sun, Planescape, and Spelljammer. Featuring boxed sets!"
Debits soar.
Does producing a chicken meal that doesn't get sold result in a loss or a profit?
"We are the bookstores that have been carrying all this stuff. We haven't been able to sell them fast enough, so we are returning them now."
"But we sold you that stuff at a loss already. Now we'll take another loss on the return."
Bankruptcy beckons.
Would producing a bacon double cheese burger meal that does get sold result in a loss or a profit?
"How come the boxed sets don't have the monster sheets separate any more? And what about the other inclusions?"
"They cost too much and we have to sell them at less of a loss if we are to survive as a company."
"And how come the prices on other things are higher when the fonts and margins are so bloated?"
"Ummmm paper prices are up. Look! There are more pages in each book! You have to pay more."
Bankruptcy appears.
What is the better business decision; giving the customer the meal he asked for or a random different meal that the customer didn't want?
Dennis Stout
TSR did give people what they wanted. They gave people so much of what they wanted without considering the bottom line that along with giving people what TSR wanted (like the Buck Rogers game), WotC now publishes D&D.
The other problem is how do the site designers determine what people like?
It isn't a question of "like." What I would "like" is a grey background with deep purple fonts. What I can read without being blind afterwards is a white to parchment background with black fonts.
I like the ENWorld default. After staring at a computer screen all day it's less jarring to my eyes not to have a stark white background glaring at me.
It is that very difference that makes it so jarring, and damaging, to me. Switching from ENWorld to any other website in less than 5 minutes is simply not possible for me. The afterimages won't fade before then.
What is more critical is that my general environment is well lit, with dark objects (my furniture) contrasting against a light background (my walls). I suffer the same afterimages and need for major readjustment of my vision turning from reading ENWorld to getting up and going to the bathroom or getting a drink.
And ENWorld definitely does not suffer from light web traffic despite it not catering to your preferences.
I'm sure it doesn't. It does however suffer from nonexistent web traffic, and consequent consideration of its content, from me.
And if you had taken time to ask the folks at ENWorld why such a color scheme was chosen, they could have pointing you to the other style settings.
Again, that presumes I could read the site long enough to figure out how to contact them to ask.
Their default product was not attractive, so I didn't bother. To use the fast food simile, they advertised as a chicken joint when I wanted a burger, so I just walked an extra block to a burger place.
So, in the end, you are the one missing out on a very popular website because you couldn't be bothered with a style that doesn't appeal to you.
Funny, I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything. Popularity doesn't always equal utility.
It is that very difference that makes it so jarring, and damaging, to me.
So do the designers of ENWorld choose the color scheme that damages your eyes or the one that damages mine? Can't please everyone.
So do the designers of ENWorld choose the color scheme that damages your eyes or the one that damages mine? Can't please everyone.
It is not a contest of who is most discomfitted by a particular web graphics scheme, or some attempt to force a choice of customers.
I simply said I won't use a website that causes me such discomfort to use any more than I would buy tissue with perfumes that I am allergic too and cause me discomfort to use. However, unlike a website where I must suffer the discomfort to, theoretically, set it to something that doesn't cause me the discomfort, I don't have to check out perfumed swatches of tissue before being able to select the fragrance free varieties. I can just walk down the aisle, reading the labels until I find what i want, much the same as I surf the web, reading only those websites that I find attractive. And when a product survey comes along and asks my preferences, I make it clear what those preferences are, then purchase whatever products or use whatever services meet my requirements and needs.
MtGO seems just as upset.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=864169
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=865697&page=7
I could not find anything regarding Gleemax in the DDM General forum.
I could not find anything regarding Gleemax in the MtG General forum, either.
I didn't look in the other forums.
A Google search of the website just floods me with Gleemax's forum spam (read: the entire forum), so I couldn't really find much else. Anyone else with Gleemax cross-over forum links would be great. I'd like to see the reactions from the other "Gamers" about this "Home for Gamers".
I'd like to point out, after a small amount of surfing, that we aren't the only ones to hate Gleemax.
MtGO seems just as upset.
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=864169
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=865697&page=7
I could not find anything regarding Gleemax in the DDM General forum.
I could not find anything regarding Gleemax in the MtG General forum, either.
I didn't look in the other forums.
A Google search of the website just floods me with Gleemax's forum spam (read: the entire forum), so I couldn't really find much else. Anyone else with Gleemax cross-over forum links would be great. I'd like to see the reactions from the other "Gamers" about this "Home for Gamers".
Please dont say 'we'. Its you and a few others. I haven't seen enough of gleemax yet to make such an informed decision as you, you must know everything about it to be able to hate it?
Here's an idea. Ease up, go have a lie down and just wait to see what we are fully going to get. If you still dont like it thats your choice. But you made your point that you dont like it. Not everyone wants to see you constantly post the same negative comments over and over.
I was using it as an example of the whole "me too" thread sub topic..but maybe you should post in the questions thread.
OH you know I have!
Please dont say 'we'. Its you and a few others. I haven't seen enough of gleemax yet to make such an informed decision as you, you must know everything about it to be able to hate it?
Here's an idea. Ease up, go have a lie down and just wait to see what we are fully going to get. If you still dont like it thats your choice. But you made your point that you dont like it. Not everyone wants to see you constantly post the same negative comments over and over.
I think I smell gasoline!!
Please dont say 'we'. Its you and a few others. I haven't seen enough of gleemax yet to make such an informed decision as you, you must know everything about it to be able to hate it?
I wouldn't say "a few others", as it is not just this topic in the D&D forums that are talking about Gleemax and their dislike. ENWorld has an equally long thread reguarding this, and in the post you quoted, the MtGO users are also upset. It's not just "a few others".
From what they've mentioned about where the site is going, what it'll be and what it is already. Yes. MySpace already doesn't appeal to me.
Here's an idea. Ease up, go have a lie down and just wait to see what we are fully going to get. If you still dont like it thats your choice. But you made your point that you dont like it. Not everyone wants to see you constantly post the same negative comments over and over.
Actually, if you'll notice in the quote, I posted other people's negative comments from the other side of the boards. In case anyone cares:
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=198644&page=1&pp=40
ENWorld's Gleemax thread
I'm sorry that my distaste for this product has upset you. I'm trying to dislike WotC's products less, they just aren't making it easy. ;)
Me too.
Maybe Gleemax started out as an inside joke for Magic: the Gathering players, but I think we can all agree that it's a joke we're all in on now. At least, it's a joke.
I don't use smilies. Hope that translates appropriately.
I've been to the Gleemax website. I'm glad that you've begun to change some of the more irksome elements. Personally, I'm not fond of the color scheme. Considering how on the forums they have the 'tool' to select a different appearance, but it doesn't actually let you override the default, I think that would be a very good place to get started. It took me a long time to figure out what Gleemax was supposed to be, but since they've actually answered the question, I at least have an idea.
Again, as long as we're talking about personal opinions, I do think the name is a stupid one. I understand now how it came from an inside joke. I agree with others that have indicated that for the site to appeal to *ALL* gamers it has to at least have the appearance of 'neutral ground'. I'd be a little nervous about joining a new community that might not welcome my sort of gamers. If I were going to join that community, I'd at least have to feel that there was an effort to be welcoming to gamers from the other groups. Gleemax doesn't sound welcoming to me as a D&D player. I've also played M:tG both in a physical incarantion and online. I haven't played in a while, but I believe I still have my deck available to use online. I don't play the game not because I don't think it is not enjoyable - it can be. I just don't like to invest in the randomized cards in order to build a superior deck. I've made decent decks with the relatively few cards I've had, but with new card releases, I just didn't want to try to keep up. For online play, it was the set that introduced 'modular' to the game. I just didn't find it fun to play against.
Maybe it is too late to change the gleemax name. Maybe not. I think there are a lot of good reasons to use a different name for this 'aspect' of the Digital Initiative.
Regarding the expected behavior of an employee versus a 'regular' community member, I think it is 'fair' to hold employees to a higher standard regarding their online behavior. If I'm a total jerk I should be banned. If an employee is a total jerk, even if I deserve it, some people will see those comments out of context and misunderstand. Others may see that I deserve it, but still keep the opinion that an employee shouldn't 'sink to my level'. I'm probably one of the former.
A number of other posters have talked about 'respect'. As a customer, that is something that I value very highly. Whether you agree or disagree with me, I should be respected. I really think that is a much better 'philosophy' than 'the customer is always right'. I work in Customer Service. I'm an insurance agent and I talk to dozens, sometimes hundreds of people, in a day. Some of the customers have legitimate concerns, some don't understand, and some choose to deliberately misinterpret the information they've been provided. With all the customers I deal with, I try to provide the highest level of service possible, I try to focus on solutions, and when the problem can't be 'solved' I apologize for the misunderstanding or the fact that there is nothing that can be done. The 'category' of customer has nothing to do with how they're treated.
I'd hope that the people reading this would consider some of those actions the basics of customer service. I'd hope Wizards would as well. You can be sorry for how someone feels without being sorry about your decision to make that happen. For example, in my line of work, there are people that we cannot insure. They are an 'unacceptable' risk. I'm not sorry that my company deems them an unacceptable risk - that's a policy that isn't going to change. I can still be sorry that I'm unable to do more to help them. I can still be sorry that they'll have additional inconvenience. I can even express it. Maybe they won't care, but offering genuine sympathy can go a long way toward healing rifts.
There are a lot of people here who are saying how upset they are. If this were my company, I'd be working a lot harder to let them know that I understand how upset they are, even if I couldn't do anything about it at the moment. People have been getting angrier and angrier because they've felt ignored for the most part - as though our opinions don't matter. Showing that you value a customers opinions is another important component of showing respect.
So, for the sake of argument, let's say that some things could have been done differently, and doing things differently might have been better. Let's not say that they were 'mistakes'. That doesn't really matter anyways. As nice as it is when someone admits that an honest-to-god mistake was made, the solution is more important.
So, here are some problems. I'll use I but in some cases it will mean 'me' and in others it will mean 'me'. Pretty much depends on your perspective.
1) As someone who identifies myself as a D&D player, I feel that the name, color scheme, layout and intial roll-out of Gleemax seem exclusive rather than inclusive. I don't feel welcomed there, and I'm not sure if I'll be willing to 'give it a fair shot'.
2) The magazines were an important part of my gaming experience. Magazines and other periodicals are very different from books in their utility and design. The loss of the magazines is disheartening to say the least. I've lost the content in my preferred format and don't feel comfortable with the idea of a 'digital replacement'.
3) It has been said that WotC will use a model of 'you buy it, you own it -forever' regarding the Digitial Initiative. We can't know the future, but what guarantee can be provided that this is the truth? 10 years from now, if I've lost my 'backup' for the material, will I be able to reaquire that material legally? What if WotC has gone out of business?
4) Social networking has concerns regarding the security of personal information, particularly for minors. What precautions will be used to maintain that private information is not abused?
Those are a few. I'd love to see some responses to some of my worries - I don't think they require specific answers. We don't need to know the method - just that these things have been considered.
----------------------
I don't get it. When I first went and looked at the gleemax site, I thought it had to be some late april fool's joke. It all seems rather innane at that site, nothing I see worth my time as it is now.
From what I've been reading, it sounds like the forums here are going to be rolled into gleemax. Why? Is it because of all the technical problems the current forums have been having? Is this a simple consolidation of seperate servers into one? Other than these, I can't really see why something like that would be done.
I've got my own site where I'm posting my friday night game, so I can understand that a blog function would be nice, but isn't there already a forum here where folks are recounting their own games? Seems a bit redundant. The ability to post characters or NPCs in a character-sheet like format has perks - but rolling over to a new web site just for that feature and one or two more? That seems a bit silly.
And finally, I think gleemax is a poor name choice - having seen the card image, fairly ironic in a way.
And if you had taken time to ask the folks at ENWorld why such a color scheme was chosen, they could have pointing you to the other style settings.
If I took the time to ask the folks at every website that I simply don't visit why it is they do one thing or another, I'd be 90 years old before I got done talking to the last one - and then I'd be 270 by the time I got done reading the responses!
I prefer the method of finding a place that's very very close to what I want to begin with, then proceeding from there. A lot less time gets wasted that way. Sure, I may be missing content, but really, if there was some huge feature of EnWorld that a person absolutely has to have, I'm sure I would have heard about it by now.
As it stands, I've never been to the EnWorld site before, not even to look at it. All I've heard of it is that it has forums, but you know what? So does the wizards site, and I'm content with the forums here, so I'm not going to bother to go looking elsewhere for more forums.
Now, if someone were to tell me that the EnWorld site featured a tool similar to Google's SketchUp that allowed me to use very deceptively simple tools to produce a 3D drawing of {fey court|lich dungeon|wizard tower|drake lair} in a few seconds, complete with floorplan and everything in PDF format.. then I might consider taking the time to go there.
But, like I side, I'm sure if they had a huge awesome feature that nobody could live without, I would have heard about it by now.. so here I am, trying to put my input into a new site where the staff are actually asking us what we want.
Um... Mike _did_ ask us at some point what it is we'd like to see on gleemax, right?
Dennis Stout
I dunno. I vaguely recall someone asking for a Draconomicon-style book on Fey not long ago and several people saying "me too" in response to it, followed shortly after by some WizO saying he's wanted to do that book for a good long time.
I certainly don't recall any biased propaganda about victims in the thread. Except perhaps the Fey who haven't been fully developed yet
Dennis Stout
For the record, I was talking specifically about the "I'm boycotting wizards because they canceled the mags" threads that I have seen. I couldn't pretend to know how all of the "me too" threads start. And there's a difference between people seeing some info that they agree with and posting 'me too' as opposed to someone starting a thread that states something like 'WotC is sneaking into peoples houses and murdering their babies, join me in boycotting all of their products. Together we can bring them to their knees'.
A number of other posters have talked about 'respect'. As a customer, that is something that I value very highly. Whether you agree or disagree with me, I should be respected. I really think that is a much better 'philosophy' than 'the customer is always right'. I work in Customer Service. I'm an insurance agent and I talk to dozens, sometimes hundreds of people, in a day. Some of the customers have legitimate concerns, some don't understand, and some choose to deliberately misinterpret the information they've been provided. With all the customers I deal with, I try to provide the highest level of service possible, I try to focus on solutions, and when the problem can't be 'solved' I apologize for the misunderstanding or the fact that there is nothing that can be done. The 'category' of customer has nothing to do with how they're treated.
I work at a hardware store that has a focus on customer service (due to being smaller than the big ones like Home Depot). I can safely say that respect is, by far, the most important thing a company can give a customer.
And it's something that WoTC, most of the Wiz0s, and even Gamer_Zer0 have not given us. Threads are deleted and closed for minimum reasons, posts are edited without explanation ... it all reeks of censorship and disrespect.
Gamer_Zer0, perhaps simply under the workload he is under, has been incredibly disrespectful and flat-out rude to us. I'm sorry, but as a customer, I consider someone being a smartass to be unacceptable. In a store, I would ask to speak to a manager if treated as he has treated us.
Of course, that is not possible to do on the forums, as all of the email addresses provided on the contact page do not work. That is another sign of disrespect on WoTC's part.
How the company manages to stay afloat, I haven't a clue.
I work at a hardware store that has a focus on customer service (due to being smaller than the big ones like Home Depot). I can safely say that respect is, by far, the most important thing a company can give a customer.
And it's something that WoTC, most of the Wiz0s, and even Gamer_Zer0 have not given us. Threads are deleted and closed for minimum reasons, posts are edited without explanation ... it all reeks of censorship and disrespect.
Gamer_Zer0, perhaps simply under the workload he is under, has been incredibly disrespectful and flat-out rude to us. I'm sorry, but as a customer, I consider someone being a smartass to be unacceptable. In a store, I would ask to speak to a manager if treated as he has treated us.
Of course, that is not possible to do on the forums, as all of the email addresses provided on the contact page do not work. That is another sign of disrespect on WoTC's part.
How the company manages to stay afloat, I haven't a clue.
Sorry you feel that way, but it's simply not true. The code of conduct is being enforced as always.
Not giving out information they're not ready to give is not disrepsecting you.
I've got a perfect analogy for you, but I worry it will be mis-read or misunderstood.
Sorry you feel that way, but it's simply not true. The code of conduct is being enforced as always.
Selectively enforcing does not help. There are many threads that get away with stuff, and then others don't. Why?
Not giving out information they're not ready to give is not disrepsecting you.
Have...have you bothered to read anything they have said?
I've got a perfect analogy for you, but I worry it will be mis-read or misunderstood.
'course, now you got me curious. :P
3) It has been said that WotC will use a model of 'you buy it, you own it -forever' regarding the Digitial Initiative. We can't know the future, but what guarantee can be provided that this is the truth? 10 years from now, if I've lost my 'backup' for the material, will I be able to reaquire that material legally? What if WotC has gone out of business?
Come on, not backing up electronic content that you've bought is the equivalent of not taking care of your magazines. If you left your 10-year old Dragon magazine out on the patio because you had to run inside to grab the phone, then forgot it as it started to pour down rain and ruin your mag, would you expect a free replacement of your magazine? No. You'd have to see if they had the back issue in stock or end up looking for one on eBay probably at a higher price than you originally paid.
There's probably a greater chance of getting your electronic content back, but I wouldn't expect it anymore than the magazine scenario.
Come on, not backing up electronic content that you've bought is the equivalent of not taking care of your magazines. If you left your 10-year old Dragon magazine out on the patio because you had to run inside to grab the phone, then forgot it as it started to pour down rain and ruin your mag, would you expect a free replacement of your magazine? No. You'd have to see if they had the back issue in stock or end up looking for one on eBay probably at a higher price than you originally paid.
There's probably a greater chance of getting your electronic content back, but I wouldn't expect it anymore than the magazine scenario.
An excellent point. If you paid good money for electronic content then back it up!
Also @ Paradox... A company deciding when it is ready to tell us important imformation that we need in order to make decisions as to how worthwhile it would be to buy the latest product is disrespectful.
It is disrespectful in the same way that it would be disrespectful for an amusement park like six flags to not disclose when they will be shutting down for the year and still trying to sell their customers year long passes a week before they shut down.
What do we have to do buy stock in the company and fly to shareholders meetings in order to find out what is going on?
Or are even they kept guessing?
Come on, not backing up electronic content that you've bought is the equivalent of not taking care of your magazines. If you left your 10-year old Dragon magazine out on the patio because you had to run inside to grab the phone, then forgot it as it started to pour down rain and ruin your mag, would you expect a free replacement of your magazine? No. You'd have to see if they had the back issue in stock or end up looking for one on eBay probably at a higher price than you originally paid.
There's probably a greater chance of getting your electronic content back, but I wouldn't expect it anymore than the magazine scenario.
I agree that I should backup my electronic content. That said, one of the real advantages of electronic content is how easily it can be 'restored' if lost. Now, this is a bigger problem with DRM files. I purchased two books as PDFs since both were out of print. They were both part of the John Carter series of books by Edgar Rice Burroughs (also author of Tarzan). These files were 'bought' on one computer, and backed up appropriately. Later, when I had a new computer I tried to open them.
Because the computer was different, and the type of DRM used, I could not.
I purchased them from Amazon.com, and I was able to 'redownload' a 'key' to allow me to access those books again.
Amazon.com is a big company, but they might not be around in 20 or 30 years, but I might. If I own it, I should be able to 'pass it on' to my children or grandchildren, even if I only own a 'single copy'. If the form of DRM requires 'activation' with every new computer, I'd have some real concerns. That is why it was listed as a concern.
I don't expect that my 'physical' product will be 'replaced' in a fire. But, I do have insurance. The insurance will at least compensate me for my loss of a physical product. However, the insurance has special restrictions regarding 'electronic' content. To the insurance company, electronic content doesn't have a 'physical value' so if I cannot download it again after a fire, I may be out that money. Now, I can have 'backups' stored on remote servers, or on CDs at other locations, but I think that an official response to my concern is something a lot of people on the boards would like, rather than another poster 'poo pooing' the concern.
I'm already generally against the DI. If these concerns are addressed, I may start coming around.
Gleemax = power word blind
I agree that I should backup my electronic content. That said, one of the real advantages of electronic content is how easily it can be 'restored' if lost. Now, this is a bigger problem with DRM files. I purchased two books as PDFs since both were out of print. They were both part of the John Carter series of books by Edgar Rice Burroughs (also author of Tarzan). These files were 'bought' on one computer, and backed up appropriately. Later, when I had a new computer I tried to open them.
Because the computer was different, and the type of DRM used, I could not.
I purchased them from Amazon.com, and I was able to 'redownload' a 'key' to allow me to access those books again.
Amazon.com is a big company, but they might not be around in 20 or 30 years, but I might. If I own it, I should be able to 'pass it on' to my children or grandchildren, even if I only own a 'single copy'. If the form of DRM requires 'activation' with every new computer, I'd have some real concerns. That is why it was listed as a concern.
I don't expect that my 'physical' product will be 'replaced' in a fire. But, I do have insurance. The insurance will at least compensate me for my loss of a physical product. However, the insurance has special restrictions regarding 'electronic' content. To the insurance company, electronic content doesn't have a 'physical value' so if I cannot download it again after a fire, I may be out that money. Now, I can have 'backups' stored on remote servers, or on CDs at other locations, but I think that an official response to my concern is something a lot of people on the boards would like, rather than another poster 'poo pooing' the concern.
I'm already generally against the DI. If these concerns are addressed, I may start coming around.
Those are valid concerns. I admit I'm not fully aware of all the issues with different types of DRM. Maybe Mike can shed some more light on the "own it forever" promise. Will we be able to use the content on multiple computers? I for one alternate between my home PC and my work laptop.
On a lighter note:
Gleemax = power word blind
I've been looking for physical props for spell effects! That'll work nicely.
Would WotC consider changing the forum settings so they use whatever users have set in their profile, rather than forcing the icky green color?
I'll add this to my list of ransom demands, thanks. I'll also ping the web dev guys on the overlap issue you're seeing.
Yo, Mike! (If you're unaware, that's Philadelphian for a lot of things. Feel free to interpret it whatever way you like
)Any news on this one yet? It's my understanding that this change (setting the forum to make use of the user's settings rather than the default) is a very simple change in the forum settings. Making the Gleemax forums look and feel more like what the community members are already used to, I think, will go a long way towards getting the community to participate there.
Any news on this one yet? It's my understanding that this change (setting the forum to make use of the user's settings rather than the default) is a very simple change in the forum settings.
Yes. The decision thus far has been, "Not quite yet." Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Remember to aim high and shoot the messenger, not his horse.
1) That implies the change will happen?
2) Can we have a time frame for when the change will be made? Frankly, I don't foresee myself contributing a whole lot on the Gleemax forums, even though I have stuff I would love to discuss, because (again) the color scheme gives me headaches.
The bad news is for WotC, not me. If the color doesn't change, I won't be participating. So, I see no reason to shoot the messenger (this time
).2) Can we have a time frame for when the change will be made? Frankly, I don't foresee myself contributing a whole lot on the Gleemax forums, even though I have stuff I would love to discuss, because (again) the color scheme gives me headaches.
What he said.
I know you keep tossing out bait with 'Well, gleemax would be a great place to dicuss 'topic x'.
But, frankly, without this step being taken I'm unlikely to bother.
1) That implies the change will happen?
2) Can we have a time frame for when the change will be made? Frankly, I don't foresee myself contributing a whole lot on the Gleemax forums, even though I have stuff I would love to discuss, because (again) the color scheme gives me headaches.
Right now, that section of the forum is set to specifically look the way it does. At some point in time, we'll likely revisit the issue and see if we decide to change it to the default/user-selected settings. Right now, meaning the next couple of weeks, we plan on holding it as it is.
May I ask why you would opt to intentionally set up the site in a way that excludes people?
It's the same reason they opted to intentionally exclude a rather larger number of people with the podcasts and the DI in general.
It's the same reason they opted to intentionally exclude a rather larger number of people with the podcasts and the DI in general.
General lack of respect for the consumer?
Time and time again Wizards seems to flip me the middle finger, and claim to know exactly what I want("No, you may say you don't like the monsters with levels in MM4, but we know you do!" "No, you may say that you like Planeswalkers in your novels, but we know you don't and we'll spend an entire trilogy doing nothing but killing off your favorite characters!") It's become rather apparant that Wizards doesn't care for what I want in either game at all, all they seem to care about is the money in my wallet, and not what I actually want, they don't respect me for anything else. I may not be the sharpest tool in the box, but I know when I've been insulted. Thank you wizards I take enough of that from my workplace, I don't need the company that produces the games I play to do it as well.
So...yeah when Wizards says "Omg the Online Initiative is going to be great! We're not going to release any information on it, you'll just have to trust us!", I'm sorry but no. I'm not going to trust you, I've found Wizards implementation of online material to be sub-par at best in the past. The online articles for both D&D and MTG are dry, boring, and generally poor quality. Magic Online was a horrible mess of poor customer service, a poor interface, and generally not worth the money at all. Knowing Wizards track record for online support, no I won't be trusting you, and no I won't be buying into this. Not only because I can't trust the company to give proper support to an online product but because it's actions in the past few weeks have been outright insulting.
In fact as of today, until Wizards decides to change how it views and treats it's loyal customer base(at the very least stop acting like we're your damn enemies), I won't be purchasing another WoTC product. Thank you for the bumpy ride Wizards of The Coast, the light at the end of the tunnel, at least for me, has gone out.
It's the same reason they opted to intentionally exclude a rather larger number of people with the podcasts and the DI in general.
consider this: why would it make any sense for Wizards to intentionally exclude consumers?
why would it make any sense for Wizards to intentionally exclude consumers?
That's precisely what they have done in regards to the DI. It is (by their own admission) targeted to those with an internet connection. Hence, customers have been excluded (for better or worse, that remains to be seen).
It wasn't adressed to me personally, but the idiot shot was uncalled for. Everyone has their own opions on the subject, no one is an idiot.
That's precisely what they have done in regards to the DI. It is (by their own admission) targeted to those with an internet connection. Hence, customers have been excluded (for better or worse, that remains to be seen).
Everything WotC does or publishes is going to 'exclude' (prospective) customers: Releasing a new supplement will exclude all customers who decide not to buy it.
So, what's your point again?
Everything WotC does or publishes is going to 'exclude' (prospective) customers: Releasing a new supplement will exclude all customers who decide not to buy it.
So, what's your point again?
My point: The DI excludes far more customers than those who simply "will not buy it". There will, in fact, be those who cannot buy it because they lack an internet connection. These are not prospective customers, these customers are excluded, plain and simple.
Time and time again Wizards seems to flip me the middle finger, and claim to know exactly what I want("No, you may say you don't like the monsters with levels in MM4, but we know you do!"
Here's the problem. You are taking offense as if WotC is purposefully publishing books that do not meet your personal taste. Guess what? They have alot more people than you to cater to. And I saw just as many people saying they liked the classed monsters in MMIV. So the MMV team in one of the previews said that they heard the community in regards to classed monsters. That even those who liked it wished the choices were more exotic. So they've changed their approach for MMV. They listened to the feedback and have changed the way they are doing things for the next book. What more do you want? Do you want them to contact you personally before they make any decisions about a book to make sure you will like it?
"No, you may say that you like Planeswalkers in your novels, but we know you don't and we'll spend an entire trilogy doing nothing but killing off your favorite characters!") It's become rather apparant that Wizards doesn't care for what I want in either game at all, all they seem to care about is the money in my wallet, and not what I actually want, they don't respect me for anything else. I may not be the sharpest tool in the box, but I know when I've been insulted. Thank you wizards I take enough of that from my workplace, I don't need the company that produces the games I play to do it as well.
Again, who are you? Just because you don't like their current offerings doesn't mean they are out to disrepect you. They can't care for what you want in either game because they don't know you. They are just making business decisions and creative decisions, nothing personal against you.
So...yeah when Wizards says "Omg the Online Initiative is going to be great! We're not going to release any information on it, you'll just have to trust us!", I'm sorry but no. I'm not going to trust you,
Except that Mike has actually said "don't trust us, see what comes out and decide for yourself."
In fact as of today, until Wizards decides to change how it views and treats it's loyal customer base(at the very least stop acting like we're your damn enemies), I won't be purchasing another WoTC product. Thank you for the bumpy ride Wizards of The Coast, the light at the end of the tunnel, at least for me, has gone out.
This is getting kind of old. From when I first made this "duh!" statement when I was mad they cancelled Dungeon up until now. Either you're saying:
1) I'm not gonna buy product I don't like. (Duh!)
or
2) Until they start creating books and cards based solely on my initerests and nobody else's, I'm not gonna buy anything even if I do like it. (Oh well, bye bye Lord Polaris!)
This is getting kind of old. From when I first made this "duh!" statement when I was mad they cancelled Dungeon up until now. Either you're saying:
1) I'm not gonna buy product I don't like. (Duh!)
or
2) Until they start creating books and cards based solely on my initerests and nobody else's, I'm not gonna buy anything even if I do like it. (Oh well, bye bye Lord Polaris!)
Maybe before we tell someone "bye bye", we should ask the pertinent questions.
What are some specific examples of the MtG Online customer service pitfalls? Technical "messes"?
I've seen plenty of examples of shoddy book work, and I don't mean just content (which, I can forgive shoddy content - my idea of good content is different than yours), but shoddy layout and editing.
I don't play Magic and don't plan to, so I won't be introduced to the MtG Online situation directly. I really have no idea what goes on way over there on the other end of the gaming spectrum
My take on the CoC: While a discussion of Magic is prohibited in the D&D forums, MtG _will_ be included under the DI, so I think some info on "what went wrong" with the MtG Online stuff is pertinent. I want to hear about the technical end of things; not the Magic game itself. We could just as easily be talking about D20 Modern for all I care.
A good follow up question, no matter what your answer is going to be, is whether or not the MtG Online interface will be upgraded with the new DI or not. If it is, then this is all pretty much irrelevant.
Dennis Stout
Except that Mike has actually said "don't trust us, see what comes out and decide for yourself."
The official article on the main page was a bunch of people saying, "You gotta trust us. We know stuff that you don't!"
Mike has been rather inconsistent with a LOT of things.
Maybe before we tell someone "bye bye", we should ask the pertinent questions.
What are some specific examples of the MtG Online customer service pitfalls? Technical "messes"?
There was a thread about it. It was deleted--not locked, but literally deleted (or "moved to a WizO only forum").
I've seen plenty of examples of shoddy book work, and I don't mean just content (which, I can forgive shoddy content - my idea of good content is different than yours), but shoddy layout and editing.
I don't play Magic and don't plan to, so I won't be introduced to the MtG Online situation directly. I really have no idea what goes on way over there on the other end of the gaming spectrum
There are many threads on the Magic side talking about the problems.
And there is at least one thread dedicated to how Gleemax is not wanted there, either.
My take on the CoC: While a discussion of Magic is prohibited in the D&D forums, MtG _will_ be included under the DI, so I think some info on "what went wrong" with the MtG Online stuff is pertinent. I want to hear about the technical end of things; not the Magic game itself. We could just as easily be talking about D20 Modern for all I care.
I thought it wasn't a violation of the CoC, as there are no parts of the CoC that say that discussion of future products is against the CoC when posted in the Future Releases section--yet here we are.
And I've been warned in the past about discussing the possible content of future releases in the Future Releases forum.
That's precisely what they have done in regards to the DI. It is (by their own admission) targeted to those with an internet connection. Hence, customers have been excluded (for better or worse, that remains to be seen).
It wasn't adressed to me personally, but the idiot shot was uncalled for. Everyone has their own opions on the subject, no one is an idiot.
I will remind you that my question asked why, not when. Reading skills, Econ 101: these get you out of the idiocy/uninformed opinion/"lalalala" box on this one.
EDIT:
My point: The DI excludes far more customers than those who simply "will not buy it". There will, in fact, be those who cannot buy it because they lack an internet connection. These are not prospective customers, these customers are excluded, plain and simple.
"Well, I'm just calling in to say I'm a Gator fan!" "So why didn't you..." "Cause I'm a Gator fan and I'm calling now!"
The official article on the main page was a bunch of people saying, "You gotta trust us. We know stuff that you don't!"
Mike has been rather inconsistent with a LOT of things.
I came on after the initial announcement and my position has never been that you should just trust us. Judge us by our actions, and judge us by our words, and evaluate us in the manner you feel is fair.
If there's anything you think I've been inconsistent about and need clarification on, point them out and I'll try to address it.
There is no valid reason that I can think of. So, why did they do it?
I was a happy WotC customer who also happened to buy the magazines. They announced that they will not allow Paizo to continue to produce the product. While my 'Complete Warrior' or 'Unearthed Arcana' are good books, I bought each of those once. I bought Dragon and Dungeon every month for many years.
They cancelled (let's not get into semantics on this) the product I liked, in favor of an electronic product that has no value to me, personally. When I sent letters regarding my opinions on the subject I got a form letter back telling me that they think I'll be excited. Then they launch Gleemax.com which is not a welcoming environment from the word 'minions' to describe the forums (thankfully changed) to the color scheme, to the disorganized discussion and no explanation for what the site was (at least not at first that I could see).
While changes have been made to Gleemax, there has been very little 'real' information about the DI. They have yet to answer the question of whether content will be downloadable. Who here agrees that the definition of 'download' is so difficult to define that no answer to that question is possible?
Those who support the 'DI' don't even know what it will do. Perhaps the only thing that we know for certain is that it will have some of the content of the magazines, there will be subscription fees, and gleemax will be the social side and portal to the rest of the DI. The people who 'support' the DI are guilty of wishful thinking - the thing is, maybe they will get their wish. Maybe the DI won't suck. I'd really like some information to support such a conclusion with.
As for comments suggesting people learn to read and take Econ 101 to get out of lalalalala land - those comments are designed to be insulting. I think we as a community are better than that. Aren't we?
If you see some one 'on the other side' insulting someone, feel free to call them out on it or bring in the WizOs. Don't sink to their level.
And last comment - we should all be on the same side. We should all want the best game for the most people. Right?
Well, how is the game worse if the magazines existed side by side with the Digital Initiative? Who would be hurt by that? Don't tell me it is Wizards. They have marketing research - if they'd be hurt, let them say so. Tell me about yourself personally. Did having the magazines available in case you should want to buy one really make the game WORSE?
It is my opinion that if people look at this decision objectively, and move away from a 'fan boy' perspective (both sides) we can recognize our common ground.
I came on after the initial announcement and my position has never been that you should just trust us. Judge us by our actions, and judge us by our words, and evaluate us in the manner you feel is fair.
If there's anything you think I've been inconsistent about and need clarification on, point them out and I'll try to address it.
Mike, you are our liaison and you know very well where those quotes came from. They may not have been your words, but you are stuck with dealing with them. You have your co-workers and execs to thank for much of the fire you're taking.
For clarification: They may not be your words but they are the words of the company you represent.
I came on after the initial announcement and my position has never been that you should just trust us. Judge us by our actions, and judge us by our words, and evaluate us in the manner you feel is fair.
That might be your position. But the official WoTC position is "Trust us."
If there's anything you think I've been inconsistent about and need clarification on, point them out and I'll try to address it.
You're serious? You have been highly inconsistent with a number of things. I like the time right now to acquire those, and the Search doesn't return me detailed enough things (I still have to parse each thread) to do the job in the time I have.
The biggest example would be the fact that you appearently already knew that Gleemax was an inside joke within the MtGO group and that there was not much cross over ... but you were surprised to learn that there was not much cross over between the two.
My point was that we had the wherewithall to know folks on the RPG side of things might feel left out ahead of time, as proven by the questions I asked.
In another post, you stated the surprise you and others felt that it hadn't crossed over.
I will remind you that my question asked why, not when. Reading skills, Econ 101: these get you out of the idiocy/uninformed opinion/"lalalala" box on this one.
So I'm in the idiocy/uniformed opionion/"lalalala" box because of my reading skills? Gotch ya! :P.
Have a good day, Arivia.
The biggest example would be the fact that you appearently already knew that Gleemax was an inside joke within the MtGO group and that there was not much cross over ... but you were surprised to learn that there was not much cross over between the two.
Given the hundreds of thousands of fans that exist for both D&D and MTG, our surprise was that their wasn't more cross-over in the forum communities. We've always had a good idea of what the cross-over was on a pure statistical level.
We knew before we launched that Gleemax could be perceived as more of a Magic thing, given that the original Gleemax idea received more play in the MTG community, plus the fact that RaBu came up through the Magic: The Gathering ranks.
We knew before we launched that Gleemax could be perceived as more of a Magic thing, given that the original Gleemax idea received more play in the MTG community, plus the fact that RaBu came up through the Magic: The Gathering ranks.
I find it hard to believe that a company about to launch a new 'product' anticipated a negetive response from a portion af it's customer base, yet took no steps to prevent it.
I mean
1) Why does it have to be named after a thing that targets one audience more that others?
2) Why were no steps taken to introduce the RPGers to the concept beforehand? And no, your cutesy little jokes attempted a few days before don't count.
We were given the name and left to find out what the hell it meant on our own. This did not gain WotC any brownie points with us.
1) Why does it have to be named after a thing that targets one audience more that others?
The name will grow to mean whatever people associate the social networking site with. So I think this is ultimately a non-issue.
2) Why were no steps taken to introduce the RPGers to the concept beforehand? And no, your cutesy little jokes attempted a few days before don't count.
The entire Gleemax promotion was designed to help introduce the concept of Gleemax to the community *months* before it launches. The whole idea behind Randy's blog is to give the community warning, information, and a chance to provide feedback.
Those names do the same thing as Gleemax just to the other half of the people on the WotC forums.
And if nobody said anything about Gleemax and you didn't know that it was some inside joke and it was just a name that they came up with would it be better? Why?
As far as the steps I agree there were not enough. I can get over the name and the out look of the site doesn't hurt too much but I will side with everybody else and not want to use it if there is no change.
Right now, that section of the forum is set to specifically look the way it does. At some point in time, we'll likely revisit the issue and see if we decide to change it to the default/user-selected settings. Right now, meaning the next couple of weeks, we plan on holding it as it is.
May I ask why you would opt to intentionally set up the site in a way that excludes people?
This may have been lost in the most recent flurry of activity, Mike. I am curious to talk about this, if you're at liberty to have such a conversation.
I really can't think of a good reason why WotC wouldn't set up the Gleemax forums (note - not the entire site, just the forums) so they were more user friendly, by having the forum use the member's settings.
I really want to give Gleemax a fair chance, even though I have problems with the name (and we don't need to rehash that). I have thread ideas I'd love to start over there. I want to offer suggestions and read other people's suggestions. I want to make those forums part of my daily trip around the boards while I do my work. And WotC is, essentially, telling me I can't go there and participate.
So if it was called Meepo.com or maybe PunPun.com it would be better? Why?
1) Uh, exactly where did I say that?
Oh, that's right. I didn't. 2) For the record, I think that would be just as bad an idea for exactly the same reasons.
Edit: Now, if the D&D area were named punpun.com, that would be cool. The M:TG side can be called anything in the world. Won't affect me at all. (Hey, here's a crazy idea; call it gleemax.com! I think it could work.)
And if nobody said anything about Gleemax and you didn't know that it was some inside joke and it was just a name that they came up with would it be better? Why?
Well, no. I would have asked myself, "Self, just what in the heck do you suppose 'gleemax' is?" To which I would reply, "Well, I have no idea. Better break out 'Ye olde search engine' and find out, eh?"
Because, well, that's just the way I am.
I never did say that you or anyone else for that matter said it would be better if they named it anything D&D related. I was just trying to center in on your specific arugment before I begain to side against or with you. From what I understand your stance is; That there should be a division between games on the site.(Correct me if I am wrong) I was looking at it as if Gleemax were Wizzards.com and we would be able to choose what game suits us best from there. I just see it as a name. I do, however, see it (I hope) from your point of view where it is a M:tG thing and it shouldn't interest you in the slightest.
Nobody said there should be a division and unless I am wrong, and I never am, nobody wants there to be a division.
They don't want it named after anything D&D related either, something that alienates anyone isn't what we are after, rather something that includes everyone would be much preferable.
It might be "just a name" but lets face it, in web terms a name is everything. Think location, location, location for real estate if you need an analogy.
I never did say that you or anyone else for that matter said it would be better if they named it anything D&D related. I was just trying to center in on your specific arugment before I begain to side against or with you. From what I understand your stance is; That there should be a division between games on the site.(Correct me if I am wrong) I was looking at it as if Gleemax were Wizzards.com and we would be able to choose what game suits us best from there. I just see it as a name. I do, however, see it (I hope) from your point of view where it is a M:tG thing and it shouldn't interest you in the slightest.
Sorry if I read more into your post than was intended. There is going to be a division of sorts on the site. Much as there is on these wizards boards now. That's not a bad thing. If you don't have any interest in Magic, why wold you want to sift through a bunch of MtGO stuff to get to your D&D material. Same goes the other way. Division of content is helpful and needed.
Your view of the site being similar to wizards.com is probobly more than a little accurate. (log in here and go to the game of your choice.)
As for it being 'just a name'. Sim nailed it quite well:
They don't want it named after anything D&D related either, something that alienates anyone isn't what we are after, rather something that includes everyone would be much preferable.
It might be "just a name" but lets face it, in web terms a name is everything. Think location, location, location for real estate if you need an analogy.
I could think of several names off the top of my head that would work nicely. (Granted they aren't very creative, but you get the idea.) Some of these names lead to 'placeholder' websites but I would think that if WotC had any real confidence in this DI they'd be willing to drop some 'investment' in a name that appeals to a larger crowd.
http://www.gleemax.com/articles/announcement003.html
I will say however that I am fairly impressed with the "Professionals" they have so far. I mean they even got Monte Cook to get on board. This makes me somewhat hopeful. But again...I thought they knew what we wanted already? ;)
I'm still concerned about the discussion of NON Wizards/Hasbro games. I mean If I put up a link to my LGS to help them get the word out on an up coming Rogue Trader 40K tournament thus ensuring that they get people to sign up and help them make some money selling their Games Workshop products, will this violate the COC? Again they say that they will allow us to discuss and support eachother in ALL our gaming endevors no matter who the publisher/manufacturer is BUT it still seems to me that this will violate the COC. Am I wrong?
Is it possible for someone to fill us in on what or how the COC will change and will it affect the Wizard's community as a whole? I put this up on the Gleemax forums and all I got was a user (not a Wizo or WotC rep.) saying it will have it's own COC. Not really very helpfull.
Will we be able to discuss Paladium? As I understand, Palladium has specifically requested of WotC in the past that no discussions of their products take place on the WotC forums. On top of that, Palladium is fairly well known for zealously defending their products. So, even more specifically, could I start a thread over on the Gleemax forums about how to use Palladium's material in a D&D game without getting in trouble?
Well, advertising is most definitely against the CoC. So either they're going to change the CoC (for just Gleemax or the whole site doesn't really matter), or they're going to selectively enforce the CoC on the Gleemax forums.
Well see that's what I've been thinking. If it's going to be a "Home for Gamers"
(sorry visions of senior citizens sitting around playing D&D and 40K keep poppin into my head) then being able to discuss those kinds of topics is a must, in my mind. Seems to me they will DEFFINATELY need a Gleemax only CoC. OR abandon the notion of "ALL GAMES WELCOME" and go with "ALL GAMES WELCOME...as long as it's a WotC or Hasbro Product".Palladium is fairly well known for zealously defending their products.
Masterful use of understatement here. You sir, truly are a master of the written word. All I could do not to laugh myself silly with that statement.:D
So if it was called Meepo.com or maybe PunPun.com it would be better? Why?
Those names do the same thing as Gleemax just to the other half of the people on the WotC forums.
And if nobody said anything about Gleemax and you didn't know that it was some inside joke and it was just a name that they came up with would it be better? Why?
As far as the steps I agree there were not enough. I can get over the name and the out look of the site doesn't hurt too much but I will side with everybody else and not want to use it if there is no change.
I'd never heard the inside joke, nor knew anything about Gleemax when I saw it. I'd actually be happy with meepo.com, but that's simply because I associate meepo with D&D. Again, there is a joke there as well, I know nothing about.
I however thought that:
1. It was too sci-fi, not D&D
2. It seemed kind of childish, which sn't bad, but more in line for my 10 year old son.
I will pay for useful, correct, and updated content, no issue on that aspect. How much depends on what is really provided. I won't however do so from that site, with that design, and the implied audience level.
I have never played Palladium games and have only really heard about the company through RPGnet's forums - and then tend to ignore those threads - but from what I can tell they appear to seriously overestimate the level of control which IP law gives them over what people say about their products. They might request that Wizards doesn't allow people to discuss Palladium products but as far as I can tell there would be no way for them to enforce that - nor to seriously threaten WotC should Gleemax users put Palladium-based content on a Gleemax page. Apart from anything else, Palladium does not have the resources to do battle with WotC.
...they appear to seriously overestimate the level of control which IP law gives them over what people say about their products.
Yep. That sums it up nicely.
And here's a similar question:
Will we be able to discuss Paladium? As I understand, Palladium has specifically requested of WotC in the past that no discussions of their products take place on the WotC forums. On top of that, Palladium is fairly well known for zealously defending their products. So, even more specifically, could I start a thread over on the Gleemax forums about how to use Palladium's material in a D&D game without getting in trouble?
Good point! Granted Palladium is kinda busy with their own problems right now to care. They deffinately wouldn't have the resources, right now, to go toe to toe with WotC. I could be wrong though.
I don't want Palladium to send their lawyers after me.
Mr Zherog...you will come with us. K.S. would like to have a word with you..
.......
It's getting more and more frustrating as time goes on and it's WOTC is starting to smell a lot like TSR did right before they went under.
(yes, it is)
Really, seriously, they expect D&D RPG folk to use that site? With the ridiculous color scheme, the over-the-top hype about, well, seemingly nothing of use or interest and the entire adolescent: "Isn't this too rad to be real feel"?
For this, they canceled Dragon & Dungeon? And thought folks who read those magazines would be interested in that site?
I thought when they spoke of DI, they meant something specific to D&D, maybe DDM. Like Dragon & Dungeon, you know?
Hasbro can't afford a portal specific to D&D? They have to combine it with all sorts of other content, and then make the most nightmarish and amateurish looking website, with the most annoying name (oh, yeah its an inside joke in another game...that will draw D&D fans in...)
I was very calm about the cancellation of Dragon & Dungeon, assuming we'd get something specific to D&D, trying to meet our interest and needs. I figured I'd pay for some content to at least give it a try. But there is no way I'd pay anything or even use anything on that site. It is a nightmare. All flash, no content, the only interesting thing on the site so far are the forums threads where folks are plotting the downfall of the site. What a fiasco.
Clearly, whoever is in charge of marketing the DI has badly miscalculated, and they've rushed out something way before they have anything to offer. My only hope is WOTC will realize this, and scrap the Gleemax/DD link, and give us a separate portal that appeals to what D&D players want. Mashing sites together seems less likely to encourage player cross over than increase rivalries, create animosity and drive folks away from the hobby.
I also hope they don't offer anything until they have something to offer. This really just makes them look bad; unprofessional and as if they canceled Dragon & Dungeon without really doing any serious work on the replacements, and are now just trying to whip something up on the fly.
Here's hoping this mess gets straightened out into something useful, and that whatever the heck Gleemax is, it just goes away. Or back to MTG land, where they may embrace it. But I'd can't help but believe it is DOA as far as DI D&D content goes.
Given the hundreds of thousands of fans that exist for both D&D and MTG, our surprise was that their wasn't more cross-over in the forum communities. We've always had a good idea of what the cross-over was on a pure statistical level.
Please, oh please, share some of that marketing research that you have! Because it is extremely uncommon for there to be crossover between the two.
It just doesn't happen. And I'm not the only one to make that observation. Whoever thought it was an accurate statistic has never spent time in a store with a Magic event and a D&D event going on at the same time.
And Zherog brings up an excellent point. Why is the whole 'gleemax' thing designed, seemingly, around the idea of excluding a rather large demographic of people?
*Those with eye problems
*Those who cannot hear
*Those without internet
*Those without printers and/or laptop [they just luck out, really]
...how can a product, based on a game that excludes all of those individuals, achieve success?
For this, they canceled Dragon & Dungeon? And thought folks who read those magazines would be interested in that site?
While I dislike what I've seen of Gleemax so far, to be far - no, this is not what is replacing the magazines.
And Zherog brings up an excellent point. Why is the whole 'gleemax' thing designed, seemingly, around the idea of excluding a rather large demographic of people?
Again, to be fair, at the moment I'm only interested in discussing why the behind-the-scenes people are unwilling to allow a user's forum settings to override the settings on the Gleemax forums. I'm not really looking to discuss any of the rest of it at the moment.
Again, to be fair, at the moment I'm only interested in discussing why the behind-the-scenes people are unwilling to allow a user's forum settings to override the settings on the Gleemax forums. I'm not really looking to discuss any of the rest of it at the moment.
I understand, and I did not mean to implicate you in the rest of what I said.
Apparently, dear forum users, I have "violated the spirit of the forum" with my disappointment with the DI. If I have offended anyone, I apologize.
I wasn't offended. Yet.
Honestly, WoTC's actions are rather in "violation of the spirit of the forum" ... maybe I should report those posts? Probably should.
Anyways. Gleemax is here to stay, at least for a few months.
So if it was called Meepo.com or maybe PunPun.com it would be better? Why?
Whos Meepo? and whats is the punpun thing?.......
Please, oh please, share some of that marketing research that you have! Because it is extremely uncommon for there to be crossover between the two.
It just doesn't happen. And I'm not the only one to make that observation. Whoever thought it was an accurate statistic has never spent time in a store with a Magic event and a D&D event going on at the same time.
Let's sing it in the round, kids!
SAMPLE BIAS AND OPPORTUNITY COST
____________SAMPLE BIAS AND OPPORTUNITY COST
________________________SAMPLE BIAS AND OPPORTUNITY COST
Why is the whole 'gleemax' thing designed, seemingly, around the idea of excluding a rather large demographic of people?
You still haven't answered my question.
While I dislike what I've seen of Gleemax so far, to be far - no, this is not what is replacing the magazines.
So, the content replacing these will not be associated with this abomination? Has WotC said this? I may well have missed this, since as I said, at first I ignored this as I could not conceive of it having anything to do with D&D.
And if this is true (and I so), what is that site supposed to be? So far, it isn't really anything, but many grand statements have been made about how wonderful we'll all find it, though exactly why still seems unclear.
You would think Hasbro would have better quality control than this. They seem to be pretty tight about what can released, etc., and then this fiasco is allowed to escape.
Put your idiocy aside for a few seconds and consider this: why would it make any sense for Wizards to intentionally exclude consumers?
You still haven't answered my question.
Aside from calling him an idiot, maybe you should ask that question to WotC who have confirmed that they are indeed targeting all official gaming support solely for customers who have a computer, access to the internet and a printer. When asked what % of D&D's customer's they will no longer be supporting we have been told that WotC doesn't share marketing information.
I don't know why they would intentionally exclude customers, but I assume its because their "marketing" numbers make them irrelevant. As 30+% of the gamers I play with fall into that category of players it is a sore spot with me.
Aside from calling him an idiot, maybe you should ask that question to WotC who have confirmed that they are indeed targeting all official gaming support solely for customers who have a computer, access to the internet and a printer. When asked what % of D&D's customer's they will no longer be supporting we have been told that WotC doesn't share marketing information.
I don't know why they would intentionally exclude customers, but I assume its because their "marketing" numbers make them irrelevant. As 30+% of the gamers I play with fall into that category of players it is a sore spot with me.
Thank you for misinterpreting rhetoric, but that question wasn't asked of you.
And if this is true (and I so), what is that site supposed to be? So far, it isn't really anything, but many grand statements have been made about how wonderful we'll all find it, though exactly why still seems unclear.
From what has been said... when you think Gleemax, think MySpace, or Facebook, only for "gamers".
Thank you for misinterpreting rhetoric, but that question wasn't asked of you.
You're welcome. Glad I could help.
Why is the whole 'gleemax' thing designed, seemingly, around the idea of excluding a rather large demographic of people?
*Those with eye problems
*Those who cannot hear
*Those without internet
*Those without printers and/or laptop [they just luck out, really]
...how can a product, based on a game that excludes none of those individuals, achieve success?
The simple answer, whether it is the right one or not, is that some person who is paid to look at numbers came to the conclusion that marketing Gleemax to be insulting, ugly and internet only will attract more new customers to WotC then they will lose over this decision.
However, I think its over the line to call for the failure of the product. I hope that this whole Gleemax / DI thing works out for two main reasons.
1 - I don't want those employees of WotC who had nothing to do with making these decisions to lose their jobs.
2 - If Gleemax fails to draw the internet generation to the hobby, what will? Sure those kids on MySpace don't have disposable income at the moment, but they'll be big spenders in a few years. I'd rather they spend their money on D&D instead of World of Warcraft 2.
2 - If Gleemax fails to draw the internet generation to the hobby, what will? Sure those kids on MySpace don't have disposable income at the moment, but they'll be big spenders in a few years. I'd rather they spend their money on D&D instead of World of Warcraft 2.
Not sure if that's a real problem. I see lots of teenagers and even a few pre-teens at the gaming store playing RPGs. Granted there are a lot more of them playing Magic, but I see plenty gravitating towards the other tables as they age.
And competeing with the MMORPG market is a whole other topic.
That being said, while I'm certain somebody 'looked at the numbers' that doesn't mean they are necessarily right. There are a number of reasons that the 'numbers' might appear right, and be wrong. For instance, what if the 'numbers' are based on a poor representative sample. For example, if the survey were only available online, the numbers would be skewed toward online content.
The concern with bias is a legitimate one. Even people who are paid a lot of money to produce surveys make mistakes. And sometimes, the survey is designed to ask one question, but it appears that there is support for something beyond the original survey - sometimes the apperance is deceptive.
If the DI brings in the same number of players as leave the game - it would be a failure (unless those new players spend MORE than those leaving). Gaining new customers is more expensive. Basically, if WotC could have not done the DI (with all the money and resources that required) and had the same number of dollars, they would have had a higher profit.
The thing about 'new customers' is you haven't really had a chance to survey them for the most part. If they haven't started playing yet, you don't really have a venue to discuss what would make them interested in playing. Even if they tell you what may interest them in the game, it doesn't mean that they'll actually switch over. If the DI 'entices them' but they can't find a DM, they won't start playing.
Now, the DI itself isn't a bad idea. If the magazines hadn't been cancelled the DI could have done its thing, and if it worked, there would be more players. But there wouldn't be people upset with WotC and leaving the hobby (or at least boycotting WotC products) as a result.
When asked 'how should wizards have handled the DI' I said this:
here
If I had made the decision to cancel the magazines, the first thing I would want to do is make sure they 'end with a bang'. While Paizo has announced they'll try to make the last several issues special, I would have done even more.
I'd start with announcing that the magazines will remain in production for 1 year, and each issue will count down to the release of the DI. Each issue will have something special - extra page counts, or something. Each of the 12 issues would highlight something new and exciting that the DI will contain. At the same time, I'd be willing to explain that not all the intended functionality would be available initially if necessary, but I also would have been sure that I was on track to complete all the programming required to release on schedule. Thus, when the 'final 12 issues' are announced, I'd be able to at least beta test all the software required.
Now, at the same time, if I believed there would be a negative reaction from the community, I would have been prepared. I would have tried to have the community liason position already established so the community didn't have weeks of silence before 'official answers'. I'd be ready to answer questions, at least saying 'The information you seek will be announced over the next year in the pages of Dragon and Dungeon magazines." Not "we can't tell you, and we can't tell you when we can tell you, and we can't even begin to tell you what plans we have. It's a surprise - you like surprises, don't you?"
That's a little annoying.
Furthermore, when concerned customers sent letters explaining why they think the change was a bad idea, I wouldn't have sent them a form letter that made it plain that their concerns were not even being considered - in fact, I have no evidence that anyone read the letters I sent.
Even if the letter simply assured us that all our letters were being read, but a specific reply to the quantity of letters was impossible, I would have been happy. Or at least, felt that I was being listened to. To receive a form letter back that didn't even indicate that others were getting the exact same letter is bad form. Telling us that an individual reply would be impossible would be a courtesy, rather than trying to give the impression that we did receive a 'personal reply' that simply failed.
When members of the community started saying they were feeling alienated, I'd try to find ways to engage the 'grognards'. Obviously the 'grognards' don't want to be 'minions' to Gleemax. I'm not sure how exactly I'd try to make sure that their opinions are wanted and needed - but I'd try.
And at the very end, I might at least reconsider my decision. So far, nothing we've heard about the DI requires the Dungeon or Dragon name. If the names are not required, even if some content will be similar, I don't understand how the two can't be allowed to compete. It is true that the DI might be 'more profitable' without the competition of the magazines, and it is true that the magazines might be more profitable without the DI. But, they're clearly different enough products that it is POSSIBLE that they both could have co-existed and generated more profit together than either one alone. Obviously there are people who prefer digital content and those that don't. As a company like WotC, I'd like to appear magnanimous and really quick to respond to my customers. I'd probably make an announcement about how the magazines will continue based upon the feedback.
If distribution costs are too high, I might consider combining the magazines. Dungeon used to be a bi-monthly and while I like getting both magazines monthly, if I had to scale back I would....Still keeping a physical product. And I would then probably keep that product until it is clear that the product can no longer survive.
People have compared the cancellations of the magazines to cancelling a TV show. I think this is a little different. Stargate SG-1 is a show that's been around for a long time. I believe the first couple of seasons were on Showtime, and then the rest were produced and aired on Sci-Fi. If this were like a TV show cancellation, it wouldn't be like Sci-Fi cancelling the show. It would be like Showtime cancelling the show on Sci-Fi. It would be hard for anyone to do something like that and not appear as something of a jerk. So, while I've enjoyed buying a lot of WotC products, I'm still pretty steamed about the situation and their response(s).
want to say thank you for an awesome post! (The whole thing. I would have quoted the whole thing, but folks find that annoying.)
It was well thought out and answers the question. If only we could get more posts like that; without the hostility or flames, name calling, trolling and baiting.
Again, great job!
But if I'm right and WotC COULD have done better, the question becomes, what SHOULD they do now to make things better. Whether you think the DI is a good thing or a bad thing, surely you realize that creating a strongly negative reaction among the customer base (even a part of it) is overall a bad thing, at least compared to not creating a negative reaction among the customer base. How could they proceed from here and make it better?
1. Don't launch something until you have something to launch. This saves you from having people say WTF is this supposed to be? There isn't anything here but a bunch of vague promises. Very poor marketing. So, number one, take it down. say it was a mistake and we're going to re-tool it (including a new name).
2. Give it a name that means something to your customers. Gleemax is an inside joke, assoicated with one brand over others, and seems to be pretty well disliked by many (nearly everyone who has posted a comment about it).
3. Know who your market is that you're trying to reach, and market it to them. If they are trying to reach a younger demographic, fine. Say so, and don't try to market to others who ar eunlikely to respond to it positively. Yes, we all know there is research that says the D&D demographic is older, and may not be the most traditionally desired market. If you want to find ways to expand the market, great. But don't annoy your main present market trying to expand it in ways that make them feel as if they're going to be left out or ignored.
4. Re-think the whole "One-site-for-all-games" concept. There has been so much alluded to what Gleemax will become (eventually the WOTC forums will be there, exclusive content, generators, etc) that is boggles th emind. If you want a portal to all these, it needs to be simple, easy to navigate & customizable, and that draws in your market, not annoy them. This means it needs to have a broad-based appeal, and believe me, Gleemax ain't got that. That means it needs to have a name that is recogniziable, connects to what the site is about, and makes folks want ot be there. yes, this does mean the portal site will probably not be as exciting and over-the-top as the team that developed Gleemax seems to desire. Once you've got folks to your portal, the sites off of that can be designed to appeal to whatever market those games, etc. appeal to or are trying to attract.
5. For the D&D portion, have some useful things, not just vague promises. You killed two well liked products to give us this, so make it worth it. Don't say "Well, Gleemax may not be the place where the DI that replaces Dungeon & Dragon go". You've all ready said different in how you marketed this mess ("exclusive content", etc). Start out with the things that made Dragon & Dungeon popular...adventures, articles, advice, etc. Then add new things (generators, columns, whatever) that can be tested to see wha tthe response is. If it's good, keep 'em. Bad, ditch 'em or at least tweak 'em.
That's about it. Really, the whole thing seems so poorly done, I don't think there is much to be done but gracefully remove it, and start over. And don't put something up until there is something of value to be seen. We don't want vague promises and grandiose concepts, we want actual content that is useful, connections that take us somewhere we have interest in, screens that can be viewed with out annoyance (or worse) and a name that means somehting to the market. Gleemax is none of these things.
4. Re-think the whole "One-site-for-all-games" concept.
This always makes me chuckle, its so true, and the best advice most of us have given so far.
I was on a project for a company that sold forklifts and wanted to make a ebay-like site for any forklift dealer or owner to list and sell their goods. I thought it was a bad idea, but they insisted that even their competitor companies would surely use it, because it was a good concept, and needed tool.
The project went live, and failed miserably. It was used by their dealers, but as predicted, their competitors wanted nothing to do with it.
I come here to talk D&D, I go elsewhere to talk other games. If I have questions about another games, I want a dedicated community of players, and maybe their developers reading my posts. That won't happen here.
I don't expect to come to gleemax and talk wow, or nwn, or anything else.
BUT, if I can come to one board to talk MtG, D&DM, A&AM, and the lot, that's a great thing.
Facebook, MySpace et al aren't about talking with a large group of largely-anonymous people - they're about connecting with people you know, or who share interests (lots of music networking on MySpace, lots of different user-created groups on Facebook, for instance).
So while Gleemax might have forums, I don't expect them to be as influential in the D&D world as these boards or ENWorld, or in the wider RPG community as RPGnet (or The Forge), and similarly for other games which already have niche sites for the discussion of games. I expect the primary use for Gleemax to be a site where people can contact others who share similar interests and/or are local.
This is something which messageboards are actually not very good at - looking for gamers forums are ok, but pretty hard to use as every new request bumps others down the list and eventually off the front page, oftentimes not enough detail is provided, search functions are not designed for the task and so on.
This is something which is truely publisher-independent, so while Wizards might be providing the functionality there is no reason why this should make it less hospitable for those who write/sell/play other games.
So while Gleemax might have forums, I don't expect them to be as influential in the D&D world as these boards or ENWorld, or in the wider RPG community as RPGnet (or The Forge), and similarly for other games which already have niche sites for the discussion of games. I expect the primary use for Gleemax to be a site where people can contact others who share similar interests and/or are local.
I anticipate these forums being placed under the Gleemax banner, for just that reason. I also expect you won't really notice the difference (unless, of course, they force everybody to use the god-awful color scheme that forum is using).
I anticipate these forums being placed under the Gleemax banner, for just that reason. I also expect you won't really notice the difference (unless, of course, they force everybody to use the god-awful color scheme that forum is using).
Dooooooooom!!!!
1. I would like to see online character sheets like THIS. It would be nice if the public characters were searchable by level, race, class, etc. for a ready made database of NPC's for DMs.
2. A meeting place would be great and I love the idea. The site we have here now is OK, but seems to be pretty limited in scope and not that many people us it.
3. Support for games in the form of user forums like The Tangled Web
4. More love for the online gaming community. Folks who are in rural areas or overseas make great use of this resource and Wotc needs to step up and promote this type of play. (I play online & PnP both and PREFER PnP, but that is not always an option).
5. Links to online resources like the srd, online shareware, virtual table top programs, VOiP software, mappers, etc. These should be in one consolidated area so we don't have to search forums for links.
6. Weekly or monthly online chat sessions with Wotc staff and game designers to discusse their work. This would also be a great way to let the community have more involvement in shaping future products.
I would hope that quite a bit of want I would like to see is already on the planning table as I feel they are essential elements to what a gaming community would need. I realize that my wants might be quite a bit different than other folks and that brings us to the old addage that "you can't please all the people all the time". I sure hope that Wotc tries though!
The thing is, I don't really get the feeling that Gleemax is primarily about talking, at least not in the way that a messageboard is.
So while Gleemax might have forums, I don't expect them to be as influential in the D&D world as these boards or ENWorld, or in the wider RPG community as RPGnet (or The Forge), and similarly for other games which already have niche sites for the discussion of games. I expect the primary use for Gleemax to be a site where people can contact others who share similar interests and/or are local.
As much as I agree with you, you just implied that now I'll need to go to gleemax for one thing, and to the game forums for another. I post here, for my D&D needs, because this is where the action is. I've tried posting on otehr forums for things, and the one reply in the last three months, turn-a-round is tiring.
So, if they plan to do this right, it really needs to be a one stop shop.
1. Don't launch something until you have something to launch. This saves you from having people say WTF is this supposed to be? There isn't anything here but a bunch of vague promises. Very poor marketing. So, number one, take it down. say it was a mistake and we're going to re-tool it (including a new name).
The reverse of this is "Why didn't you give us any warning this was coming?" What we launched was a promotional site which serves as a vehicle to let people know that Gleemax is coming and to try to help explain what that means.
This is important for a few reasons:
For any social networking or community site you need some critical mass. So just launching it when it was finished wouldn't have really worked.
Many of our customers have asked that we talk about our plans before we made decisions, so that they have some warning and are not caught by surprise.
In order to provide something that our community finds valuable, we need to try and get as much feedback as possible.
2. Give it a name that means something to your customers. Gleemax is an inside joke, assoicated with one brand over others, and seems to be pretty well disliked by many (nearly everyone who has posted a comment about it).
I don't want to sound dismissive, but the name is really a non-issue. Wii, Google, Ebay, Kodak...there are countless examples of names that had no meaning or a different meaning, yet quickly came to be known for what they represent. Gleemax is the same way. It'll end up evoking the image of whatever it is Gleemax becomes.
3. Know who your market is that you're trying to reach, and market it to them. If they are trying to reach a younger demographic, fine. Say so, and don't try to market to others who ar eunlikely to respond to it positively. Yes, we all know there is research that says the D&D demographic is older, and may not be the most traditionally desired market. If you want to find ways to expand the market, great. But don't annoy your main present market trying to expand it in ways that make them feel as if they're going to be left out or ignored.
We had to pick one theme and run with it. Someone brought up TV commercials and I think they made a good point. Think of the promotional site as a soda commercial that is using a song. Maybe it's a hip-hop song and you hate hip-hop. Maybe it's a Country sound and Country music annoys you. Maybe it's an Alternative song and...well, we might have issues if you dislike alternative music... But seriously, it's a promotional campaign designed to get some attention and not intended to be representative of what Gleemax itself and each brand area will look like.
4. Re-think the whole "One-site-for-all-games" concept. There has been so much alluded to what Gleemax will become (eventually the WOTC forums will be there, exclusive content, generators, etc) that is boggles th emind. If you want a portal to all these, it needs to be simple, easy to navigate & customizable, and that draws in your market, not annoy them. This means it needs to have a broad-based appeal, and believe me, Gleemax ain't got that. That means it needs to have a name that is recogniziable, connects to what the site is about, and makes folks want ot be there. yes, this does mean the portal site will probably not be as exciting and over-the-top as the team that developed Gleemax seems to desire. Once you've got folks to your portal, the sites off of that can be designed to appeal to whatever market those games, etc. appeal to or are trying to attract.
I agree with you that it needs to be simple, easy to navigate, and customizable. That's what Gleemax will be. And the current promotional site is not Gleemax. Other than that, I agree with your points.
5. For the D&D portion, have some useful things, not just vague promises. You killed two well liked products to give us this, so make it worth it. Don't say "Well, Gleemax may not be the place where the DI that replaces Dungeon & Dragon go". You've all ready said different in how you marketed this mess ("exclusive content", etc). Start out with the things that made Dragon & Dungeon popular...adventures, articles, advice, etc. Then add new things (generators, columns, whatever) that can be tested to see wha tthe response is. If it's good, keep 'em. Bad, ditch 'em or at least tweak 'em.
Gleemax and our D&D digital offerings are not one in the same, although our D&D stuff will try to leverage alot of the Gleemax features for those who want them.
1. I would like to see online character sheets like THIS. It would be nice if the public characters were searchable by level, race, class, etc. for a ready made database of NPC's for DMs.
I can't provide any details yet, but this has been brought up and discussed intensively.
2. A meeting place would be great and I love the idea. The site we have here now is OK, but seems to be pretty limited in scope and not that many people us it.
I agree, but I'd like to hear more about how you think a meeting place could provide the value and usefulness you want.
3. Support for games in the form of user forums like The Tangled Web
I've been forwarding the forum design folks a lot of requests for better forms of support for various types of forum games.
4. More love for the online gaming community. Folks who are in rural areas or overseas make great use of this resource and Wotc needs to step up and promote this type of play. (I play online & PnP both and PREFER PnP, but that is not always an option).
I agree. We currently have the Goblin Game in development and are also working on our board gaming portal, in addition to some other stuff we're not ready to announce yet.
5. Links to online resources like the srd, online shareware, virtual table top programs, VOiP software, mappers, etc. These should be in one consolidated area so we don't have to search forums for links.
I think this will be an important aspect of Gleemax. Given the way user-generated content will work, if someone on the Gleemax side isn't doing a good enough job of aggregating useful links and information, our users certainly will. Community is often like a river in that it's going to mostly flow where it needs to flow, and people will gravitate to the content they find useful, regardless of who puts it up.
6. Weekly or monthly online chat sessions with Wotc staff and game designers to discusse their work. This would also be a great way to let the community have more involvement in shaping future products.
Agreed. This is one of the huge areas where I think Gleemax can be great, not just for WotC folks, but for anyone involved in game development who has something to talk about with the community. Our plan is to make sure that our staff is blogging and posting articles and being involved in chats and discussions. If you take a look at the Gleemax general gamer discussion forum, you'll see a lot of WotC folks chiming in on random talk about games. It's a lot of fun.
I would hope that quite a bit of want I would like to see is already on the planning table as I feel they are essential elements to what a gaming community would need. I realize that my wants might be quite a bit different than other folks and that brings us to the old addage that "you can't please all the people all the time". I sure hope that Wotc tries though!
We definitely have a lot planned, but we're going to keep soliciting feedback on what people want and how they would like it to work. Thanks again for making this post. It really helps a lot.
If you take a look at the Gleemax general gamer discussion forum, you'll see a lot of WotC folks chiming in on random talk about games. It's a lot of fun.
I'd love to. Change the forum settings so it uses my choices rather than the default, and I'm there.
Bring back Dungeon and Dragon. Otherwise, get ready to ride the short bus with Wotc.
They'll have made that decision the way all advertising-types make decisions: knowing that not everyone will like it and some will hate it but that a strong visual 'brand' is important. They're not going to change it, at least while the promotional campaign is going on. Later, it's far more likely that it'll change to allow users to choose their preferred skin.
I'm sure they understand that some people aren't going to participate at the moment, but believe (rightly or wrongly - and no-one is really in a position to judge whether they're right or wrong) that the strength of the campaign is enough of a 'good' to risk alienating those who dislike it: that the campaign will reach more people this way than it turns off. It's tough being in a group which dislikes something that someone else has decided is necessary, but there is a reason (most likely a logical one) why that decision was made.
I don't want to sound dismissive, but the name is really a non-issue. Wii, Google, Ebay, Kodak...there are countless examples of names that had no meaning or a different meaning, yet quickly came to be known for what they represent. Gleemax is the same way. It'll end up evoking the image of whatever it is Gleemax becomes.
See, this is where you're wrong. "Google" did not have any previous meaning before it became a website, so people associated what the website was with the name. Gleemax, on the other hand, already has a meaning that has been established for quite a few years now. It is always going to carry that meaning behind it, no matter what else it may come to mean.
I get the feeling someone (not GamerZero) has decided that the green is an important part of the current Gleemax 'advertising campaign' in the sense that Mike set out above.
>>snipped for space<<
I agree it's not Mike's decision to keep things green. I'm hoping Mike can get a reason out of whomever made that decision. I understand they have a marketing campaign that a lot of people worked really hard on, and that marketing campaign revolves around a brain in a jar and the color icky green. What I don't understand is why the forums (which are part of these forums) can't be changed to allow the user's preferences anyway. The Gleemax site itself is still the brain in a jar and icky green; but the forums - something a lot of people use and are used to - would, in my perfect world, be more inviting to more people; that would increase traffic, create buzz, and all that stuff you want from a marketing campaign.
That's what I'm interested in discussing, because it just doesn't make sense to me that they'd want to alienate a bunch of people when it's a real simple setting change on the forum.
See, this is where you're wrong. "Google" did not have any previous meaning before it became a website, so people associated what the website was with the name. Gleemax, on the other hand, already has a meaning that has been established for quite a few years now. It is always going to carry that meaning behind it, no matter what else it may come to mean.
Not that this should change any substantial part of this debate, but Google is just the word Googol mispelled. Googol is a large number (1 with 100 zeros after it).
Link
Not that this should change any substantial part of this debate, but Google is just the word Googol mispelled. Googol is a large number (1 with 100 zeros after it).
Link
Interesting...still, I doubt many people had heard the word "googol". Even then, those who knew the word already probably thought it made sense - Google was supposed to be a search engine that brought up a lot of results, thus, it's name came from the word for a number with a lot of zeros.
Hmmm... looks like my request is being ignored. I can't even get a "I can't talk about that" type comment.
Which request are you referring to, a zillion zip across my screen over the course of a day. If it wasn't answered was it a leading question? (i.e. "Do you still kick your dog, Mike or have you stopped?")
Or, something along those lines.
Which request are you referring to, a zillion zip across my screen over the course of a day. If it wasn't answered was it a leading question?
I repeated the question in post 567...
Only the same question he's been asking for days now. i.e. Why in the &*^% does the gleemax.com setting have to override our personnal forum setting?
Or, something along those lines.
I guess that's sort of the question... only asked more politely. ;)
Only the same question he's been asking for days now. i.e. Why in the &*^% does the gleemax.com setting have to override our personnal forum setting?
The forums are designed to fit in with the theme and style of the Gleemax site, and that's why it's set to look the way they do.
The forums are designed to fit in with the theme and style of the Gleemax site, and that's why it's set to look the way they do.
I understand the theme thing, but most of the boards (Starwars, Duel Masters, whatever) use a themed header and maybe a sidebar, while allowing you to set the look of the threads area yourself.
I've said it before, if I didn't have to look at green text, I might be willing to participate in your discussins there. I would think that would be a conideration since you only have handful of D&D posters there at the moment.
***
I understand the theme thing, but most of the boards (Starwars, Duel Masters, whatever) use a themed header and maybe a sidebar, while allowing you to set the look of the threads area yourself.
Yep. That's exactly what I can't understand. The D&D forums still have a "D&D feel" even though I use Parchment and Leather as my skin and you might use something else. The same is true if I go to the Community boards (such as the Castle of Fun, where I'm a GM), or the d20 forums. So that's what I'm confused about.
I've said it before, if I didn't have to look at green text, I might be willing to participate in your discussins there. I would think that would be a conideration since you only have handful of D&D posters there at the moment.
I can say with complete certainty that I'd post there. I have plenty of things I'd love to discuss about RPG gaming in general.
So, in other words, WotC doesn't want me to post there, even though doing so is a simple setting change on the forum software. Got it.
I don't have a dog. So please stop asking me if I still kick it. =)
And if you don't have a dog, whose dog have you been kicking? :P :P :P
Please note that I've edited the snarkiness out of my post you quoted, because I thought it was an unfair comment... ;)
And if you don't have a dog, whose dog have you been kicking? :P :P :P
Mine! :raincloud
P.S. I also think you should stop kicking your dog, if you haven't already.
Nevermind.
Edit: and don't EVEN go getting all offended Mike. This isn't directed at you but the moroons who make this idiotic kind of BS decision.
That's fine. I am just glad you didn't ask me how my dog died!
However...
Surely you can see why I find that fact that you can set the entire forum to look like gleemax but not the other way around? I mean we get it. It's green, annoyingly green. Enough already.
And the current promotional site is not Gleemax.
Alright then, that settles this entire thread as far as I'm concerned.
Please release an announcement, on the WotC site, when Gleemax is released.
Dennis Stout
These boards are staying?
I thought that the Gleemax was the highest pinnacle of joy (glee) that is experienced while gaming. I have heard that some especially talented DMs have been able to cause their players to have multiple Gleemaxes in one gaming session.
:heehee
Maybe more of this could make them change their minds on the name. Even if it doesn't it would surely be entertaining.
Thank you in advance.
1) Will this place offer a way to play fairly free-form D&D online? That is, basically like being at home, but playing through an internet connection? If so, why would we use it over multiple programs that exist currently? (simpler to use would be a major plus for me).
To really answer this, I'd need to provide details which aren't available quite yet.
2) Will it be a Gamers Personals? i.e., look up local gamers in order to arrange games (I'm HOPING this is what's meant by "social networking")
Yes. One of the major focuses will be to allow gamers to find each other.
I don't want to sound dismissive, but the name is really a non-issue. Wii, Google, Ebay, Kodak...there are countless examples of names that had no meaning or a different meaning, yet quickly came to be known for what they represent. Gleemax is the same way. It'll end up evoking the image of whatever it is Gleemax becomes.
The problem isn't "It doesn't mean anything." The problem is, as has been clarified about a googolplex times, "It means something to MTG players." So for D&D players it will evoke the image of "MTG in-joke."
How about if they put a joke Major Artifact called Gleemax in a D&D supplement? Then we could be on the inside of the joke too. Of course, the Star Wars people might still feel left out...
If the posting of this image is a copyright infringement of some sort, my humblest of apologies, but I do request that it be permitted so as to help some others who might be as confused as I was about this Gleemax inside MTG joke controversy.
At our D&D games, we let a couple of magic players participate too. But they have to sit on the floor, and if they start playing/talking about magic we consider their PCs to be helpless and in-between any bad guys and the rest of the party. They are also in charge of retrieving sodas when any of the rest of us get thirsty. Now that I know about this WotC-Gleemax favoritism thing, I think we'll have to consider being extra mean to them.
That's always the best policy anyways :P
I think what Mike/Gamer_Zero is getting at with the 'Non-issue' comment is this:
It means a Magic In-joke now but over time the names meaning will evolve over time to mean whatever the site eventually becomes known for, so give it a little time.
Eventually the name might have a good meaning in the D&D community or might mean the thing to steer clear of, we need to wait an see. Plus if it screws up that badly we can always use it in that sense.
"Man they really Gleemaxed that didn't they" :P
"Man they really Gleemaxed that didn't they" :P
Love it!
"Man they really Gleemaxed that didn't they" :P
Man, on my drive home from work today this woman came flying through an intersection without paying attention and almost Gleemaxed me right then and there.
At our D&D games, we let a couple of magic players participate too. But they have to sit on the floor, and if they start playing/talking about magic we consider their PCs to be helpless and in-between any bad guys and the rest of the party. They are also in charge of retrieving sodas when any of the rest of us get thirsty. Now that I know about this WotC-Gleemax favoritism thing, I think we'll have to consider being extra mean to them.
I sincerely hope this is humor. Being cruel to anyone because of which game they prefer is not right.
We are all gamers, and we must accept that we are a community. Now of course I still have issue with WotC including one section and not the other, but that has nothing to do with those that play MtG and everything to do with WotC.
So this is what all of the fuss is about? A joke card? That's why I shouldn't feel welcome on the Gleemax website?
How about if they put a joke Major Artifact called Gleemax in a D&D supplement? Then we could be on the inside of the joke too. Of course, the Star Wars people might still feel left out...
Don't forget the D20 Modern players...oh wait we're always forgotten about
Man, on my drive home from work today this woman came flying through an intersection without paying attention and almost Gleemaxed me right then and there.
Don't you usually have to buy dinner for a woman before she'll Gleemax you?
Don't forget the D20 Modern players...oh wait we're always forgotten about
Wait...did someone say something?
No, I guess not.
;)
Wait...did someone say something?
No, I guess not.
;)
lol..not funny at all :P
I'm not eligible for the UGT...
Contractors of Wizards and Employees of Wizards, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, franchisees, agents, retailers, advertising and promotion agencies, and fulfillment companies, and their immediate families (parents, children, siblings, spouse) and members of their same households (related or not) are not eligible to participate in the Search.
All in all I'm excited to see how this site turns out. Social networking where gamers and DM's can share their thoughts and content? Sounds wonderful
Good God that test was hard.
Yeah, I haven't seen my score yet, but I'm feeling pretty embarassed by how poorly I think I did. It was tough!
All in all I'm excited to see how this site turns out. Social networking where gamers and DM's can share their thoughts and content? Sounds wonderful
I can give you site where gamers and DMs can share thoughts and content:
link
I can give you site where gamers and DMs can share thoughts and content:
link
no freaking waySigh.
I thought Gleemax was supposed to be an online initiative? I hate to break it to you, but nowadays, online includes this thing called 'the Internet' that people can access from all over the world...
;)I can give you site where gamers and DMs can share thoughts and content:
link
Cute :P
Not so much the same thing, though.
I'm not worthy!!!!
Edit: Okay, got to it, took it...
To really answer this, I'd need to provide details which aren't available quite yet.
Yes. One of the major focuses will be to allow gamers to find each other.
Thanks so much for taking the time to answer that. I expected you either wouldn't be allowed to, or wouldn't have the resources to answer at least one of them...but #2 makes me very hopeful indeed.
Now, just gotta wait until they decide on an inoffensive color scheme, and I'll be all set!
Thanks again.
Does that imply that Gleemax is merely a rules-correcting site? I hope not.
I can give you site where gamers and DMs can share thoughts and content:
link
I think I may have been there before. There is quite a lot of sharing of thoughts and content, if I remember correctly. ;)
And I see that for this international community, no-one outside the US and Canada will have a seat or a say on the board.
Sigh.
I thought Gleemax was supposed to be an online initiative? I hate to break it to you, but nowadays, online includes this thing called 'the Internet' that people can access from all over the world...
The problem I have (they actually let Canadians participate?! Wow!), other than the one you pointed out is, who's to say the "Ultimate Gamer" has any idea what should or shouldn't be on Gleemax. The way I see the "Ultimate Gamer" is those stereotypical nerd types. Basements, glasses with tape, pocket protectors, wizard's robes/cosplay, and zero social skills. That's the perfect candidate for a "social environment".
Well, as we all would expect, 20% of an ultimate gamer's knowledge should be about Magic: the Gathering. I was half surprised the last question wasn't something along the lines of "Do you understand the Gleemax inside joke?"
Wait...so Wizards knows (now, at least) that there's little to no crossover between the games, they know that a lot of people don't play both games, and yet...these "Ultimate Gamers" are supposed to know about both?
Wait...so Wizards knows (now, at least) that there's little to no crossover between the games, they know that a lot of people don't play both games, and yet...these "Ultimate Gamers" are supposed to know about both?
I'd hope the 'Ultimate Gamer' would know about a lot more then just D&D and Magic. There are a few gamers that know both though, I'd say 3 maybe 4 :P
Wait...so Wizards knows (now, at least) that there's little to no crossover between the games, they know that a lot of people don't play both games, and yet...these "Ultimate Gamers" are supposed to know about both?
Oh don't worry you don't have to know much about D&D at all. I mean as long as you know some of the basic magic items you will nail all *2* of the D&D questions.
I'd hope the 'Ultimate Gamer' would know about a lot more then just D&D and Magic. There are a few gamers that know both though, I'd say 3 maybe 4 :P
I happen to know both. What I don't know is anything about pokemon, or some of the video game questions.
Anyways I am only complaining because for a D&D/MtG/Other Games site to advertise a test for the "ultimate gamer" and then have less than 10% of your questions be related to D&D just seems dumb.
Oh don't worry you don't have to know much about D&D at all. I mean as long as you know some of the basic magic items you will nail all *2* of the D&D questions.
I happen to know both. What I don't know is anything about pokemon, or some of the video game questions.
Anyways I am only complaining because for a D&D/MtG/Other Games site to advertise a test for the "ultimate gamer" and then have less than 10% of your questions be related to D&D just seems dumb.
Whoa, whoa, whoa here - they want you to know about a game made by a completely different company? What the...? Hang on a second, I'm going to go take the quiz myself...this just sounds whacked.
EDIT: On second thought, cancel that. I'm not giving out my name, address, and telephone number just to take an online quiz. Sorry Wizards, but that's not going to fly with me.
Whoa, whoa, whoa here - they want you to know about a game made by a completely different company? What the...? Hang on a second, I'm going to go take the quiz myself...this just sounds whacked.
EDIT: On second thought, cancel that. I'm not giving out my name, address, and telephone number just to take an online quiz. Sorry Wizards, but that's not going to fly with me.
Thats ok cause there aren't really any pokemon questions, I just used pokemon to indicate "games that I have never and will never play" such as hecatomb or neopets or any of that.
And I see that for this international community, no-one outside the US and Canada will have a seat or a say on the board.
Simon Carless is originally from England but now lives in the States, making it easier for him to get to WotC for meetings. I don't know if thats international enough for you, but WotC also said that the current list is only the list "so far". I'm sure you could help them get more international members by suggesting some people who are well respected by the gaming communities abroad.
I thought Gleemax was supposed to be an online initiative? I hate to break it to you, but nowadays, online includes this thing called 'the Internet' that people can access from all over the world...
Unfortunately, laws in other countries often preclude US based companies from including them in contests. Blizzard does the same thing for all their contests that have real prizes.
EDIT: On second thought, cancel that. I'm not giving out my name, address, and telephone number just to take an online quiz. Sorry Wizards, but that's not going to fly with me.
It's not just an online quiz, its a contest with real cash prizes. I can't remember ever entering such a contest without providing my real contact information.
I also checked out that test, and I'm rather disappointed. I was hoping wizards would be prioritizing community and social skills, but the test is apparently entirely about knowing pointless gaming trivia.
I'm not sure what they've decided as the number of people that will advance to the next step in the UGT, but we needed the first challenge to be something that helped us get things down to a manageble size.
My biggest fear was that we'd have thousands of people take the exam, only to end up with 800 people tied for 1st place(with a perfect score). Since only the first challenge is automated, having to deal with 800 submissions on the second step would have just overwhelmed us.
I wouldn't read too much into what we're looking for based on the first challange. It really exists to give us a chance to narrow the field.
Well, as we all would expect, 20% of an ultimate gamer's knowledge should be about Magic: the Gathering. I was half surprised the last question wasn't something along the lines of "Do you understand the Gleemax inside joke?"
Actually, 10% of the questions were Magic: the Gathering related.
EDIT: On second thought, cancel that. I'm not giving out my name, address, and telephone number just to take an online quiz. Sorry Wizards, but that's not going to fly with me.
I'm going to see if we can figure out a way to let people take the test after this round ends on Monday. It won't be that easy since the exam will probably have to be hosted someplace different, but we'll see. (and ideally, I'll try to get it so no information is requested to take the exam for fun)
It's not just an online quiz, its a contest with real cash prizes. I can't remember ever entering such a contest without providing my real contact information.
I checked the rules, and yes, it is an actual contest. However, I won't submit any personal information over the internet due to security reasons, for any purposes. Although it might sound paranoid to some people, it is actually quite easy for someone to trace your online history and pick up any information that you send through websites, emails, and the like - and I have had it happen before on two different occasions. To me, it simply isn't worth the hassle it takes to correct the problem should it happen. In my case, it took us over two months to work out all the problems that arose - we had to cancel bank accounts, fill out literally dozens of forms to have our balances restored, and all other sorts of nonsense that really should take less than a week with today's technology; to top it all off, they were never able to track down the individual responsible.
EDIT:
I'm going to see if we can figure out a way to let people take the test after this round ends on Monday. It won't be that easy since the exam will probably have to be hosted someplace different, but we'll see. (and ideally, I'll try to get it so no information is requested to take the exam for fun)
I would definitely be interested in doing something like that, just to see how my knowledge of games compares to others. It's not so much things like my name, birthday, or even my email address that I'm concerned about giving out - it's my street address and telephone number. Like I said, I'm not overly paranoid about giving out information, but I have had instances in the past where, after giving out our address or number, we were flooded with advertising junk mail and constant telemarketing calls - we just got Craftmatic beds to stop calling us, who were sometimes calling two, three, or four times in a single day.
...and I have had it happen before on two different occasions.
I can see how that would definitely make you paranoid about submitting your information over the Internet; it's not an unwarranted fear. The form really should be protected with SSL to help prevent things like that. Let's hope someone at WotC remembers that when they want to start taking online payments.
I can see how that would definitely make you paranoid about submitting your information over the Internet; it's not an unwarranted fear. The form really should be protected with SSL to help prevent things like that. Let's hope someone at WotC remembers that when they want to start taking online payments.
True. If Wizards uses SSL or TLS for their pages, I wouldn't have any problem submitting information, but I'll have to wait until we have an official statement. Actually...now that I think about it, I'm using Firefox 2.0.0.4 (I was, regretfully, using Internet Explorer back in those days when our information was stolen) and it has both SSL 3.0 and TLS 1.0 - that should work for any site, correct (I don't know much about cryptographers, but I assume they would protect both incoming and outgoing data and should be compatible with any format)? If that's the case, then I will certainly give the test a try.
I applied, got the email, opened the test, but had to run off to do something so I closed the window. Family friends we're over and just leaving so I had to say goodbye.
"The time limit for this exam has expired. Unfortunately, it's too late to submit your answers."
I'm apparently not an Ultimate Gamer because I have friends. :P
It won't be that easy since the exam will probably have to be hosted someplace different, but we'll see. (and ideally, I'll try to get it so no information is requested to take the exam for fun)
Uh. Compared to what Gleemax is supposed to do, this scares me. If finding a way to make an exam be hosted separately is challenging, how could the DI even succeed? I mean, comparing the difficulty of the two ... the exam thing should be extremely simple and easy to do. If they're having trouble with that, Gleemax is even more doomed than it was before!
Uh. Compared to what Gleemax is supposed to do, this scares me. If finding a way to make an exam be hosted separately is challenging, how could the DI even succeed? I mean, comparing the difficulty of the two ... the exam thing should be extremely simple and easy to do. If they're having trouble with that, Gleemax is even more doomed than it was before!
Hehe. OMG, time to panic! =)
And now back to your regularly scheduled apocalypse...
Hehe. OMG, time to panic! =)
No. But it's a sure sign that if you can't manage a simple task, how can you manage a significantly more difficult one?
Or are you trying to "joke" ...? I don't think it's really a joking matter. If WoTC can't competently handle a basic task as that, how can we expect a quality experience with Gleemax?
Or are you trying to "joke" ...?
Yes, just having some fun with ya.
Yes, just having some fun with ya.
Sorry Mike but that is a violation of CoC... ;)
Actually, 10% of the questions were Magic: the Gathering related.
hmmm and how many questions were in total? With only 2 being D&D related.........
hmmm and how many questions were in total? With only 2 being D&D related.........
I'm sure that 10% of the questions were D&D related as well, but I'll double check when I get into the office tomorrow.
I'm sure that 10% of the questions were D&D related as well, but I'll double check when I get into the office tomorrow.
Yeah really in depth D&D questions too...
(Question removed. Please do not post any questions, whether they are real questions from the test or mock questions) -WizO_Chaos
No. But it's a sure sign that if you can't manage a simple task, how can you manage a significantly more difficult one?
Or are you trying to "joke" ...? I don't think it's really a joking matter. If WoTC can't competently handle a basic task as that, how can we expect a quality experience with Gleemax?
He probably thought you were joking (I did). I mean who could seriously think that they don't have the technology/knowhow to put the test back? It was obvious to all that mike was going to see if HE (the community liason) could get them to do it. If you weren't joking, you should probably just play it like you were so you don't sound like a..... (edited for politeness).
I'm sure that 10% of the questions were D&D related as well, but I'll double check when I get into the office tomorrow.
So,if two questions = 10% and then that would mean that there were only 2 magic questions as well....i hope some one checks my math here....
So,if two questions = 10% and then that would mean that there were only 2 magic questions as well....i hope some one checks my math here....
There is a pool of questions. Within that pool of questions, 10% are Magic related (and I am guessing 10% is D&D related). Out of that pool of questions (I am not sure how many let's say it's 100) 30 are picked for the test.
There is a pool of questions. Within that pool of questions, 10% are Magic related (and I am guessing 10% is D&D related). Out of that pool of questions (I am not sure how many let's say it's 100) 30 are picked for the test.
oh,okay but where the questions limited to WotC games and products or were they questions that also dealt with different game systems like form other gaming companies in compation with WotC since Gleemax is going to be the home for the ultimate gamer....
oh,okay but where the questions limited to WotC games and products or were they questions that also dealt with different game systems like form other gaming companies in compation with WotC since Gleemax is going to be the home for the ultimate gamer....
When I took the test, I saw questions that were not WotC specific.
When I took the test, I saw questions that were not WotC specific.
I had several non WoTC game questions (one was about poker) and 7 D&D related questions.
If the questions were related to TV, it would be something along the lines of asking what TV show popularized the idea of showing multiple scenes at once in order to show what is happening across multiple storylines .. the answer of course being 24. Or asking which of a list of actors has starred in the most TV shows. (Hope that's vague enough)
The point is that the questions are not strictly related to knowing game systems, lore, and history. There may even be more questions that do not cover subjects like this then there are that do. I really don't think there's any way you could prepare for this test.
The point is that the questions are not strictly related to knowing game systems, lore, and history. There may even be more questions that do not cover subjects like this then there are that do. I really don't think there's any way you could prepare for this test.
So rumor has it that one of the R&D guys who helped proof all the questions for the test, took the test and only got 80% right, even though he had already seen all the questions and answers. =)
So rumor has it that one of the R&D guys who helped proof all the questions for the test, took the test and only got 80% right, even though he had already seen all the questions and answers. =)
Yeah. That test was brutal. My gamer-fu is weak.
Yeah. That test was brutal. My gamer-fu is weak.
It might be but I wouldn't let this test tell you that. This test has little to nothing to do with actual gaming knowledge. It's more like useless trivia.
I felt like pointing these cheat tactics out earlier, but I figured that I should wait till it was over. If anyone checks my score, they'll know (or at least hope) that I wasn't cheating
I personally would prefer for them to narrow the participants down randomly. This test favors those who would try to cheat. You could make a bunch of fake e-mail accounts and take the test a bunch of times to get a pool of the questions. Then you could have a bunch of your friends be ready to help you look up answers as you take the test for any that you haven't already researched ahead of time. Maybe they had ways to detect such tactics... doubtful.
I felt like pointing these cheat tactics out earlier, but I figured that I should wait till it was over. If anyone checks my score, they'll know (or at least hope) that I wasn't cheating
You could also google the crap out of the questions to get most of the answers if you wanted to. I got pretty darned good at using google search quickly and efficiently when this board didn't have a search option. Mind you, I am not actually that interested in winning (it was mainly curiosity that lured me in), but I'm sure many of the people out to "win teh prize" did exactly that.
You could also google the crap out of the questions to get most of the answers if you wanted to. I got pretty darned good at using google search quickly and efficiently when this board didn't have a search option. Mind you, I am not actually that interested in winning (it was mainly curiosity that lured me in), but I'm sure many of the people out to "win teh prize" did exactly that.
Did you try googling the test? 30 questions in 15 minutes doesn't leave a lot of time for googling. Especially when most of the questions would require some real digging if you didn't know.
Here’s hoping that someone with some sense makes it in.
I can’t believe that Zherog can’t take part. I mean what’s the difference between him and, say Monte Cook? (Well, besides the name recognition and Monte having his own successful game publishing company. ;))
I can’t believe that Zherog can’t take part.
He's not allowed to take tests at work and prefers not to take them at home? ;)
He's not allowed to take tests at work and prefers not to take them at home? ;)
Was refering to this post:
Le sigh
I'm not eligible for the UGT...Contractors of Wizards and Employees of Wizards, its parent, affiliates, subsidiaries, franchisees, agents, retailers, advertising and promotion agencies, and fulfillment companies, and their immediate families (parents, children, siblings, spouse) and members of their same households (related or not) are not eligible to participate in the Search.
Which makes it all the more interesting knowing that GZ took the test. But, I'm sure it was all for fun, right GZ? :DEdit: just a joke, I'm sure you played around with as did some other employees.
He's not allowed to take tests at work and prefers not to take them at home? ;)
Was refering to this post:
Yep, I'm (technically) a contractor of WotC. So I'm not eligible for the contest. I took the test anyway - and even if I were eligible, I wouldn't be winning. Some of those questions were ridiculous...
By the way, Mike: How's your dog. I hear he has some sore ribs...
I had several non WoTC game questions (one was about poker) and 7 D&D related questions.
You're the one who got all my D&D questions!
:D I didn't have ANY D&D questions!
Luckily I did get Shadowrun and Rail Baron questions, two of my faves.
I had several non WoTC game questions (one was about poker) and 7 D&D related questions.
Ahhh yes because poker has anything to do with gaming...
I mean don't get me wrong I am an avid poker player, but what exactly does that have to do with gaming?
Gaming involves RPGs, CCGs, LARPs, Board Games and Video Games. If I am forgetting any please let me know but I know for darn sure that gambling games such as poker or craps or roulette are NOT gaming!
Ahhh yes because poker has anything to do with gaming...
I mean don't get me wrong I am an avid poker player, but what exactly does that have to do with gaming?
Gaming involves RPGs, CCGs, LARPs, Board Games and Video Games. If I am forgetting any please let me know but I know for darn sure that gambling games such as poker or craps or roulette are NOT gaming!
I think it counts. So does the related wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming
Edit: And most states have a Gaming Control Board which is specifically set to regulate gambling within the state.
I think it counts. So does the related wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming
How does playing poker fall into the same catergory as playing battleship or D&D or MtG?
How is playing craps anything like playing monopoly?
Poker, Craps, Roulette, Slots, The Lottery and many other forms of gambling are not gaming and I don't care what some fakeapedia has to say I am intelligent enough to know the difference between gaming and gambling.
And just because they call it the Gaming Commision does not make them the same kind of gaming.
How does playing poker fall into the same catergory as playing battleship or D&D or MtG?
How is playing craps anything like playing monopoly?
Poker, Craps, Roulette, Slots, The Lottery and many other forms of gambling are not gaming and I don't care what some fakeapedia has to say I am intelligent enough to know the difference between gaming and gambling.
When playing craps you're playing for real money?
You seem to like to complain about every little thing WotC does. if you detest them so, why are you still here?
I am intelligent enough (thank you for the insult btw) to realize that games are games. Some take more involvement (like RPGs), others take a little skill and alot of luck (M:TG and Poker), and others are just pure luck (Cosmic Encounter and Craps). Just because you tack on a wager doesn't make the game any less of a game.
When I first started playing M:TG people were wagering cards on the outcome of games. Was M:TG not gaming while people were doing that?
You seem to like to complain about every little thing WotC does. if you detest them so, why are you still here?
Whoa! Where the hell did this come from?
I have complained but certainly not anywhere close to "about every little thing WotC does"
In fact I defy you or anyone to find 3 topics that I did complain about that directly ties in to WotC.
You can't. Cause I didn't.
I am intelligent enough (thank you for the insult btw) to realize that games are games. Some take more involvement (like RPGs), others take a little skill and alot of luck (M:TG and Poker), and others are just pure luck (Cosmic Encounter and Craps). Just because you tack on a wager doesn't make the game any less of a game.
When I first started playing M:TG people were wagering cards on the outcome of games. Was M:TG not gaming while people were doing that?
Seriously, Sim. Poker is a game, as are black jack and craps and roulette and so on. I've played poker with no money at stack before. The presence of a wager doesn't make or break something as a game.
So games are games eh?
What about football? Is that gaming?
How about fishing? Is that gaming?
What about basketball?
Ski shooting?
Cross country skiiing?
Golf?
Tennis?
Volleyball?
Hop scotch?
Etch a sketch?
Seriously what criteria must a "game" meet in order to be considered gaming to you then?
So games are games eh?
What about football? Is that gaming?
How about fishing? Is that gaming?
What about basketball?
Ski shooting?
Cross country skiiing?
Golf?
Tennis?
Volleyball?
Hop scotch?
Etch a sketch?
Seriously what criteria must a "game" meet in order to be considered gaming to you then?
Most you mention above I would classify as "sports." Etch a sketch is a "temporary artistic device." :D
A "game" in the sense that the contest is defining seems to be pasttimes enjoyed while sitting about a table with friends, drinking beer (or soda) and eating pretzels; or the electronic derivitives thereof.
You'll probably have to go somewhere other than Gleemax to get your Hop Scotch fix, Sim.
Poker and the like, while certainly 'games' of a sort, are not nearly the same type of gaming as boardgames, stratagy games, RPGs, or even CCGs.
Seriously what criteria must a "game" meet in order to be considered gaming to you then?
I'm gonna do something I don't usually do - I'm going to turn that question around and ask you the same thing.
For me, if I can sit around a table (whether real or virtual) playing it with friends, it "qualifies" under gaming. So, under my definition all the following qualify:
MMORPGs such as World of Warcraft
RPGs such as D&D
CCGs such as Magic: the Gathering
Board Games such as Monopoly, chess, Taboo, Scattergories, etc
Card Games such as Uno, rummy, poker, etc
Console Games such as Nintendo, Playstation, etc
"Party" Games such as Twister, Spin the Bottle, Truth or Dare, etc
I'm going to have to side with Sim on this one.
Poker and the like, while certainly 'games' of a sort, are not nearly the same type of gaming as boardgames, stratagy games, RPGs, or even CCGs.
What about games such as Uno? Sequence? Rummy? Crazy Eights? Old Maid?
What about card games such as Bang! or Lunch Money?
What about games such as Uno? Sequence? Rummy? Crazy Eights? Old Maid?
What about card games such as Bang! or Lunch Money?
Sorry, I should clarify.
If a game is normally associated with gambling it no longer falls into the same catagory of 'gaming'.
i.e. Poker, Blackjack, Roulette, Craps, whatever.
Whoa! Where the hell did this come from?
I have complained but certainly not anywhere close to "about every little thing WotC does"
In fact I defy you or anyone to find 3 topics that I did complain about that directly ties in to WotC.
You can't. Cause I didn't.
Since you asked nicely:
1) WotC's decision to name the new site Gleemax and thus, IYO, exclude people.
2) WotC's business decisions not to release upcoming product information when you want them to, thus disrespecting all of their fans by keeping them (and the shareholders) in the dark.
3) WotC's creating an UGT that has non-game material (according to you) and that amounts to nothing more than a "useless trivia test."
Those are three topics on this thread alone. I don't know how well you are behaving on other threads. :P
Sorry, I should clarify.
If a game is normally associated with gambling it no longer falls into the same catagory of 'gaming'.
i.e. Poker, Blackjack, Roulette, Craps, whatever.
So, as someone who has adamantly attacked WotC for excluding certain types of gamers throughout this thread, you now want to exclude gamers whose game just happens to normally involve a wager?
Most you mention above I would classify as "sports." Etch a sketch is a "temporary artistic device." :D
A "game" in the sense that the contest is defining seems to be pasttimes enjoyed while sitting about a table with friends, drinking beer (or soda) and eating pretzels; or the electronic derivitives thereof.
You'll probably have to go somewhere other than Gleemax to get your Hop Scotch fix, Sim.
Sports are games as defined by the wiki article on games.
I'm gonna do something I don't usually do - I'm going to turn that question around and ask you the same thing.
For me gaming involves some form of fantasy, whether it be actually RPing or just building a deck of the spells you have at your disposal (MtG) it could also include being a character in a video game or pretending to command a fleet of ships (Battle Ship) but in any case it certainly (at least for me) excludes anything that is a sport, or any form of gambling.
For me, if I can sit around a table (whether real or virtual) playing it with friends, it "qualifies" under gaming. So, under my definition all the following qualify:
MMORPGs such as World of Warcraft
RPGs such as D&D
CCGs such as Magic: the Gathering
Board Games such as Monopoly, chess, Taboo, Scattergories, etc
Card Games such as Uno, rummy, poker, etc
Console Games such as Nintendo, Playstation, etc
"Party" Games such as Twister, Spin the Bottle, Truth or Dare, etc
I see where you are coming from but respectfully disagree.
I think that poker and its kind are not the same type of gaming that people mean when they talk about the gaming community.
I mean seriously how many times has Doyle Brunson or Chris Ferguson been called a gamer?
Dice statistics is not gaming. This is really the only question that actually upset me by its inclusion. They asked about a number of statistics for rolling 3 six-sided dice, like whether it's more common for 10 to come up than 12 or some such. This really irked me, but I got over it.
The poker question was really easy. A quick wiki search on poker gave you an illustration as to which poker hands beat which. I didn't have that much of an issue with it.
Since you asked nicely:
1) WotC's decision to name the new site Gleemax and thus, IYO, exclude people.
To be fair I haven't complained about the name so much as just pointed out that if its a MtG thing then obviously the D&Ders are going to feel excluded.
2) WotC's business decisions not to release upcoming product information when you want them to, thus disrespecting all of their fans by keeping them (and the shareholders) in the dark.
This one is an actual complaint by me indeed. I mean seriously if the museum was about to close but they tried to get you to buy a ticket to go in without telling you that it was closing in 15 minutes, you would be quite upset, no?
3) WotC's creating an UGT that has non-game material (according to you) and that amounts to nothing more than a "useless trivia test."
Not really a complaint about WotC as much as it is a complaint about calling something an "Ultimate Gamer Test" and then having little in it about actual gaming.
It would be like if you made an "Ultimate Gambler Test" and then included a bunch of questions about Pog and MtG because technically you can wager on those games too.
Those are three topics on this thread alone. I don't know how well you are behaving on other threads. :P
Moderately well behaved
Sports are games as defined by the wiki article on games.
Um, no it doesn't:
Gaming may refer to participating in:
Board games
Collectible card games
Video games
PC games
Console games
Gambling, wagering
Game of chance
Live action role-playing game
Miniature wargaming
Peace gaming
Role-playing games
Wargaming
For me gaming involves some form of fantasy, whether it be actually RPing or just building a deck of the spells you have at your disposal (MtG) it could also include being a character in a video game or pretending to command a fleet of ships (Battle Ship) but in any case it certainly (at least for me) excludes anything that is a sport, or any form of gambling.
So, you don't include board games like Scattergories or Taboo or Balderdash? What about a card game like Lunch Money, where the object of the game (basically) is to play the cards in your hand in such a way as to insult your friends?
I mean, I understand everybody has their own definition of "gaming" and that based on those definitions there's somethings somebody will say is "not a game." But I guess my point (and Vyv's too) is that for enough people, games such as poker qualify as "gaming" simply because you sit around and play them with your friends.
The poker question was really easy. A quick wiki search on poker gave you an illustration as to which poker hands beat which. I didn't have that much of an issue with it.
It's not whether the question was hard or not, it's whether poker questions belong in an Ultimate Gamer Test.
I know just about anything you could want to know about poker, I just don't see what that has to do with gaming...
To be fair...[snip]
Not really a complaint about WotC...[snip]
I see how you got your screen name. :P
So, you don't include board games like Scattergories or Taboo or Balderdash? What about a card game like Lunch Money, where the object of the game (basically) is to play the cards in your hand in such a way as to insult your friends?
I mean, I understand everybody has their own definition of "gaming" and that based on those definitions there's somethings somebody will say is "not a game." But I guess my point (and Vyv's too) is that for enough people, games such as poker qualify as "gaming" simply because you sit around and play them with your friends.
In all seriousness are you telling me that all of the professional poker players around the world are part of the gaming community?
If so then how come I never see them at Gen Con?
So, as someone who has adamantly attacked WotC for excluding certain types of gamers throughout this thread, you now want to exclude gamers whose game just happens to normally involve a wager?
Pretty much, yep. :rolleye2:
Really it's not even that I want to exclude them. (although if you want to paint me that way, go right ahead) Simply put, as much as I am put off by the brain-in-a-jar. How much more ridiculous do you think an avid poker player would find it? Think they'll be flocking to the lime green web site? Unlikely.
I see how you got your screen name. :P
Actually I was given this screen name along time ago by another high profile poster.
He was making a funny analysis of a DMPC debate and clearly the character in it named sim_antix was based off of me, so I just ran with it.
In all seriousness are you telling me that all of the professional poker players around the world are part of the gaming community?
If so then how come I never see them at Gen Con?
Cause the poker game at GenCon doesn't have a big enough purse?
Not joking about a poker tourny at GenCon either, I was gonna play.
Cause the poker game at GenCon doesn't have a big enough purse?
Not joking about a poker tourny at GenCon either, I was gonna play.
So there are poker games at GenCon?
If so then based off of new evidence I might have to reverse my stance.
In all seriousness are you telling me that all of the professional poker players around the world are part of the gaming community?
If so then how come I never see them at Gen Con?
There was a rather large poker event at GenCon last year... Does that make it part of "gaming?"
edit: heh. I started posting before I saw Vyv's reply about the tournie at GenCon. Yes, there was a poker tournament at GC. I'll check to see if there's another one this year.
There was a rather large poker event at GenCon last year... Does that make it part of "gaming?"
Was that the first year they had it?
Pretty much, yep. :rolleye2:
Really it's not even that I want to exclude them. (although if you want to paint me that way, go right ahead) Simply put, as much as I am put off by the brain-in-a-jar. How much more ridiculous do you think an avid poker player would find it? Think they'll be flocking to the lime green web site? Unlikely.
I don't don't think they would find it any more rediculous than anyone else would. Some of those guys are pretty odd, I would wager (pun intended) that some of them cross over into other games. I think they are just as likely to be RPGers, CCGers, etc. as anyone else. Just because poker is their profession doesn't mean the only thing in their life is poker. I'd shudder to think if my profession defined me!
Was that the first year they had it?
No. There was definately one the first year they held the Con in Indy because that was the last time I could afford to go.
I don't don't think they would find it any more rediculous than anyone else would. Some of those guys are pretty odd, I would wager (pun intended) that some of them cross over into other games. I think they are just as likely to be RPGers, CCGers, etc. as anyone else. Just because poker is their profession doesn't mean the only thing in their life is poker. I'd shudder to think if my profession defined me!
Actually alot of them play Ro-Sham-Bo in their free time.
No. There was definately one the first year they held the Con in Indy because that was the last time I could afford to go.
I will never forgive them for moving it away from Milwaukee...
wait does that count as another complaint against WotC? ;)
I'll check to see if there's another one this year.
Yes, there is a poker tournament again this year.
Actually alot of them play Ro-Sham-Bo in their free time.
I count kicking someone in their dice as "gaming"... technically. :D
I will never forgive them for moving it away from Milwaukee...
I do miss Milwaukee, but I am just far enough from there to want a hotel room, so the cost is about the same for either city for me (a little extra gas for Indy). Although Indy does not have Thai Palace (which we still drive up to eat at a couple times a year) or Major Goolsby's.
wait does that count as another complaint against WotC? ;)
Wouldn't that be Richard Garfield of GenCon LLC? Or is my Oldtimer's acting up today?
Yes, there is a poker tournament again this year.
Then I guess I will have to admit I was wrong.
Then I guess I will have to admit I was wrong.
Painful, ain't it?
Painful, ain't it?
Well if it happened more often it might not be so bad... ;)
Did you try googling the test? 30 questions in 15 minutes doesn't leave a lot of time for googling. Especially when most of the questions would require some real digging if you didn't know.
No I didn't. I'm not actually interested in winning; I just like trivia. However despite my apparent shortcomings in gamer-fu, I have thoroughly mastered google-fu. It wouldn't take me more than a few seconds to find out things like release dates for old board games, winning poker hands, or specific resources in warcraft (some of the questions I got). Keep in mind we had no search feature on these boards for about 2 years (give or take), so many of us here got pretty skilled with google out of basic necessity.
I was simply suggesting that you could have google searched for the answers if getting them correct was your goal. Even if you only had time for 15 questions, that would be what? half the test? Assuming you actually know a few answers like MTG Alpha being released in 1993, Avalon Hill being older than TSR and WotC, and so forth, it is entirely possible to score 100% w/o too much effort or hard core gamer knowledge. I'd say the test is about as accurate as an online poll (and I know how much faith you have in online polls). ;)
Did you try googling the test? 30 questions in 15 minutes doesn't leave a lot of time for googling. Especially when most of the questions would require some real digging if you didn't know.
Google is not a very efficient way to look up answers, too much overhead. Use Wikipedia instead
Since the test is over I'm sure we can get in to more detail now...
Dice statistics is not gaming. This is really the only question that actually upset me by its inclusion. They asked about a number of statistics for rolling 3 six-sided dice, like whether it's more common for 10 to come up than 12 or some such. This really irked me, but I got over it.
gee if you played GURPS you would knwo the answer right away...I guess it really is going to inculd non WotC RPG games...
I think that the probability of 6 sided dice is very legitimate fodder for a gaming test. I mean, even if you're playing monopoly that is useful. Then there's risk, Settlers of Catan... and most any role-playing game, where understanding how the probabilities of d6's is a very important mechanic of the game.
yes,but monopoly only uses 1d6,whereas the question was about rolling not 1,not 2 but 3d6 (sorry couldn't resist very well) which is the cornerstone of GURPS...sadly there hasn't been a mention of Gleemax over at the SJG forums...so i guess WotC is counting on crossover of players....just like with the MtG and D&D,but we all saw how well that turned out didn't we?
THE END IS NIGH!
And now back to your regularly scheduled apocalypse...
Actually, the end was Nigh a while back when we all found out about Gleemax.
No, it was before that when Dragon & Dungeon were cancelled.
No, I think it was when 3.5 came out...
or was it when 3.0 came out?
No, I remeber, it was when TSR folded and WotC bought D&D!
Or maybe when 2nd edition came out...
No, it was when Gary was forced out of TSR. Everything good ended then !!
Maybe it was when they went to AD&D and Basic D&D, and left OD&D with the charming little brown books I still have sitting on a shelf somewhere.
Okay, I give...we're all have a little "Henny-Penny" in us, and see the sky falling at any little change! :D
yes,but monopoly only uses 1d6,whereas the question was about rolling not 1,not 2 but 3d6 (sorry couldn't resist very well) which is the cornerstone of GURPS
And HERO.
yes,but monopoly only uses 1d6
Monopoly uses 2d6. ;)
No, it was when Gary was forced out of TSR. Everything good ended then !!
I thought things improved at that point... *shrug*
change colors
change name
for the char page maby something like this: http://www.pathguy.com/cg35.htm except only with books you own (aka type the upc code or whatever of your copy of the book)
When I'm on this page while not logged in, Gleemax is listed as the first forum choice. Once I log in, however, Gleemax no longer appears.
Of course, until my boards settings are affective on that forum, I suppose it's for the best that I don't see it, but I thought somebody over there might care.
What forum "skin" do you use to view the boards? I use Parchment and Leather.
(you can scroll to the very bottom of the page and see your skin choice in a drop down list on the left hand side)
Your right, I switched to Parchment & Leather and the pic doesn't come up. (The link is there, no icon.)
(The link is there, no icon.)
I can't even find any evidence of the link...
I can't even find any evidence of the link...
They've banned you...
:raincloud
Maybe they don't want me going there. :D
What forum "skin" do you use to view the boards? I use Parchment and Leather.
(you can scroll to the very bottom of the page and see your skin choice in a drop down list on the left hand side)
You learns summat new every day...
I must be like, the most boring person ever, since I've just got it on what ever the generic setting is (apparently Wizards Community default).
Some of those other are pretty though. the Magic players have got much better background than that boring floaty castle...
Trouble is, I'm loath to change the settings, because then it might not feel like the same board! I am just seriously congealed in my ways or what?
And as a futher note, when on the linked screen Zherog mentions, if I switch to Parchment and Leather, the Gleemax icon is replaced by a no image tag (or whatever the heck the technical term is for those little red crosses. That's going to bug me now, isn't it...)
I can't even find any evidence of the link...
I get a blank spot where the icon should be, so I know something should be there, it's just hiding.
Here's another problem for you to take to the tech team, Mike.
When I'm on this page while not logged in, Gleemax is listed as the first forum choice. Once I log in, however, Gleemax no longer appears.
Of course, until my boards settings are affective on that forum, I suppose it's for the best that I don't see it, but I thought somebody over there might care.
Mike - are you paying attention to this thread any longer, or should I find some other means of reporting this bug?
Mike - are you paying attention to this thread any longer, or should I find some other means of reporting this bug?
I'd find another way, as I don't think they're paying much attention any more.
Course now having said that, watch them magically appear.
Mike - are you paying attention to this thread any longer, or should I find some other means of reporting this bug?
It may be that the run up to GenCon has them too busy to visit anymore. It's always something with the youngins these days, to busy with there playpods and istations to visit the old folks. Bah!
Here's another problem for you to take to the tech team, Mike.
When I'm on this page while not logged in, Gleemax is listed as the first forum choice. Once I log in, however, Gleemax no longer appears.
Of course, until my boards settings are affective on that forum, I suppose it's for the best that I don't see it, but I thought somebody over there might care.
*taps microphone*
Hello? Is this thing on?
*taps microphone*
Hello? Is this thing on?
WotC failed their Listen check. You're probably going to have to try something else.
Try the "Contact Us" page.
Another bit of news was an announcement by Randy Buehler, the Vice President of Digital Media at Wizards of the Coast, on the Gleemax⁚ site about the Gleemax⁚ board gaming portal.
Is there anybody out there who can actually tolerate the color scheme who would be willing to copy/paste the text of the announcement here?
Mon, June 25
Randy's Blog
By Randy Buehler
This week's topic is the Gleemax Board Game Portal. We've mentioned a couple of times now that Gleemax is being built on three pillars: community, games, and editorial. Community is probably the biggest and most important pillar, but this wouldn't make a very good home for gamers if there weren't some great games available. Just like a hobby store, we'll have a bunch of tables set up in the back and a wall full of games that you can pull down and play.
We have quite a few different game ideas in our plans already, one of which is a board game portal. I'll talk about some of our other ideas in depth in upcoming weeks, but today I want to examine the details of our take on a board game portal. This piece actually has a special place in my heart because it includes the very first thing that we built.
I spent a lot of time last year championing the Wizards digital initiative, and one of the things I knew we needed to do was to convince our management team that we could actually build this successfully. A board game portal was part of the pitch from the very early stages, and as we were figuring out exactly how much various parts of the initiative would actually cost, we discovered a website and a company called Game Table Online. The folks at GTO had already built pretty much the exact technology that we would need. Their plan was to use their own portal as a way to show off their technology - Metagame⁚ (www.metagame.biz) - and then they wanted to make money by licensing their platform to other companies. Like us.
What better way to prove we were capable of creating digital versions of our games than to actually create one? So we contracted GTO to build a prototype of Guillotine. Guillotine is fairly simple but pretty fun card game that Wizards has reprinted several times over the last decade. It's a one-time purchase that plays a lot more like a board game than like any of our trading card games. The idea is that it's the French Revolution and your goal is to collect the heads of nobles who are being led to the guillotine. Collect the most valuable heads and you win the game. Anyway, GTO turned around a playable version of Guillotine (including AI opponents!) pretty quickly and that demo became a fixture of my presentations. (It also meant we had an online version of Guillotine we could mess around with when we were bored.) Here's a screenshot:
Once our initiative got funded, we decided to go ahead and sign up GTO to help us develop the board game portal. We plan to have at least eight titles when we launch, including a mix of both board games and card games. Guillotine will be there as a fairly light offering and Axis & Allies will be there on the deeper, more intense side of things. Another title we're really proud of and will definitely have on the site is Vegas Showdown. It's more of a German-style board game and definitely my favorite of the Wizards-designed additions to the Avalon Hill catalog. It's also Games Magazine's 2007 Game of the Year.
The easiest way for us to launch this portal is to take advantage of the titles that Wizards of the Coast and Avalon Hill already have in their catalogs. However, we do not want this to be "just" an Avalon Hill portal. We're already talking with other companies about acquiring the rights to more board games. We don't have anything ready to announce yet, but we are definitely interested in bringing the best titles we can to Gleemax and turning this into the place that gamers hang out and play gamer-games.
Our current plan for a pricing system for the board game portal works like this:
1. Anyone can join a game that someone else has started (unless the starter made it a private game, anyway). Thus, you'll be able to try out games (many times) without ever giving us a dime.
2. Tournament games cannot be joined for free.
3. Subscribers will be able to start lots of games each month. (There will also be other premium features that are only available to subscribers.)
4. There will be a way for non-subscribers to start games and/or join tournaments by paying one game at a time, coin-op arcade style.
Having free players means that subscribers should never have trouble getting enough folks to play with. It also means that potential future subscribers get the chance to sample a meaningful portion of the content in order to decide whether they think it's worth paying for. Meanwhile, given that our overall goal with Gleemax is to recruit new hobby gamers, we figure the more people that come hang out and play the better.
Our current timeline has us launching this portal first thing next year. There's a small chance that some of our infrastructure projects could fall into place quickly and facilitate an earlier launch, but our current expectation is early 2008. I'll be there and I hope you will be too.
There's one last aspect of this topic that I want to cover: We haven't actually decided on all of our launch titles. We would like you guys to help us pick one. Please go to this article's forum thread and tell us what Avalon Hill* or Wizards of the Coast title you would like to see us put into the portal. We will collect those suggestions and then put together a poll so you guys can vote one in.
*We don't have rights to all the games that Avalon Hill has ever done, so please don't hate us if your suggestion fails to make the cut into the official poll.
Randy Buehler
Vice President, Digital Gaming
Did you try googling the test? 30 questions in 15 minutes doesn't leave a lot of time for googling. Especially when most of the questions would require some real digging if you didn't know.
Sorry Mike, but as somebody who "passed" the test (I got a qualification email) by googling/wikipedia-ing about two-thirds of the questions, I have to shoot this one down. :P
Don't worry, folks, I haven't ruined the test -- I live in Australia and replied to the email saying so; the admin replied acknowleding my response and I was disqualified. It kinda makes you wonder about the other 50 people who qualified, though, doesn't it? ;)
Sorry Mike, but as somebody who "passed" the test (I got a qualification email) by googling/wikipedia-ing about two-thirds of the questions, I have to shoot this one down.
Hey, if you're able to google/wiki 30 fairly complicated questions with an average time of 30 seconds each, good for you. You obviously must have some game knowledge to have pulled it off.
When I took the test I started with google and wiki open, as well as a couple of other pages. Most of the questions either took way longer then 30 seconds to google, or I couldn't get the answer at all.
A good example is the question that listed 5 RPGs and asked you to check which of them were skill based. How long would it take to google/wiki each of those games to find out if they were skill based if you didn't already know?
Another great example is a list of four names where you had to select which of them were game designers. If you didn't know them off the top of your head, how long would it take to google each name?
So unless your argument is that you passed the test without having any meaningul knowledge of gaming (and I don't think that's your point), then I don't think it matters.
Oh and for the record, despite all my googling/wikiing when taking the test, I scored a 23%.
Hey, if you're able to google/wiki 30 fairly complicated questions with an average time of 30 seconds each, good for you. You obviously must have some game knowledge to have pulled it off.
When I took the test I started with google and wiki open, as well as a couple of other pages. Most of the questions either took way longer then 30 seconds to google, or I couldn't get the answer at all.
A good example is the question that listed 5 RPGs and asked you to check which of them were skill based. How long would it take to google/wiki each of those games to find out if they were skill based if you didn't already know?
Another great example is a list of four names where you had to select which of them were game designers. If you didn't know them off the top of your head, how long would it take to google each name?
So unless your argument is that you passed the test without having any meaningul knowledge of gaming (and I don't think that's your point), then I don't think it matters.
Oh and for the record, despite all my googling/wikiing when taking the test, I scored a 23%.
I suppose it depends on your browser and connection speed. If I type someone's name into the address bar, Firefox will take me to the first web page listed in the search results (usually Wikipedia), and from there I can just start typing and it will automatically open up a "Quick Find" box with whatever I type in (equivalent to Ctrl + F). If I needed to know which people were game designers, I'd just type their name into the address bar (maybe 3 seconds to do so), then type "game design". If Firefox highlights something, I know they're involved in game design. If not, there's the answer. I doubt it would take 30 seconds to search for four people, especially since I'd recognize the D&D designers (assuming they listed some, of course).
Hey, if you're able to google/wiki 30 fairly complicated questions with an average time of 30 seconds each, good for you. You obviously must have some game knowledge to have pulled it off.
Well, OK, I have been playing Magic since Alliances and D&D for a few years.
When I took the test I started with google and wiki open, as well as a couple of other pages. Most of the questions either took way longer then 30 seconds to google, or I couldn't get the answer at all.
The way to do it is to read each question quickly and either answer it off the top of your head, or open a google window and search for the answer. While that's still going, you advance to the next question and repeat. After a few questions, you should have a batch of completed searches to check out. Good skimming skills help, too.A good example is the question that listed 5 RPGs and asked you to check which of them were skill based. How long would it take to google/wiki each of those games to find out if they were skill based if you didn't already know?
I don't think I got that question. You said there was a pool of more than 30 questions, right? I guess I might have had a good selection.
Another great example is a list of four names where you had to select which of them were game designers. If you didn't know them off the top of your head, how long would it take to google each name?
About 30 seconds each, but all at the same time. ;)
So unless your argument is that you passed the test without having any meaningul knowledge of gaming (and I don't think that's your point), then I don't think it matters.
Well, if the purpose of the test was more of a "sieve" to cut numbers down drastically (as it seems it was), rather than indicative of an insanely detailed knowledge of the industry being a requirement, then I suppose you're right!
Oh and for the record, despite all my googling/wikiing when taking the test, I scored a 23%.
Ouch. :P
I asked (several times, actually) why the Gleemax forums don't use my settings for the boards, and instead force me to look at the icky green color. Your answer (other than accusing me of saying you were kicking your dog) was, basically, "because."
So I would like to follow up on this a bit. I want to add the Gleemax site to my daily message board routine. I think there's some interesting things that could be discussed over there. But with the icky green color scheme, I just can't. So, two follow up questions.
1) Is it now possible to change the forum settings to allow me to override your choice with the skin I choose?
2a) If not, can you either tell us why or convince the person who is making the decision to come and tell us why?
2b) If it can be changed, when can we expect to see it happen?
And again, just to be clear. I'm not asking for the entire Gleemax site to change color schemes from icky green to something else. I'm just asking for the Gleemax forums (which are a part of this community) to allow me to use the forum skin of my choice, so I (and, I'm sure, others) are more comfortable with the way the forums look so I can participate.
Mike - I want to follow up on something from back around June 20th or so.
I asked (several times, actually) why the Gleemax forums don't use my settings for the boards, and instead force me to look at the icky green color. Your answer (other than accusing me of saying you were kicking your dog) was, basically, "because."
So I would like to follow up on this a bit. I want to add the Gleemax site to my daily message board routine. I think there's some interesting things that could be discussed over there. But with the icky green color scheme, I just can't. So, two follow up questions.
1) Is it now possible to change the forum settings to allow me to override your choice with the skin I choose?
2a) If not, can you either tell us why or convince the person who is making the decision to come and tell us why?
2b) If it can be changed, when can we expect to see it happen?
And again, just to be clear. I'm not asking for the entire Gleemax site to change color schemes from icky green to something else. I'm just asking for the Gleemax forums (which are a part of this community) to allow me to use the forum skin of my choice, so I (and, I'm sure, others) are more comfortable with the way the forums look so I can participate.
I forgot about that issue..
Is it now possible to change the forum settings to allow me to override your choice with the skin I choose?
It's not technically possible without a fair amount of work by a group of folks who are pretty overly taxed at the moment. Due to time constraints, they were able to save a lot of time on the existing version by cutting some corners to get it up and running. One of those corners was the support for user selectable forum schemes.
It's not technically possible without a fair amount of work by a group of folks who are pretty overly taxed at the moment. Due to time constraints, they were able to save a lot of time on the existing version by cutting some corners to get it up and running. One of those corners was the support for user selectable forum schemes.
Too bad
It's not technically possible without a fair amount of work by a group of folks who are pretty overly taxed at the moment. Due to time constraints, they were able to save a lot of time on the existing version by cutting some corners to get it up and running. One of those corners was the support for user selectable forum schemes.
I can't help but wonder what in the world this group of overly taxed folks have been working on. What time constraints could they possibly be under? Why is it necessary to cut corners at all?
I mean, this thing has arguably been in development for a year now. All we've seen so far is the "face" of the project, a very low-budget version of our own forums (at this point, anyway).
When the DI is revealed in all its glory, maybe these overly taxed folks can finally take a well deserved day off.
Yes, I'm being sarcastic (and maybe even a little mean). Sorry.
It's not technically possible without a fair amount of work by a group of folks who are pretty overly taxed at the moment. Due to time constraints, they were able to save a lot of time on the existing version by cutting some corners to get it up and running. One of those corners was the support for user selectable forum schemes.
It should not be much more than going into the forum as the Admin and switching a button to allow different skins.
I assume--hopefully correctly--that if a basic, free message board such as proboards, allows such ...that the software that WoTC uses ought to be able to do that as well. So I don't know how much validity this actually has.
Of course, this sort of thing is not unexpected. The people who maintain the website have no direct contact with those who run the message boards, and the person who takes care of webpage errors did not even know there was a community liaison, and insisted that there was nothing to be done to already-created webpages on the WoTC page with regard to broken email addresses, other than, "Do not use those email addresses."
It's not technically possible without a fair amount of work by a group of folks who are pretty overly taxed at the moment. Due to time constraints, they were able to save a lot of time on the existing version by cutting some corners to get it up and running. One of those corners was the support for user selectable forum schemes.
It should not be much more than going into the forum as the Admin and switching a button to allow different skins.
I'm only vaguely familiar with vB, but to the best of my knowledge Obrysii is correct - it's just a setting in the admin console where the forum is defined. Allowing user skins to override the defaults shouldn't be any more difficult, for example, than adding another moderator to the forum.
Can I request you bring the issue up with Melanie and her team? I'm certain it wouldn't take longer than 5 minutes to change, and if that's the only reason the forums are icky green then I think it's 5 minutes well spent, because it makes your customers happyy.
I can't help but wonder what in the world this group of overly taxed folks have been working on. What time constraints could they possibly be under? Why is it necessary to cut corners at all?
Most of them are hard at work on the actual Gleemax site.
I mean, this thing has arguably been in development for a year now. All we've seen so far is the "face" of the project, a very low-budget version of our own forums (at this point, anyway).
The promotional site and the forums are on the old software, not the new software that will support gleemax.com and our digital offerings.
When the DI is revealed in all its glory, maybe these overly taxed folks can finally take a well deserved day off.
Yes, I'm being sarcastic (and maybe even a little mean). Sorry.
The alternative is to pull them away from their work on the stuff you *really* want to see, and have them put more work into a promotional site that is going to be totally replaced in just over a month.
I'm only vaguely familiar with vB, but to the best of my knowledge Obrysii is correct - it's just a setting in the admin console where the forum is defined. Allowing user skins to override the defaults shouldn't be any more difficult, for example, than adding another moderator to the forum.
Obrysii is incorrect, although in his defense that is how I was convinced it worked when I tried to get it changed. It turns out that the artwork that supports that forum will only show up for anyone if it's forced for everyone.
Can I request you bring the issue up with Melanie and her team? I'm certain it wouldn't take longer than 5 minutes to change, and if that's the only reason the forums are icky green then I think it's 5 minutes well spent, because it makes your customers happyy.
Melanie sits right next to me and is the source of nearly all of my technical information. =)
The alternative is to pull them away from their work on the stuff you *really* want to see, and have them put more work into a promotional site that is going to be totally replaced in just over a month.
Good point. I'm glad my li'l poke at fun caused you to stick your head out, Mike ;).
This is the first I've heard that the new Gleemax will appear in a month or so. Some progress is obviously being made then, so that's really good news. I'm curious about the content that will be available online after the magazines finish their runs. I really hope the promo site isn't any indicator of what to expect with the new one (I mean as far as style, presentation and such).
Good point. I'm glad my li'l poke at fun caused you to stick your head out, Mike ;).
This is the first I've heard that the new Gleemax will appear in a month or so. Some progress is obviously being made then, so that's really good news. I'm curious about the content that will be available online after the magazines finish their runs. I really hope the promo site isn't any indicator of what to expect with the new one (I mean as far as style, presentation and such).
To be honest, I can't really blame anyone for associating the promotional site with our new software. I think it's a natural reaction. However, the current Gleemax promotional web site and forums are essentially an extremely weathered billboard that was hastily erected in front of a major construction site to read "coming soon". All the folks with hardhats and heavy equipment are busy working on the construction site, except when we pull one of them away for a second to ask them to pound a nail into the side of the billboard because the "coming soon" banner is starting to droop.
Obrysii is incorrect, although in his defense that is how I was convinced it worked when I tried to get it changed. It turns out that the artwork that supports that forum will only show up for anyone if it's forced for everyone.
Right - that's sort of the point of allowing a user to override the default board setting with his/her own choice of skin.
And not all the artwork is overridden by the skin choice. For example, the banner at the top remains the same regardless of what skin choice you have.
Melanie sits right next to me...
You're a lucky guy. :D
The promotional site and the forums are on the old software, not the new software that will support gleemax.com and our digital offerings.
Does this mean there will be different forum software for Gleemax? If so, why would a company want to support two different pieces of forum software when they very easily could've supported just one?
I don't think this was the right move. Not everyone peruses the boards. So many people said they were thinking of giving up D+D outright as a result of the cancellation, and I was just having casual conversations with people. I didn't bring up the cancellation personally once.
Take my advice and even if it's a loss, go to Origins next year.
Right - that's sort of the point of allowing a user to override the default board setting with his/her own choice of skin.
Sorry if my wording was off. Basically, we can't allow *anyone* to override the default board setting without losing all those graphics and colors for everyone.
Can you type slower maybe? I'm still not getting it...
Oh, I can definitely demonstrate how slow I can type. ;)
Or putting things another way: I'm still not understanding your point. Could you try to explain it one more time, please?
Kind of like:
'We got this great new thing for you to look at!'
'Great can I change the settings so I can look at some of it easier?'
'No, if we let you do that, no one will be able to see some of the great new thing.'
Might be talking about the head in the jar theme no longer working if they make it customizable.
Well, I was hoping your typing slower would help me understand.
Or putting things another way: I'm still not understanding your point. Could you try to explain it one more time, please?
Apparently the software is set up so that if even one person overrides the skin then the skin shuts down for everyone...
Thats what I got out of that, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either though, I mean who in their right mind would design software like that?
Here's a screen shot of this forum with my skin set to the D&D Default skin
The only graphics I see on the page are the banner at the top and the icons that appear to the left of the page that indicate things like 'New Posts,' 'Hot Topic,' and so on.
Here's a screen shot of this forum with my skin set to my preference (parchment & leather)
Notice that all the graphics are the same - the banner at the top is the same, the icons to the left of the thread are the same, and so on. Changing my skin hasn't changed the graphics on the page at all.
Here's a screen shot of the Gleemax forums
So, yet again we see that there's a banner at the top; we know that shouldn't be affected. We see that there's icons to the left of the threads; we know those shouldn't be affected. Hence why I'm confused by what Mike is saying.
With the exception of the "Low Bandwidth" skin, as far as I can tell the only things that change when you change your skin is the color scheme. That's why I keep asking for Mike to clarify - there's a disconnect somewhere, and I'd really like to understand where.
Wow, Mike. Thanks so much for explaining things. I mean, you could at least say something like, "Burgandy and Sim are (more or less) correct." While it still wouldn't make any sense to me, I would at least have had my point of confusion cleared up. Instead, you tell me to trust you while giving me no reason to do so.
The promotional site and the forums are on the old software, not the new software that will support gleemax.com and our digital offerings.
Does this mean there will be different forum software for Gleemax? If so, why would a company want to support two different pieces of forum software when they very easily could've supported just one?
Can you tackle this question?
Also, can you tell me when the Gleemax forums will allow me to get rid of the icky green color?
If they had built the graphics into the skin, I could see why they wouldn't be able to change it. However, I don't understand why anyone would do it that way. It defeats the purpose of the skins in the first place.
If it is designed that way, my only thought is that the powers that be WANT the site to be obvious. They don't want someone to navigate from these forums to the gleemax forums without realizing it. Whether for promotional reasons, or because they don't want people thinking that is the 'real' site - I guess doesn't matter.
However, in happier news I bought a subscription to Paizo's Game Mastery modules in addition to my Pathfinder subscription. With my subscription, I receive a free PDF of each print module. I really want to commend the model of supplying electronic content that is supplemental to the print material. Now, I can choose whether to run an adventure from my computer or from paper..... I can have (eventually) hundreds of adventures on my laptop ready on a moment's notice, without carrying them all with me. Of course, since I prefer print, I can bring the one I plan on running and only use the laptop as a last resort.....
It's funny that I remember asking for that. Good customer service and giving customers what they want sounds like a recipe for success. Let's see how that goes.
However, in happier news I bought a subscription to Paizo's Game Mastery modules in addition to my Pathfinder subscription. With my subscription, I receive a free PDF of each print module. I really want to commend the model of supplying electronic content that is supplemental to the print material. Now, I can choose whether to run an adventure from my computer or from paper..... I can have (eventually) hundreds of adventures on my laptop ready on a moment's notice, without carrying them all with me. Of course, since I prefer print, I can bring the one I plan on running and only use the laptop as a last resort.....
It's funny that I remember asking for that. Good customer service and giving customers what they want sounds like a recipe for success. Let's see how that goes.
Dear WotC,
Please read these words and attempt to understand them. We your customers are loyal and will continue to buy D&D products even when the quality has slipped significantly as it has in the past year and a half. We are waiting to see what this Digital Initiative will bring, but with your past record of not including a PDF version of books available for purchase, or better yet recieving a copy of it when you purchase a book for $35-50 US, we tend to have serious doubts as to your ability to provide us what we need and want as far as digital media is concerned.
I think that if you want to truly succeed, you will do a more intensive study into what it is that your customers would like to see. I think you have seen that there is unrest and even outright anger due to recent events and a very clear message has to be sent that you the caretakers of our game do care about the players (hint: you call them customers) and that you will work with us to make this game everything it can be, which incidentally will lead to higher sales since everyone will be actually happy with a product.
-Chad
Personally, I am looking forward to what's in store. I'll save my constructive criticism until the real site is up and running. In the meantime, my understanding that the current site is a placeholder keeps me from making a tempest in teacup about font colour.
Would a detailed and technical explanation of WHY it is not possible really make any difference?
Honestly, yes it would.
You see, the Gleemax forums are a part of these forums. I can change the appearance of these forums just fine - it doesn't matter if I go to the D&D pages, or the Magic pages or the Star Wars pages; in all those places, I get the area specific graphics while still having the color scheme I find the easiest to look at it with my poor vision.
Essentially, I feel like WotC is telling me, as a customer, "We don't want you to come play around in our new area, even though you think you have things to contribute to the potential conversations over there."
Just to clarify, you're asking us to trust you?
Well, I was going to say: "You'll have to take me at my word (or not)" but I was afraid that would sound too snarky. =)
if Gleemax is to be the home of online resources does that mean that "progrmas" found therein will all be run via asp or php internally to WotC site, or will they be downloaded software that can be used to help with D&D, such as generators for PC, NPC, encoutnres etc. and i mean truely compiled executables, rather than downloadable HTML and javascripts like the DDM warband generator.
or will there be both. for those who wish to use features only and people who wish to have copies of the software tools for use offline when there is less acess to the internet?
without the OP i would not have read a bit of the site because of the painful colors. so i barely know anythign about it still sicne it is all speculation so i will jsut ask rather than read through 15+ pages to see if this question exists.
if Gleemax is to be the home of online resources does that mean that "progrmas" found therein will all be run via asp or php internally to WotC site, or will they be downloaded software that can be used to help with D&D, such as generators for PC, NPC, encoutnres etc. and i mean truely compiled executables, rather than downloadable HTML and javascripts like the DDM warband generator.
or will there be both. for those who wish to use features only and people who wish to have copies of the software tools for use offline when there is less acess to the internet?
All, some or none of that will be answered after Gen-Con. We don't know what is going to be said, only that something will be said after that convention.
I hope that helps.
1) The forums software wouldn't display the Gleemax skin the way the marketing guys wanted it without some interface hacks.
2) The forum guys were able to perform these hacks without taking too much time out of their schedule, but not without leaving the "change forum skin" functionality broken.
3) Somebody, either the forum guys or their boss(es), has decided that to keep the Gleemax skin as-is while fixing the skin-changing functionality would be too expensive, and the marketing guys won't let them ditch or modify the Gleemax skin.
If this is the case, then it's unfortunate, but given that it's a temporary thing, I for one can live with it.
Mike, I get the vibe from your posts that the reasons the forum guys won't let anyone use a different skin on the Gleemax forums are as follows:
1) The forums software wouldn't display the Gleemax skin the way the marketing guys wanted it without some interface hacks.
2) The forum guys were able to perform these hacks without taking too much time out of their schedule, but not without leaving the "change forum skin" functionality broken.
3) Somebody, either the forum guys or their boss(es), has decided that to keep the Gleemax skin as-is while fixing the skin-changing functionality would be too expensive, and the marketing guys won't let them ditch or modify the Gleemax skin.
If this is the case, then it's unfortunate, but given that it's a temporary thing, I for one can live with it.
Your account is pretty much spot on regarding the technical aspects. As easy (and fun) as it is to blame things on the marketing guys, this isn't a case where marketing wants one thing and everyone else wants another. (When that happens we beat our marketing folks into submission)
Your account is pretty much spot on regarding the technical aspects. As easy (and fun) as it is to blame things on the marketing guys, this isn't a case where marketing wants one thing and everyone else wants another. (When that happens we beat our marketing folks into submission)
Reminds me of that Dilbert cartoon where the girl comes in and beats the snot out of the marketing guys face, then says to him...
"this way there's more congruence between the things you say and the way you look."
See, Mike, that's the sort of clarification I was asking for yesterday. I didn't expect you to provide specific details. I was asking you to re-explain the problem, because I wasn't understanding it.
Maybe I should steal Mike's job. ;)
Maybe I should steal Mike's job. ;)
Sorry, too late. I have, in fact, already assumed his titles and job duties. I'm Artifact, your new community liaison. Did I spell all that correctly? :P.
Sorry people, I don't have a lot of time to post right now, I've got to leave for my real life job in about five minutes. My dog's fine though, so see you soon ;).
My dog's fine though
However, in happier news I bought a subscription to Paizo's Game Mastery modules in addition to my Pathfinder subscription. With my subscription, I receive a free PDF of each print module. I really want to commend the model of supplying electronic content that is supplemental to the print material. Now, I can choose whether to run an adventure from my computer or from paper..... I can have (eventually) hundreds of adventures on my laptop ready on a moment's notice, without carrying them all with me. Of course, since I prefer print, I can bring the one I plan on running and only use the laptop as a last resort.....
It's funny that I remember asking for that. Good customer service and giving customers what they want sounds like a recipe for success. Let's see how that goes.
Thanks DDM, I was debating about subscribing to the Game Mastery as well as Pathfinder. I think you just convinced me to do so.
Is the Ultimate Gamer quiz available for fun yet? Will it be? I didn't feel like being on the board (not that I would make it) or filling out the form before taking the quiz, so I haven't taken it.
I've seen numerous times where WotC staff - especially moderators - have denied this is true. It's nice to see it finally explicitly stated, even if the policy will be changing shortly.
BTW, the moderators have always said, "If you're that worried about it, don't post it."
I don't recall anyone denying it- if anything, we've said something about joint ownership which more or less is what's said above. If you post it, WotC can use it.
*shrug*
It's pretty much a moot point, I guess. Though I suppose maybe you can answer the question I posed to Mike, Dox:
A question for Mike (or for Mike to take to Randy or whomever): Will this new Terms of Use apply only to Gleemax, or to anywhere on these forums? (of course, if these forums are moving under Gleemax (as I suspect they will) then it's really a moot question)
The WotC boards PrG (Pre-Glee) were a community center. They were a generic tool, that had only limited customizability.
Now in the PoG (Post-Glee) world of tomorrow, WotC is designing tools and functionality specifically to attract GM's, writers and designers (along with the rest of the gaming community) to their site. They are promoting a single centralized repository of gaming content & community across every gaming system, setting and IP. Of which anything posted on the Gleemax site will be usable by WotC in any manner they wish. Now obviously anything posted that is the IP of another company, is off limits, but beyond that, everything else is open.
Now I am not saying that this is in any way a conspiracy on WotC's behalf. I just think that its an interesting side-effect of the push towards the DI.
If I was writing anything that I eventually wanted to be able to publish now or in the future, I would make certain to stay clear of this or any public site.
There is a practical difference in the User Generated Content Policy, even if on "paper" they remain the same.
The WotC boards PrG (Pre-Glee) were a community center. They were a generic tool, that had only limited customizability.
Now in the PoG (Post-Glee) world of tomorrow, WotC is designing tools and functionality specifically to attract GM's, writers and designers (along with the rest of the gaming community) to their site. They are promoting a single centralized repository of gaming content & community across every gaming system, setting and IP. Of which anything posted on the Gleemax site will be usable by WotC in any manner they wish. Now obviously anything posted that is the IP of another company, is off limits, but beyond that, everything else is open.
Now I am not saying that this is in any way a conspiracy on WotC's behalf. I just think that its an interesting side-effect of the push towards the DI.
If I was writing anything that I eventually wanted to be able to publish now or in the future, I would make certain to stay clear of this or any public site.
I have to agree with what Taurren said; if I were a game designer looking at publishing any material in the future, I would avoid any site that gives them the rights to publish my material, even if I still retain the rights, like it was the plague.
Now, that may sound like a silly question, but currently it's a forbidden topic on the forums. Some folks got overly critical of one of the writers, and in order to appease the writer WotC decided to ban the topic. Ever since that time, we can refer to events in the books when discussing, for example, Realms history; but we can't discuss the book itself as a topic. I'm wondering if that will change.
Thanks.
Hey, Mike. If you're still reading along I have another question about Gleemax. Will we be permitted to discuss the WotC novel line?
Yes, you may discuss anything you like.
And of course I am still reading. =)
BTW, the moderators have always said, "If you're that worried about it, don't post it."
I don't recall anyone denying it- if anything, we've said something about joint ownership which more or less is what's said above. If you post it, WotC can use it.
Can we expect credit for the work and get proper citation in the printed material?
Wizards may have noticed some kind of marketing weakness in that D&D consumers are not enjoying all of the other...good?...things that Wizards has to offer. Thus, by dispelling Dragon and Dungeon (Curse you! I was just about to subscribe this year!) and creating this obviously epic level aberration of a site, they are attempting to herd D&D consumers into meeting Magic Online users. Hopefully, this introduction chapter to Complete WotC Products will cast emotion: excitement on the viewing crowd, making them want to spend their hard-earned platinum on Magic: The Gathering, Dreamblade, Duel Ma-- No, I'm not even going to finish that one. As for the site itself, I hope they at least polymorph the color scheme of the promotional site placeholder; the first time I saw the site, I could have sworn that some evil programmer switched the Brain in a Jar with a Symbol of Pain centered on my eyes. An arcing community site that covers all of its cohorts and minions so as to force Diplomacy checks between them is a nice idea, and I would like to see this develop more before I express any further opinions. As for now, I'm holding my action.
Seeing it from their perspective, while they COULD steal something, I doubt that is why they do it this way. If they come up with a new 'feature', completely independently, but someone has something similar posted, they don't want to be sued.
How many people have I heard told WotC to get out of their brain. Let's face it - there are a slew of 'alternate' rules that can be created, but there are only a fairly small number that are good alternate rules. There are probably a bunch of gaming groups which had 'alternate classes' similar to Unearthed Arcana before it was released. I don't think WotC watched a different gaming group to get those ideas, nor do I think they came from the boards. But if someone had posted it on the boards, even if WotC didn't read it ('cause in my humble opinion, a few recent exceptions not withstanding, nobody from the company reads these boards) they could sue for copyright infringement etc.
I don't think anybody wants that. Not you, not me, and not WotC. Bastards suing will just drive up the price of the books. Not that I'm buying any. So far it looks like I really will get everything I want about gaming from Paizo (and maybe Necromancer Games when they get their partnership going). Still, I don't think that the prices should get higher for those of you still purchsaing the books.
Kleenex are 'Kleenex brand tissues' made by Kimberly-Clark. But if you ask someone for a kleenex, they know you mean tissue - thus, they're synonymous. If that is the kind of brand recognition they want, well, I guess I understand that, but it sounds to me like trying too hard.
Quiznos did something similar by including both a Q and Z (both letters that are not commonly used) to make it extremely memorable. I think that would have been a better strategy with Gleemax.
My official guess is that it is a blend of 'wii' and 'kleenex' but they changed 'wee' to something synonymous.
All I can think of is a Forum with Blogs.
Are there any new informations what Gleemax will be one far away day, or better, what it is intended to be sometimes in the far future?
All I can think of is a Forum with Blogs.
Well...other than the fact that the URL tells me all of the forums are now on Gleemax, I don't think they've given out any new information.
Well...other than the fact that the URL tells me all of the forums are now on Gleemax, I don't think they've given out any new information.
From the Gleemax side of things, Randy's Blog has been a pretty good showcase of where the site will eventually be heading and he's also provided a few "kewl bits" like the board game portal for gamers to think about and anticipate.
It's a shame that the other aspects of the DI aren't as equally forthcoming. Oh well ... hopefully Gen-Con will finally provide us with something other than the two-step we've been getting up until now.
From the Gleemax side of things, Randy's Blog has been a pretty good showcase of where the site will eventually be heading and he's also provided a few "kewl bits" like the board game portal for gamers to think about and anticipate.
It's a shame that the other aspects of the DI aren't as equally forthcoming. Oh well ... hopefully Gen-Con will finally provide us with something other than the two-step we've been getting up until now.
Yeah, I haven't had a chance to check out the blog yet. I really should, but I don't have the time. Maybe after school starts back up. Until then...no updates for me
It appears the settings on the Gleemax forums have been changed so that it'll now use your forum skin choice, rather than forcing you to use the green color scheme they had.
Now that they are presentable, does anyone know how/when the regular forums are going to be integrated into gleemax?
Score!
Now that they are presentable, does anyone know how/when the regular forums are going to be integrated into gleemax?
like this
or this 
I know that WotC wants a 'brand name' that is easily remembered. Everytime I hear Gleemax, I think of Kleenex. I think that they're trying to capture that exact thing.
Kleenex are 'Kleenex brand tissues' made by Kimberly-Clark. But if you ask someone for a kleenex, they know you mean tissue - thus, they're synonymous. If that is the kind of brand recognition they want, well, I guess I understand that, but it sounds to me like trying too hard.
That kind of brand recognition leads to you losing the rights to your own brand name.
"The one thing you do grant to us by posting your content onto our site is the right to use it as we please. So, if you post (for example) an awesome Magic card or a D&D feat that we think is cool, we're allowed to put it into one of our books, card sets, etc."
...and there it is.
You basically want to harvest free material for your games from other people's creativity and hard work.
The community itself doesn't need these "features". Anyone who was serious about a blog already has one, and I doubt they'll abandon it to start one up here, where someone else can profit from it.
I won't risk a warning by telling you where you can shove "gleemax", but I can tell you I won't be using any of these "features". I'll continue to use the forums that I do now, but I'm not using anything else. If I want a blog (which I don't), I'll go off-site.
...and there it is.
You basically want to harvest free material for your games from other people's creativity and hard work.
The community itself doesn't need these "features". Anyone who was serious about a blog already has one, and I doubt they'll abandon it to start one up here, where someone else can profit from it.
I won't risk a warning by telling you where you can shove "gleemax", but I can tell you I won't be using any of these "features". I'll continue to use the forums that I do now, but I'm not using anything else. If I want a blog (which I don't), I'll go off-site.
Simple fix. Copyright anything 1st. Don't post under a known ID. You claim s/o stole and posted. Done.
...and there it is.
You basically want to harvest free material for your games from other people's creativity and hard work.
The community itself doesn't need these "features". Anyone who was serious about a blog already has one, and I doubt they'll abandon it to start one up here, where someone else can profit from it.
Not really. That's more of a protection for WotC from people saying "Hey, I posted that and now it's in the book!" Plus, by having it posted on their servers, it might be considered "publishing". You're granting them a right to show your blog. I think.
I won't risk a warning by telling you where you can shove "gleemax", but I can tell you I won't be using any of these "features". I'll continue to use the forums that I do now, but I'm not using anything else. If I want a blog (which I don't), I'll go off-site.
Eh... has to be said. These very boards also fall under the User-Generated Content Policy the Wizo quoted. In fact, they're already part of Gleemax. Don't believe me? Check out your address bar.
;)
Simple fix. Copyright anything 1st. Don't post under a known ID. You claim s/o stole and posted. Done.
You automatically have a copyright of anything you create the moment it exists. You don't have to register it - though doing so allows you to collect damages in a lawsuit, and also makes it a little bit easier to defend.
As for your scheme -- there's a better way. Post it off site and then post a link. That seems to circumvent granting WotC rights to your materials.
Not really. That's more of a protection for WotC from people saying "Hey, I posted that and now it's in the book!" Plus, by having it posted on their servers, it might be considered "publishing". You're granting them a right to show your blog. I think.
I know of at least one person who most definitely had his material lifted from the forums by WotC for publication in a book. When he began to mention it on forums - here and other places - he was slapped with a Cease and Desist from the legal department.
The community itself doesn't need these "features". Anyone who was serious about a blog already has one, and I doubt they'll abandon it to start one up here, where someone else can profit from it.
Sorry, but I think you're incorrect. As ugly and rough as Gleemax is right now, there's folks who maintain a blog there who didn't maintain one elsewhere prior to the Gleemax Alpha launch.
This is standard policy for many companies, I don't see why Wizards is being demonised over it.