Not counting Ampersand, editorial and confessions, how many actual articles are we getting? With the Druid and Invoker previews...
If the content goes this light from now on, I'm going to be changing my tone about the value of this "magazine".
So, are we only getting 4 real articles in the issue this month?
Not counting Ampersand, editorial and confessions, how many actual articles are we getting? With the Druid and Invoker previews...
If the content goes this light from now on, I'm going to be changing my tone about the value of this "magazine".
I only count 3 articles.
Edit: no, sorry, 4. Forgot Mercykillers.
So, are we only getting 4 real articles in the issue this month?
Not counting Ampersand, editorial and confessions, how many actual articles are we getting? With the Druid and Invoker previews...
If the content goes this light from now on, I'm going to be changing my tone about the value of this "magazine".
Well, there were plenty of complaints when people saw the calendar with four Playtests and only three other articles of non-preview type content, so they changed the schedule.
In response to the complaints, they changed the schedule... by scaling back two of the Playtests to Previews only.
I am annoyed.
Well, there were plenty of complaints when people saw the calendar with four Playtests and only three other articles of non-preview type content, so they changed the schedule.
In response to the complaints, they changed the schedule... by scaling back two of the Playtests to Previews only.
I am annoyed.
You make a good point. I didn't have the previous complaints - I consider playtests to be articles - but I can see why other people were upset. I think this wasn't the right solution, though.
We got a nice editorial calendar that has proven to be quite reliable and now there's this huge confusion on december's release shedule.
We get this toned down issue of Dragon Magazine with nothing but a few articles...
We do NOT get any meaningful feedback why these things happened...
A few weeks ago I thought about making my 1-month subscription a 1-year subscription, but now I'm playing with the thought to stop my auto-renew if the next editorial calender will look equally disappointing than this month (especially if the subscription becomes more expansive)
Catching customers with high quality to get subscriptions and then lowering the quality of the product feels bad.
Or, was December intended (from the start) to be a *thinner* issue, utilizing various previews/playtests. December is the start of holiday season; maybe they just got lazy. That's the impression I'm getting at least.
This is the one reason I want to buy Inisder on a mont-to-month basis though. I saw the editorial calendar but had I realized just how Lite this isssue was going to be, I'd have skipped this time. Glad I didn't decide to extend my subscription for 3-months or a year ;); It costs a bit more, but month-to-month works best for me.
I'm not really disappointed, I'll get my money's worth, for sure. My main concern is it's relatively early in the life of Insider for the e-zines to be experiencing "off" issues already-- they should still be blowing us away at this point ;). First, a lackluster preview period, now a lackluster end to the first few months of the subscrption serivice. I hope Dragon-lite doesn't doesn't become the standard.
To be honest though, I think it's just a quirk; from my experience as a longtime reader (since issue #200), Dragon always seems to get back on track soon enough. I'm willing to overlook an occasional lackluster issue, and I can't deny I'm excited to see what's in store for next year.
This is why I do not count them as original and exclusive content that has to be in Dragon magazine.
Art: I wonder, did the concerns a few of us voiced (myself included), really cause them to "pull back" on the excessive playtests?
If true, it might be a good thing.
If a significant number of Dragon subscribers arent satisfied with playtests, then 1) WotC may make the playtests available to nonsubscribers again - which is good because the more eyes that see a playtest the more helpful it becomes - and 2) WotC will be forced to provide other content for the Dragon magazine which seems to make these subscribers happier.
The developers really do listen to the feedback of playtesters. They fix the problems and implement the wishlists as much as possible. Before publication locks it in place - before its too late to change it.
The result is a better class and a better D&D experience for me for years to come!
Extremely valuable.
Playtests ARE valuable!
The developers really do listen to the feedback of playtesters. They fix the problems and implement the wishlists as much as possible. Before publication locks it in place - before its too late to change it.
The result is a better class and a better D&D experience for me for years to come!
Extremely valuable.
To WotC, perhaps... but why are we paying to test the content? Why are we paying for advertising in the form of previews?
For what it's worth, I don't think they ever planned to do a play-test for both Druid and Invoker. I think they were always going to be small previews. They listed the Mercykillers article as a play-test as well. I think whoever drafted the calendar simply made a mistake in labeling the articles.
That's the official story.
I am very disappointed too by the way things are developing. It may be a bit early to judge this correctly, but for me there seems no doubt the quality of DDI has gotten worse again after a very good start.
We got a nice editorial calendar that has proven to be quite reliable and now there's this huge confusion on december's release shedule.
We get this toned down issue of Dragon Magazine with nothing but a few articles...
We do NOT get any meaningful feedback why these things happened...
A few weeks ago I thought about making my 1-month subscription a 1-year subscription, but now I'm playing with the thought to stop my auto-renew if the next editorial calender will look equally disappointing than this month (especially if the subscription becomes more expansive)
Catching customers with high quality to get subscriptions and then lowering the quality of the product feels bad.
I know it feels disappointing to expect the playtests mentioned in the editorial calendar, but I'm not sure that you can claim the quality of the December issue has taken a sudden drop when that content hasn't actually been released yet.
October had 7 feature articles (counting the Playtest Barbarian, which was free), plus 5 columns. November had 6 feature articles, plus 6 columns. December has 6 feature articles (the ones listed on the Table of Contents, plus the Adventure's Vault playtest), plus 7 columns. (Plus 2 previews.)
In total, only one of the month's feature articles is a Playtest. Now, some people feel that including these playtest articles in Dragon is an insult, forcing them to pay twice for the same content. On the other hand, a very large group feel they are the highlight of the magazine.
I think one a month is perfectly fair. I wouldn't want to see the four originally listed, but one Playtest and two previews - along with the same standard amount of other content - is entirely fair.
I can definitely understand everyone's disappointment in the editorial calendar confusion, and it is something I hope WotC avoids in the future. But I really don't think there is grounds for people to claim December is "Dragon-lite" - especially only two days into the month! The planned amount of content is right up there with all the other issues - if they fail to deliver by the end of the month, that is one thing, but right now, people seem to have no real basis for this claim.
Now, one might certainly not find the particular articles as interesting as ones from a past month - but that is personal preference, and I'm sure there will be plenty interested in an article on a Primordial, on the Mercykillers, and so forth.
Playtests ARE valuable!
yes but are previews
) that I'm still getting three Dungeon adventures for my money. That makes me feel better (even if they have decided to make all previous issues available for first-time subscribers ;)).On the Dungeon side of things: I've not been following the Scales of War closely (yet, I'm actually waiting for the inevitable print book). Right now, the adventure path is just a nice "bonus".
I'm am really enjoying the Greenbrier campaign of James Wyatt. Being able to see the actual thought process behind it all is interesting. It's an excellent backup feature that I really hope gets proper respect as a full-fledged feature (once completed, that is ;)).
I don't know about you, but I play in 1 group. How many people are going to switch to a druid or invoker, in the middle of a campaign, for 2-3 levels? If we were really playtesting, that might, might be different.
It bothers me that "Starmantle" is a simple promotion for a novel, just like the playtests are promos (in essence) for PH 2. I really prefer articles that stand on their own, as more than another monthly tie-in. This sort of thing has always had it's place in Dragon but this month has gone overboard in my mind.
I take back what I said earlier: I am kind of disappointed.
I take back what I said earlier: I am kind of disappointed.
I agree with you. I'm not going to fire off angry letters and cancel my subscription or anything, but it's a bummer that, with the various changes made, there isn't anything in the calendar that looks terribly interesting. Last month was stellar; this one is "meh."
We'll have to see how it goes, I guess.
Also, the whole website is a mess. Links to old editorial calenders, broken links to messageboards that were moved months ago, no DDI17 to be found. I'm not impressed this month, not at all.
And, it isn't the holidays. This stuff is all in the can well before it is published.
Yup, Dungeon looks lite too. I hadn't noticed that before. Sigh.
Also, the whole website is a mess. Links to old editorial calenders, broken links to messageboards that were moved months ago, no DDI17 to be found. I'm not impressed this month, not at all.
And, it isn't the holidays. This stuff is all in the can well before it is published.
DDI 17 is available now, but that does remind me that I have never been able to find the D&D Insider posts without a combination of forum hunting and the search feature. I've never noticed them featured on the main page or anything.
While playtests become useless after the real book comes out, I still like one PLAYTEST per month (or every second month) since I'm always curious about upcoming stuff and I would get something new to play with, even though there might no crunch-books that month.
But lvl 1-3 Previews are useless and more than one playtest per month would be to much wasted pages (after the real books are out).
Dungeon is not much better (for me!) this month. I'm angry about the Encounter since it was primary a Product Placement. That leaves me with two adventures, one of it an Adventure Path which I ignore since I don't want to play a fixed campaign. So it's a very Adventure LIGHT Issue for me.
The playtests are valuable.
Normally people don't have to pay to playtest stuff though, you are doing them a favour.
Dungeon is not much better (for me!) this month. I'm angry about the Encounter since it was primary a Product Placement. That leaves me with two adventures, one of it an Adventure Path which I ignore since I don't want to play a fixed campaign. So it's a very Adventure LIGHT Issue for me.
Last month wasn't much better for dungeon. Summer's End was a promo for Dungeon Delve. It only had 2 other adventures (one being SOW). I'm kinda regretting paying a year subscription for mostly getting previews.
The playtests are valuable.
Onlt to WOTC..
Compare WOTC playtesting to that of Paizo'e Pathfinder Playtesting..
Paizo's Pathfinder Playtesting
A separate free product from any other product. The playtest is a stand alone product downloadable in PDF form, not contained in any other product.
No Subscription required. Free to anyone who wanted to download. As revisions are made the PDF is corrected and changed to reflect such.
WOTC's 4E Playtesting
It is consider a part of several products
To obtain those products you must subscribe
i actually gave serious thought to subscribing but... i'm sorry i can't pay for ads/previews
previews and/or carrots on a string for future releases in a magazine i'm paying for? totally uncool.
now if paizo got a hold of dragon again... i'd totally be ALL OVER IT :D.
Boy I hope on hope that DDI fails and falls to the ground with a thud, if this is the quality i'm seeing and is to be expected then I hopes this fails so bad and paizo gets their creative hands on it again. I miss you old dragon magazine e.e the art was top notch, the articles were so fun, even the comics were fun! I highly doubt WotC's dragon will ever compare to old dragon q.q sigh.... and we know the true secret to why wotc grabbed dragon... because it was GREAT competition and had to be whiped out or bought out
we know they put previews on the ads to lure you in for money, we all know that. But it's going to kick them in the balls later on because i think more people will realize how much better the previews would do as free content.
4e is a good product but I really hate the direction wotc's D&D stuff has been going as of the last few months.
At WotC Christmas is a time to layoff workers and underdeliver content to its' fans.
I'm massively dissapointed, and hope that by next year, things have picked up (I'm on a year's subscription). Thank the Immortals that Dungeon seems to be pretty full - can't complain there :D
January's Dragon looks pretty thin on the ground too (this is my personal opinion of course; I'm sure there are a lot of folks who would disagree)...a bunch of previews, the pointless columns that are either space fillers ("Confessions" "D&D Alumni") or locked into specific campaign worlds, and (by the looks of it - though as I am going merely by titles, I could be ENTIRELY wrong), one maybe two articles that will have any crunch of worth.
I'm massively dissapointed, and hope that by next year, things have picked up (I'm on a year's subscription). Thank the Immortals that Dungeon seems to be pretty full - can't complain there :D
I agree... January's Dungeon looks pretty thin too. Up until November, I was quite happy with my year's subscription. Now, not so much.
Overall, the number of articles have decreased, but not the quality.
The playtests are valuable.
but they are 1-3 levels only. most of campaigns are near paragons...so they woun't sart over just to test a new character class...
eh..barbarian and artificer playtests were cool...invoker and druid aren't. hope that Warden and Sorcerer will be more that almost useless 1-3 preview...
Looks like the answer is "no".
Gee, I guess that's what happens when instead of using the bets of fan submissions you only use staffers. When the staffers are busy doing the work they were hired for there's a drop in production.
I like the idea of playtests. I'm not against that. But 1-3 levels is not enough to even remotely test a class (some argue that the game begins at L3). Especially when the book is all but at the printers so any possible feedback would arrive far, far too late for anything to be done. Even the feedback from the barbaian playtest was probably only the initial couple weeks of comments and was likely hastily corrected (like the paladin challenge changes where they just slapped on a wad of restrictions and conditions because they didn't have time to really revise).
But what's really sad is that even counting the ads the issue looks like it will be smaller than normal (I've heard talk of 77 or 78 pages with the average being closer to 80-85). Knock off ten pages of preview and the issue is tiny.
However, in sake of balance, it should be mentioned that January's Dungeon has a sizable number of articles and might be hefty. This might just be a give-take between the issues and we might get a larger issue of Dragon while Dungeon drops for a moment.
But what's really sad is that even counting the ads the issue looks like it will be smaller than normal (I've heard talk of 77 or 78 pages with the average being closer to 80-85). Knock off ten pages of preview and the issue is tiny.
I know. It's almost as bad as back when Paizo was running it. I mean, it was 95-100 pages long, but then you knock off the 20-25 pages of ads and the 5-10 pages of upcoming releases and the issue was tiny.
As far as article content goes, things really haven't changed that much. How they present their upcoming releases and which upcoming releases they choose to promote has. People here are acting as though ads and previews were something new that has suddenly appeared in Dragon magazine.
I'll admit that December's issue was a little light. But it was still as long as an old Paizo issue (sans ads) and the articles were of comparable quality as far as I am concerned. As for the new "previews" versus the old "previews". I much prefer the new. Sure, I'm not going to play a third level druid... but seeing the implementation of the basic mechanics is much more useful to me in evaluating its worth than someone describing the content in a general sense (which is how Paizo's previews were handled).
But hey, that's just me. Maybe I'm not nostalgic enough to have forgotten that this is just more of the same as far as magazines are concerned, and not some drastic change.
I know. It's almost as bad as back when Paizo was running it. I mean, it was 95-100 pages long, but then you knock off the 20-25 pages of ads and the 5-10 pages of upcoming releases and the issue was tiny.
Comparing apples to strawberries.
Ads are a necessary evil of print magazines.
It would be comparable if 100% of the ads were for Paizo products, generated no revenue, and replaced other content.
But what's really sad is that even counting the ads the issue looks like it will be smaller than normal (I've heard talk of 77 or 78 pages with the average being closer to 80-85). Knock off ten pages of preview and the issue is tiny.
Well, the price I pay for it is pretty tiny too (and since I don't live in the USA, it's still $5, compared to an insane amount when it was a print magazine). Also, as you said, the Dungeon issue looks good, so what are you complaining about exactly ? Not getting your money worth ? I know a buck means a lot these days, but still ...
Well, the price I pay for it is pretty tiny too (and since I don't live in the USA, it's still $5, compared to an insane amount when it was a print magazine). Also, as you said, the Dungeon issue looks good, so what are you complaining about exactly ? Not getting your money worth ? I know a buck means a lot these days, but still ...
December didn't give me anything useful I don't think. The Druid and Invoker previews were OK, but A) Haven't impacted on me buying the book and B) Aren't playable with only 3 levels, so have very limited value. The only other interesting thing was the Maul-tar article, which was neat, but since I don't DM, I'll probably never use.
Well, the price I pay for it is pretty tiny too (and since I don't live in the USA, it's still $5, compared to an insane amount when it was a print magazine). Also, as you said, the Dungeon issue looks good, so what are you complaining about exactly ? Not getting your money worth ? I know a buck means a lot these days, but still ...
If they cut the size by 1/8th and fluff-up the remaining content with another 1/8 of "previews" and we just accept it then it becomes the new status-quo. Why produce an 83-page monthly magazine each and every four-weeks when you can produce a 74-page magazine with 10-pages of recycled content?
Once (December's) is acceptable. Holidays play merry havoc with schedules and such. Twice in a row is pushing it.
We protest now or February will also be light (gee, it's a short month, less time for updates). Then March. And then we've had four months of lite magazines and have lost out on a enough content to fill an additional issue (Smarch?)
That's my problem and the reason for complaints.
Paizo's Pathfinder Playtesting
A separate free product from any other product. The playtest is a stand alone product downloadable in PDF form, not contained in any other product.
No Subscription required. Free to anyone who wanted to download. As revisions are made the PDF is corrected and changed to reflect such.
No revisions are being made to the Pathfinder Beta PDF.
Three supplements (or web enhancements or whatever you want to call them) have been posted. They cover material that was not originally part of the Beta document, including additional spells and magic items, prestige classes, and a new version of magic item creation without xp costs.
As for playtesting itself, I am not sure most people have a reasonable idea of what it is or how it should be done, and I think that has serious consequences for both the playtest discussion at Paizo as well as the playtests being performed via subscriber service by WotC. That is a whole other topic all its own.
As for playtesting itself, I am not sure most people have a reasonable idea of what it is or how it should be done, and I think that has serious consequences for both the playtest discussion at Paizo as well as the playtests being performed via subscriber service by WotC. That is a whole other topic all its own.
Most people do have no clue. There is a small amount that give useful feedback though. I had the impression that both of the playtest articles put up got some valuable feedback for WotC.
If they cut the size by 1/8th and fluff-up the remaining content with another 1/8 of "previews" and we just accept it then it becomes the new status-quo. Why produce an 83-page monthly magazine each and every four-weeks when you can produce a 74-page magazine with 10-pages of recycled content?
Once (December's) is acceptable. Holidays play merry havoc with schedules and such. Twice in a row is pushing it.
We protest now or February will also be light (gee, it's a short month, less time for updates). Then March. And then we've had four months of lite magazines and have lost out on a enough content to fill an additional issue (Smarch?)
That's my problem and the reason for complaints.
this... but we're discussing all this in the januaryeditorial thread.
66 pages including the cover.
Comparing apples to strawberries.
Ads are a necessary evil of print magazines.
Why? To cover printing costs? I would advise you to look into the revenue streams of subscription magazines. Ads pay for content, as well as other production costs. Printing costs are amongst the smallest concerns for a magazine budget. Their existence in magazines and the overtness do not excuse them. Ads are a necessary evil of television and the internet as well. They are also a necessary evil of riding a buss or walking downtown. They are a necessary evil of watching a movie or television program. Ads are everywhere, and the majority of them are far less useful and contain far less substance than the ones you are currently crusading against.
Of all the ads to get your panties in a bunch about, you're complaining about a fairly interesting preview that could (theoretically) be used to test drive material before you purchase an upcoming product.
Reprioritize.
It would be comparable if 100% of the ads were for Paizo products, generated no revenue, and replaced other content.
About 7-10 of the twenty pages of ads, were for Paizo products and thus generated no revenue. Their sole intention was self promotion.
Additionally, whether or not advertisements generate revenue is irrelevant to the consumer. Why should we care whether or not WotC is making money off of the magazines? Whether or not they positively effect subscription prices may be relevant. In this case, we have no evidence to suggest that using the magazines to promote upcoming WotC releases isn't decreasing the price of content. In fact, it would be a fairly logical assumption that the lower price of Dungeon/Dragon is primarily a result of their intention to use certain features to promote their products.
Lastly, we have no evidence that the previews are replacing other content. According to the subscription, we signed up for 120 pages worth of content. Even in this "LITE" month, we received over 60 pages of Dragon excluding previews and well over that much Dungeon content. They have met their contractual obligation.
Why? To cover printing costs? I would advise you to look into the revenue streams of subscription magazines. Ads pay for content, as well as other production costs. Printing costs are amongst the smallest concerns for a magazine budget.
Printing plus distribution eats up much of the cost.
In fact, many daily newspapers make ALL their money through advertising. The cost of production is so high that they're essentially selling papers at a small loss.
Dragon and Dungeon magazine have NO printing cost, no shipping cost, no manufacturing cost. Just the articles and a dude who knows pagemaker.
It should turn a profit just through subscription. And unlike print magazines there are no stores or distributors eating away at the profit.
Ads are a necessary evil of television and the internet as well. They are also a necessary evil of riding a buss or walking downtown. They are a necessary evil of watching a movie or television program. Ads are everywhere, and the majority of them are far less useful and contain far less substance than the ones you are currently crusading against.
Ads, by definition, bring in money. They're someone paying someone else to put their ad in their product.
No one is paying for the previews. There is NO revenue being generated. And since someone has to format them from book product to online/magazine product they're actually costing money thus defeating their purpose as standard ads.
Of all the ads to get your panties in a bunch about, you're complaining about a fairly interesting preview that could (theoretically) be used to test drive material before you purchase an upcoming product.
Except there isn't enough information for most to playtest. One cannot really play an Invoker with the information given, especially since their main new feature (summoning) is undescribed.
They are recycled content for a book that will be out in less than three months (I can wait).
Would you rather have 10 pages of content you *might* be able to use and is "interesting" at best, or would you rather have brand new, non-recycled, non-ad content.
About 7-10 of the twenty pages of ads, were for Paizo products and thus generated no revenue. Their sole intention was self promotion.
And that differs from this how?
Oh yeah, the Paizo ads weren't originally described as "content" and didn't take pages away from actual articles.
Why should we care whether or not WotC is making money off of the magazines? Whether or not they positively effect subscription prices may be relevant. In this case, we have no evidence to suggest that using the magazines to promote upcoming WotC releases isn't decreasing the price of content.
That is true, whether or not Wizbro turns a profit is meaningless to us.
However, since people are paying for a subscription it DOES matter to them that they get their money's worth. It DOES matter that each and every month they receive a useful product that will be as useful to them six months from now as it is today.
A magazine where content is invalidated within three months is not a worthwhile investment. Especially when that content is 1/7th of the total magazine.
Playtests are the exception. The eat-up alot of pages but providing feedback and helping shape the class is worth it. I have no interest in ever playing a barbarian but I accept its addition to the product.
Lastly, we have no evidence that the previews are replacing other content. According to the subscription, we signed up for 120 pages worth of content. Even in this "LITE" month, we received over 60 pages of Dragon excluding previews and well over that much Dungeon content. They have met their contractual obligation.
Firstly, the average page-count of the magazines is 83 pages. Where are the other 20 pages of Dragon content?
Secondly, the individually released articles had page-numbers which placed the original page-count closer to 74 pages. Why the drop? Maybe because 10 pages of material (conveniently the size of 2 classes from L1-3) was excised from the magazines.
Not alot of conclusive evidence, but NOT "no evidence that the previews are replacing other content".
Dragon has been subscription-only for just a tad over two-months. And they've already dropped the quantity of the magazine by 10 pages below the previous low-make (set last month) and 20 pages below the average. That's what concerns me. They're not really setting out to maintain the quality...