here is what they said just today. they were asked: "Just wondering, do you think we will still be able to use the CB for 4e once NEXT is released?"
"We want to keep support for the CB going, but it's too early to tell exactly how that's going to work out."
twitter.com/#!/Wizards_DnD
im sorry but that doesnt fill this loyal subscriber with much confidence and it is a much weaker statement than you gave us the day you dropped the 5e bomb. what you need to say to us is that under no circumstance will you kill 4e tools when next comes out. you need to tell us not that you 'intend' to support 4e tools, but that you WILL, period.
this kind of tweet is completely irresponsible if you are going to support it, and if you arent, then tell us now
I will echo your request. WotC needs to answer this question and answer it indefinitely. There can be no tip toeing around it, I think its a make and break decision for supporters of both 4E and 5E.
I've been a pretty big supporter of DDI. I like what's out, I recognize significant improvement when I see it, and I have pretty high hopes for the future of the service.
But this is some piss poor communication, Wiz. Piss poor.
4e Character Builder to be a permanent part of DDI with updates continuing through the final releases of any 4e material
Same goes for the Compendium AND the Monster Builder -- these are vital to my game.
I want the VT to remain compatible with the 4e Character Builder and Monster Builder.
This is the primary reason that I have a DDI subscription and when these tools are no longer available I won't be renewing my account.
Why are you so suprised? The entire point of the GSL (and why it was written the way it was) was to ensure that when Wotc changed editions, they could stop 4e cold. Completely cold. That means cutting off the 4e support in DDI after a certain period. If Wotc believes that 4e people aren't switching over to 5e in "enough numbers", 4e support will vanish overnight and without warning. You heard it here first.
-Polaris
The Character Builder is my friend. If it is not fully-4e-supportive, my subscription will end, regardless of my feelings toward 5e. Fortunately, there is a 4e offline builder support community out there, so my 4e tools will not disappear if WotC pulls the plug. And if worse comes to worst, I will learn how to make characters manually, just like I did for all previous editions.
Fortunately, there is a 4e offline builder support community out there, so my 4e tools will not disappear if WotC pulls the plug.
This is an important point. If WotC kills the online 4e CB, it won't make any real difference to me because I have alternatives. What it will do is guarantee that they get no more of my money, because (once there are no more 4e books to buy) they do not have any alternative ways of getting my money other than through me choosing to maintain my DDi subscription.
Hopefully someone at WoTC takes a long, hard look at the Netflix disaster and understands that the contemporary market is one over which they have far less control than they used to. It would be easy enough to switch to another product or service that is willing to fill the gap should they decide things need to change.
On an alternative note, should they feel like an OCB and the constant maintenance it requires is no longer worth their time and effort, I would appreciate a downloadable builder be made available.
Realistically thinking however, I am sure they don't really care what I want or think and will continue to screw me over as much as possible, while still offering just enough to keep my money coming in.
tl;dr I'm disillusioned...
OP,
Why are you so suprised? The entire point of the GSL (and why it was written the way it was) was to ensure that when Wotc changed editions, they could stop 4e cold. Completely cold. That means cutting off the 4e support in DDI after a certain period. If Wotc believes that 4e people aren't switching over to 5e in "enough numbers", 4e support will vanish overnight and without warning.
-Polaris
There is no certainty here. If there are enough 4e players who are putting out good money and make it clear they won't switch to 5e in any case, support for 4e may continue for a long time, or it may end as soon as some top executive has a brainstorm. In essence, there is nothing WOTC can say that we should consider reliable. There are too many ifs involved.
However support for 4e is not likely to vanish without warning. It may be short warning, but we should expect an announcement, along with a pitch about how easy it is to switch over to 5e.
Fortunately, there is a 4e offline builder support community out there, so my 4e tools will not disappear if WotC pulls the plug.
This is an important point. If WotC kills the online 4e CB, it won't make any real difference to me because I have alternatives. What it will do is guarantee that they get no more of my money, because (once there are no more 4e books to buy) they do not have any alternative ways of getting my money other than through me choosing to maintain my DDi subscription.
Ditto. I mean, just looking at the transition from 3e to 4e, and ignoring the people who went to Pathfinder....how many people just pirate the 3e books they want? If Wizards kills DDI, or removes all the 4e from it....what makes them think that people won't just pirate the material anyways if they don't want to switch to 5e?
edit: or just use the offline builder. Which, by the by, was better than the current builder.
Fortunately, there is a 4e offline builder support community out there, so my 4e tools will not disappear if WotC pulls the plug.
This is an important point. If WotC kills the online 4e CB, it won't make any real difference to me because I have alternatives. What it will do is guarantee that they get no more of my money, because (once there are no more 4e books to buy) they do not have any alternative ways of getting my money other than through me choosing to maintain my DDi subscription.
Ditto. I mean, just looking at the transition from 3e to 4e, and ignoring the people who went to Pathfinder....how many people just pirate the 3e books they want? If Wizards kills DDI, or removes all the 4e from it....what makes them think that people won't just pirate the material anyways if they don't want to switch to 5e?
edit: or just use the offline builder. Which, by the by, was better than the current builder.
You forgot this:
Our party has become addicted to those tools... it just makes everything so much easier and quicker. Need a new character quickly... done in ten minutes (not two hours)... need some rewards for the party? Go to the compendium and get exactly what you want and print it out. Need to level a monster up or down quickly? Done.
One quick thought... I would make a guess that many of the DDI subscriptions represent not just one D&D fan/player/DM but probably whole groups of people. I know that WOTC would prefer that everyone would have their own sub but in our group of about 7 people, I am the only one who subscribes and we all gather to make characters together on the builder. Not ideal for WOTC to sell one sub instead of 7... but on the flip side, all of these 7 have also purchased D&D books, minis, a couple have purchased D&D board games for home... they have spent money. And if the 4E tools disappear and I as the DM drop DDI and D&D altogether, well... our whole group will drop off the WOTC radar.
Come on WotC, give us a firm commitment or you will lose people very quickly. You already know how hard it can be to get them back (ie - creating 5e)
WotC needs to get out in front of this NOW before they lose the paying customers they still have. I know a LOT of 4e players who are getting ready to jump ship to a different system because they feel the edition is dying. This kind of waffling will probably push them over the edge. WotC is at least a year away from releasing 5e and I bet losing a lot of customers would hurt them where it counts.
Come on WotC, give us a firm commitment or you will lose people very quickly. You already know how hard it can be to get them back (ie - creating 5e)
They (Wotc) can't. They can't because the decision will ultimately be up to mgt and that decision will depend on how well 5e does. If 5e falters even a little (by Hasbro standards mind you not real TRPG standards), then Wotc will yank all 4e support in an effort to inflate 5e as a last ditch effort by trying to force 4e people to convert. You are hearing it here first. That's why Wotc is waffling. They will not commit to something that they (reasonably) don't think they can follow through on.
-Polaris
WotC needs to get out in front of this NOW before they lose the paying customers they still have. I know a LOT of 4e players who are getting ready to jump ship to a different system because they feel the edition is dying. This kind of waffling will probably push them over the edge. WotC is at least a year away from releasing 5e and I bet losing a lot of customers would hurt them where it counts.
Come on WotC, give us a firm commitment or you will lose people very quickly. You already know how hard it can be to get them back (ie - creating 5e)
They (Wotc) can't. They can't because the decision will ultimately be up to mgt and that decision will depend on how well 5e does. If 5e falters even a little (by Hasbro standards mind you not real TRPG standards), then Wotc will yank all 4e support in an effort to inflate 5e as a last ditch effort by trying to force 4e people to convert. You are hearing it here first. That's why Wotc is waffling. They will not commit to something that they (reasonably) don't think they can follow through on.
-Polaris
The honest problem with this thinking (and it's been stated right here in this thread) is that none of us have to switch over, not even if they pull all their tools. In fact, that would give us more reason not to switch. So if some schmuck at the top thinks like in "ye olde days" when we didn't have internet, community, and a dedicated fan base for any one of the editions, 4th included, and they can just pull the rug and expect someone to fall in line? Well, that person needs to be fired, and they need to get someone in there who knows the way things go now that we have this here internet.
Because we will find a way, no matter what their decision is. That's the beauty of fandom and the internet. We may get screwed by them, but it doesn't really matter; there are plenty of independet tools, and furthermore, everyone I know who has the legacy CB has it backed up. And that's not counting more . . . unsavory avenues.
It's better to make money off us than drive us further away. If they think pulling the plug will get us to "convert", they are sorely mistaken. Good quality and enjoyable gaming mechanics, and a solid, non-broken gaming system will get us to play their new iteration. Nothing else.
Hopefully they read this.
Besides- relax. D&D Next is all about fluffy, tree hugging, let's all get along edition lovers (Mearlsy Mearls- there will always be edition wars no matter how fat and awesome DDnext is). I don't see them killing off 4E support for DDI. I just think they want your DDI money- 4E or 5E- it doesn't matter; we just want your cold hard cash. There will not be any online maintenance for the 4E once DD Next is released- no more 4E will be coming out so what is there to maintenance!
Meh, it's too soon for them to know exactly what they intend to do with DDI 4th support. I don't intend to switch over to D&D Next. I've been a DDI supporter from its beginning but I don't plan on keeping my subscription once D&D Next comes out. Everything I have is in the books and in the articles/magazines. I create all my character sheets by hand and use post-it notes for monster modifications.
Besides- relax. D&D Next is all about fluffy, tree hugging, let's all get along edition lovers (Mearlsy Mearls- there will always be edition wars no matter how fat and awesome DDnext is). I don't see them killing off 4E support for DDI. I just think they want your DDI money- 4E or 5E- it doesn't matter; we just want your cold hard cash. There will not be any online maintenance for the 4E once DD Next is released- no more 4E will be coming out so what is there to maintenance!
I suppose that's one positive; they'd never miss an update deadline again!
Meh, it's too soon for them to know exactly what they intend to do with DDI 4th support. I don't intend to switch over to D&D Next. I've been a DDI supporter from its beginning but I don't plan on keeping my subscription once D&D Next comes out. Everything I have is in the books and in the articles/magazines. I create all my character sheets by hand and use post-it notes for monster modifications.
Besides- relax. D&D Next is all about fluffy, tree hugging, let's all get along edition lovers (Mearlsy Mearls- there will always be edition wars no matter how fat and awesome DDnext is). I don't see them killing off 4E support for DDI. I just think they want your DDI money- 4E or 5E- it doesn't matter; we just want your cold hard cash. There will not be any online maintenance for the 4E once DD Next is released- no more 4E will be coming out so what is there to maintenance!
I suppose that's one positive; they'd never miss an update deadline again!
Double LOL!
But seriously WotC, at the very least finish 4E DDi BEFORE 5E/D&D Next comes out. After all the kobold droppings that hit the fan concerning DDi and 4E, just PLEASE. We still need:
1) an encounter builder
2) a way to create companion characters
3) a way to modify character/monster/treasure/sheets
4) full tile/token support for the VT. Not even having all the tokens from the "Red Box" is just ridiculous...
5) full house rule implementation across the board
6) a way to print maps an such we make from the tiles
7) full epic support including a DMG 3 by among others Chris Perkins
8) encounters style character and monster cards
PLEASE
Also, while I do feel for those who will be CB-less when WoTC cuts the obline 4e CB, I can't help but chuckle at all those who defended the thing when the transition happened.
And to those who didn't think they'd pull something like this, We told you so!
Sigh.
I've been a pretty big supporter of DDI. I like what's out, I recognize significant improvement when I see it, and I have pretty high hopes for the future of the service.
But this is some piss poor communication, Wiz. Piss poor.
I want to second this opinion. I remember Steve Winters (before they fired him) writing that in the last year they had learned a lot from their mistakes and had embarked on a more open and honest communication with customers. He said the result was a greatly improved atmosphere on the forums and a better product because people were more willing to give constructive feedback.
I fear that WotC is reverting to their old bad habits of secrecy, misdirection, and obfuscation.
Don't beat around the bush WotC, just be honest and tell us what you are planning. Let us be a part of the conversation so we can give you quality feedback.
Sigh.
I've been a pretty big supporter of DDI. I like what's out, I recognize significant improvement when I see it, and I have pretty high hopes for the future of the service.
But this is some piss poor communication, Wiz. Piss poor.
I want to second this opinion. I remember Steve Winters (before they fired him) writing that in the last year they had learned a lot from their mistakes and had embarked on a more open and honest communication with customers. He said the result was a greatly improved atmosphere on the forums and a better product because people were more willing to give constructive feedback.
I fear that WotC is reverting to their old bad habits of secrecy, misdirection, and obfuscation.
Don't beat around the bush WotC, just be honest and tell us what you are planning. Let us be a part of the conversation so we can give you quality feedback.
Yeah, I'm getting the feeling that all the hubbub with NDA's and tightly controlled information release regarding D&D Next, they have reverted back to some old not-so-good habits with 4e.
I'd love to know what products are going to be released to wrap up 4e. Its basically March and we still don't know what's going to be released after August? Come on.
"Hey guys, we'd like to continue to support the 4e tools into the future but we're not sure best how to do that. How can we create archival quality software that will still be accessable into the future given limited resources to support 4e products? What advice do you have on setting up such a system?"
Asking the client what they want is the cornerstone of marketing and customer support. There's also a lot of very knowledgable people on these forums who make a living in techonology and would undoubtably give some good advice on the topic.
You've got to get into the forums and talk to the people who pay for your product. Vague comments in Twitter are not a good form of communication. Don't be afraid of us, we want to help you help us.
I'd love to know what products are going to be released to wrap up 4e. Its basically March and we still don't know what's going to be released after August? Come on.
The answer is pretty much nothing.
By August, 5e will be in start-up mode, and all attention will be on the big roll-out in 13. There will be little attention paid to any loose ends for 4e.
One of the early signs of 4e [which I more or less missed] was the lack of product for the 2nd half of the year. [Which, I'm told, sold poorly, and some said deserved to.] And while WOTC is giving us an earlier warning this time, the same scheduling seems to be in use. 5e will be roughed out until about August and then officially announced. Thereafter there will be a host of minor changes and the actual production for August 13. In the meantime, 4e will be left to wither. If some product comes in without problems and looks hot, it will be offered, but they are just going after the low-hanging fruit. They are not going to artistically finish 4e.
And we as players don't have much interest in them making 4e produce. Right now there is still a year to play with it and it's a reasonable buy, but with every day, that becomes more questionable and by year's end, we will be concentrating our purchases on edition-free stuff. 4e buys will be limited to those we can use right away. Much better for us that they make sure 5e is done right than that they put out a little junk we will soon throw away. [Now it is possible that 5e will bomb and 4e will still sell well in January, but in that case, they should not bother with 5e at all. Having decided there is good potential in 5e, the decision to produce little or no more 4e products follows almost immediately and automatically.]
Gee, if only there were some way to enjoy my favorite rpg without WotC's support...
thats not really the point though is it? the tools allow you to scan all classes entire power lists from every source instantaneously. you can import your own monsters and pcs into the vt. i could go on and on, but suffice it to say that the fact that you can make a pc by hand isnt either impressive or pertinent. im sure everyone has a different value they ascribe to the tools, but this is about whether they keep them up or not, not whether you personally like or need them
Gee, if only there were some way to enjoy my favorite rpg without WotC's support...
thats not really the point though is it? the tools allow you to scan all classes entire power lists from every source instantaneously. you can import your own monsters and pcs into the vt. i could go on and on, but suffice it to say that the fact that you can make a pc by hand isnt either impressive or pertinent. im sure everyone has a different value they ascribe to the tools, but this is about whether they keep them up or not, not whether you personally like or need them
I'll go a step further. It's also about stating one thing and then quickly back-peddling back out of it. They said they plan to support the tools, now it's well...."maybe, possibly, we're not sure, we're looking into it."
By the way "we're looking into it and we're excited about the future plans" is the new WotC stock answer.
Gee, if only there were some way to enjoy my favorite rpg without WotC's support...
thats not really the point though is it? the tools allow you to scan all classes entire power lists from every source instantaneously. you can import your own monsters and pcs into the vt. i could go on and on, but suffice it to say that the fact that you can make a pc by hand isnt either impressive or pertinent. im sure everyone has a different value they ascribe to the tools, but this is about whether they keep them up or not, not whether you personally like or need them
I'll go a step further. It's also about stating one thing and then quickly back-peddling back out of it. They said they plan to support the tools, now it's well...."maybe, possibly, we're not sure, we're looking into it."
By the way "we're looking into it and we're excited about the future plans" is the new WotC stock answer.
. . . "soon" what? ;)
I'll be mad as hell if the old back-log of 4e Dragon/ Dungeon Magazine articles that are now online only aren't accessible. There was some seriously good content tucked away in all that and it's one of the few things I'd still re-subscribe over.
Do WotC people not ever read forums and answer questions? I mean, they must read them, how can they not? But I guess they don't ever bother to answer?
They sometimes do but the answer is usually: "We can't say for sure at this point but we'll look into it. Meanwhile, we are excited about our future plans that are not pertinent to your question but that we thought we could mention here!"
With the advent of DDI I changed my customer role from buying several of the books and using single parts of it to buying a subscription and accessing all material in a convenient way. I made this decision knowing that I'd have to trust WotC to fullfill their part of the bargain as long as I want, ie, as long as my 4e campaign is running.
As my campaigns tend to run for a long time, it will be probably in full swing at the time D&DN is released. I won't cut this healthy campaign short because of the new edition. So what will happen if DDI 4e is removed before our campaign ends?
We will continue to play our game, of course, using some other means to support it. But I won't be able to further trust WotC to fullfill their part of the bargain and, as I prefer not to deal with companies I don't trust, this will be the end of me being a WotC customer.
Maybe I'm part of a minority with my slow moving games, maybe I'm not part of their D&D customer demographic anymore, maybe they don't actually care: it doesn't matter. I'll be spending my money and playing a game that I want to play and feel good spending my money for.
Gee, if only there were some way to enjoy my favorite rpg without WotC's support...
thats not really the point though is it? the tools allow you to scan all classes entire power lists from every source instantaneously. you can import your own monsters and pcs into the vt. i could go on and on, but suffice it to say that the fact that you can make a pc by hand isnt either impressive or pertinent. im sure everyone has a different value they ascribe to the tools, but this is about whether they keep them up or not, not whether you personally like or need them
This.
I am looking for some sort of timescale for when these tools are going to be scaled back or cancelled (if they are) or a guarantee they are being continued. The new edition looks good but the 4E tools are enormous time savers for me and my time is precious so if they are suddenly going to be pulled I would like to know, particularly given that I'm signed up for another year (as of a few days before the D&D Next announcement / leak) and therefore paying money for them.
The VT, which had such promise, seems to have been put on the back burner after a year of pretty slow development so are we going to see the same thing happen with other tools?
as a Mac user I wish I had more (any) 3rd party options. I used to use the old offline CB under Bootcamp, but I had to get rid of the partition so I lost it.
I am a mac user too. I use HeroLab as my character builder. It's ugly and one has to use windows in order to download material from the compendium (and wait even 8 hours in order to download everything) but it's legal (at least that's what the herolab guys say) and the said content remains in your computer for ever!
The mac version is in beta, but you can download it for free, once you buy the pc version.
There are some bugs, some content missing, but still, it is a lot easier to create / upgrade your character, than using pen and paper.
I only wish there was something to replace adventure tools too...
And, anyone at WOTC, listen to me please: the reason that I bought herolab is that I have no faith in you. I don't believe that you will let me use the 4e tools for years to come and if you don't support them, I am sure that someday something will be incompatible with my system and I won't be able to use them.
I would pay an entire year's subscription for each of the programms that I like (character builder and adventure tools) if only I could download them to my computer, after 5e comes out. Hell, I don't even want all the content, I would be happy to have only the content from the books that I own!
as a Mac user I wish I had more (any) 3rd party options. I used to use the old offline CB under Bootcamp, but I had to get rid of the partition so I lost it.
I am a mac user too. I use HeroLab as my character builder. It's ugly and one has to use windows in order to download material from the compendium (and wait even 8 hours in order to download everything) but it's legal (at least that's what the herolab guys say) and the said content remains in your computer for ever!
The mac version is in beta, but you can download it for free, once you buy the pc version.
There are some bugs, some content missing, but still, it is a lot easier to create / upgrade your character, than using pen and paper.
I only wish there was something to replace adventure tools too...
And, anyone at WOTC, listen to me please: the reason that I bought herolab is that I have no faith in you. I don't believe that you will let me use the 4e tools for years to come and if you don't support them, I am sure that someday something will be incompatible with my system and I won't be able to use them.
I would pay an entire year's subscription for each of the programms that I like (character builder and adventure tools) if only I could download them to my computer, after 5e comes out. Hell, I don't even want all the content, I would be happy to have only the content from the books that I own!
How is Herolab? Does it have all the latest greatest stuff, like themes, racial utility powers, and essentials classes? How is the homebrew support for it?
How is Herolab? Does it have all the latest greatest stuff, like themes, racial utility powers, and essentials classes? How is the homebrew support for it?
Well, I'll tell you what I know for sure. I had a problem using material that was available in more than one sources. There was this feat that was in both heroes of... books and player's handbook. When I unchecked the player's handbook (that I do not own and I want to use only the content from the books that I have bought) the feat was gone. So the filter option before you start creating your character, is not such a good idea. Then again I maybe was so unlucky and this is the only feat that is not available.
My sentinel had to use one more atwill power than she whould normally choose at first level. Then again, I have to check again to be sure that I didn't do something wrong...
There is no content from the "heroes of the feywild" book. It will be in the future I guess, but as it is right now, you cannot use it. I do not know about other books that came out later than the hotf.
You can change some things, I think that you can even design your own class or powers from scratch. I only took a quick look at it, and the interface was a bit.. well I didn't understand much. Then again, I didn't spent much time.
I don't know if I helped you. I prefer the online builder a thousand times, but herolab can just do the work. Or at least, help you a lot!
Support is average at best. I bought it last week and right away I encountered an issue because of the new Compendium entries. My dowload failed twice. They offered no solution, nor any hints in what could be the cause. Their answer was "you will have to wait a few days for the patch to the downloader." I managed to solve the problem on my own. The patch just arrived yesterday, although I haven't tested it yet.
The only real advantage is that you can add anything custom, albeit it has a learning curve to do so. I was able to add the Skald from Feywild manually so I could roll one up.
The online builder is far superior as it stands. If you could build things custom in the online builder, there would really be no need for HL.
Well, I'll tell you what I know for sure. I had a problem using material that was available in more than one sources. There was this feat that was in both heroes of... books and player's handbook. When I unchecked the player's handbook (that I do not own and I want to use only the content from the books that I have bought) the feat was gone. So the filter option before you start creating your character, is not such a good idea. Then again I maybe was so unlucky and this is the only feat that is not available.
My sentinel had to use one more atwill power than she whould normally choose at first level. Then again, I have to check again to be sure that I didn't do something wrong...
There is no content from the "heroes of the feywild" book. It will be in the future I guess, but as it is right now, you cannot use it. I do not know about other books that came out later than the hotf.
You can change some things, I think that you can even design your own class or powers from scratch. I only took a quick look at it, and the interface was a bit.. well I didn't understand much. Then again, I didn't spent much time.
I don't know if I helped you. I prefer the online builder a thousand times, but herolab can just do the work. Or at least, help you a lot!
Thanks for the information. The ability to use it offline and the ability to create custom content are more important to me than timely updates so this may prove to be useful for me.
I'm not sure that WotC knows what it's going to do re: DDI. I'm not sure there will even be a DDI for 5e.
First point: agree, at least for 4e. I have a good bet theyre busy carefully planning their 5e DDI rollout.
Second point: DDI for 5e is an absolute guarantee. Theres no way WotC is going back to offline electronic tools. Theyve been very clear that the move to online was an attempt at protecting their intellectual property and I doubt the lawyers at Hasbro would let them backtrack on that change. At the D&D XP convention last month they said the VT will soon be able to run games from any edition of D&D, especially 5e. We know the DDI team has been putting in a lot of work into the software (at least the few forum posts they make that tell us that) but weve seen virtually no change to the online tools in a long time. The only thing I can think of is that theyre working on something for 5e. Paulo posted many months ago that he was busy putting the S in Adventure ToolS. We still havnt seen anything new so my guess is that he is working on tools for 5e.
Assuming my guesses are correct, I feel a little cheated thinking that a chunk of my subscription money is going towards building software for a game system I might not play. However, I still receive a lot of value from my 4e subscription so its still worth it for me, for now at least.
There's no way Wizards could responsibly give a definitive statement on 4e support for the rest of humanity's future, a "will always support" statement is simply never going to be made as there are too many unforseen possibilities that could impact it. A "we plan to" is the best statement that any responsible company could make. Ultimately, if enough people continue subscribing to justify its inclusion, it'll stay. If no one uses it, and it becomes a burden that makes future iteration impossible, it'll probably go away or be shifted to its own thing. That's my guess, anyway.
I agree with this. There is no way they can commit to support the 4E tools indefinitely and given the seemingly limited support team, I suspect we will get minimal updates until 5E comes out. The point I was trying to make above, though, is that a lot of people rely on these tools to play and run their games so a communications strategy for how they scale back 4E support should be part of their planning. They can't suddenly announce they are switching off 4E tools in a month or a week and expect everyone to be ok with it.
I suspect we will see some overlap between 4E tools being available but unsupported and 5E tools coming out in the hope that we all jump on the new edition (which I'd hope to want to do) and then they can quietly switch off 4E tools after a few months of the new edition. Here's hoping....
A "we plan to" is the best statement that any responsible company could make.
I am sorry, but I have to argue. A (hypothetical) "till March 2013" would be the statement of a responsible company. Everything else just seems like "well, we'll see, if there is people interested and if we don't have other things to do, or simply if we want... then, yeah, we (now) plan to, but tomorrow we may not... So, you just pay right now and we'll see..."
Not so responsible, no, no...
However, their service is (almost) great and if you don't agree with that you have to admit that their applications are better of everything else that exists out there for 4e. I just wonder why don't they sell as offline applications the adventure tools and the character builder once 5e comes out... Who wouldn't buy them? Knowing that after sometime (but not specifically when) the tools will no more be available...
on twitter today, and over the past weeks, wizards seem to beat around the bush on 4e tools, slowly but surely backing away from their 'promise' to support 4e tools after 5e comes out. i want 4e subscribers to please make your voice heard regarding this
here is what they said just today. they were asked: "Just wondering, do you think we will still be able to use the CB for 4e once NEXT is released?"
"We want to keep support for the CB going, but it's too early to tell exactly how that's going to work out."
twitter.com/#!/Wizards_DnD
im sorry but that doesnt fill this loyal subscriber with much confidence and it is a much weaker statement than you gave us the day you dropped the 5e bomb. what you need to say to us is that under no circumstance will you kill 4e tools when next comes out. you need to tell us not that you 'intend' to support 4e tools, but that you WILL, period.
this kind of tweet is completely irresponsible if you are going to support it, and if you arent, then tell us now
Wizards ongoing business practice of giving loyal players less while charging more, and making changes that FORCE us to migrate to the newest edition, by eliminating support for past editions is not only driving me away as a player...
It is also making me reconsider my plans to open a gaming center that would have revolved around games like D&D and MTG. I can not in good conscience have a business that supports such unethical practices.
Asking them now what their plans are for 4th Edition support in DDI in D&D Next is quite unrealistic. There are an enormous number of things that could happen that could result in things changing as to whether or not they can (or will) support 4E then.
D&D Next is, by my guess, about 18 months out (GenCon 2013 is my guess).
Asking them now what their plans are for 4th Edition support in DDI in D&D Next is quite unrealistic. There are an enormous number of things that could happen that could result in things changing as to whether or not they can (or will) support 4E then.
im sorry, but thats absurd. you act like they cant control anything when it is their choice and their choice alone whether they stay up. if other businesses used your "shucks we dont know what is happening" line of thinking then what a mess the world would be.
D&D Next is, by my guess, about 18 months out (GenCon 2013 is my guess).
Asking them now what their plans are for 4th Edition support in DDI in D&D Next is quite unrealistic. There are an enormous number of things that could happen that could result in things changing as to whether or not they can (or will) support 4E then.
im sorry, but thats absurd. you act like they cant control anything when it is their choice and their choice alone whether they stay up. if other businesses used your "shucks we dont know what is happening" line of thinking then what a mess the world would be.
You are asking them to commit to something when they have no idea at all of how many subscribers they will have that will want to continue playing 4E. There is a minimum number of subscribers that need to exist for WotC to even consider continuing to support 4E. It is a matter of business reality.
Do I think that WotC should continue to support 4E?? Yes, definitely. Do I think that they *have* to support it, no matter the circumstances? No.
We have seen time and time again that D&D fans on the forums, as soon as WotC makes *any* sort of announcement on what they might do in the future that it is taken as holy writ.
ah, so its kind of like when they announced that subscribers didnt like compiled magazines. i get it. the current subscriber base will be blamed
I can see the future announcement now....
As a result of our online polls and data analysis, we have decided that most DDI customers want to play 5e and we will shut down our 4e tools in the coming weeks. Our new direction is very exciting and we look forward to bringing you lots of great new tools very soon.
ah, so its kind of like when they announced that subscribers didnt like compiled magazines. i get it. the current subscriber base will be blamed
Yeah, exactly like that.
Of course, what actually happened is that they said that the great majority of people went only to the articles and not the compiled magazines. Plus, it saved significant amounts of time (and thus, money just having to make corrections to the articles as opposed to the articles and then re-compiling the magazine, which often included re-formatting it and re-doing the pagination. But that is just the nitpicky details.
But, to be blunt. Yes. It will be up to the subscriber base. If a significant number contnue to use DDI tools and indicate that they wnt to use the D&D Next version of the DDI tools to continue to run 4E stuff, then WotC will probably do so. If only 30 or 40 people want to continue using it, then WotC has to see if the time can be better spent elsewhere.
Plus, it saved significant amounts of time (and thus, money just having to make corrections to the articles as opposed to the articles and then re-compiling the magazine, which often included re-formatting it and re-doing the pagination. But that is just the nitpicky details.
And of course that monetary savings was passed on to the customer in the form of reduced subscription fees. Oh wait, it wasn't.
But that's just a nitpicky detail.
Plus, it saved significant amounts of time (and thus, money just having to make corrections to the articles as opposed to the articles and then re-compiling the magazine, which often included re-formatting it and re-doing the pagination. But that is just the nitpicky details.
And of course that monetary savings was passed on to the customer in the form of reduced subscription fees. Oh wait, it wasn't.
But that's just a nitpicky detail.
Were the savings used perhaps to prevent an increase in the subscription fee?
Were the savings used to reduce the amount at which DDI was operating in the red ?
Were the savings put towards future improvements in DDI or the hardware behind it?
All of my possibilities are much more likely than yours. Expecting a subscription company to reduce the price that the customers pay is, to use a favourite phrase of mine, unrealistic.
All of my possibilities are much more likely than yours.
Why? Without any comment at all from WotC, my possibility is just as valid as yours. "Much more likely" is very loaded statement to be making without any evidence whatsoever.
Expecting a subscription company to reduce the price that the customers pay is, to use a favourite phrase of mine, unrealistic.
No, not unrealistic at all. I'm currently a subscriber to a number of services. I can think of two situations in the last year where subscription rates were dropped and they have yet to increase. In one case the company scaled back its offering and dropped rates as a result to customer complaints (which they openly acknowledged in an honest and forthwright manner) while in the other case a company dropped rates as a way to retain customers who were defecting to another service (also acknowledged by the company in question. They make no secret of their attempts to undercut their competitors).
The big problem I have with WotC in this case is that I find their stated rationale behind removing the compiled mags to be simply unbelievable and their total lack of response to significant and ongoing customer complaint an offense to the paying customers.
I've been a very happy supporter of DDI throughout most of its history. Heck, I even like the fact that the CB and MB are online because I like accessing my characters/monster everywhere I go. BUT the way they (mis)handled the removal of compiled magazines has really made me angry. I find that my good will towards WotC is slowly draining away. Most companies actively try to encourage customer retention through promotions, sales, rewards, and new products. This makes customers feel valued and happy to pay for a product. How many customers might WotC retain or even gain with a little more effort to keep us happy?
I'm okay with what I get from my DDI subscription, but I'm certainly not happy with it. There is a tipping point when customers who feel okay begin to feel unhappy. I'm not sure where my own tipping point is, but I do know that I recently resubbed to DDI for 3 months instead of the yearly subscription I had before.
I've been a very happy supporter of DDI throughout most of its history. Heck, I even like the fact that the CB and MB are online because I like accessing my characters/monster everywhere I go.
For many it seems this was a horrible situation that caused no small amount of hand-wringing. The *one* "fact" it seems is that WoTC will fail in trying to please everyone. I will guess, that like most companies they will analyze their data and research and choose the options that will (a) please the most customers in a (b) cost effective manner and (c) cause the least amount of customer loss. Part of this calculation will be based on how much their customers are willing to "take" before walking from the product. It's done by many companies from Netflix to Bank of America to Time Warner Cable / Comcast / etc. Most companies, when they see their calculations are off, will change direction such as Netflix and Bank of America did. It's business as usual. Par for the course.
As far as subscriptions giving refunds, I know my local cable company has had many disputes with programmers over raising their cost per suscriber or tier placing. Some of these has led to the channels being taken off the air until new agreements were reached. In few of the cases was I given a rebate while the channel was off the air. More often then not, my bill stayed the same while I lost out on the channel. In the most recent case, subscribers were given replacement access to a more expensive channel. But if you were already receiving this replacement channel, then you were not compensated any further. Unless you called and complained.
As far as DnD, for us this is a hobby. For them it's a business as much as we wish (and I'm sure many of their employees) wish it was run as hobby by hobbyists.
As far as being more forthcoming, I've seen too many statements by WoTC employees be analyzed, dissected and taken out of context by posters which then get innocently picked up by others posters and rages across the forum to cause bad will. No wonder they are gun shy.
Plus, it saved significant amounts of time (and thus, money just having to make corrections to the articles as opposed to the articles and then re-compiling the magazine, which often included re-formatting it and re-doing the pagination. But that is just the nitpicky details.
And of course that monetary savings was passed on to the customer in the form of reduced subscription fees. Oh wait, it wasn't.
But that's just a nitpicky detail.
Were the savings used perhaps to prevent an increase in the subscription fee?
Were the savings used to reduce the amount at which DDI was operating in the red ?
Were the savings put towards future improvements in DDI or the hardware behind it?
All of my possibilities are much more likely than yours. Expecting a subscription company to reduce the price that the customers pay is, to use a favourite phrase of mine, unrealistic.
oh my dear mud, where to start. it should be obvious why they had more dls for individual articles. thats bc they had links for the articles come out before the compilation. so some subscribers didnt dl the compilation bc they already had the article. if they didnt put the link out early, then people would only dl the compilation. thus, it has nothing to do with subscribers liking one more than the other. a child can grasp these plain facts.
as to the actual subject of the thread, that being wizards talking out of two sides of their mouths regarding 4e tools, the fact is that this is not treating your current customers well, especially given we are basically paying for their new editions development. heres the deal wizards, if you cant promise the things people are subscribing for will be up thru their subs, DONT SELL SUBS!!!
and to all the 5e players out there, watch how they treat their 4e customers when they get ready to dump them. same as they did 3e players. this is going to be you in about 4 or 5 years when they make 6e
oh my dear mud, where to start. it should be obvious why they had more dls for individual articles. thats bc they had links for the articles come out before the compilation. so some subscribers didnt dl the compilation bc they already had the article. if they didnt put the link out early, then people would only dl the compilation. thus, it has nothing to do with subscribers liking one more than the other. a child can grasp these plain facts.
Wait. What?
If people wanted the compiled issues more, they would have downloaded the at the end of the month. It is as simple as that. What you are arguing is that somehow WotC is supposed to be able to determine how many people didn't download the compiled issues because they prefer the individual articles and how many people didn't download the compiled issues because they prefer the compiled issues.
If more people downloaded the individual articles, despite the option for downloading the compiled mgazines being available, there is no other possibility that WotC can determine out of it. They cannot guess why people downloaded (or didn't download) a given article/magazine. All they can go on is by the numbers. And the numbers indicated, according to WotC, that a very significant majority of people *only* downloaded the ndividual articles.
as to the actual subject of the thread, that being wizards talking out of two sides of their mouths regarding 4e tools, the fact is that this is not treating your current customers well, especially given we are basically paying for their new editions development. heres the deal wizards, if you cant promise the things people are subscribing for will be up thru their subs, DONT SELL SUBS!!!
How are they not treating their current customers well? The Compendium and other DDI tools are being updated with information. They have said that they would like to continue support for 4E in DDI once D&D Next comes out. Expecting them to commit to something 17+months out is unrealistic. Also, given that the maximum length of time for which you can subscribe is 1 year, no-one can subscribe past the popular guesstimate for when D&D Next will be released (which is GenCon 2013.)
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />
? its 17 months away after all. what a joke.i will try a different angle on the articles, since you dont seem to grasp my point. even if more people dled the separate articles, it shouldnt matter. these guys have been given the keys to the most famous and beloved game magazine of all time, and bc a few people dl an article separate from the comp (DUE TO THEM POSTING THE ARTICLES UP SEPARATELY), their solution is to stop putting them together as mags? thats crazy. they have to be lazy, bc i cant stand to think that they honestly think they are curbing piracy. bc thats just a freaking joke. they have no respect for the mags. hell even about a year ago they were floating the idea of not even having two mags. now were getting a 200 issue retrospective; they should have an article in there apologizing
i will try a different angle on the articles, since you dont seem to grasp my point. even if more people dled the separate articles, it shouldnt matter. these guys have been given the keys to the most famous and beloved game magazine of all time, and bc a few people dl an article separate from the comp (DUE TO THEM POSTING THE ARTICLES UP SEPARATELY), their solution is to stop putting them together as mags? thats crazy. they have to be lazy, bc i cant stand to think that they honestly think they are curbing piracy. bc thats just a freaking joke. they have no respect for the mags. hell even about a year ago they were floating the idea of not even having two mags. now were getting a 200 issue retrospective; they should have an article in there apologizing
Without getting into the will they / won't they commit to 4E tools argument, I very much sympathise with the compiled issues point. I still think that was a serious mistake and there are very simple ways for these figures to be potentially misread. Personally, I have downloaded multiple copies of articles on occasions since I index things multiple ways (issue / setting or DM / player content for example). I only ever downloaded an issue compilation once. Not sure how the stats are collated but this could skew numbers if others are doing the same thing.
Secondly, I would be interested to know whether reading an article again classes as a download since the article is usually downloaded to a temporary folder when you are reading it. I have certainly referred to the same article multiple times online but again, I only ever access the compilation once.
I am no expert of course and I would hope WotC took account of vagaries such as these but in all honesty, given the standard of customer engagement at the time, I doubt it.
A) Those who just DL'd the articles when they came out, and then waited for them to be added to the CB, or simply used them as is, skipping compilation (like me).
B) Those who like the compilations, but because individual articles come out, they ALSO download the individual articles. Thus increaseing the DL's of both types.
C) Patient people who wait till the end of the month to DL the whole issue.
Now, I'm generally going to assume the patient people are a minority, as it seems to be the trend these days. This makes the number of pre-comp DL's much larger than the comp DL's, because both group A and B are feeding into them.
I'm also unsure how the numbers are tracked, but its also possible every time the same person downloads the ariticle, this also counts as another DL on Wotc's tracker. A person is more likely to download an individual article multiple times, because that way they can use the website to work as a sort of 'bookmark' for them. Person DLing a compilation is likely to only DL it once to their harddrive.
Once again, thats pretty much my views on how the base is split on its usage. Regardless though, Compilations are really, really easy to do. Its just another feature removed for strange reasons that just annoy the fanbase.
They aren't ready to consider and talk about the tools.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yoa_xQTya8Y
Doesn't really say a lot. Just lets you know they are keeping the online tools in mind as they build.
At 49:30, they are asked about paper books vs digital books, but no real answer is given.
As a potential customer, why should I be interested in paying for a new edition involving digital support from WotC when they don't seem to want to commit to even keeping the older 4E tools available? As soon as the next edition after the upcoming release comes along, I'd be afraid of losing access to the tools for it's predecessor. Without guarantees, why risk committing?
I'll tell you why I'm not terribly worried at this point. The D&D Insider program has been successful for 4e. People are paying a subscription for these tools, and WotC is making money off of it.
I would bet anything that there will be an Insider type of program for 5th edition. I don't expect it will support 4e forever. At best, the current tools will be kept available and alive for a number of years, but not actively worked on or supported before finally being discontinued. For some reason, they don't feel comfortable revealing that. WotC isn't a software company. Maybe they don't realize that software is sort of expected to decay eventually. But support for the current version will certainly happen.
they should just include 4e tools in future ddi subs, it just comes with a 5e sub, along with being able to access old mags. after all, they wont be adding any new content. thats what they would do if they gave a damn about 4e players
Monster Builder:
Ability to Add Templates
Ability to Print Multiple Monsters to a Page ala WotC Adventure Modules with artwork if desired
Aventure Tools:
Encounter Builder Including but NOT limited to Terrain, Environment, Monsters, and Traps.
A Treasure Builder with a way to randomly roll said treasure.
VT:
At least all the tiles and tokens for the Essentials Line that I BOUGHT and paid for. I keep on hearing on how they are figuring out a way for people to pay for these. NO. We are already paying for a BETA and 5E/D&DNext is on the horizon. So please for the love of all that is holy nostalgic in D&D throw us a bone.
Character Builder:
Way to easily mesh essentials and non-essentials characters, especially with the hybrid and multiclassing rules.
Ability to Customize Character Sheets.
Ability to print Character Sheets in "D&D Encounters Premade Formats"
Ability to Have Familiars, Animal Companions, et al, fully stated automatically and printed thus.
Ability to make and print COMPANION CHARACTERS.
Something more than, "we are currently thinking about maybe someday in the future soon looking in to continue offering the DDi in a 4E format possibly"
I.E. - enough already with the corporate double speak. Either you want our money (you know the money that has made DDi profitable) or you dont.
YOU WANT OUR GOOD WILL, GIVE US YOURS, SIMPLE AS THAT. I'm sick of waiting.
I think you might be reading a bit too much into it, Paulon.
I'll tell you why I'm not terribly worried at this point. The D&D Insider program has been successful for 4e. People are paying a subscription for these tools, and WotC is making money off of it.
I would bet anything that there will be an Insider type of program for 5th edition. I don't expect it will support 4e forever. At best, the current tools will be kept available and alive for a number of years, but not actively worked on or supported before finally being discontinued. For some reason, they don't feel comfortable revealing that. WotC isn't a software company. Maybe they don't realize that software is sort of expected to decay eventually. But support for the current version will certainly happen.
This. Whilst I will criticise WotC (and have done) for bad decisions and poor handling, I don't think we can reasonably expect any more than this. The dev team is small for the reasons AL has set out above and they are not going to commit resources to maintain what ultimately will become legacy products. They will instead want to commit as much as possible to ensuring the next edition tools are the best they can be and frankly, that's what I want them to do!
Personally, I would like to see all the lessons that hopefully have been learned in developing D&DI for 4E around managing expectations, promising deliverables rather than ideals and listening to the customer base, applied successfully to the 5E tools. That means I want them to put as many people as possible onto making the tools as good as they can be. If that means the 4E tools are no longer supported 6 months to a year into the new edition then so be it. The only thing I would say is that I hope they have also learned lessons they should have around communications and will tell us in plenty of time when this is going to happen.
LOL they def aren't producing that for a 'dieing' edition.
Also, while I do feel for those who will be CB-less when WoTC cuts the obline 4e CB, I can't help but chuckle at all those who defended the thing when the transition happened.
And to those who didn't think they'd pull something like this, We told you so!
Yep, I said it from the beginning. Just read my signature. WotC has to EARN my trust back and so far they don't look to be doing such a good job.
Imagine for a moment if WotC posted on the forums and said:
"Hey guys, we'd like to continue to support the 4e tools into the future but we're not sure best how to do that. How can we create archival quality software that will still be accessable into the future given limited resources to support 4e products? What advice do you have on setting up such a system?"
Asking the client what they want is the cornerstone of marketing and customer support. There's also a lot of very knowledgable people on these forums who make a living in techonology and would undoubtably give some good advice on the topic.
You've got to get into the forums and talk to the people who pay for your product. Vague comments in Twitter are not a good form of communication. Don't be afraid of us, we want to help you help us.
Speaking as one of those knowledgable people, I can tell you that the server and HDD space is dirt cheap for something like this. If they are paying more than a couple hundred a month, they are getting [explitive deleted]...
D&D Next is, by my guess, about 18 months out (GenCon 2013 is my guess).
Asking them now what their plans are for 4th Edition support in DDI in D&D Next is quite unrealistic. There are an enormous number of things that could happen that could result in things changing as to whether or not they can (or will) support 4E then.
im sorry, but thats absurd. you act like they cant control anything when it is their choice and their choice alone whether they stay up. if other businesses used your "shucks we dont know what is happening" line of thinking then what a mess the world would be.
You are asking them to commit to something when they have no idea at all of how many subscribers they will have that will want to continue playing 4E. There is a minimum number of subscribers that need to exist for WotC to even consider continuing to support 4E. It is a matter of business reality.
Do I think that WotC should continue to support 4E?? Yes, definitely. Do I think that they *have* to support it, no matter the circumstances? No.
We have seen time and time again that D&D fans on the forums, as soon as WotC makes *any* sort of announcement on what they might do in the future that it is taken as holy writ.
We are not asking them to support 4E indefinitely. We are asking them to make the current tools with no more updates available (because it would be dirt cheap and 3-5 members would easily cover the cost per month). If they are unable to do that, then they are more ignorant than they appear...
I still want access to the tools.
Wait now, are you complaining about how the money is folded now?
it would be dirt cheap and 3-5 members would easily cover the cost per month
Citation Needed.
it would be dirt cheap and 3-5 members would easily cover the cost per month
Citation Needed.
First site I found:
Cloud Computing $0.015 per hour of actual usage (it scales base on use). $10.95 per month for 356 MB and goes up from there. Scales so I would say it wouldn't go above $100.00 per month which means what 10 subscribers could keep it going?
Really, not that much. I'm sure if you look around you can go cheaper.
But, the model isn't clear and won't be for some time. Maybe it will make sense for them to support 4E tools after D&D Next's release. Maybe it could be done in a way to keep things separate, not cause confusion for a new player, and get both goodwill and still be focusing on where they should (D&D Next). D&D next speaking to previous editions might allow for both.
I do know I'm having a blast with 4E while having a lot of interest in D&D Next. It will most likely be my new edition, just as all the previous ones replaced the one before it. I will, as I did before, want Wizards to put their energy on the current edition.
It really depends. If DDI is making money, I could imagine that any D&D Next tools could be additive, without removing any existing tools. But, even in that scenario, from a business perspective? I would want to see if people really stay on 4E. For example, imagine that right now they were sustaining a 3E tool... it would be a waste of resources for them. They would earn so little goodwill (and associated revenue, etc.) that it wouldn't be worth it. And their support for an old edition would be contrary to their goals. For example, most of us would say that building 3E support right now would detract from their goals for D&D Next. Over time, that can happen again. We want them focused on the current edition of the game (whichever that happens to be at any given point in time), not the previous one that most people aren't playing.
But, the model isn't clear and won't be for some time. Maybe it will make sense for them to support 4E tools after D&D Next's release. Maybe it could be done in a way to keep things separate, not cause confusion for a new player, and get both goodwill and still be focusing on where they should (D&D Next). D&D next speaking to previous editions might allow for both.
I do know I'm having a blast with 4E while having a lot of interest in D&D Next. It will most likely be my new edition, just as all the previous ones replaced the one before it. I will, as I did before, want Wizards to put their energy on the current edition.
We are not talking about 'extra energy' we are talking about putting it on a scaling cloud server until subscribers can no longer support it, then letting it quietly die (but giving a copy out to everyone before you shut it down, open source it at that point and let others mess with it).
Are we supporting the otehr apps as well? Monster Builder? Virtual table?
Using the website you linked, I selected a single windows server, with 1 GB RAM, with 1 GB outgoing bandwidth(your estimate had 0 outgoing bandwidth), without an SQL backend(which would probably be required), and it costs $0.26/hour.
Adjusting your quote to that cost per hour means we need ~200 subscribers to keep it going.
Also, you aren't taking into consideration that WotC will still need to provide some level of support, just for the people who call in saying they can't connect to the service.
Maybe that's still feasible. I don't know. I'm not Wotc's accountant or anything. But that's certainly quite a bit of a difference than your initial estimate, and I'm pretty sure that you are oversimplifying the actual costs.
Your quote is for a linux server. The Char Builder would need a Windows server.
Are we supporting the otehr apps as well? Monster Builder? Virtual table?
Using the website you linked, I selected a single windows server, with 1 GB RAM, with 1 GB outgoing bandwidth(your estimate had 0 outgoing bandwidth), without an SQL backend(which would probably be required), and it costs $0.26/hour.
Adjusting your quote to that cost per hour means we need ~200 subscribers to keep it going.
Also, you aren't taking into consideration that WotC will still need to provide some level of support, just for the people who call in saying they can't connect to the service.
Maybe that's still feasible. I don't know. I'm not Wotc's accountant or anything. But that's certainly quite a bit of a difference than your initial estimate, and I'm pretty sure that you are oversimplifying the actual costs.
We are not talking about 'extra energy' we are talking about putting it on a scaling cloud server until subscribers can no longer support it, then letting it quietly die (but giving a copy out to everyone before you shut it down, open source it at that point and let others mess with it).
You are describing an ideal situation for a solution provided by a fan. I've never seen what you describe being cheap, easily accomplished, and 100% beneficial at an IT level (I work with software and server solution providers).
That doesn't mean it can't be done. It doesn't mean it shouldn't be done (to some extent, it is a no-brainer to extend the tools for some length of time - how long is the question). But if I were the project manager I would be doing a very full cost accounting and I doubt the end summary would be "cheap and easy". Not because I would bias it that way, but because when you ask questions carefully costs seem to come out of the woodwork and become surprisingly large. In my experience, those estimates are substantiated over time (at least, that has been my experience... if anything, they turn out to be low).
It would likely be a real cost in both money and resources, a cost in terms of potential confusion to the market and lost revenue if you reduce the incentive for gamers to try the new product (as an example, having 3E stick around gave many gamers a reason not to ever give 4E a fair try), a benefit in terms of keeping gamers happy - especially those that want to be at least a partial customer of yours (this was a 4E problem), and a benefit in terms of DDI revenue (assuming it continues to be the same model). It is a complex assignment to make that call. If I were a project manager or member on making that decision I would be bringing my A game.
You also mention open source. I would be shocked if Wizards did that. There is very little that supports that being a sound financial decision. Please understand I would love it as a fan. I love open source and I love fan maintained tools. But open source models do not fit all RPGs, all RPG companies, or all business situations.
Is it all about the money? Yes and no. Wizards isn't a company that does it "just for the money", even though they get that reputation. There are many times when they shirk profit and even revenue for their vision of a game (especially the classic tabletop experience). You can hear it time and time again in the words of Peter Adkison, for example, when discussing the acquisition, management, and sale of TSR/WotC. But, companies would be foolish not to look at the bottom line and the industry is still mired by a track record of no profit, highly cyclical revenues, inability to make demand inelastic, and many other factors. It is always a balancing act. Yes, it is great when a company can believe in open source and be in a position to profit from it (such as with Posthuman Studios), but that isn't true of every RPG company. It is probably not true of Wizards of the Coast.
last i checked DDi was making $24,000+ which would easily cover it. in reality they wouldn't need more than a website package which you can get for $100-$200 per month. as far as i know, its just a silverlight app running on a webpage server. either way that kind of money isn't going to disapear overnight...
Hate to ask the question but why should they? As I've said in previous posts, I sincerely hope WotC handle the transition to the new edition well in terms of D&DI by communicating well with us and giving plenty of notice of termination of tools but I don't expect them to continue to support 4E tools.
This is a commercial business and the D&D part of WotC seems to be run on very little both in terms of cash resource and staffing (I have no figures, that's just my impression). Even diverting a single person to answer e-mails or phone calls about the server for 4E tools being down is a drain on a limited resource and personally, I'd rather all of that resource was committed to making D&DI a true success for the next edition. The 4E tools have IMHO been poorly managed from both a development and a communication point of view and I want everyone who can be in WotC ensuring that the same issues do not arise with the new edition. Recent evidence (the last year or so) in terms of delivery and communications suggests that a lot of lessons have been learned so I hope there is a team in the company that is committed to doing better next time around. Diverting someone to answer server queries for legacy tools will detract from that.
I should add to this that I use all the 4E tools and find them invaluable meaning I have no idea how I will manage when they are removed. I do, however, accept that they will be removed in order to provide something that I hope will be more polished from the start for D&D Next.
last i checked DDi was making $24,000+ which would easily cover it. in reality they wouldn't need more than a website package which you can get for $100-$200 per month. as far as i know, its just a silverlight app running on a webpage server. either way that kind of money isn't going to disapear overnight...
Hate to ask the question but why should they? As I've said in previous posts, I sincerely hope WotC handle the transition to the new edition well in terms of D&DI by communicating well with us and giving plenty of notice of termination of tools but I don't expect them to continue to support 4E tools.
This is a commercial business and the D&D part of WotC seems to be run on very little both in terms of cash resource and staffing (I have no figures, that's just my impression). Even diverting a single person to answer e-mails or phone calls about the server for 4E tools being down is a drain on a limited resource and personally, I'd rather all of that resource was committed to making D&DI a true success for the next edition. The 4E tools have IMHO been poorly managed from both a development and a communication point of view and I want everyone who can be in WotC ensuring that the same issues do not arise with the new edition. Recent evidence (the last year or so) in terms of delivery and communications suggests that a lot of lessons have been learned so I hope there is a team in the company that is committed to doing better next time around. Diverting someone to answer server queries for legacy tools will detract from that.
I should add to this that I use all the 4E tools and find them invaluable meaning I have no idea how I will manage when they are removed. I do, however, accept that they will be removed in order to provide something that I hope will be more polished from the start for D&D Next.
The problem is "some money" > "no money". Many people will still want to use the 4E tools well into the release of 5E. Some will want to finish their campaigns, others will only play other games because they can't find enough 5E players. Others will not want to fork over the cash for more books. They could simply put a lable on it "No longer supported." So they don't have to provide customer support for it. Another option would be to open source it and let it be maintained by volunteers and just pay for the webspace until it becomes unprofitable. If they do this they will make more money and more importantly foster some goodwill with their customers (some of which feel that WotC has betrayed them with their antics during 4E[I am one of these]).
any more news or info wizards?
Why would there be news? 4E is current right now, and will be so for a fair amount of time. There is no reason for Wizards to promise anything either way beyond that, so I don't expect they would be foolish enough to make a promise.
any more news or info wizards?
Why would there be news? 4E is current right now, and will be so for a fair amount of time. There is no reason for Wizards to promise anything either way beyond that, so I don't expect they would be foolish enough to make a promise.
just hoping theres news alpha, i dont think just patiently waiting and twdiilding thumbs til they turn them off to ask is a real good game plan. its not unthinkable for there to be something to say on the subject. i would ask the same of any company, i am not 'picking on' d&d and it is not unreasonable to ask questions about a service you pay for. it is cool that you dont agree, i respect your opinion.
But, from their perspective it would seem very foolish for them to even say they would support it through all of next year. They don't seem to at all be at the point where they know what digital tools would look like for D&D Next... nor to understand the revenue models. It would be pretty hard for them to know what they can afford to do, or even what the numbers of people will look like at that time for wanting 4E support. I just think, realistically, it has to wait-and-see well into next year.
i mean the whole reason why there moving to a new edition so quickly is not because 4th is no longer profitable
On what do you base this? Can you quote a source?
What i am saying is that the problem which caused the release of a new edition was the fact that they just dropped the old edition and moved onto something new, so it will be amusing to see whether this happens again.
I'm not sure I understand. Almost every RPG company uses a model that begins with a core book, adds supplements until profit drops, then releases a new edition. Every major RPG company with a large following has done this, pretty much always. This isn't seen as a mistake - it is seen as the only way to survive.
I recommend reading up on the industry, because it is fascinating and helps frame the constraints of our hobby. One of the best sources is the book by Shannon Appelcline, Designers & Dragons, chronicling the history of the industry through a detailed analysis of the individual companies. A shorter and free version can be found through his articles on RPGnet. You may find the one on Wizards of the Coast particularly interesting.
While some companies don't create editions, they tend to be games that are self contained (one or two books) or have a limited following (few buyers means no real reason to reprint). Major games see editions because companies have to (shocking!) make money to keep creating great material.
I would also mention, and this circles back to the first quote above, that games don't have infinite expansion capacity. There are obvious subjects (undead, the planes, psionics) which any RPG in the genre will cover. At some point the obvious ones and even the not-so-obvious ones are largely covered. At that point any publisher has to consider what to do. Do they continue to push into non-obvious subjects and hope they have an audience? Or are they done? Have they explored all the ground worth exploring and need to turn back and create a new game? The answer, in large part, will depend on the current revenue and profit, which is itself an indication of appeal. Take a look at Chris Perkins' column where he polled DMs on what books they like. Most DMs didn't own any recent books even when those books were awesome (such as Monster Vault: Threats of Nentir Vale). I don't know another way to read the obvious conclusion: time for a new edition.
To avoid that, you need an entirely new RPG model. There has, to date, not been a successful other model for a large RPG company with many customers.
i mean the whole reason why there moving to a new edition so quickly is not because 4th is no longer profitable
On what do you base this? Can you quote a source?What i am saying is that the problem which caused the release of a new edition was the fact that they just dropped the old edition and moved onto something new, so it will be amusing to see whether this happens again.
I'm not sure I understand. Almost every RPG company uses a model that begins with a core book, adds supplements until profit drops, then releases a new edition. Every major RPG company with a large following has done this, pretty much always. This isn't seen as a mistake - it is seen as the only way to survive.
I recommend reading up on the industry, because it is fascinating and helps frame the constraints of our hobby. One of the best sources is the book by Shannon Appelcline, Designers & Dragons, chronicling the history of the industry through a detailed analysis of the individual companies. A shorter and free version can be found through his articles on RPGnet. You may find the one on Wizards of the Coast particularly interesting.
While some companies don't create editions, they tend to be games that are self contained (one or two books) or have a limited following (few buyers means no real reason to reprint). Major games see editions because companies have to (shocking!) make money to keep creating great material.
I would also mention, and this circles back to the first quote above, that games don't have infinite expansion capacity. There are obvious subjects (undead, the planes, psionics) which any RPG in the genre will cover. At some point the obvious ones and even the not-so-obvious ones are largely covered. At that point any publisher has to consider what to do. Do they continue to push into non-obvious subjects and hope they have an audience? Or are they done? Have they explored all the ground worth exploring and need to turn back and create a new game? The answer, in large part, will depend on the current revenue and profit, which is itself an indication of appeal. Take a look at Chris Perkins' column where he polled DMs on what books they like. Most DMs didn't own any recent books even when those books were awesome (such as Monster Vault: Threats of Nentir Vale). I don't know another way to read the obvious conclusion: time for a new edition.
To avoid that, you need an entirely new RPG model. There has, to date, not been a successful other model for a large RPG company with many customers.
I fully understand what you are saying, but what i mean is that 4e seems to of been made to cater for a different type of rpg player, i.e liking 3,5 by no means you like 4e and visa versa, but liking 3.5 nearly defiently would set you up as a fan for pathfinder. I mean they just dropped 3.5 and pazio picked up and look what happened, i am saying that if they had instead continued to support this probably wouldnt of happened. Seriously how do you drop a game and people take an already made game, change a minimal amount of things, re release it and out perform the new game you just released??? I mean i am not saying they were not following the usual industry model, what i am saying is that it was wrong of them to do, and if they had been a loss on 4e do you think they would of been continuing it for so long. I am not saying i know how long 4e will have continued to be profitable but i would say that i feel the player base would of continued to increase if they hadnt announced a new edition. Also 5e is to get their old fans back, would it have been a better buisness decision not to lose them in the first place???
I mean they just dropped 3.5 and pazio picked up and look what happened, i am saying that if they had instead continued to support this probably wouldnt of happened. Seriously how do you drop a game and people take an already made game, change a minimal amount of things, re release it and out perform the new game you just released???
Paizo went on to do well, but there were a lot of factors that led to that... and it wasn't a sure thing. They had deep pockets (see the history of Lisa Stevens), they had fantastic talent that truly new the game (Mona, Bulhman, etc.), and they had an OGL that allowed them to keep a 'closed' edition going. But for all of that, none of the other d20 companies have done well (or particularly well, depending on your view). Paizo did what very few RPG companies have done in the history of RPGs, and they did it with a system a different company wrote.
The same was not likely to be true of Wizards, interestingly. Look at the late 3.5 releases: Book of Nine Swords, for all its acclaim, was not a book many people owned. And it was far better than the other late offerings. Complete Adventurer? Complete Mage and Complete Arcane? Where could 3E go from there? 3E to 3.5 was not an easy transition, so doing a3.75 wasn't an easy task to do. Only an outside company (Paizo) could easily get away with that.
4E is in the same situation. All the obvious content is there. The edition is tremendously well supported. We have thousands of monsters, thousands of feats, thousands of items, tons of adventures, several great campaign settings... what is left to create? (Ok, Greyhawk... but it isn't like any deep fan can't create that content or use everything we already have).
I mean i am not saying they were not following the usual industry model, what i am saying is that it was wrong of them to do
Wrong of them to follow the only profitable model there is? I'm sorry, I don't understand that. While some people have RPGs as their hobbies, the businesses do need to make money. This isn't charity. And, again, it isn't like they are leaving you high and dry. You have tons of product.
Let me pause and ask you a question. Do you own all of the 4E content? Most of it?
If you do own most of it, you are in the vast minority of 4E gamers. Most 4E gamers own very little: maybe 3-4 books, but perhaps even lower than that. So, why should wizards create more content for 4E? Who will buy it?
, and if they had been a loss on 4e do you think they would of been continuing it for so long. I am not saying i know how long 4e will have continued to be profitable but i would say that i feel the player base would of continued to increase if they hadnt announced a new edition. Also 5e is to get their old fans back, would it have been a better buisness decision not to lose them in the first place???
You are assuming it is profitable now. It may not be. None of us know. We do know that their intial model (Divine Power 1, Divine Power 2, etc.) was changed. They then changed again to Essentials, discussing it as a set of Evergreen products. That they abandoned that so soon has to be a very clear indication that the approach wasn't working. They aren't a charity. They have no reason to operate at a loss. (To be clear, the typical RPG model is as follows: borrow money, print core books, make your money back and hopefully a bit more, begin publishing ever less profitable supplements so your fans are happy, use up all the money you made on core books and now they aren't selling anymore, make new edition, repeat). It is very likely they reached that last step, and that's despite some really terrific final products.
It is just painfully clear. If quality material like Mordenkainen's, Gardmore Abbey, Neverwinter, MV:NV, and the like aren't immensely profitable, then it is time for an edition change. I don't see how Wizards could see another option (and if there is one, I've never heard of another RPG finding it).
==
I absolutely understand fans that bemoan an edition ending. Count me amongst the many that would love to see continued 4E support. (I'm one of the guys writing 4E support!) I've been through the transition of AD&D to 2E, 2E to Skills & Powers, S&P to 3E, 3E to 3.5, 3.5 to 4E. And I've been through all the Shadowrun editions, through Spycraft, through L5R, through Deadlands, etc. Change always stings because we love what we have.
At the same time, change is awesome. 4E was my favorite edition yet, and I say that as a guy who loved 3E for a really long time. And I love what they did with Shadowrun 4E. And the latest Legend of the Five Rings is better. And D&D Next really pulls back some of the great things I loved in all the D&D editions. Each edition provides us with something new. And, with major games, they advance the 'science' of gaming. Other RPGs get better when all those designers from all the various companies play each other's latest innovations. It is a good thing, and not just a necessary thing for the RPG company.
If you are a 4E fan, and believe there should be more content, show your support for 4E projects such as the Midgard Bestiary for 4E. I've had the pleasure of playtesting monsters from this book and I highly recommend it.
A last comment, and I'll let this thread drop.
If you are a 4E fan, and believe there should be more content, show your support for 4E projects such as the Midgard Bestiary for 4E. I've had the pleasure of playtesting monsters from this book and I highly recommend it.
+1