The content it was updated with is literally over 50 days old. I'm not sure why this is updated so slowly. There should be a point where it's litterally inserting values into your backend (not a double entendre) and finishing these things as they come out. When the issue is compiled it should be in the next CB update IMO.
I'd like to think there's at least some synergy about what's getting posted and what's getting updated in the next update. It just seems like a major delay. Isn't there some type of Data Entry Tool you have that does a lot of that work for you? I'd just really like to know why there's a crazy delay between Dragon Updates and CB Updates?
2) Previously CB updates were always on the first Tuesday of each month (no I'm not going to debate if this is still their plan or not)
3) Because of the window of literally days between 1 & 2 the magazine content was always in the following months update (for example December content would be in the Feb update).
Feel free to speculate about the new online CB and how this may or may not change their release schedule.
1) Dungeon/Dragon content is not "official" until the end of month PDF release.
2) Previously CB updates were always on the first Tuesday of each month (no I'm not going to debate if this is still their plan or not)
3) Because of the window of literally days between 1 & 2 the magazine content was always in the following months update (for example December content would be in the Feb update).
Feel free to speculate about the new online CB and how this may or may not change their release schedule.
Nonetheless, the very act of creating the classes/power should have those listed in their DB in order to easily update the Character Builder with. The people that create them could easily update this through some internal software after they're stuff is approved to be posted. After it's in the DB they could havesome type of Go-Live Boolean and then it starts showing up. A 50 day delay is ridiculous if they're not going to update the character builder until the 3rd-4th week in the month.
That should be plenty of time to have all that data inserted. That content that's created for Dragon/Dungeon should be integrated into their software development sprint. A 50+ day delay isn't acceptable. It should also be easy to change these if a change is required after they're already inserted.
The window prior made it more undestandable, a 21 day window should be plenty of time now. Considering they haven't given us a development plan though, I'm basing it on this last update.
Even a 10 day window should be plenty of time for what essentially amounts to data entry into a data editor that's designed by the internal development team.
So Dragon 393 will be in the January update (normally 2nd Tuesday) and that means that it will be February before Dragon 394 (and the Essentials Assassin) will be in the CB.
This is the way its always been.
Dragon and Dungeon content for the life of the tools has never been included until 6 weeks after it was compiled.
So Dragon 393 will be in the January update (normally 2nd Tuesday) and that means that it will be February before Dragon 394 (and the Essentials Assassin) will be in the CB.
This is the way its always been.
I understand that. Just because it has always been, doesn't mean it always should have been. I'm saying that it's not efficient and if they continue to update late in the month it should not continue to be that way and that there are internal systems that they should look at in order to bring content quicker to the CB and the public.
As it stands, it seems ridiculous to have such a delay because:
1) They've cut back the Dragon/Dungeon content that they used to provide. (Smaller Articles/Less Content)
2) They have a completely web based approach now meaning they should be able to have quicker baseline updates to the code.
3) That there are more efficient ways to do this. As the article is created for Dragon it should be created in their Database. If it needs to change than it needs to change and they'll just have to update it later.
A 50 day delay is ridiculous if they're not going to update the character builder until the 3rd-4th week in the month.
You are incorrectly representing what is happening to forward your position. I will use an example:
November (magazine) content is not "official" until the last day of the month when the compiled PDF is released. Once the PDF is compiled it is (probably) sent to programming. This cannot happen any earlier than this because changes can and have been made up until that time.
At this time, all of Novembers magazine content is 21 days past release. The fact that the preview of the article was posted prior to Nov. 30th is irrelevant. You are suggesting that they change this model and input the data when the article is published and then duplicate their work at the end of the month giving them double the chance for data errors and double the workload. I would be completely opposed to this idea. A better idea is that they push back updates from the first Tuesday so as to have time to include magazine content the month after release.
Physical printed material does not suffer from this because they must have the content sent to the printer months before release and thus can be sent to the printers and programming at the same time...lag time next to nil.
You are incorrectly representing what is happening to forward your position. I will use an example:
Everything that we recieved in this patch is from October. Hence, 50 days old. That's not incorrect at all.
By the time we recieve November's content it will have been close to 50 days old(actually 42 days old if it's on the second Tues. and 49 days old if it's on the Third again). None of that is wrong or being misrepresented as that is what you have already confirmed to me. If, I'm misrepresenting that data than you're contradicting yourself.
I'm saying between the time it's official and between the time there is an update there should be ample time to input that data into their backend. To believe otherwise is nonsense. Very little actually changes between release and compilation anyway. It's updating things if they change. To say double is to misrepresent the idea.
Considering that when they notice it needs to be changed they have to change it elsewhere as well. It's not double work...and if their system was setup right in the first place it would only ever be changed in one place anyway.
Considering that when they notice it needs to be changed they have to change it elsewhere as well. It's not double work...and if their system was setup right in the first place it would only ever be changed in one place anyway.
Development tools have probably quite different requirements than the official CB (version control comes to mind).
Its not as simple as you may want to make it seem.
You are incorrectly representing what is happening to forward your position. I will use an example:
Everything that we recieved in this patch is from October. Hence, 50 days old. That's not incorrect at all.
Lies. HotFK was released on November 16th and is in the CB. Nice try though.
It's WPF and .NET it's not exactly rocket science.
I'm not sure what you're talking about with version control though. If you're talking about the code base... TFS handles all that for them. If you're talking about the powers and such on the data backend...that might be a little more tricky. How ever it is easy to keep a history of changes on data.
I will admit that it's not as simple as I can possibly understand due to red tape and management approvals and such. I'm not in the business with them...I do know that other companies can handle time frames a bit better though. I do feel that there could definitely be improvement.
Kenjoon, I've mostly been talking in regards to Dragon content please go back and read some of it.
However you explain that quite eloquently yourself anyway "Physical printed material does not suffer from this because they must have the content sent to the printer months before release and thus can be sent to the printers and programming at the same time...lag time next to nil."
Hence, it is easier with printed content, and I've never had an issue with their printed content taking forever. (Except that one time...
)Kenjoon, I've mostly been talking in regards to Dragon content please go back and read some of it.
However you explain that quite eloquently yourself anyway "Physical printed material does not suffer from this because they must have the content sent to the printer months before release and thus can be sent to the printers and programming at the same time...lag time next to nil."
Hence, it is easier with printed content, and I've never had an issue with their printed content taking forever. (Except that one time...
In that case I'm back to my "you are free to speculate about schedule changes...". Really it comes down to that I wouldn't be surprised if they start releasing sooner and sooner, but they have a big hill to climb first (all the missing features from offline CB to web CB) and as that list gets shorter and shorter I'd expect new content from Dragon/Dungeon to come sooner and sooner as well.
You are incorrectly representing what is happening to forward your position. I will use an example:
Everything that we recieved in this patch is from October. Hence, 50 days old. That's not incorrect at all.
Lies. HotFK was released on November 16th and is in the CB. Nice try though.
Actually.... I bought mine on the 5th of November from my FLGS which is a premier WotC retailer. But the "Official" street date was the 16th for other establishments.
I always said they should have had both Essentials books in the CB since the launch was the 16th and the release date was the same day. It would have all tied in so nicely.
I'm not saying it's simple. I'm just saying that they could look at their internal systems and make it simpler for them, alleviating the downtime. I literally have something very similar at my own job that has a quicker turn around time.
It's WPF and .NET it's not exactly rocket science.
I'm not sure what you're talking about with version control though. If you're talking about the code base... TFS handles all that for them. If you're talking about the powers and such on the data backend...that might be a little more tricky. How ever it is easy to keep a history of changes on data.
I will admit that it's not as simple as I can possibly understand due to red tape and management approvals and such. I'm not in the business with them...I do know that other companies can handle time frames a bit better though. I do feel that there could definitely be improvement.
Yes, im talking about the backend, and the interface with their development procedures; that is at least a magnitude higher inters of complexity regarding software development, not to mention the change of work habits that take time.
You say you have a setup like that at work: did you make it in house ou used a 3rf party setup? How much did it cost in terms of money and man-hours? How long did it took to adapt all the work procedures to use those tools?
Going digital has many advantages, but is nowhere near easy, fast or cheap.
Anyway, I'm not trying to claim that its cheap to change but its not difficult...I am saying that there are better ways and possible efficiency increases they can make to have closer to dynamic updates...a lot of what I said is speculation based on systems I have setup personally in the past. Anyway, thanks for the discussion all... I would like to see some improvements though in this regard...i think that's the bottom line...
I think we all do but not at the cost of quality...sorry for the messy post from my phone.
I agree it takes time...data versioning is just setting up a db with the structure to store iterations of changes. I would be very surprised if they don't already do that.
There is much more than that; of the top of my head, some more requirements would be printing the version on the character sheet, and the interface with the rules and Magic/Item/Monster (front end) with the backend 8and then add tools to manage the backend).
Anyway, I'm not trying to claim that its cheap to change but its not difficult...
Completely disagree; changing a workflow in a company is VERY dificult, mostly because ppl are creature of habits and tend to hate what is new (these forums are full of perfect examples of this); and from what i can tell, WotC work very much with freelance workforce, which makes things a lot more dificult.
I am saying that there are better ways and possible efficiency increases they can make to have closer to dynamic updates...a lot of what I said is speculation based on systems I have setup personally in the past. Anyway, thanks for the discussion all... I would like to see some improvements though in this regard...i think that's the bottom line...
There are always ways to improve, and i agree with you on the essence, just not on the ease of implementation.
I think we all do but not at the cost of quality...sorry for the messy post from my phone.
I'd just really like to know why there's a crazy delay between Dragon Updates and CB Updates?
If you're looking for a good reason, you aren't going to find one. The process by which the company produces and delivers its digital offerings is deeply flawed, but those are deliberate decisions, and are not likely to change. They do not serve the interest of the customer, but they do serve the interest of someone at WotC, and that's the criteria by which decisions are made.
Simply put: managing the project schedules of multiple departments well enough to assure rapid and reliable integration of content to the digital tools would be a lot more work for them, and would require skills their team does not currently have on board.
Brannon