Before we get to the data, a couple of notes:
- I didn't include previews/playtests in the numbers. They aren't really an indication of content going into Dragon; they're content going into a published book.
- I didn't include the short stories that have appeared in the last few Dragon magazines. I suppose you could say they bump up the number of insider content pages, but they'd also significantly drop the elements/page.
- Whenever I use the term "Insider Pages" it's a page count of the articles that have player and/or DM content, are insider-only, and are not, as noted above, previews, playtests, or short stories.
- "Elements" refers to actual gameplay elements: items, powers, feats, races, PPs, EDs, etc.
- This may or may not have been the best way to do it, but I counted each PP and each ED as one element. It's a variation from the way I counted everything else, but I wasn't quite sure how to treat features etc. I will note that the number of PPs and EDs have remained reasonably consistent over time--not every magazine, but if you picked any given period of 3-4 months, you'd find a fairly reasonably consistent number. Based on that, even if the counting of PPs and EDs isn't ideal, it shouldn't skew the numbers too badly.
- Backgrounds aren't gameplay elements. They're crap filler. I counted them separately.
A note regarding the Executioner
I didn't include the Executioner articles in D391 or D394 (D393 never saw compilation, so obviously I didn't include it, either). Reasonable minds can differ over whether that was really Insider content.
If they were included, you'd see an increase of 20 Insider Pages, 35 Gameplay Elements in D391, and 20 Insider Pages, 34 Gameplay Elements in D394.
To my mind, if any of it is to be included, it should be the D391 article. That was the basis for 95% of the article in D393 (which wasn't compiled), which was in turn the basis for 99% of the D394 article--meaning minimal new content.
The numbers would translate to a 21% increase in % Insider Pages for D391 and a bump to Elements per Page of 0.614--a significant spike that would bump that issue back up near pre-388 levels.
Note: Sorry about the shrunken images. Preview shows them at the correct size, but once I submit they get shrunk.
I didn't include the Executioner articles in D391 or D394 (D393 never saw compilation, so obviously I didn't include it, either). Reasonable minds can differ over whether that was really Insider content.
If they were included, you'd see an increase of 20 Insider Pages, 35 Gameplay Elements in D391, and 20 Insider Pages, 34 Gameplay Elements in D394.
To my mind, if any of it is to be included, it should be the D391 article. That was the basis for 95% of the article in D393 (which wasn't compiled), which was in turn the basis for 99% of the D394 article--meaning minimal new content.
The numbers would translate to a 21% increase in % Insider Pages for D391 and a bump to Elements per Page of 0.614--a significant spike that would bump that issue back up near pre-388 levels.
Note: Sorry about the shrunken images. Preview shows them at the correct size, but once I submit they get shrunk.
Anyway, that's the material I put together so far. I'm happy to do other comparisons if people want. It needed separate charts, since the scales vary dramatically.
Some observations:
- The number of insider pages, the percent of insider pages, and the number of elements per page have all declined in the past 5-6 months.
- It's not shown in the numbers there, but I noticed a significant decline in the quality of most (not all) of the articles starting around D387.
- Earlier issues there do a lot more mixing of DM and Player content--there are adventures, monsters, etc. in the early-mid 370s. Kinda odd. I counted monsters as gameplay elements.
- Starting around D386 or D387, EVERYTHING begins to decline... except backgrounds. Backgrounds are going strong.
- Number of elements are going down.
- Elements per page are going down.
- Number of insider pages are going down
- % insider pages is going down. For the past 6 months, it's been below 60%.
- In other words, starting around April-May 2010, they're putting less insider content into the magazine
- In Dragon 383, we see the last "[Class] Essentials" article: Invoker Essentials. In D388, we see the return of the exact same article format with a brand new name: "[Class] Basics." Gee, I wonder what prompted that name change. It's interesting to note the timing. Essentials articles stop a couple of months before the decline in content. They get replaced with Basics articles as the decline begins. Causation? Who knows? But there's some logical correlation there.
Dragon 395:
- The numbers show a bit of an increase from Dragon 394, which was a low point (18 elements in 41 pages? LOL). It's still more or less in line with the steady decline in quantity over the past 8ish months, though, being toward the low end in pages, elements, and elements per page.
- What the numbers don't show are the shenanigans pulled by WotC this month. Despite their assurances, they didn't get their weekly calendar announcements out on time, and even when they did, they often didn't produce the articles they said they would. The last insider article came out Feb. 1--after the end of the month--and wasn't the article they said it'd be (they said "Godly Images" and released "Channel Divinity: Windswept Lord" with a different blurb. As someone points out later in this thread, the article may have just evolved in the writing).
- Unrelated to the numbers above, quality this month was a mixed bag. Obviously the following assessments are merely my opinion. The Eladrin Knights article is fantastic. Great flavor and even better crunch. There have been some arguments on the forums over whether restricting stuff to Eladrin was appropriate, but regardless, the actual elements produced were great. At the opposite end of the spectrum, CA: Ardents and the extremely late CD: Windswept Lord are terrible, with uninteresting flavor and bad crunch.
I update this graph every month... although it's going to be tricky this month, since there's no official release. On the other hand, so far, only 2 articles.
Llamas, do you think it could be possible to do the same graph with say the last 20 of the printed mags, to really compare the two?
I didn't record everything the same way as KP, sadly (although we compared notes, and we actually used roughly the same definitions).
I'm just finishing adding 3-month averages to the graphs, and adding a couple of extra graphs, to better show trends. I'll update the images here shortly.
Edit: Updated with the new charts, and added a few more observations regarding timing of the decline.
Awww. Goldo sad panda.
Cause comparing the printed mags and the emags would really show if fans of the mags got screwed or not in terms of quantity of contant. Cause quality is very subjective.
Word count would really be the key way to compare. Any obsessive compulsive types around here?
Do you mean printed or compiled? This is based on compiled magazines, not the article archive... so I'm assuming it's the same as print mags.
Are you keeping stats on dungeon magazine? I've been curious about the numbers on single delves vs. full scale adventures, and also the number of new DM game elements such as new monsters, new traps, new terrain, etc. I understand that analyzing Dungeon magazine would be much more complex, but I'm curious if you've given it some thought.
So, for some reason it auto-shrinks the images here, even though it doesn't in the preview. Kind of a nuisance.
It appears that the images are not the only things that are shrinking.
Great work, Llamas.
Fascinating stuff, thanks! I know you probably don't have the time to do this, but it would interesting to see a breakdown in game elements offered: feats/month, powers/month, magic items, etc.
Are you keeping stats on dungeon magazine? I've been curious about the numbers on single delves vs. full scale adventures, and also the number of new DM game elements such as new monsters, new traps, new terrain, etc. I understand that analyzing Dungeon magazine would be much more complex, but I'm curious if you've given it some thought.
I've considered it, but if it happens, it won't be for a couple of days.
Does anyone have a rough timeline of the delays, transitions, etc. over the past year and change?
1) Dark Sun/First Essentials CB delays
2) Steve Winter taking over (D388?)
3) Period of complete silence and and no support
I'd be interested in the amount of (original) artwork across the 2 years, and compared to the printed run of magazines. It seems that has been on a decline as well.
I doubt I'd be good at recognizing original vs. reprinted art. If you wanted to go through D371-394 and identify it, I'd be happy to add the numbers and a new chart.
My first inclination is that for art, it's worth looking at original work in the entire issue, not just in the Insider gameplay articles?
I doubt I'd be good at recognizing original vs. reprinted art.
Hence the brackets, I think any artwork would be okay, since they have reused artwork in both magazines.
I could just go by what they put in the Art/Map galleries, ignoring tile based maps.
As a side note (and I'm sure you knew this was coming), I do think your results conflate "game elements" with "quality" somewhat. Still, I appreciate the work you put into getting the data and I do think the trend is concerning.
Interesting data. Thanks for compiling it. Perhaps we could forward this over to the editor of the mags?
As a side note (and I'm sure you knew this was coming), I do think your results conflate "game elements" with "quality" somewhat. Still, I appreciate the work you put into getting the data and I do think the trend is concerning.
I think we can all agree that there's great content with few game elements (herid fel's Epic Defenders article in Dragon 387 is a spectacular example) and terrible content that's chock full of game elements (many of the feat-heavy Winning Races articles, for example... as contrasted with the Forgeborn article, which had fewer feats, but which was actually REALLY good).
The problem is, quality is kinda hard to quantify. What we can quantify is content. There's been a decline in content--good and bad. Quality control comes down to individual articles. There's always something good and something bad in both the best of months and the worst of months. But when there's an outright decrease in content, it's not a matter of quality control; it's something systemic in either the approach to the magazines or the resources devoted to them.
Well put, Llamas. And thanks for making the graphs. I think most readers noticed the decline, but this really makes it clear.
Credit goes to kilpatds for the idea. I couldn't find his graph, which I saw when he initially posted it a few weeks (months?) ago, but I thought it was a really good idea. So I figured I'd go ahead and do it too, and see if our results were the same (they're almost identical, except for D391 and D394, in which he included the Executioner content; see first post here for an explanation on why I didn't, and the impact it would have had if I did).
perhaps they should wow you guys with some class acts and shiny play tests?
i dunno some articles are cool others were not, i have not been interested in anything out of the mags since the executioner i am to understand there is a knight article coming out, sounds intriguing, but im not an insider so it dosent matter.
the declining quality of the mags has been more of a side note to the stuff people are pissed about over DDI, thank you for showing us this
How is "quality" defined? Let's say you don't like elves, and there's more and more articles on elves, you would find the "quality" going down. "Quality" to me would fall under the "physical" quality- are there typos, is the font difficult to read, and so on.
The data here are obviously focused on quantity, not quality.
That said, quality, as you note, is fairly subjective. I think if you jumped into the middle of any of the discussions of Dragon content quality here and started talking about fonts and typos, you'd get some weird looks. My interest, and I'd guess most people's interest, is in quality for game purposes: does it add something valuable to the game? Value added can be in the form of flavor--which is inherently more subjective--or texture (crunch)--which can be evaluated much more easily.
For me, flavor adds value if it inspires me to play a character based on it. The Bane article, back sometime in the D370s, was amazing. I don't recall a single mechanical element in it; it was pure flavor, or fluff if you prefer, but it became the basis of my halfling rogue's personality and goals.
Quality when it comes to crunch is a much simpler question. It has nothing to do with whether you or I want to use it based on our character preferences, but whether it's useful. Does it add something new--specifically, something that's interesting and useful enough that you aren't gimping yourself by taking it? Many of the Winning Race articles have introduced a double-fist-full of feats not one of which is useful. News flash: stuff that adds an extremely conditional benefit to an already conditional racial power isn't useful. The designers seemed to finally realize that after half a dozen articles of really inferior gameplay content, and more recently we got some good stuff: Forgeborn dwarves, or that humans of the wild one.
When I was going back through the last 2 years of Dragon Magazines putting these numbers together, there were a lot of articles where I went "oh, man, I loved this article" and made a note to go back and read it over again. The most recent of those was the Thief of Legend one. Prior to that, there was the Epic Defenders article in D387. Two in the past 8 months isn't a very good rate. Through the 370s, it averaged at least one article per magazine.
There are some trends I do like, too. For instance, sometime around the late 370s, they stopped printing adventures in Dragon. Now, I love a good premade adventure, and new monster content is great. But that's what Dungeon is for. There have been a number of very solid setting-based articles that lay out a really cool city (often without a single mechanical element) since then that are perfectly respectable. They offer something to get a player's imagination going, and help shape a character (in a way crappy, single-paragraph backgrounds most definitely do NOT). But I'm definitely glad they moved the DM content to the DM-oriented magazine.
the declining quality of the mags has been more of a side note to the stuff people are pissed about over DDI, thank you for showing us this
The magazines have been a hot-button topic for many, many months. And it is just one piece of the puzzle to people's dis/satisfaction.
One thing that really sets me off is how much of the editorial space was dedicated to products being released within the calendar month. Much of that may have literally been previews, and little of it would contain game elements, but I wonder if that was highlighted separately in any way. For the last half of 2010, the magazines felt much more like glorified advertisement fliers.
I appreciate that some people stress quality over quantity, but I believe that quantity has an important place in 4e. There are 38 individual races and 60 classes (each with separate builds). The likelihood of a single feat, paragon path, epic destiny or power having any relevance to most players is quite slim. Increased quantity means increased relevance.
As quantity decreases, you eventually change from waiting expectantly for something fun, to just hoping you will get even one good (usable) thing in a month.
are 38 individual races and 60 classes (each with separate builds). The likelihood of a single feat, paragon path, epic destiny or power having any relevance to most players is quite slim. Increased quantity means increased relevance.
This is a game of diminishing returns though. As they put out more mechanical options, they need to release more mechanical options to support them. Either the magazine gets bigger and bigger every month or the options become wasted space as they become more and more niche in the face of an avalanche of other options.
I actually don't mind the shift away from mechanical tidbits, personally. I have a hard enough time choosing a feat as it is.
are 38 individual races and 60 classes (each with separate builds). The likelihood of a single feat, paragon path, epic destiny or power having any relevance to most players is quite slim. Increased quantity means increased relevance.
This is a game of diminishing returns though. As they put out more mechanical options, they need to release more mechanical options to support them. Either the magazine gets bigger and bigger every month or the options become wasted space as they become more and more niche in the face of an avalanche of other options.
I actually don't mind the shift away from mechanical tidbits, personally. I have a hard enough time choosing a feat as it is.
It's not like they'd have to support every class and every race each month. 2-3 good articles that actually have useful content each month would be amazing.
The other thing they could do is actually flesh out class roles. Many, many classes don't have paragon paths that help them further their primary role. PHB1 had tons of great options for nearly every class. Subsequently, though, it's far less frequent. IMO every class should have at least two genuinely role-oriented PPs. It's kind of ridiculous when things like Pit Fighter and Son of Mercy are (or were prior to the much-needed nerf to Pit Fighter) the best striker PPs available to many striker classes.
Have you written a letter to the editor with your requests? It seems to me like you will probably get a response.
Have you written a letter to the editor with your requests? It seems to me like you will probably get a response.
Yup, at least twice. Can't remember whether I re-sent the one that didn't get any real reply, although I considered it.
That said, if anyone from wizards reads this thread, here are four things, any one of which would get me to resubscribe:
1. Positive reviews of over half the DDI articles published in Dragon which sound interesting to me
2. A return to the amount of content that we got in early 2010
3. The new character builder surpassing the old one in terms of utility, functionality, and customization
4. A significant reduction in subscription costs
Dragon: 38 pages of PDF + Editorial + Amp + alumni
compares with last month (and December wasn't historically a good month) of Dragon of 85 pages including Editorial, ampersand,alumni, cover and contents
Dungeon: 40 pages of PDF + editorial
Compares with last month of dungeon of 76 pages including editorial, covers and contents
So knocking off contents and covers you've got approx:
85 pages total content this month vs 156 pages last month (knocking off 5 pages for covers and content)
edit: and 200 pages for January last year.
(i reached 85 by counting each editorial as a page and ampersand and alumni at 3 pages each)
I absolutely agree that quantity without quality is useless, but we have yet to reach the point where we have sufficient quantity as it is.
While I find all of this interesting I do have to side with DrNick on his comment about equating game elements (crunch) with quality. I think to be more credible the OP should remove the word quality from his terminology. I happen to think well written story elements (fluff) are far more valuable at this stage in the life cycle of 4e than new crunch. As DrNick said, I already have a devil of a time picking feats, not to mention most powers, and I'm not even playing one of the most well supported classes or races (Deva Avenger). I think WotC should focus on slowly balancing out the game element content down the slope to 5e, but fleshing out the assumptions for the default setting are, at least to me, way more important at this stage.
Thanks. First post changed per your suggestion.
I'll be updating the data once the Godly Images article comes out (or fails to come out) today.
Just a side note Kalex. It may be very difficult of you to pick just one feat for your Human/Elf/Halfling Rogue or Fighter, but that is not the case for everyone. Try making a Seeker that feels at all custmized or on par with other controllers. For that matter, try doing the same with most PH3 content.
I absolutely agree that quantity without quality is useless, but we have yet to reach the point where we have sufficient quantity as it is.
IMO, there are a variety of reasons for this. I do think it would be appropriate to release an article or two for the few classes that don't have overwhelming support yet (like the seeker). However, I also think that the concepts for these classes are much narrower in scope than everybody's favorite, the Fighter (for instance). By the designer's own comments, they don't write articles for the mechanics. They have always started with a niche and then fleshed out the mechanics for them. It's much easier to fill in niche mechanics when the class is a broad archetype (the rogue) rather than a more specific niche (the seeker or runepriest).
To that end, I would agree with the many people who stated, when the PHB3 was released, that the classes were too narrow and should have probably been builds within other classes (the seeker would have made a good Ranger as we've seen in Essentials while the Runepriest would have been a fine cleric with some fluff about runes in an article or something).
This is a bit of an aside on game design, but I feel that it directly relates to Dragon content delivery and quantity.
Some classes (especially ranger) are already broad and bloated. Looking at our foresty friend, we find a tremendously powerful ranged attacker, a confused and squishy melee fighter, and the truly odd man out, the Beastmaster. There is essentially nothing that can be shared between them. Adding Seeker to that mix would have further confused the issue.
As it stands now, we have what classes and races have been produced. I do not believe unequal content publishing helps the health of the game. There are large gaps in what Dragon has been able to deliver. Many times we have cried out for things missing from source books (deities in FR) and been assured Dragon would fill in the gaps. Unfortunately many of those gaps remain.
With D&D content, I always follow the old adage "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush." I can not trust the hope that Dragon will deliver content to fill in the gaps. As the magazine thins and focuses on fluff, the situation only gets worse.
While I find all of this interesting I do have to side with DrNick on his comment about equating game elements (crunch) with quality. -snip- I happen to think well written story elements (fluff) are far more valuable at this stage in the life cycle of 4e than new crunch. .
Emphasis mine.
I agree with this. In Dragon "Fluff", backgrounds, variant options (like Curses), these are all things I'm more interested in right now than more crunch. I rarely read that stuff. If anything has made Essentials appealing to me, is the cutting back of the amount of crunch. Now, with that said, I could go with a limited amount of crunch to fill out some of the blanks in essentials (such as druid and cleric domains).
There is room for both crunch and fluff, but so far crunch has certainly had the upper hand.
Personally I like having art in the mag that is evocative and that I can use at my table to inspire. I would love to have more maps! Good cartography and not just tiles. I like tiles. I have most of them - I'd just like more illustrated area maps.
My 2. YMMV
Seems like they're adding kinks in rather than working them out.
We are getting last months articles two days into this month, and February is a short month so this months magazines are going to be really thin again, at least the calender gives them an easy excuse this time.
Interesting. One day after the end of the month, with Godly Images and Alumni still missing, they drop Godly Images from last month's list and replace it with Windswept Lord.
Seems like they're adding kinks in rather than working them out.
Not sure if it is actually a replacement, though. The "Godly Images" blurb was about gods appearing in different forms for different races, by Chris Sims. We got an article by Chris Sims about how Kord is worshipped by the Dwarves.
Sounds like the Godly Images article simply evolved into the "Windswept Lord", rather than being replaced by something entirely different.
Interesting. One day after the end of the month, with Godly Images and Alumni still missing, they drop Godly Images from last month's list and replace it with Windswept Lord.
Seems like they're adding kinks in rather than working them out.
Not sure if it is actually a replacement, though. The "Godly Images" blurb was about gods appearing in different forms for different races, by Chris Sims. We got an article by Chris Sims about how Kord is worshipped by the Dwarves.
Sounds like the Godly Images article simply evolved into the "Windswept Lord", rather than being replaced by something entirely different.
Could be. It's a shame the article is pretty terrible. The couple of pages of flavor are pretty blah, and the items are bad. Even the rare only has one decent power. The encounter is reasonably nice, but the property is terrible.
Anyone else amused that they're dedicating their manpower to making cheesy Flash popups for "BEWARE THE PHANTOM BRIGADE" on the Dragon page rather than, you know, something worthwhile and not annoying?
I'll be updating the data in the original post shortly.
Still I think my initial hunch that there has been a drop in the amount of art, (and original art) in Dungeon is correct. Although it is sometimes hard to judge what art is for an article and what is just from another source, sometimes it is clear sometimes it isn't so I'm probably just going to count all art.
What I've noticed is some weird stuff like the art for some of this months articles was in a gallery two months ago (giving some idea of when the article might have been planned for), and last month there was a load of Modron art that doesn't appear in January's Modron article. Basically the galleries are a complete mess, especially more recently, sort of what we have come to expect.
I've started looking at Dragon as well.... and unfortunately the second Art Gallery I look at all (and virtually all the rest) all of the links are broken, great!
This is turning out to be a lot harder to do than I thought.
Anyone else amused that they're dedicating their manpower to making cheesy Flash popups for "BEWARE THE PHANTOM BRIGADE" on the Dragon page rather than, you know, something worthwhile and not annoying?
Are you implying that the flash programmer could write articles or am I reading you wrong?
Anyone else amused that they're dedicating their manpower to making cheesy Flash popups for "BEWARE THE PHANTOM BRIGADE" on the Dragon page rather than, you know, something worthwhile and not annoying?
Are you implying that the flash programmer could write articles or am I reading you wrong?
Nah, I was thinking of the software end of things.
It's an unfortunate fact of business that resources will be brought to bear on those things that directly and positively impact the bottom line. As someone in the service side of a business (internal IT), I'm keenly aware of the sharp divide between the resources allocated to the sales team and the resources allocated to mine.
Anyone else amused that they're dedicating their manpower to making cheesy Flash popups for "BEWARE THE PHANTOM BRIGADE" on the Dragon page rather than, you know, something worthwhile and not annoying?
Are you implying that the flash programmer could write articles or am I reading you wrong?
Nah, I was thinking of the software end of things.
Maybe they could compile the magazine PDFs ;)
Oh, okay. In the context of this thread you could see how I was mistaken.
It's an unfortunate fact of business that resources will be brought to bear on those things that directly and positively impact the bottom line. As someone in the service side of a business (internal IT), I'm keenly aware of the sharp divide between the resources allocated to the sales team and the resources allocated to mine.
Yeah, except when they underfund you and "suddenly" nothing works and the sales team can't do their job...
Oh, okay. In the context of this thread you could see how I was mistaken.
It's an unfortunate fact of business that resources will be brought to bear on those things that directly and positively impact the bottom line. As someone in the service side of a business (internal IT), I'm keenly aware of the sharp divide between the resources allocated to the sales team and the resources allocated to mine.
Also, just because someone can make a neat Flash applet, doesn't necessarily mean they can help program a Sliverlight app. Most Flash programmers I know are more on the web design side of things as opposed to the hardcore programming side.
Anyone else amused that they're dedicating their manpower to making cheesy Flash popups for "BEWARE THE PHANTOM BRIGADE" on the Dragon page rather than, you know, something worthwhile and not annoying?
Are you implying that the flash programmer could write articles or am I reading you wrong?
Given the latest articles: Sure, why couldn't he? Can't get any worse
Really, though, I have been quite disappointed with things for some time. They were overdoing it (a bit) at the start of 4E with crunchy bits, and have now over-corrected it to a dearth of anything resembling usefulness.
Only reason I'm still subscribed is I still run a home game and am one of the Encounters DMs at my FLGS. Buh. Seriously considering to unsubscribe after the inauspicious start of this year.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
This is half what we are used to.
So huscarl has stated their goal is approx 60000 words a month between the two magazines.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
This is half what we are used to.
And half what they originally promised us...
So huscarl has stated their goal is approx 60000 words a month between the two magazines.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
This is half what we are used to.
And half what they originally promised us...
Do you have a cite for that promise? Not disagreeing, just curious where they said it.
So huscarl has stated their goal is approx 60000 words a month between the two magazines.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
This is half what we are used to.
And half what they originally promised us...
Do you have a cite for that promise? Not disagreeing, just curious where they said it.
They promised 250 pages when they first went to online PDF. When they said this 250 pages was equal to 100,000 words. They are definitely not keeping thier promise no matter how you interpret it...
Do you have a cite for that promise? Not disagreeing, just curious where they said it.
It used to be on the What you get for DDi page, that each month would have 60 pages for each magazine, so 120 pages total. In general, they would give us about 75-100 pages each magazine, each month. There have definetly been a decrease at times from that, but over all I think they have hit the 60 pages each month, except for the last few.
But now it no longer says how many pages each month.
They promised 250 pages when they first went to online PDF. When they said this 250 pages was equal to 100,000 words. They are definitely not keeping thier promise no matter how you interpret it...
Please stop making things up, Lokiare.
Previously, DDI was advertised as delivering "over 120 pages" of content every month. This claim was still seen on the website up through last week. Up through December 2010, we received that much content. Early on, DDI often delivering well over 100,000 words; through the last 6 months, we tended to receive 80,000 to 100,000 words.
In January, we received around 70,000 words, and under 120 pages of content. Technically, due to the articles delayed until February, we recieved around 60,000 words and under 100 pages of content.
Even taking that reduced amount of 60,000 words, at no point had they delivered "half of what they originally promise us." That have offered us a reduced amount of content, yes, without warning, and while still advertising more content - none of which I find acceptable.
But the truth, as usual, is that every numerical claim Lokiare makes in this thread is incorrect. They did not promise 250 pages. 250 pages was not equivalent to 100,00 words. They did not deliver half of what they had promised.
What they delivered in January was less than we were told to expect. We have been told that future content will be similarly reduced. That's a reason to cancel your subscription, if that is unacceptable. That's a reason to seek a refund in January, if you feel that difference between offered and advertised content was unacceptable.
But it's worth using the actual numbers if you do make a complaint. Every time someone like Lokiare pulls random numbers from thin air or exaggerates a flaw, it makes it that much harder to offer genuine criticism of the situation.
They promised 250 pages when they first went to online PDF. When they said this 250 pages was equal to 100,000 words. They are definitely not keeping thier promise no matter how you interpret it...
Please stop making things up, Lokiare.
Previously, DDI was advertised as delivering "over 120 pages" of content every month. This claim was still seen on the website up through last week. Up through December 2010, we received that much content. Early on, DDI often delivering well over 100,000 words; through the last 6 months, we tended to receive 80,000 to 100,000 words.
Sorry my mistake I saw 120 and thought it was for each magazine, instead of both. Someone did a count in another thread and it came out to be 50,000-60,000 in the past few months. Since I don't have access to DDi anymore I couldn't corroborate or deny it.
In January, we received around 70,000 words, and under 120 pages of content. Technically, due to the articles delayed until February, we recieved around 60,000 words and under 100 pages of content.
Did you count, because someone else did and the numbers range from 50,000 - 60,000...
Even taking that reduced amount of 60,000 words, at no point had they delivered "half of what they originally promise us." That have offered us a reduced amount of content, yes, without warning, and while still advertising more content - none of which I find acceptable.
Its about half give or take 10,000. No exaggeration there...
But the truth, as usual, is that every numerical claim Lokiare makes in this thread is incorrect. They did not promise 250 pages. 250 pages was not equivalent to 100,00 words. They did not deliver half of what they had promised.
See above...
What they delivered in January was less than we were told to expect. We have been told that future content will be similarly reduced. That's a reason to cancel your subscription, if that is unacceptable. That's a reason to seek a refund in January, if you feel that difference between offered and advertised content was unacceptable.
I agree...
But it's worth using the actual numbers if you do make a complaint. Every time someone like Lokiare pulls random numbers from thin air or exaggerates a flaw, it makes it that much harder to offer genuine criticism of the situation.
See above...not random and not thin air....
Previously, DDI was advertised as delivering "over 120 pages" of content every month. This claim was still seen on the website up through last week. Up through December 2010, we received that much content. Early on, DDI often delivering well over 100,000 words; through the last 6 months, we tended to receive 80,000 to 100,000 words.Sorry my mistake I saw 120 and thought it was for each magazine, instead of both. Someone did a count in another thread and it came out to be 50,000-60,000 in the past few months. Since I don't have access to DDi anymore I couldn't corroborate or deny it.
I'm the one who did the count! That's why I'm objecting to having you take those numbers and make stuff up about them!
You claimed that WotC gave us half the content they promised. What did they promise? Over 120 pages each month, which is probably around 75,000 - 80,000 words.
In January, they gave us 100 pages, and around 60,000 words. (With the goal of maybe 110 pages and 70,000 words). Both of those are below what we had come to expect, and what they claimed the subscription offered. Neither, however, is it anywhere close to "half" of what was advertised.
Now, it is true that in the past, they have given us well above and beyond 120 pages. I'd estimate between 140-200 pages, and between 80,000 - 110,000 words, as perhaps being the general ranges. So the content is now dropping a vast amount from what we have come to expect, and that is what I am most worried about. Even then, however, claiming that January's offering is "half" of the average would be an exaggeration.
Did you count, because someone else did and the numbers range from 50,000 - 60,000...Its about half give or take 100,000. No exaggeration there...
WotC_Huscarl said that 50,000 - 60,000 is the word goal going forward. Thus far, they have not produced below 60,000; that is around what we recieved for January, and closer to 70,000 if one considers the delayed articles.
Neither 60,000 or 70,000 is "about half" of 100,000, nor is 100,000 the amount that we were promised, as you claimed.
Again, I'm not saying you can't criticize WotC. But the more you exaggerate or make up numbers, the easier it is for genuine concerns to get dismissed alongside your outlandish claims.
No but is "about half" of the 126,000 words we were getting a year ago. Or the 110,000 from Aug 2009 or the 144,000 from Aug 2008
you are right, exaggerateing doesn't help, and I don't know exactly what has been advertised, but they really have slashed the content in half from 120,000 ish words and 200 ish pages, to 60,000 (officially stated goal) and 100 ish pages.
Even without a original promise it's reasonable to expect when you sub in July that they will continue to provide the same amount of content they had been to that point (>120,000 words, >200 pages), if they were cutting that to half of that as they have, it's reasonable to expect an explanation and a chance to cancel with a refund in advance.
I don't know if it is fair to compare it to the single biggest month - I don't think 120,000+ words and 200+ pages was the average content at any time. But I do agree that once they established a regular amount of content, a big change to that should have come with an announcement.
That said, January is really the only month in question. Up until then, numbers have remained relatively steady, even if a gradual downward trend was there. And going forward, they have now told us the goal for future word count, and they do offer a refund for remaining service for those who want to cancel their accounts in light of that announcement.
The only question is whether they will be offering refunds for those upset over the change happening in January without any warning, and that remains up in the air as to what their response will be.
I'm curious, has anyone figured how many words the Gamma World stuff is contributing each month?
0, in that it has all been free content, not part of DDI.
Even if you want to tally up how much effort has been spent writing it... still not much. Remember, most Gamma World content has just been free excerpts from the print products. In terms of actual writing, we've had two D&D Alumni articles, one world building article and one adventure. That comes to around 15,000 words... but most of it in December, when we had an acceptable amount of DDI content.
In January, the month in which the magazines were reduced in content, there hasn't been any Gamma World content outside of the free excerpts for this month's release, Legion of Gold.
Even without a original promise it's reasonable to expect when you sub in July that they will continue to provide the same amount of content they had been to that point (>120,000 words, >200 pages), if they were cutting that to half of that as they have, it's reasonable to expect an explanation and a chance to cancel with a refund in advance.
I don't know if it is fair to compare it to the single biggest month - I don't think 120,000+ words and 200+ pages was the average content at any time. But I do agree that once they established a regular amount of content, a big change to that should have come with an announcement.That said, January is really the only month in question. Up until then, numbers have remained relatively steady, even if a gradual downward trend was there. And going forward, they have now told us the goal for future word count, and they do offer a refund for remaining service for those who want to cancel their accounts in light of that announcement.
The only question is whether they will be offering refunds for those upset over the change happening in January without any warning, and that remains up in the air as to what their response will be.
honestly January was a month I plucked as a benchmark at random, thinking this January should be comaparable to last January (and eliminating any seasonal/convention/holiday factors), I wasn't aware it was on of the highest content months.
Anyway I'm putting exactly that to the test. I've been very disappointed in their offerings for a while. I'm after at least a refund for Jan na the cancelation of the rest of my sub.
They promised 250 pages when they first went to online PDF. When they said this 250 pages was equal to 100,000 words. They are definitely not keeping thier promise no matter how you interpret it...
Sorry my mistake I saw 120 and thought it was for each magazine, instead of both. Someone did a count in another thread and it came out to be 50,000-60,000 in the past few months. Since I don't have access to DDi anymore I couldn't corroborate or deny it.
Do you see why people think you overdo it with the rhetoric and complaints? I know anger often leads to exaggeration, but you'd do well to cut down on both. If nothing else, it'll be good for your blood pressure.
honestly January was a month I plucked as a benchmark at random, thinking this January should be comaparable to last January (and eliminating any seasonal/convention/holiday factors), I wasn't aware it was on of the highest content months.
And I may be wrong about that. I haven't run the actual numbers on every month. That looked like an above average amount compared to 2010. But not sure how it compares to 2009.
Let's do a quick look just for page count...
In 2008, when DDI started, the average over 7 months was ~197 pages. The first half of 2009, the average dripped to ~193 pages, but the second half of 2009 (particularly the last few months) saw a jump up to ~215 pages. The first five months of 2010, the average dropped back to ~190 pages. And the remaining seven months dropped even farther, to an average of 160 pages a month.
So, in general, you are actually correct as far as page count - 200 pages was the average for the first two years. For most of that time, it largely fluctuated between 190-195 pages, with a big boost in content near the end of 2009.
In June of 2010, content began to diminish to about 80% of what we saw before. And it looks like, going forward, it may be dropping to nearly half what we used to receive.
Anyway I'm putting exactly that to the test. I've been very disappointed in their offerings for a while. I'm after at least a refund for Jan na the cancelation of the rest of my sub.
Yeah, this is what I'd recommend. Those who feel this isn't acceptable, ask for a refund for January. If the content remains diminished going forward, decide whether it is worth it or not, and if not, cancel your remaining subscription.
I'm not sure why they decided to reduce the content, but I'm guessing it involves cost-saving measures from above, and enough pure monetary feedback from customers may help change that decision.
Don't you just love the United States...
Last night I spent a couple of hours going through the last two years of Dragon Magazines (371-394) to see whether my impression of a decrease in quantity was accurate. Quality is a separate issue. While I feel that it, too, has generally declined, the data below are purely quantitative and do not purport to offer any conclusions about quality.
Before we get to the data, a couple of notes:
- I didn't include previews/playtests in the numbers. They aren't really an indication of content going into Dragon; they're content going into a published book.
A note regarding the Executioner
I didn't include the Executioner articles in D391 or D394 (D393 never saw compilation, so obviously I didn't include it, either). Reasonable minds can differ over whether that was really Insider content.
If they were included, you'd see an increase of 20 Insider Pages, 35 Gameplay Elements in D391, and 20 Insider Pages, 34 Gameplay Elements in D394.
To my mind, if any of it is to be included, it should be the D391 article. That was the basis for 95% of the article in D393 (which wasn't compiled), which was in turn the basis for 99% of the D394 article--meaning minimal new content.
The numbers would translate to a 21% increase in % Insider Pages for D391 and a bump to Elements per Page of 0.614--a significant spike that would bump that issue back up near pre-388 levels.
Last night I spent a couple of hours going through the last two years of Dragon Magazines (371-394) to see whether my impression of a decrease in quantity was accurate. Quality is a separate issue. While I feel that it, too, has generally declined, the data below are purely quantitative and do not purport to offer any conclusions about quality.
Before we get to the data, a couple of notes:
- I didn't include previews/playtests in the numbers. They aren't really an indication of content going into Dragon; they're content going into a published book.
A note regarding the Executioner
I didn't include the Executioner articles in D391 or D394 (D393 never saw compilation, so obviously I didn't include it, either). Reasonable minds can differ over whether that was really Insider content.
If they were included, you'd see an increase of 20 Insider Pages, 35 Gameplay Elements in D391, and 20 Insider Pages, 34 Gameplay Elements in D394.
To my mind, if any of it is to be included, it should be the D391 article. That was the basis for 95% of the article in D393 (which wasn't compiled), which was in turn the basis for 99% of the D394 article--meaning minimal new content.
The numbers would translate to a 21% increase in % Insider Pages for D391 and a bump to Elements per Page of 0.614--a significant spike that would bump that issue back up near pre-388 levels.
I'm also planning on using Calendar months. My Jan number was compiled at the end of Jan, and does not contain 395 articles that got pushed out to Feb. My Feb number will contain those articles, but won't contain any 396 articles that get pushed to March.