This is having the end result of the original topic of discussion of the thread being drowned out and lost in the noise.
I ask that people use one of the threads out there that are already devoted to discussing said topic.
Ash2Dust has started one entitled "I, too, am reasonably upset that DDI has its problems."
Should the situation continue to get out of hand, I will unfortunately have to create a "Catch-all" thread, in which all posts that start talking about this end up merged into. It is something that I really, really don't want to do, but if it keeps things running a bit smoother in DDI General, i am willing to do it.
Thanks in advance.
Edit to add - This is in no way an attempt to stifle or remove discussion about what people find wrong with WotC plans, both past and present. What it is is an attempt to keep said discussion from taking place in every thread and preventing other discussions from happening without difficulty.
Community dissent isn't a problem of the community that the community needs to fix. It's a problem of WotC's that WotC needs to address by current and future actions.
Community dissent isn't a problem of the community that the community needs to fix. It's a problem of WotC's that WotC needs to address by current and future actions.
Well said.
It is my very last choice of action. However, if every thread starts turning into discussions of this, washing out all other discussions, it is something that I will (unhappily) do.
At which point I would (unhappily) ask the ORCs to revoke your VCL status. But I don't think we'll ever get to that point.
Please do not become Gamer_Zer0 mk2.
Note that I ask what you think Mudbunny should do, not WotC.
If there is one topic that is invading every thread (and I am not saying that this topic is there yet), there are very few options. Other forums simply completely ban all discussions of said topic. That is not something that I will do unless CM tells me to do so, and I am certain that CM will not do so anytime soon.
However, if the topic comes up in a number of threads to the point that it stifles the original topic of the thread, what am I to do? Am I to allow those threads and the topic that was originally being discussed in those threads to die, simply because one or two people took it off topic? Again, that is not something that I want to do.
So given the above, and given that allowing one topic to crowd out others in various threads is not something that I can allow, what would you like me to do, realistically?
Shemeska, what would you suggest Mudbunny do instead of his proposed action?
Note that I ask what you think Mudbunny should do, not WotC.
I'd let things go and let topics evolve as they do, forking threads as needed if a few people get into a heated debate that's tangential to the original topic (if people are still talking about the original topic). A more heavy handed approach would not help things, and would likely only foster community ill will (and more PR problems are not needed even if things on these boards would be minor by far to things elsewhere like the pdf debacle, etc). The tone you initially took also (intentionally or not) suggested as I implied earlier, that people complaining, themselves had or were a problem, and that some discussion and speach was proper and some was not. Not cool.
But in your defense on some level, I suppose I'm a bit jaded about the role and relevancy of the VCL program in its entirety to an extent. Given its origins during Gamer_Zer0's tenure, it carries a stigma in my mind that's a bit difficult to wash away. There was, and may continue to be, a perception that the program began by putting untrained fanboys in a position of influence that had previously been the sole domain of the paid WizO's (several of whom I happened to be friends with, which also gave me something of a different perspective on things hearing of some of the drama during that period).
I think that things were run much more smoothly when the WizOs had more direct influence on the boards, prior to the VCL programs inception.
The tone you initially took also (intentionally or not) suggested as I implied earlier, that people complaining, themselves had or were a problem, and that some discussion and speach was proper and some was not. Not cool.
If my tone came off like that, I apologize. It was not meant to. I, in no way, shape or form want to stifle or remove complaints or disagreements with the direction that WotC is taking. I just want to avoid having it end up being in *every* thread and making it difficult to have other conversations.
If my tone came off like that, I apologize. It was not meant to. I, in no way, shape or form want to stifle or remove complaints or disagreements with the direction that WotC is taking. I just want to avoid having it end up being in *every* thread and making it difficult to have other conversations.
I agree that it is a problem. It is also a problem on every forum that I have ever read, all the way back to every old BBS I called way back when. It is the nature of the beast.
One of the problems in this very forum is the LACK of posts. There really is not alot of traffic here, and alot of the same questions keep getting asked.
That begs for a sticky to me.
One of the problems in this very forum is the LACK of posts. There really is not alot of traffic here, and alot of the same questions keep getting asked.
That begs for a sticky to me.
This is probably a good idea. Every couple of days there's a new "Where's this tool?" thread, and while I'm not going to be angry at anyone for wondering, it might make things easier on everyone, not least of all the people who would post those threads, if there was a sticky along the lines of "Current known status of Insider tool development" so everybody's on the same page as far as knowing what information is there.
I know a sticky won't make everything better, but it might make things a bit easier.
there are quite some posters who will always post the same, whatever thread they are in.
bad wotc!
bad other poster!
bad fanboys!
bad haters!
this is really annoying.
Community dissent isn't a problem of the community that the community needs to fix. It's a problem of WotC's that WotC needs to address by current and future actions.
this is absolutely the wrong way. fixing from the outside can and will never work. actually, i'm of the opinion that this will never work out for a company, as it can not risk to take drastic options that a private forum could do. while drastic options reduce the user base, they make discussions more homogenous.
---
as for stickied threads - won't work. been there, done that. people who come solely to complain, almost never take the time to look around. often, they don't even come back after complaining because they do not find their complaint again.
i have to say, that i agree with bunny on this.
Really, there is no way to combat this. It always happens no matter how much a site does not want it to happen. I would consider ENWorld a heavily moderated forum. It happens there, even though everyone knows that a mod will speak up.
These forums went down the other road before, and from what I understand, that did not work either.
There is not alot of traffic here. Making a post in the thread reminding people to stay on topic or getting the topic forked is the best bet, IMO.
Sticky threads work when they are labeled right.
Dor instance, a sticky that says CB information here would not work as well as one that says Character Builder Update Information.
If anybody wants to put up a first draft in this thread, feel free, and I will
Community dissent isn't a problem of the community that the community needs to fix. It's a problem of WotC's that WotC needs to address by current and future actions.
I'll be honest, Shemeska. A lot of the "community dissent" we've seen here is simply not valid. It's often based on misperceptions ("We're paying full price for half a product!"), flat out lies ("There are lots of references to the Virtual Tabletop in the PHB!"), and accusations of things which aren't true ("DDI is a classic bait and switch!"). Legitimate complaints are WotC's problem, and something they need to take responsibility for. Illegitimate complains are the community's problem, and something that we need to take responsibility for. The reality is that the tabletop fan base is tremendously spoiled and entitled, and has been for years.
I'm gravitating more and more over time towards the position that the tabletop fan base doesn't deserve good things until it can learn to behave itself.
overly righteous people just increase dissent, even though they might have a point sometimes.
I'm gravitating more and more over time towards the position that the tabletop fan base doesn't deserve good things until it can learn to behave itself.
gladly, it's not your position to decide who deserves what.
---
@rjdafoe: well, stickied threads only work on people who actually care enough to read the forums. most of those would never even post such a thread as "where is the insider vtt?" as they would be able to find it within 2 minutes of skimming the already existing posts.
@rjdafoe: well, stickied threads only work on people who actually care enough to read the forums. most of those would never even post such a thread as "where is the insider vtt?" as they would be able to find it within 2 minutes of skimming the already existing posts.
I agree. However, the traffic here is low. The information that they find may be weeks or months old.
I agree. However, the traffic here is low. The information that they find may be weeks or months old.
agreed, its a valid point. a sticky for those willing to search would help at least in that regard. i believe bunny already stated something to that effect, so lets just wait for the new faq.
dissent can never be invalid.
Completely untrue.
When dissent is based on falsehoods, it is not valid.
overly righteous people just increase dissent, even though they might have a point sometimes.
"Overly righteous" here is a stand-in for much more insidious issues - lies, misperceptions and misrepresentations spread as the truth.
Like "Coming Soon" banners all over the site? :P
The honest inability to meet a deadline should not be said to be identical to willful or arrogant misrepresentation and lying, which is what we witness pretty often here.
And, quite frankly, you've basically taken the "We're no worse than you are!" argument, which isn't really going to do any good at all. It just makes that side look particularly petty.
But... so what? It's a subscription service. You pay by renewal. If you didn't think it was worth your money without the VTT, you shouldn't have signed up until the VTT was released. If you now regret your decision to sign up, cancel your subscription. It's not like an MMO where you're investing time as well as money on the basis that the character you're developing will have an ongoing wealth of content thanks to patches. The DDI services are discrete and are as applicable for people signing up today as they are for existing subscribers.
It's exactly the same as if a movie studio decides not to make a movie. You can be disappointed, you can argue that it would have made sense to make the movie, but you can't claim you were entitled to the movie.
No one's lost money as a result of the tools not being delivered. No one went, "I'm going to buy heavily into 4E, but only on the basis there'll be a VTT some day." No one made decisions on a rational basis that would have been different had there been no VTT discussed.
And to Wizards - sweet jeebers - just licence MapTool, host your own servers for it, skin it with Wizards art and make all the 4E grid/token/macro settings the default. The coding would be a two-week job for one person. Maybe three weeks if you wanted to upgrade the UI to make it more noob-friendly or incorporate a voice chat utility.
The honest inability to meet a deadline should not be said to be identical to willful or arrogant misrepresentation and lying, which is what we witness pretty often here.
Did I say it was? I just pointed out that there were signs on the DDi page for a long while which suggested that the DDi projects would be "Coming Soon". *makes note to try and find a clearer smiley next time*
And, quite frankly, you've basically taken the "We're no worse than you are!" argument, which isn't really going to do any good at all. It just makes that side look particularly petty.
Nope. I was just pointing out a point where what WotC has said was inconsistent with what they were actually able to produce for a long while. It's a trend which seems to have changed somewhat now, but it's also the cause of much of the distrust which some people hold them in. If they'd been open about the fact that there were serious issues with DDi from the start there wouldn't be so many annoyed people now.
They certainly aren't making money off this. Because no one gave them any money without knowing the VTT and CV weren't ready. They have been offering free months, lower rates and extend trial time to make up for the fact they failed.
Scammers don't do that. Liars don't do that.
So again, other then upset customers, what was WoTC going to gain by all of that?
Exactly, nothing. They have a lot more to lose.
The false accusations come from a real sense of being let down and dissappointment, which WoTC knew was going to happen, once they made the choice.
They failed. They bit of more then they could chew, and rather then scrap everything, they are trying to make it work, over the long haul.
I know some people want them to admit they mismanaged it. Maybe they did. I know some people want them to admit they lied. I doubt they did.
So, if WoTC came out and admitted they mismanaged it, then what? Or they lied, again, then what?
That very small amount of posters could be happy? Basically it sounds like Schadenfreude, Happiness at the misfortune of others. This isn't really about getting WoTC to do the right thing.
Because if WoTC was guilty of everything they have been accused of, and admitted it, what then? Would those people stop? No they would take every oppurtunity, derail as many threads as they can, reminding everyone how WoTC is nothing but a bunch of incompetent, liars who pull bait and switch.
Probablly to the point they eventually get banned, but not before they make a big ugly mess of the forums, driving posters away.
So WoTC failed. Companies are allowed to fail. There is no law saying they can't. They are trying to make it right, and in economy were products like this are often the first thing on the chopping block for customers trying to save some money.
So WoTC failed. It's not the end of the world. It's not the end of DnD. No one is going to die. No one is saying don't let them know how you feel. But for goodness sake, this is a company that makes a game. They aren't evil, they aren't out to hurt you.
They love the game, and have more ideas then they could ever make come happen in a life time.
I'd like to know what people think WoTC was going to gain, doing all the things they were accused of. I've read people saying they are liars, incompetent, dishonest, thieves, pulled a bait and switch.
The usual reply - and I admit I don't quite follow the logic - is that by not announcing "SoftwareX" is canceled they can trick the people waiting for that tool to keep subscribing.
It seems to me that anyone who's been tricked and keeps paying this long is someone with the proverbial "More dollars than sense" - and to an highly unlikely degree. ~shrug~
Given that it was announced. . . last month(?) that DDI subscriptions have doubled since launch (or was it announced at DDXP) I find it unlikely that people are leaving DDI in droves, or that people are being tricked.
I don't deny people the right to leave, and I don't deny that some customers are (rightly!) leaving because it doesn't offer what they want, but it seems that WotC has a success on their hands - even if it isn't finished yet, or everything for everyone.
It *will* be interesting to see what new features and new pricing (if/when it changes) do.
Given that it was announced. . . last month(?) that DDI subscriptions have doubled since launch (or was it announced at DDXP) I find it unlikely that people are leaving DDI in droves, or that people are being tricked.
Though that figure doesn't mean much without also knowing the raw number of initial subscriptions. Doubling a small or moderate number isn't going to be a record setting number, but it makes for great spin. And no, I don't know the number either, just a possible rate of subscription increases per day during a few periods this year (but not any rate of subscription lapse), and I won't draw overall conclusions because I don't think that I can.
That said, it doesn't mean much unless they hit whatever target that Hasbro was provided with, and given how few of the original DDI features currently exist, it probably was a number that was missed. If they had met expectations, or greatly exceeded it, I would expect them to be shouting it from the rooftops, but generally they've been very quiet about the situation, other than downplaying what isn't available, providing slim update news, and promoting what currently is available. That all sounds like someone trying to make the best of a horrible situation (succeeding at that or not, I can't say).
Though that figure doesn't mean much without also knowing the raw number of initial subscriptions. Doubling a small or moderate number isn't going to be a record setting number, but it makes for great spin. And no, I don't know the number either, just a possible rate of subscription increases per day during a few periods this year (but not any rate of subscription lapse), and I won't draw overall conclusions because I don't think that I can.
That said, it doesn't mean much unless they hit whatever target that Hasbro was provided with, and given how few of the original DDI features currently exist, it probably was a number that was missed. If they had met expectations, or greatly exceeded it, I would expect them to be shouting it from the rooftops, but generally they've been very quiet about the situation, other than downplaying what isn't available, providing slim update news, and promoting what currently is available. That all sounds like someone trying to make the best of a horrible situation (succeeding at that or not, I can't say).
Lets put it like this. Clearly they had to launch DDi to start making money. At some point, a company needs to start making money on a project, and at some point Hasbro is going to ask, where's the DDi money.
For products like this, so long as the service is being offered, it's more then likely, making money. Tons of money? Can't say. But account numbers aside, it's making money to keep it around, and to be worked on even in a slow pace.
Community dissent isn't a problem of the community that the community needs to fix. It's a problem of WotC's that WotC needs to address by current and future actions.
When some posters make it difficult for other posters to hold any conversation without diverting it into an imflammatory direction, that is a community problem and one that should be addressed within that community.
I, for one, am all for Mudbunny's attempts to do so, and think that this thread is a very good start.
When some posters make it difficult for other posters to hold any conversation without diverting it into an imflammatory direction, that is a community problem and one that should be addressed within that community.
I, for one, am all for Mudbunny's attempts to do so, and think that this thread is a very good start.
Agreed, I shouldn't have to weed out posts about the evil of WoTC and their promise breaking ways in the rules section. Or any thread that doesn't have anything to do about the lack of VTT or CV
For products like this, so long as the service is being offered, it's more then likely, making money. Tons of money? Can't say. But account numbers aside, it's making money to keep it around, and to be worked on even in a slow pace.
well, they make money with ddi. but do they make profit? i very much doubt that. they'd need about 3000 subscriptions to pay for one DDI worker. (dev or content, doesnt really matter). this is before paying infrastructural costs like the servers. also, this does not account for money already sunk into the project before it went into production, or new products being developed.
so, assuming they have 15 people working on this, they'd need at least 50.000 subscribers to go on at a very slow pace without losing money. going on at a faster rate, would make it like 70.000-100.000 subs needed. and i doubt they hit that mark, else they'd probably have it announced many times, because that would really have been a huge success.
Staff, realy staff not project/contract workers, often have their pay and benefits paid out of different accounts. Project/contract workers often have thier pay budgeted to the fianances of the project. That's a very standard business model.
Which when a project goes over budget often to fix that, you let those project/contract workers go.
Since we don't know WoTC staffing structure, again, those are facts which can't be proved.
But even your basic numbers...3,000 subscriptions to pay one person. Well, it's 5/8 dollars a month, if your American or Canadian. So lets average it, 6.5 per person for one month. Well, that's 19,500 a month if they only have 3,000 subscriptions. So in a year, that's 234,000 a year. Again, that's only if they have 3,000 subscriptions.
I am so going to work for WoTC if they pay everyone that a year.
So if they have only 12,000 subscriptions, that's almost a million a year!
Heck if they only have 15 staffers, they only need 45,000 subscriptions a year to pay them all well over 200,000 each!
It's very eays to through out made up numbers, especially if you want those numbers to make it seem like DDi is failing.
Heck if they only have 15 staffers, they only need 45,000 subscriptions a year to pay them all well over 200,000 each!
It's very eays to through out made up numbers, especially if you want those numbers to make it seem like DDi is failing.
this is not what they can pay them. you have lots of other costs, which would be accounted towards the project as well. like the space those people use up when they come to work, that costs something. the computers they use, that costs something. the secetary doing the work so those people get paid, costs something. the janitor keeping their rooms clean, costs something. this is basic business logic to you.
for each dollar you pay someone, you need to account for at least 1-2 dollars for something else, so he can actually go to work. management has also to be paid, although they might look like they do not count into the equation.
at the end of the day, businesses would be very happy if they could just go and pay just their workers on the given project.
that's basically why you'd need 3000 yearly subs (i was calculating with 5$ per month, as all other subscriptions you can't really depend on as a company) to maintain a developer/content guy. 30-50000 spare, for unexpected costs, drops or whatever, for new people getting trained, or maybe, just payback on the costs that were invested upfront. 150.000 merely pays for one person. and that person likely won't see more than 60.000 a year, which is not that much.
this is not what they can pay them. you have lots of other costs, which would be accounted towards the project as well. like the space those people use up when they come to work, that costs something. the computers they use, that costs something. the secetary doing the work so those people get paid, costs something. the janitor keeping their rooms clean, costs something. this is basic business logic to you.
for each dollar you pay someone, you need to account for at least 1-2 dollars for something else, so he can actually go to work. management has also to be paid, although they might look like they do not count into the equation.
at the end of the day, businesses would be very happy if they could just go and pay just their workers on the given project.
that's basically why you'd need 3000 yearly subs (i was calculating with 5$ per month, as all other subscriptions you can't really depend on as a company) to maintain a developer/content guy. 30-50000 spare, for unexpected costs, drops or whatever, for new people getting trained, or maybe, just payback on the costs that were invested upfront. 150.000 merely pays for one person. and that person likely won't see more than 60.000 a year, which is not that much.
Sorry, your words were:
they'd need about 3000 subscriptions to pay for one DDI worker. (dev or content, doesnt really matter).
There's no miss understanding such a simple statement. Secertaries are people that you pay, they would be considered a DDi worker, would they not? As for janitors, that probably comes under the contract for the building, and is covered by rent, which doesn't come directly out of DDi's budgets.
Even at $5 a person per month, that's $180,000 a year if they just had 3,000 subscriptions. I seriously doubt, that one person uses $120,000 of that $180,000 to do their job. That's a huge waste. I cedrtainly know I don't use 1-2 dollars for every dollar I'm paid to do my job for a year.
You simply made up a number, to try and show how DDi couldn't possibly be making a profit, because it would need at leats 100,000 subscriptions just to pay 15 people.
DDi wouldn't exist without the game and the books and all the physical products of DnD. So it might be safe to assume that DDi doesn't have to be self supportive in terms of staff. Pay for staff can easily come the profit from books. After all, Players Handbook 2 made the best sellars lists when it came out. Since DDi is in fact a tool to help with the sales of the books and other products, it wouldn't be to much of an assumption that money from those sales gets allocated to DDi.
In the end, DDi is making money, though probably not what they hoped for.
Still, I'd be a janitor if my pay was 180,000 a year.
As for janitors, that probably comes under the contract for the building, and is covered by rent, which doesn't come directly out of DDi's budgets.
sorry, but you have no idea how businesses work. a share of the rent is of course accounted towards DDIs costs, as are all costs for other staff that is not directly related to any of the products sold.
this is called cost-centre accounting, and while sometimes stupid, is the usual method of deciding which department gets the promotions and which is downsized.
you may not like my numbers, but they are not as unreasonable as you might think. making ridiculous statements about janitors is not really a valid counter-argument. maybe it's just 2500 people, but well - it's definitely not less than 2000.
sorry, but you have no idea how businesses work. a share of the rent is of course accounted towards DDIs costs, as are all costs for other staff that is not directly related to any of the products sold.
this is called cost-centre accounting, and while sometimes stupid, is the usual method of deciding which department gets the promotions and which is downsized.
you may not like my numbers, but they are not as unreasonable as you might think. making ridiculous statements about janitors is not really a valid counter-argument. maybe it's just 2500 people, but well - it's definitely not less than 2000.
Sorry, but you are once again, making assumptions. You have no idea what goes on at WoTC, so it would be nice if you stopped acting like you did, and stop tossing out your opinions as if they were insider fact.
I'd like to know what people think WoTC was going to gain, doing all the things they were accused of. I've read people saying they are liars, incompetent, dishonest, thieves, pulled a bait and switch.
They certainly aren't making money off this. Because no one gave them any money without knowing the VTT and CV weren't ready. They have been offering free months, lower rates and extend trial time to make up for the fact they failed.
They sold an undetermined (I personally believe it to be rather large) amount of books based on the assumption that the game table would be released they knew ahead of time that it wouldn't and did very little to inform the user base and actually continued to advertise products that didn't exist.These are the facts.
Now based on the fact that almost a year has passed since said release date and still no sign of the game table. I'd say they new well before the Ampersand that these products weren't going to make it out at release. That is my opinion and its a totally reasonable one there was still money to be made from the books and releasing information that these tools were not on schedule could impact those sales. You can do what wolfstar did here and voice the least rational point possible to make the detractors seem like an angry mob and continue to sew dissent or you could accept that people actually have reasons for believing WotC had something to gain.
It's my opinion that what MB is proposing here is fine at face value and I understand the decision.The problem being that I honestly trust and respect MB more than anyone else around here that's semi official he's earned that but I do find him to be a fan boy (I'm really not trying to be insulting here MB I just cant think of a better word.) and I worry that his ardent defense of what I and some others believe to be shady practices may color his opinions on what should and should not be moved. I think it's Asmodes lore that I'm thinking of but I would be perfectly comfortable if he were to head up this project he has voiced strong opinions on both sides and I think he can keep his personal issues out of it.
It's my opinion that what MB is proposing here is fine at face value and I understand the decision.The problem being that I honestly trust and respect MB more than anyone else around here that's semi official he's earned that but I do find him to be a fan boy (I'm really not trying to be insulting here MB I just cant think of a better word.)
I think that I have been very honest that I am a big fan of WotC and DDI, and accusations of fanboy wouldn't be far from the mark. That being said, I think I have been pretty clear in that I am *not* a fanboi. I have been pretty clear in that I think that WotC could have done better and that I understand how some people are pretty unhappy with how WotC has done some stuff.
and I worry that his ardent defense of what I and some others believe to be shady practices may color his opinions on what should and should not be moved. I think it's Asmodes lore that I'm thinking of but I would be perfectly comfortable if he were to head up this project he has voiced strong opinions on both sides and I think he can keep his personal issues out of it.
For now, I am not going to move stuff. I think that the discussion has calmed down a fair amount, and it will suffice to have the threads that are out there so far remain as-is, and any sub-threads in other threads be linked to the first threads as the appropriate place for the discussion.
That being said, I am also going to work on an FAQ that should hopefully answer all the questions in a neutral "here are the facts" type-way that will allow people to come to their own conclusions. I will be putting up drafts for comments/corrections once I get around to it. Look for an initial list of topics to discuss to go up sometime in the next day or two.
They sold an undetermined (I personally believe it to be rather large) amount of books based on the assumption that the game table would be released they knew ahead of time that it wouldn't and did very little to inform the user base and actually continued to advertise products that didn't exist.These are the facts.
Now based on the fact that almost a year has passed since said release date and still no sign of the game table. I'd say they new well before the Ampersand that these products weren't going to make it out at release. That is my opinion and its a totally reasonable one there was still money to be made from the books and releasing information that these tools were not on schedule could impact those sales. You can do what wolfstar did here and voice the least rational point possible to make the detractors seem like an angry mob and continue to sew dissent or you could accept that people actually have reasons for believing WotC had something to gain.
It's my opinion that what MB is proposing here is fine at face value and I understand the decision.The problem being that I honestly trust and respect MB more than anyone else around here that's semi official he's earned that but I do find him to be a fan boy (I'm really not trying to be insulting here MB I just cant think of a better word.) and I worry that his ardent defense of what I and some others believe to be shady practices may color his opinions on what should and should not be moved. I think it's Asmodes lore that I'm thinking of but I would be perfectly comfortable if he were to head up this project he has voiced strong opinions on both sides and I think he can keep his personal issues out of it.
I knew, from here, that DDI wasn't going to be ready when the books came out. I was not duped into buying the books based on the digital side.
Not only that, once the books did come out, they continued to offer Dragon and Dungeon for free. That's a fact, you can go look at the ampersand articles. dated 6-9-08, 5 days before the books got released.
In that article, it mentions how you can get a free beta subscriptions, and how in the following months what they will be adding to DDI.
You can't have been duped into buying books that weren't out, with the idea of DDi offering the VTT and CV the same day.
Because even a month early, they said:
[INDENT]D&D Insider’s free beta period coincides with the launch of 4th Edition. You get to try out the first digital components without paying the subscription fees, and you can provide feedback to help us improve your experience. The initial rollout includes Dragon and Dungeon online magazines, and the D&D Rules Compendium. [/INDENT]
By the time they started charging anyone, it was clear, the VTT and CV were some ways off.
A whole month before the books came out, they told us what would be available for DDi. Just because you or someone else didn't find the information doesn't mean they didn't tell anyone.
It's easy enough to come to a website, and skip all those things you don't find interesting, and go straight to that which you do.
That's not WoTC fault. All they can do is put the information out there. You have to read it. It's not like the ampersand article was posted in a locked, disused lavatory, in the basement, behind a filing cabinet with a sign on it that said, Beware of the Leopard.
I knew, from here, that DDI wasn't going to be ready when the books came out. I was not duped into buying the books based on the digital side.
Not only that, once the books did come out, they continued to offer Dragon and Dungeon for free. That's a fact, you can go look at the ampersand articles. dated 6-9-08, 5 days before the books got released.
In that article, it mentions how you can get a free beta subscriptions, and how in the following months what they will be adding to DDI.
You can't have been duped into buying books that weren't out, with the idea of DDi offering the VTT and CV the same day.
Because even a month early, they said:
[INDENT]D&D Insider’s free beta period coincides with the launch of 4th Edition. You get to try out the first digital components without paying the subscription fees, and you can provide feedback to help us improve your experience. The initial rollout includes Dragon and Dungeon online magazines, and the D&D Rules Compendium. [/INDENT]
By the time they started charging anyone, it was clear, the VTT and CV were some ways off.
A whole month before the books came out, they told us what would be available for DDi. Just because you or someone else didn't find the information doesn't mean they didn't tell anyone.
It's easy enough to come to a website, and skip all those things you don't find interesting, and go straight to that which you do.
That's not WoTC fault. All they can do is put the information out there. You have to read it. It's not like the ampersand article was posted in a locked, disused lavatory, in the basement, behind a filing cabinet with a sign on it that said, Beware of the Leopard.
No its not WoTC fault people missed the very limited amount of information out there. but it is their fault that they continued to advertise D&DI in a very aggressive fashion without mention it was incomplete. Just because you were aware that the tools would not be there doesn't mean there wasn't a large group of people led to believe otherwise I'm not saying they did anything illegal here they covered there basses very well but I find it distasteful. I no longer buy products from the company based on this I will go back to doing so once people have the tools expected or they announce that they will not be provided them with an actual apology.
Something along the lines of Were sorry we are no longer dedicated to developing the online game table we understand many were looking forward to this feature but you will have to use 3rd party support if you wish to play on line we thank you for your patience and understanding. would go along way towards regaining my trust in the company. anything longer than that and they tend to find a way to make it insulting.
I think that I have been very honest that I am a big fan of WotC and DDI, and accusations of fanboy wouldn't be far from the mark. That being said, I think I have been pretty clear in that I am *not* a fanboi. I have been pretty clear in that I think that WotC could have done better and that I understand how some people are pretty unhappy with how WotC has done some stuff.
For now, I am not going to move stuff. I think that the discussion has calmed down a fair amount, and it will suffice to have the threads that are out there so far remain as-is, and any sub-threads in other threads be linked to the first threads as the appropriate place for the discussion.
That being said, I am also going to work on an FAQ that should hopefully answer all the questions in a neutral "here are the facts" type-way that will allow people to come to their own conclusions. I will be putting up drafts for comments/corrections once I get around to it. Look for an initial list of topics to discuss to go up sometime in the next day or two.
You have always done your best to foster an environment open to opinions that don't coincide with yours MB but there's always a point where peoples personal opinions color what they do that's why I suggested someone fairly neutral if it does eventually become a problem. Even in a case where your you don't there's always the perception that you do (I really don't think I have to tell you that. not with all the misconceptions you've dealt with around here.) I feel you have done a great job putting the community first I've always felt you to be honestly open to the opinions of others even if you disagree. That said I am glad to hear we are moving away from lock the opinions of dissent in the corner it leads to bad juju.
No its not WoTC fault people missed the very limited amount of information out there. but it is there fault that they continued to advertise D&DI in a very aggressive fashion without mention it was incomplete. Just because you were aware that the tools would not be there doesn't mean there wasn't a large group of people led to believe otherwise I'm not saying they did anything illegal here they covered there basses very well but I find it distasteful. I no longer buy products from the company based on this I will go back to doing so once people have the tools expected or they announce that they will not be provided them with an actual apology.
Were sorry we are no longer dedicated to developing the online game table we understand many were looking forward to this feature but you will have to use 3rd party support if you wish to play on line we thank you for your patience and understanding. would go along way towards regaining my trust in the company. anything longer than that and they tend to find a way to make it insulting.
Would you be willing to point out all this aggressive advertising? I don't call a one page add, with no date of delivery, in the back of the books aggressive.
Mostly I saw advertising for 4E, and even then, it wasn't that aggressive.
You know what, I simply checked back in every few weeks to see what was going on, and when things were expected. My activity in this forum only went up because I'm currently freelancing, and working at home. For me, if I want information about a companies product, I would go to the companies site and find that information.
If you mean aggressive advertising here on the site, well, isn't this the same site you just admitted that the information can be found about it?
What would they have to do to have let you know the tools weren't ready? And make it realistic, nothing like the front page should have said in big bold letters, "DDI isn't ready!"
Cause at the time, you could go to the DDi section and see that some tools were posted as coming soon. So you know, if you came here to get to DDI, you kind of had to go past that part.
Would you be willing to point out all this aggressive advertising? I don't call a one page add, with no date of delivery, in the back of the books aggressive.
Mostly I saw advertising for 4E, and even then, it wasn't that aggressive.
You know what, I simply checked back in every few weeks to see what was going on, and when things were expected. My activity in this forum only went up because I'm currently freelancing, and working at home.
If you mean aggressive advertising here on the site, well, isn't this the same site you just admitted that the information can be found about it?
What would they have to do to have let you know the tools weren't ready? And make it realistic, nothing like the front page should have said in big bold letters, "DDI isn't ready!"
Cause at the time, you could go to the DDi section and see that some tools were posted as coming soon. So you know, if you came here to get to DDI, you kind of had to go past that part.
Games day fliers banner adds many of which were still around after failure to launch ect..
I've given this several times and I expect it to be done several more.
1) a forum sticky with the information found in the ampersand
2) Informing the store owners to Pull the games day fliers advertising D&DI that were put out at most Stores
3) Not waiting for nearly a month and a get the word out campaign to put coming soon clearly on the applications you seem to think always had them
4) A page linking to clear information about D&DI on the web address provided in the books.
All these things could have and should have been done and I'm sure there are several other reasonable things people could suggest. The fact that WoTC thought of none of them seems odd to me. it really only leaves me with 2 options Massive Stupidity or well Dishonesty. I've actually started thinking its the former with the decision to pull PDF's being made.
Games day fliers banner adds many of which were still around after failure to launch ect..
I've given this several times and I expect it to be done several more.
1) a forum sticky with the information found in the ampersand
2) Informing the store owners to Pull the games day fliers advertising D&DI that were put out at most Stores
3) Not waiting for nearly a month and a get the word out campaign to put coming soon clearly on the applications you seem to think always had them
4) A page linking to clear information about D&DI on the web address provided in the books.
All these things could have and should have been done and I'm sure there are several other reasonable things people could suggest. The fact that WoTC thought of none of them seems odd to me. it really only leaves me with 2 options Massive Stupidity or well Dishonesty. I've actually started thinking its the former with the decision to pull PDF's being made.
1) you mean like this one? Which goes all the way back to 6/3/2008? The next post is a podcast talking with WoTC about DDI, saying they are releasing components as they are ready? And he says it's free until they are ready! In fact, before the game launched, they already were addressing people saying they lied.
It's not wrong for a company to lay out it' plans and what players should expect. Now you are saying they are wrong for doing so, which goes against most of your points about them giving better informations. Is it really so hard to accpet that when they said, Coming Soon, they were working towards it? That was thier goal? They weren't trying to weasle out a couple more bucks, because they weren't charging anyone for DDi.
2) Game day isn't just about DDi is it? So you want them to take down banners for Game day, if it has anything about DDi? Just like the VTT isn't just DDi, Game day isn't just DDi.
3) they said a month before launch, it wasn't going to be ready, and that parts would be rolled out over the following months. No dates were ever attached to months. So, coming soon was their intent. Once they passed coming soon, they came and said, we can't do it. We failed.
4) you mean like they used to have before they changed direction? When I came here following the link on that page, I got the information I needed to know. Now the format is changed because since they can't say when will be, they are just promoting what they have.
I mean seriously I've answered all your questions. I've shown they did the very things you wanted. I'm sure the response will be "It wasn't enough" Well, please explain what is enough. I've shown lots of links that still exist, on this site, with easy access, some of which was on the front page, that a month before the game came out, they were telling us DDi wasn't ready.
They gave access to the magazines for free, free beta, extended that, lowered the cost. I mean that all sounds like they are hiding something.
If you come right to the forums, and don't look anywhere else, and then get up set you didn't know...well...what can be said that isn't going to upset you more?
Look you are right to be upset, because those are your feelings. No one is telling you that they are wrong. They are your feelings.
But WoTC tried their best. Time to move on.
1) you mean like this one? Which goes all the way back to 6/3/2008? The next post is a podcast talking with WoTC about DDI, saying they are releasing components as they are ready? And he says it's free until they are ready! In fact, before the game launched, they already were addressing people saying they lied.
Once again this is a single announcement of a very important information they used D&DI to pump sales of the books Manny D&D adds were full of D&DI hype. Instead its burred in a FAQ it that's a fine place for it to be permanently
but a poor place for an announcement. I do believe that faq used to be available on D&DI general, and perhaps it was moved there for that purpose.
2) Game day isn't just about DDi is it? So you want them to take down banners for Game day, if it has anything about DDi? Just like the VTT isn't just DDi, Game day isn't just DDi.
If the Banner has Adds for D&DI Yes I want them to take them down. or edit them in some way as to not lead people to make a misinformed decision.
3) they said a month before launch, it wasn't going to be ready, and that parts would be rolled out over the following months. No dates were ever attached to months. So, coming soon was their intent. Once they passed coming soon, they came and said, we can't do it. We failed.
Coming soon was not there at the release it simply wasn't it took a full month before those things were clearly labeled.
4) you mean like they used to have before they changed direction? When I came here following the link on that page, I got the information I needed to know. Now the format is changed because since they can't say when will be, they are just promoting what they have.
That also was not there uppon release when you went to the web adrees it redirected you to wizards main site where there was little to no information for about a month.
I mean seriously I've answered all your questions. I've shown they did the very things you wanted. I'm sure the response will be "It wasn't enough" Well, please explain what is enough. I've shown lots of links that still exist, on this site, with easy access, some of which was on the front page, that a month before the game came out, they were telling us DDi wasn't ready.
Yes they did all these things after they had already sold the books. so yes it wasn't enough they've even went so far as to say it wasn't enough in a backwards way.The problem is they continue to do the same kind of things while saying I understand your problem. They really need to make more information available if they intend to revisit the game table later they need to say it and say it straight. If they don't say it apologize and then we can start moving on. Clear Communication is not as hard as they make it
Once again this is a single announcement of a very important information they used D&DI to pump sales of the books Manny D&D adds were full of D&DI hype. Instead its burred in a FAQ it that's a fine place for it to be permanently
but a poor place for an announcement. I do believe that faq used to be available on D&DI general, and perhaps it was moved there for that purpose.
If the Banner has Adds for D&DI Yes I want them to take them down. or edit them in some way as to not lead people to make a misinformed decision.
Coming soon was not there at the release it simply wasn't it took a full month before those things were clearly labeled.
That also was not there uppon release when you went to the web adrees it redirected you to wizards main site where there was little to no information for about a month.
Yes they did all these things after they had already sold the books. so yes it wasn't enough they've even went so far as to say it wasn't enough in a backwards way.The problem is they continue to do the same kind of things while saying I understand your problem. They really need to make more information available if they intend to revisit the game table later they need to say it and say it straight. If they don't say it apologize and then we can start moving on. Clear Communication is not as hard as they make it
Ok fine, that's how you see it. I'm glad to be up to date on your opinion.
Once again this is a single announcement of a very important information they used D&DI to pump sales of the books Manny D&D adds were full of D&DI hype.
Okay, yes - but did that affect your decision? Did you buy books thinking, "Man, these books suck, but not if there's an virtual tabletop that goes with them?" If there had been no VTT advertised would you have never bought the game?
If so, I strongly suspect that if you write directly to Wizards and make a loud enough noise, they will be happy for you to return your Player's Handbook to them and get a refund.
If not, then what's the problem? Where does your sense of offence come from? Why do you feel you're entitled to anything whatsoever?
Or is your problem with D&DI generally? Did you unwisely sign up to D&DI expecting a virtual tabletop despite it being clear on the face of the website that the VTT wasn't yet included? Again, if so, that's more than a little foolish but I suspect if you make a loud enough noise you can get a month's refund. (If you stayed subscribed more than a month despite these complaints then you've no one to blame but yourself.)
Okay, yes - but did that affect your decision? Did you buy books thinking, "Man, these books suck, but not if there's an virtual tabletop that goes with them?" If there had been no VTT advertised would you have never bought the game?
If so, I strongly suspect that if you write directly to Wizards and make a loud enough noise, they will be happy for you to return your Player's Handbook to them and get a refund.
If not, then what's the problem? Where does your sense of offence come from? Why do you feel you're entitled to anything whatsoever?
Honestly I bought the books expecting it to be there but It's only a minor inconvenience for me the problem is that There are other people out there that had groups scattered to the winds that picked this up thinking hey I'd love to play D&D again look wizards is going to have an online game table so we can play with our old college buddies. they bought the books under the expectation of using said books on line and there's no official online support for them. Those people are out of the money for their starter boxes as great a game as 4th ed is it makes a ugly overpriced paperweight. For those people and I hate to use the comparison its like buying WoW only to find there's no official server to play on. That's the rub I really really want to buy what they have to offer but I don't like the way they have conducted business and there's absolutely no way I'm going to condone it by continuing to purchase said products. If and when WoTC decides they are ready to communicate with the community openy and honestly. I'll jump right back on board.
Or is your problem with D&DI generally? Did you unwisely sign up to D&DI expecting a virtual tabletop despite it being clear on the face of the website that the VTT wasn't yet included? Again, if so, that's more than a little foolish but I suspect if you make a loud enough noise you can get a month's refund. (If you stayed subscribed more than a month despite these complaints then you've no one to blame but yourself.)
Haven't paid for D&DI and I won't until I see a game table or the game table scrapped what they are selling is in fact worth the money for me I'm a DM. I don't think its worth it from a players perspective but once again I want honest clear information before I make that move. The lack of communication caused the problems in the first place now they expect them to fix it. At this point I don't even really care about the game table I expect it has been canned its honestly just the principal of the matter.
To be Clear I am sure WoTC is very dissapointed that they couldn't release the tools it's a lot of lost revenue they could be making right now. I just don't feel they made a real effort to inform the public. I feel they knew full well that they would lose some portion of sales had they been more vigilant in getting that info out and I understand its a business at the end of the day it's about sales. I don't agree with that mentality which is why I'm not raking in the 6 figure salary somewhere.
There are other people out there ... they bought the books under the expectation of using said books on line and there's no official online support for them. Those people are out of the money.
Those people - if they exist - are perfectly capable of coming here and complaining, or going directly to Wizards. They will be more eloquent and effective by dint of their personal loss, and will be able to demand a resolution specific to their circumstances rather than expressing a generic dissatisfaction.
Making a complaint on behalf of a potentially non-existent group of people you haven't met who may or may not have a problem... just isn't helpful - it's the equivalent of "Won't somebody think of the children?".
If you've suffered some specific, personal loss then please feel free to bring it forward. Debates are always much more helpful when they're not in the hypothetical.
Good on you for expressing your opinions (however right or wrong) by way of your continued custom, or lack thereof. We'd have a better society if everyone behaved similarly, in all likelihood. I'd point out, however, that if it's a failure to deliver previously advertised products that's offending you, you'll be looking at a very long list of boycotts, starting with all three of the major videogame console manufacturers, Microsoft, Apple, Intel, nViDIA, Mozilla, Google, and Wikipedia - and that's just in the IT field. Feel free to post pictures of the DIY laptop with home-coded browser you're using to read this message - it sounds awesome!
Those people - if they exist - are perfectly capable of coming here and complaining, or going directly to Wizards. They will be more eloquent and effective by dint of their personal loss, and will be able to demand a resolution specific to their circumstances rather than expressing a generic dissatisfaction.
Making a complaint on behalf of a potentially non-existent group of people you haven't met who may or may not have a problem... just isn't helpful - it's the equivalent of "Won't somebody think of the children?".
If you've suffered some specific, personal loss then please feel free to bring it forward. Debates are always much more helpful when they're not in the hypothetical.
Good on you for expressing your opinions (however right or wrong) by way of your continued custom, or lack thereof. We'd have a better society if everyone behaved similarly, in all likelihood. I'd point out, however, that if it's a failure to deliver previously advertised products that's offending you, you'll be looking at a very long list of boycotts, starting with all three of the major videogame console manufacturers, Microsoft, Apple, Intel, nViDIA, Mozilla, Google, and Wikipedia - and that's just in the IT field. Feel free to post pictures of the DIY laptop with home-coded browser you're using to read this message - it sounds awesome!
Honestly its not so much missed deadlines as lack of communication so people can make an informed decision, and as I have said I understand this is just business as usual in the world we live in but I'm honestly done with it. I drew the line here with the game I grew up spending a large amount of time with. I have no Idea what a DIY laptop with home-coded browser is but I assume its never been released.
I always encourage them when they start to send clear info out but unfortunately every time we get to that point the person giving us it gets canned or mysteriously disappears.
I honestly doubt Wizards intends to refund anyone anything over this mess and we have had quite a few people post in the past that they bought the books solely for the reasons I have stated. The general response is well unpleasant at best. And generally comes down to well your a moron you should have researched it better before you purchased. Now I'm not saying there's anything WoTC could have done about the adds in the book but when its staring you in the face you really don't feel the need to do any research It says right there I can sign up for D&DI and play on line.
1) They didn't lie.
2) People would be rubbing their faces in it for decades.
It would be a stupid move that wouldn't help at all. Several WotC Employees have officially announced that they are sorry that there are so many setbacks, and some of them even wanted to hear the Community's opinions on what might help their image. That was a great move. There's really not much left to complain about, other than the fact that they always put things off until last minute, and sometimes there are invariably people who suffer a bit for that (I use "suffer" very loosely here :rolleyes
. As Greg said, though, those people would almost certainly be compensated for their loss if they really wanted to be; squeaky wheels and all.Mostly, though, I'm fairly certain that almost every time WotC is late announcing something they've failed to deliver on (the VTT/the PDFs of late), they weren't sitting around cackling maniacally; they were more than likely in a few Board Meetings going, "Crap. CRAP. Guys, is there any way we can get this stuff out there? 'Cause the people are NOT going to be happy about this!"
But there's really not much they can do when **** hits the fan like it has. Sorry it takes such a toll on you, Nexus. :S
EDIT: Oh, yeah, and they do always fire the good Employees, that's true. I dunno WTF is up with that.
EDIT: Oh, yeah, and they do always fire the good Employees, that's true. I dunno WTF is up with that.
Probably because the might be employee's, but project/contract workers, rather then staff. Companies like this, tend to go with project/contract workers, because you can, legally let those people go without reason, or issue. So if there isn't a lot of work going on, they will lay off those people. And when work picks up, hire them or someone else back.
It's the fastest way for a company to save money.
Honestly its not so much missed deadlines as lack of communication so people can make an informed decision, and as I have said I understand this is just business as usual in the world we live in but I'm honestly done with it. I drew the line here with the game I grew up spending a large amount of time with. I have no Idea what a DIY laptop with home-coded browser is but I assume its never been released.
I always encourage them when they start to send clear info out but unfortunately every time we get to that point the person giving us it gets canned or mysteriously disappears.
I honestly doubt Wizards intends to refund anyone anything over this mess and we have had quite a few people post in the past that they bought the books solely for the reasons I have stated. The general response is well unpleasant at best. And generally comes down to well your a moron you should have researched it better before you purchased. Now I'm not saying there's anything WoTC could have done about the adds in the book but when its staring you in the face you really don't feel the need to do any research It says right there I can sign up for D&DI and play on line.
No matter how much people point out the information, it's not good enough, for you. WoTC has many products, and uses this website to get that information out. They need to be consistent about how and where that information is kept, so people don't have to search for it.
I understand your point, that information eventually leaves the front page. But here's the thing. These people you talk about being duped into buying books they normally wouldn't want, knew about DDI before the books came out. So they either took what little info they had, and bought the books when they came out, or they missed the information. What can WoTC do when someone doesn't take the time?
The bottom line, some people will read and be informed, some won't. WoTC shouldn't have to put up big flashing graphics all over the website saying. "IN CASE YOU ARE CONFUSED..." That's just silly. If that's what you want, you aren't going to get it, as Trevor has already pointed out. Companies talk about what they are doing, not what they aren't doing.
And it doesn't sound like you were one of the people that bought the books, thinking that DDi was up and running with all features. So let those people speak for themselves, and you speak for yourself.
And yes, I bet if those people called CR and explained, they would refund the books. WoTC is actually pretty generous, and have gone out of their way to make up for failing.
Honestly, the fact that they came out and said, look, we failed. It was more then we could do in the time we thought we needed. Not only that, we had to let people go, which further diminishes our ability to get this out. And we are sorry.
Most companies wouldn't have even said that.
Currently it's just you and a handful of others that keep complaining about this, and to the point that it was derailing threads. And rather then ban you for that, they gave you a platform to speak.
If they were really trying to hide something, you would be banned so you couldn't post anymore.
No matter how much people point out the information, it's not good enough, for you. WoTC has many products, and uses this website to get that information out. They need to be consistent about how and where that information is kept, so people don't have to search for it.
I understand your point, that information eventually leaves the front page. But here's the thing. These people you talk about being duped into buying books they normally wouldn't want, knew about DDI before the books came out. So they either took what little info they had, and bought the books when they came out, or they missed the information. What can WoTC do when someone doesn't take the time?
Hello I have said the information out there about it now is FINE PLENTY OF INFO THERE!!!!!!!!!!!!! unfortunately most of what you pointed out was missing at the release 1 ampersand, and apparently a news article that has been pointed out lately but was never mentioned at the time was it. WoTC admitted that they failed to communicate properly and apologized and it was almost good till they turned around and threw up the ampersand and ****** a whole lot of people off by implying they really should be grasping at every scrap they throw us. they didn't mention the news article though strange.
The bottom line, some people will read and be informed, some won't. WoTC shouldn't have to put up big flashing graphics all over the website saying. "IN CASE YOU ARE CONFUSED..." That's just silly. If that's what you want, you aren't going to get it, as Trevor has already pointed out. Companies talk about what they are doing, not what they aren't doing.
Nice straw man there I've already made it abundantly clear that I don't expect that I want simple official announcements on if they have discontinued or are continuing to work or whatever on the advertised programs.that could easily be linked to the faq being created. It really really isn't an unreasonable request.
And it doesn't sound like you were one of the people that bought the books, thinking that DDi was up and running with all features. So let those people speak for themselves, and you speak for yourself.
And yes, I bet if those people called CR and explained, they would refund the books. WoTC is actually pretty generous, and have gone out of their way to make up for failing.
I'll speak when I want for who I want it's an issue of principals I don't feel they went the distance to insure customer service to those people tells me that they will treat me in exactly the same manner.
Honestly, the fact that they came out and said, look, we failed. It was more then we could do in the time we thought we needed. Not only that, we had to let people go, which further diminishes our ability to get this out. And we are sorry.
Most companies wouldn't have even said that.
ummn don't actually care woho!! they actually tried to scrap together a tiny bit of PR. IR SO PROUD they have constantly let go the few assets they had that could buy them some decent PR.
Currently it's just you and a handful of others that keep complaining about this, and to the point that it was derailing threads. And rather then ban you for that, they gave you a platform to speak.
If they were really trying to hide something, you would be banned so you couldn't post anymore.
Yes Yes If they had something to hide they would have banned me they aren't stupid man its not like I cant go through a proxy and a hundred different user names and all it does is show they have something to hide which in all honesty they don't so they didn't go the extra mile it's not like they did something illegal or something. And honestly I don't feel that I have derailed any threads.
WotC will never straight-up say, "Sorry, we lied." 2 Reasons:
1) They didn't lie.
2) People would be rubbing their faces in it for decades.
It would be a stupid move that wouldn't help at all. Several WotC Employees have officially announced that they are sorry that there are so many setbacks, and some of them even wanted to hear the Community's opinions on what might help their image. That was a great move. There's really not much left to complain about, other than the fact that they always put things off until last minute, and sometimes there are invariably people who suffer a bit for that (I use "suffer" very loosely here :rolleyes
Mostly, though, I'm fairly certain that almost every time WotC is late announcing something they've failed to deliver on (the VTT/the PDFs of late), they weren't sitting around cackling maniacally; they were more than likely in a few Board Meetings going, "Crap. CRAP. Guys, is there any way we can get this stuff out there? 'Cause the people are NOT going to be happy about this!"
But there's really not much they can do when **** hits the fan like it has. Sorry it takes such a toll on you, Nexus. :S
EDIT: Oh, yeah, and they do always fire the good Employees, that's true. I dunno WTF is up with that.
I don't actually expect them to say they lied I'm not a complete moron I thought me and you worked that out long ago :D and I'm absolutely sure they crapped their pants every time they were late or whatever it's pretty much what happens everywhere when you mess up.
1) I agree they just didn't put fourth the effort they could have. I am disappointed in the fact that I think it was a conscious decision.(I am a pessimist and I could be entirely wrong. It is just my opinion.
2) I agree there's really no point in saying we lied. but I want assurances that were not going to have a repeat here where is it.
let see
1) We still have no pay pal option after almost a year of it being a top priority I call bull @#$^ I have no Idea why they don't want it to be an option but if they did Digital river would be gone by now if they were the problem here.
2) We still have no choice on auto renew and no automated option to unsubscribe with . There has been made an option to unsubscribe with a button which is a move you don't have to hassle with contacting a person. but it still has to pass through customer service.While this is a huge step forward it could definitely be better(This has been edited in light of mudbunny's revelation of a button option)
3)There's still no clear info on if the game table is just not a priority or if its been canned I honestly don't care which one anymore I'd just like to know.
I truly do understand that they are in a hard place but I'm not just going to let it slide I want action I want them to be the company they were and that I know they can be.
2) We still have no choice on auto renew and no option to unsubscribe with a button. Seriously I mean seriously I expect more than Girls Gone Wild or Columbia house nonsense from a reputable company. A button is not hard.
There is a button to cancel your subscription.
http://wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1435
There is a button to cancel your subscription.
http://wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1435
This is full on awesomeness MB thank you for pointing that out.I'll edit my post as to not cause any confusion or misinformation. it's still not automated but not having to actually contact a person is a start.
I'll be honest, Shemeska. A lot of the "community dissent" we've seen here is simply not valid. It's often based on misperceptions ("We're paying full price for half a product!"), flat out lies ("There are lots of references to the Virtual Tabletop in the PHB!"), and accusations of things which aren't true ("DDI is a classic bait and switch!"). Legitimate complaints are WotC's problem, and something they need to take responsibility for. Illegitimate complains are the community's problem, and something that we need to take responsibility for. The reality is that the tabletop fan base is tremendously spoiled and entitled, and has been for years.
I'm gravitating more and more over time towards the position that the tabletop fan base doesn't deserve good things until it can learn to behave itself.
This is the weirdest post I have ever read. Unless it is made by the owner of a large unpopular corporation.
It is in the nature of commerce that consumers who are not satisfied with the service, product or timeliness of deliverance will become disatisfied. Consumers that feel that they are treated unfairly and can set up proof that certain services promised are not services renedered will remain to have a righteous claim (not necessarily a legal claim though) and since there isn't always a legal foundation to base any action on, you can launch your action in other public ways, e.g. these forums.
By denying people this right (either by labelling them essentially as 'spoiled' or other demeaning characteristics or by extreme censorship governed by a moderating body) you will sustain this feeling of disatisfaction until the original failure has been corrected.
This is not specific to Wizards, it's standard free market practice in effect.
This is the weirdest post I have ever read. Unless it is made by the owner of a large unpopular corporation.
It is in the nature of commerce that consumers who are not satisfied with the service, product or timeliness of deliverance will become disatisfied. Consumers that feel that they are treated unfairly and can set up proof that certain services promised are not services renedered will remain to have a righteous claim (not necessarily a legal claim though) and since there isn't always a legal foundation to base any action on, you can launch your action in other public ways, e.g. these forums.
By denying people this right (either by labelling them essentially as 'spoiled' or other demeaning characteristics or by extreme censorship governed by a moderating body) you will sustain this feeling of disatisfaction until the original failure has been corrected.
This is not specific to Wizards, it's standard free market practice in effect.
You make it sound like you are entitled to a VTT, that you are owed it.
You do realize that you aren't?
WoTC is under no obligation to complete it. They don't have to correct their failure if they don't want to.
If they end up going out of business because of this, well that was their choice wasn't it?
I honestly doubt Wizards intends to refund anyone anything over this mess and we have had quite a few people post in the past that they bought the books solely for the reasons I have stated. The general response is well unpleasant at best.
The thing is, we also have 5 or so people who've taken it upon themselves to carry the pitchforks and torches for the downtrodden here and are so utterly fixated on the crusade to reveal the sinister face of WotC that it's turning into caricature. There have been a lot of posts about where the gametable is. And, in general, the response by the poster when they found out that it wasn't ready has seemed to be to say "jeez, that sucks," and then they get over it.*
From a personal standpoint, I was ticked off about DDI a lot early on - I whined and griped more than a few times. And then I moved on.
I'm not happy with the way things were handled but it's not a hill worth dying on.
* Or, maybe they don't. I suppose they could fly into a rage every time their eyes fall on their 4th Edition books, but I kinda doubt it.
You make it sound like you are entitled to a VTT, that you are owed it.
You do realize that you aren't?
WoTC is under no obligation to complete it. They don't have to correct their failure if they don't want to.
If they end up going out of business because of this, well that was their choice wasn't it?
Like I stated, I'm not necessarily owed anything in a legally binding fashion. I think most people who have bought one of the original books and looked at the last page or seen their launch posters will agree that one of the major hooks D&D4 was advertised as having, was an online gaming environment allowing players to game together over the internet.
I'm not owed anything in the sense that I have paid for something and not received it. I have been willfully misled to believe that an online gaming environment would be available at launch (or soon thereafter) which influenced my willingness to buy their product. There is no question of a legal basis here, that's not my point, my point is that it is important to learn from the mistakes you make (investing in Wizards products) and it's only reasonable to attempt to warn others to stay away from a previously disinforming publisher. Here as well on other forums, newsgroups, gaming groups, RPG shops and similar.
It's what is normally known as 'political consumerism' where you react to the actions of a company and attempt to influence others to follow your example. It's democracy applied to the forces of a free market.
Once Wizards launch the VTT they will immediately have invalidated my claims in reference to other people, since if other people later on (at the launch of the VTT) buy Wizard's products, they will have gotten what they were led to expect and my experiences will have been pointless. Until that point however the consumer (in this case, me and our extended gaming circle) will keep the finger firmly pointed.
In the end I think all companies, especially companies that rely on consumers with imagination and the will to use it, thrive on having consumers with strong oppinions.
The thing is, we also have 5 or so people who've taken it upon themselves to carry the pitchforks and torches for the downtrodden here and are so utterly fixated on the crusade to reveal the sinister face of WotC that it's turning into caricature. There have been a lot of posts about where the gametable is. And, in general, the response by the poster when they found out that it wasn't ready has seemed to be to say "jeez, that sucks," and then they get over it.*
From a personal standpoint, I was ticked off about DDI a lot early on - I whined and griped more than a few times. And then I moved on.
I'm not happy with the way things were handled but it's not a hill worth dying on.
* Or, maybe they don't. I suppose they could fly into a rage every time their eyes fall on their 4th Edition books, but I kinda doubt it.
ummn how am I dying on a hill no monsters are going to come and get me because I am not purchasing WoTC products and I'm posting criticism on their web page. Seriously its a small problem and this is a small solution I post on a message board I'm not taking a hill marching on Washington whats What do I stand to lose here what they ban me O NOES!! I find it funny that people are constantly telling me to put it in perspective that it's not worth all this trouble. Seriously it's a tiny portion of my free time.
ummn how am I dying on a hill no monsters are going to come and get me because I am not purchasing WoTC products and I'm posting criticism on their web page. Seriously its a small problem and this is a small solution I post on a message board I'm not taking a hill marching on Washington whats What do I stand to lose here what they ban me O NOES!! I find it funny that people are constantly telling me to put it in perspective that it's not worth all this trouble. Seriously it's a tiny portion of my free time.
"Not a hill worth dying on" is a figure of speech. I wasn't actually thinking of you, to tell the truth.
Then, people could start a new thread and have thier opinions on top (which some posters like to do) and people who want to read those discussions will have one place to go and see all the threads together.
I think one thing that should be considered is that if you gently moderate people to stay on topic, and everyone in the community assists in that effort, there is a good chance it will never come to that.
BTW, Thanks for the forum, I'm new here and I have managed to find some good info.
Cheers,
dram
WoTC has more than likely spread itself too thin... look at all the stuff they are working on... Magic, Pokemon, All the starwars games, a new PHB every other month along with a new DMG and MM... then to put that stuff into the Character builder ( wich has some major flaws still)...
Look at magic Online... that took forever to get 3.0 out...
they also might be paying their staff decent wages... unlike the cooks or waiters at you favorite restaurant ( which in VA is crap... $11/hr to put up with stupid people, not everyone... but please know what you want before you order!!! )
I got DDI because i didnt want to spend a few hundred dollars a year for books... seriously they are way too expensive... maybe they should have waited and combined PHB 1 and 2 into a single book, then i might pay $40 for it... unlike what $35 for PHB 1...
Alright i am gonna stop Ranting...
but we want the VTT over Campaign Editor like 9-1 so far... can we put a poll up or something?? that way WoTC can know where their Priorities need to be??
sorry for the Rant...
but we want the VTT over Campaign Editor like 9-1 so far... can we put a poll up or something?? that way WoTC can know where their Priorities need to be??
sorry for the Rant...
There was a poll. The results are here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20090414
It shows that those polled want the campaign tools over the Game Table.
Just because people are vocal - even if they're VERY vocal - doesn't make them the majority.
There was a poll. The results are here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20090414
It shows that those polled want the campaign tools over the Game Table.
Just because people are vocal - even if they're VERY vocal - doesn't make them the majority.
That's not really the same as a poll of "which would you prefer." Simply because more people said they'd use the campaign editor than the VTT doesn't mean that if the poll had been "You are given the choice between the two, assuming you can only have one, which do you want" the campaign editor would have won out.
also, the poll actually never said "prioritise these". i have read at least from 2 different posters here, that they thought this was a survey for what to do AFTER gametable, dungeon builder and visualizer are out.
1) Let's assume those two (or more) people represent a much larger group of - let's call it 100 people.
Out of 4000+ respondents that's still a FRACTION of 1% of those polled. I'm not a statistician, but I wouldn't call that statistically significant.
2) It's odd that people reading a question that INCLUDED the game table would think this would come after the game table.
"Oooh! After you finish the game table, you should work on the game table!"
I'm not saying it didn't or couldn't happen, but these are people who read into the question things that weren't there and/or didn't read the options thoroughly.
It's unfortunate, but no poll is going to be fool-proof.
If they make the poll as error-free as possible (and ~2 hundredths of 1% is pretty error free), they're doing a fine job.
3) Asking people to prioritize would have weighted the question based on emotional desire. It was worded as it was "pick "x" of these options that you'd be likely to use" to gauge utilitarian usefulness. Now WotC has altered their plans to deliver on that.
i won't be around any longer, that's for sure. releases you from your duty to look down on me. yay - one less wotc critic in here.
That's not really the same as a poll of "which would you prefer." Simply because more people said they'd use the campaign editor than the VTT doesn't mean that if the poll had been "You are given the choice between the two, assuming you can only have one, which do you want" the campaign editor would have won out.
Well, that's because WotC wasn't asking which people want more.
More people said they'd use the campaign tools - so instead of catering to a statistically smaller group based on emotional desire, they're trying to grow their audience (which isn't unreasonable) and deliver what the larger audience would use.
Don't forget - I'm WITH you. I want the Game Table more than I want the other tools combined.
But if I look at it from where WotC stands ("Wow, we might get more subscribers with Campaign Tools!") I'm hard pressed to fault the LOGIC - despite my emotional desire.
1) Let's assume those two (or more) people represent a much larger group of - let's call it 100 people.
Out of 4000+ respondents that's still a FRACTION of 1% of those polled. I'm not a statistician, but I wouldn't call that statistically significant.
It has about as much meaning as a self-selected push poll with an N of ~4000. Given traffic trends on the website (unless they've had a 180 turnaround in the last 6 months), and the general purge of non-4e fans from the forums, and likely a lot of people who simply gave up on the DDI after watching most of it exist as vaporware at launch, and the Gleemax fiasco before that, the poll wasn't likely hitting any representative sample of the possible audience for DDI buyers.
And even more so, the results of the poll responses were only selectively released, skewing any information that might be gathered from it.
Given traffic trends on the website (unless they've had a 180 turnaround in the last 6 months), and the general purge of non-4e fans from the forums, and likely a lot of people who simply gave up on the DDI after watching most of it exist as vaporware at launch, and the Gleemax fiasco before that, the poll wasn't likely hitting any representative sample of the possible audience for DDI buyers.
You could come to the poll from places other than the D&D website; ENWorld, for example, had selective links to it, I believe. That's in fact how I found the poll previous to this one.
If the population was 6 million as Wolfstar has heard, (I've seen this number bandied about as well, don't know if it is true, but it leads to a larger population) Though it really doesn't matter once you reach large populations the sample size needed is going to change ever so slightly. (I'm going to use 6 million, but even using 500,000 will give me similar results.)
We have the results, what we don't have is the the confidence interval that they used. But for our purposes let's use +/-4, +/-3, +/-2, for our Confidence Interval.Confidence IntervalThe confidence interval is the plus-or-minus figure usually reported in newspaper or television opinion poll results. For example, if you use a confidence interval of 4 and 47% percent of your sample picks an answer you can be "sure" that if you had asked the question of the entire relevant population between 43% (47-4) and 51% (47+4) would have picked that answer.
I would direct you to the excellent post here by seTiny, which I have quoted below:
Rather interesting, however not useful.
A poll has a confidence ratio based on random polling. If the poll is not random, for example targeted at a group that reads websites, it is flawed before released.
Then there becomes an issue of how questions are asked and answers permitted.
In any poll there are too factors
the margin of error
and the confidence level the poll provided a correct answer.
There is always a margin of error though it can be cut down to about 2.5 percent.
The confidence level is how many times out of 100 you got a good result with the acceptable error margin.
A sample size of 600 for 6 million has a confidence rate of perhaps 80 percent, with a plus ot minus of 4 to 6 percent.
That means there are four chances in 5 that the poll was correct, that the reported numbers should be considered with a 12 point spread.
Of course the which way poll, that makes the poll less viable then the small sample size already. In some ways it was a push poll in that if you do not select certain answers correctly, you will not be fully considered (if at all).
But I guess they think differently then normal people.
Rather interesting, however not useful.
A poll has a confidence ratio based on random polling. If the poll is not random, for example targeted at a group that reads websites, it is flawed before released.
I am sure that WotC could have done polling of people chosen randomly from the phonebook, but there comes a point when you *need* to limit it to a certain population so that the answers you get have some sort of meaning. In this case, they chose the group of people that regularly visit websites that have to do with RPGs. Here, ENWorld are sites I *know* had the poll. I am pretty sure that RPGNow had it, and it was being spread around via the Blog-o-sphere and Twitterverse as well.
Of course the which way poll, that makes the poll less viable then the small sample size already. In some ways it was a push poll in that if you do not select certain answers correctly, you will not be fully considered (if at all).
In this case, the answers that got you removed from the poll were the ones that indicated that you didn't play any version of D&D. Was it an oversight to have prevented them from answering the poll? Yes, and WotC has said so. That being said, the results of the poll are such that there would have had to have been a fairly large number of them (on the order of a couple of thousand based on seTiny's numbers) to really affect the results some. Is it possible that there were that many? Yes. Is it probable? In my opinion, no.
Well, that's because WotC wasn't asking which people want more.
More people said they'd use the campaign tools - so instead of catering to a statistically smaller group based on emotional desire, they're trying to grow their audience (which isn't unreasonable) and deliver what the larger audience would use.
Don't forget - I'm WITH you. I want the Game Table more than I want the other tools combined.
But if I look at it from where WotC stands ("Wow, we might get more subscribers with Campaign Tools!") I'm hard pressed to fault the LOGIC - despite my emotional desire.
I think you missed my point.
If someone asked me whether I spent more time eating or watching TV, I'd say I spent more time watching TV.
If someone asked me that given the choice, if I could choose to have the option to eat, or I could choose to have the option of watching TV, I'd obviously go with eating. This is because TV is convenient but provides something I could realistically get in numerous other places, while eating is something not easily replacable.
Just because people are more likely to use the campaign editor on a day to day basis had they been given both, doesn't mean that if they were forced to choose between the two, they'd go for the campaign editor. The reason for this is because the campaign editor makes something that's already fairly easy to do easier, that is to say, I can already keep track of my campaign on my computer using various tools already readily availible (namely notepad). I'd use the campaign editor because it would make this easier.
The VTT on the other hand, provides a service that's harder to acomplish without it, play by post works occasionally, but the VTT tends to fill a gap people might not be able to fill otherwise.
What this means is that had the poll been honest about saying we were choosing one or the other, it's entirely possible (and maybe even likely) the results would have been drastically different, because the campaign editor simply makes something we can do already slightly more convenient, while the VTT makes something that's difficult to do far more possible.
As is, the way the current poll was phrased, it's worthless in prioritizing one or the other because simply because it doesn't explicitely state you're giving up the other option.
As is, the way the current poll was phrased, it's worthless in prioritizing one or the other because simply because it doesn't explicitely state you're giving up the other option.
I couldn't disagree more.
WotC has limited resources and can only choose to focus on one project at a time.
That means it's in their best interest to work on the tool that most respondents said they'd like to see.
It isn't a matter of giving up one over the other (as I still firmly believe that the VTT will be out in its course) - it's a matter of where should WotC focus their efforts?
Why would they choose to focus their efforts on a tool that got less hits for "useability"?
To try to be clear here, the campaign editor is nice, but not vital.
The VTT on the other hand, is filling in a void that is otherwise difficult to fill. Play by post can be difficult without truely dedicated players, and even then a lot of responsibility falls on the dm to create maps and grids for the players to use. VTT would be a vast improvement on standard internet play by post, and would likely make it an option availible for people who wouldn't have considered play by post a valid way of doing it.
To emphasize the point here, the VTT can be seen as the only way some online games would happen.
So when you combine these two, what you get is a situation where if you simply poll people what they will use more often, people will probably say campaign editor, because it's a general tool and fairly convenient. Whereas if you say they can only use one or the other, it's likely there would be some swing in voting because while it's true that on average they may use the campaign editor more, when they need to use the VTT, they might feel they lack alternative options, whereas the campaign editor can always be replaced with notepad.
For example, if you asked me whether I would use the campaign editor or VTT more often I'd say campaign editor. If you asked me which one I want given only one, I'd say VTT.
That is why the poor wording of the poll makes it more or less useless in determining which people would have prefered coming out given the option. Because they weren't told they would only be getting one (or at least, that the other would be delayed indefinitaly). You can't switch the poll's meaning after the fact, that's dishonest.
Now if you have an actual rebuttle I'd like you to adress my points rather than flatly disagreeing, I've reworded it in the event I was initially unclear, but completely missing my point again would be frustrating.
As I recall it was something to the effect of "what tools would you use, pick three" and people chose accordingly - that people could choose more than one is why the numbers (quickly) add up to over 100%.
WotC wasn't asking what you want more - regardless of whether you think that's what they should ask or not.
They were, we can see now, asking what would MORE PEOPLE USE. And - unsurprisingly - they're tailoring their business plans to accommodate the MOST PEOPLE.
You've reworded your point, so now I've done the same.
I don't believe the poll said what do you want more.
As I recall it was something to the effect of "what tools would you use, pick three" and people chose accordingly - that people could choose more than one is why the numbers (quickly) add up to over 100%.
WotC wasn't asking what you want more - regardless of whether you think that's what they should ask or not.
They were, we can see now, asking what would MORE PEOPLE USE. And - unsurprisingly - they're tailoring their business plans to accommodate the MOST PEOPLE.
You've reworded your point, so now I've done the same.
And yet you still miss it.
Here is my argument:
There is a difference between choosing between two things (with the assumption that you will either never or at least, not for a while, have the one you don't choose) and saying which of the two you're more likely to use on a day to day basis.
I'm sure you can even think of examples in your day to day life for this. I watch TV more than I use my cell phone, but if money was tight and I could only afford cable or my phone bill, I'd stick with my cellphone, because when I need to use my cellphone I don't have a lot of other options (payphones are a rarity now) while my TV is only one form of entertainment while I have plenty of other options.
The question for the poll (according to the poll itself) asked the people taking the polls which of these are you'd be likely to use (and the option was given to select more than one thing), and you're making the erroneous assumption that more likely to use means that the person would have selected that option had they known it meant they wouldn't get the other options.
The question for the poll (according to the poll itself) asked the people taking the polls which of these are you'd be likely to use (and the option was given to select more than one thing), and you're making the erroneous assumption that more likely to use means that the person would have selected that option had they known it meant they wouldn't get the other options.
And you're still missing the point that more people responded that they'd use a given tool.
More PEOPLE. That could very directly equate to more subscribers. Is it really hard to understand that WotC would want to focus on where a bigger income might come from?
If a small group of people would use a feature more often doesn't factor as strongly as giving a tool that more people want (regardless of how much more or less they will use it).
I acknowledge and even AGREE that yes, I and others want the Game Table more, and would use it more.
But if there are more subscribers to be had - and more people said they'd use a tool other than the game table, that doesn't change the logic. Give the majority what they said they'd use.
WotC is a business, they're following the money, that's a smart thing for them to do.
But given a clear choice about which toll I'd pick for first development which the poll omitted, I'd still go for the game table, because I could prepare an adventure without the campaign tools, but don't have a group to play face to face with.
I didn't take the poll because people who don't currently play got kicked out of it, but if I had answered the questions as they have been reported to be my answer would have been interpreted in support of the campaign tools, but my preference would have been for the game table and ignored.
It's kind of academic anyway in my case. I doubt a dialup connection could support the game table properly to begin with.
And you're still missing the point that more people responded that they'd use a given tool.
More PEOPLE. That could very directly equate to more subscribers. Is it really hard to understand that WotC would want to focus on where a bigger income might come from?
If a small group of people would use a feature more often doesn't factor as strongly as giving a tool that more people want (regardless of how much more or less they will use it).
I acknowledge and even AGREE that yes, I and others want the Game Table more, and would use it more.
But if there are more subscribers to be had - and more people said they'd use a tool other than the game table, that doesn't change the logic. Give the majority what they said they'd use.
WotC is a business, they're following the money, that's a smart thing for them to do.
Ah, I see where the confusion is. My apologies if I misworded it. You seem to feel that I'm talking about a niche audience, but I'm actually talking about the exact same audience as the one that was polled, you can even assume it will be the same people take take the poll.
More people said that they're more likely to use the campaign editor when it wasn't specified this meant that they wouldn't have the VTT.
Because of this, the poll results are irrelevant to the present discussion. It's possible that the same people who voted in the poll presented would have voted differently had it been made clear you were choosing one or the other. It's also possible they would have voted the same way.
What I was saying wasn't that a niche audience would get more value out of the VTT (while I think this is true, this isn't really a valid point as catering to niche audiences isn't normally an effective business model). What I'm saying is that due to poor wording of the poll, it can not be read as a choice for the campaign editor over the VTT because it was not made clear you'd be getting one or the other, not both.
If I was polled and asked which I'd be more likely to use on a day to day basis, I'd say the campaign editor. So in a poll that only featured me, it'd be 1 for campaign editor and 0 for the VTT.
However, if the question was asked differently, and I was given the choice between only having the VTT and only having the campaign editor, I would say I wanted the VTT. So again in the world of only me being polled, it'd be 0 for the campaign editor and 1 for the VTT.
You see what happened? The question was phrased differently and had a different intent, and even though the exact same populace (in this case, myself) was polled, the answer changed.
You can not rule out the possibility that many of the people whom were in the poll you presented would have changed their answer had the poll been clear that you would be getting the campaign editor at the cost of the VTT (or vice versa). This means that it is inherently possible that given the choice and a properly worded poll, more people would have voted for the VTT than the campaign editor, even if it was the exact same people polled.
Due to the poor wording of the poll, you can not extrapolate which people would prefer having if they were only given the option of having one.
I think I can see where Jenius is coming from Wolfstar. If I was preparing an adventure I planned to play using the game table, using upcoming campaign tools to do the preparation, I have to admit I would use the campaign tools more than the game table to do so.
But given a clear choice about which toll I'd pick for first development which the poll omitted, I'd still go for the game table, because I could prepare an adventure without the campaign tools, but don't have a group to play face to face with.
I didn't take the poll because people who don't currently play got kicked out of it, but if I had answered the questions as they have been reported to be my answer would have been interpreted in support of the campaign tools, but my preference would have been for the game table and ignored.
It's kind of academic anyway in my case. I doubt a dialup connection could support the game table properly to begin with.
Yes this is precisely what I mean. Here Paulon admits that if he had both, he would use the campaign editor more frequently, so if we pretend he was in the poll, that would be one vote for the campaign editor.
However, Paulon also acknowledges that he has many other tools for campaign editing that he can already use whereas the VTT provides something he'd have difficulty getting elsewhere. He then goes on to say because of this, if he was only given the choice of one, he'd go with the VTT.
That is to say, his answer changed because the question was worded differently. It's impossible to determine how many people in the poll that was done would have changed their answer had it been worded more accurately, which is what makes the poll flawed as a reason for doing the campaign editor over the VTT.