Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 kartesh Nov 04, 2010 14:45:10	A Question of Honor. To represent all those loyal customers, that are in need of the offline features Dungeons & Dragnons Insider offered them up until now, I whould like to adress a question to Wizards of the Coast, before canceling my membership: Is there no way, which whould allow this company to provide us with the product we were given so far, and for which we were willing to sign in and pay for a full time subscribtion? It has been two days since the company announced to stop the support of the old character builder and its intention to go „online only“ with their new product. Since then there have been a lot of customers complaining to be in need of the former offline function the old system offered to them, yet there was no reply, no sign the company realises this issue and is willing to adjust in order to keep these loyal customers. If you dont want to loose us as the long term customers we were, and therefor devide the fanbase your product has, please answer to our concearns and try to adjust your product so we can once again be part of this community and make use of the service you provided us this far.
#2 kartesh Nov 05, 2010 12:10:12	The question is yet unanswered, it whould be great to atleast get some feadback that it was heard.
#3 KM.549 Nov 05, 2010 12:17:17	The fact no one from WOTC is responding is your answer, shows everyone how they are by how they act. Edit: Spelling.
#4 evilref Nov 05, 2010 12:20:29	The fact no one from WOTC is reszponding is your answer, shows everyone how they are by how they act. It's like critical reasoning was never developed. Their lack of a reply shows no such thing, it shows they haven't replied. There are millions of posts by hundreds of thousands of customers to tens of thousands of companies demanding they reply to their post. Insisting on a response doesn't mean the company has to respond. Nor does it mean you're being ignored. It means...they haven't replied. Just that. If you think otherwise then please let us know where you work and what methods we have of contacting your workplace so we can start making all sorts of demands off you. No? Didn't think so.
#5 canormorum Nov 05, 2010 12:29:42	The first place we decided to make changes was to move from a client-based to a web-based tool set. We are moving to a web-based solution to make the tools accessible to multiple platforms. The web-based solution makes it easier for us to react to new technology opportunities, such as tablets and mobile devices. We also wanted to move to a solution that promotes individual account ownership and hinders piracy. Source: www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/d... There it is, in a nutshell.  The most you can hope for is an offline character viewer.
#6 Jharii Nov 05, 2010 12:31:33	The fact no one from WOTC is reszponding is your answer, shows everyone how they are by how they act. The fact that the answer is readily available shows everyone how you act.  Did you stop to think that the question has already been answered in the sticky above that is completely dedicated to the FAQ about the new CB? 26. If the CB is replaced, will the last updated version still be available for subscribers? No.
#7 Ra-Tiel Nov 05, 2010 12:36:13	@Kartesh: I don't understand what you want. You ask for a tool that requires you to have an active subscription and to log into your DDI account to use it? Well, sounds you get what you ask for with the nCB. ;)
#8 rhianni32 Nov 05, 2010 12:56:06	Whats to communicate? They are ending the CB and going online. Lots of people complained they dont like it. PaoloM and others have been very good at communication since then and what they are planning on doing. The fact that its not the answer you like doesnt change the fact that they have.
#9 kartesh Nov 05, 2010 13:04:52	@Kartesh: I don't understand what you want. You ask for a tool that requires you to have an active subscription and to log into your DDI account to use it? Well, sounds you get what you ask for with the nCB. ;) Please dont change the topic by relating to different threads, never the less id like to clear up your confusion a bit: Is was talking about an offline tool, that required the user to activate it once in a wile by using an active subscribtion, otherwise it whould not be accessable to him anymore. It whould be a way to hand out offline tools that were not available to every person that bought a single month of subscription, and therefor make them pay in order to use it all the time, while providing its offline features 24/7 to anyone who was a full time subscriber. That said, please return to the topic if you have to say something. Whats to communicate? They are ending the CB and going online. Lots of people complained they dont like it. PaoloM and others have been very good at communication since then and what they are planning on doing. The fact that its not the answer you like doesnt change the fact that they have. I am not a fan of finding answers by making interpretaions of what we were told when asking different things, nor do i ignore facts simply because i dont like them. I was asking if the company realises that the decision they made is a great inconveniance for some of their customers, forcing some of them to cancel their subscribtion, and if they can think of a way to find a solution, which allows those customers to once again draw some use out of their product, even if it means some compromises. If they dont like to answer this question, i dont mind, nor do i mind it if they tell me they dont want me as a customer any more, or simply that they dont care at all.
#10 Ra-Tiel Nov 05, 2010 13:51:15	@Kartesh: I really wasn't being snarky or anything, it was an honest question. Your OP is a bit unclear in that regard, that's why I was asking. On topic: the solution you suggest wouldn't help with account sharing at all. What you ask is basically the current state, but instead of an optional update requiring you to log in you'd have a required authentification that forced you to log in. So, how does that stop people doing that once per month on their friends' computers? To prevent account sharing you'd have to require a log in each time the CB was started and do some background authentification (perhaps with session tracking) each time a new data set was used (e.g. each time material from anything other than the PHb1 was accessed). But then you basically get the nCB which we know raised all seven hells.