Unfulfilled promises, false advertising, little to no customer support or contact.
I paid for DDI since I got my 4e books hoping for the dungeon builder and VTT with the hope that it would be coming soon. I didn't mind the limited character builder and the poor quality of Dungeron and Dragon mags, I didn't really care too much that they canceled the pdf plans for book releases, I would have a VTT with that in them I though. But boy was I wrong.
First the content was delayed, then it was removed from the site, then announced as on hold and to me it seems like the next logical steps are canceled and "lol we never said anything about any virtual tables, your monster manual speaks lies."
Furthermore with the extended delay of the VTT Wizards has still refused to release at least some right to table tops that DO work like Fantasy Grounds, so my group of players and I are forced to spend hours if not days going through and parcing our own books one by one since we can't share them online with each other even though we all have the books.
I have been a long follower of Wizards, my collections of MTG and pokemon cards would most likely increase global temperatures by 3-5C if my house ever caught fire and I bought almost every published 3e and 3.5 book, but there's only so much one can take.
I know people say that DDI is priced for the current content and I should be happy for what I'm getting, but I'm not exactly getting much. (Of course I canceled my subscription a long time ago so I'm not getting anything at all.) But I come back about once a month to see if anything is improving. From what I can see, it isn't. A price increase and a drop in new content and slacking in updates of existing content. I don't count the previews of PHB3 as new content because it is probably something you will purchase anyway so in reality you are paying more just to look at it earlier. (I realize that it's been said that the price increase has nothing to do with PHB3 and that's fine with me, but what exactly warrants the price increase then other than Wizards wants some money?)
I know I'm venting quite a bit and I'm sure there's reasons for what Wizards is doing, but I'm also positive that not all those reasons are fully justifiable and know that they could have handled this much, much better.
I paid for DDI since I got my 4e books hoping for the dungeon builder and VTT with the hope that it would be coming soon.
Well, there's your problem.
Don't pay for things that might happen. That's called gambling.
Either the D&Di is worth the price you pay now for the services you receive now or its not.
If it is worth it (I think it is), then enjoy it. If not, then don't pay for it. Simple.
Well, there's your problem.
Don't pay for things that might happen. That's called gambling.
Either the D&Di is worth the price you pay now for the services you receive now or its not.
If it is worth it (I think it is), then enjoy it. If not, then don't pay for it. Simple.
This I completely agree with.
Well, there's your problem.
Don't pay for things that might happen. That's called gambling.
Either the D&Di is worth the price you pay now for the services you receive now or its not.
If it is worth it (I think it is), then enjoy it. If not, then don't pay for it. Simple.
Gambling? Purchasing a product for advertised goods and services is gambling? I guess I was the only one who watched the "unveiling" of 4th edition with the preview of the VTT and all that other jazz.... Or perhaps I am hallucinating everytime I flip through my books and see advertisements for the VTT.
You guys kill me.
Actually, DDI was free for months & months after the release of 4E, which also happened to be months and months after the advertised release date for the VTT et al. At the time that the OP would have to have started paying for DDI, he would also have known that the VTT wasn't available and might not ever be. So, yes, gambling. Anybody who is paying for DDI is getting what they're paying for, not what has been advertised (psst... Red Bull doesn't actually give you wings...).
Oh what a short memory you have.... When DDI went from free to subscription, the words "COMING SOON" were written above the VTT, the visualizer, and the dungeon builder. It didn't say "maybe coming soon." In fact, the selling point for DDI for those not intersted in Dungeon or Dragon magazines was that you would be able to lock in your subscription price for however long you subscribed even when the VTT, CB, Visualizer, and dungone builder were released. Please get your facts straight before you start spouting off.
I am over the fact that the VTT and all the other products have been canned, but obviously the OP is not. I believe he has a right to express his displeasure without people making things up to defend WotC.
The VTT and other tools were not listed, but on the up-side I wasn't being charged for them!
Paying for D&Di and getting angry when you don't get the VTT is like buying a Big Mac and getting angry when you don't get the winning Monopoly piece. You paid for a Big Mac, you got a Big Mac, why are you angry?
OK, not the best analogy. Maybe I shouldn't write responses on an empty stomach.
Honestly I am, shocked, disappointed and appalled at what has been happening to Wizards for the past two years.
Unfulfilled promises, false advertising, little to no customer support or contact.
I paid for DDI since I got my 4e books hoping for the dungeon builder and VTT with the hope that it would be coming soon. I didn't mind the limited character builder and the poor quality of Dungeron and Dragon mags, I didn't really care too much that they canceled the pdf plans for book releases, I would have a VTT with that in them I though. But boy was I wrong.
First the content was delayed, then it was removed from the site, then announced as on hold and to me it seems like the next logical steps are canceled and "lol we never said anything about any virtual tables, your monster manual speaks lies."
Furthermore with the extended delay of the VTT Wizards has still refused to release at least some right to table tops that DO work like Fantasy Grounds, so my group of players and I are forced to spend hours if not days going through and parcing our own books one by one since we can't share them online with each other even though we all have the books.
I have been a long follower of Wizards, my collections of MTG and pokemon cards would most likely increase global temperatures by 3-5C if my house ever caught fire and I bought almost every published 3e and 3.5 book, but there's only so much one can take.
I know people say that DDI is priced for the current content and I should be happy for what I'm getting, but I'm not exactly getting much. (Of course I canceled my subscription a long time ago so I'm not getting anything at all.) But I come back about once a month to see if anything is improving. From what I can see, it isn't. A price increase and a drop in new content and slacking in updates of existing content. I don't count the previews of PHB3 as new content because it is probably something you will purchase anyway so in reality you are paying more just to look at it earlier. (I realize that it's been said that the price increase has nothing to do with PHB3 and that's fine with me, but what exactly warrants the price increase then other than Wizards wants some money?)
I know I'm venting quite a bit and I'm sure there's reasons for what Wizards is doing, but I'm also positive that not all those reasons are fully justifiable and know that they could have handled this much, much better.
I hear you OP. You're not alone. I was pretty upset with the "back burner" for VTT, because I (like you) see the writing on the wall, and I'm pretty sure back burner will lead to cancellation. I posted my displeasure on these forums and I even emailed WotC about it. They never bothered replying. I tried emailing them a few times, because I wanted some response. I guess my emails go in the shredder when they don't like them.
I'll still play 4e, but I've been considering canceling my DDI subscription. I don't think I get all that much out of it. I like the CB, but I dunno if its worth what they want for it. I also believe in "putting my money where my mouth is". I'll keep paying for it as long as I feel like I'm getting my value, but that barrier is rapidly approaching, especially considering the price increase.
I was really optimistic about DDI before the launch of 4e, I was hoping that it would provide the business model they needed to keep the Hasbro corporate big-wigs happy. I'm afraid that isn't happening, and that is the reason for the price increase, since they don't have the volume of subscribers they want, they'll see if the subscribers they do have will stay around with a price hike. They are using the "PHB3 Previews" as incentive for those who are on the fence about the price hike. I suspect that the PHB3 preview novelty will wear off, and if they don't have their Campaign Tools ready by then people will probably start getting dissatisfied with DDI. I hope it can be successful for them, I want D&D to be successful, but I'm really unhappy with how things have progressed thus far.
Oh what a short memory you have.... When DDI went from free to subscription, the words "COMING SOON" were written above the VTT, the visualizer, and the dungeon builder. It didn't say "maybe coming soon." In fact, the selling point for DDI for those not intersted in Dungeon or Dragon magazines was that you would be able to lock in your subscription price for however long you subscribed even when the VTT, CB, Visualizer, and dungone builder were released. Please get your facts straight before you start spouting off.
I am over the fact that the VTT and all the other products have been canned, but obviously the OP is not. I believe he has a right to express his displeasure without people making things up to defend WotC.
So you saw the words "Coming Soon" and believed them?
That's kinda sad.
So you saw the words "Coming Soon" and believed them?
That's kinda sad.
Yeah I know, I had faith in WotC.
So you saw the words "Coming Soon" and believed them?
That's kinda sad.
I think its sad that you are so jaded that when someone tells you they'll have something done soon, you don't believe them.
Gambling? Purchasing a product for advertised goods and services is gambling? I guess I was the only one who watched the "unveiling" of 4th edition with the preview of the VTT and all that other jazz.... Or perhaps I am hallucinating everytime I flip through my books and see advertisements for the VTT.
You guys kill me.
When the OP purchased DDI well aware that the VTT and DB were not currently available, then yes it was essentially gambling - although some might consider it investing.
Lets be clear here, there is a subset of fans who purchased their books because advertising in the book stated (or gave the perception) the VTT would be available. Within that subset, there is a subset who subsequently purchased DDI with the assumption that the VTT was already available. The OP is not within that subset.
There is a subset of fans who purchased DDI aware that not all tools have been completely developed, with the hope that the remaining tools would be completed soon. This is the subset that the OP appears to belong to. Personally I find that view somewhat deluded, but I chock most of it up to those people being unfamiliar with software development and/or out of the loop on Wotc news.
I can sympathize that people are upset some of the tools aren't being worked on. I'm not maintaining a subscription right now because I don't feel that DDI provides enough incentive for me to agree to an extended purchase. I do think that Wotc would like to complete the VTT at some point, but my guess is that without a change in DDI management it won't be feasible. I'm not certain they have the resources to complete it with the way things are right now.
There is a subset of fans who purchased DDI aware that not all tools have been completely developed, with the hope that the remaining tools would be completed soon. This is the subset that the OP appears to belong to. Personally I find that view somewhat deluded, but I chock most of it up to those people being unfamiliar with software development and/or out of the loop on Wotc news.
QUOTE]
I don't know how you can justify that statement when all the information provided by WotC at that time indicated that the software was COMING SOON and being actively developed. At no point at the beginning of pay-for-DDI was it mentioned that the VTT might not appear. That's a fact.
Unfulfilled expectations, false conclusions, little to no motivation to be informed.
I paid, willingly, for DDI since I got my 4e books paying for tools that with limited reading I would have know weren't available at the moment and had no release date at all. I paid for a character builder I didn't like (though I could play around with a free demo), magazines I thought were crappy (despite the four free issues I could peruse before deciding to pay for them), I didn't really care too much that they canceled the pdf version of books that are not part of the DnDi service I decided to pay for; because I thought that I would get a VTT with DnDi, even though there was ample news by the time all of the afore mentioned thing were released that the VTT wasn't on the release schedule. But boy, I refused to be an informed buyer.
First the content was delayed, then removed from the site, then announced as on hold and— since I fell the need to jump before looking and ignore the facts around me— I think they will be cancelled, despite news that they are simply on hold until there is enough demand for them. And they dare expect me to realize that by the time the MM was being printed is was too late to delete the announcement and that by simply taking a look at the DnD website I could see that the VTT wasn't available and under development still, shame on them for expecting us to be rational participants of our economy!
Furthermore with the announced pause in development of the VTT and Visualizer, Wizards has refused to take care of it's IP by not giving away all of it's content to third parties. Now my player's and I are forced to respect copyright law instead of being able to post complete segments of book all over the internet. Again, how dare they protect their IP! It's like they are prohibiting us from talking through the phone or Skype by sending ninjas to our rooms to kill us if we even dare to talk about the PHB in a IM, without actually prohibiting us from doing so.
I have been a compulsive buyer of Wizards, my collections of MTG and Pokemon cards would likely make economically sensible people's heads blow up due to the immense monument they are to instinctual consumption. Not only that, I bought almost every published 3e and 3.5 book, but I seem to finally have come to my senses and realize that I, like many gamers, am a consumerist.
I know that common sense dictates that DnDi is priced for the current content and if I pay for it it is because I agree that the pricing is fair for the product given. (Of course I canceled my subscription a long time ago so I'm not getting anything as all, as is to be expected.) But I, now an informed participant of this market, come back about once a month to see if what I think DnDi should be priced and what they think DnDi should be priced match and is within my means. From my economic standpoint, it is not. An announced price increase with the chance to avoid it for a whole year and a non-existent mythical drop in content that has actually been increasing—with every book released and added to DnDi, with every new feature, with all the new playtests and all the previews— leading to the change in the date the Compendium and Character builder are updated, causing a delay so that mags are still added a month after their release and books six weeks after theirs. Not only is the schedule virtually the same but they dared to incorporate hybrid classes and the monk to the Character Builder ahead of time, shame on you WotC.
I refuse to consider the previews of PHB3 as the new content that they are because they are just like the preview of new comics they give at the end of some comic books that are meant to be read to see if you would enjoy buying that comic before actually paying for it; or like private showings of the next big geek film at Comic-con that you can see before seeing it in theaters; or like videogame trailers or tv-show commercials. So in reality you are just paying money to see something before it is released so you can pay for it again— it's like going to the cinema watching The Dark Knight and then buying the DVD, who does that?!. And I know that it has been said that the price increase has nothing to do with the PHB3 previews and that's fine, I can ignore the fact that a price increase would come after the release of the CB, and that WoTC didn't immediately raise the price though they had every right to do so; because by ignoring those facts i can complain about WotC wanting to make more money, something that is completely contrary to business sense)
I know that I'm ranting over here, that's the purpose of this post. And I'm sure I've ignored the reasons and substituted my own for what Wizards is doing, but I have convinced myself that the reasons I've made up are unjustifiable, and we all know that it is my fault that I didn't inform myself and that Wizards should run business as I say.
Honestly I am, amazed, dismayed and appalled at what has been happening to me for the past two years.
Unfulfilled expectations, false conclusions, little to no motivation to be informed.
...WHOLE BUNCH OF FUNNY STUFF...
I know that I'm ranting over here, that's the purpose of this post. And I'm sure I've ignored the reasons and substituted my own for what Wizards is doing, but I have convinced myself that the reasons I've made up are unjustifiable, and we all know that it is my fault that I didn't inform myself and that Wizards should run business as I say.
Thanks for a good laugh.
In the end, people either keep themselves informed or don't. Regardless, it will always be someone elses fault when they are unhappy.
And thankfully for them, companies can't say anything back, so they can vent. Hopefully it's to the point where they finally step back and look back at what they have said.
In fact, the selling point for DDI for those not intersted in Dungeon or Dragon magazines was that you would be able to lock in your subscription price for however long you subscribed even when the VTT, CB, Visualizer, and dungone builder were released. Please get your facts straight before you start spouting off.
As also one of the people who saw the ads and made some choices, I can agree and disagree on a lot of this. On the flip side, I was aware (by the track record of years past) when the paid version came out, what was likely not going to happen and as such I made a choice for a shorter subscription.
As indicated by someone above, not until the recent price change did I opt to re-evaluate if the cost for now, was worth the price for now. For me, it's not, so I canceled. No big fan fare, no flaming message. I will ride out my subscription for the Eberron release and then walk away.
However, the issue I have with the OP is really just what I quoted.
The point of the lock in price, was for what was available *then* and anything that *might* be released during that time. They were very clear that the price would likely go up when the VTT, DB and other items came out. I admit, I think we still believed they *might* come out period, but I don't think many of us felt they would come out in that years time...sadly.
It was not to lock in the price forever, and it was only as a *potential* bonus just in case the items came out and you were still under a lock down price. Wizards offer to let you lock it in again for another year at that same price is actually a bonus, and not one I'd expect them to offer again.
It was a gamble, maybe just maybe you'd pay for a low year cost, the VTT and DB might come out, the price would rise and you'd get to use it for a few cool months at your lower cost, but...it was not only a risk, but it was discussed, analyzed, re-analyzed and confirmed in forum and Bill's articles, numerous times.
As also one of the people who saw the ads and made some choices, I can agree and disagree on a lot of this. On the flip side, I was aware (by the track record of years past) when the paid version came out, what was likely not going to happen and as such I made a choice for a shorter subscription.
As indicated by someone above, not until the recent price change did I opt to re-evaluate if the cost for now, was worth the price for now. For me, it's not, so I canceled. No big fan fare, no flaming message. I will ride out my subscription for the Eberron release and then walk away.
However, the issue I have with the OP is really just what I quoted.
The point of the lock in price, was for what was available *then* and anything that *might* be released during that time. They were very clear that the price would likely go up when the VTT, DB and other items came out. I admit, I think we still believed they *might* come out period, but I don't think many of us felt they would come out in that years time...sadly.
It was not to lock in the price forever, and it was only as a *potential* bonus just in case the items came out and you were still under a lock down price. Wizards offer to let you lock it in again for another year at that same price is actually a bonus, and not one I'd expect them to offer again.
It was a gamble, maybe just maybe you'd pay for a low year cost, the VTT and DB might come out, the price would rise and you'd get to use it for a few cool months at your lower cost, but...it was not only a risk, but it was discussed, analyzed, re-analyzed and confirmed in forum and Bill's articles, numerous times.
I'm not the OP, was just trying to offer some support.
Petition to get the VTT back in development
I was also appalled. I'm starting a petition to get wizards to reconsider laying off the VTT or Game Table. It is located here:
Petition to get the VTT back in development
Alas, petitions are against the CoC - so your petition thread is almost certain to be short lived.
Just so you know.
Good on ya!
At the same time, what really sucks is we can't do anything about the pace and timing of DDI's features.
The only real choice is not to give them your money... which also sucks because some of it's great. It's just nowhere near what we thought we'd have by now.
But again, you or I can't control that - we can voice our displeasure, which we should, but then have to move on and make some choices.
I also dont care if others want to bash me for my opinion, its how I feel. Wizards created the problem not I and they continue to make it worse.
There is a subset of fans who purchased DDI aware that not all tools have been completely developed, with the hope that the remaining tools would be completed soon. This is the subset that the OP appears to belong to. Personally I find that view somewhat deluded, but I chock most of it up to those people being unfamiliar with software development and/or out of the loop on Wotc news.
I don't know how you can justify that statement when all the information provided by WotC at that time indicated that the software was COMING SOON and being actively developed. At no point at the beginning of pay-for-DDI was it mentioned that the VTT might not appear. That's a fact.
Well, if you're suggesting that some customers came to the website and saw COMING SOON and purchased a DDI subscription based on the assumption that "SOON" was a range of months (I'd guess that most people would think Soon was 3-6 months for a product like this) now feel mislead, I'd say you've got a point to an extent. I think it was wrong of Wotc to have COMING SOON up there in the first place, at least without clearly explaining what was going on. I also think that anyone who signed up without bothering to do any research on how long SOON was made an incredible leap of logic; it wasn't very hard to find out the info by the time COMING SOON was posted. There was a lot of confusion at that time, but if you parsed the fact from the opinion it was fairly obvious what was going on; Wotc had a lot of trouble communicating with the fans, but there were statements about what was being done. So one hand you've got a company that posted misleading info in their ads and didn't come clean with the fans because management couldn't decide how to proceed with the project (clarification: this is a summary based on my PoV), and on the other hand you've got a customer who made a baseless assumption about an impulse purchase. If you ask me who's wrong in that scenario I'd say it's 50/50 with a lot of grey.
Now, I still think that there should be a statement on the DDI webpage or in the DDI FAQ about the current status of the VTT and other tabled tools; to me that's the ethical choice considering someone was incompetent enough to put an ad in the PHB that implied all tools would be ready use at 4e's rollout.
Again it is the duty of a consumer to be informed, if they are not an because of that buy into something they don't like it is their fault an nobody else's.
Even if the company whose product they are buying makes very little effort to get the word out ot the public that parts of the product would not be ready when the product would be out?
I understand WOTC put it up in the news and in these fourms that DDi would not be ready at launch. But they should have made sure that info would be on the main DnD page for at least 2 weeks before and a month after launch. They did'nt. WOTC should have put out press relases and told there main disributiors about the delay in DDi. They let the info stay buried in the fourms. How many people do you know goes digging through a message board to find every bit of info on a product before buying?
WOTC did tell the public about the delay. But they should have done a much better job at it. They wanted to sell books so they let it get buried.
Even if the company whose product they are buying makes very little effort to get the word out ot the public that parts of the product would not be ready when the product would be out?
I understand WOTC put it up in the news and in these fourms that DDi would not be ready at launch. But they should have made sure that info would be on the main DnD page for at least 2 weeks before and a month after launch. They did'nt. WOTC should have put out press relases and told there main disributiors about the delay in DDi. They let the info stay buried in the fourms. How many people do you know goes digging through a message board to find every bit of info on a product before buying?
WOTC did tell the public about the delay. But they should have done a much better job at it. They wanted to sell books so they let it get buried.
I did? I informed myself, as a consumer one should inform themselves. And it wasn't exactly difficult to find, it only took a mild interest in the product, it only takes google. Honestly to blame a company because they didn't breast-fed you information about a product you claim to be oh so interested about is to renounce all responsibility for unhealthy buying habits.
They wanted to sell books so they let it get buried.
I'm trying really hard not to say "Prove it."
A less pessimistic view would be to say that a book publishing company overreached when it came to web development and did a less than adequate public relations job.
Mistakes were made, sure. But the subscription page very clearly spelled out exactly what you were paying for. If you paid hoping for something more than that, you really can't (rationally) blame WotC.
Dress it up with all the "Evil corporate manipulation...ooo spooky spooky" you want, we're getting what we pay for and that's that.
I understand product releases and the troubles with software development, but I've never seen such advertising for a non-existent product. For anyone who follows VALVe at all they have their own release announcements which are held in their own time system known as VALVe time, where soon means a week or so and a week or so means a month, but they never fail to deliver on the scale that Wizards has. They also do a great job at pr and customer relations which is, as I see it, not something that interests Wizards in the least bit.
I liked the first Dungeon and Dragon magazines, but the amount and quality of content has been steadily slipping while the price is increasing. I also did not really find many situations in which I could use it.
To whoever mentioned the OH NO CAN'T DISTRIBUTE THINGS ILLEGALLY, if I really had the mind to I could download all the 4e books, like I'm sure many others could. I'm disappointed because if I do wan't to get a copy of a pdf of a book I already purchased I have to get it in illegitimate ways instead of from Wizards. But I restrain myself because I still have hope in the company and don't want one of my favorite hobbies to die out. What I am complaining about is them not allowing the release of simple base information like they did with all previous versions so games could be run quickly but still impossible to run without the proper books. It's inconvenient to have to shuffle through books while hosting an online game because it creates very awkward periods of silence while you look up the weight of a greataxe or some other nearly insignificant piece of information.
I think a more accurate food analogy would be ordering a cheeseburger, but being told that there's no cheese right now but they sent an employee to go get it for you while they make you a hamburger. Then telling you the employee got fired while on his way to the freezer and you can't have the cheeseburger you wanted but get the hamburger instead.
Yes I could have said no I will wait until he gets back to order and pay, and I could have asked the other employees what their thoughts were on the absent employee to find out that he was a slacker, but I was trusting enough to believe a company who I was a faithful customer of for almost 20 years that my cheese would be delivered.
I'm trying really hard not to say "Prove it."
Well I rememeber coming to the DnD site and the fourms on a pretty regular basis, almost daily, leading up to the relase of 4th ed and I don't remember seeing anything about the delay. But I have been sent links proving that the info was there, just hard to find. My point is WOTC could have done a much better job letting the public know about it.
I saw coming soon and figured they would be out with-in the year... I mean who advertises that way???
Now i do agree that not everyone is willing to dig through forums to find information... and then when you do... its been moved or removed completely
The VTT was the only reason i even came back to DnD!!! I left when 2.5 came out... remember that players option crap...
I went to Palladium and WW... now because i have been with WoTC playing Magic forever... i thought I would give it another try... I do like the CB, and I will never have to buy a player side book again because of it... thats worth the price, especially at the rate they are putting books out now... whats next martial power 2?? PHB 4?? how many more books am I gonna save money on by having my DDI Subscription...
HELL YES I AM DISSAPOINTED AT THE PITIFUL WAY WOTC DID THINGS!!!
but at the same time I feel that 4e should have come after 2e... 3e and 3.5 never happened in my opinion
I bought the mini's and the tiles and the first round of books... even teh supplements like the Adventures vault, martial power, and both Forgotten realms books...
Now I am not going to buy anymore books with this Subscription increase... and not getting the stuff that I really want... I mean you can only eat chicken for so long before you start to crave that medium rare steak!!!
to me the VTT is the steak...
What happened to KM's poll post... i tried to quote it and i couldn't...
I know... its like a petition... its against the CoC... but what WoTC did is against the Hasbro CoC... I did look that up...
now I guess parts of this post will be sensored because someone might not like what I said...
Well I rememeber coming to the DnD site and the fourms on a pretty regular basis, almost daily, leading up to the relase of 4th ed and I don't remember seeing anything about the delay. But I have been sent links proving that the info was there, just hard to find. My point is WOTC could have done a much better job letting the public know about it.
I agree that they didn't do as good a job as they should have, but how does that imply sinister intent?
What happened to KM's poll post... i tried to quote it and i couldn't...
I know... its like a petition... its against the CoC... but what WoTC did is against the Hasbro CoC... I did look that up...
now I guess parts of this post will be sensored because someone might not like what I said...
I just got a message that my post was removed because it goes against the CoC, they said it was a poll. But I said it was a survey. Last time I checked surveys are not against the CoC. But they must be now.
I do think WOTC will remove or sensor what they don't like. Sorry, not gonna drink the DDi kool aid anymore.
I just got a message that my post was removed because it goes against the CoC, they said it was a poll. But I said it was a survey. Last time I checked surveys are not against the CoC. But they must be now.
I do think WOTC will remove or sensor what they don't like. Sorry, not gonna drink the DDi kool aid anymore.
I would think that if polls are against the CoC that surveys would be as well.
I agree that they didn't do as good a job as they should have, but how does that imply sinister intent?
WOTC knew if the public found out DDi would not be ready at launch lie WOTC promised it would, that would lead to people not buying the books. So WOTC let that little info out then let it get burried.
Please no one say "well you can play without DDi". Yes you can. But I have seen alot of posts here from people saying the only reason they bought the books was because they thought they could play online with old gaming buddies that are now all over the country.
I can't believe how naive people still are when it comes to software releases. Software releases always take longer then projected
I'm not upset that the computer stuff got delayed. I know stuff like that does. I'm upset at how WOTC went about telling the public about it. Then after all that died down, they said they would come out with one tool at a time. The put out one tool, leave the other three, so they can work on yet another tool. They totally changed direction. They are not following through.
How do we know WOTC won't drop these campign tools and change direction without completing them? They have done this too many times with computer stuff.
How do we know WOTC won't drop these campign tools and change direction without completing them? They have done this too many times with computer stuff.
Ohh... sounds like the new Magic Online... which we should have known!!! WoTC is gonna take its sweet *** time putting that stuff out... maybe they could put out discs of the whole suite so that we may buy them...
or my theory now is... they are tired of people stating the truth!! and are going to take their time and put them out with out any bugs
now that doesn't take into account the fact that there are how many new books coming out and magazines... they could never be finished with their tools
Uh Oh I just got my hopes up and then dashed them againOf course I canceled my subscription a long time ago so I'm not getting anything at all.
I was going to post a whole bunch of stuff about value and expectations and such. But the more I think about this sentence in your first post, the less I understand how this thread got to two pages in the first place.
Maybe I have just been spoiled by companies like VALVe and Paradox Productions where if I send an email I can expect a reply to be waiting for me in my inbox within a week.
I understand product releases and the troubles with software development, but I've never seen such advertising for a non-existent product. For anyone who follows VALVe at all they have their own release announcements which are held in their own time system known as VALVe time, where soon means a week or so and a week or so means a month, but they never fail to deliver on the scale that Wizards has. They also do a great job at pr and customer relations which is, as I see it, not something that interests Wizards in the least bit.
Well i don't know about you, but every time I have contacted CustServ they have replied so what you claim is completely alien to me. But then again, that sort of hands-on approach is usually reserved for smaller (gourmet, to use a food term) companies of which WotC doesn't form a part of.
I liked the first Dungeon and Dragon magazines, but the amount and quality of content has been steadily slipping while the price is increasing. I also did not really find many situations in which I could use it.
Ok, I'm really amazed at how people believe this idiotic hearsay about a reduction in content, after the first four issues of Dungeon/Dragon the amount of content has remained constant (specifically so for Dragon which is the flagship magazine and the one I keep a better eye on). It is a myth that content has been reduced both page and feature-wise content has been constant.
How people believe the crap that the previews and playtest has replaced magazine content is beyond me, it requires a willingness to follow the loudest baying of the biggest ass to believe somethign without verification. So I will say this to those that are lost in the sea of ********: previews and non-class playtest never were, never have been part of the final pagecount of Dungeon or Dragon, they are essentially bonuses, something in addition to, not in place of magazine content.
Now if you can't find utility in the magazines then you're entitled and I encourage you not to spend money on it because you will not use it. I, and others, however do find good use in those magazines.
To whoever mentioned the OH NO CAN'T DISTRIBUTE THINGS ILLEGALLY, if I really had the mind to I could download all the 4e books, like I'm sure many others could. I'm disappointed because if I do wan't to get a copy of a pdf of a book I already purchased I have to get it in illegitimate ways instead of from Wizards. But I restrain myself because I still have hope in the company and don't want one of my favorite hobbies to die out. What I am complaining about is them not allowing the release of simple base information like they did with all previous versions so games could be run quickly but still impossible to run without the proper books. It's inconvenient to have to shuffle through books while hosting an online game because it creates very awkward periods of silence while you look up the weight of a greataxe or some other nearly insignificant piece of information.
Well I was referring to your complaint that: "so my group of players and I are forced to spend hours if not days going through and parcing our own books one by one since we can't share them online with each other even though we all have the books." If you want to share parts of your books online you can use IM's and not be breaking any laws or bruising sensitivities. Now, WotC has decided that selling PDF's was a net loss to them and that they couldn't trust people with digital versions of their books. You may not agree with that, I frankly didn't care much for the PDF's and their extinction is not of my concern. However, the compendium, if you were still paying for it, would have most of the information you are looking for. About your other concerns, they legitimate to you and there is nothing I can say about them as they aren't a matter of fact or myth (in the sense of the other stuff I have been replying to, such as the incorrect belief that no information was given about the non-existence of a complete VTT) as much as it is a matter of situation, one which I hope you can fix soon.
I think a more accurate food analogy would be ordering a cheeseburger, but being told that there's no cheese right now but they sent an employee to go get it for you while they make you a hamburger. Then telling you the employee got fired while on his way to the freezer and you can't have the cheeseburger you wanted but get the hamburger instead.
Yes I could have said no I will wait until he gets back to order and pay, and I could have asked the other employees what their thoughts were on the absent employee to find out that he was a slacker, but I was trusting enough to believe a company who I was a faithful customer of for almost 20 years that my cheese would be delivered.
Well, I simply don't see it like that, I as well bought into DnDi at soon as it went to a payment system, knowing what was available, what wasn't and what was being worked on. I knew those things not because of clairvoyance or a direct relationship with WotC, but because I did the sensible thing and informed myself and it is my belief that those who fail to inform themselves should suffer the inconveniences of ignorance so that we may learn to look before we jump.
To complain that WotC is evil because they stopped development on the VTT is to equate the bliss of ignorance (and I wish I had a better, less charged word) to victimhood.
PS:
In a somewhat unrelated issue, to ask the WotC rewind and begin development in the original VTT and Visualizer when they have explained why they have been placed on hold and after doing market research on what tool they should work on next is the epitome of entitlement.
Also logical thought will lead to the conclusion that a DM would benefit most from the current DnDi and that a DM is the main consumer of DnD products. Therefore to focus time and money on PC focused tools as opposed to DM tools is illogical, I for once I'm glad they dropped the ridiculous idea of the visualizer and have decided to focus on campaign tools because it is what most DM's (most consumers of DnDi) need at the moment.
I was going to post a whole bunch of stuff about value and expectations and such. But the more I think about this sentence in your first post, the less I understand how this thread got to two pages in the first place.
It got to two pages because WotC does not want to listen to what their audience is saying and we all know where that leads (TSR comes to mind).
We have WotC_Trevor in these forums quite regularly reading and reponding to threads. I chat with him via IM at least 3 or 4 times a week. Some of my other NGs chat with him on a regular basis as well. The Status reports that I write up get routed to WotC directly, and don't get routed through CS.
WotC *is* listening to the complaints that are being posted in the forums. However, they feel that the direction that they are taking is the proper one for them, long term.
(Note, not speaking for WotC, the above is my opinion only, and is not meant to be repesentative of the opinion of WotC or any of its employees.)
I amnot sure where the idea that WOtC doesn't listen comes from.
We have WotC_Trevor in these forums quite regularly reading and reponding to threads. I chat with him via IM at least 3 or 4 times a week. Some of my other NGs chat with him on a regular basis as well. The Status reports that I write up get routed to WotC directly, and don't get routed through CS.
WotC *is* listening to the complaints that are being posted in the forums. However, they feel that the direction that they are taking is the proper one for them, long term.
(Note, not speaking for WotC, the above is my opinion only, and is not meant to be repesentative of the opinion of WotC or any of its employees.)
Wow, so your little disclaimer means that you are only saying that in your opinion WotC is listening, but that they in actuality may not be listening? Weird.
(By reading this post you are agreeing that I am not responsible for anything ever!)
Wow, so your little disclaimer means that you are only saying that in your opinion WotC is listening, but that they in actuality may not be listening? Weird.
A number of times, new people to the forums will see that I am a SVCL, and will assume that when I say something, that I am speaking *for* WotC, and that my words carry *official* weight or something like that.
My disclaimer is an attempt to cut that off before it starts.
As I said, I *know* that WotC reads these forums. Do they read every, single post? Doubtful. Do they read enough to get a *very* good idea of the mood(s) of the forums? Yes. That I can guarantee.
Wow, so your little disclaimer means that you are only saying that in your opinion WotC is listening, but that they in actuality may not be listening? Weird.
(By reading this post you are agreeing that I am not responsible for anything ever!)
I'm sure the part he was indemnifying himself against was his prediction that WotC is happy with their current course for the current and long-term (while this certainly appears to be true, WotC could - in listening to customer feedback, always change their plans "tomorrow" to speak proverbially).
We (VCLs and NGs) aren't part of WotC and so aren't privvy to their innermost workings, and can only speculate same as others can.
However, because it isn't uncommon for people to view us as semi-official, it never hurts us to post clear reminders when we are speculating - even a tiny bit.
The parts about WotC listening is easily verifiable both through posts from WotC_Trevor, as well as other WotC staff members from time to time (including mdonais, WotC_DM, WotC_BrianP, WotC_CPerkins, and others I'm sure I'm forgetting).
I'm sure the part he was indemnifying himself against was his prediction that WotC is happy with their current course for the current and long-term (while this certainly appears to be true, WotC could - in listening to customer feedback, always change their plans "tomorrow" to speak proverbially).
We (VCLs and NGs) aren't part of WotC and so aren't privvy to their innermost workings, and can only speculate same as others can.
However, because it isn't uncommon for people to view us as semi-official, it never hurts us to post clear reminders when we are speculating - even a tiny bit.
The parts about WotC listening is easily verifiable both through posts from WotC_Trevor, as well as other WotC staff members from time to time (including mdonais, WotC_DM, WotC_BrianP, WotC_CPerkins, and others I'm sure I'm forgetting).
Ok that makes sense to me (about the disclaimer). The only things that I have seen that makes me think WotC is even listening is the repeated removal of posts that somehow (I'm not entirely sure I understand why) have violated the CoC. Why exactly in your opinion doesn't WotC want petitions, surveys, or other statistical measurements to be used by the users of their forums?
Ok that makes sense to me (about the disclaimer). The only things that I have seen that makes me think WotC is even listening is the repeated removal of posts that somehow (I'm not entirely sure I understand why) have violated the CoC. Why exactly in your opinion doesn't WotC want petitions, surveys, or other statistical measurements to be used by the users of their forums?
A poll by it's very nature is a yes/no situation that allows for no real opportunity for discussion and debate. Threads like that also tend to devolve fairly quickly into flame wars when someone posts something that goes against the grain of the rest of the people that have posted.
Now, if you had phrased it in the form of a question asking for debate and discussion, it would probably have not been ORCed.
Ok that makes sense to me (about the disclaimer). The only things that I have seen that makes me think WotC is even listening is the repeated removal of posts that somehow (I'm not entirely sure I understand why) have violated the CoC. Why exactly in your opinion doesn't WotC want petitions, surveys, or other statistical measurements to be used by the users of their forums?
Short version?
These are *discussion* forums. A petition/poll isn't a discusiion, it's a bunch of "me too" posts - until the point comes where someone posts something to the effect of "this is stupid, it won't work" and a derailed, disruptive argument breaks out.
So in short, it's counter-productive to the purpose of the forum.
A poll by it's very nature is a yes/no situation that allows for no real opportunity for discussion and debate. Threads like that also tend to devolve fairly quickly into flame wars when someone posts something that goes against the grain of the rest of the people that have posted.
Now, if you had phrased it in the form of a question asking for debate and discussion, it would probably have not been ORCed.
Short version?
These are *discussion* forums. A petition/poll isn't a discusiion, it's a bunch of "me too" posts - until the point comes where someone posts something to the effect of "this is stupid, it won't work" and a derailed, disruptive argument breaks out.
So in short, it's counter-productive to the purpose of the forum.
Well is there a way to get someone to officially put up a poll or petition that would simply be a for or against type of thing?
I would be *very* surprised if WotC would allow a poll like that to go up. Your best bet to ask for permission for something like that might be to go through the Contact Us link at the bottom of the page and use the drop down options as follows:
What did you expect to get out of your DDI Subscription? type thread
something more like that would be appropriate instead of a poll or survey?
i can see that, and this thread has kinda stayed with the Appalled note though, I did however notice that the VTT and Visualizer have not had an official announcement in almost a year... on the front page when you look at the DDI news it has been almost a year since we have had any real news on the matter... we as a community need more updates. I only came into the forums because i got bored of waiting for the VTT to be released... I could care less about the Visualizer(IMHO we dont need one that looks that well anyway, it could be put into the VTT)
WOTC knew if the public found out DDi would not be ready at launch lie WOTC promised it would, that would lead to people not buying the books. So WOTC let that little info out then let it get burried.
I think you are unfairly assuming malice aforethought and sinister intent when a simple lack of familiarity with web dvelopment and basic incompetence* works just as well to explain the situation.
Occam's razor and all that. WotC is a company comprised of human beings and they deserve the benfit of the doubt.
*Not the best word for the situation, but I can't think of a better alternative.
That being said, a post like that will draw people who both really, really like what they are getting with their subscription and are very happy, as well as people who are very unhappy with what they are getting (or not getting, as the case may be.) It would be very, very easy for a thread such as that to drown in flames fairly quickly.
People will disagree with each other in the thread, and as long as it is kept civil and within the bounds of the CoC, there should be no problems. I would expect whomever starts it to work hard to ensure that the thread stays civil.
I think you are unfairly assuming malice aforethought and sinister intent when a simple lack of familiarity with web dvelopment and basic incompetence* works just as well to explain the situation.
Occam's razor and all that. WotC is a company comprised of human beings and they deserve the benfit of the doubt.
*Not the best word for the situation, but I can't think of a better alternative.
Well I dont think anyone is suggesting that WoTC NEVER planned to release the VTT and made the whole thing up, if that is what you think we think.
However, I have read of other examples of books getting sigificant changes (much more than removing an add on the last page) with 4 months to release date. With the ads still in, this would imply that WoTC would not know 4 months before release that they were at least two years from a VTT. That simply defies belief, especially for a company that has worked on these types of things before, albiet unsuccessfully (and I have written code).
Being off by two years on a project 5 years away is one thing. Being off by two years on a project you need to to be stress testing for server loads in a month is something else entirely.
Which is the simpler solution to fit Occam's Razor? That a small group of professional programmers couldn't figure out that they were two years or more behind schedule 4 months to release? Or, that when told about the fact that the project was much bigger and would take much longer and/or much more money than expected and would not make release, some 'marketing genius' decided to bury the info rather than risk poor sales?
I amnot sure where the idea that WOtC doesn't listen comes from.
How about when WOTC decides to totally change direction based on a survey they put out that WOTC admit was bugged? Then after WOTC says they are dropping trhe other tools they promised they were working on and working on campiagn tools, we have a bunch of posts on here with alot of peopel upset. Gee would'nt that be a hint that was the wrong step to take? I guess WOTC does not care about that. Shows to me they not listening.
I think you are unfairly assuming malice aforethought and sinister intent when a simple lack of familiarity with web dvelopment and basic incompetence* works just as well to explain the situation.
Occam's razor and all that. WotC is a company comprised of human beings and they deserve the benfit of the doubt.
They had issues with 3rd edtion and etools/ master tools. They should have learned from that but now I know they have not. They should have gotten there crap together and the preview videos of all the cool DDi stuff made it look like they did have it together. They were proudly proclaming that it would be out on 4th ed relase. Its my fault for beliving them.
Fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice shame on me.
How about when WOTC decides to totally change direction based on a survey they put out that WOTC admit was bugged? Then after WOTC says they are dropping trhe other tools they promised they were working on and working on campiagn tools, we have a bunch of posts on here with alot of peopel upset. Gee would'nt that be a hint that was the wrong step to take? I guess WOTC does not care about that. Shows to me they not listening.
WotC said the poll was perhaps less than perfect, yes. That doesn't make it worthless - even a flawed poll can still produce valid data. In this case the flaw that was mentioned was that the poll may have eliminated too many potential pollsters out-of-turn.
That doesn't mean the data that was gathered from people who WERE polled was invalid. Others who know statistics and analysis have already demonstrated the math behind such statistics and that the given sample size gives us a very high confidence rating that the poll should be accurate withing a couple %.
People complaining after the fact are NOT a representative sample. This can also be shown mathematically. If I were generous and said that 100 people have posted here complaining that the VTT needs to be first - that's still a fraction of 1% of people polled (the poll consisting of roughly 4000 respondants).
The squeakiest wheel, as it were, is not the "most correct" wheel. That's why a poll was done in the first place - to convert the signal-to-noise ratio into data that can be easily interpreted without strong bias.
This is coming from someone who actually agrees with you. I DO want the VTT more than I want The Campaign Tools (as I play via the RPGA pretty much exclusively, I don't need DM/Campaign Tools, I just need tools to play the game).
Not getting what I, personally, want doesn't mean WotC isn't listening. It means that I'm not a majority voice. While that sucks - it isn't illogical, and it doesn't make WotC some horrible corporate monster.
It means they're following what they feel is the best plan, based on solid DATA, and not just the loudest voice(s) in a single forum, or even from a single website (keeping in mind that other sites were privy to the poll as well).
Well, there's your problem.
Don't pay for things that might happen. That's called gambling.
Either the D&Di is worth the price you pay now for the services you receive now or its not.
If it is worth it (I think it is), then enjoy it. If not, then don't pay for it. Simple.
You're forgetting the "lock in the introductory price!" angle of all this.
How about when WOTC decides to totally change direction based on a survey they put out that WOTC admit was bugged? Then after WOTC says they are dropping trhe other tools they promised they were working on and working on campiagn tools, we have a bunch of posts on here with alot of peopel upset. Gee would'nt that be a hint that was the wrong step to take? I guess WOTC does not care about that. Shows to me they not listening.
Trevor has also stated that the survey was not the only source/factor they referred to when making the decision. They had e-mails through the customer service and the forum to look at when making the decision. I don't know what other sources they used.
They're listening, but they're also going to make their own decisions. The Character Builder has changed many times because of feedback. People started complaining about the online mags not having exclusive content like they use to, now they are giving it.
They're listening. Trevor works hard, mdonais is always around, WotC_DM stops by from time to time. They probably bring up the concerns of the forum members (and someone brings the concerns emails from the Customer Service side) to the meetings. Some things will get shot down, some will not. Just because they make a decision that we may or may not like does not mean they are not listening.
(If you count pages alone, the content is actually has actually been increasing with the last four issues, but don't get facts get in the way, makes it harder to rant, and defeats the purpose of the internet)
First, let me say that your posts have been quite rude, and there is no reason to be. I wish you'd stop using pejorative terms and insulting statements like the above.
Second, those charts were a reply to another rude statement of yours, stating that (and I bolded it) "How people believe the crap that the previews and playtest has replaced magazine content is beyond me, it requires a willingness to follow the loudest baying of the biggest ass to believe somethign without verification."
This was not "counting pages alone." This was "counting pages that were not previews."
You were stating that I was willing to follow the loudest baying of the biggest ass without verification. I disagree, frankly. If WotC promised us 80 pages per magazine (as Wolfstar mentioned), then, if I subtract the pages of preview material, we get the following for Dragon:
375 - 66 pages
374 - 75 pages
373 - 78 pages
372 - 83 pages
371 - 69 pages
370 - 63 pages
369 - 68 pages
368 - 87 pages
367 - 70 pages
366 - 84 pages
365 - 66 pages
364 - 80 pages
That is, 8 failed to meet 80 pages and only 4 succeeded when one elliminates preview content. (the average was 74.083 pages overall, btw-also short of 80).
Interestingly, of the 4 that met the 80 page cutoff, only one of those had ANY preview content. It's as though the preview content is being used to fill magazine space that would otherwise be utilized by features and columns.
Further, the original statement by WotC at DDXP07 was that each magazine would have 80 pages of content every month.
Ahh, Wolfstar76, good to talk to you, but I'll have to disagree here that they've "delivered it constantly".
79 pages for the latest dungeon.
75, 74, 66, and 73 pages for four of the dragons.
(That is total page count, I did NOT subtract previews or anything else).
That is 5 instances where they did not meet their own minimum of 80 pages. Also, they mentioned a minimum of 3-5 adventures for dungeon. I count 6 issues that had only 2. (Never mind that they said they'd have at least one for each tier and there are only a total of 3 epic at all).
People may say "I like having longer adventures, so I like that there are only 2" or might say "of course they haven't done as many epic, people were all starting campaigns, there should be an upswing of epic now and a downswing of heroic to accomodate what people use and need".
Those are not bad sentiments, but two things: 1. that is not what was promised as part of what people paid for when they bought a year's subscription. 2. If they ever get around to locking back access, then people buying month to month may end up with no adventure of the tier that they are actually using, contrary to the supposed design of Dungeon magazine.
This is not the right situtation.
TO YOU.
---
@bunny: just tell me something. would you buy anything different like that?
say, a company that sells you bread, and you might eventually, maybe, sometime later get cheese and sausages to it as well. to some, bread alone might be worth the offer. to some, it's just sausages or cheese they want.
noone would tell you that the right place to go for cheese and sausages would be to stick with this company and hope. but this is exactly the stuff you're proposing here.
honestly, if you pay for something you don't like at all, you're stupid. but obviously, both dane and bunny like insider - so they're not really the audience that should speak about paying for something they don't like.
Now I did check the website about once a week. Since there was no changes I started checking less frequently until I got to the point that I was checking once a month or so. This was because there were no changes.
Apparently during my absence they threw up a survey which I never saw about which DDi product they wanted to work on. I'm not alone in this because I have seen many people on this board being vocal (or textual) about it.
I personally feel that when they moved from "very nearly" complete VTT or Game Table that was in the beta stage of testing to "we've put it on hold" that they pretty much betrayed a significant portion of their following, me included.
I'll repeat the only reason I bought the books is because they made it completely clear that the VTT was just months away from release. They lied in this and it really makes me wonder if WotC wants D&D to succeed or just wants to suck what remaining money they can from it before dropping it and moving on to something else.
@bunny: just tell me something. would you buy anything different like that?
say, a company that sells you bread, and you might eventually, maybe, sometime later get cheese and sausages to it as well. to some, bread alone might be worth the offer. to some, it's just sausages or cheese they want.
noone would tell you that the right place to go for cheese and sausages would be to stick with this company and hope. but this is exactly the stuff you're proposing here.
Huh?? I have *never* said that. What I have been quite consistent in saying is that how people decide whether it is worth subscribing (or resubscribing, as the case may be) is very subjective. What one person takes into account may have no influence on another. That it is up to each person to make their own decision, based on their own personal opinions and priorities.
It is unreasonable to you. To others, it is very reasonable to say "I don't like what they have out so far, but I do like what they have planned, so I am going to subscribe to show my support for the future plans."
you might not have said this exactly, however, you _always_ do support this standpoint by arguing against those of differing opinion. you might not yet have realized it - but you support the same fraction as dane, those that tell us it's best to pay for something we don't like. even if you don't do it as verbose.
you might not have said this exactly, however, you _always_ do support this standpoint by arguing against those of differing opinion. you might not yet have realized it - but you support the same fraction as dane, those that tell us it's best to pay for something we don't like. even if you don't do it as verbose.
I am not sure where you are getting the point of view I hold, 'cause I haven't said anything. All I have said is that different people use different things to determine whether, for them, subscribing (or re-subscribing) is a good idea or not.
Really the only reason I bought the 4E books was the very prominent and misleading advertising that showed a "very nearly" complete VTT or Game Table. That would be out "very soon". The video that they showed at GenCon and the other conventions that was downloadable via the Wizards website that said it will come out within a year because it was in the beta-stage.
Now I did check the website about once a week. Since there was no changes I started checking less frequently until I got to the point that I was checking once a month or so. This was because there were no changes.
Apparently during my absence they threw up a survey which I never saw about which DDi product they wanted to work on. I'm not alone in this because I have seen many people on this board being vocal (or textual) about it.
I personally feel that when they moved from "very nearly" complete VTT or Game Table that was in the beta stage of testing to "we've put it on hold" that they pretty much betrayed a significant portion of their following, me included.
I'll repeat the only reason I bought the books is because they made it completely clear that the VTT was just months away from release. They lied in this and it really makes me wonder if WotC wants D&D to succeed or just wants to suck what remaining money they can from it before dropping it and moving on to something else.
Yes. This exactly.
Even character visualizer was coming "very soon". I'll quote a post by one of my players here:
Here is a youtube video (from 8/15/08) with Randy Buehler talking at GenCon about how character visualizer will be done almost in tandem with Character Builder (and that they were both practically finished, again on 8/15/08).
Some Quotes:
Quote:
"We do not have the client applications up and running on the website but they are on the kiosks. So if you can get to Indiannapolis, check them out."
Quote:
"It's nice, because, they're, they're close. The builder and the visualizer are usable, they function, they work"
In response to when they will available, he said a lot of hedging but also:
Quote:
"The visualizer should trail behind it [character builder] pretty quick. It's sorta the two sides of the same coin. How does the character sheet work? Well, what does my guy look like. Those applications are pretty close, they're installed, people are playing with them right now. I'm not going to give you a date, sorry, but they're, we're getting close."
Quote:
"I do not expect to see the gametable up this year for example."....."Even the gametable is installed on these kiosks. We've got it where we are doing demos of the gametable."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixHUK...e=channel_page
But, ya know, things change.
Add to that the nonsense of "subscribe NOW and lock in the current price for the future applications." Well, I'd frankly not have felt that it was gambling to buy a year's subscription on 8/15/08, when this video was put out, with the expectation that I'd have locked in the price and would have access to character visualizer. I mean, maybe I'd be naive, but he basically said they were done and it was just finishing touches. To expect that my YEARLONG subscription would have it? They make that seem like a done deal.
you might not have said this exactly, however, you _always_ do support this standpoint by arguing against those of differing opinion. you might not yet have realized it - but you support the same fraction as dane, those that tell us it's best to pay for something we don't like. even if you don't do it as verbose.
Have you been reading Dane's posts?
Here is Dane's argument, as I'm reading it:
1) Boycotting DDI in the hopes that it will cause them to change tracks and bring the VTT to the frontline of development won't work (and will likely backfire by leading to DDI's demise).
2) If you like what is being offered now for the price, you should subscribe - holding out until the package is complete may still lead to #1
3) If you don't like what's being offered now, then it's reasonable that you shouldn't pay.
mudbunny, on the other hand, has so far (in this thread) said little more than "It's up to each person to decide if DDI is or isn't worth it to them (and how they evaluate and come to their decision is up to them)".
Where you're getting that EITHER is (effectively) saying "OMG! Everyone should buy DDI because it MIGHT be cool someday!" is completely beyond me.
I'd be wary as well about putting words into the mouths of others. If someone TELLS YOU their stance - it's a bit presumptive of you to tell them that they think/believe otherwise.
@wolfstar: dane wrote in his last two posts or so, that "this is not the right time to vote with your wallet". obviously, you must have missed that. clearly, this is a message intended to bring people back to pay for something they do not like. dane is saying 3, but figures it just leads to the same result as 1, and thus argues that anyone should pay that has even a minor agreement to ddi. and this is just silly.
to use my previous example: i like bread, cheese and sausages.
however, if one vendor only sells me bread, i'll be likely to get my bread also where i get my sausages and cheese. if he sees this as "my customer is not happy with me", that's ok with me. because that's the original message. if i, however, buy always his bread, he might think everyone is content, and never get to selling cheese, as everything is perfect.
and far to many people here are advocating that this is good to do. "pay just for the possibility of keeping dd-online play alive"
this is just outright silly. if wotc wants to do the gametable still, wotc will do so. if wotc doesn't, it won't. no amount of additional or reduced subscriptions will change that. else many game companies would never publish a second game.
@bunny: this is a direct reaction to you replying always to posts like mine, never to posts like dane's, telling people that they are not right.
My first post in this thread was not even a reply to you at all. It was a reply to someone else where I was quite clear in saying that (a) for some people "pay now to support future products" is a good reason to subscribe, and for others it is not a good reason to subscribe; and (b) neither side is right and neither side is wrong.
To repeat what I said:
For Dane, it is important to subscribe now to help ensure that future tools get worked on.
For Falcon, people should subscribe based on what they are getting when they subscribe, not based on what they *might* get in the future.
@bunny: this is a direct reaction to you replying always to posts like mine, never to posts like dane's, telling people that they are not right.
Actually, mb had been known to post corrections to some of Dane's statements in the past. I recall seeing a couple not two weeks ago.
@wolfstar: dane wrote in his last two posts or so, that "this is not the right time to vote with your wallet". obviously, you must have missed that. clearly, this is a message intended to bring people back to pay for something they do not like. dane is saying 3, but figures it just leads to the same result as 1, and thus argues that anyone should pay that has even a minor agreement to ddi. and this is just silly.
Now, put those posts back into the context of his original message. His most recent post "Now is not the time to vote with your wallet" goes HAND IN HAND with his original message about boycotting to get the VTT.
In fact, out of that context if you take it literally - the key word is VOTE. If you want to buy DDI, buy it. If you don't, don't. But holding out to make a statement is (from what I interpret Dane to be saying) a poor choice at this time.
Again - you have to read his entire message, and not just try to take bits and pieces and conform them to what you want him to be saying.
No, my point is this. People calling for everyone to "Speak with their wallet" isn't going to have the desired results.
If people drop their subscriptions in mass as some protest, it won't be a case of WoTC or Hasbro saying, well, I guess we need to give them the VTT and CV. They will say, shut DDi down, it's failed completely. They won't care what factors contributed to people dropping subscriptions.
When I say that I'm speaking with my wallet, that doesn't mean that I'm assuming they'll do what I want, it means that I'm choosing not to spend my money on the product because it doesn't do what I want. You are right, if I'm naive enough to believe that WotC will see my lost subscription and suddenly spring into action to reverse course and actually finish the VTT, then I'm not going to get my desired result. However, if my desired result is to both signal displeasure and save myself money on a product that isn't meeting my expectations, then I am most certainly getting my desired result.
I'm not saying we need to subscribe to finance the VTT, I'm saying trying to use our wallets to leverage getting the VTT isn't going to work, it's just going to get DDI shut down.
Its not about using our wallets to somehow force them to make the VTT, its about both saving what money we haven't spent on a product that isn't meeting expectations (dare I say promises?) while also showing displeasure with the product. If that leads to DDI failing and never getting a VTT, then that is a result of their decisions. I shouldn't somehow feel bad that I'll never get a VTT because they didn't meet their own generated hype.
In fact, it's been stated by WoTC employees' The way Money talks at WoTC and Hasbro. That which brings in money, gets attention and more resources. Just like all companies. The products that make the most, also get the most.
So if people ever want to see a VTT, trying to get it by getting people to NOT subscribe to DDi is going to cause the exact opposite to happen
Your argument doesn't make much sense to me. If I want a VTT, then not subscribing to DDI can lead to never getting a VTT. On the other hand they aren't promising a VTT will ever be done. Why would I choose the option that sees me shelling out cash for a product I may never get? I'm pretty much not getting a VTT either way.
The most laughable part of your argument is that I can't help but feel like a year down the road when someone comes on these forums and says "I kept subscribing to DDI because I was hoping they would finish the CT and get back on the VTT, but that looks like it'll never happen, so now I'm quitting" you'll be one of the first people to jump on here and shout about how WotC never promised a VTT, and how they were foolish if they spent their money expecting it. You can't have it both ways. Either people who want DDI for a VTT should expect it and thus keep spending money, or they shouldn't expect it and cancel their subscription. They shouldn't not expect it but keep spending money so that DDI will stay alive and MIGHT produce it.
Yes, voting with my wallet may kill DDI (and by extension the VTT), but that isn't something I should feel guilty about. I didn't choose to hype the VTT, and I didn't choose to shelve it.
I'm not upset that the computer stuff got delayed. I know stuff like that does. I'm upset at how WOTC went about telling the public about it. Then after all that died down, they said they would come out with one tool at a time. The put out one tool, leave the other three, so they can work on yet another tool. They totally changed direction. They are not following through.
How do we know WOTC won't drop these campign tools and change direction without completing them? They have done this too many times with computer stuff.
Short answer: You don't.
Longer answer: Given that they have not signed a contract with you obligating them to produce said tools, they are under no direct requirement to actually produce them.
Do you know what the punishment for them not producing campaign tools will be? That they won't be able to sell campaign tools!
Look, I am confident that WotC would be extraordinarily happy if they had finished all their projects as planned and was currently able to sell you the products that you were so eager to see. There is no rejoicing on their part that they were unable to finish those products by their originally planned timeline. The punishment they suffer for not having a completed product is not having a completed product.
But they do have other products in DDI that are currently available - the magazines, the Compendium, the Character Builder. If those products are a worthwhile purchase, then people will purchase them.
Now, WotC has not had the best communication in this department, it is true. On the other hand, it has vastly improved since the initial issues at the release of 4E. The staff are in the forums, regularly keeping users up to date on the current situation - exactly what people claim to want.
Some folks, however, remain upset - not because WotC isn't communicating with them, but because WotC isn't telling them what they want to hear. People continue to demand to know when VTT and such will be released - even though being given unreliable dates was what people complained about in the first place!
In any case, WotC's failure to live up to advertising is not, and should not be, a reason to not buy their product. What it is is a reason to not buy product until that product is fully available - which is the proper way to buy things anyway.
So in the end? You don't have to buy the campaign manager in advance. You don't need to purchase a DDI subscription in the 'hopes' that a manager will come out during the lifetime or your subscription. If you buy a subscription, you are entitled solely to the material actually available at the time you purchase the subscription - anything that does come along is just gravy.
If you want to wait for the campaign manager to be actually available before subscribing? That is an option.
And once again - the punishment WotC receives for not having a product to sell you is not having a product to sell you.
happy now?
(still not gonna pay for half-finished products, whitewashed content and previews of content i buy anyway via the books)
You don't like me, so you go out of your way to twist anything to something it's not. If you don't like what I have to say, you have the option of NOT saying anything. Just like I often over look the majority of what you say.
When I say that I'm speaking with my wallet, that doesn't mean that I'm assuming they'll do what I want, it means that I'm choosing not to spend my money on the product because it doesn't do what I want. You are right, if I'm naive enough to believe that WotC will see my lost subscription and suddenly spring into action to reverse course and actually finish the VTT, then I'm not going to get my desired result. However, if my desired result is to both signal displeasure and save myself money on a product that isn't meeting my expectations, then I am most certainly getting my desired result.
Its not about using our wallets to somehow force them to make the VTT, its about both saving what money we haven't spent on a product that isn't meeting expectations (dare I say promises?) while also showing displeasure with the product. If that leads to DDI failing and never getting a VTT, then that is a result of their decisions. I shouldn't somehow feel bad that I'll never get a VTT because they didn't meet their own generated hype.
Your argument doesn't make much sense to me. If I want a VTT, then not subscribing to DDI can lead to never getting a VTT. On the other hand they aren't promising a VTT will ever be done. Why would I choose the option that sees me shelling out cash for a product I may never get? I'm pretty much not getting a VTT either way.
The most laughable part of your argument is that I can't help but feel like a year down the road when someone comes on these forums and says "I kept subscribing to DDI because I was hoping they would finish the CT and get back on the VTT, but that looks like it'll never happen, so now I'm quitting" you'll be one of the first people to jump on here and shout about how WotC never promised a VTT, and how they were foolish if they spent their money expecting it. You can't have it both ways. Either people who want DDI for a VTT should expect it and thus keep spending money, or they shouldn't expect it and cancel their subscription. They shouldn't not expect it but keep spending money so that DDI will stay alive and MIGHT produce it.
Yes, voting with my wallet may kill DDI (and by extension the VTT), but that isn't something I should feel guilty about. I didn't choose to hype the VTT, and I didn't choose to shelve it.
Well, you mentioned guilt, I didn't. But what is the purpose of speaking with your wallet? To let them know your are displeased. Well, fine, you did that.
End of story.
HOWEVER, the post I was responding to directly, was someone saying that to let WoTC know how displeased we are, and you can do that by not giving them your money.
What I got from that persons post was this:
[INDENT]We need to let WoTC know how dissappointed we are and we can do that by not giving them our money for this.[/INDENT]
Maybe that's not really what the poster meant, but that's what I took away from his post.
And if that's what the poster is saying, I'm saying, all that will do is kill DDI, because Hasbro will just see DDI as a failed product, because it's not making money.
And that's not really my opinion, it's how business works.
You know, you can let WoTC know that you are dissappointed by simply telling them. You don't need to speak with your wallet or whatever. Because lets be honest, saying I'm speaking with my wallet is an attempt to influence WoTC towards what you want. Otherwise, why say it? If someone doens't like a product, they simply don't buy it.
If someone doesn't like a product, they simply don't buy it.
Exactly.
This still doesn't address the legitimate frustration that some are feeling over having been sold DDI subscriptions on the assumption that the VTT was "coming soon". A year later and it is not only not coming out, but shelved indefinitely. Do you really not understand why these people feel gyped?
I was the poster you keep alluding to earlier. And I was saying that we should speak with our wallet by not buying DDI if what we wanted DDI for is the VTT. You make the argument that doing that will only result in killing the VTT. The inference would be that we should support DDI so that VTT has some chance of getting produced, and I'm saying that is illogical.
Again, you guys sure like to point out that WotC never "promised" the VTT, yet you think that people should consider subscribing to DDI because they may one day get the VTT, and I'm saying this is foolish. If said people come here a year from now and say they are ending they're subscription because they didn't get VTT, you'll claim WotC never said they would definitely have it. You can't have it both ways. Either people who want the VTT should support DDI with the expectation that they'll eventually get it, or they should not support DDI because they don't have the VTT. To suggest that they should both support DDI and not expect VTT is silly.
Short answer: You don't.
Longer answer: SNIP
You are right. We're not contracted to anything, and we're not guaranteed anything. But do you really think convincing people to lock in a subscription now so that they'll get to use whatever tools are out at the current "low" price, and then never releasing those tools isn't in an ethically gray area? I mean, they aren't legally required to produce those tools, but they are reneging on expectations that they created. Those who paid with the expectation that they would get CV/VTT, after being shown working versions of those tools a year ago, and being sold on the idea that they could lock in a low price now and get the tools later have a legitimate grievance. Can you people not see this? You don't have to agree that CV/VTT should be the immediate priority, or that people should run screaming from DDI, or whatever, but do you really feel like WotC hasn't engaged in some shady behavior here?
There are other (even FREE) options and it will probably raise the price of my subscription if there are no price plans with different options. I don't have cable TV because I can't just pick the channels I want and pay accordingly. I understand that it helps spread the cost, like it does in the minis being random, but I do hope they have some choice in the future.
For the folks who subscribed expecting the VTT... It's understandable they are upset. If the VTT was the main reason behind their subscription, then perhaps it isn't providing value for the price. Perhaps in the future.
I'm quite happy with my yearly subscription once the character builder came out... ;)
Exactly.
This still doesn't address the legitimate frustration that some are feeling over having been sold DDI subscriptions on the assumption that the VTT was "coming soon". A year later and it is not only not coming out, but shelved indefinitely. Do you really not understand why these people feel gyped?
I was the poster you keep alluding to earlier. And I was saying that we should speak with our wallet by not buying DDI if what we wanted DDI for is the VTT. You make the argument that doing that will only result in killing the VTT. The inference would be that we should support DDI so that VTT has some chance of getting produced, and I'm saying that is illogical.
Again, you guys sure like to point out that WotC never "promised" the VTT, yet you think that people should consider subscribing to DDI because they may one day get the VTT, and I'm saying this is foolish. If said people come here a year from now and say they are ending they're subscription because they didn't get VTT, you'll claim WotC never said they would definitely have it. You can't have it both ways. Either people who want the VTT should support DDI with the expectation that they'll eventually get it, or they should not support DDI because they don't have the VTT. To suggest that they should both support DDI and not expect VTT is silly.
Unless you are using several names, the poster I'm alluding to that I orignally responded to was Kilsek of Sheverash.
But, as for a person that got a subscription to DDI, under the Coming Soon for the VTT and CV. There really isn't anything to address.
Why? Because in my opinion, WoTC had all honest intentions to fullfill that coming soon. And while they failed, those that bought a subscription to DDI, expecting that in time, the VTT and CV would be added, bought a service that was priced at a lower cost, because of the lack of those.
So now that those who know they have an account for something that doesn't offer what they want?
Simple they cancle their account. If they have time left, they need to take that up with Customer service, and see if they can get a refund for the remaining time on their account. All things considered, they probably have a good chance.
I'm not suggesting at all that anyone support DDi if it offers nothing. If I type it all in caps, will that help?
IF DDI DOESN'T OFFER YOU ANYTHING YOU WANT, DON'T SUBSCRIBE.
But again, I refer back to the ACTUAL post I was responding to, which points out there is a lot of great stuff in what DDi currently offer.
If you like and find value in DDi, but are unhappy with the state of the VTT and CV, trying to get people to speak up with their wallet, to let WoTC know you are upset, isn't going to do anything other then get DDi as a product cancled.
We should remember WotC contracted out the tools to a Company that said they could produce tools on time. We do not know the details of the contract or what went wrong. At the time WotC made the contract they had confidence in the vendor. I recall posts from back them from WotC to that effect when issue was raised with in house development. The plan then was to take completed tools in house for maintenance and ongoing support
We now know that Radient Machine was not able to meet target date. There is some question of if that company even still exists as of this time. The result was WotC had to take incomplete tools in house to try to complete them. People that were hired to maintain an existing tool, actually had to be diverted to completing the tool before they could maintain them. Staff required to build tools did not exist, the staff was hired to maintain tools. WotC IIRC actually did manage to hire one person to build the tool, however then they had to downsize and likely cut people that at least spent some time on building the tools. Currently WotC can not hire anyone.
There are not from all indications enough in IT to work on more then one tool and maintain the few existing tools. Yes people are upset about this, some believe they were cheated as well. WotC and their evil [1] overlord are also upset about this.
At this point in time one should look at what exists, not what was planned. One should buy what exists if they believe it is worth to them. They should not purchase in hope of what will be completed. Somebody wanting the VC or VT and believe money will help should make a restricted donation to WotC. Should WotC accept such a donation the money could only be spent on working on that tool.
[1] Companies are not evil unless one believes a company should not make a profit.
Just to get back to topic.
We should remember WotC contracted out the tools to a Company that said they could produce tools on time. We do not know the details of the contract or what went wrong. At the time WotC made the contract they had confidence in the vendor. I recall posts from back them from WotC to that effect when issue was raised with in house development. The plan then was to take completed tools in house for maintenance and ongoing support
We now know that Radient Machine was not able to meet target date. There is some question of if that company even still exists as of this time. The result was WotC had to take incomplete tools in house to try to complete them. People that were hired to maintain an existing tool, actually had to be diverted to completing the tool before they could maintain them. Staff required to build tools did not exist, the staff was hired to maintain tools. WotC IIRC actually did manage to hire one person to build the tool, however then they had to downsize and likely cut people that at least spent some time on building the tools. Currently WotC can not hire anyone.
There are not from all indications enough in IT to work on more then one tool and maintain the few existing tools. Yes people are upset about this, some believe they were cheated as well. WotC and their evil [1] overlord are also upset about this.
At this point in time one should look at what exists, not what was planned. One should buy what exists if they believe it is worth to them. They should not purchase in hope of what will be completed. Somebody wanting the VC or VT and believe money will help should make a restricted donation to WotC. Should WotC accept such a donation the money could only be spent on working on that tool.
[1] Companies are not evil unless one believes a company should not make a profit.
Thanks Kential, I wasn't really sure they had hired an outside contractor, with the plans to do maintance and updates internally.
If that's the case, I can understand more why they couldn't get it up and running.
Who knows. I've certainly worked with vendors who lied to me about the progress they were making on a project. I've worked with vendors that don't turn over all the files when the project is done. And yes, the whole time I would be checking their work and all that.
I had one vendor that would always ask for a few extra days on their page rounds, which I would have to say no to. Why? Because we used a file sharing server, and i could look and see whenever a file had been opened, looked or anything.
So when they have 10 days to do a round of corrections, and call up on day 8, saying it's taking longer to get the corrections done because of the amount, and I can see they haven't touched those files once in those 8 days.
That says to me, they are lying.
BUT the project is so far along, that I can't pull it back, and give it to someone else without missing my files to printer date.
So until it's critical, I'm stuck in a vendor client relationshop that is strained, because they aren't living up to outlined expectations, and I have to be the one to crack the whip.
Ultimatly, we don't and won't know the details. But if it's true that WoTC hired an outside source, that failed to deliver as contratually agreed, they are going to have a hard time bringing that to final product.
if wotc can not hire people, and is developing one tool at a time, by the time the VTT would be in line, they'll have noone left since updates, changes, etc for the other tools will eat up most of the time of their staff.
it is quite save to assume, that this staff will end up only supporting the tools anyway. (and i believe that to be soon, probably after the campaign tools are out)
@dane: you seem to have no idea about the specifics of IT-projects, but trust me: they're a lot more complicated than what you believe to be a problem.
@kentinal:
if wotc can not hire people, and is developing one tool at a time, by the time the VTT would be in line, they'll have noone left since updates, changes, etc for the other tools will eat up most of the time of their staff.
it is quite save to assume, that this staff will end up only supporting the tools anyway. (and i believe that to be soon, probably after the campaign tools are out)
I well understand the problem. WotC_DM we know is spending time maintaining existing tools, IIRC he also has oversight of tool development.
The Hasbro hiring freeze restricts the ability to expand staff to work on on completing tools. This of course can change any day or WotC might even be given a waiver to hire more if they can justify it well enough to be worth the investment.
BTW welcome back.
@kentinal:
if wotc can not hire people, and is developing one tool at a time, by the time the VTT would be in line, they'll have noone left since updates, changes, etc for the other tools will eat up most of the time of their staff.
it is quite save to assume, that this staff will end up only supporting the tools anyway. (and i believe that to be soon, probably after the campaign tools are out)
@dane: you seem to have no idea about the specifics of IT-projects, but trust me: they're a lot more complicated than what you believe to be a problem.
whitebaron, I have no idea why you said that. I didn't talk at all about the complexity if IT projects. I was talking about client/vendor relationships.
Please, stop, I've asked you several times. You keep trying to put words in my mouth that I never even came close to saying.
And I actually have worked on IT projects, because while I work in publishing, my work is basis for the IT projects. Much like what WoTC does with their projects. Make a print project, take that and make an digital product off of that. Like online tests to anaylize where children are excelling and were they need work.
I fully understand how complex an IT project is.
So please, just speak for yourself.
Choosing not to be informed, for whatever reason doesn't equal WoTC failed to put the information out there.
Hold on there. There is a big difference in not activily looking for info and not being to find info because its no longer easy to find. Yes WOTC put the info out there but by the time 4th ed. was in stores it was hard to find in the fourms and news feed. IMO WOTC should have made the infovery clear on the DnD main page.
Hold on there. There is a big difference in not activily looking for info and not being to find info because its no longer easy to find. Yes WOTC put the info out there but by the time 4th ed. was in stores it was hard to find in the fourms and news feed. IMO WOTC should have made the infovery clear on the DnD main page.
It was clear on the main page. It was easy to find, it's still easy to find. It's called the archive.
What I feel you mean is that, WoTC should made it huge and large and all you noticed on the main page saying.
"HEY, we aren't going to have DDI ready in time! SORRY."
Not going to happen.
If anyone stops coming for months, you really expect them to keep months old news on the front page?
Ok.
Not going to happen.
All snark aside - THIS is the key phrase I feel.
You can rail all you want about what WotC "should" have done - but they can't go back in time and change what happened.
To keep dredging the issue up every few days helps, frankly, nobody. You're upset how it was handled, and we get that. WotC can't undo the way it was handled - it's not going to happen.
While they can't undo the past, they could start being more transparently honest now.
BUT, they aren't.
And yet they're silent when asked if VTT is "just tabled for now" or "cancelled".
While they can't undo the past, they could start being more transparently honest now.
BUT, they aren't.
What do you expect them to say?
They've told you that the VTT isn't being actively developed. Even they probably don't know if they'll be able to eventually get around to it. But I'm sure they still want to. Why are you picking over this? They've told you probably everything they can.
You're looking for ways of accusing WotC of dishonesty, and it's getting old.
They don't want to say "canceled" because it might not be true - they still may develop it.
They don't want to say "It's just tabled for now," because then if they do end up canceling it down the line, people like you will rip them apart for it.
ShowFirst, let me say that your posts have been quite rude, and there is no reason to be. I wish you'd stop using pejorative terms and insulting statements like the above.
Second, those charts were a reply to another rude statement of yours, stating that (and I bolded it) "How people believe the crap that the previews and playtest has replaced magazine content is beyond me, it requires a willingness to follow the loudest baying of the biggest ass to believe somethign without verification."
This was not "counting pages alone." This was "counting pages that were not previews."
You were stating that I was willing to follow the loudest baying of the biggest ass without verification. I disagree, frankly. If WotC promised us 80 pages per magazine (as Wolfstar mentioned), then, if I subtract the pages of preview material, we get the following for Dragon:
375 - 66 pages
374 - 75 pages
373 - 78 pages
372 - 83 pages
371 - 69 pages
370 - 63 pages
369 - 68 pages
368 - 87 pages
367 - 70 pages
366 - 84 pages
365 - 66 pages
364 - 80 pages
That is, 8 failed to meet 80 pages and only 4 succeeded when one elliminates preview content. (the average was 74.083 pages overall, btw-also short of 80).
Interestingly, of the 4 that met the 80 page cutoff, only one of those had ANY preview content. It's as though the preview content is being used to fill magazine space that would otherwise be utilized by features and columns.
Ahh, Wolfstar76, good to talk to you, but I'll have to disagree here that they've "delivered it constantly".
79 pages for the latest dungeon.
75, 74, 66, and 73 pages for four of the dragons.
(That is total page count, I did NOT subtract previews or anything else).
That is 5 instances where they did not meet their own minimum of 80 pages. Also, they mentioned a minimum of 3-5 adventures for dungeon. I count 6 issues that had only 2. (Never mind that they said they'd have at least one for each tier and there are only a total of 3 epic at all).
People may say "I like having longer adventures, so I like that there are only 2" or might say "of course they haven't done as many epic, people were all starting campaigns, there should be an upswing of epic now and a downswing of heroic to accomodate what people use and need".
Those are not bad sentiments, but two things: 1. that is not what was promised as part of what people paid for when they bought a year's subscription. 2. If they ever get around to locking back access, then people buying month to month may end up with no adventure of the tier that they are actually using, contrary to the supposed design of Dungeon magazine.
What do you expect them to say?
They've told you that the VTT isn't being actively developed. Even they probably don't know if they'll be able to eventually get around to it. But I'm sure they still want to. Why are you picking over this? They've told you probably everything they can.
You're looking for ways of accusing WotC of dishonesty, and it's getting old.
They don't want to say "canceled" because it might not be true - they still may develop it.
They don't want to say "It's just tabled for now," because then if they do end up canceling it down the line, people like you will rip them apart for it.
Yes, people like me, and very likely, I personally will rip them apart for it. I'll do that even if they say it is cancelled at this point. It's really a matter of "they screwed up and then hemmed and hawed about it without really coming clean, ever". Sometimes, it's warranted to rip someone apart even when they come clean. It is rare, but I think it applies in this case. Imagine: "I know I've been cheating on you for three years and I've denied it each and every time you've accused me of it, but I want to come clean now that you found that person naked in the closet. It's true. I have been cheating on you."
I don't need to "look for ways of accusing them of dishonesty" there are plenty out there.
In fact, I'm not saying that they're being dishonest here...I am saying that they were dishonest in the past and now they have a chance to be transparent and upfront. They are choosing to keep information to a minimum instead. That only reopens old wounds rather than making people forget about them.
Your phrasing is actually pretty good. What would I like them to say? "Even we don't know if we will get around to it. Rest assured, we still want to, and it is a goal, but there is a chance it will never come to fruition."
I don't know why they can't say that. Seems like it would tick a lot of people off in the short term but be good overall in the long term (rather than ticking people off both short and long term as they seem to be dong now).
Egads, it appears content is increasing and once again claims of reduced content are shown to be false. Of course this isn't really the best way to calculate the value of DnDi we also need to add all the pesky previews people seem to be complaining about and the actual pagecount would also include soft articles like Confessions and the Editorials and Design and Development, but whatever.
Well, I find it interesting how you parsed "usable content" using your own style of interpretation. The charts I read have it parsed by Wizards as previews and features and columns and such.
Care to clarify what qualifies as "usable content"? I mean, I'd expect WotC to claim that everything is usable content, but you and I apparently agree that this is not the case (while we may disagree what does and does not qualify).
You've used a selective process to determine what to pick and choose, in my opinion. I've used WotC's own determinations of categorization. Which of our two analyses would you say is more impartial?
Also, I find it interesting to note how you've identified how far from the mark of "80 page magazines" they get with usable content in some of your assessments. 54, 50 and 49 pages? Yeouch.
And yet they're silent when asked if VTT is "just tabled for now" or "cancelled".
While they can't undo the past, they could start being more transparently honest now.
BUT, they aren't.
What do you want, a post each week or two that effectivly says:
VTT Update:
Still on hold.
CV Update:
Still on hold.
Campaign Tools:
We are working on this. Like we've said, we will give you more information when we feel we've got it to the point we feel comfortable being able to talk about.
As for being silent, the said it's not activly being worked on. While you may want them to say, We are cancling it, or we will work on it later, it maybe they haven't decided that.
So you saw the words "Coming Soon" and believed them?
That's kinda sad.
On their part. They should have been belivable if you belive in this company enough to spend you money on it.
No on is asking anyone to do that. So you can just stop trying to make a case thats what I'm saying.
Voting with you wallet is a valid tactic, in the right situation.
This is not the right situtation.
Why isnt it if they dont give what you expected that is always the time to vote with your wallet. We expected the table and not getting time to fish or cut bait and spend you money on something that gives what you expect.
Short answer: You don't.
Longer answer: Given that they have not signed a contract with you obligating them to produce said tools, they are under no direct requirement to actually produce them.
Do you know what the punishment for them not producing campaign tools will be? That they won't be able to sell campaign tools!
Look, I am confident that WotC would be extraordinarily happy if they had finished all their projects as planned and was currently able to sell you the products that you were so eager to see. There is no rejoicing on their part that they were unable to finish those products by their originally planned timeline. The punishment they suffer for not having a completed product is not having a completed product.
But they do have other products in DDI that are currently available - the magazines, the Compendium, the Character Builder. If those products are a worthwhile purchase, then people will purchase them.
Now, WotC has not had the best communication in this department, it is true. On the other hand, it has vastly improved since the initial issues at the release of 4E. The staff are in the forums, regularly keeping users up to date on the current situation - exactly what people claim to want.
Some folks, however, remain upset - not because WotC isn't communicating with them, but because WotC isn't telling them what they want to hear. People continue to demand to know when VTT and such will be released - even though being given unreliable dates was what people complained about in the first place!
In any case, WotC's failure to live up to advertising is not, and should not be, a reason to not buy their product. What it is is a reason to not buy product until that product is fully available - which is the proper way to buy things anyway.
So in the end? You don't have to buy the campaign manager in advance. You don't need to purchase a DDI subscription in the 'hopes' that a manager will come out during the lifetime or your subscription. If you buy a subscription, you are entitled solely to the material actually available at the time you purchase the subscription - anything that does come along is just gravy.
If you want to wait for the campaign manager to be actually available before subscribing? That is an option.
And once again - the punishment WotC receives for not having a product to sell you is not having a product to sell you.
Your kidding right
If they fail to bring one thing expected they will fail to bring more the time to stop spending money is early so you dont waste as much.What do you want, a post each week or two that effectivly says:
VTT Update:
Still on hold.
CV Update:
Still on hold.
Campaign Tools:
We are working on this. Like we've said, we will give you more information when we feel we've got it to the point we feel comfortable being able to talk about.
Yes, thats what I want. That is alot more info then what they have been giving us.
Yes, people like me, and very likely, I personally will rip them apart for it. I'll do that even if they say it is cancelled at this point.
So it seems to me that you are telling them "Talk dishonestly to me and I'll rip you apart. Talk honestly to me and I'll rip you apart. In fact, just talk to me and I'll rip you apart" and you're wondering why they don't talk to you?
Listen, I'm not particularly happy with the current level of communication. I, too, wish they would tell us more. But I at least understand why they're keeping mum if their only choices are "keep quiet" or "get torn apart".
Yes, thats what I want. That is alot more info then what they have been giving us.
I can understand why you personally are upset.
To me it seems you have extreme unreasonable expectations.
Well, I find it interesting how you parsed "usable content" using your own style of interpretation. The charts I read have it parsed by Wizards as previews and features and columns and such.
Care to clarify what qualifies as "usable content"? I mean, I'd expect WotC to claim that everything is usable content, but you and I apparently agree that this is not the case (while we may disagree what does and does not qualify).
You've used a selective process to determine what to pick and choose, in my opinion. I've used WotC's own determinations of categorization. Which of our two analyses would you say is more impartial?
Also, I find it interesting to note how you've identified how far from the mark of "80 page magazines" they get with usable content in some of your assessments. 54, 50 and 49 pages? Yeouch.
Well, if you read what I wrote it is obvious what I consider usable content, anything that a DM or Player can use in the game, it includes everything with the exception of: Confessions, Editorials, Design and Development, DnD Alumni and Ampersand.
As for the 80 pages of content (which I haven't seen the statement so I won't vouch for it, then you'd have to count all pages in the magazines (including Confessions, Editorials, etc...) and if they meant between both magazines they are meeting that (still due to the way it was phrased it is unlikely), then again I'm not vouching for that statement.
And if they've missed 80 pages, big whoop is all I have to say, I still think I'm still getting enough for the price (although as someone who has worked in publishing I know that it is to be expected that sometimes you won't make somethings up to the standard you want to hold).
But back on point, the thing I'm discussing with you are your claims that content is on the downturn when in fact it is on the uptick the burden of proof is on you to explain how you counted your pages.
I can understand why you personally are upset.
To me it seems you have extreme unreasonable expectations.
Amen. They have already stated what he wants to hear he just seems to be deaf to it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_e5wAUwdmM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slLNNbcgiSs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aLXuMb6WWw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj-9vMYGu0Q&feature=related
I remember how pumped up I got thinking about playing online with my friends. We are all busy irl with family and professional responsibilities and the VTT was going to make getting together for a game much easier.
Then, the core books come out and if you don't remember, the ad's in the back say the following:
"Combat Improves When You Add A Mouse" Bring even more to your game table with D&D Insider. With quick access to exclusive material and digital tools D&DI will help enhance every aspect of your tabletop game. And, with D&DI, you can take your game online, so you can play with friends anywhere-wherever they live, wherever you go.
Of course we all remember that DDI was not available upon the release of the books, but they did have lots of advertisements for it. They finally released DDI which was composed of Dungeon and Dragon magazines, the compendium, and some bonus tools.
At that point they had the words COMING SOON! written above the CB, DB, CV, and VTT. WotC came out and said, "hey everyone, we know we don't have a lot of the stuff we promised, but if you sign up now we will lock in your billing price for the remainder of your subscription, even when all the other tools come out."
A lot of people are probably in the same boat as me and thought: "You know, I really am not interested in the E-Zines and I really want DDI mainly for the VTT, but hey, it says coming soon and surely the CB,VTT,CV,DB will be out before too long, it says so right on the advertisement. I might as well buy it now."
One could argue that it was deceptive business practice. They advertised advertised advertised, got people to subscribe, then took all of it down from the site and are now saying "we have decided to work on other projects at this time."
Most of us who are upset have very valid reasons. I have no major complaints about the CB or 4th edition in general. However, I have invested thousands of dollars in D&D over the years and I feel tricked into purchasing 4th edition and subscribing to DDI.
My gaming friends are spread all over the country and we are all busy irl. The VTT was the reason we all converted to 4th edition. I know there are alternate online table-tops out there, and we will gladly use them. But we all spent money to get a product that was advertised that never came into fruition. We could have not spent a dime on books or DDI and could have been playing 2nd ed or 3.5 on MapTool the entire time.
I can understand why you personally are upset.
To me it seems you have extreme unreasonable expectations.
Gee, so you are saying that me expecting a company to be HONEST with its customers is extremely unreasonable?
Lets see, first they pimp all these great tools the WOTC promised that they would all be out on launch day. Then launch day comes, none of the tools are out. Two months later we finally hear from someone from WOTC saying "yeah well, we really can't tell you anything, but the tools are not here.". So thats one promise broken. Then they announce a new plan, that they need to pool the resources into one tool at a time, WOTC would work on the character maker, viewer, dungeon maker, and VTT. WOTC puts out the character maker. Then they go silent again. A survey pops up from them. After the bugged survey WOTC says they are working on campign tools instead of the other 3 promised tools that were not out yet. Thats two promises broken.
I have a feeling WOTC will drop the campaign tools and start work on something else. They do not deliver what they promise the customer.
So excuse me for wanting to trust what a company says they will do. If thats unreasonable, then that is allowing comapines that break promises to its customers, alowing them to crap on the customers. I know WOTC has said "plans change". But if my boss asked me to work on a project and he told me he wanted it done a certin way, and I did it in a different way and told him "plans change" I would get fired.
So if expecting honesty from WOTC is unreasonable, consider me finished with 4th ed.. I will not support a company that has no direction or integrity.
I understand how one can feel angry and even feel justified in that anger; but if other people can tell you that they never made the leaps of faith that you made, that they had information of what DnDi was and what was being done. Isn't the fault then yours for not being informed, when it is evident through the testimony of others that you could have been?
I'm not talking about the fact that WOTC could have done a better job of letting people know about the DDi tools not being ready. I'm talking about the fact WOTC to me has constinlty changed direction and not followed through with what was promised.
1. everything out on launch day. Not ready.
2. OK due to limited resorces, whe can only work on one tool at a time. We are going to work on the character maker, viewer, dungeon maker and VTT. WOTC puts out one of the four tools. They are dropping the others for now without delivering what was promised, all 4 tools.
3. Now the campaign tools are being worked on. I say WOTC will go 3 for 3 and end up not putting these out as promised either.
I understand how one can feel angry and even feel justified in that anger; but if other people can tell you that they never made the leaps of faith that you made, that they had information of what DnDi was and what was being done. Isn't the fault then yours for not being informed, when it is evident through the testimony of others that you could have been?
well. i have been a forums regular here for a long time, and it was not at all easy to get the information WHAT would be out. i missed (some of) those announcements, and i tried to be very informed since ddi, vtt, cb+db fired up my imagination. (they still do, but let's be honest - with the advent of campaign tools, we likely won't see any of those other tools within the next 2 years)
from the last year to now, wizards has gone a long way in making me more distrustful towards them, and the only person at wotc i take at face value right now is trevor. and that's not because he is an wotc official, but because he's a rock-solid guy trying to move things. the company at large, has done so many things wrong in this last year (or maybe even before that) , that there really is nothing they can do to re-earn my trust.
and this is a very sad notion to have about a GAME company. one can say many things about game companies and where they could better themselves, but needing to earn trust should not be something they'd have an issue with.
I'm not talking about the fact that WOTC could have done a better job of letting people know about the DDi tools not being ready. I'm talking about the fact WOTC to me has constinlty changed direction and not followed through with what was promised.
1. everything out on launch day. Not ready.
2. OK due to limited resorces, whe can only work on one tool at a time. We are going to work on the character maker, viewer, dungeon maker and VTT. WOTC puts out one of the four tools. They are dropping the others for now without delivering what was promised, all 4 tools.
3. Now the campaign tools are being worked on. I say WOTC will go 3 for 3 and end up not putting these out as promised either.
Ok, now see, this is a legitimate concern. (one i don't have much interest in, but legitimate still). I do have to add though, that I have never felt misinformed, I think they've done a decent job telling use what was going on; and they have been brutally honest about their reservations on stating when the rest of the tools are coming out to evade another fiasco, but they have stated they are working on one of them (The campaign tools) and the others are, for the time being, frozen with the possibility of being worked on if enough people want them or of being ignored if the opposite happens.
3. Now the campaign tools are being worked on. I say WOTC will go 3 for 3 and end up not putting these out as promised either.
No, these will be released. The reason is that "Campaign Tools" is so nebulous that they can complete what they can, and anything they can't they can leave off. Who is to say what our expectations are on Campaign Tools. We won't know what was promised.
This is the reason they've dropped CV and VTT, because they demoed this stuff to us, so they know what is expected of the software, and they know they are no where near completing it. CT is perfect for them, CT is whatever they say it is.
Think about it, we still haven't heard what exactly it is they mean when they say "tools to help with a Campaign".
Think about it, we still haven't heard what exactly it is they mean when they say "tools to help with a Campaign".
I imagine it will be a glorified Excel document.
Please refrain from personal attacks and flaming, these are violations of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
IMO WOTC mislead and decived the public and I will not let them forget it. Like Whitebaron said, its sad when a game company has to rebuild trust.
FalconGK81, I agree with you. It could just be a campaign worksheet you print out.
I have a feeling they will throw us another bone at Gencon so the WOTC staff there does not get hit with a bunch of questions about DDi.
Gee, so you are saying that me expecting a company to be HONEST with its customers is extremely unreasonable?
Lets see, first they pimp all these great tools the WOTC promised that they would all be out on launch day. Then launch day comes, none of the tools are out. Two months later we finally hear from someone from WOTC saying "yeah well, we really can't tell you anything, but the tools are not here.". So thats one promise broken. Then they announce a new plan, that they need to pool the resources into one tool at a time, WOTC would work on the character maker, viewer, dungeon maker, and VTT. WOTC puts out the character maker. Then they go silent again. A survey pops up from them. After the bugged survey WOTC says they are working on campign tools instead of the other 3 promised tools that were not out yet. Thats two promises broken.
I have a feeling WOTC will drop the campaign tools and start work on something else. They do not deliver what they promise the customer.
So excuse me for wanting to trust what a company says they will do. If thats unreasonable, then that is allowing comapines that break promises to its customers, alowing them to crap on the customers. I know WOTC has said "plans change". But if my boss asked me to work on a project and he told me he wanted it done a certin way, and I did it in a different way and told him "plans change" I would get fired.
So if expecting honesty from WOTC is unreasonable, consider me finished with 4th ed.. I will not support a company that has no direction or integrity.
Well, if you can't trust a company that has demonstrated embarrassment at their failure to meet expectation, you are well within your right to not trust them. But that does bring up the question if you do not trust WotC to listen to it's customers and that they will ultimately fail you... Why do you continue to post in a forum made for people who believe WotC is listening?
Let me ask you another question, what do you gain by coming here every day And wouldn't the time being spent doing that be better spent enjoying yourself with other hobbies?
The tone in the thread is getting a little heated and over-the top, and I would really appreciate it if it calmed down real quick. [1]
While WotC did make an effort to publicise the fact that the tools wouldn't be ready for the release of 4E, it is clear that the information didn't get to all the people, and even more clear that, for some people, the effoprt that WotC did put out was, for them at least, not enough. So for the sake of sanity on my part, and keeping the ORCs away, I would really, really appreciate it if people just accepted it, and dropped this line of "discussion".[2]
[1] No, I don't care who started it.
[2]In this little subthread, I use that term lightly.
You can disagree, but do NOT turn this into a flame war.
I suggest you re-read the Code of Conduct. http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php.
I am a game developer I have about four months left before I have my B.S. in Game Software Development. I have also worked on a project previously called "Devil's Whiskey" which was moderately successful.
I am volunteering to work free of charge from my home, after signing any kind of non-disclosure agreements or contracts that WotC feels is necessary, on the VTT/Game Table.
I repeat I am completely willing to work on the VTT/Game Table for nothing more than my name in the credits.
I encourage any other software developers to also volunteer so that we can one day see the VTT/Game Table as a reality.
If anyone from WotC sees this and is interested please contact me. For a while I will be checking these boards daily.
Well lets just solve this VTT/Game Table issue right here.
I am a game developer I have about four months left before I have my B.S. in Game Software Development. I have also worked on a project previously called "Devil's Whiskey" which was moderately successful.
I am volunteering to work free of charge from my home, after signing any kind of non-disclosure agreements or contracts that WotC feels is necessary, on the VTT/Game Table.
I repeat I am completely willing to work on the VTT/Game Table for nothing more than my name in the credits.
I encourage any other software developers to also volunteer so that we can one day see the VTT/Game Table as a reality.
If anyone from WotC sees this and is interested please contact me. For a while I will be checking these boards daily.
This is a generous offer, however I suspect it will not be accepted.
There in the past was offer to compile PDFs of the transitional ezines., it was not accepted by all indications. They still do not exisit except for the one WotC managed to compile.
From the indications I get, WotC is not allowing any remote access to work on the tool. You would need to be in House, so unless you currently live near there or are willing to move there you would not get access.
There have been other offers to provide free assistance and from all indications non of them accepted.
As for making your offer better known to WotC a PM to WotC_DM or WotC_Trevor might get better notice. The ORCS are reading the threads as well and might forward your offer up the chain of command. As well the VCL and/or the NGs might forward your offer. One thing you should be certain of is WotC will know of your offer in days, if not a week.
I do wish you luck with your offer, I have been known to be in error from time to time. Perhaps you will get the job.
For those of you who keep saying you only bought 4E for the VTT... huh? There have been VTT programs in existence for... I don't know, probably approaching a decade now, in various forms? (I remember playing 2E on WebRPG, complete with character sheets, maps and minis in the program). And if the older ones weren't up to snuff, newer, cooler, more powerful tools have come along, and all of them have been around since before 4E was even announced.
So I don't really get the argument. If there's some other system you prefer, and you want to play it with your friends... you can do that. Right now. And you could have done it before. If you want to play 4E on a VTT... you can do that too. Right now.
So again, I don't get it. There are legitimate complaints about WotC's PR, advertising, and so on, but this argument about buying books specifically for VTT, now not having VTT and thus having worthless books, when VTT DEFINITELY EXISTS, seem strange. /shrug
Should we send a message of disappointment by ending our DDI subscriptions?
Or
should we send them a petition of what we want, and how much we're willing to pay for services.
What do we as a community want from WOTC?
But let me ask you this. How can you say WotC mislead the public when the majority of people knew what was available at the time of 4e release, when with a simple search you could find that the VTT and CV where in development hell?
First I need to say I'm sorry.
Last year when 4th ed came out I saw alot of posts of people asking "where is all this DDi stuff?". I felt it was the majority of people asking about it. Most people that had no idea about DDi, just saw the ads in the back of the core books. Most people expect news like this to be made clear on the main page, not have to look for the info in an arcarve. Most people want the info handed to them and not bother with a search.
ok, So....How do we as consumers get WOTC to deliver on the good they promised?
Should we send a message of disappointment by ending our DDI subscriptions?
Or
should we send them a petition of what we want, and how much we're willing to pay for services.
What do we as a community want from WOTC?
While they read the forums, another way to convey your feelings about any product WotC has released or has not released would be to write an e-mail through the Customer Service system or a physical letter.
Hell, my "date joined" precedes most of the VCLs on this forum! I'm not saying that alone proves I'm right, but I was fanboy #1 promoting DNDI last June.
OK you joined in 2005, not sure about uidbunny, though can check. You have about 103 posts made, number subject to change even as I type this.
My membership goes back about that long maybe , I also joined in 2005. I have 1688 posts, more then 90 percent are about 4th Edition. It would not surprise me much if 85 percent are in this section of the forums. I was one of the first discussing the proposed tools as likely being vaporware. Some advised me I had to wait a year, that year is not quite up yet. I posted warnings and concerns long before WotC offered their web-subscription package. Of course being a member for a longer time does not mean much, I made perhaps a total of three posts in 2005 and did not actively start reading the boards almost everyday until the announcement of 4th edition was made.
The information was out there, not well described by WotC (they really do have a problem in effective communication and has had for years), however there was no deception in what was being offered for sale.. My concerns were out there as was a few others that recalled Mastertools (which is vaperware). Heck even Ken Troop posted that the Tools would be released when they were ready, no sooner then that.
For a time we even got weekly updates on DDI to try to keep the community advised.
All of this was available to you before you paid anything for DDI. If you did not see it, if you did not read the purchase agreement of what was being sold, it is not the fault of WotC.
There was notice and there were warning available for you to read if you were following this topic even half as much as I have been. Yes be upset about WotC hoping to complete tools far sooner then it appears they even can with current resources. The company did not lie about such hopes or beliefs. When somebody believes something when they state it it is not a lie. A person could be misguided, under informed, however a lie is an act of trying to deceive. There is no evidence of intent to deceive, just a belief to achieve.
OK you joined in 2005, not sure about uidbunny, though can check. You have about 103 posts made, number subject to change even as I type this.
My membership goes back about that long maybe , I also joined in 2005. I have 1688 posts, more then 90 percent are about 4th Edition. It would not surprise me much if 85 percent are in this section of the forums. I was one of the first discussing the proposed tools as likely being vaporware. Some advised me I had to wait a year, that year is not quite up yet. I posted warnings and concerns long before WotC offered their web-subscription package. Of course being a member for a longer time does not mean much, I made perhaps a total of three posts in 2005 and did not actively start reading the boards almost everyday until the announcement of 4th edition was made.
The information was out there, not well described by WotC (they really do have a problem in effective communication and has had for years), however there was no deception in what was being offered for sale.. My concerns were out there as was a few others that recalled Mastertools (which is vaperware). Heck even Ken Troop posted that the Tools would be released when they were ready, no sooner then that.
For a time we even got weekly updates on DDI to try to keep the community advised.
All of this was available to you before you paid anything for DDI. If you did not see it, if you did not read the purchase agreement of what was being sold, it is not the fault of WotC.
There was notice and there were warning available for you to read if you were following this topic even half as much as I have been. Yes be upset about WotC hoping to complete tools far sooner then it appears they even can with current resources. The company did not lie about such hopes or beliefs. When somebody believes something when they state it it is not a lie. A person could be misguided, under informed, however a lie is an act of trying to deceive. There is no evidence of intent to deceive, just a belief to achieve.
See, that's what I can't accept from some of the upset people who claim WoTC lied and kept information hidden, and didn't tell anyone.
These are people who have been following along, and can pull up most of the press about the VTT and CV from years ago. But are suddenly blind and ignorant about all announcements saying it was delayed, wasn't going to be ready at launch and so on.
Some even claim they stopped posting a few months before, and came back a few months after launch only to find no information about what happened. And even though people put up the links, showing the information, because it wasn't dumped right in their laps, it doesn't count.
Really? Ok, pull the other one because it's got bells.
I acknowledge and validate being upset over the VTT and not getting it. But that's about as far. The rest just seems like a child throwing a fit because they didn't get a new toy.
Really WOTC I want to pick and choose the stuff I use and how much I pay for it. I don't expect it to be free, but I don't want to pay nearly ten bucks for stuff I don't use.
For me this is the biggest issue, it makes no sense to charge Mac users the same price as a PC user, when the Mac user can not use the tool. It though more belongs in the the pricing thread on offering ideas that WotC might consider (or might not).
I know I selected this one quote, because in part I addressed I believe other issues in my last reply to another poster.
As far as facts goes, a few promises were made that were not kept YET, however other then the Tool June 6th release failure, non that apply to the pricing model in place now or even the price increase.
For me this is the biggest issue, it makes no sense to charge Mac users the same price as a PC user, when the Mac user can not use the tool. It though more belongs in the the pricing thread on offering ideas that WotC might consider (or might not).
I know I selected this one quote, because in part I addressed I believe other issues in my last reply to another poster.
As far as facts goes, a few promises were made that were not kept YET, however other then the Tool June 6th release failure, non that apply to the pricing model in place now or even the price increase.
And how would you go about ensuring the person is a mac person over a pc person, in a cost effective manner?
Because yeah, that is a very good point, mac users get less for the same cost.
Mind you any cost to do so has to show that the amount of Mac users will offset and show profit
See, that's what I can't accept from some of the upset people who claim WoTC lied and kept information hidden, and didn't tell anyone.
These are people who have been following along, and can pull up most of the press about the VTT and CV from years ago. But are suddenly blind and ignorant about all announcements saying it was delayed, wasn't going to be ready at launch and so on.
Some even claim they stopped posting a few months before, and came back a few months after launch only to find no information about what happened. And even though people put up the links, showing the information, because it wasn't dumped right in their laps, it doesn't count.
Really? Ok, pull the other one because it's got bells.
I acknowledge and validate being upset over the VTT and not getting it. But that's about as far. The rest just seems like a child throwing a fit because they didn't get a new toy.
Quote for truth, if the information was out there, the only people you can blame for being under-informed and thus buying something you did not need, are yourselves. It is childish to pass the blame along for your own lack of research.
Quote for truth, if the information was out there, the only people you can blame for being under-informed and thus buying something you did not need, are yourselves. It is childish to pass the blame along for your own lack of research.
*sighs* "If true".
It is indeed fact that WotC did place a notice that tools would not be available, the big issue at the time of discussion is how little it was featured and distributed. Many have expressed concern about WotC meeting the letter of the law (which they did), but not the spirit of being a partner of the gaming community. That tricks were used to increase sales.
It is true, that the later announcement of web-subscription was featured better.
It is also true that some people did not read what they agreed to purchase, even though the purchase agreement clearly stated what was being sold (It did not indicate what was not currently available for sale, so it appears some users believed when going fee meant the entire package).
The facts are there, others can offer screen shots if required I believe.
There are a few reasons I can think of off the top of my head:
1) It was suppose to be 3-D, I don't think any of the others are 3-D
2) You were suppose to be able to create a custom 3-D mini to use on the table.
3) It was suppose to have an easy to use dungeon builder that would have the tilesets for D&D making it easy to recreate some of their adventure maps.
4) Integration with the other tools, like the Compendium and Character Builder
5) It would have been Official.
6) Didn't know about or were unsure of the reliability of the other game tables out there
Those are just some of the reasons, and I'm not in the group of which you asked.
All fair points, but I just keep seeing the 'Get together with people who don't live near you anymore/whose RL's are too busy to come to your house/etc' stressed as the primary concern, and that one is certainly met by the (often FREE) VTTs out there presently. They don't do 3D, no, but many of them have rather sophisticated features (probably in excess of what the WotC one would have given you in terms of customization and control). Also, the 3D in all the gencon preview vids looked like crap
While the integrated products would have certainly been cool, it seems a bit of a stretch that people absolutely need the fancy 3D stuff (I mean, I'm betting most of us have played with coins, chess pieces, M&Ms, and other random stand ins for proper minis from time to time :P). Also, in terms of the integration with their tiles, I know WotC used to have a free online mapping program that used images from their tile sets. I think it's been removed, but if they'd kept that (or re-released it in DDI), you could easily make maps with it, export them as an image, and then use that image in any one of the many VTTs around.
Anyway, I still get why people zomg wanted it and why they're upset they don't have it, but there are alternatives, and some of them don't even suck
I made the decision to not get involved with 4E when it launched for many reasons, DDI being one of those reasons. I've checked in on the forums a handful or so times since the release of 4E as the Spirit moves. I'm glad that many people are enjoying 4E, but nothing posted has given me any reason to rethink my initial decision. The problems with DDI lead me to fear for the future of D&D. I would be shocked if DDI, and its revenue stream, was not an integral part of the 4E business plan. My suspicion is that DDI is vastly underperforming and the price increase is an attempt to make up for that underperformance. It sounds like outside the ezines and the compendium, there's nothing actually working properly on DDI a year after 4E's release, with no certainty that there ever will be anything else. Without DDI pulling its own weight, the books will have to make up the slack. Unfortunately, the RPG books tend to have diminishing returns as the material elaborated in the books becomes more and more esoteric. There's only so much material a significant number of people are willing to pay $.20 a page to own.
I'm SO grateful I've spent the money that would otherwise have gone to 4E on 3xE items I passed over the first time around like Arcana Unearthed and Ptolus. I hope that those who chose otherwise have gotten as much pleasure from their purchases as I have.
Boy, DDI turned out FAR worse than I ever thought it might.
I made the decision to not get involved with 4E when it launched for many reasons, DDI being one of those reasons.
Confirmation bias much?
There have been informal polls conducted here and elsewhere on subscribers' satisfaction with DDI. They have uniformly shown subscribers to be very happy with DDI; the people who have actually experienced what DDI has to offer are quite pleased with it. It seems that a lot of the complaining about how supposedly awful DDI has turned out is coming from people who have no idea how it's turned out.
Confirmation bias much?
I don't think I have any confirmation bias, but I also think there's nothing I could say which would convince you of that.
There have been informal polls conducted here and elsewhere on subscribers' satisfaction with DDI. They have uniformly shown subscribers to be very happy with DDI; the people who have actually experienced what DDI has to offer are quite pleased with it. It seems that a lot of the complaining about how supposedly awful DDI has turned out is coming from people who have no idea how it's turned out.
I have no doubt that most subscribers to anything they have a choice about are satisfied. Just as I have no doubt that a poll of FORMER subscribers would show that they were nowhere near as happy as current subscribers. When I talk about underperforming, I am talking about the number of actual subscriptions to DDI rather than how satisfied those subscribers happen to be. Do you, or anyone, have solid information as to the number of subscribers? A price increase without a corresponding increase in product is indicative of less demand than projected, so the price is increased to cover the supply cost. We will also have to see if WotC has adequately projected for subscription losses due to the price increase. If not, then DDI may be entering a death spiral of price increases, followed by canceled subscriptions, followed by further price increases to compensate for those subscription cancellations, etc.
It sounds like outside the ezines and the compendium, there's nothing actually working properly on DDI a year after 4E's release, with no certainty that there ever will be anything else.
Don't forget the Character Builder, which is IMO awesome.
I'm SO grateful I've spent the money that would otherwise have gone to 4E on 3xE items I passed over the first time around like Arcana Unearthed and Ptolus. I hope that those who chose otherwise have gotten as much pleasure from their purchases as I have.
Well, I don't know how much pleasure you've gotten, but I'm enjoying the hell out of 4e, and the current DDI offerings are a significant source of that enjoyment. :D
Being unhappy/angry/irritated/disappointed/whatever is one thing.
Having a list claiming lies and bait and switch and cheating people is a different thing.
So his frustration is fine.
His claims of fraud, bait and switch and being dishonest are not, because they are simply not true.
Lying, bait and switch, and cheating is still lying, bait and switch, and cheating if it is done because of neglect.
They may not have meant to do it, but if I have to search through news archives one by one to find a sentence that might mean D&Di is in trouble and won't be out on time, then yes I believe I have been deceived.
They should have put an apology up on the main site for not having it done, this would appease most people, instead they decided they were going to play word games and try to salvage their reputation and put a good face on all the bad activities that happened.
To this day if an official WotC board member would just come out and say "I'm sorry we promised this in x amount of time, but because of internal and vendor problems were are unable to get D&Di out on schedule. We are sorry we were not able to fill the dungeon and dragon magazines to 80 pages a week like we said we would." I would be completely satisfied. Since no one is being adult enough to do this, I can't help but feel betrayed by the entire company.
They are trying to act like the big corporations that can lose millions of customers and the only thing they have to worry about is a couple point drop in their stocks. Wizards however is not such a company. They are struggling apparently to even get the funding to put together a decent development team to finish off the D&Di content.
The only thing they have to do is come clean completely. If that means admitting that the company they contracted with to complete the D&Di filed for chapter 11 and they lost all the money they had marked for the project, that is what needs to be said.
This ho, hum, there was a delay and it'll be out later, ho, hum, oh wait no its "shelved" now. Just doesn't work. People may have been that ignorant in the 1840's but we live in a modern world where companies lie, cheat, and steal from consumers everyday. What they need to do is just be honest.
To this day if an official WotC board member would just come out and say "I'm sorry we promised this in x amount of time, but because of internal and vendor problems were are unable to get D&Di out on schedule. We are sorry we were not able to fill the dungeon and dragon magazines to 80 pages a week like we said we would." I would be completely satisfied. Since no one is being adult enough to do this, I can't help but feel betrayed by the entire company.
The apology was made by Ken Troop as to missing the planed release date. There has never been stated the full reason of why the release date was missed so you only get half of what you demand occur now. However we do know an outside vendor was used and we also know one WotC employee involved in the project died. This clearly could indicate both of what you ask for.
As for 80 pages per ezines, that is a harder thing to deal with. It also depends on what you call pages. The actual sold package was 160 pages of content, without saying 80 pages would be in each one. As far as I know there has always been the 160 pages, though I recall a report of at least one ezine galling short of 80. the companion had more then 80 and total for both was in excess of the 160. There are others that track this data and might repeat their results.
For the first you have had your apology, if not as full and complete as you would desire.
The second I am sure you will get one should you be able to prove any one of the monthly releases was less then 160 pages. The fact that many believe 5 to 25 (or more) pages are not something they believe does not count toward page. One way you or anyone else can justify claiming some pages should not count would be the phase "new content". You can not complain if the table of contents takes 20 pages (which of course it never has) as long as the contents are new. Those 20 pages had new content, names of articles and page numbers never seen before. If both of them print out for a total equal to or exceeding 160 pages, the promised page count is there. If you can find a few pages of reprints, thus not new content you can subtract those pages from the promise to see if there is 160 of "new content"
Oh clearly you can complain about the :new content" and of course complain if the table of contents somehow becomes 20 pages long. As far as it goes if you or others believe the page count is expanded by white space you can complain. Heck I can double font size and double page count. WotC has not done page extending tactics as far as I know, font size has not changed. Biggist complaint I have seen was that ink sucking decorations that even if removed likely would not reduce the page count.
Not what you wanted, yes we know this.
WotC not communicating well, yes we know this.
A few broken promises, yes we know this. Those though related to the free period of time, not the fee period of time.
Don't forget the Character Builder, which is IMO awesome.
I was reading that the Character Builder was still not working 100% properly. Is that not true?
Well, I don't know how much pleasure you've gotten, but I'm enjoying the hell out of 4e, and the current DDI offerings are a significant source of that enjoyment. :D
Fabulous. As long as we're both enjoying the D&D we choose, it's all good to me. :D
As far as no mac support, I heard macs now can run windows based stuff, so I would think the mac users could use the tools. But I never used a mac so I'm not sure.
All the players in my group would sign up for DDi if the VTT would come out. I think that what alot of people are waiting on.
But the way WOTC did things, they may shut down DDi before we see the VTT.
WOTC, between etools/ master tools and DDI, have you learned your lesson about computer tools for DnD?
Lying, bait and switch, and cheating is still lying, bait and switch, and cheating if it is done because of neglect.
They may not have meant to do it, but if I have to search through news archives one by one to find a sentence that might mean D&Di is in trouble and won't be out on time, then yes I believe I have been deceived.
They should have put an apology up on the main site for not having it done, this would appease most people, instead they decided they were going to play word games and try to salvage their reputation and put a good face on all the bad activities that happened.
Then you clearly haven't not actually looked, because they did. One month before DDI was launched, they put ON THE MAIN PAGE, as the NEWS item, the announcement that parts of DDI, like the game table, wouldn't not be ready at launch. All that information is still there to this day. The News section is always in the same place, so you know, when you come you don't have to try and find where the latest news is. And there is archive link right there!
To this day if an official WotC board member would just come out and say "I'm sorry we promised this in x amount of time, but because of internal and vendor problems were are unable to get D&Di out on schedule. We are sorry we were not able to fill the dungeon and dragon magazines to 80 pages a week like we said we would." I would be completely satisfied. Since no one is being adult enough to do this, I can't help but feel betrayed by the entire company.
WOTC_Trevor, and other have come and apologized many times for the game table and other late DDi products. MANY. And more so once they had to back burner it.
And both magazines have meet it's minimum page requirement. If you are refering to the recent charts showing it dropping in page count and features, that's because some months, it had way more then 80 pages. And again, an official person came and explained this. On this site, in the DDI section, it says you are provided with 120 pages of new content each month.
Oh and befor typing that, I went and checked. Yup between both magazines, you get more then 120 pages of new conent. That means articles talking about the game are not considered new content. The lowest page count I found was 79 pages for a Dungeon magazine. But that still means they met the stated content of 120 pages of new conent.
So, everything you say they should have done, they have. You consider yourself informed, and yet you seemed to have missed all this information, while others found it easily.
So, what should I conclude? That you didn't bother to keep yourself updated? That you are using selective reading? Or should I conclude you are lying? I don't want to pick for you, I'll let you tell me which it is.
I don't think anyond does not think the CB is not great.
As far as no mac support, I heard macs now can run windows based stuff, so I would think the mac users could use the tools. But I never used a mac so I'm not sure.
All the players in my group would sign up for DDi if the VTT would come out. I think that what alot of people are waiting on.
But the way WOTC did things, they may shut down DDi before we see the VTT.
WOTC, between etools/ master tools and DDI, have you learned your lesson about computer tools for DnD?
Thanks for the update.
The VTT was by far the most tempting part of 4E to me. I've played MMORPGs since 1999 and the idea of officially sanctioned servers, etc., might have been enough to get me past my other reservations about 4E. Without it, no way.
Thanks for the update.
The VTT was by far the most tempting part of 4E to me. I've played MMORPGs since 1999 and the idea of officially sanctioned servers, etc., might have been enough to get me past my other reservations about 4E. Without it, no way.
That's not an update, KM can't speak for WoTC, and saying DDI is going to be shut down is spreading rumors.
I was reading that the Character Builder was still not working 100% properly. Is that not true?
Depends on how you're defining "100% properly", I suppose. There are bugs, but every software application has bugs. Compared to the overall functionality, they're minor. And it gets updated both bugfix-wise and content-wise on a monthly basis.
Heck, go to the Test Drive page and download the free demo version to check it out for yourself. (unless you're on a Mac or Linux box, unfortunately) You get the first three levels, and all content up to (I think) Arcane Power.
That's not an update, KM can't speak for WoTC, and saying DDI is going to be shut down is spreading rumors.
I took it as an update on the Character Builder. The question of DDI being shut down is a matter of WotC/Hasbro seeing the cost of DDI outweighing the benefit they receive from it. Given that we have no solid information as to number of subscribers or cost associated with DDI, ANY thoughts as to the future of DDI is speculative.
Depends on how you're defining "100% properly", I suppose. There are bugs, but every software application has bugs. Compared to the overall functionality, they're minor. And it gets updated both bugfix-wise and content-wise on a monthly basis.
Heck, go to the Test Drive page and download the free demo version to check it out for yourself. (unless you're on a Mac or Linux box, unfortunately) You get the first three levels, and all content up to (I think) Arcane Power.
Sure, all software has bugs, but not all bugs are equal. I was reading about it not showing all the information properly with high level characters, which would be a very significant bug in my book.
Thanks for the recommendation on the Test Drive. I have a standing offer to play with some friends who run a 4E game. I have talked to my friend running the game for many hours about 4E and it seems like a tactical miniature game with some rules for role playing appended. To date myself, it seems like a fantasy RPG version of Squad Leader. I'm far more of a simulationist than a tactician. I like all the myriad of rules covering nearly every possible situation in 3xE, as well as the fact that the bad guys live under the same rules as the good guys. I actually enjoy specing out villains and trying to balance encounters. I also can understand how that might be tiresome to others and how 4E is a better system for them.
I acknowledge and validate being upset over the VTT and not getting it. But that's about as far. The rest just seems like a child throwing a fit because they didn't get a new toy.
You're equating boycotting a company based on what we believe to be poor business practices with stomping around and kicking the wall?
Okay...
Depends on how you're defining "100% properly", I suppose. There are bugs, but every software application has bugs. Compared to the overall functionality, they're minor. And it gets updated both bugfix-wise and content-wise on a monthly basis.
Heck, go to the Test Drive page and download the free demo version to check it out for yourself. (unless you're on a Mac or Linux box, unfortunately) You get the first three levels, and all content up to (I think) Arcane Power.
There are major bugs which render high level character sheets useless. They have been reported repeatedly through the official bug reporting including attached proof in the form of the bad character sheets.
Across multiple patches, nothing has been done to correct the issue, nor even has anyone from WOTC so much as indicated that it's being worked on.
The CBuilder has some nice features. As software goes, I'd give it is a Suggested Retail Price of about $20. Games you can play which have been SERIOUSLY ironed out go for $50, software with real life application such as building houses or learning languages ranges from $20 and up, and limited software with no real life application and very limited specific application (such as creating characters for ONE tabletop RPG) sits at the low end. If you're being generous, you could talk it up to $30 or $40.
That's worth about 3 months subscription depending on your price plan.
I do like the CBuilder but I never read the articles which -- again, are NOT delivered to me, even DIGITALLY -- though I do read the NY Times, which IS delivered digitally, for FREE.
I intend to resubscribe for one month every four months or so, cutting the cost to me by 25% but getting the same content I have any interest in using. This also gives WOTC a third of the year to iron out the bugs that annoy me each time which still seems a bit short given their history of software product development so far.
You're equating boycotting a company based on what we believe to be poor business practices with stomping around and kicking the wall?
Okay...
They did not lie. You can feel they did, but they did not. Failure doesn't equal dishonesty.
Failure to get the VTT up does not equal poor business practice, unless they fail across the board, and go out of business. Clearly WoTC isn't going out of business. GM is a good example of poor business practices.
Customers not keeping informed, when the information is out there, easy to find, does not equal failure to communicate on the companies part. More so when the loudest complaing customers admit they stopped checking for several months, of their own choice.
Keeping all their articles and announcements up and availabe, for years back, doesn't not equal trying to hide the truth.
So yes, the fact that a small few people keep up this litany of things that are not true, and won't let it go, because the past can't be changed, I say you are acting immature and like a child that didn't get a toy.
And the part that makes me laugh the most, is how the people who claim WoTC is an dishonest, greedy company, is that youn are allowed to say all this, and they don't take your posts down. They already have people that volunteer to monitor the forums, it would be easy enough to get more volunteers to look just for posts of this nature, and delete them, and ban the IP of repete offenders.
And yet they don't, they are tottaly letting you vent your frustrations.
That sure is some odd behavior for a dishonest company, that is only concerned about appearance and making money.
There are major bugs which render high level character sheets useless. They have been reported repeatedly through the official bug reporting including attached proof in the form of the bad character sheets.
Not a bug.
The font to show all the feats and other items you get at high level on one page would be so small it would be unreadable. What they have done, is allow users to move all the parts of the character sheet around and add pages if necessary.
In the character sheet viewer you can add or delete panels as well as add or delete pages. With a new page you can place the feats panel on an empty page (or make some more room for it on another page) and expand the feat panel. Now all your feats at high level are visible.
Repeat with any other panels you want to see more information from. After you get the character sheet to a point in which you are satisfied with the layout you can then save the layout and load it again for future character sheets.
Adding a page is under the Layout menu. To expand the panels you need to go under the Options menu and select Unlock Panels. Then you are free to move, shrink, expand, and delete each panel on the character sheet.
I just did a quick level 30 character and with three pages (not including the power card pages) I was able to show all the information about the character. I'm going to play around with it a little more and get the page into a layout that I like, but I was going for proof of concept with this character.
I do like the CBuilder but I never read the articles which -- again, are NOT delivered to me, even DIGITALLY -- though I do read the NY Times, which IS delivered digitally, for FREE.
You sig claims that there is no RSS feed, but there is. It is for the main site though and not for each magazine individually. The feed will tell you when there are new articles up (Free, Dragon, and Dungeon) as well as when new NEWs announcements are posted.
And both magazines have meet it's minimum page requirement. If you are refering to the recent charts showing it dropping in page count and features, that's because some months, it had way more then 80 pages. And again, an official person came and explained this. On this site, in the DDI section, it says you are provided with 120 pages of new content each month.
just to get one of your facts right: they initially said that dungeon and dragon would be around 80 pages of content each, and when they finally went subscription, after some days or weeks, i don't remember exactly, put that text in front of their subscription firewall. this was made after the fact, after initial subscriptions went life. originally, there was no pagecount on ther ads. even back then, some people felt a little cheated, but not very much so, because the actual issues had higher pages than what was put in the ads. my guess back then was, that they'd just done this to have a backup if they ever fail to meet their 80 pages plan.
To me it seems that some of you think if you can get more people to see things your way, that you can force WoTC to be afraid and change thier minds and give you what you want.
And, what's wrong with that if it's what the customers want?
Just a question, suppose I promised you to mail a check on friday but then on my way to the bank my car breaks down and it takes (as it quite frequently does) the whole of my day to fix it, and I call you to tell you why I can't mail that check; do you still consider that lying? Because if you do you have some serious issues with expectations and entitlement (border-line expectations of reverence I'd say).
your example is a good one, but you have to take one additional thing to make it an accurate one: you would not phone that you can't pay, you would send a low-priority letter. most likely, the check will still be there before i even receive that letter. that's the way ddi handled it.
i would not call that lying, but i also would not call that honestly trying to inform me.
your example is a good one, but you have to take one additional thing to make it an accurate one: you would not phone that you can't pay, you would send a low-priority letter. most likely, the check will still be there before i even receive that letter. that's the way ddi handled it.
i would not call that lying, but i also would not call that honestly trying to inform me.
They posted that the tools would not be available a moth in advance of the original release date, so your analogy isn't correct.
Nice job dehumanizing Wizards of the Coast, guys.
I hope that makes it much easier for you to hold on to that pointless anger, thinking of them as a faceless, soulless corporation only concerned with the bottom line instead of a collection of dedicated creators and gamers who are just trying to make a good game under trying circumstances.
Face it. They aren't "a big machine without any kind of brain or morals". They're a collection of individuals. Mistakes were made and apologized for, move on already.
There's no need to dehumanize WotC or Hasbro, neither are human to begin with. Why do you see the need to anthropomorphize them?
A corporation of any appreciable size is not filled with people, but rather filled with positions which are then filled by people. It's a very different thing to have a person removed from a position and having a position eliminated, even though to the person involved it can appear the same and have the same effect on them.
I have no doubt that the employees of WotC are trying to make a good game under the constraints set by their employers. That is their job, after all.
There's no need to dehumanize WotC or Hasbro, neither are human to begin with. Why do you see the need to anthropomorphize them?
A corporation of any appreciable size is not filled with people, but rather filled with positions which are then filled by people. It's a very different thing to have a person removed from a position and having a position eliminated, even though to the person involved it can appear the same and have the same effect on them.
I have no doubt that the employees of WotC are trying to make a good game under the constraints set by their employers. That is their job, after all.
Again, nice job setting up the congnitive dissonance you need to hold on to your anger.
I'm not anthropomorphizing the corporation, I'm recognizing it for what it is: a collection of individuals working towards a common goal. The people ARE the company and the company IS the people. There is no shadowy puppet master, there was no cabal meeting where their dark lord said "lie to them and steal their money". There are just PEOPLE who made MISTAKES and apologized for them.
If you want to view WotC/Hasbor as a dark villain out of nightmare only interested in "fleecing" you out of your money, that's fine. I just think you need to realize that you are lying to yourself just as much as you think they are lying to you.
Just a question, suppose I promised you to mail a check on friday but then on my way to the bank my car breaks down and it takes (as it quite frequently does) the whole of my day to fix it, and I call you to tell you why I can't mail that check; do you still consider that lying? Because if you do you have some serious issues with expectations and entitlement (border-line expectations of reverence I'd say).
Yep, that's still lying in my book. You failed to take the proper actions to see that reality matched your words. I would question why you couldn't walk to a mailbox while your car was being fixed, why you had no support system that could help you out. I certainly would appreciate you telling me you were unable to get the check in the mail, but you still would have failed to live up to your word. Then it is up to me whether I see fit to forgive your failure, with you bearing the consequences if I choose not to.
If you think that having the expectation that some live up to their word as having "some serious issues", that's your call. I think that only reasonable.
That's what happened, they planned for something and it went horribly wrong, they over-shot and have said so and apologized several times, and every time the outlook changed they have told us, including, as has been said a month before the product was released.
Just how do you know that EVERY TIME the outlook changed they informed everyone?
You people are complaining (mainly) because of your own failings in purchasing something that you failed to inform yourself on. If you had a few minutes you could search the archives, if you had less time, there's this great website called google in which you can find information in a jiffy, and if you had no time at all, before you hit the buy button a list was given of what you are getting.
Ignorance, voluntary or not, is your to account for and nobody else's.
I'm really not sure how you think it appropriate to accuse me of having unreasonable expectations that someone live up to their word when you have this standard of people informing themselves before they purchase something. You seem to be implying that people need to have availed themselves of all information before making any purchase. That seems far more unreasonable than my standard.
Taking an example from two fields I know of: first my father, he's a teacher and sometimes he gives his students the homework of learning something that he knows they can learn on their own so he can cover more difficult material in class and advises them to ask him if they fail to understand something, the students who do not read nor ask often times fail in his tests, whose fault is it they didn't understand? The student's who didn't read and review? or his for not spoon-feeding them the chart in page 35 that they should have learned?
What about the student who sat down, did the reading, and thought he understood even though he really did not? If the student put in the effort and thought he understood, can you really fault him for not asking?
You cases don't adequately cover the situation.
Another one, I'm currently involved in politics as an intern, my main job is to help to find out what the people/news/and opposition within and outside my boss's party are saying about the party at-large and him specifically. Recently while listening to a talk-radio program that shares more or less the same ideology as the party I'm currently working for; the station, which I dislike for being rather extreme. My boss said that it was on of the great failures of society that the least informed one is the more extreme (violent) they are, and that as far as more ways to gain information were available, people would feel less and less need to be informed and thus be more susceptible to disinformation. Leading to a cycle of ignorance feeding ignorance. He then made a joke: "At least it gets us elected.... for now".
I think that people will most often stop looking for more information once they have an answer to their question, thinking they are adequately informed. Relating this to the VTT, I can easily see a person thinking that since they had seen the ads and the demo video they were adequately informed, never realizing their information was incorrect. This is similar to the student I invoked in the previous example who did the work but did not know they failed to understand.
You (if you bought into 4e or DnDi expecting the CTT) were clearly lacking information that was available and refuse to accept the fact that you could have been informed with the merest effort. You then erroneously blame DnD because you fell pray to the believed that the existence of multiple road to information means that you are already informed. And by further propagating falsehoods you are promoting the belief that information should be innate instead of sought.
I question some of your assumptions here. First is "the merest effort" to become informed. There are people who do not have internet access. Second, as I have explained above, I think you have unreasonable expectations that people inform themselves exhaustively on a given subject before they act. At what point do you consider a person adequately informed? If I want to inform myself about Obama's speech in Cairo, just how many different news outlets do I need to read before you would consider me adequately informed? One? Ten? A thousand? There is FAR more information available on nearly every subject than a person can process and still go about their daily life. I think it becomes a question of what is an adequate level of information, since complete information on all relevant subjects is unreasonable.
Yep, that's still lying in my book. You failed to take the proper actions to see that reality matched your words. I would question why you couldn't walk to a mailbox while your car was being fixed, why you had no support system that could help you out. I certainly would appreciate you telling me you were unable to get the check in the mail, but you still would have failed to live up to your word. Then it is up to me whether I see fit to forgive your failure, with you bearing the consequences if I choose not to.
If you think that having the expectation that some live up to their word as having "some serious issues", that's your call. I think that only reasonable.
I'm going to have to agree on the "serious issues" here. Failure to deliver is a matter of incompetence, not deception. Something, of course, one can be equally disappointed in - but you are adding a degree of intention and malice beyond what is accurate.
Again, nice job setting up the congnitive dissonance you need to hold on to your anger.
I'm not anthropomorphizing the corporation, I'm recognizing it for what it is: a collection of individuals working towards a common goal. The people ARE the company and the company IS the people. There is no shadowy puppet master, there was no cabal meeting where their dark lord said "lie to them and steal their money". There are just PEOPLE who made MISTAKES and apologized for them.
If you want to view WotC/Hasbor as a dark villain out of nightmare only interested in "fleecing" you out of your money, that's fine. I just think you need to realize that you are lying to yourself just as much as you think they are lying to you.
No cognitive dissonance on my part. You, OTOH, are failing to recognize that a corporation is an entity in its own right, entirely separate from the any people it might employ. What you seem to be terming a "cabal" is a board of directors, who acts in behalf of the stockholders, yet another group of people separate from both the corporation. The stockholders issue the cry "make me wealthier", and the board acts to carry out the decree.
I'm going to have to agree on the "serious issues" here. Failure to deliver is a matter of incompetence, not deception. Something, of course, one can be equally disappointed in - but you are adding a degree of intention and malice beyond what is accurate.
I'm willing to admit that at times a failure to deliver can be a result of incompetence. Are you willing to admit that sometimes a failure to deliver is the result of deception?
No cognitive dissonance on my part.
Treating the hard working individuals of WotC like nameless, faceless drones in a shadowy conspiracy that exists solely to steal your money just so you can feel justified in your anger? Sorry, friend, that is cognitive dissonance.
You, OTOH, are failing to recognize that a corporation is an entity in its own right, entirely separate from the any people it might employ.
Who anthropomorphizing now? The only way the corporation is an "entity" is by legal technicality. By any other yardstick, it is just a group of individuals working towards a common goal.
What you seem to be terming a "cabal" is a board of directors, who acts in behalf of the stockholders, yet another group of people separate from both the corporation. The stockholders issue the cry "make me wealthier", and the board acts to carry out the decree.
So, wait, now your saying that this nameless, faceless corporation entity (which is evil) is controlled by a swarm of nameless, faceless stockholders (who are also evil)?
Honest, real and fallable people don't enter into it anywhere?
Yep, that's still lying in my book. You failed to take the proper actions to see that reality matched your words. I would question why you couldn't walk to a mailbox while your car was being fixed, why you had no support system that could help you out. I certainly would appreciate you telling me you were unable to get the check in the mail, but you still would have failed to live up to your word. Then it is up to me whether I see fit to forgive your failure, with you bearing the consequences if I choose not to.
If you think that having the expectation that some live up to their word as having "some serious issues", that's your call. I think that only reasonable.
It's not a matter or hoping people keep their words, that's completely legitimate, the problem you seem to have however is the failure to recognize that other people live their own circumstances separate of yours, and that those circumstances supersede yours in the life of other people. You act as if the world revolves around you and that promises made to you must be kept without excuses. That is a narcissistic, egotistical, borderline psychotic kind of view of the world, that will lead you to many disappointments, because guess what, real life often gets in the way of laid out plans and to fail to recognize that and think yourself important enough to have the power to forgive or forget a person who failed at keeping a promise because of an accident is completely antithetical with commonplace systems of philosophy and morality.
Just how do you know that EVERY TIME the outlook changed they informed everyone?
Because of all the news every time they decided to do something different maybe?
I'm really not sure how you think it appropriate to accuse me of having unreasonable expectations that someone live up to their word when you have this standard of people informing themselves before they purchase something. You seem to be implying that people need to have availed themselves of all information before making any purchase. That seems far more unreasonable than my standard.
Your expectations become unreasonable not because you expect people to fulfill promises, but because you fail to understand that sometimes circumstances impede the fulfillment of a promise and refuse to accept apologies of it. And my expectations aren't illogical, they are completely logical, one of the fundamental theories of economics is that of the informed and rational customer. Even more than that, I'll give you a real life anecdote; my father was raised in poverty, and even though we are currently an upper-middle class family, he still lives as if he was poor (it's a psychological oddity that even Sidney Poitier admitted to have suffered in his memoirs); when you know that money can run out you consider deeply what you are going to spend your money on and try to be educated about your purchase. Therefore I ask to you, is money expendable and exhaustible? Knowing that it is; is it more logical to buy that which you need/will use or to buy something that you do not need/ will not use? Knowing that the first option is correct we must answer 'How do we know what we need or will use?' Is it instinctive or must it be learned? The answer is also patently obvious it must be learned (including what you can eat is something we learn, even if we do have an instinctive impulse to know that we must suckle a breast to get milk we must first learn from whom to suckle). Therefore, 'Is it illogical to expect people to know about what they are buying?' No, on the contrary it is illogical to not know what you about what you are buying.
What about the student who sat down, did the reading, and thought he understood even though he really did not? If the student put in the effort and thought he understood, can you really fault him for not asking?
You cases don't adequately cover the situation.
Yes. Because he did not verify his findings, that is why you subtract point from his test when he answered wrongly. One of the vital steps of the scientific method (or any other valid method of learning) is the step in which you verify your conclusions. Nevertheless, it is highly unlikely that if he understood incorrectly he would not have noticed in class when the material, or material that builds upon it, is discussed. If he did not see something wrong in the process he was either distracted or needs to spend more time learning (which is what after-school teaching is for). However, your argument here can be easily proven irrelevant through a simple and recognizable phrase: "Ignorance of the law (situation or material) does not excuse you"
I think that people will most often stop looking for more information once they have an answer to their question, thinking they are adequately informed. Relating this to the VTT, I can easily see a person thinking that since they had seen the ads and the demo video they were adequately informed, never realizing their information was incorrect. This is similar to the student I invoked in the previous example who did the work but did not know they failed to understand.
You do realize you have just proven what I stated, people think that because they have more channels to information they can acquire it easier. That is not the case. And as I said before: Ignorance does not excuse you from accepting your mistakes. If a person bought 4e for the sole reason of DnDi he should have informed himself of DnDi before paying for the books, it is the economically rational thing to do.
I question some of your assumptions here. First is "the merest effort" to become informed. There are people who do not have internet access.
If they lack internet access, why would they buy something that requires internet access?
Second, as I have explained above, I think you have unreasonable expectations that people inform themselves exhaustively on a given subject before they act. At what point do you consider a person adequately informed? If I want to inform myself about Obama's speech in Cairo, just how many different news outlets do I need to read before you would consider me adequately informed? One? Ten? A thousand? There is FAR more information available on nearly every subject than a person can process and still go about their daily life. I think it becomes a question of what is an adequate level of information, since complete information on all relevant subjects is unreasonable.
You are adequately informed when you have verifiable knowledge, easy as that, easy as asking in the boards before even having to pay for DnDi, before the release of the books about the status of DnDi and somebody would have pointed you to the news that DnDi wasn't available. It isn't a matter of knowing everything. It is a matter of have verifiable conclusions.
It's not a matter or hoping people keep their words, that's completely legitimate, the problem you seem to have however is the failure to recognize that other people live their own circumstances separate of yours, and that those circumstances supersede yours in the life of other people. You act as if the world revolves around you and that promises made to you must be kept without excuses. That is a narcissistic, egotistical, borderline psychotic kind of view of the world, that will lead you to many disappointments, because guess what, real life often gets in the way of laid out plans and to fail to recognize that and think yourself important enough to have the power to forgive or forget a person who failed at keeping a promise because of an accident is completely antithetical with commonplace systems of philosophy and morality.
Because of all the news every time they decided to do something different maybe?
Your expectations become unreasonable not because you expect people to fulfill promises, but because you fail to understand that sometimes circumstances impede the fulfillment of a promise and refuse to accept apologies of it. And my expectations aren't illogical, they are completely logical, one of the fundamental theories of economics is that of the informed and rational customer. Even more than that, I'll give you a real life anecdote; my father was raised in poverty, and even though we are currently an upper-middle class family, he still lives as if he was poor (it's a psychological oddity that even Sidney Poitier admitted to have suffered in his memoirs); when you know that money can run out you consider deeply what you are going to spend your money on and try to be educated about your purchase. Therefore I ask to you, is money expendable and exhaustible? Knowing that it is; is it more logical to buy that which you need/will use or to buy something that you do not need/ will not use? Knowing that the first option is correct we must answer 'How do we know what we need or will use?' Is it instinctive or must it be learned? The answer is also patently obvious it must be learned (including what you can eat is something we learn, even if we do have an instinctive impulse to know that we must suckle a breast to get milk we must first learn from whom to suckle). Therefore, 'Is it illogical to expect people to know about what they are buying?' No, on the contrary it is illogical to not know what you about what you are buying.
Yes. Because he did not verify his findings, that is why you subtract point from his test when he answered wrongly. One of the vital steps of the scientific method (or any other valid method of learning) is the step in which you verify your conclusions. Nevertheless, it is highly unlikely that if he understood incorrectly he would not have noticed in class when the material, or material that builds upon it, is discussed. If he did not see something wrong in the process he was either distracted or needs to spend more time learning (which is what after-school teaching is for). However, your argument here can be easily proven irrelevant through a simple and recognizable phrase: "Ignorance of the law (situation or material) does not excuse you"
You do realize you have just proven what I stated, people think that because they have more channels to information they can acquire it easier. That is not the case. And as I said before: Ignorance does not excuse you from accepting your mistakes. If a person bought 4e for the sole reason of DnDi he should have informed himself of DnDi before paying for the books, it is the economically rational thing to do.
If they lack internet access, why would they buy something that requires internet access?
You are adequately informed when you have verifiable knowledge, easy as that, easy as asking in the boards before even having to pay for DnDi, before the release of the books about the status of DnDi and somebody would have pointed you to the news that DnDi wasn't available. It isn't a matter of knowing everything. It is a matter of have verifiable conclusions.
Them's are some right fancy words your throwin' round partner.
Just to counterpoint. At the release of 4E when the majority of people were considering purchasing their books most of the big conventions had videos or presentations that were saying that D&Di would be released at the same time as the 4E books. Now a lot of people bought the books with the missing impression that D&Di would be out. It wasn't. Some of them probably went online to check www.wizards.com to see if it was out, but I bet most didn't. I know I didn't I had the books on pre-order since they promised they would have the D&Di out with the books. Was that unreasonable? I don't think so. some of the more internet savvy should have checked, but most of us didn't does that make it our fault WotC couldn't hold up their end of the bargain? no, the fault squarely rests on WotC's shoulders.
Not to mention the video that they called "beta", which means the code is locked and the program is nearly ready for release minus some low to mid severity bug fixes, turned out to be a mock up of something that wasn't even there. The lawsuit that they copied the images of the dice from FG2 is proof of that. Any program that makes it to beta has its own images and artwork, and doesn't include anything that could be considered copyrighted material.
That right there is complete proof no matter how you look at it that WotC did lie to us. They later said it wouldn't be available, and later said it was shelved. That still doesn't address the people that bought the books knowing that WotC would have D&Di up and running with the VTT, especially those of us that pre-ordered the books through places like www.amazon.com. We open the books and it says check out D&Di at www.wizards.com. So we go there dice in hand, three books that cost us almost $100.00 on the table next to us, and lo and behold "We're sorry D&Di is not available at this time".
Not to mention the really bad bugs with the website. So you tell me who is to blame in this scenario? The people that pre-ordered the books a long time before because WotC said they would have D&Di out? or WotC that should have had the product out? I have to say that I will never pre-order anything from WotC again that is for sure, heck I might not even order anything from them again until I try it and see for sure if it is something I feel is worth spending my money on.
As far as the evil corporation argument goes. The direct employees of WotC may not have any malicious intentions, but they do want to keep their meager jobs. So they will do anything that their bosses at Hasbro tell them to do. If they have a project falling behind and Hasbro says cut the project out. Of course what are they going to say? "No, we think we are going to continue to work on it". I don't think so. They will moan and groan among themselves and imagine the peasants (the consumer) standing outside their gates with torches and pitch forks. I agree it may not have been WotC's direct fault, but regardless they are to blame for letting the project fall behind, or not properly planning it, or not having contingency plans. It would also be their fault for letting the books get out in .pdf format before the physical books were even released.
All of these things contributed to the situation we find ourselves in. D&Di did not live up to its original expectations whether some people like what they get for the price they are paying or not. What they really need are some good project managers, and an honest dialog with Hasbro, and the consumer.
You don't have to dig and click and try and find the archive, because the link is right on the front page. And then you get a list of news updates and the date they were posted.
That means if you came a month after and looked, it would have been near the top of the list, and you wouldn't even have to scroll down.
So, they told us, they left and easy to find, front page link to the archive, and not to mention, it was all over the forums section.
If you want to try and redefine what a lie is so as to be right, well, your wrong. For them to have lied, that would mean they knowingly told use release dates that were false.
Trying to change what a lie is only makes that person look stupid, but petty and frankly, some what off balance.
As for incompetence, I'll meet you half way there. None of us really know what happened. You are more then welcome to say incompetent, I'll look at it as inexperienced in software developement.
However, go ahead and post over and over again all this dishonest, greedy, incompetent ideas.
All it really does is say who you are, how irrational and unreasonable you can be. And don't try and kid us into thinking that you aren't carring your anger off the forum and beyond.
So I pity those people because frankly, it's got to suck spending any of your time carring around that much anger over dungeons and dragons.
Them's are some right fancy words your throwin' round partner.
Just to counterpoint. At the release of 4E when the majority of people were considering purchasing their books most of the big conventions had videos or presentations that were saying that D&Di would be released at the same time as the 4E books. Now a lot of people bought the books with the missing impression that D&Di would be out. It wasn't. Some of them probably went online to check www.wizards.com to see if it was out, but I bet most didn't. I know I didn't I had the books on pre-order since they promised they would have the D&Di out with the books. Was that unreasonable? I don't think so. some of the more internet savvy should have checked, but most of us didn't does that make it our fault WotC couldn't hold up their end of the bargain? no, the fault squarely rests on WotC's shoulders.
Not to mention the video that they called "beta", which means the code is locked and the program is nearly ready for release minus some low to mid severity bug fixes, turned out to be a mock up of something that wasn't even there. The lawsuit that they copied the images of the dice from FG2 is proof of that. Any program that makes it to beta has its own images and artwork, and doesn't include anything that could be considered copyrighted material.
That right there is complete proof no matter how you look at it that WotC did lie to us. They later said it wouldn't be available, and later said it was shelved. That still doesn't address the people that bought the books knowing that WotC would have D&Di up and running with the VTT, especially those of us that pre-ordered the books through places like www.amazon.com. We open the books and it says check out D&Di at www.wizards.com. So we go there dice in hand, three books that cost us almost $100.00 on the table next to us, and lo and behold "We're sorry D&Di is not available at this time".
Not to mention the really bad bugs with the website. So you tell me who is to blame in this scenario? The people that pre-ordered the books a long time before because WotC said they would have D&Di out? or WotC that should have had the product out? I have to say that I will never pre-order anything from WotC again that is for sure, heck I might not even order anything from them again until I try it and see for sure if it is something I feel is worth spending my money on.
I'm willing to recognize truthfulness when I see it. In the case you have stated of those who pre-ordered the books before the news of DnDi being in the back burner, then yes, responsibility lies on the shoulders of WotC because those customers were acting on the information available at the moment. However, I think it is fair to see that most purchasers of 4e did not fall into that scenario. However, under any other circumstance presented so far, responsibility falls upon the consumer to be informed and on WotC for failing to meet its goals (for which they have already apologized and demonstrated a change in attitude so as to not repeat it).
However, and we are entering 'what if's here, if WotC at the moment that you pre-ordered believe the DnDi tools to be on schedule, what happened wasn't maliciousness but rather a horrible case of Murphy's law. The best option available to those consumers is the hope of an in-store refund.
Treating the hard working individuals of WotC like nameless, faceless drones in a shadowy conspiracy that exists solely to steal your money just so you can feel justified in your anger? Sorry, friend, that is cognitive dissonance.
I don't treat them like nameless, faceless drones, that's their corporate overseers' job. There's no shadowy conspiracy, corporations openly exist solely to create wealth for their stockholders. Lastly, I'm not angry, since I never bought into 4E, DDI, or anything else WotC has produced in well over a year. I'm trying to explain why it's perfectly reasonable for some people to be angry and feel deceived.
Who anthropomorphizing now? The only way the corporation is an "entity" is by legal technicality. By any other yardstick, it is just a group of individuals working towards a common goal.
A corporation is every bit as much a person under the law as you are with the sole exception that you can vote and it can't. Those people you cite are no more intrinsic to the corporation than the air you breathe in and out is to you.
So, wait, now your saying that this nameless, faceless corporation entity (which is evil) is controlled by a swarm of nameless, faceless stockholders (who are also evil)?
Please show where I have EVER said corporations or stockholders were evil.
I have consistently maintained that corporations are AMORAL. Like water rolling down a hill, they will follow the path of least resistance to the most profit. Corporations exist to increase the wealth of their stockholders, not to benefit their employees or customers. If benefiting those later groups generates more profit than the corporation will benefit them. If cutting them loose as so much dead weight is more profitable, then away they go.
Honest, real and fallable people don't enter into it anywhere?
Yes, they do. They are customers, employees, and stockholders. But honest, real and fallible people are NOT corporations.
I don't treat them like nameless, faceless drones, that's their corporate overseers' job. There's no shadowy conspiracy, corporations openly exist solely to create wealth for their stockholders. Lastly, I'm not angry, since I never bought into 4E, DDI, or anything else WotC has produced in well over a year. I'm trying to explain why it's perfectly reasonable for some people to be angry and feel deceived.
A corporation is every bit as much a person under the law as you are with the sole exception that you can vote and it can't. Those people you cite are no more intrinsic to the corporation than the air you breathe in and out is to you.
Please show where I have EVER said corporations or stockholders were evil.
I have consistently maintained that corporations are AMORAL. Like water rolling down a hill, they will follow the path of least resistance to the most profit. Corporations exist to increase the wealth of their stockholders, not to benefit their employees or customers. If benefiting those later groups generates more profit than the corporation will benefit them. If cutting them loose as so much dead weight is more profitable, then away they go.
Yes, they do. They are customers, employees, and stockholders. But honest, real and fallible people are NOT corporations.
Gosh, you sure don't like having a lot of things assumed about you, or traits given to you. You know much like you've been doing to WoTC.
You suddenly are all, where did I say this? I'm not the one, that's not what I said.
It's all so laughable.
Not to mention the video that they called "beta", which means the code is locked and the program is nearly ready for release minus some low to mid severity bug fixes, turned out to be a mock up of something that wasn't even there. The lawsuit that they copied the images of the dice from FG2 is proof of that. Any program that makes it to beta has its own images and artwork, and doesn't include anything that could be considered copyrighted material.
Great post and I was unaware about a lawsuit from FGII regarding the dice. This post in itself makes me think that WotC was being more deceptive than I had previously believed.
I wonder how far the VTT, Dungeon Builder, and Visualizer were actually developed when DDI went live with paid subscriptions. I specifically remember the words COMING SOON! plastered all over the above mentioned programs. The "lock in your price now" bit is what lured me buy a year's subscription. If it wasn't for that, I would not have subscribed at all as I had/have no desire to have the E-zines.
For those who say I payed for exactly what DDI was offering at the time and nothing more, I agree 100% and will make no agrument regarding that. But I will also state that it was very misleading to imply that the other programs would be out "SOON". They got a year's subscription out of me with that tactic. Looking back, I see that my mistake was having faith in WotC.
The "coming soon" was only added after several days (maybe even a week or more, I don't remember) of campaigning on the forums for there to be ANY clear announcement that the tools weren't ready yet.
"Coming soon" was what WotC elected to put up (eventualy).
If you logged on before that, the tools appeared as if they already existed (unless you happened to read the one ampersand article that mentioned about two paragraphs in that all the web tools weren't coming out immediately).
For people who are wondering which of the two groups ("WotC was deceitful" versus "WotC did nothing wrong") please, look for yourself.
Go through the Insider forums starting at about this time of year (early June) when 4e was released.
It will be eye-opening.
ON HOW WotC HAD TO BE FORCED TO ACTUALLY MAKE IT CLEAR:
Welcome to the "Get the Word Out" Campaign
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043721
Wizards, please put a "Comming Soon" message in the INSIDER!!!!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043159
ON LACK OF CLARITY:
Where are the online tools?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041731
Sorry but, where can I find DDI?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041578
DnDi - Marketing Disaster, Can't Find, Can't Join
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043006
Sick of it!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042596
So FREAKING anoying to go in CIRCLES trying to get info on D&Di
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043179
Downloads
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042373
When does D&Di go live?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1035448
HOORAY!! It's June 6th! 4th Edition day!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041770
D&DI
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043473
D&DI
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043443
LOL are you kidding me?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043725
Help, I am confused
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043512
Were and if availbe do I get the new DnD Character generator software?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043324
D&Di Character Builder
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043151
How do I subscribe?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043912
A conspiracy of silence...
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1044228
Casual "Drop-in" Gaming and DDI!?!?!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1044648
DDI Online Tools?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1047208
PICKING UP THE PIECES (AKA more false promises):
Why does WOTC think its ok to lie to its customer base?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042035
timeline?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1028906
Is D&DI Being Killed?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042420
An Open letter to Ken Troop - Executive Producer for D&D Insider.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043222
(So is it reasonable to assume WotC was clear enough? Were all of these people deserving of this because they believed what they read in one place or another that it would be ready, or worse WAS ALREADY READY in the back of the books and on the WotC pamphlets provided to stores?)
Aw heck, rather than making others dig, here is a sampling of some of what I saw (though feel free to check for yourself. These are the most extreme examples):
Wizards, please put a "Comming Soon" message in the INSIDER!!!!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043159
Where are the online tools?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041731
Sorry but, where can I find DDI?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041578
DnDi - Marketing Disaster, Can't Find, Can't Join
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043006
Sick of it!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042596
So FREAKING anoying to go in CIRCLES trying to get info on D&Di
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043179
Downloads
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042373
timeline?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1028906
Is D&DI Being Killed?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042420
An Open letter to Ken Troop - Executive Producer for D&D Insider.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043222
When does D&Di go live?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1035448
HOORAY!! It's June 6th! 4th Edition day!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041770
D&DI
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043473
D&DI
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043443
LOL are you kidding me?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043725
Help, I am confused
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043512
Were and if availbe do I get the new DnD Character generator software?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043324
D&Di Character Builder
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043151
Why does WOTC think its ok to lie to its customer base?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1042035
How do I subscribe?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1043912
A conspiracy of silence...
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1044228
Casual "Drop-in" Gaming and DDI!?!?!
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1044648
DDI Online Tools?
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1047208
(So is it reasonable to assume WotC was clear enough? Were all of these people deserving of this because they believed what they read in one place or another that it would be ready, or worse WAS ALREADY READY in the back of the books and on the WotC pamphlets provided to stores?)
^ I really like this guy!
The answer is because the owners of the site choose not to ban people and delete their posts. As with all other decisions a corporation makes, I assume it is because they judge it as more profitable to not ban and delete than to ban and delete.
No, the owner of the site have deleted posts, I have lost a few. There are people that have been site banned as well.
Great post and I was unaware about a lawsuit from FGII regarding the dice. This post in itself makes me think that WotC was being more deceptive than I had previously believed.
I wonder how far the VTT, Dungeon Builder, and Visualizer were actually developed when DDI went live with paid subscriptions. I specifically remember the words COMING SOON! plastered all over the above mentioned programs. The "lock in your price now" bit is what lured me buy a year's subscription. If it wasn't for that, I would not have subscribed at all as I had/have no desire to have the E-zines.
For those who say I payed for exactly what DDI was offering at the time and nothing more, I agree 100% and will make no agrument regarding that. But I will also state that it was very misleading to imply that the other programs would be out "SOON". They got a year's subscription out of me with that tactic. Looking back, I see that my mistake was having faith in WotC.
It was not a law suit, it was a notice of violation. Something like a light violation, fix in 24 hours or legal lawsuit will start. WotC fixed the light, there was no lawsuit.
The words coming soon was community requested, as opposed to no label at all about the tools not available at the time. At the time the community and I suspect WotC believed tools would be completed soon.
"Belief is error" Facts clearly indicate soon was much further away then what WotC hoped for. There again soon does appear to be years in time on at least a few promises. I still wonder why that typesetter did not complete task within two weeks. or if completed why WotC did not put on site as pledged.
I was there at the time.
Heck. I was one of the News Guides for Mudbunny at one point (and I respected him then as I respect him now...very much.).
I remember it all vividly, and I gotta say, they have not done a good job with this.
They really need to work on honesty.
I'm not saying they are evil schemers twirling their moustaches.
I'm more saying they're like the "screw up kid" who didn't study, got a bunch of F's on his report card, and then tried not to show it to Mom and Dad.
Certainly a different form of dishonesty, but not really honest nonetheless.
It's not a matter or hoping people keep their words, that's completely legitimate, the problem you seem to have however is the failure to recognize that other people live their own circumstances separate of yours, and that those circumstances supersede yours in the life of other people. You act as if the world revolves around you and that promises made to you must be kept without excuses. That is a narcissistic, egotistical, borderline psychotic kind of view of the world, that will lead you to many disappointments, because guess what, real life often gets in the way of laid out plans and to fail to recognize that and think yourself important enough to have the power to forgive or forget a person who failed at keeping a promise because of an accident is completely antithetical with commonplace systems of philosophy and morality.
It's called personal responsibility. Maybe you've heard of it. If you promise something, and you fail to deliver, then you have no one but yourself to blame.
Because of all the news every time they decided to do something different maybe?
What proof do you have there there was an announcement EVERY TIME?
Your expectations become unreasonable not because you expect people to fulfill promises, but because you fail to understand that sometimes circumstances impede the fulfillment of a promise and refuse to accept apologies of it. And my expectations aren't illogical, they are completely logical, one of the fundamental theories of economics is that of the informed and rational customer.
That NOT a fundamental theory of economics, that's an ASSUMPTION which is part of many economic theories. I suppose you've never heard of bounded rationality, or satisficing behavior. Those are assumptions different from the "economic man" you cite which leads to other, different economic theories. You are also making the assumption of "perfect knowledge" and taking to task anyone who falls short of your assumption. The rationality and knowledge assumptions you are making are demonstrably false in the real world, but can be very useful in economic modeling.
Even more than that, I'll give you a real life anecdote; my father was raised in poverty, and even though we are currently an upper-middle class family, he still lives as if he was poor (it's a psychological oddity that even Sidney Poitier admitted to have suffered in his memoirs); when you know that money can run out you consider deeply what you are going to spend your money on and try to be educated about your purchase. Therefore I ask to you, is money expendable and exhaustible? Knowing that it is; is it more logical to buy that which you need/will use or to buy something that you do not need/ will not use? Knowing that the first option is correct we must answer 'How do we know what we need or will use?' Is it instinctive or must it be learned? The answer is also patently obvious it must be learned (including what you can eat is something we learn, even if we do have an instinctive impulse to know that we must suckle a breast to get milk we must first learn from whom to suckle). Therefore, 'Is it illogical to expect people to know about what they are buying?' No, on the contrary it is illogical to not know what you about what you are buying.
What you've failed to account for is the opportunity cost of gathering knowledge. It is only logical for people to gather more knowledge about a purchase if the benefit they gain by the knowledge is greater than the cost of acquiring that knowledge. To spend more in opportunity cost than you are going to save from the knowledge that cost gains you is simply illogical.
Yes. Because he did not verify his findings, that is why you subtract point from his test when he answered wrongly. One of the vital steps of the scientific method (or any other valid method of learning) is the step in which you verify your conclusions. Nevertheless, it is highly unlikely that if he understood incorrectly he would not have noticed in class when the material, or material that builds upon it, is discussed. If he did not see something wrong in the process he was either distracted or needs to spend more time learning (which is what after-school teaching is for). However, your argument here can be easily proven irrelevant through a simple and recognizable phrase: "Ignorance of the law (situation or material) does not excuse you".
You're going to hang someone out to dry for their ignorance, yet give someone else a pass on their inability to live up to their commitments. I've got to disagree with you on this one. I would FAR rather have someone who was ignorant, which is an easily correctable situation, than someone who won't live up to their promises.
You do realize you have just proven what I stated, people think that because they have more channels to information they can acquire it easier. That is not the case. And as I said before: Ignorance does not excuse you from accepting your mistakes. If a person bought 4e for the sole reason of DnDi he should have informed himself of DnDi before paying for the books, it is the economically rational thing to do.
It's economically rational by some theories, but not by all.
Are you trying to claim that the fewer channels of information available, the more reliable that channel of information happens to be? Pravda was the height of reliability by that reasoning.
If they lack internet access, why would they buy something that requires internet access?
I guess you forget my example of someone seeing the book at Borders, looking it over, and deciding to buy it based on what they read in the book, which included the ad for DDI in all its original vaporware glory.
You are adequately informed when you have verifiable knowledge, easy as that, easy as asking in the boards before even having to pay for DnDi, before the release of the books about the status of DnDi and somebody would have pointed you to the news that DnDi wasn't available. It isn't a matter of knowing everything. It is a matter of have verifiable conclusions.
Not all knowledge is verifiable, and not all verifiable knowledge is worth the cost of acquiring and verifying it.
Gosh, you sure don't like having a lot of things assumed about you, or traits given to you. You know much like you've been doing to WoTC.
You suddenly are all, where did I say this? I'm not the one, that's not what I said.
It's all so laughable.
You got something better than an ad hominem fallacious argument? THAT is truly laughable.
You got something better than an ad hominem fallacious argument? THAT is truly laughable.
I think it is quite possible the Dane works for WotC, is related to someone who works for WotC, or is a shareholder of Hasbro.
Heck. I was one of the News Guides for Mudbunny at one point (and I respected him then as I respect him now...very much.).
Yup. You were one of my first news guides.
I remember it all vividly, and I gotta say, they have not done a good job with this.
I think that there are very few people, inside WotC or out, who won't acknowledge that WotC could have done things better in letting people know. That being said (and I am playing devil's advocate here) we don't know how much info was passed on to the marketing team, and how much the people who were out and about around that time were *allowed* to say about the state of DDI at the time.
They really need to work on honesty.
I am not so sure that it is honesty as it is being willing to simply say something. It is something that I continually poke them about, and credit for this I think should go to Trevor for a lot of work on the inside, they *are* getting better.
Corporate change takes time. Changing attitudes in the company takes time.
Based on what I have heard about stuff coming out, I am excited about the campaign tools. I think that they will be more useful to a broader base of users than the GT would have been, as they will (I hope) be useable offline as well.
The words coming soon was community requested, as opposed to no label at all about the tools not available at the time. At the time the community and I suspect WotC believed tools would be completed soon.
Yep.
Check out the first two links I have up there. (I added the more important one after you quoted me, so you'll need to use my post's link to "the get the word out campaign).
It is (I think, there may have been others) the main thread in which the community put the pressure on about actually telling people the tools weren't available for purchase.
The later threads I quoted were the threads of confusion demonstrating the need for the words "coming soon" or, really, anything.
And the last threads were about how WotC tried to communicate what was happening after they dropped the ball. They started to, by having Ken Troop (executive producter of D&Di) post. But then he dissapeared. There were some funny "where in the world is Ken Troop" posts. I don't know if he has even logged in to these forums since back then.
And then, Randy Buhler started giving weekly updates. Some were even like the joking one in this thread: "We're still working on stuff, but nothing to report this week." Randy started giving us all confidence that D&Di was actually going to happen (at that time D&Di was the whole suite of suggested tools...it's funny how the term has come to mean what we've got now).
Then Gamer Zero (who was not very popular here, but was just starting to really make a difference) got fired/laid off. And Solice came on to manage the forums.
Then Randy Buheler (I'm probably butchering spelling his name, for which I apologize. Good guy.) and Solice (the new forum manager who was really great at communication and making people in the forums feel heard) BOTH got laid off. (Along with notables in the design department as well).
I'll also say that there was little communication AT ALL until Gamer Zero, Mudbunny, Randy Buehler, Wolfstar76, and probably a few others, really got things going nicely. But the smooth machine that once was seems to have become just Mudbunny and Wolfstar76. They're both great guys and really do represent everyone who comes here. I know they can be painted as apologists, but they're a lot like me (but optimists rather than pessimists). They still believe in WotC and work hard to help build.
EDIT: I say "just" Mudbunny and Wolfstar76 because, while they are great forum leads, and constantly bring information to WotC, they don't have the ability to really speak BACK to us forumgoers. Trevor can, and he's been dong a good job (see my next post), but in terms of regularity, it's not that same smooth machine I remember feeling comfortable with communication-wise. I do feel I can bring any concern to our forum leads, and I have a 80%/20% feeling that WotC will listen to them as well as Solice...i.e. they'll listen but not QUITE as well. Problem is that the line of communication is one way, as it appears that any WotC communication that goes back to them is either hush hush NDA agreement material, is a minor point, or is released via some other venue (ampersand/editorial/news/etc). So, good, but not as good as Mudbunny and Wolfstar76 plus more.
So that's a brief history lesson as I remember it. I've been careful not to intentionally distort anything, but I'm sure others remember it differently than I did and that they will share their own versions as well.
The thread is getting close to a lot of personal attacks again, and I would really appreciate it if everyone would calm down.
It is obvious that there are a number of sides in the debate. For some people, the effort that WotC put out when they realized that the tools wouldn't be ready for the release of DDI was more than enough. For others, it wasn't nearly enough.
Neither group has an exclusive hold on "I am right and you are wrong". The position that is taken is entirely subjective and will change depending on the biases and views held by the person stating the argument.
Discuss why you think that WotC did it good enough or not good enough all you want. The personal attacks against the person whose position you disagree with needs to stop.
Trevor has been very, very good.
As good as Mr. Buehler, at least...but instead of weekly updates, he addresses specific concerns (which I prefer, and others may or may not, I dunno).
I almost hesitate to mention that, given the track record of people who communicate well.
You're also right that they are more silent than lying...but as with my "kid with the bad report card" example, that can be pretty bad too.
If you say you're going to do something and then don't do it, it's really dishonest to "go silent" rather than "own up".
Least, that's the way I see it.
To respond to Ninjabunny er, Mudbunny.
I would put up a picture of a ninjabunny, but to honor the memory of David Carradine, I will just put up
Trevor has been very, very good.
Yup. I usually get a poke once every couple of weeks if he catches me online just before he goes into a meeting with "I need a couple of big points I can bring up that the forums want/need". Most of the points I mention to him he already has on his list. The information that you guys want is getting noted by WotC, but they are still a little gun-shy on releasing it and ending up missing a deadline or two.
I can't blame them either. I see the release of info as a sort of pendulum. For a while we were at one extreme end, and we were getting lots of info. Then they got burnt, and it swung all the way to the other side. Now, slowly but surely, we are moving towards more info being released. It will take time, but I have confidence that they are getting there.
They made mistake...which amoung us have never made a mistake...to borrow a qoute from the Bible (he with out sin may throw the first stone)
They should have done this and they should have done that...
The mistake was made, I hope as adults we cam learn to forgive them. They are not thieves (rogues) they are just hard working people who screwed up and are now trying not to screw up even more.
Lets send them some positive feed back, end our subscriptions unless your like me and in general satsfied paying the ten bucks or whatever it is for the update, and magazines.
I just got done looking at a bunch of VTT's and find that they all suck from the real deal. But for the bulk of my players being in seperate towns it is good enough. Buy those...like any other consumer product. If hershy's ran out of chocolate you would buy something else like cadbury, or if the world ran out we suffer but there currently alternatives out there. Buy those, use those and WOTc well they can suffer for there mistake.
What more do you want from WOTC? A lap dance?
Untill I find a +5 vorpal shaving razor make mine D&D4e! :D
WOTC rolled a critical fumble.
They made mistake...which amoung us have never made a mistake...to borrow a qoute from the Bible (he with out sin may throw the first stone)
They should have done this and they should have done that...
The mistake was made, I hope as adults we cam learn to forgive them. They are not thieves (rogues) they are just hard working people who screwed up and are now trying not to screw up even more.
Lets send them some positive feed back, end our subscriptions unless your like me and in general satsfied paying the ten bucks or whatever it is for the update, and magazines.
I just got done looking at a bunch of VTT's and find that they all suck from the real deal. But for the bulk of my players being in seperate towns it is good enough. Buy those...like any other consumer product. If hershy's ran out of chocolate you would buy something else like cadbury, or if the world ran out we suffer but there currently alternatives out there. Buy those, use those and WOTc well they can suffer for there mistake.
What more do you want from WOTC? A lap dance?
Untill I find a +5 vorpal shaving razor make mine D&D4e! :D
I'll take a lap dance!
On the serious side, those other VTT's are only useful if you are good with software, for the casual user they are not going to be nearly as useful as what the WotC VTT was supposed to be.
Not to mention you have to download a bunch of other things to make them comparable to the VTT that WotC failed to release. It's a real hassle, and I don't envy anyone going that route because of the GSL and IP laws you literally have to type everything you are going to use into the outside VTT. It just makes it almost not worth using.
It's called personal responsibility. Maybe you've heard of it. If you promise something, and you fail to deliver, then you have no one but yourself to blame.
Not if circumstances prohibit you from keeping that promise. Another example, which I hope doesn't come to pass, I recently told my girlfriend that I would call her as soon as I hit Madrid before heading off to Valencia. If for some reason the plane crashes, it is the morally correct thing to do to forgive and forget. Something that you seem incapable of doing. They had plans (promises as you like to call them) and circumstances prohibited them from completing the plan, they have apologized, they told you about it a month before you had to pay anything for the failed plan. It is expected, by any established code of ethics, that you swallow your pride, place yourself in their position and recognize that 'the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry'.
What proof do you have there there was an announcement EVERY TIME?
The news that DnDi wasn't ready, all the reports on the progress of the CB, all the reports about 'evaluating where they were after finishing with the CB before deciding what to do', reporting the results of the survey and how they would build campaign tools, admitting that the original tools are in development hell.... I ask you what proof do you have that none of those things have happened? (not to mention that you mischaracterizing my original statement that they have begun to do this when the whole DnDi fiasco took a life of it's own, or at least that's what the original statement meant)
That NOT a fundamental theory of economics, that's an ASSUMPTION which is part of many economic theories. I suppose you've never heard of bounded rationality, or satisficing behavior. Those are assumptions different from the "economic man" you cite which leads to other, different economic theories. You are also making the assumption of "perfect knowledge" and taking to task anyone who falls short of your assumption. The rationality and knowledge assumptions you are making are demonstrably false in the real world, but can be very useful in economic modeling.
Glad to see that in order to make an argument you have to break my paragraphs in order to break idea chains, it's an excellent sign of weakness of argument. If you would have kept the paragraph whole it is evident that in the anecdote I made about my father I used the phrase need/will use, I used this phrase because we not only buy because we need (which is a flaw in the argument '**** economicus' but also use (either aesthetic or pleasure reasons, because you use something by the mere fact that it brings satisfaction to you— much like what happens with many collectors); all that however, the inclusion of irrational wants (though not so irrational if the need for happiness is taken into consideration), does not mean that we can live out of rationality within our irrationality and be happy, regardless of impulsive wants we still act with the knowledge of our limits. Also I never made the assumption of perfect knowledge, if acquired knowledge was perfect the verification part of our scientific method of learning would be unnecessary, and later on on my answer to you I talked about the need to verify conclusions. To finish the only action which I find worthy of reprimand is that of, using a word you used before, abdicating responsibility because the conclusions one reaches are not the correct one. Reaching wrong conclusions is not a failure of the method but either its user or its application.
What you've failed to account for is the opportunity cost of gathering knowledge. It is only logical for people to gather more knowledge about a purchase if the benefit they gain by the knowledge is greater than the cost of acquiring that knowledge. To spend more in opportunity cost than you are going to save from the knowledge that cost gains you is simply illogical.
And in which case would the acquisition of knowledge have a higher cost of opportunity that the lack of knowledge? Especially in a case such as the one we are discussing where information was free. And foreseeing possible arguments, if the opportunity cost comes from lack of time the it is logical to assume that if you do not have time to search for information, you do no have time to play the game. if it's because it costs money, that has no place in this argument because at the moment all the information was free. More importantly, if it is because the mere action of acquiring knowledge, in any for, has a cost of opportunity attached to it, then not looking for it, if this is your argument, has no cost of opportunity added to it and thus all pursuit of knowledge is wasteful and thus not logical; of course that sort of argument would be idiotic, because even if the mere act of looking for knowledge has a cost of opportunity, not having knowledge will eventually result in an even greater one (as has happened with those who purchased 4e for DnDi without checking the status of DnDi—with the exception of those who had the product pre-ordered before news of the fiasco came out.
You're going to hang someone out to dry for their ignorance, yet give someone else a pass on their inability to live up to their commitments. I've got to disagree with you on this one. I would FAR rather have someone who was ignorant, which is an easily correctable situation, than someone who won't live up to their promises.
Nice strawman, as this does nothing to address what I said. I am not hanging anyone for ignorance, I am saying that a person should attain to the consequences of being actively ignorant, such as heading into an unknown city without a map and complaining about being lost, or in the case of the student, studying something shoddily and then being blissfully unaware when events that could have warned him about his lack in knowledge. Now, is the lack of knowledge wrong in its own? No! A young boy that burns himself on a stove shouldn't be punished for it, but one hopes that the shock teaches him to be more careful, or to learn to bring a map next time, or to pay attention in class, or to try to be more informed next time. What I'm trying to say is that people should accept when they could have avoided moments were ignorance took the better of them and learn from them, not blame others for their lack of knowledge. Also I do not condone the breaking of promises because of convenience, but I do recognize that 'the best laid plans....often go awry' and am willing to accept that and forgive and forget, something you seem either incapable of doing or think to be above of doing.
It's economically rational by some theories, but not by all.
All economic theory has the pretense that somebody participates in an economy out of a want or need (conscious or unconscious), the very want or need of something requires knowledge of it, from the minimal (I know it exists) to the more complicated (I can get an equivalent product at a cheaper price, for example). As partially (if not mainly) rational beings we should expect from ourselves that we would choose the latter and not the former because it is safer.
Are you trying to claim that the fewer channels of information available, the more reliable that channel of information happens to be? Pravda was the height of reliability by that reasoning.
Another straw man, or a complete lack of comprehension by your part (I'll assume the former). What I said is that people equate the quantity of channels of information with quality of information and, more importantly for my argument, possession of information. Think of it this way a redneck with 200+ cable channels and Internet will think himself more cultured than a man with no cable and access only to a library just because he has more channels of information. That's the idea, an observable one from what I gather. In short we expect information to be a given because we have more information at our fingertips.
I guess you forget my example of someone seeing the book at Borders, looking it over, and deciding to buy it based on what they read in the book, which included the ad for DDI in all its original vaporware glory.
You complained about people without internet access, I said people without internet access wouldn't buy it to begin with. but if you want to change the scenario, fine, I'd say they are the unfortunate victims of Murphy's Law, WotC couldn't delete the ads in time so you can't blame them if they thought the tools would be ready at the time the books were being printed, then again the customer could have done some research if possible (which is unlikely under these exact circumstances). One would hope he was able to resell the book or still get use out of it, or even that he began using a third party VTT. Other than that he would have to suck it up, and I would hope he wouldn't wallow on whatever anger he feels, and is mature enough to accept the circumstances, and go on with his life, hopefully having learned to be more cautious before purchasing anything with the hopes of utilizing it with an intangible product.
Not all knowledge is verifiable, and not all verifiable knowledge is worth the cost of acquiring and verifying it.
I was talking about verifiable conclusions, not knowledge, not all knowledge is verifiable (I'm hungry, can you verify that?). But (scientific) conclusions are, and I am advocating for a scientific approach to purchasing. And as I said above, I disagree that, in the case of DnDi, knowledge has too high a cost of opportunity.
Actually, it gets even worse.
The "coming soon" was only added after several days (maybe even a week or more, I don't remember) of campaigning on the forums for there to be ANY clear announcement that the tools weren't ready yet.
"Coming soon" was what WotC elected to put up (eventualy).
IIRC, WOTC did not come on the fourms and say anything about DDI or post the coming soon stuff until TWO MONTHS after the relase of 4th ed..
Someone else said the info on the delay was on the arrcaive. But IMO WOTC needed to keep it as a main story headline on the main page. Most people would not search the arrcaive. Just human nature.
Plus I remember Ken Troop coming to the fourm saying. "I'm Ken Troop, I will be the man to answer your questions about what we are doing with DDi. Post away and I PROMISE to get back to you." Then he pretty much dissapeared. Until right beofre GenCon and said "sorry".
There is only so much incomptence people can take.
IIRC, WOTC did not come on the fourms and say anything about DDI or post the coming soon stuff until TWO MONTHS after the relase of 4th ed..
Well you mention Ken Troop in the same post that you say it was two months before they said anything about D&Di, when Ken Troop posted about D&Di the day after the books were released.
His post for those you that were not around during that time.
Ken Troop post:
Sorry for the long context above, but context is important to me. The more shared premises that exist between two people, the more likely productive conversation will follow. And that productive conversation is why we're here.
I want to start by trying to summarize what I see as the largest questions/concerns on the forums over the last two days and my perspective on them. I'm not going to cover every issue, and these are also paraphrases, not actual quotations (I think) --
1) "How could Wizards not have D&D Insider ready for the launch of 4th edition?"
From the very beginning of this project our goal had been to launch the full suite of D&D Insider tools and applications with the launch of 4th edition. How could we want to do anything else?
But to mangle a quote from the Princess Bride -- "Software Development is pain. Anyone who says differently is selling something." And for those of you who want to tell me how your company does software at perfect quality and on perfect schedule and budget -- thank you for sharing. I'm truly glad it is so easy for you. It makes me happy to know those stories exist.
This is one of those times where I won't go into all the details. See G.R. #4 (the Ground Rules in the above post). And G.R. #3 is even more relevant...at a date sometime in the future we're going to decide D&D Insider is ready and that we can charge for it. That's our decision. After our decision is made, then it becomes your decision. Are you going to pay for it? Of course I want and hope for that answer to be yes, and we're all working very hard here to make sure that answer is yes. But it is still a simple set comprised of two decisions...and if we can make that transaction of decisions as painless and drama-free as possible, I think we'll both be happier for it.
2) "Why weren't we told about this?"
My first answer to that is, "We did."
See Bill Slavicsek's Ampersand column from a month ago -- http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dramp/20080507a
My second answer to that is, "Yes, even though we did, we could have done a better job overall."
Part of that is all of us have had our heads down in the trenches over the last few months trying to get as much of D&D Insider as possible ready to use and deploy for launch, or failing that, as soon as possible thereafter. With such tunnel vision, it can be difficult to remember to put down the code and the content and talk with your audience.
But regardless, we didn't do a very good job here of keeping up good lines of communication with the community. We're trying to get better at it. We'll appreciate hearing when we do better, and when we still miss the mark.
3) "I'm very sad that Game Table/[insert your favorite app here] isn't ready today."
We are, too. Very much so. In the meantime, 4th edition D&D is a wonderful game, and able to enjoyed on its own merits...just like D&D has always been.
And we'll be offering more info over the next several weeks on the applications and where they're at...for example, check out this thread where Wotc_DM gives a sneak peek at a screenshot for the Character Visualizer
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1041844
(Wotc_DM is the producer in charge of developing the various applications, reporting to me, and his posts are usually full of great detail about the current state of the applications).
4) "When will everything be ready?"
A very important question. Also one of the hardest to answer.
The baseline here, and please understand it's not a flippant response -- Everything will be ready when we decide it's ready. Software development planning is still an inexact process...far more so when you deal with such a subjective experience as entertainment software...all the budgets and schedules and process in the world can't guarantee a given experience is "fun." So we're not going to release this until we decide it's ready to release.
I could give you a tentative set of dates, but those dates are likely to change. In fact, it's generally accepted practice in this industry not to mention dates at all.
The very next focused goal for us is to get the Compendium, in its first iteration, up and running as soon as possible. Expect a more formal note from me about the Compendium posted onto the website soon. The first iteration may go live in a couple of weeks, it may be longer than that.
As for the rest of the applications (Game Table, Character Builder, Character Creator), I'd say a safe bet is at least a few months from now, probably longer. Either way, we're very likely going to be rolling out one application at a time, to ensure as smooth and quality a launch as possible. Also take it as a given that each application will get roughly a "month-window" to launch in, meaning there would be at least a month in-between launches.
I'm giving you this context because I understand how frustrating it is to have no information. But ultimately, if you go back to the line of, "We'll launch them when they're ready", then you have your best and most succinct understanding of the situation.
5) "Dragon and Dungeon articles look great."
Thank you, we agree. Chris Youngs and his team have done a fantastic job getting the magazines ready...we're glad you liked what you saw on Friday, and expect a lot more of it over the weeks and months to come. And also continue with your specific feedback...I saw the response asking about improving the readability -- keep those comments, both good and bad, coming.
If you haven't already seen one of the articles, go here for the link to a great Dragon article by Chris Sims about the Warforged --
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20080606b
At this point, I'll wrap up for now. I'm excited about 4th edition. I'm excited about the re-launch of Dragon and Dungeon magazines and the soon-to-be launch of the Compendium. I'm excited about the eventual launch of D&D Insider. As I said at the very beginning of this, I wrote all this to both give everyone some more information, as well as kick off the first of what I hope will be many, many productive conversations about the shape and nature of what D&D Insider can and should be.
I may not be able to post responses to this thread next week, but please know I, and others here, will read every response.
Thank you for giving me some of your time.
Ken
Not if circumstances prohibit you from keeping that promise. Another example, which I hope doesn't come to pass, I recently told my girlfriend that I would call her as soon as I hit Madrid before heading off to Valencia. If for some reason the plane crashes, it is the morally correct thing to do to forgive and forget. Something that you seem incapable of doing. They had plans (promises as you like to call them) and circumstances prohibited them from completing the plan, they have apologized, they told you about it a month before you had to pay anything for the failed plan. It is expected, by any established code of ethics, that you swallow your pride, place yourself in their position and recognize that 'the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry'.
In other words, when you don't get your credit card payment to the bank on time because "circumstances prohibit you from keeping that promise," you actually think the bank should pat you on the back and say "that's OK, we won't charge you any penalties." You really need to grow up. Personal responsibility is not making promises you can't fulfill and facing the consequences if you don't fulfill them. You seem to think that it's fine to promise anything you want and when you can't come through the other guy is wrong for holding you accountable.
The news that DnDi wasn't ready, all the reports on the progress of the CB, all the reports about 'evaluating where they were after finishing with the CB before deciding what to do', reporting the results of the survey and how they would build campaign tools, admitting that the original tools are in development hell.... I ask you what proof do you have that none of those things have happened? (not to mention that you mischaracterizing my original statement that they have begun to do this when the whole DnDi fiasco took a life of it's own, or at least that's what the original statement meant)
Oh, they certainly reported SOME of the changes, but I maintain we have no way of knowing if there were changes they never announced. YOU, OTOH, are making the claim that we were informed of ALL changes. Burden of proof is on you to show we've been informed of ALL the changes.
Glad to see that in order to make an argument you have to break my paragraphs in order to break idea chains, it's an excellent sign of weakness of argument. If you would have kept the paragraph whole it is evident that in the anecdote I made about my father I used the phrase need/will use, I used this phrase because we not only buy because we need (which is a flaw in the argument '**** economicus' but also use (either aesthetic or pleasure reasons, because you use something by the mere fact that it brings satisfaction to you— much like what happens with many collectors); all that however, the inclusion of irrational wants (though not so irrational if the need for happiness is taken into consideration), does not mean that we can live out of rationality within our irrationality and be happy, regardless of impulsive wants we still act with the knowledge of our limits. Also I never made the assumption of perfect knowledge, if acquired knowledge was perfect the verification part of our scientific method of learning would be unnecessary, and later on on my answer to you I talked about the need to verify conclusions. To finish the only action which I find worthy of reprimand is that of, using a word you used before, abdicating responsibility because the conclusions one reaches are not the correct one. Reaching wrong conclusions is not a failure of the method but either its user or its application.
And in which case would the acquisition of knowledge have a higher cost of opportunity that the lack of knowledge? Especially in a case such as the one we are discussing where information was free. And foreseeing possible arguments, if the opportunity cost comes from lack of time the it is logical to assume that if you do not have time to search for information, you do no have time to play the game. if it's because it costs money, that has no place in this argument because at the moment all the information was free. More importantly, if it is because the mere action of acquiring knowledge, in any for, has a cost of opportunity attached to it, then not looking for it, if this is your argument, has no cost of opportunity added to it and thus all pursuit of knowledge is wasteful and thus not logical; of course that sort of argument would be idiotic, because even if the mere act of looking for knowledge has a cost of opportunity, not having knowledge will eventually result in an even greater one (as has happened with those who purchased 4e for DnDi without checking the status of DnDi—with the exception of those who had the product pre-ordered before news of the fiasco came out.
Have you EVER taken an economics course? You certainly don't show an understanding of the most basic of economic concepts "opportunity cost". You also fail to address the problems with you economic knowledge that I brought up, like you thinking that rationality was a theory rather than an assumption. You sound like you've gotten your half-baked economic ideas from all that talk radio you've listened to. I'm sorry you're woefully ignorant of economics, and even sorrier that you use your misunderstood crumbs of economic thought to bludgeon others.
Nice strawman, as this does nothing to address what I said. I am not hanging anyone for ignorance, I am saying that a person should attain to the consequences of being actively ignorant, such as heading into an unknown city without a map and complaining about being lost, or in the case of the student, studying something shoddily and then being blissfully unaware when events that could have warned him about his lack in knowledge. Now, is the lack of knowledge wrong in its own? No! A young boy that burns himself on a stove shouldn't be punished for it, but one hopes that the shock teaches him to be more careful, or to learn to bring a map next time, or to pay attention in class, or to try to be more informed next time. What I'm trying to say is that people should accept when they could have avoided moments were ignorance took the better of them and learn from them, not blame others for their lack of knowledge. Also I do not condone the breaking of promises because of convenience, but I do recognize that 'the best laid plans....often go awry' and am willing to accept that and forgive and forget, something you seem either incapable of doing or think to be above of doing.
You do realize you prove I'm right here.
You want someone ignorant to face the consequences of their actions and not blame others, yet you hold others accountable for not giving WotC a pass when WotC fails to fulfill their responsibility.
All economic theory has the pretense that somebody participates in an economy out of a want or need (conscious or unconscious), the very want or need of something requires knowledge of it, from the minimal (I know it exists) to the more complicated (I can get an equivalent product at a cheaper price, for example). As partially (if not mainly) rational beings we should expect from ourselves that we would choose the latter and not the former because it is safer.
Another display of economic ignorance on your part.
There can be no economic issue without SCARCITY, a word you've YET to mention in you economic "theories". The most fundamental reason people are economic creatures is because they are mortal and therefore their time is finite and, here it comes, SCARCE. A person never needs to want or need something from anyone else, yet economics still applies to them.
You complained about people without internet access, I said people without internet access wouldn't buy it to begin with. but if you want to change the scenario, fine, I'd say they are the unfortunate victims of Murphy's Law, WotC couldn't delete the ads in time so you can't blame them if they thought the tools would be ready at the time the books were being printed, then again the customer could have done some research if possible (which is unlikely under these exact circumstances). One would hope he was able to resell the book or still get use out of it, or even that he began using a third party VTT. Other than that he would have to suck it up, and I would hope he wouldn't wallow on whatever anger he feels, and is mature enough to accept the circumstances, and go on with his life, hopefully having learned to be more cautious before purchasing anything with the hopes of utilizing it with an intangible product.
I'm sure the person will accept reality and go on with their life. I think it entirely reasonable for that person to decide to not support WotC in the future. From my perspective, WotC would have fumbled the ball HORRIBLY (a bad business practice). WotC would have not only gotten the person to notice their product and have the person actually spend their money to purchase WotC's product, but then driven that customer away from future purchases with no one to blame but WotC themselves. You can grumble all you want about how that person is to blame for not properly educating themselves, but the end result is WotC has lost an ongoing revenue stream for no reason other than their own incompetence.
I was talking about verifiable conclusions, not knowledge, not all knowledge is verifiable (I'm hungry, can you verify that?). But (scientific) conclusions are, and I am advocating for a scientific approach to purchasing. And as I said above, I disagree that, in the case of DnDi, knowledge has too high a cost of opportunity.
The opportunity cost is not too high, FOR YOU. Each person will place a different opportunity cost on that activity. This is definitely a case of "your mileage may vary."
While I can appreciate a scientific approach to purchasing, unfortunately it is almost impossible most times to know the outcome of a purchase until AFTER the purchase is made. I don't know if a meal at a restaurant is going to satisfy me until AFTER I have purchased and eaten it. Until purchase and usage, one can only speculate on the outcome.
PS Have a good time on your trip.
In other words, when you don't get your credit card payment to the bank on time because "circumstances prohibit you from keeping that promise," you actually think the bank should pat you on the back and say "that's OK, we won't charge you any penalties." You really need to grow up. Personal responsibility is not making promises you can't fulfill and facing the consequences if you don't fulfill them. You seem to think that it's fine to promise anything you want and when you can't come through the other guy is wrong for holding you accountable.
You seem to be unable or, more likely, unwilling to grasp what I'm saying. Yes, it is immoral to make promises and break them because of, an this is the important part, circumstances under your control; however, when you make a promise and are unable to fulfill it due to circumstances out of your control, that is not an act of immorality on your part. Do you grasp what I'm trying to say now? As for your example with the Credit Card it isn't an accurate representation of what happened, to some extent, to WotC in the case of the DnDi ads at the end of the PHB. In the case you presented above, I signed a contract, contracts are laws amongst the parties and the law cares not for circumstances. WotC's plans about DnDi was not a contract. So instead of telling me to grow up, why don't you mature and recognize that not everything is black and white?
Oh, they certainly reported SOME of the changes, but I maintain we have no way of knowing if there were changes they never announced. YOU, OTOH, are making the claim that we were informed of ALL changes. Burden of proof is on you to show we've been informed of ALL the changes.
And you seem to continually miss the gist of my arguments and choose to focus on tangential matters. But I shall make it obvious to you, WotC has, lately kept us informed of their plans it is on you to prove to me that all the previous examples I gave are fictitious. I'll be nice and help you, they aren't.
Have you EVER taken an economics course? You certainly don't show an understanding of the most basic of economic concepts "opportunity cost". You also fail to address the problems with you economic knowledge that I brought up, like you thinking that rationality was a theory rather than an assumption. You sound like you've gotten your half-baked economic ideas from all that talk radio you've listened to. I'm sorry you're woefully ignorant of economics, and even sorrier that you use your misunderstood crumbs of economic thought to bludgeon others.
Actually, if you must know, I'm currently studying political sciences with a focus on foreign policy, so yes I have studied economics. However, in order to answer to you tirade of attacks against my intellect and presumptions about behavior (I despise talk-radio). The concept of Opportunity cost does not escape me, however I fail to see how knowledge could have, except in the circumstances where knowledge equals death, imprisonment or exclusion, a higher opportunity cost than not having knowledge.
You do realize you prove I'm right here.
You want someone ignorant to face the consequences of their actions and not blame others, yet you hold others accountable for not giving WotC a pass when WotC fails to fulfill their responsibility.
I don't recall, and if I did it must have been because of lack of proper thinking, that people had no right to be angry at WotC for failing to meet deadlines. I object to people who were capable of being informed wanting to absolve themselves of the consequences of not being informed (especially those who who have claimed that they searched the website before purchase of DnDi or 4e products because of DnDi).
Another display of economic ignorance on your part.
There can be no economic issue without SCARCITY, a word you've YET to mention in you economic "theories". The most fundamental reason people are economic creatures is because they are mortal and therefore their time is finite and, here it comes, SCARCE. A person never needs to want or need something from anyone else, yet economics still applies to them.
Another display of your lack to address what is presented o you directly and your expertise in attacking the person when you are cornered and your arguments refuted. Scarcity as an economic theory (sorry 'concept', which by the way are synonyms under OED, so there goes whatever you hoped to achieve by focusing so much on my use of the word theory instead of it's synonym assumption as well) is shaky to begin with, it presupposes unlimited wants, which can be argued to be much more a manner of culture than nature, as opposed to rationality. I subscribe to the theory —sorry assumption or concept or any of its other synonyms— that man is an economic creature because of needs and wants that originate from wanting to survive and feel pleasure. Also your last line is completely contrary to the idea of scarcity, and does nothing to help your argument and everything to help you shoot yourself on the foot.
I'm sure the person will accept reality and go on with their life.
I agree
I think it entirely reasonable for that person to decide to not support WotC in the future.
Also agree.
From my perspective, WotC would have fumbled the ball HORRIBLY (a bad business practice). WotC would have not only gotten the person to notice their product and have the person actually spend their money to purchase WotC's product, but then driven that customer away from future purchases with no one to blame but WotC themselves.
In the case of those who never set foot in WotC, yes, they lost a customer due to carelessness. (I could argue that the person made a mistake in not waiting for a later day after returning to his home or place with internet access; but that would be extreme in my part, and I do not believe they should have as they were completely alien to WotC.)
You can grumble all you want about how that person is to blame for not properly educating themselves, but the end result is WotC has lost an ongoing revenue stream for no reason other than their own incompetence.
Yes in the case of the completely ignorant (and not willful ignorance, for they had no chance to attain knowledge or the knowledge available to them was limited). But that is not the case of those who, as they have said on this website, visited and saw nothing when something was posted.
The opportunity cost is not too high, FOR YOU. Each person will place a different opportunity cost on that activity. This is definitely a case of "your mileage may vary."
I dare you to come up with a common case in which the acquisition of knowledge on DnDi results in a higher cost of opportunity on not having knowledge. (For that case any other product).
While I can appreciate a scientific approach to purchasing, unfortunately it is almost impossible most times to know the outcome of a purchase until AFTER the purchase is made. I don't know if a meal at a restaurant is going to satisfy me until AFTER I have purchased and eaten it. Until purchase and usage, one can only speculate on the outcome.
But you can reduce the number of outcomes through a scientific approach to purchasing. You do not know if the meal will satisfy you but if you know the components of a dish and how it's cooked and wether you like similar dishes you can come to a fairly safe conclusion about wether or not you will like the dish.
PS Have a good time on your trip.
Thanks, it's been fun debating with you, despite the use of some arguments that I disagree with (personal attacks), shame that we can't continue to it's conclusion.
Well you mention Ken Troop in the same post that you say it was two months before they said anything about D&Di, when Ken Troop posted about D&Di the day after the books were released.
His post for those you that were not around during that time.
Don't put someone as project lead just because they are excellent at what they do. Put a person as project lead because they are a good project lead, and have training.
you have a good grasp on how projects are supposed to work, but obviously, a bad grasp on how companies work. dilbert was invented for a reason. there are reasons why tom demarco sells that many books. because outside of theory, companies often place the wrong people in the important positions.
especially in creative companies, this happens a lot, due to key creative people being believed to be the heart and sould of such projects, no matter their management experience.
you have a good grasp on how projects are supposed to work, but obviously, a bad grasp on how companies work. dilbert was invented for a reason. there are reasons why tom demarco sells that many books. because outside of theory, companies often place the wrong people in the important positions.
especially in creative companies, this happens a lot, due to key creative people being believed to be the heart and sould of such projects, no matter their management experience.
I agree, and this is why projects such as these don't work, because instead of giving the person in charge some training and starting with smaller projects, they throw them into a position where they cannot succeed, and then they wonder why that happened.
It would be far more fruitful in the long run to put the person that is the "soul" of the project as an assistant lead or have them have a project leader that works over them to manage the people and the person with the "vision" just tells the project manager what is acceptable and what is not, kind of like an overpowered consultant.
Most of the time however people that are inexperienced are added to teams of experienced people, and the experienced people are moved up. In software this is a super bad idea. A programmer is usually, but not always, an introvert that likes to break everything down into logical sections. They are notoriously bad at social situations. With proper training they can become decent project managers. Just thrown into the position they make horrible decisions about the social structure of the team. This causes bad feeling which get in the way of the work. They also lose out on a motivated team that has "buy in" on the project. No on will buy in if the manager doesn't know what they are doing.
To summarize:
Talk to corporate managers using monetary terms and projected earnings based on observable facts. This will sway them to allow you to follow the plan.
Talk to customers with the truth. If a project gets derailed, tell them why it got derailed.
don't promote to management because of competence in a different area. Train them and start them on a smaller less important project and see how well they do first.
TOLD YOU SO
All I am gonna Say is
TOLD YOU SO
Told us so what? What exactly are you talking about?
That doesn't equal diminishing content to me. Rather it shows what I'd rather expect from a magazine - some issues will be thicker/heavier than others.
Really?
From a newspaper, sure. The amount of reasonably newsworthy, or even fluffworthy and thus printable, information varies significantly from day to day.
Magazines, with their longer cycle, have significantly more leeway in finding acceptable information. They also have considerably more precise requirements in terms of advertisers and printers, and will thus very rarely change their page count on an ad hoc basis. More likely they will have special pre-set yearly expanded issues, or they might announce specific plans to increase or decrease the size of their magazine from a certain date.
Of course that applies to actual, physical magazines, with dedicated subscriptions, printing contracts, hard deadlines, advertising, and the like. With the DDI e-zines having none of those things, WotC is free to take a casual attitude towards it, treating it as some sort of sanctioned and privileged fanzine, with no real need to make release dates or content goals. Of course that is what they were supposed to be, a "bonus tool" to go with the "actual" DDI content. It was only when that content turned into vaporware that they had to now market the e-zines as product in order to justify charging for them. Unfortunately the same standards as printed magazines, and sourcebooks, has not yet caught up, despite pushing on a year, to the e-zines.
Told us so what? What exactly are you talking about?
He was a fairly active poster, that did not believe WotC would deliver. Had not seen the user post for many months now, however perhaps the June 6th (one year) brought him back. *shrugs*
This thread, in review, is completely useless.
Of course that applies to actual, physical magazines, with dedicated subscriptions, printing contracts, hard deadlines, advertising, and the like. With the DDI e-zines having none of those things, WotC is free to take a casual attitude towards it, treating it as some sort of sanctioned and privileged fanzine, with no real need to make release dates or content goals. Of course that is what they were supposed to be, a "bonus tool" to go with the "actual" DDI content. It was only when that content turned into vaporware that they had to now market the e-zines as product in order to justify charging for them. Unfortunately the same standards as printed magazines, and sourcebooks, has not yet caught up, despite pushing on a year, to the e-zines.
I don't believe the online magazines were ever intended to just be 'bonus tools' - from the start, when they stopped the printed magazine, they intended to transition them into online magazines.
Your comments about release dates and content goals make me suspect you aren't actually a subscriber - would you be able to confirm that, one way or the other? It certainly seems an absurd claim to state that every issue of magazines should always be identical in size, and that the occasional issue with oversized or undersized content is nonexistent in either the printed or online magazine industry.
And it is certainly true that the content standards, at least, currently are far beyond those the printed magazine had. At least, during the decade I was a subscriber - I'm not as familiar with earlier iterations of Dragon, so I won't make any claims or comparison regarding then.
I think its sad that you are so jaded that when someone tells you they'll have something done soon, you don't believe them.
Typical for the world of software. Sales guys sell things that don't exist all the time.
Typical for the world of software. Sales guys sell things that don't exist all the time.
I agree it is typical for the world of software, on the other hand WotC is not a software company. So when they say they are going to do something people believe it. Of course from now on I won't believe it. WotC has lost my trust.
I agree it is typical for the world of software, on the other hand WotC is not a software company. So when they say they are going to do something people believe it. Of course from now on I won't believe it. WotC has lost my trust.
Just Curious How Long Have you been a Customer....Long Enough to remember the Promised MasterTools..All in One Digital Add for Generating Characters, Campaign Manager for Creating Monsters/NPCs/Campaign Logs/Map Generator....if so you wouldn't have trusted them when They promised it again...instead of 3.0 SCREWED your got 4E Screwed.
Just Curious How Long Have you been a Customer....Long Enough to remember the Promised MasterTools..All in One Digital Add for Generating Characters, Campaign Manager for Creating Monsters/NPCs/Campaign Logs/Map Generator....if so you wouldn't have trusted them when They promised it again...instead of 3.0 SCREWED your got 4E Screwed.
I've played for at least 10 years or more. I skipped out on that part, so I don't know what you are talking about. I do remember finding a tool at a software shop that allowed me to map and create characters and everything for 2nd edition. That's the only software I knew about from WotC.
I've played for at least 10 years or more. I skipped out on that part, so I don't know what you are talking about. I do remember finding a tool at a software shop that allowed me to map and create characters and everything for 2nd edition. That's the only software I knew about from WotC.
Yep that was CORE RULES and CORE RULES 2.0
Even had Online Access to the Books
The Mapper was Based off Campaign Cartographer..
That Was from TSR not WOTC
Mastertools was suspose to do the Same thing as Core Rules for 3.0
First came Promises, then Demo Discs in the Back of the Players Handbook doing Character Generation to a certain point and with promises of everything to come...........Then We got just the Character Generator with Rest Promised to Come out....MasterTools the Complete Package...just Became ETOOLS....and Just about when everything was about worked out...Low and Behoild along Came DDI and 4E...so All Support was pullled and We once again was promised the Moon..and here we are again back to a bunch of broken promises and delayed/canceled/broken software
When I started paying for D&DI, the Game table, Dungeon builder, and Character visualizer were all links on the D&DI frontpage, advertised as coming soon. When I set up my subscription one of the main selling points was that these products were going to be available soon and if I started my subscription now I would not have to pay the increased cost until the subscription ran out.
Since I'm also a realist I did not take out a long term subscription plan because paying for something that MIGHT happen is not a good idea. When it became apparent that there was no long term intention on the part of Wizards to pursue these tools as originally advertised and intented I cancelled my subscription.
For me personally it is a question of getting your money's worth and it just isn't there with D&DI. That does not make me hate anyone still paying nor does it somehow vindicate me that others also cancel their subscriptions. Each to their own.
If the various newsgroups are right, partial .PDFs of PHB3 is already leaking from the editing rooms of Wizards and Character Builder can be updated for free on various websites. My suspicion (if it is true) is that this activity is picking up due to disgruntlement both within Wizards as well as in the community. People feel that they are being treated unfairly and therefore customer loyalty is at an all time low making bootlegging and codecracking directed at Wizards more and more widespread.
You can't support these illegal endeavours since they won't accomplish anything but they try to do what Wizards fail to see is the only way forward: They cater to the customers and treat them as a valuable party in an on-going relationship.
Funny fact: According to DriveThruRPG sales has gone up for various other lines (notably Palladium and White Wolf) since Wizards closed their .PDF sales and if newsgroups are any reference, the amount of bootlegged Wizards material has gone up as well.
One interpretation could be that people would happily pay for the product but if denied the opportunity have no qualms about getting a bootlegged copy if they feel ignored by the original publisher. Viewed this way I would hazard the conclusion that the Wizards business model isn't as good as they must have hoped for and lots of customers are feeling let down.
Personally I stopped my D&DI subscription months ago and switched to ShadowRun4. They run a sterling .PDF plan with regular updates mailed directly to me and an engaging group of community staff. Old fashioned customer service but it works and it breeds customer satisfaction and loyalty.
Promised material was never delivered..
I know I have posted this in another Forum and Post, but a Prime Example is the Maps of Mystery Collum is a perferct example...They promise a Map each issue.....there is only one map from October 2007...What is todays date
Various Cartographers have stated that there were tagged and Untagged Versions of theirr maps that would be posted and they never have.
I went Pathfinder when 4E was announced and Products became available electronically. I wanted to use Dragon and Dungeon E-zines but they were always late and Electronic didgital aids were of poor quality..(Low RES JPG Files)..Blurred Quality
Promised material was never delivered..
I know I have posted this in another Forum and Post, but a Prime Example is the Maps of Mystery Collum is a perferct example...They promise a Map each issue.....there is only one map from October 2007...What is todays date
Various Cartographers have stated that there were tagged and Untagged Versions of theirr maps that would be posted and they never have.
Exactly! more broken promises and people wonder why I stopped supporting WotC. Hasbro is forcing them to cancel projects as well as rushing other projects out the door.
Hasbro is forcing them to cancel projects as well as rushing other projects out the door.
Source?
Source?
Look at their past record, the canceled projects are obvious. As to things being rushed out the door, look at the 3.5E Master Tools or E-Tools, I'm sure there are many other examples.
If it is not Hasbro, then it must be some managers at WotC which would mean the problem is not Hasbro's corporate managers that are at fault but WotC. I shudder to think that WotC is directly responsible for any of this.
Look at their past record, the canceled projects are obvious. As to things being rushed out the door, look at the 3.5E Master Tools or E-Tools, I'm sure there are many other examples.
If it is not Hasbro, then it must be some managers at WotC which would mean the problem is not Hasbro's corporate managers that are at fault but WotC. I shudder to think that WotC is directly responsible for any of this.
So in other words you have no evidence that any projects have been canceled, don't know what decisions are being made OR at what level, and have no basis for your claims whatsoever.
I'm just as mystified by the argument that things are being rushed out the door - I think any number of people asking "where is " would disagree with you on that point alone.
What we've been told is that WotC is only going to focus on producing one software at a time. That doesn't sound like rushing to me. It also doesn't mean other projects are canceled - it means that they're taking all the resources they have at their disposal and focusing them on ONE project, instead of many.
If that means we'll be seeing software that matches the overall quality of the Character Builder, it should be worth the wait (as much as I hate waiting).
I don't believe the online magazines were ever intended to just be 'bonus tools' - from the start, when they stopped the printed magazine, they intended to transition them into online magazines.
Your comments about release dates and content goals make me suspect you aren't actually a subscriber - would you be able to confirm that, one way or the other? It certainly seems an absurd claim to state that every issue of magazines should always be identical in size, and that the occasional issue with oversized or undersized content is nonexistent in either the printed or online magazine industry.
And it is certainly true that the content standards, at least, currently are far beyond those the printed magazine had. At least, during the decade I was a subscriber - I'm not as familiar with earlier iterations of Dragon, so I won't make any claims or comparison regarding then.
I was a subscriber from September 1980 until September 2007.
As for variations in the size of issues, as I said, other than special inclusions or specific size expansions, the page count was not casually variable from issue to issue. The same has been true of my other magazine subscriptions over the years. It would indeed be absurd to claim that variations are non-existent, which is why I did not do that. What is equally absurd is to suggest that print magazines are as variable in size as newspapers.
As for the content standards, I have no idea what decade you subscribed, but unless there was a massive surge in quality from the free period, the e-zine is still far from the Mohan and Moore years.
It also doesn't mean other projects are canceled - it means that they're taking all the resources they have at their disposal and focusing them on ONE project, instead of many.
Actually, it does.
When no resources are being put into a project, and the next project to be worked on will only be determined when the current project is finished, it means all those other projects have been cancelled. They would not be on the schedule, or in the budget.
Actually, it does.
When no resources are being put into a project, and the next project to be worked on will only be determined when the current project is finished, it means all those other projects have been cancelled. They would not be on the schedule, or in the budget.
Also, and correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember WotC saying anything about working on the VTT, Dungeon Builder, or Visualizer after they are done with the campaign manager crap. I believe they used the term, "we will re-evaluate everything once we have finished the manager...." Sounds like padding for the inevitable "the VTT has been shelved forever." That is of course til 5th edition is being advertised and they start showing the holographic virtual reality smellivision system that 5th edition DDI subscribers will have access to.
Also, and correct me if I am wrong, but I don't remember WotC saying anything about working on the VTT, Dungeon Builder, or Visualizer after they are done with the campaign manager crap. I believe they used the term, "we will re-evaluate everything once we have finished the manager...." Sounds like padding for the inevitable "the VTT has been shelved forever." That is of course til 5th edition is being advertised and they start showing the holographic virtual reality smellivision system that 5th edition DDI subscribers will have access to.
That is what they said.
That is not "We are putting all of our resources into this project while putting those other projects on hold."
That is "We are doing only one project, and all other projects are cancelled."
There is no padding there, the VTT is cancelled. A new project that does something similar may be created at some undefined future point, but that particular project is ended.
Add to this the fact WOTC said awhile ago that they are only working on one toll at a time. The other tools are canceled. I think WOTC needs to come forward and say either way if they will work on the character viewer, dungeon maker (rumored to be in the campaign tools), and VTT.
I can't beilve WOTC does not see alot of people saying they are disapointed that the VTT is not out and they would subscribe if it was out.
Actually, it does.
When no resources are being put into a project, and the next project to be worked on will only be determined when the current project is finished, it means all those other projects have been cancelled. They would not be on the schedule, or in the budget.
Cancelled would mean they have no intention of ever returning to the project.
As long as they intend to go back to the project it's on hold.
Cancelled would mean they have no intention of ever returning to the project.
As long as they intend to go back to the project it's on hold.
Well they said something more like when CB is completed we will decide what to wort on nest. So maybe in 6 months they will say what tool (if any) will then be worked on.
OK I do not have any idea how long CM will take.
Well they said something more like when CB is completed we will decide what to wort on nest. So maybe in 6 months they will say what tool (if any) will then be worked on.
OK I do not have any idea how long CM will take.
Yeah, don't misunderstand.
I want the tools, and I want them yesterday.
However, the fact that they limited down to working on JUST the CB and produced it, then went on to the next project tells me - well - that they're doing what they said they would do.
Work on one project, evaluate where they are, what's needed next, then work on that.
Does it suck that they aren't doing it all at once (with the same end quality that the CB produced) - yup! I hate waiting - especially for fun toys like this.
But, it doesn't mean its all doom and gloom.
I want them to be done with the CM tool(s) already as well - mostly so they can work on the next project which, in turn will bring us closer to the VTT - the VTT being my most highly anticipated tool.
Yeah, don't misunderstand.
I want the tools, and I want them yesterday.
However, the fact that they limited down to working on JUST the CB and produced it, then went on to the next project tells me - well - that they're doing what they said they would do.
Work on one project, evaluate where they are, what's needed next, then work on that.
Does it suck that they aren't doing it all at once (with the same end quality that the CB produced) - yup! I hate waiting - especially for fun toys like this.
But, it doesn't mean its all doom and gloom.
I want them to be done with the CM tool(s) already as well - mostly so they can work on the next project which, in turn will bring us closer to the VTT - the VTT being my most highly anticipated tool.
You do know that there are a TON of virtual table top applications already out on the net, right?
I was a subscriber from September 1980 until September 2007.
As for variations in the size of issues, as I said, other than special inclusions or specific size expansions, the page count was not casually variable from issue to issue. The same has been true of my other magazine subscriptions over the years. It would indeed be absurd to claim that variations are non-existent, which is why I did not do that. What is equally absurd is to suggest that print magazines are as variable in size as newspapers.
As for the content standards, I have no idea what decade you subscribed, but unless there was a massive surge in quality from the free period, the e-zine is still far from the Mohan and Moore years.
I was a subscriber from the mid-90s until now - I won't claim my opinion is an absolute one, by any means, but I definitely find the content of the magazinely to currently be just as good as when it was in print, with the addition of significant added usability in actual gameplay. (As opposed to just being nice articles with excellent flavor that tended to not be well-balanced enough for actual use.) Flavor plus usefulness is hard to beat, for my money.
That said, I'll certainly accept that others might judge it differently, and that everyone is entitled to their own opinion...
...though, admittedly, I'm dubious of yours, given that all the statements you have made have apparently been without any direct experience as a subscriber to the online magazines themselves. I'm willing to respect that you believe the things that you say, but I also think you are throwing out a lot of commentary on a topic you aren't actually qualified to judge, and that does a significant disservice to those who might take your statements at face value.
You do know that there are a TON of virtual table top applications already out on the net, right?
Yup, I'm a supporter of FGII, actually - I was the first person to post about the Easter Egg for spinning dice on their forums (used to work with ALL dice, now it seems limited to the d20).
I still want WotC's VTT to release and be successful, however, because I believe it will help act as a unifying point for online D&D.
Right now each group uses a different table based on individual preference - and while I don't expect the DDI Game Table to capture 100% market share, I'd think that if it captures even 50% that it means it will be that much easier to find a "pickup" game - especially in the RPGA.
Admittedly, that's equal parts belief AND hope, but it's where I stand all the same.
Cancelled would mean they have no intention of ever returning to the project.
As long as they intend to go back to the project it's on hold.
Go Newspeak!
Cancelled means cancelled, it does not mean prohibited for all eternity.
On hold means on hold, and is a specific description that has not been given to the tools.
I know you cannot bear to accept that the VTT is vaporware, but that does not mean anyone else has to accept casual redefinitions of basic terms to buy into that.
...though, admittedly, I'm dubious of yours, given that all the statements you have made have apparently been without any direct experience as a subscriber to the online magazines themselves. I'm willing to respect that you believe the things that you say, but I also think you are throwing out a lot of commentary on a topic you aren't actually qualified to judge, and that does a significant disservice to those who might take your statements at face value.
What commentary would that be?
That randomly fluctuating issue size is not particularly standard for magazines?
Why would I need to be a subscriber to judge that?
That the quality of the preview issues was below what I have seen in the past?
Why would I need to be a subscriber to judge that?
That when WotC says the tools are cancelled they mean that, and not that they are just "on hold"?
Why would I need to be a subscriber to judge that?
I have not said anything about the quality of the subscription issues, the rules compendium, or the character builder.
Why?
Because I am not a subscriber, and thus, in fact, not able to reasonably judge them.
I think perhaps your judgement of my ability to comment is seriously flawed, and does a significant disservice to those who might take your comments at face value. If you, and others, cannot present a reasonable case in support of DDI, why should anyone consider it a useful product?
Cancelled means cancelled, it does not mean prohibited for all eternity.
On hold means on hold, and is a specific description that has not been given to the tools.
How about put to the side?
There's been a lot of work done on the Game Table and the Visualizer, and while we focus on the Campaign Tools, we're putting those and any other unreleased tool ideas to the side. I didn't use the phrase "we're putting those on the back burner" but that seems to be an appopriate way to think about it. Once we're done with the Campaign Tools we'll have a better idea of what our next step is.
Of course, if we're going by SPECIFIC descriptions you may be right - I can't (in a quick google search at work) find the term "on hold" - but if we're playing by specific terms, I don't see CANCELED anywhere either.
Go Newspeak! Put to the side, or backburnered, or delayed = canceled!
That when WotC says the tools are cancelled they mean that, and not that they are just "on hold"?
Why would I need to be a subscriber to judge that?
And they said the tools are canceled where?
How about put to the side?
Not even that.
Of course, if we're going by SPECIFIC descriptions you may be right - I can't (in a quick google search at work) find the term "on hold" - but if we're playing by specific terms, I don't see CANCELED anywhere either.
Go Newspeak! Put to the side, or backburnered, or delayed = canceled!
That is actually CorpSpeak, which can be just as bad as Newspeak.
And of course, they never said those projects were put to the side, backburnered, or delayed, so you are wrong about that equivalence as well.
And they said the tools are canceled where?
When they said they would consider what to work on next after the campaign manager tool was finished.
If they had said "We will consider which of those projects to take up again and complete", then you would be correct, and the VTT and others would just be set aside, backburnered, or delayed.
If they had said "As we get more resources, we will take up those projects again", then you would be correct and they would "on hold".
If they have to completely consider, from scratch, what project to undertake after the current project is finished, then any other extant projects have been cancelled.
Again, I know you have your challenge for critics to admit the VTT is not vaporware and buy a DDI subscription if the VTT shows up by the end of the year. And I know you have my counter for you to admit that and apologize for attacking everyone who has called it vaporware. I doubt they chose their language just because of that, and so it stands that they have said what they have said.
Not even that.
Wow, so, despite the fact that I just provided the quote to you, you're going to pretend it didn't happen?
Very well, you win all arguments from here out as I'm reminded again at the futility.
That the quality of the preview issues was below what I have seen in the past?
Why would I need to be a subscriber to judge that?
Well, your original comments were not limited to the preview issues alone, just a statement that a year after the online magazines started, standards have not yet caught up with earlier works. That would seem to pretty clearly be making claims about the current content, of which you admit to not having any actual experience with.
That, honestly, was the only thing I really took issue with in your original claim, and will continue to stand by it. If you did not intend to make any such judgement on the current content, then sure - I have no issues with you judging elements outside of that. If I misinterpreted what you were trying to say, then I apologize.
But at least to me, you very definitely seemed to be making a value judgement about the quality of material you yourself had not actually viewed, and that was what I mainly objected to.
I think perhaps your judgement of my ability to comment is seriously flawed, and does a significant disservice to those who might take your comments at face value. If you, and others, cannot present a reasonable case in support of DDI, why should anyone consider it a useful product?
I... really don't think that taking my words, and switching them around to mock me, presents any significant contribution to the discussion. I'm not sure if you are trying to get a point across or simply don't realize how condescending parroting someone's words might be, but I think you might want to take a step back here and take a look at the tone of your last paragraph, there.
Wow, so, despite the fact that I just provided the quote to you, you're going to pretend it didn't happen?
Very well, you win all arguments from here out as I'm reminded again at the futility.
You mean like the futility of trying to get you to acknowledge what is actually said instead of what you want it to say?
Yes, there is a great deal of futility in that.
Now that you are actually ready to actually go by what is said, let us consider:
He does not say it is on the backburner, but we can think of it that way?
Putting them to the side?
That could be, if the rest was not included, that when the campaign tools were finished they would have a better idea of what to do next. That may not be outright cancelled, but it is significantly more than just on hold.
Well, your original comments were not limited to the preview issues alone, just a statement that a year after the online magazines started, standards have not yet caught up with earlier works. That would seem to pretty clearly be making claims about the current content, of which you admit to not having any actual experience with.
Read that again.
I was referring to the same production standards of regular magazines. In context, it refers to issue size and hard deadlines, as ad contracts would not apply, and the subscriptions have their own issues. I said nothing about quality of content.
But at least to me, you very definitely seemed to be making a value judgement about the quality of material you yourself had not actually viewed, and that was what I mainly objected to.
I have written material, for WotC, and just fan work.
I am quite aware of how "annoying" (to understate it politely) it is to have quality judged by someone who has not read your work.
If I am going to criticize the quality of something written I am going to take the time to read it first.
As it happens, the one 4E book beyond the core rules that I have read I rated as of exceptionally high quality. (The Dungeon Delve book.)
He does not say it is on the backburner, but we can think of it that way?
Well according to WotC_Trevor, yes.
There's been a lot of work done on the Game Table and the Visualizer, and while we focus on the Campaign Tools, we're putting those and any other unreleased tool ideas to the side. I didn't use the phrase "we're putting those on the back burner" but that seems to be an appopriate way to think about it. Once we're done with the Campaign Tools we'll have a better idea of what our next step is.
I remember that ad, they were sued for false advertiment and they lost 1.5 million which at the time was a load of money.
I talked with the DCA (department of Cunsumers assaocation) about this confession of failure to produce the advertised product with in a timely date. (which legaly has to be reassigned a new realease date with in ten business days of product realease, the laws concerning media products indicate that new realease has to be with in 6 months of the Intial realease.) They said that some one has to file a formal complaint (which I did not am thinking aboutit) that technicaly according to fedarl law it is false advertisment.
I like what Iam payingfor even though I domiss the adds and comics in the old magazines. But according to my lawyers, my state senator and stae representive and the DCA, they have commited an ethical breach of conduct and advertising.
Hey I'm haveing fun this.
sorry for the spelling folks no time for spell check
I'm no lawyer, but as an underwriter for professional liability and E&O I would say that their lack of ability to produce what they promised, and lack of responsibility in updating their customers is an infraction and claims-worthy. However a loss of business income would have to be proven in order to get it into court on an Errors and Omissions basis; and as far as I know no one has an arrangement with WOTC in which they were expecting to provide a service/business based on WOTC's promise to deliver the game table within a certain time frame (a good example would be if WOTC had contracted... I'm no IT type person... someone to run the servers or something for the game table, and this company lost out on income/suffered loss because the game table was never completed or that company had purchased additional technology to prepare for said contract).
As far as this being a question of ethics, companies have an obligation to deliver on certain promises and deadlines - namely those that are contractual. Subscriptions are contractual agreements, however seeing that I've never subscribed I don't know what stipulations are in the EULA, or what an individual subscriber is agreeing to (operating purely off of what was announced and the timeline of the website).
What I lament is that WOTC could be damaging the game as a whole, in their attempt to introduce it to a broader audience. I think what they are guilty of is being overly ambitious and wanting to provide too much. It would have been really nice to have the game table and its a great idea but this company doesn't have the best track record with this kind of tech stuff.
I talked with the DCA (department of Cunsumers assaocation) about this confession of failure to produce the advertised product with in a timely date. (which legaly has to be reassigned a new realease date with in ten business days of product realease, the laws concerning media products indicate that new realease has to be with in 6 months of the Intial realease.) They said that some one has to file a formal complaint (which I did not am thinking aboutit) that technicaly according to fedarl law it is false advertisment.
is it april 1st already.... who you want to talk to (well not really since they will laugh this off)is the Federal Trade Commission...
wikipedia is your friend
But according to my lawyers, my state senator and stae representive and the DCA, they have commited an ethical breach of conduct and advertising.
uh-huh: your senator...you really expect me to belive not only you have your own personal lawyer to ask but you can ask you senator...
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/
ok here is a link...I dare you go file a complaint see how far it goes...that should stop this nonsense real quick... this goes for everyone...Report the 'false advertising' and force WotC to live up to the ad...or stop complaining....or to put it more unfriendly...put up or shut up...
You know what gets me the most...I am mad that the stuff isn't ready, and I want to come here and complain, but I can't...do you know why , becuse then my sane "Man I wish it were ready and it annoys me that it isn't":raincloud would be associated with this nonsense...
I don't think it is a question of legality. I do think it is a question of integrity, which makes it an ethical question.
Integrity is something we judge everyone on every day: Our spouses, our friends, co-workers, our employers, our bosses, our employees, even drivers on the road who don't know how to signal properly.
When I hand a coworker or subordinate a project due on Monday, and I don't see it for six months, I know better than to trust that coworker.
When the sign outside the restaurant says a plate of Spaghetti is $20, and when I go inside, it's $50, I know better than to eat there.
If my wife or husband promises to take out the trash every day and doesn't, I know better than to believe him or her.
If a driver cuts me off without signaling, I know to be wary of him.
Integrity can be defined another way: Following through.
It is easy to measure: Will the entity in question do what they say?
For WOTC, the answer is no. No amount of justification, apology, or future plans will make up for that.
Therefore, they have lost my business. That's the way capitalism works. I have no illusions that WOTC will be "punished" legally or any other way. I'm angry customer just like one who ordered a Big Mac and got an empty box instead.
Their current methodology is akin to the manager of a fast food store telling me, "Nope, we don't have any Big Macs. I realize the sign outside said we did, but we don't. They aren't ready. But I'll tell you what: We aren't going to charge you for the Big Mac! Isn't that great? And...we're sorry about the sign! Furthermore...we'll have a much better burger than the Big Mac if you can come back in a month."
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/
ok here is a link...I dare you go file a complaint see how far it goes...that should stop this nonsense real quick... this goes for everyone...Report the 'false advertising' and force WotC to live up to the ad...or stop complaining....or to put it more unfriendly...put up or shut up...
Sweet! Thanks GM! Complaint is being filed now.
Last year my friends and I grew anxious with the article of how much they were enjoying the Character Visualizer. Do you know what I love? The staff members who have Character Visualizer avatars for their posts on here. Those are the best.
Here's the deal. Don't advertise something until you are close to having something marketable. Don't advertise a half baked idea with no work put into it already. Ideas are easy to sell when they are nothing more than a poorly-planned concept that is well marketed, but people will catch on eventually. If anyone cares to retort that work has been put in... show it to me. I'm sitting here a year later and the only things I have that are useful are a Character Builder and the Compendium. Another handful of you will point out that I have magazines at my disposal as well.
Big. Deal.
For years you could buy those at a shop downtown. My point is that there are thousands of devoted players that were excited to be a part of the future of gaming and were willing to accept it with open arms only to be slapped in the face.
They did not falsely advertise. You can say all you want that you see it as false advertising, but legally, and morally they didn't not falsely advertise.
Failure, without profit, of any kind does not equal false advertising.
I don't think it is a question of legality. I do think it is a question of integrity, which makes it an ethical question.
Therefore, they have lost my business. That's the way capitalism works.
I have no problem with the way capitalism works...yes vote with yout wallet...I have a problem with the moral card and false advertising being thrown aaround....
Their current methodology is akin to the manager of a fast food store telling me, "Nope, we don't have any Big Macs. I realize the sign outside said we did, but we don't. They aren't ready.
had you ended the analogy here it was perfect...and no one would ever mkae the absurd cliams people here do...
Hi. I had to remove some content from this thread because it violates the Code of Conduct
What I find funny is that when content gets removed, it seems that entire posts from people who are dissatisfied with WotC get deleted, but WotC's supporter's have their posts edited so that only the offending sections are taken out. That's awesome!
What I find funny is that when content gets removed, it seems that entire posts from people who are dissatisfied with WotC get deleted, but WotC's supporter's have their posts edited so that only the offending sections are taken out. That's awesome!
Normally I don't want to do this, but I've seen this come up a couple times and I want to try to squash the myth a bit.
While I can understand why you might think that we're actively removing more content from those with dissenting opinions, in reality that's not what's happening. In general, when a post has content that breaks the code of conduct, that section of the post is removed. If, lets say, you break the code of conduct by harassing/baiting someone with a single line of your post, ORCs will remove it if reported.
Now if I quote that single line before it's removed, and my whole post is a reply to that line, my entire post is removed, since removing a single line would destroy context and accomplish nothing in that case.
If you really believe that we're tuning out or targeting dissenters, I would invite you to take a couple minutes to peruse our forums. There are plenty of voices out there who are intelligently speaking of what they don't like and why they don't like it. All without violating the code of conduct.
/end derailment
Are you willing to tell us (even in a general non-committing corporate speak way) what the campaign tools will be for? will we have a map editor, a combat tracker, a rules analyzer that we can use to pre-calculate everything? what features do you think may make it into the CT?
I'd really like to lokiare. At this point I'm working with people to get some information to share. As soon as I have it and all bundled up in a nice post format, you'll know
I'd really like to lokiare. At this point I'm working with people to get some information to share. As soon as I have it and all bundled up in a nice post format, you'll know
Pardon my ignorance, but how did Wizards decide that fans wanted a campaign tool without telling anyone what would be in it? What did the community vote on?
Pardon my ignorance, but how did Wizards decide that fans wanted a campaign tool without telling anyone what would be in it? What did the community vote on?
Simple, they asked what tools would help them more, and the most popular answer came back tools to help with DMing and campaigns.
Now they are in the process of figuring out what the campaign tools need to do for people, and are collecting that information. Like in the thread asking what you want out of campaign tools.
I have no problem with the way capitalism works...yes vote with yout wallet...I have a problem with the moral card and false advertising being thrown aaround....
oops
But you are 100% guilty of doing what you claim WoTC is doing.
Umm Dane, take deep breaths. Calm down, he was saying that he disagrees with the people who are using those tactics to express their displeasure, not that WotC is guilty of them. You need to decrease your intake of cofee.:P
If you really believe that we're tuning out or targeting dissenters, I would invite you to take a couple minutes to peruse our forums. There are plenty of voices out there who are intelligently speaking of what they don't like and why they don't like it. All without violating the code of conduct.
/end derailment
I would point to, oh, say - THIS ENTIRE THREAD as evidence that WotC isn't all about unfairly squashing the voice of dissenters.
But maybe that's just me.
I would point to, oh, say - THIS ENTIRE THREAD as evidence that WotC isn't all about unfairly squashing the voice of dissenters.
But maybe that's just me.
:heehee
I am not laughing at you wolfstar...but the situation...where in a thread full of dussenters we have to point out it is allowed to exsit...
I'd really like to lokiare. At this point I'm working with people to get some information to share. As soon as I have it and all bundled up in a nice post format, you'll know
I wantt to thank you...alot of posters who are dissapointed in the lack of info and product (Witch I am one that is dissapointed) trash you guys out on the coast...so I want to say thank you for being here for us...some of us really appretiate the time you put in here...(even if we wish there were more)
I see. I'll look through that thread. So far its just in the idea brainstorming phase then?
That thread, I infer, that you looked at was started by midbunny with the purpose of add on ideas. WotC clearly already had a plan form what CB would be, I believe (belief is error) that its core is DB with some aspects of the other tools.
The reason I believe Dungeon Building is core starting code is it strikes me hard to manage a campaign without having the dungeon to start with.
Good enough, *smiles*, in time the youth will rule the world (unless they have children *wink*)
Actually I'm 32 years old, and while that might not be considered an old man, I am not a "youth", I've simply kept up with programming trends.
That thread, I infer, that you looked at was started by midbunny with the purpose of add on ideas. WotC clearly already had a plan form what CB would be, I believe (belief is error) that its core is DB with some aspects of the other tools.
The reason I believe Dungeon Building is core starting code is it strikes me hard to manage a campaign without having the dungeon to start with.
Well a campaign is really a long set of adventures strung together with a central idea/theme. This being the case the Dungeon Builder would be a nice tool, but a campaign notes program would be more useful. After that I see the DB, and a CT (combat tracker), and maybe an adventure builder program. The problem lies in the fact that each of those would need to plug into the compendium to effectively do their job. If the compendium has a back end that is a database I see no problems. If they built the different rules in the CB as a separate module that can be re-used, then I don't see a problem there either, on the other hand if those two things aren't true, I feel for the WotC programming team.
After that I see the DB, and a CT (combat tracker), and maybe an adventure builder program. The problem lies in the fact that each of those would need to plug into the compendium to effectively do their job.
I believe that a combat tracker is supposed to be part of the Virtual Table, so I doubt that they would put one into the Campaign Tools....unless I am grossly misunderstanding what you meant by combat tracker.
File all the complaints you want.
They did not falsely advertise. You can say all you want that you see it as false advertising, but legally, and morally they didn't not falsely advertise.
So the thing on page 11 of the 4th ed. players handbook saying DDi will have a VTT and the fact that a whole year after the relase of 4th ed., WOTC is saying nothing right now about it does not make you feel like they promised something and did not deliver?
Sounds like false advertising to me.
Sounds like false advertising to me.
That's because you don't understand what false advertising is. It is the process of selling a product to someone while it is currently advertised as something else.
Now, you can make the argument that you bought the 4E books because they were being advertised as having some awesome online support tools available. But this argument fails for two reasons: First, it was announced before the actual release of the books that those tools would not be available at launch. Second, you were not actually purchasing those tools - you were purchasing the 4E rulebooks, which were precisely what they claimed to be.
You could also make the argument that the D&DI Subscription originally promised to have various tools that it ended up not having. But, again, by the time it was available to purchase, it very clearly stated what products you were purchasing.
You could also claim that it did mention that other products were upcoming and so you were persuaded to buy in anticipation of them. But the purchase was not for those upcoming tools, and when the subscriptions were available, at no point was a specific date set for their release. You purchased a subscription, which was precisely what it claimed to be.
None of these situations were false advertising.
That's because you don't understand what false advertising is. It is the process of selling a product to someone while it is currently advertised as something else.
Now, you can make the argument that you bought the 4E books because they were being advertised as having some awesome online support tools available. But this argument fails for two reasons: First, it was announced before the actual release of the books that those tools would not be available at launch. Second, you were not actually purchasing those tools - you were purchasing the 4E rulebooks, which were precisely what they claimed to be.
You could also make the argument that the D&DI Subscription originally promised to have various tools that it ended up not having. But, again, by the time it was available to purchase, it very clearly stated what products you were purchasing.
You could also claim that it did mention that other products were upcoming and so you were persuaded to buy in anticipation of them. But the purchase was not for those upcoming tools, and when the subscriptions were available, at no point was a specific date set for their release. You purchased a subscription, which was precisely what it claimed to be.
None of these situations were false advertising.
Now, they will come back and claim they ONLY bought the books because of the tools, which for a few months, they stopped looking at WOTC website in any way, and missed the announcement on the front page.
That's still not false advertising, that's people being lazy, and or lying about not looking at the site at the time they announced the state of the tools.
Also, you really can't play the game, regardless of the presences of a VTT. Because 4E is a near complete overhaul of the game, you have to read through the rules to understand the game. The VTT isn't going to teach you how to play the game. The rules compendium isn't going to teach you to play the game, the Character builder isn't going teach you about making characters.
You really need the books, to best learn how to play the game, because it's the only format that leads you through all the options you have.
So, if the claim is "I bought the books thinking the VTT would be ready" you had plenty of time to return the books and get your money back. If you figured that you'll just hold onto the books until it comes out, and now are upset that it's going to be years before that happens, contact WoTC in writing asking if they will help you get your money back.
However, to do that, your books need to be in a returnable condition. If they are all beat up and clearly not in good condition, to me it seems you've been using them, even without the VTT.
Now, they will come back and claim they ONLY bought the books because of the tools, which for a few months, they stopped looking at WOTC website in any way, and missed the announcement on the front page.
That's still not false advertising, that's people being lazy, and or lying about not looking at the site at the time they announced the state of the tools.
Well, I wouldn't go that far - I think there was legitimate opportunity to get confused about the situation, get the books expecting to use them via the game table, and then be frustrated about the entire situation. I can definitely understand their disappointment, and I'm not trying to say they aren't entitled to being upset about it - in that situation, I probably would be too!
But claiming it as false advertisement isn't accurate, was my main point. And yeah, a lot of those other claims (such as trying to convince us 4E isn't complete without the VTT and CV) are completely without merit.
That's still not false advertising, that's people being lazy, and or lying about not looking at the site at the time they announced the state of the tools.
Come on now. I'm one of those people that pre-ordered the 4e books based on the VTT. And as I've posted before, the WoTC site didn't make it easy to find info on what was going on with the tools. I know you had an easy time of it, but just because you did, doesn't mean everyone else did. They didn't exactly put it on the front page.
So then they kept delaying it, which was fine. I understand the circumstances. But it wasn't until fairly recently that they said they were putting it on the back burner. Long after I had gotten my books.
And yeah, I know the arguments about the VTT not being required to play 4e and how there's other VTT's out there. But that's still the reason I bought the books.
I take offense at you calling me lazy or that I'm lying about something.
Why is it so hard for you to comprehend that people might have bought the 4e books based on all the Youtube vids and the ad in the books? I know we can't all be as smart as you, but give us a break. There's no need to insult us.
Well, I wouldn't go that far - I think there was legitimate opportunity to get confused about the situation, get the books expecting to use them via the game table, and then be frustrated about the entire situation. I can definitely understand their disappointment, and I'm not trying to say they aren't entitled to being upset about it - in that situation, I probably would be too!
But claiming it as false advertisement isn't accurate, was my main point. And yeah, a lot of those other claims (such as trying to convince us 4E isn't complete without the VTT and CV) are completely without merit.
I also said they are right to be disappointed. And that they should express that dissapointment. Very few are saying they are wrong to feel what they feel.
I agree with you, it wasn't false advertising. But no matter what anyone says, they will come back with some reason why you are wrong.
It's like the guy that bought a new laptop so he would have a better computer for when it finally came out, so he could have a computer that could handle the VTT. How would you know what to buy when no specs to go by?
Come on now. I'm one of those people that pre-ordered the 4e books based on the VTT. And as I've posted before, the WoTC site didn't make it easy to find info on what was going on with the tools. I know you had an easy time of it, but just because you did, doesn't mean everyone else did. They didn't exactly put it on the front page.
THEY DID! They did exactly that, they put it on the FRONT PAGE!
See, there is a section called NEWS, right there on the front page. And right there, a link to the archive, so if you only look once a week or so, you can see all the old articles! In fact, they all still there, going back several years!
Not to mention it was all over the forums. So if you missed the front page announcement, and only went to the forum, you might have seen it.
I take offense at you calling me lazy or that I'm lying about something.
I take offense at the fact you call WoTC liars and such. Don't do what you don't like being done to you. Most of us are taught that as a child.
Why is it so hard for you to comprehend that people might have bought the 4e books based on all the Youtube vids and the ad in the books? I know we can't all be as smart as you, but give us a break. There's no need to insult us.
You insult yourself.
I do accept some, but a small some, bought the books hoping for the VTT, and learned it hadn't worked out like you hoped after buying the books. Like I said, you could have returned them.
Like I've said, the VTT won't teach you how to play the game, which is a near complete overhaul. If so, you won't have bought the books, because you wouldn't have needed the books.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that WoTC didn't false advertise, didn't lie, didn't deceive, and aren't greedy bastards?
Oh I know why. But it's my opinion, and probably against the CoC to post my opinion on why.
Come on now. I'm one of those people that pre-ordered the 4e books based on the VTT.
.....
But why? It was stated, and I believe stated multiple times, that the VTT would not deal with rules. It was to be, and probably still will be, rules neutral. There was no need to switch to 4th edition to make use of the VTT. You can play 4th edtio, 3rd edition, 3.5, 2nd edition, or pretty much any other game that uses a grid, pieces, or die(I'm willing to bet you could play both chess and Yatzee on it if you tried). So why would you switch editions just to use it? I just can't understand this line of thinking. Someone explain it to me......
I remember hearing/seeing the analogy to a DVD with Bonus Features being touted a few times.
The game (4E) is the DVD with the movie on it. It's what you're REALLY buying - it's the meat and potatoes.
The DDI features are what you would get on a bonus disc - extras that are nice to have, but without 4E they're of relatively little use.
It seems to me that many people have the analogy backward - that somehow 4E is useless without the "bonus features" of DDI.
I take offense at the fact you call WoTC liars and such. Don't do what you don't like being done to you. Most of us are taught that as a child.
I never said they were liars. I said I understand the circumstances. Why would you say that I called them liars?
Like I've said, the VTT won't teach you how to play the game, which is a near complete overhaul. If so, you won't have bought the books, because you wouldn't have needed the books.
Why do you think that I don't understand what the VTT is? I know it's only an online medium to play the game over. I know that it doesn't come with automated rules. Quit making false statements about what I said.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that WoTC didn't false advertise, didn't lie, didn't deceive, and aren't greedy bastards?
I never said anything about them false advertising, lying, deceiving or being greedy bastards. I said that it was long after I had bought my books they said they were putting the VTT on the back burner.
.....
I understand the edition/game neutrality of the VTT. But it was marketed with 4e and so I bought into that. My regular group wanted to stick with 3.5. I figured most of the games available on the VTT would be 4e. And I wanted to play 4e. The VTT was going to be my best shot. I have kids, work, etc.. and didn't want to mess around with finding another local game to join.
They didn't post that the VTT was put on the back burner on the front page.
That's not what is being talked about. If you can't follow along, it's hard to have a conversation.
The point I was making wasn't about the VTT being back burnered.
It was about how people say they bought the books when they came out (Launch of 4E) expecting a VTT. That is what people are talking about false advertisement of DDI is about.
That's not what is being talked about. If you can't follow along, it's hard to have a conversation.
The point I was making wasn't about the VTT being back burnered.
It was about how people say they bought the books when they came out (Launch of 4E) expecting a VTT. That is what people are talking about false advertisement of DDI is about.
Yeah, I know what you were talking about. You were talking about the tools being delayed. I already said that I knew that and it was fine.
It's also hard to have a conversation with someone who thinks that any one's experience other than his own is not genuine.
I understand the edition/game neutrality of the VTT. But it was marketed with 4e and so I bought into that. My regular group wanted to stick with 3.5. I figured most of the games available on the VTT would be 4e. And I wanted to play 4e. The VTT was going to be my best shot. I have kids, work, etc.. and didn't want to mess around with finding another local game to join.
I see the kids/work reason posted lots of time.
Outside of having to travel to a friends house, how is the VTT going to make more time that you already don't have? How is the VTT going deal with your work or kids?
It's not.
Having, like many people here, played MMO's it's pretty common on what it's like playing with someone that has kids. It's they are AFK to much, dealing with their kids.
I can only imagine that will get worse with the VTT, because it's not like a computer run monster which is going to attack whether you are at the keyboard or not.
And as for the VTT being your best chance to play 4E without finding another group. Bull, because there are plenty of options for online game tables and such. You aren't without options to play 4E online without having to find a group.
What I will accept is that the VTT looked really cool and seemed like it would be the best one out there! I'm disappointed, because it looked like having the ability to really make the game come alive visually.
I see the kids/work reason posted lots of time.
Outside of having to travel to a friends house, how is the VTT going to make more time that you already don't have? How is the VTT going deal with your work or kids?
It's not.
Having, like many people here, played MMO's it's pretty common on what it's like playing with someone that has kids. It's they are AFK to much, dealing with their kids.
I can only imagine that will get worse with the VTT, because it's not like a computer run monster which is going to attack whether you are at the keyboard or not.
Well I'm glad you seem to know exactly how things go at my house. Not sure how you handle your kids, but mine are in bed by 8pm. The pick up games at the LGS start around 6pm. 6-8pm is prime after dinner play with the kids & housework time. It would be nice to have been able to pick up VTT games after 9-10pm.
And as for the VTT being your best chance to play 4E without finding another group. Bull, because there are plenty of options for online game tables and such. You aren't without options to play 4E online without having to find a group.
What I will accept is that the VTT looked really cool and seemed like it would be the best one out there! I'm disappointed, because it looked like having the ability to really make the game come alive visually.
As I said before, I'm aware of this argument and you answered it nicely with your follow up sentence.
Please understand as I have said before my main issue is not with how W0TC handled things.
But I haven't translated my disappointment into false accusations at a company, in a childish fit.
It's with statements like this one.
I haven't once said W0TC were liars or accused them of false advertising.
As a parent with 2 young kids being able to play online DOES give me time that I wouldn't otherwise have.
This of this, if I'm going to go to the local game club, they start the games around 6pm and end at 10pm That's a time frame that I need to be at home getting the kids ready for bed and eating dinner. If my wife needs to be out of the house for a while that means that I can't leave at all and gaming is out of the question. However I can sit at my computer downstairs while my kids are sleeping and still be there if they need me. If I find an online game that starts at 8pm I can playing knowing that my kids are safe in bed without them interrupting me.
If, and thats a big if, I go AFK, I'd want to be gaming with a mature group that understands that personal issues come up from time to time which really doesn't fit the typical gaming club groups I've played with (ie, mostly college kids that have no concept of what its like to have kids)
EDIT: gabe1k saw your post after I posted mine... glad to see I'm not alone.
It is quite clear that for some people, the problems that WotC has had getting the Digital tools that were originally announced for DDI programmed and out of the door is a big reason for their disappointment with DDI, 4E and WotC. For other people, they look at the problems as no big deal, and are content with the way that WotC has proceeded with the rollout of DDI tools and their plan going forward.
Those points of view, in and of themselves, is not the problem. Not for me, not for CM, nor for WotC. They knew that changing the manner of tool rollout would anger some people, but they made the decision that, in the long run, the change was a better fit for their abilities. Discussion of this is (usually) friendly and good-natured.
Problems arise when people claim a moral high ground and state that all other opinions are invalid or false. That their interpretation of how things are (or should be) is the one true way to look at things. No good ever comes of framing a discussion in those terms. Unfortunately, some of the recent posts in this thread are starting to veer towards that type of "discussion".[1]
This forum very rarely (as compared to other forums) sees the presence of ORCs, and I would really, really like to keep it that way. So please keep all discussion polite.
[1]And no, I don't care who started it. It doesn't work with my kids, it won't work here.
I can't play D&D but every few months because my gaming group is spread around a three state area and we all have busy professional/personal lives. It is literally takes some people hours to travel to a game, and getting everyone to be able to schedule an ENTIRE day off at the same time can be difficult.
However, with the VTT, it could have been as simple as, "hey guys, can everyone spare a 3-4 hours every Wednesday night?'
Think about it a little bit Dane.
And as you have said many times, there are many free VTT systems out there for us to use, and now we have started. We converted to 4th edition for the VTT and online applications that were said would be available. No sense in spending money of 4th edition books or DDI when we have a complete 3.5 ruleset that we can do all the same stuff with. Now we don't have to spend any more money on WotC products and will not need to purchase DDI. If enough people stop their subscriptions, WotC will have to make some serious changes or DDI will cease to exist.