steve
havent been on for a while and I dont see that anywhere at a glance, was that scrapped?
steve
Effectively, yes.
It's possible that developers are allowed to work on them in their spare time, but they are shelved, and IMO, as Guivre says, they are effectively (in the sense of "for all practical purposes") canceled.
oh well.
steve
I recommend reading the forums and I am sure you will find the other 100 posts about this.
If you're more patient this can also read as a delay while other tools take priority.
The game table is not currently in active development. People who want it "now" see this as cancellation.
If you're more patient this can also read as a delay while other tools take priority.
Some people who want it now see it as a cancellation.
Id be happy with a "delay" so I hope that is it.
steve
Id be happy with a "delay" so I hope that is it.
Well prepare to be happy then, it is delayed indefinitely.
I too had originally subscribed to DDI to give wizards an incentive to complete the Virtual Table Top. However after almost a year since the launch of the game and the VTT having been effectively put on the back burner I'm done. I've cancelled my DDI account and I will likely never buy another wizards product. After 30 years of D&D I think I'm done. I will continue to play 4e with the books I've purchased, but wizards has done a lot of damage in their relationship with me and I doubt they will ever gain my trust back. I'd like to see it happen but I doubt it.
same here. i came here just to see if anything was being done with the tools that i signed up for... visualizer, dungeon builder, virtual table top...
and I am getting hosed. Congrats WotC, on hosing me for a year's subscription and not delivering the goods. Way to reward 26 years of die-hard loyalty to your brand.
I survived the corny saturday morning cartoon, the terrible line of action figures, the god-awful thora birch movie, the constant cash-grab new editions getting cranked out every 5 years, the world-of-warcraft-ification of the game, and other outrages only to get robbed by you clowns. I'm done.
It's a good thing Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax aren't alive to see this.
http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
only to get robbed by you clowns. I'm done.
Robbed? Really?
So, you were walking past your FLGS, minding your own business, and WotC jumped out, grabbed you, took your money, shoved a bagfull of books at you, and ran off cackling?
Don't get me wrong - if you don't feel you're getting a good value for your money, you're right to stop spending your money on the product.
But robbed is more than a little hyperbolic.
Robbed? Really?
So, you were walking past your FLGS, minding your own business, and WotC jumped out, grabbed you, took your money, shoved a bagfull of books at you, and ran off cackling?
Don't get me wrong - if you don't feel you're getting a good value for your money, you're right to stop spending your money on the product.
But robbed is more than a little hyperbolic.
It would never happen like that. First, you wouldn't be able to get the drop on me like that because my perception score is too high. You may have cackled, I don't know...
What I DO know is this is a fiasco.
You promised me upcoming functionality of those features (visualizer, table top, etc), enticed me to buy a whole year up front in order to lock in a good rate for when those additions came on line, and then cancelled developing the very functionality i signed up for.
Don't get all defensive. That is exactly what happened. You advertised services as part of a pricing package you marketed to me, I took the bait, and you bailed on me without fulfilling your promises. They're not just 6 months late, they're not even being developed anymore. I don't want any more dragon magazines. I want my money back.
Ok maybe robbed is hyperbolic. Defrauded isn't.
You defrauded me.
Oh wait, yeah I was!
S'alright, I didn't get into 4E for the VTT, there's plenty of those out there that exist and didn't need to borrow screen shots from other VTTs to claim they had a product in development. I play 4E because I find DMing fun again, that's it.
Fantasy Grounds II, MapTools, Battlegrounds RPG, etc, etc. Calm down and go play on an existing VTT, like the rest of us already have been since the mid-90s.
Ok maybe robbed is hyperbolic. Defrauded isn't.
You defrauded me.
I promised and defrauded nothing.
I am not a WotC employee.
As for claims of fraud, depending on when you signed up for DDI you were told that you were getting what you got, and the price that would be charged.
If you signed up early enough you've had the Character Builder ADDED to your subscription for FREE.
The other tools were behind a "coming soon" banner - and yes, unfortunately, that plan changed.
Rumors circulate that a ball was dropped by their 3rd party development company. True or not WotC decided to focus on one piece at a time instead of just pushing everything out all at once.
As such, they have to pick and choose which tool is being actively developed at a time.
Unfortunately, they've chosen not to work on your favorite (or, to be honest, my favorite) tool at the moment.
That isn't fraud. That's life.
I promised and defrauded nothing.
Pretty sure the guy's not talking to you specifically, dude, but to WotC in general. Pretty sure he couldn't care less whether you're actually a paid employee of WotC or not (and it's completely beside the point anyway).
And, pretty sure you know that ;)
Pretty sure the guy's not talking to you specifically, dude, but to WotC in general. Pretty sure he couldn't care less whether you're actually a paid employee of WotC or not (and it's completely beside the point anyway).
And, pretty sure you know that ;)
Actually, because of my VCL and News Guide titles, people make the mistake from time to time. Since he replied to me directly and said "you" as opposed to previous posts where he said "WotC" it seems likely he'd made that error.
As its not an unheard-of (or unreasonable if you're not well-versed in how the WotC forums operate) mistake, we (VCLs) have to clarify from time to time.
That's what I was looking forward to. Planned on using an HD projector pointing down onto a table.
I *think* that MapTool can do real-time lighting. I know that it can do real-time line of sight, so lighting shoyuld just be an extension of that, but I don't know off-hand.
First: it will not do lighting like that seen in the demo/mockup whatever-it-was of the VTT. Light is "hard-edged" - there's no gradual falloff of light or realtime shadows or anything like that.
However, MapTool does have an extensive (and customizable) lighting system, that handles light sources, line of sight, and fog of war. Line of sight is not based on the 4E "draw lines to each corner of the target square" since that's very 4E specific (however, that is a feature being considered as an option).
The lighting and vision system is very good. It's not perfect, but it's very good.
I don't know about Battlegrounds, but IIRC it has a pretty good lighting system too - a little prettier visually than MapTool, and different options.
There are also some REALLY cool things people have done with projectors (including projecting the image onto hand-built terrain so that the image wraps onto the terrain, or using Wii remotes as an input device, etc)
I must mention that it is very amusing seeing the hasbro reps humming and hawing with excuses and denials throughout these threads. Maybe a career in politics is a future calling " if " edition 4.5 doesn't put the game back onto the table.
I don't think anyone in this thread is a Hasbro rep. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen anyone from WotC or Hasbro (actually, I've never seen anyone who professed to be a Hasbro rep) make any statements that weren't flat "this is what will happen" comments.
I must mention that it is very amusing seeing the hasbro reps humming and hawing with excuses and denials throughout these threads. Maybe a career in politics is a future calling " if " edition 4.5 doesn't put the game back onto the table.
Hasbro reps??
Effectively, yes.
What?!?!?! You mean they (WOTC) are not going through with what they promised us ? Imagine that.
The game table is not currently in active development. People who want it "now" see this as cancellation.
If you're more patient this can also read as a delay while other tools take priority.
That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with there.
How about "People who have waited to use it for a 1.5 years and would have liked to have used it within 2.5 years of it first being touted as a feature see this as a cancellation" ?
They have another year to make that timeline, and since it's not being actively developed, I don't see that happening.
That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with there.
How about "People who have waited to use it for a 1.5 years and would have liked to have used it within 2.5 years of it first being touted as a feature see this as a cancellation" ?
They have another year to make that timeline, and since it's not being actively developed, I don't see that happening.
Because I'm one of the people that's been waiting for it for 1.5 years, would like to use it within 2.5 years, and I don't see it as a cancellation.
No offense, but that's extremely hopeful and/or naive of you.
Shelved software products have this alarming tendency never to be finished. I certainly can't remember the last decent offering that got shelved, then picked back up that ended up well. At the very least it would mean any work that WAS done on it would need to be redone from scratch. Who are they going to get to pick that up?
Moreover, see the other people's point of view. Hasbro/WoTC spent the better part of a year or more now marketing a product to us that, frankly, didn't exist, and if you're saying it's shelved indefinitely, that means for the forseeable future probably WON'T exist. Yes, it sucks. Yes, people are unhappy about it. They've got every right to be. I'm sorry if you don't like whining on your boards, but that's kinda going to happen.
Hasbro has changed a number of things about the franchise, not the least of which was slamming the price of the books through the roof immediately because they knew they had a hardcore fanbase who was willing to pay to get their 'fix'. Dropping these tools that had already gone out through their marketing department as an incentive to purchase a subscription to Insider just shows more of the same. Once with this problem when the original character builder was semi-released with the books was bad enough. Now this second shortfall is just ridiculous.
While I see your point, and trying to maintain hope, I honestly have to say it looks extremely bad, and I think pumping money into D&D in it's current state is a big mistake. I won't go dramatic about it, but it is a damn shame to go through picking up this new service with overdone promises of new tools, better experiences, and GENERAL COMPETENCE OF THE COMPANY TO FULFILL CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS, only to be let down, and told that 'well. our 3rd party software developer may have dropped the ball'. or, excuse me, not told that, because I highly doubt anything I've heard on here was from a rep. Oh wait, they haven't said anything except that it's delayed. Indefinitely.
I dunno. maybe that's just me, but that sounds like EXTREMELY poor planning on the part of the officials overseeing the D&D project as a whole. Proper implementation would have had 2/3+ of this software suite done by now. Before people start saying I don't know what I'm talking about, I work in distribution sales for software and hardware implementation, speaking daily with guys who do exactly this. I've seen rollouts of software platforms intended to allow remote management of systems in the 10,000+ qty pushed faster than this.
Frankly, it's a damned shame. I think a good gaming table made by the franchise itself would have pulled people back in droves to the game, besides my own happiness. Not to mention I'd hoped being connected to a large company known for gaming products would have done some good. Ah, well. Live and learn.
Wow, really Wolf?
No offense, but that's extremely hopeful and/or naive of you.
Really and truly.
I look at DDI as an entire service package. While I'm highly disappointed in the lack of a complete suite of tools - culminating in a Game Table that will let me play with my scattered friends - I still see work on the package being done. Slowly - far slower than I'd like in fact, but progress is progress. Even if it isn't on the one piece I want most.
Shelved software products have this alarming tendency never to be finished. I certainly can't remember the last decent offering that got shelved, then picked back up that ended up well. At the very least it would mean any work that WAS done on it would need to be redone from scratch. Who are they going to get to pick that up?
Moreover, see the other people's point of view. Hasbro/WoTC spent the better part of a year or more now marketing a product to us that, frankly, didn't exist, and if you're saying it's shelved indefinitely, that means for the forseeable future probably WON'T exist. Yes, it sucks. Yes, people are unhappy about it. They've got every right to be. I'm sorry if you don't like whining on your boards, but that's kinda going to happen.
I'll give you "forseeable future" - though it's worth clarifying that I don't "forsee" most things beyond a six-month window. To use conventions as an example, DDXP isn't in the forseeable future - it hasn't even been announced for 2010 yet. But I fully expect it to happen next year, and I still expect to attend.
As for "whining" - I fully encourage people to state what they want. I just reserve the right to reply as I see fit (or not) just as you have that same right. After all, that's what a discussion forum is for - discussion. That includes the exchange of sometimes conflicting opinions and ideas.
Hasbro has changed a number of things about the franchise, not the least of which was slamming the price of the books through the roof immediately because they knew they had a hardcore fanbase who was willing to pay to get their 'fix'. Dropping these tools that had already gone out through their marketing department as an incentive to purchase a subscription to Insider just shows more of the same. Once with this problem when the original character builder was semi-released with the books was bad enough. Now this second shortfall is just ridiculous.
I'm confused. You seem to be saying that Hasbro/WotC jacked the price of the books to simply get more money. However, they then dropped the price of their online subscription model. If they were just going to be money grubbing wouldn't they have simply released half-finished tools, charged full price, and told the "hard core fix" crowd to live with it?
Don't get me wrong, the project is mis-managed, but I think there's a clear line between human error (and even plain incompetence) and nefarious corporate greed.
Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding your point, however.
While I see your point, and trying to maintain hope, I honestly have to say it looks extremely bad, and I think pumping money into D&D in it's current state is a big mistake. I won't go dramatic about it, but it is a damn shame to go through picking up this new service with overdone promises of new tools, better experiences, and GENERAL COMPETENCE OF THE COMPANY TO FULFILL CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS, only to be let down, and told that 'well. our 3rd party software developer may have dropped the ball'. or, excuse me, not told that, because I highly doubt anything I've heard on here was from a rep. Oh wait, they haven't said anything except that it's delayed. Indefinitely.
It IS a damn shame that they over-committed.
But. . . WotC can't go back in time and take those original projections, estimations and over-commitments and take them away.
They CAN tell us what the current plan is (To work on one project at a time, and to not schedule inactive projects until the active piece is done).
That's a subtle difference from something being delayed "indefinately". I'll agree it isn't as easy as "we'll pick up "X" in six months" - but indefinite has a negative connotation associated with it.
It's delayed until the the current project is done. It's less about shelving the project and letting it gather dust, and more about where the current focus is.
Don't think of the Game Table as being boxed up and put into cold storage (at least, I don't) - think of it more as being right on the workbench next to the Campaign Tools, awaiting its turn.
I dunno. maybe that's just me, but that sounds like EXTREMELY poor planning on the part of the officials overseeing the D&D project as a whole. Proper implementation would have had 2/3+ of this software suite done by now. Before people start saying I don't know what I'm talking about, I work in distribution sales for software and hardware implementation, speaking daily with guys who do exactly this. I've seen rollouts of software platforms intended to allow remote management of systems in the 10,000+ qty pushed faster than this.
Frankly, it's a damned shame. I think a good gaming table made by the franchise itself would have pulled people back in droves to the game, besides my own happiness. Not to mention I'd hoped being connected to a large company known for gaming products would have done some good. Ah, well. Live and learn.
I agree. It IS a damn shame. I have high hopes (as an active RPGA gamer) that having a VTT tied directly to the D&D brand will help consolidate online RPGA games. Right now these people play on "this" VTT, those people play on "that" VTT.
While I don't think it will be as easy as 100% of the people using VTTs will switch to the Game Table - I have high hopes that a quality VTT will pickup 75% or more of the market, and offer up a consolidated place to find RPGA games.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Perhaps I'm just not seeing it, but does anyone know what the current tool is that they ARE working on? Not just updating the character builder, that's in maintenance mode.
Campaignt Tools.
There is a Directed Discussion thread here where people are discussing what they would like to see in a Campaign Manager. The details that we have gotten so far from WotC are fairly vague, so now is your best chance to have some influence on what they add.
I have hope (due to reading some of the 'official' posts) that Wolf is truly on the mark when he points us to the direction that WotC is placing their dev's attention in one tool at a time. Hasbro/WotC is fully capable of picking up the virtual table-top software any time they chose and get it into a state that will make your head spin - I completely trust in that. In the meantime, they already have their franchise name on official products that work for versions 3.0 and 3.5 through BioWare's Neverwinter Nights and Obsidian's Neverwinter Nights 2 where the entire experience is even animated and completely customizable. This is where it makes perfect sense to work on some of the other tools first - but also (and mainly) the fact that those who answer their surveys have proven to require tool delivery in the order that they are coming.
I will truly love the day that the Virtual Table Top comes to fruition - and will get a new campaign going with friends across the globe as soon as it does. In the meantime, I must say that I feel DDI to be worth (RPG gamer-wise) MUCH more than the meager subscription fee that it costs.
For those who feel otherwise, I also agree with Wolf: If you don't want it, don't buy it - that simple.
BTW, WotC, if you want/need 3d help with VTT when the time comes, I'll work for cheep just because I love how you've shaped my games over the excellent years you've given me!
Thanks!
I want to state for the record that I truly respect and appreciate the moderators and volunteers on the forums. They have a job that's incredibly hard, and they do it with a passion for gaming, and professionalism that I feel is rarely rivaled.
Now. I want to say that I don't feel that I'm one of the primary gamers that WOTC/Hasbro aims their products at. I'm in my forties with kids. I game a lot less than I used to. Unfortunately I feel after talking to other gamers that Wizards may have missed an opportunity here. Older gamers with families.
I have seen tons of older gamers quit after kids and more responsibility came along. Because they have to stay at home, they can't game unless it's on their PC. They can't spend hours away from their families.
I saw/see the DDi tabletop as a godsend for that area. When I saw the interviews and demos, I was amazed. I would finally be able to play D&D with real gamers online. I talked with more people who said that if it really happened, they loved the idea of returning to playing D&D. There's so much more it could offer them than MMO's.
Now I hear that it has been delayed for a Campaign Manager. It kills me. For me,the main draw of 4E was the online aspect. I like it, but I want to play it. (Yes I know about the online options, but they are nowhere near the same, when all factors are taken into account.)
I have friends who own almost every 2e-3.5e book out. These same friends are now playing MMO's only because they can't play D&D on the online tabletop. These people have good jobs. We have the cash to buy the new books...if we have somewhere to use them. All the money going to other companies would be paid to WOTC. Every day delayed is money lost from my point of view. (example...I have a friend who dropped over two hundred bucks on video games the other day, all the while angrily complaining about how much he misses playing D&D!)
Anyway, that's my rant. I understand business concerns, but 4E was touted as being designed with the virtual tabletop in mind. I looked forward to playing Living RPGA games on the tabletop. For now, 4E looks petty bleak to me. (Not putting the system down, but the inability to enjoy it.) For now, my buying will go on hold, at least until I can use what I buy.
The management and business development leaders at Wizards have once again deprived us of a highly demanded product because of poor project planning and business models.I also will graduate from Westwood Online with a B.S. in Game Software Development in October.
With that on the table I can tell you that if I had to work on the Virtual Game Table by myself 40 hours a week. I could have finished it in around a year with the features that were supposed to be supported.
It has been in development much longer than that, and the only thing that could have kept it there is bad planning and even worse (unmentionable lawsuits). The online aspect really was the reason I kept playing. While all of 3rd party the VTT's out there are really worth using, they all miss out on one aspect that was touted for D&DI GameTable. That feature is the lobby where you can log in and pick a game to join. That feature alone made it worth waiting. Since they haven't been able to keep their promises I've pretty much given up on serious gaming. I still play with my nephews occasionally, but its just not the same. I also want the ability to just drop in when I feel like playing. With the existing VTT's that is impossible.
Overall I have to say that they really should have gotten the game table working first, then work on all of the other stuff later. This would have allowed people to get into and try D&D and the GameTable. Then they could have had a higher fan base than how they are doing it now. They seem to be taking Atari's tact. "We'll get it out someday and it might even work!"
Really I'm just disappointed that Hasbro and WoTC don't care enough about the franchise and their customers to see where the market is. I guess I'll go ahead and create my own VTT with a lobby feature, then see if I can get enough money up to buy the use of the rules from WoTC.
I, and my friends, all with full-time jobs, lots of 'em with families, all scattered about the UK, subscribed to DDI purely on teh strength of the Virtual Table top.
Can't say how disappointed I am to be reading that it isn't even top of the 'jobs to be done' list and I, along with all my friends will be letting our subscriptions run out and simpy spend more time on WoW, where at least we can talk and group together. A very sad day indeed.
You see, this is the primary thing I don't get. With their keywords, relatively straightforward combat mechanics, and so forth, I can't see where the difficulty in programming this comes in. I'm not a computer science major myself, but engineers are (at least where I am) forced to take a decent amount of programming, and I know enough to know that this project doesn't seem unreasonably large at all. With a topdown view and liberal use of sprites, I'm pretty sure my brother (an actual CS major, just graduated) could make this no problem. He's already made more complicated things in his classes (I've played a few of his games).
My only guess is that graphics were the primary issue, they didn't want to release a topdown view that used sprites or something. Rather than release a bare bones thing, they probably want to go with a more modern form of graphics.
Now, I know that even in June, the DDI price is not quite up to MMO money, it's close enough for me to allocate that money into a MMO instead, and just stick to the books. Let's face it, more people were hooked into DDI by the visualizer and game table than any other content. They were the big draw. Without them, WOTC will be hard pressed, I believe, to compete for monthly dollars with X-Box live, MMO's, Netflix, ect.
Currently, I use MapTools for online D&D, but I was really looking forward to a program supported by the company producing the game I use it for. The game table, as it was promised, was far superior to anything out there thus far. There is no substitute for the visualizer.
1.) Promise the "holy grail" of geekdom: play D&D with your old friends from all across the globe again with a user friendly program.
[sorry Fantasy Grounds and other VTTs - you are hard to use. My friend Joe with a wife and two kids is NOT going to learn how to program script in Lua]
2.) Sell Insider subscriptions and release ALL the core books
[All the 30-50 year olds think "this is the one" and go purchase the books and/or the Insider subscription]
3.) Drop the virtual tabletop project to save money
[The books are now paperweights for all the folks with geographically seperated D&D friends who were depending on the tabletop]
Result: Not only did WotC sell books/subscriptions to the teen-20 year olds, but they also sold books to the 30-50 year old demographic -- and they didn't have to do anything but PROMISE a virtual tabletop!!
investment: a promise
return: more customers / subscribers
risk: no risk because we break the promise only AFTER releasing the books!
All you folks saying you "are never buying another WotC product" because of this... on behalf of WotC let me say:
"Who cares? You already bought the product! Tell your story walking."
If you had absolutely no use for the products you bought and were banking on a software release schedueled several years down the rode, it's kinda your fault you got burned. Perhaps learn to be less impulsive with your purchases in the future.
See I don't really understand that logic. Realistically, if you were only buying the books/subscription for just this, why not wait until it came out? Software is constantly delayed and canceled, it'd take a really oblivious person to see a tentative release date some years in the future and assume that nothing at all would cause a delay or cancellation.
If you had absolutely no use for the products you bought and were banking on a software release schedueled several years down the rode, it's kinda your fault you got burned. Perhaps learn to be less impulsive with your purchases in the future.
Ding, ding, ding. Winner, Winner, Chicken dinner
I don't believe you guys are this naive.
1.) Promise the "holy grail" of geekdom: play D&D with your old friends from all across the globe again with a user friendly program.
[sorry Fantasy Grounds and other VTTs - you are hard to use. My friend Joe with a wife and two kids is NOT going to learn how to program script in Lua]
I don't know the first thing about scripting. That's what the user forums are for. I download the 4E Ruleset made by others, and I play the game.
There *is* a stepping stone in that the GM has to know how to open firewall ports for inbound traffic, but that's a one-time configuration.
2.) Sell Insider subscriptions and release ALL the core books
[All the 30-50 year olds think "this is the one" and go purchase the books and/or the Insider subscription]
3.) Drop the virtual tabletop project to save money
[The books are now paperweights for all the folks with geographically seperated D&D friends who were depending on the tabletop]
I don't see how charging less money for subscriptions because of the lack of some elements is saving them money?
If they were chargning the full price, I'd have more sympathy for your argument, but they're losing money compared to their original projects for the simple fact that they aren't charging as much as they'd intended (and one could easily argue that they don't have as many subscribers as they'd like - if the voices decrying the lack of a VTT is any indicator).
This is also predicated on the (currently false) assumption that the Game Table is truly dead - WotC has not given that indication, despite claims otherwise.
I don't know the first thing about scripting. That's what the user forums are for. I download the 4E Ruleset made by others, and I play the game.
There *is* a stepping stone in that the GM has to know how to open firewall ports for inbound traffic, but that's a one-time configuration.
I don't see how charging less money for subscriptions because of the lack of some elements is saving them money?
If they were chargning the full price, I'd have more sympathy for your argument, but they're losing money compared to their original projects for the simple fact that they aren't charging as much as they'd intended (and one could easily argue that they don't have as many subscribers as they'd like - if the voices decrying the lack of a VTT is any indicator).
This is also predicated on the (currently false) assumption that the Game Table is truly dead - WotC has not given that indication, despite claims otherwise.
The vocal minority do not make a majority trust me. I know that 75 to 85 percent of our local group subscribe to DDi.
See I don't really understand that logic. Realistically, if you were only buying the books/subscription for just this, why not wait until it came out?
Umm... they trusted WotC. I think I have been up-front in saying they/we were naive.
A defense of "C'mon, you should have known projects get cancelled all the time. No one believes what a company says" - is no defense at all.
Ha! Screw us for getting excited and wanting to buy the books and learn all about the new edition we were going to play, right? Silly us! What fools!
Ding, ding, ding. Winner, Winner, Chicken dinner
Good job on contributing nothing to the conversation!
You rock!Umm... they trusted WotC. I think I have been up-front in saying they/we were naive.
A defense of "C'mon, you should have known projects get cancelled all the time. No one believes what a company says" - is no defense at all.
Ha! Screw us for getting excited and wanting to buy the books and learn all about the new edition we were going to play, right? Silly us! What fools!
Projects do get canceled all the time, it's a valid point.
Furthermore, so what if you trusted wotc? Why would you start paying for dnd insider and the books several years before the software came out that you wanted to use? That makes no sense at all. Things tend to get cheaper over time, so had you waited to buy the books until the software actually came out, not only would you not risk of cancelation, you'd probably get the same products at a reduced price.
Basically I think you're not being honest here, you paid for dnd insider and the books because you wanted them then, and while VTT may have influenced your purchase, there was also other stuff you clearly wanted out of it, otherwise you could have easily waited for an actual release of the product you wanted.
I download the 4E Ruleset made by others, and I play the game.
You obviously don't DM any games. WotC has forbid anyone from sharing 4E data. So you either (a.) spent 20-40 hours copying the rulebooks into your tabletop or (b.) illegally downloaded 4E data from other people.
Basically I think you're not being honest here, you paid for dnd insider and the books because you wanted them then, and while VTT may have influenced your purchase, there was also other stuff you clearly wanted out of it, otherwise you could have easily waited for an actual release of the product you wanted.
If the books had not been advertised with the virtual tabletop, I would not have bought them. The books and subscription are useless to me without being able to play with my friends. I think a lot of other people would have passed also for this reason.
Why would you start paying for dnd insider and the books several years before the software came out that you wanted to use? That makes no sense at all.
The virtual tabletop project was advertised as "coming soon".
We were so excited about being able to play D&D across the miles that we wanted to start reading and discussing the rules in anticipation of it arriving any day.
1.) D&D Insider was ADVERTISED with the tabletop functionality (coming soon!).
2.) The Player's Handbook I bought has a Virtual Tabletop advertisement at the back of the book.
Anything else?
The vocal minority do not make a majority trust me. I know that 75 to 85 percent of our local group subscribe to DDi.
Ya lost me, Mith.
You obviously don't DM any games. WotC has forbid anyone from sharing 4E data. So you either (a.) spent 20-40 hours copying the rulebooks into your tabletop or (b.) illegally downloaded 4E data from other people.
You obviously don't know me.
I do (or at least HAVE) DMed 4E games with FGII.
The first few games I DMed I entered the stats for the monsters by-hand into the templates provided in the JPG4E Ruleset. It took me precious little time to do so (maybe a half-hour for an RPGA game?)
My players entered their data into their character sheets under my guideance, this took a little longer (the term "herding cats" comes to mind). We simply entered powers and items by hand. After showing them how to do a power or two, they caught on and were capable of entering what they needed as they needed it.
No distribution or copyright infringement needed.
Later I found the rulebook parsers and as I own (legal) PDFs of the first three core books, I tried my hand at parsing the data into FGII - admittedly, it was hit or miss and I gave up on the project. More power to the people that have the top to set all the formatting, I'm happy to enter what I need as I need it.
If the books had not been advertised with the virtual tabletop, I would not have bought them. The books and subscription are useless to me without being able to play with my friends. I think a lot of other people would have passed also for this reason.
It's unfortunate you didn't get what you want, and I'm with you - I'm still eagerly awaiting the game table as well. My friends lost interest in playing via FGII and the lack of easy portablility for characters between hosts/GMs.
Something that simply reads the character builder files would be a huge boon to my friends. The Game Table should provide this. However, there are still multiple options available if it means that much to you. There are several groups dedicated to playing 4E online, and all do so with only minimal adaptation from the end user.
The virtual tabletop project was advertised as "coming soon".
We were so excited about being able to play D&D across the miles that we wanted to start reading and discussing the rules in anticipation of it arriving any day.
1.) D&D Insider was ADVERTISED with the tabletop functionality (coming soon!).
2.) The Player's Handbook I bought has a Virtual Tabletop advertisement at the back of the book.
Anything else?
Yes, and those books were sent off to the printers months before they were in the hands of us the consumers. It was at that point too late to remove that last page. WotC had high hopes and short deadlines for their digital initiative.
They can't go back in time (as much as I think they'd like to) and "undo" those ads.
It's unfortunate they missed their goals. It's unfortunate that this forced the pendulum from "tell everyone everything" to "don't say a word about DDI" - fortunately, thanks in no small part to WotC_Trevor I think, the pendulum is slowly creaking back to the middle ground.
If DDI isn't for you without the game table, I get that. Here's hoping that when it *does* release, we'll all be able to love it, and even roll some digital dice together.
The main part of what I was looking forward to with the Game Table was the ability to just drop in and find an open game and throw together a quick character using the character generator and start playing. This sadly is not going to happen now.
They also gave specific dates as to when the game table would be available. This was the whole reason I bought the core books, dice, game mat, and wet erase markers. See now I'm out a lot of money on nothing, AND I feel betrayed. What more could they do to me?
One thing I leanred while playing regular table top D&D is that I use a lot of my imagination. All the spells, magical effects, giants, gnomes, elves so on and so on. Now on this virtual table top game they have to take everything anyone can imagine in the D&D game and put it into this. For example spider climb they have to show your miniature climbing a wall. And all the crazy things people think of all the time. IMO they dont want to limit you to what you can and cant do on the Virutal Table top game then they realized the endless possiblities that could happen in game. Thus causing a Delay in the creation of the game.
And yes I know Rouges is spelled like Rogues :D
The only exception is if WotC expressly stated that the failure to release said product would make the purchaser ineligible for a refund, in that case, then there would be no reasonable assumption for a refund. It's not enough to put it in small print, either. It has to be very plain and very open, otherwise it gets into that legal gray area that tends to rule in favor of the user.
Now. Here's the difficult part. WotC, even to this date, has not cancelled the additional software. Should they cancel it, then people would be clamoring for money and they would be forced to give it up (that /is/ effectively a bait and switch, to advertise a product that won't be delivered in order to get people to sign up for an alternative). If they wait, then they have a class action lawsuit. The most honest and legal recourse is to apologize and provide a refund to any whom complain about this.
Also, you can't say 'You're getting this free. Oops, we don't have any so you get nothing. The value of the product offered is still considered value for the items purchased, free or not. There's a retail value. If the product does not exist yet, then we can only go on the offered estimated value of the products as given by WotC themselves.
If anyone's a lawyer here and thinks I'm wrong about this, please, let me know, but I've done a bit of research on this and well, it ends up that WotC can be in trouble for not offering what they have advertised.
The vocal minority do not make a majority trust me. I know that 75 to 85 percent of our local group subscribe to DDi.
Out of my table top group we have 11 players. Four subscribed to D&Di in anticipation of the VTT. Four more planned to get D&Di as soon as the VTT was released. The three others are spouses of players and planned to utilize their computers. After I informed the group of the current status of the VTT being officially shelved one may continue to get the subscription. The others plan to not get a subscription. So our numbers will be soon less than 10% with D&Di.
I'm the only one who comes by the forums here... on an irregular basis. None of us knew about the surveys about the products... oh well. We plan on just skipping out on D&Di and using RPTools.
Out of my table top group we have 11 players. Four subscribed to D&Di in anticipation of the VTT. Four more planned to get D&Di as soon as the VTT was released. The three others are spouses of players and planned to utilize their computers. After I informed the group of the current status of the VTT being officially shelved one may continue to get the subscription. The others plan to not get a subscription. So our numbers will be soon less than 10% with D&Di.
I'm the only one who comes by the forums here... on an irregular basis. None of us knew about the surveys about the products... oh well. We plan on just skipping out on D&Di and using RPTools.
Since RPTools are out longer and have been thoroughly bug tested by a vast community of users they will probably be better built. Unless WoTC pulls a miracle out of nowhere and actually follows a software design plan.
I agree with you completely. I am a software developer and I think I will spend my spare time creating a Game Table like software application with a lobby feature. Then I will host the lobby for $9.99 on a server computer, or spend $3.99 a month for a bounce.to address to hooks it up to my computer. Should take less than a year, plus the subscription cost will be much cheaper. I'm thinking $4.99 a month for the DM and they can play with as many players as they want within reason (8 players or so). What does everyone think?
Really and truly.
Don't get me wrong, the project is mis-managed, but I think there's a clear line between human error (and even plain incompetence) and nefarious corporate greed.
They CAN tell us what the current plan is (To work on one project at a time, and to not schedule inactive projects until the active piece is done).
Yep. There's a line. they crossed it when they decided to up the DDi price without the full suite of applications available. to be brutally honest, I think that after my current subscription runs out, I don't plan on renewing. I'm running on a very limited budget, and I don't think I can make a DDi price increase fit into it.
Yep. There's a line. they crossed it when they decided to up the DDi price without the full suite of applications available. to be brutally honest, I think that after my current subscription runs out, I don't plan on renewing. I'm running on a very limited budget, and I don't think I can make a DDi price increase fit into it.
Alas, budgets are tight all around, and if you can't afford it, you can't afford it. We've all been there, and there's no denying that DDI (and even new D&D books) are a luxury item (not as luxury as say, a new flat-screen TV, but a luxury all the same).
That said - keep in mind that while they aren't offering the full suite of tools yet, they aren't charging the full (original stated) price either. Yes, there's an increase going into effect of (up to) $2/month - but there was also no increase after the Character Builder was launched.
The price we were given was an Introductory Price, and WotC feels it's time to withdraw that now that DDI has gotten some legs under it. Be it because of added content (The Character Builder, the growing amount of data in the Compendium, or the forthcoming Campaign Tools), or because they really do just want to move away from their Introductory Price.
This doesn't strike me as crossing a line, especially not since they're giving people over a month to lock in their current rates. If *any* new software shows up in the next year it's a double win (once for keeping the lower rate, once again for getting more for your money).
If, on the other hand, WotC had announced that pricing was going full-tilt to the $15/month (with discounts for longer subs) then I'd be right there with you.
Not that any amount of reasoning that goes into the decision makes paying bills on a limited budget any easier (as someone who's been putting almost all his money into paying off debts of late, I can relate).
the increase is only $2/month?
I did my math wrong. I can afford that...Actually, I feel pretty stupid now.
wait...
the increase is only $2/month?
Actually, I feel pretty stupid now.
Really? can I feel? Just kidding.
I just don't think its worth it right now. While in the past I've supported D&D, I don't feel that I can support them when they deceive us regarding release dates of products and things of that nature. Maybe at a later date they will begin to be honest and at that date I'll support them again.
They raised the price. Period.
I wish we could get off this "end of introductory price" market-speak nonsense.
They raised the price. Period.
Exactly my sentiment. They raised the price to something that is unreasonable based on the content they are providing.
A well done 2 dimensional interface, if it just helps the DM and players get organized online would be far preferable to a 3d virtual gametop with all the bells and whistles that may lanquish on the drawing board for an indefinate amount of time. I just hope it doesn't get stuck in "Duke Nukem Forever" mode.
Deep down, D&D is still primarily a game of imagination. I know there are some "online" programs that help to organize DM and players over the internet, but WoTC is in a unique position to do that in a much more efficiant manner.
I think maybe WoTC is trying to hard to make something that is on par with MMORPGs. But unlike an MMORPG, D&D is an organic entity made up entirely of what the players and DM want to convey. There are no walls in D&D. If a DM wants to run a campaign or advanture in a land that has no continents, but only small and medium sized islands, with a sea/ocean theme, then thats what will happen.
On the flip side, a DM could deside to run a campaign in a land entirely ruled by undead, with the ocean being someplace over impassible geographic locations.. then thats his or her perojative.
A well done 2d interface would streamline the process. Maybe even make it so a DM could import maps from Campaign Cartographer. (I'm pretty sure WoTC would blanch at the mere hint of making thier interface compatible with a 3rd party software program, no matter how well done it is.).
Personally, I think WoTC should make an effort to have some sort of vitual gametop. Even if its just 2D, in order help players organize online games.
A well done 2 dimensional interface, if it just helps the DM and players get organized online would be far preferable to a 3d virtual gametop with all the bells and whistles that may lanquish on the drawing board for an indefinate amount of time. I just hope it doesn't get stuck in "Duke Nukem Forever" mode.
Deep down, D&D is still primarily a game of imagination. I know there are some "online" programs that help to organize DM and players over the internet, but WoTC is in a unique position to do that in a much more efficiant manner.
I think maybe WoTC is trying to hard to make something that is on par with MMORPGs. But unlike an MMORPG, D&D is an organic entity made up entirely of what the players and DM want to convey. There are no walls in D&D. If a DM wants to run a campaign or advanture in a land that has no continents, but only small and medium sized islands, with a sea/ocean theme, then thats what will happen.
On the flip side, a DM could deside to run a campaign in a land entirely ruled by undead, with the ocean being someplace over impassible geographic locations.. then thats his or her perojative.
A well done 2d interface would streamline the process. Maybe even make it so a DM could import maps from Campaign Cartographer. (I'm pretty sure WoTC would blanch at the mere hint of making thier interface compatible with a 3rd party software program, no matter how well done it is.).
That's what they are working on now a campaign creator program. So they would make it compatible with their own programs first.
Welcome back to the forums.
I recommend reading the forums and I am sure you will find the other 100 posts about this.
heh, I always get a kick out of the guy that spends more words telling some one to RTFM than answering the question.
zWolf -out.
Maybe a third party can develope this for us?
I agree, work thru the major problems first, then offer the product when you know you can deliver.
Maybe a third party can develope this for us?
If you're talking about getting a 3rd party to develop the GameTable, there are...dozens of existing virtual tabletops, several of them quite good. The only thing that they don't have is the "Lobby" feature, which would help with pickup games.
Otherwise...Battlegrounds, MapTool, FantasyGrounds, iTableTop, WeRole...you name it.
Wait that would mean that It would be Hasbro's Magic and DnD and there would be a restructuring at WoTC for this...
So i am guessing that they dont have to Follow the Hasbro Rules!!
So where is a decent color map tool for an Unofficial VTT??
Its nice to have the Current Maptool ( thanks creator)
but it's just not enough for my purposes... i would rather have a Baldur's gate mod made as a VTT or something... but i need to stop voicing my displeasure
I do love this game and want to see it succeed!!! I just wish they would release it already even in its incomplete!!! We as a community could probably finish it in a 10th of the time as WoTC can.
Huzzah for Open Source Community Programs!!! that way everyone prospers!!!
And when WoTC was still taking about releasing the other digital tools it was stated their would be two subscription levels. One was the "Basic" which is what is currently available and everyone that subscribes has. The other was the "Premium" (or whatever it was called) which would cost more and include all the other digital tools like the Table Top.
But I don't recall them ever promoting you would get some kind of bonus, discount, or etc. when the tools came out if you signed up for the basic subscription now. It was simply you can start "enjoying" the extra content and tools already available if you subscribe.
All that being said, yea I'm rather disappointed that they canceled other tools. But there isn't much I can do about it. And honestly I don't think the "limitations" on what they could do with it was really the major issue. I think like many things it was probably a marketing decision. That is given the state of the economy, the number of current subscribers, the estimated number of users who would "upgrade" to get the new tools, and etc. made them think it wasn't as profitable as they had hoped.
And when WoTC was still taking about releasing the other digital tools it was stated their would be two subscription levels. One was the "Basic" which is what is currently available and everyone that subscribes has. The other was the "Premium" (or whatever it was called) which would cost more and include all the other digital tools like the Table Top.
I don't recall that being discussed by WotC. I *do* recall, in one of my Directed Discussion threads, that a large number of people brought that up as a good idea, but I don't recall WotC ever confirming that this was in the plans. (I may be mistaken, and will gladly stand corrected)
now if they would have 2 separate levels to DDI, i would upgrade now... like most people!! to get the money to pay some programmers in order to start making it.
I am not lazy, but i don't want to have to run like 3 to 4 programs to play 1 game!! I want the 1 stop shop, which would make the most sense...
Ooh... even a player subscription plan and a DM subscription plan...
would you opt to have the DM plan if it let you build your encounters and dungeons?? or just the Player plan to play in others games??
Who could put in a good word for the community to have them release it now... they ran a demo at the DnD expo right?? if they would just let us subscribers use it... i would sign a NDA... just like i did for Magic and DDO...
please!!!!!! I'll even give you my firstborn son!!!
Well, I think Google might have something that will surpass the VTT on the market that is open source well before the VTT is released... I cant remember what its called... watched some video on it last night while playing 1 vs 100 on the 360(awesome)
now if they would have 2 separate levels to DDI, i would upgrade now... like most people!! to get the money to pay some programmers in order to start making it.
I am not lazy, but i don't want to have to run like 3 to 4 programs to play 1 game!! I want the 1 stop shop, which would make the most sense...
Ooh... even a player subscription plan and a DM subscription plan...
would you opt to have the DM plan if it let you build your encounters and dungeons?? or just the Player plan to play in others games??
Who could put in a good word for the community to have them release it now... they ran a demo at the DnD expo right?? if they would just let us subscribers use it... i would sign a NDA... just like i did for Magic and DDO...
please!!!!!! I'll even give you my firstborn son!!!
What they could do is a kind of loan system like bonds or something. You buy them in $20.00 increments and the money goes directly to finance an experienced group of software professionals to create the game. Then you redeem however many of the bonds you bought by using them to pay for your D&DI subscriptions. If for some reason it flops, they just refund your money which has been sitting in a bank and gaining interest. So they would still make money from it either way. It would also gauge the interest in creating the VTT or Game Table. So there is no way they could lose (unless of course they spend the money on something else instead of letting it sit in the bank, and then drop the project).
now if they would have 2 separate levels to DDI, i would upgrade now... like most people!! to get the money to pay some programmers in order to start making it.
Well one of the potential problems with the VTT which might be the reason they abandon it is because of the sheer amount "exceptions" in the game and changes with each book. I can speak from personal experience when working with another VTT program which I use to write macros for but don't any due to a lack of free time.
I would cringe every time WoTC released new powers with new exceptions on how things could potentially be handled. Things people take for granted when simply playing a regular pen & paper table top. But meant that macros had to be re-written to handle these new exceptions.
The development team can come up with whatever kind of crazy mechanic they want. But the programmers then have to get it working in the VTT and hopefully without to much need for major overhauls.
Well one of the potential problems with the VTT which might be the reason they abandon it is because of the sheer amount "exceptions" in the game and changes with each book. I can speak from personal experience when working with another VTT program which I use to write macros for but don't any due to a lack of free time.
I would cringe every time WoTC released new powers with new exceptions on how things could potentially be handled. Things people take for granted when simply playing a regular pen & paper table top. But meant that macros had to be re-written to handle these new exceptions.
The development team can come up with whatever kind of crazy mechanic they want. But the programmers then have to get it working in the VTT and hopefully without to much need for major overhauls.
I'm pretty sure they weren't planning to do any automation of the rules, though, beyond simple dice rolls - so no rules resolving; it was very literally a "virtual table top."
I would cringe every time WoTC released new powers with new exceptions on how things could potentially be handled. Things people take for granted when simply playing a regular pen & paper table top. But meant that macros had to be re-written to handle these new exceptions.
I Cringe just thinking that they put out all the handbooks so close together!! they could have spaced it out a little farther...
first they should have done the main books and the Adventurers Vault... and had everything focused on them... then onto the accessory books like the Power books and then forgotten realms... but I am getting ahead of my self!!
I just think they tried to do to much to it and it kept tanking... here's a rule that everyone knows... and a rule that works!!
KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID...
we didn't need superior graphics... NWN style would have worked ok, then maybe after you get it working properly... then hit us with the advanced graphics
I Cringe just thinking that they put out all the handbooks so close together!! they could have spaced it out a little farther...
first they should have done the main books and the Adventurers Vault... and had everything focused on them... then onto the accessory books like the Power books and then forgotten realms... but I am getting ahead of my self!!
I just think they tried to do to much to it and it kept tanking... here's a rule that everyone knows... and a rule that works!!
KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID...
we didn't need superior graphics... NWN style would have worked ok, then maybe after you get it working properly... then hit us with the advanced graphics
Seriously I agree. I could have programmed a basic 3d board and dice roller that worked over a network with voice chat in 6 months if I didn't have to worry about the rules.
Heck I might just do that.
Then all people have to do is throw some 3D figures in there and they got what WotC promised.
Seriously I agree. I could have programmed a basic 3d board and dice roller that worked over a network with voice chat in 6 months if I didn't have to worry about the rules.
Heck I might just do that.
Then all people have to do is throw some 3D figures in there and they got what WotC promised.
Why bother there are already VTT programs out there. And some that are pretty good. If you wanna play digitally just use one of those.
I've used FGII, and although it was entertaining, it takes forever to set up, and then you have to announce your game on a message board. Then you have to use some kind of voice chat software in order to communicate effectively (unless you like typing). It just takes too much time.
The main part of what I was looking forward to with the Game Table was the ability to just drop in and find an open game and throw together a quick character using the character generator and start playing. This sadly is not going to happen now.
They also gave specific dates as to when the game table would be available. This was the whole reason I bought the core books, dice, game mat, and wet erase markers. See now I'm out a lot of money on nothing, AND I feel betrayed. What more could they do to me?
dice, game mat, and wet erase markers
If the Game Table is your selling point, what do these items have to do with that?
Voice chat software is free "http://getgsc.com", and setting up FG2 is not hard. (Nor is MapTool or BattlegroundsRPG.) Building your own ruleset in FG2 is hard. But luckily a group of folks have already done that for you--the 4E Ruleset is extremely popular with FG2. Nor does it violate any copyright, it's just blank character sheets and templates for monsters, items, powers, etc.
You can just enter in powers as you gain them. If you were playing face-to-face you're going to fill out a power card, so there's not much difference. If you're more ambitious and willing to learn to use the PDF parsers that have been created, you can even parse your powers section to create drag-n-drop powers. But that isn't a required feature. If your players can struggle through filling out a template for their 4-5 starting powers (again, just like filling out face-to-face power cards) then you're good to go.
dice, game mat, and wet erase markers
If the Game Table is your selling point, what do these items have to do with that?
Voice chat software is free "http://getgsc.com", and setting up FG2 is not hard. (Nor is MapTool or BattlegroundsRPG.) Building your own ruleset in FG2 is hard. But luckily a group of folks have already done that for you--the 4E Ruleset is extremely popular with FG2. Nor does it violate any copyright, it's just blank character sheets and templates for monsters, items, powers, etc.
You can just enter in powers as you gain them. If you were playing face-to-face you're going to fill out a power card, so there's not much difference. If you're more ambitious and willing to learn to use the PDF parsers that have been created, you can even parse your powers section to create drag-n-drop powers. But that isn't a required feature. If your players can struggle through filling out a template for their 4-5 starting powers (again, just like filling out face-to-face power cards) then you're good to go.
I've played with both the battle mat face to face, and FG2 using VoiP software, and the 4E ruleset that was out at the time. It was too hectic to schedule game sessions and it is difficult to use FG2 we had to restart several times each session, just to get everyone to see what the DM (me) wanted them to see. It became very difficult to use and eventually too time consuming. You also have to type in every feat, monster, and power because it is against the GSL and terms of use to copy anything else. So I can say that I would much rather have a VTT with a lobby that can load a character from the CB.
So some friends ask if we can start playing DnD again. Nope. Im glad to see hasbro's ******* of the brand is still well in effect. Why the big hoopla and videos of demos etc if were just gonna kill it off? Seriously. It cant be THAT hard to code.
Maybe ill check back in another year. Im just glad i didnt buy books waiting for empty promises:D
Sad part is, we can post on here all day. The VTT wont come, and Hasbro has most of the money they wanted.
Seriously I agree. I could have programmed a basic 3d board and dice roller that worked over a network with voice chat in 6 months if I didn't have to worry about the rules.
Heck I might just do that.
Then all people have to do is throw some 3D figures in there and they got what WotC promised.
Let me know when ur done. Ill buy it. For that matter, i dont care about all of the "free" VTTs. sounds like there a pain and they suck.
I'd pay up to 100 cash for a GOOD VTT, u know, like the one they got our hopes up with.
Let me know when ur done. Ill buy it. For that matter, i dont care about all of the "free" VTTs. sounds like there a pain and they suck.
I'd pay up to 100 cash for a GOOD VTT, u know, like the one they got our hopes up with.
Check out Maptools. It's free and it's a great VTT. It may only be 2D but it does more than the simple dice rolling & stat tracking one that WoTC was showing off.
Check out Maptools. It's free and it's a great VTT. It may only be 2D but it does more than the simple dice rolling & stat tracking one that WoTC was showing off.
Or, for a more well-rounded VTT (in my humble opinion) check out Fantasy Grounds. It isn't free (though, there IS a demo) - but I find it to be the most user friendly/least complicated of the stable tabletops.
You can ASSUME all you want about the other VTTs - but you really *should* try them before dimissing them completely.
The only "hard" part, about setting them up is that the host/GM needs to have a basic understanding of firewalls and networking to allow connections from the Internet in to his machine - and they ALL have forums to help you in that step.
Or, for a more well-rounded VTT (in my humble opinion) check out Fantasy Grounds. It isn't free (though, there IS a demo) - but I find it to be the most user friendly/least complicated of the stable tabletops.
You can ASSUME all you want about the other VTTs - but you really *should* try them before dimissing them completely.
The only "hard" part, about setting them up is that the host/GM needs to have a basic understanding of firewalls and networking to allow connections from the Internet in to his machine - and they ALL have forums to help you in that step.
As I posted above about Fantasy Grounds 2 there are many other problems. One being that you must retype everything into FG2 you want to use. You also have to set up a VoIP program to communicate (unless you like text only games). You also have to post your game on a message board and check back to see who is going to play, or if your character is acceptable for the game. You may have to restart FG2 several times in order to get everyone to see the maps. You also have to create your own maps as image files and load them up.
Or, for a more well-rounded VTT (in my humble opinion) check out Fantasy Grounds. It isn't free (though, there IS a demo) - but I find it to be the most user friendly/least complicated of the stable tabletops.
You can ASSUME all you want about the other VTTs - but you really *should* try them before dimissing them completely.
The only "hard" part, about setting them up is that the host/GM needs to have a basic understanding of firewalls and networking to allow connections from the Internet in to his machine - and they ALL have forums to help you in that step.
I agree with WolfStar, I have gotten tired of waiting for WoC to come up with stuff that they have promised and not delivered. So I went in search of my own VTT, and I found Fantasy Grounds II, and RPTools. Both come with an impressive ability to share RPG games, material, characters, dice rolls, and maps with your friends over the internet. You can import maps and Create maps and such. I have looked at both quit extensively, and think that Fantasy Grounds is better out of the two for how easy it is to use.
Fantasy Grounds has also created a 4th Ed Rule set templates so that you can enter your information for each of your powers, abilities, Feat, ETC with the software, you can find it here at Parser_3_5_4. These rule sets are empty of all 4th ed gaming information, because of copyright laws, but it is better than Not having a VTT that you can not share with your friends. Also fantasy lands software has extensive DM Tools to make their jobs easier (Campaign importing, Combat tracker, Marking, Drag and Drop abilities, Campaign and encounter tracker that are linked) and there are Demos of how to do the basic, intermediate and some advanced stuff.
No I do not work for FGII at all. I just think that this is one of the things that WOC was trying to do and instead of approaching an established Company to build on what they have to get what they wanted, they tried to build from scratch and it is not working out for them. (This is not a Shot at WoC either just one observation, I know that they have had their problems with third party code builders in the past which can make someone not to want to travail that road again).
Hope this helps some of you out there that want to play over long distances.
;)
This doesn't make one or the other "the better tool," but I would expect it changes which one you might pick, depending on how you see VTT play working. For example, in my case, I don't use MapTool for an adventure - I use it to manage a combat encounter. The other stuff is done via chat, forum, and voice chat; while we're not in combat, the map is largely irrelevant (we'll switch to a campaign world map or just a blank screen). The impression I get with Fantasy Grounds is that it contains a lot of things besides the shared map and dice roller/chat; tools that are "adventure management" instead of "encounter management."
I prefer MapTool because after looking at the options, it a) fit what I needed to do, and b) was free. But it will all depend on what the user is looking for.
I prefer MapTool because after looking at the options, it a) fit what I needed to do, and b) was free. But it will all depend on what the user is looking for.
I choose it for the free option too ;).
But all kinding aside I looked a bunch of VTT tools including FGII when I was trying to pick one. And there were a few things that stuck out to me.
1) Maptools does lighting and field of view for the players. Which is very rare.
2) It has an easy to use macro system that can do simple & complex stuff.
3) Lastly like you said it was more map focuses. So you start with a map simple drop in a few tokens and get your combat on. Since non-combat stuff is easily down with chat normally and most DMs use hand written notes or other Campaign Manager programs to house all their info and not the VTT.
FGII is more of a Campaign Manager program with VTT map included.
I'd be curious to see how/where your experience differs.
As I posted above about Fantasy Grounds 2 there are many other problems. One being that you must retype everything into FG2 you want to use.
Unless the modules you're running are being run from handwritten notes - or are exclusively published modules (from books or the adventure path line, or other "offline" formats) - this is typically as easy as copy and paste.
Open a "Story" window, create a new story element - give it a name (like 1: Fight the kobolds) and then paste the text in. Give it a little formatting if necesary, and you're done.
For an extra time-saver, create a couple links to the NPCs/Monsters you'll use in the fight, and then setup their statblocks - which is a LITTLE bit of work, yes. If the stats are already in your module or Monster Manual, however, this shouldn't take more than a minute or two per monster (barring slow typists). If that monster is repeated through the module - this becomes even less of an issue, as you can just link back to that monster again and again.
You also have to set up a VoIP program to communicate (unless you like text only games).
VOIP is becoming less and less of a challenge to setup. Many groups are finding that Skype meets their needs, though yes, one can get more advanced and setup Ventrillo, TeamSpeak, or that newer one. . . "GC" something or other.
Skype is especially simple to use, so shouldn't be a barrier to entry. It also isn't required for FG2 - though I agree it's a VERY nice option that can speed play (though, I know some groups find it to be a hindrance and claim it slows them down due to the extra chatter).
You also have to post your game on a message board and check back to see who is going to play, or if your character is acceptable for the game.
Why do you have to? Are you playing "public" pickup games exclusively?
For me, my primary use of FG2 was and has been with a group of friends - so we just discussed options via e-mail or on the phone.
Further, as we stuck to RPGA guidelines, we didn't have to worry about what is/isn't allowed at the "table" - those rules were already well established for us.
You may have to restart FG2 several times in order to get everyone to see the maps. You also have to create your own maps as image files and load them up.
I'm honestly surprised that you have what I'll term "sync" issues with the current version(s) of FGII. While those kinds of bugs existed in early versions - I've found that the current version is quite capable of transferring maps/images.
I wonder - did you use the "pre-load" option for your images and maps? If, once everyone is connected - and you're in the final stages of setting up, I know you can use that to sort of "queue" maps onto everyone's system.
That way, when the DM reveals the map, you don't have to wait (or at least, wait as long) for the maps to transfer to the players. That delay in loading you seem to have been having (especially if the DM or players are on a slower connection might be the root of your issue.
For more details we'd probably be better off chatting in the FGII forums (which I sadly don't frequent much anymore - I was one of their first active posters, once upon a time).
While it's true that you have to make your own maps/images in FGII - that will remain true for any VTT - including the DDI Game Table, so it's an issue I won't address given its universal nature.
Heck, you have to make maps for most encounters in off-the-shelf products too. WotC modules only typically come with one poster map for one, maybe two encounters.
While I did not find Fantasy Grounds easy to use (for instance, I couldn't figure out how to use a map or how dice rolls were supposed to integrate with the rest of the tool), I think one important thing that struck me about the two tools (MapTool and FG) was that MapTool is built around the concept of a shared map, while FG appears to be built more around the concept of a shared adventure module.
You may have hit the nail on the head here - and I may (having started with FG and it's module-centric format) been looking at the other tabletops the "wrong" way.
I definitely like the module-centric approach, as I tend to "format" my gaming nights around a story and/or group of encounters.
The ability to drag dice onto statblocks or onto hot keys was just an added bonus - though admittedly, NOT one of the most "obvious" or user-friendly options within FGII.
You may have hit the nail on the head here - and I may (having started with FG and it's module-centric format) been looking at the other tabletops the "wrong" way.
I definitely like the module-centric approach, as I tend to "format" my gaming nights around a story and/or group of encounters.
The ability to drag dice onto statblocks or onto hot keys was just an added bonus - though admittedly, NOT one of the most "obvious" or user-friendly options within FGII.
Likewise, I was probably coming at FG from the wrong perspective, too. I'm sure that I would have had much more success if I read through the tutorials and such and came at it from the viewpoint of "Let me make a shared adventure."
The thing was, I figured out the essence of MapTool just by messing with it, and figured that FG must be the same, so was frustrated when it wasn't. But since I was thinking in encounter terms as I got rolling with 4th Edition, MapTool hit the sweet spot.
When I use FG2, I've traditionally used it to convert either a module I wrote myself (using Microsoft Word) or an RPGA module (available in PDF format) - so my reply here comes from that angle and point-of-view.
I'd be curious to see how/where your experience differs.
I may have used an earlier version, but I found it clunky and my prep time is almost non-existent so typing in a bunch of monsters was nearly impossible. I was DMing and each of the players claimed they were on a decent high speed connection. Though several were in different parts of the U.S. I also think one was in another country. My major problems were that people would drop out of the game and we would all have to wait for them to come back. when they did come back sometimes the map wouldn't show for a long time. The maps were also difficult to use.
Unless the modules you're running are being run from handwritten notes - or are exclusively published modules (from books or the adventure path line, or other "offline" formats) - this is typically as easy as copy and paste.
Open a "Story" window, create a new story element - give it a name (like 1: Fight the kobolds) and then paste the text in. Give it a little formatting if necesary, and you're done.
For an extra time-saver, create a couple links to the NPCs/Monsters you'll use in the fight, and then setup their statblocks - which is a LITTLE bit of work, yes. If the stats are already in your module or Monster Manual, however, this shouldn't take more than a minute or two per monster (barring slow typists). If that monster is repeated through the module - this becomes even less of an issue, as you can just link back to that monster again and again.
VOIP is becoming less and less of a challenge to setup. Many groups are finding that Skype meets their needs, though yes, one can get more advanced and setup Ventrillo, TeamSpeak, or that newer one. . . "GC" something or other.
Skype is especially simple to use, so shouldn't be a barrier to entry. It also isn't required for FG2 - though I agree it's a VERY nice option that can speed play (though, I know some groups find it to be a hindrance and claim it slows them down due to the extra chatter).
Why do you have to? Are you playing "public" pickup games exclusively?
Yes, I have no "old friends" that want to play using FG2 that costs money, or any of the other online tools. Most of my game groups are with people I lost touch with. I played pickup games since.
For me, my primary use of FG2 was and has been with a group of friends - so we just discussed options via e-mail or on the phone.
Further, as we stuck to RPGA guidelines, we didn't have to worry about what is/isn't allowed at the "table" - those rules were already well established for us.
I'm honestly surprised that you have what I'll term "sync" issues with the current version(s) of FGII. While those kinds of bugs existed in early versions - I've found that the current version is quite capable of transferring maps/images.
I wonder - did you use the "pre-load" option for your images and maps? If, once everyone is connected - and you're in the final stages of setting up, I know you can use that to sort of "queue" maps onto everyone's system.
That way, when the DM reveals the map, you don't have to wait (or at least, wait as long) for the maps to transfer to the players. That delay in loading you seem to have been having (especially if the DM or players are on a slower connection might be the root of your issue.
I used the pre-load option. Supposedly the WotC VTT would be able to just read in a file that has the different maps from the Dungeon adventures or modules that would load up the proper map. That way there is almost no prep-time with regard to the maps.
For more details we'd probably be better off chatting in the FGII forums (which I sadly don't frequent much anymore - I was one of their first active posters, once upon a time).
While it's true that you have to make your own maps/images in FGII - that will remain true for any VTT - including the DDI Game Table, so it's an issue I won't address given its universal nature.
Heck, you have to make maps for most encounters in off-the-shelf products too. WotC modules only typically come with one poster map for one, maybe two encounters.
While they may only come with a poster map for one or two encounters. Usually there are maps for each encounter somewhere within the module. As its a matter of throwing tiles together according to the advertising of the WotC VTT, it would be done once by WotC for their modules and not have to be done afterword.
Supposedly the WotC VTT would be able to just read in a file that has the different maps from the Dungeon adventures or modules that would load up the proper map. That way there is almost no prep-time with regard to the maps.
While they may only come with a poster map for one or two encounters. Usually there are maps for each encounter somewhere within the module. As its a matter of throwing tiles together according to the advertising of the WotC VTT, it would be done once by WotC for their modules and not have to be done afterword.
Just to be clear, there was some talk that WotC would be investigating options for releasing pre-made modules for the DDI Game Table - but they never said for certain that they would or wouldn't go with that plan.
There were hopes (both in the community and from WotC as I recall) that DDI subscribers would be able to purchase, say H1: Keep on the Shadowfell as an adventure pack for the Game Table for a small fee. This would include all the virtual minis and virtual maps/tiles needed for that module.
I'd still quite enjoy this option - especially if it were tied into the modules from the RPGA.
Back to FGII - I'd suggest you try it again. The 4E rulesets are quite nice and while stability still isn't 100%, I've found it to be FAR better than earlier versions.
When I use FG2, I've traditionally used it to convert either a module I wrote myself (using Microsoft Word) or an RPGA module (available in PDF format) - so my reply here comes from that angle and point-of-view.
I'd be curious to see how/where your experience differs.
Unless the modules you're running are being run from handwritten notes - or are exclusively published modules (from books or the adventure path line, or other "offline" formats) - this is typically as easy as copy and paste.
Open a "Story" window, create a new story element - give it a name (like 1: Fight the kobolds) and then paste the text in. Give it a little formatting if necesary, and you're done.
For an extra time-saver, create a couple links to the NPCs/Monsters you'll use in the fight, and then setup their statblocks - which is a LITTLE bit of work, yes. If the stats are already in your module or Monster Manual, however, this shouldn't take more than a minute or two per monster (barring slow typists). If that monster is repeated through the module - this becomes even less of an issue, as you can just link back to that monster again and again.
VOIP is becoming less and less of a challenge to setup. Many groups are finding that Skype meets their needs, though yes, one can get more advanced and setup Ventrillo, TeamSpeak, or that newer one. . . "GC" something or other.
Skype is especially simple to use, so shouldn't be a barrier to entry. It also isn't required for FG2 - though I agree it's a VERY nice option that can speed play (though, I know some groups find it to be a hindrance and claim it slows them down due to the extra chatter).
Why do you have to? Are you playing "public" pickup games exclusively?
For me, my primary use of FG2 was and has been with a group of friends - so we just discussed options via e-mail or on the phone.
Further, as we stuck to RPGA guidelines, we didn't have to worry about what is/isn't allowed at the "table" - those rules were already well established for us.
I'm honestly surprised that you have what I'll term "sync" issues with the current version(s) of FGII. While those kinds of bugs existed in early versions - I've found that the current version is quite capable of transferring maps/images.
I wonder - did you use the "pre-load" option for your images and maps? If, once everyone is connected - and you're in the final stages of setting up, I know you can use that to sort of "queue" maps onto everyone's system.
That way, when the DM reveals the map, you don't have to wait (or at least, wait as long) for the maps to transfer to the players. That delay in loading you seem to have been having (especially if the DM or players are on a slower connection might be the root of your issue.
For more details we'd probably be better off chatting in the FGII forums (which I sadly don't frequent much anymore - I was one of their first active posters, once upon a time).
While it's true that you have to make your own maps/images in FGII - that will remain true for any VTT - including the DDI Game Table, so it's an issue I won't address given its universal nature.
Heck, you have to make maps for most encounters in off-the-shelf products too. WotC modules only typically come with one poster map for one, maybe two encounters.
Just to be clear, there was some talk that WotC would be investigating options for releasing pre-made modules for the DDI Game Table - but they never said for certain that they would or wouldn't go with that plan.
There were hopes (both in the community and from WotC as I recall) that DDI subscribers would be able to purchase, say H1: Keep on the Shadowfell as an adventure pack for the Game Table for a small fee. This would include all the virtual minis and virtual maps/tiles needed for that module.
I'd still quite enjoy this option - especially if it were tied into the modules from the RPGA.
Back to FGII - I'd suggest you try it again. The 4E rulesets are quite nice and while stability still isn't 100%, I've found it to be FAR better than earlier versions.
My real problem isn't stability it was mainly prep time. I can't retype every monster, power, feat, skill, and any other info from the core books that I would need each time I play. According to the WotC VTT most of that would not be needed anyway, it would have been integrated, or at least accessible through the website. As it stands now I just don't have the time.
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear before. The major reason I don't use those are:
a) No pick-up games (i.e. No games that don't require planning ahead)
b) No prep time (i.e. I don't have time to type everything I need into the VTT ahead of time, and if I don't do that the games crawl along with the 4E combat rules).
Hopefully I have made myself clear.
That means that probably they are going to publish it in the last 3 months of this year...
:D
I red all the newest infos on the website and I arrived to the conclusion that they are doing the virtual tabletop and they would like to deliver it when the virtual character creator is ready.
That means that probably they are going to publish it in the last 3 months of this year...
:D
Are you saying that you thought that's what they said in the past, or is that up on the site right now?
You know, I would put money on the fact that there are probably more DDi subscribers that use OSX than those who play over 4E over the net. My point, my theory why the GameTable was delayed/put on hold/cancelled is that only a TINY minority of the DnD gamer base would actually benefit from its development. It would make more sense to concentrate development on tools such as the Character Builder and Campaign Manager, tools that are useful to everyone one, both those who play offline and online.
The problem with that is you could use the VTT offline to run a game on a laptop, so it would benefit just as many people.
I suggest that WoTC load up a copy, play a game, and reflect on the success they had when they could do it right.
My other suggestion as an aerospace engineer is make sure that you hire a professional software requirements developer to work with you game design team next time (assuming you did not for D&D 3.0 and 4.0). You could control the scope and have a solid plan before you even mention the product to your customers.
I'll be playing the 2nd edition Core Rules and keeping an eye out to see if the new tools ever come together so I can come back.
This is totally BS. Either re-release it under the open gaming license or license it out at like 75 bucks a head or something (dicounts for book owners?).
Allow someone to make a module for Fantasy Grounds 2. You will be fricking heroes!
It's not hard to do, if the community were allowed to legally do it, they would have a module together in less than 2 weeks.
It's not hard to do, if the community were allowed to legally do it, they would have a module together in less than 2 weeks.
The community HAS a fan-made 4E ruleset for FGII.
The community HAS a fan-made 4E ruleset for FGII.
I meant to say SRD. So a person an open a 'book' in fg2 and drag a monster over to the combat tracker.
entering it all over again is annoying.
I'd rather just be able to shell out for the real thing just like in 3.5e for FG2.
The community HAS a fan-made 4E ruleset for FGII.
That's exactly what it is "Fan made". This means any actual statistics or calculations must be entered manually. It is not much better than FGII without the fan-made 4E ruleset. Except after you take the time to enter several hundred pages of information.
I meant to say SRD. So a person an open a 'book' in fg2 and drag a monster over to the combat tracker.
entering it all over again is annoying.
I'd rather just be able to shell out for the real thing just like in 3.5e for FG2.
I agree if they don't plan on releasing the VTT anytime soon they need to go ahead and change the licensing or allow FGII to license the ability to read from the compendium database or something. You know have it where the end user of FGII must log into D&DI and then they can have access to the books and data using an interface within FGII so they can easily drag and drop the data from the compendium directly into the FGII 4E ruleset and not have to type everything. Heck they could even just make a library that could be used in any program that requires the user to log into D&DI like the CB does to access the information.
This is my opinion, but I wager that sometime within the decade, someone is going to go fully digital with P&P. Whoever accomplishes that would have my gratitude, dollars, and probably get a lock on the Digital P&P market for quite a while.
. . . This is my opinion, but I wager that sometime within the decade, someone is going to go fully digital with P&P. Whoever accomplishes that would have my gratitude, dollars, and probably get a lock on the Digital P&P market for quite a while.
Really? well I better get to work then . . .
Im not knocking the quailty of what they do put out. (Scales of War adventure path IS quality)... I just feel like this is bait and switch. If you promise something with the launch of a product you SHOULD DELIVER. If WoTC is over thier heads contract an independent developer to finish it. Thats only fair to those folks that got led in by the eyecandy you showed the masses at launch.
Bah, I figured something was up. I subscribed to dnd insider for the developing virtual tabletop. I will not renew until (if ever) they complete it. Ya it's nice downloading pdf's of dragon and dungeon online mags, even though you could count on about 3x as much material from paizo.
Im not knocking the quailty of what they do put out. (Scales of War adventure path IS quality)... I just feel like this is bait and switch. If you promise something with the launch of a product you SHOULD DELIVER. If WoTC is over thier heads contract an independent developer to finish it. Thats only fair to those folks that got led in by the eyecandy you showed the masses at launch.
I agree. Its one thing to say we will someday have a product, and then cancel it. It is an entirely different matter to show off a tech demo and say that the product will be released shortly, and then not release it at all or 3+ years later.
This is my opinion, but I wager that sometime within the decade
Heh, correction: "A" decade. :P
They ought to just hire the people behind Fantasy Grounds and finance the production of Fantasy Grounds III. Then WOTC can basically make a buck on anyone who purchases FG3 for using with non-D&D material, but also be able to trumpet the superiority of 4th Edition, since FG3 would be designed for it specifically from the start. Essentially, slaying multiple birds with a single stone. In this world, you have to spend money to make money, so WOTC shouldn't hold back from making the best virtual table to show up everyone else. Goddess knows that the Character Builder alone would make me switch from any P&P system to D&D, just from the simplicity! Extend that reach into the virtual game table sector, and D&D would have a drastic head-start over any other brand.
This is my opinion, but I wager that sometime within the decade, someone is going to go fully digital with P&P. Whoever accomplishes that would have my gratitude, dollars, and probably get a lock on the Digital P&P market for quite a while.
Great idea, why develope what you can simply buy? They should buy up fantasy grounds. Then they can release content for it (simple xml parsing) and they don't have to change their license.
It's not the manual entering that ticks us off, it's the fact that we can't share the modules that we have manually entered.
Great idea, why develope what you can simply buy? They should buy up fantasy grounds. Then they can release content for it (simple xml parsing) and they don't have to change their license.
It's not the manual entering that ticks us off, it's the fact that we can't share the modules that we have manually entered.
That'll never happen. They are too paranoid about people stealing their ideas and stuff. They'd have to encrypt it or something. I'd suggest a browser within FGII that could access the compendium. Since if your not logged in it asks for you to log in within the compendium page. From there you could copy and paste to your hearts content.
I meant to say SRD. So a person an open a 'book' in fg2 and drag a monster over to the combat tracker.
entering it all over again is annoying.
I'd rather just be able to shell out for the real thing just like in 3.5e for FG2.
That's exactly what it is "Fan made". This means any actual statistics or calculations must be entered manually. It is not much better than FGII without the fan-made 4E ruleset. Except after you take the time to enter several hundred pages of information.
I understand the PDF parsers are getting quite good.
Myself, it takes relatively no time for me to enter a statblock from a book or module (like, MAYBE 2 minutes for a solo with a handful of powers), so I haven't tried them. Your mileage, apparently, may vary.
I understand the PDF parsers are getting quite good.
Myself, it takes relatively no time for me to enter a statblock from a book or module (like, MAYBE 2 minutes for a solo with a handful of powers), so I haven't tried them. Your mileage, apparently, may vary.
And where exactly am I supposed to get a PDF of the core books including the MM to parse? I mean without actually breaking the law since WotC no longer sells them?
There was a statement a couple days ago (after a long period of silence) that there is no active development being done on the virtual tabletop, the dungeon builder, or the character visualizer.
It's possible that developers are allowed to work on them in their spare time, but they are shelved, and IMO, as Guivre says, they are effectively (in the sense of "for all practical purposes") canceled.
Looks like they are putting them "to the side" for now. :|
http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=18420929&postcount=22
And where exactly am I supposed to get a PDF of the core books including the MM to parse? I mean without actually breaking the law since WotC no longer sells them?
If you don't already have one you're stuck, true.
Looks like they are putting them "to the side" for now. :|
http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=18420929&postcount=22
Like I've said a million times "set to the side" means "we aren't going to work on them, and when you are distracted we will cancel them."
Like I've said a million times "set to the side" means "we aren't going to work on them, and when you are distracted we will cancel them."
And like WotC staffers have stated - that hasn't been said, and isn't the message they're putting out there.
Seems to me they wouldn't have the lead dev say otherwise if they were just going to sweep it all under the rug.
Or do you know WotC's business better than they do?
You can read more into the statements if you want - but it doesn't make you right.
Any one remember That debarcal?
See this isn't the first time WOTC's lied about software.. it won't be the last. Back when 3rd came out it shipped with a cd that had the Character Generator of 'master tools' which was to be the be all and end all of everything.. Then nothing not a word....
Then eventually we got the fluid version of .... Etools which well sucked.
It took a 3rd party getting the license to fix most of the issues with Etools (CMP) and even then it was never fully fixed there where still 'issues' and then poof WOTC pulls the license from them because there bringing out 4th edition and they claim their own tools.
Then the lead up to 4th we see the video's of the VTT, the Character Visualiser.. the DDi website claimed they where coming.. and the adverts and even tv spots.. their own press releases etc etc..
Comes launch day where's the DDi stuff?
that's right doesn't exist.
6 months later we get a working compendium
a few months later a working character generator
and of course their 'web tools'
which we can not use off line noooo that would be SMART.
Now we get sorry VTT is on hold.. Indef, and you wonder WHY people are up in arms. WOTC Lied about what they had plain and simple.. go look at the you tube video's or the press releases or even your own 4th Ed Core Books.. none of their promised stuff was finished and if you've put up with WOTC in the past you know that once they put things on hold.. it tends to stay ON HOLD until it ends up CANCELED.
Honestly I'm surprised WOTC and Hasbro haven't had lawsuits for false advertising when 4th ed came out but that's just me.
I'll believe the visualiser and VTT exist the day they actually Come out.. until then FG will do though I shouldn't HAVE to use a 3rd party tool for something WOTC promised.
Can I say one thing.. MASTER TOOLS
Any one remember That debarcal?
See this isn't the first time WOTC's lied about software.. it won't be the last. Back when 3rd came out it shipped with a cd that had the Character Generator of 'master tools' which was to be the be all and end all of everything.. Then nothing not a word....
Then eventually we got the fluid version of .... Etools which well sucked.
It took a 3rd party getting the license to fix most of the issues with Etools (CMP) and even then it was never fully fixed there where still 'issues' and then poof WOTC pulls the license from them because there bringing out 4th edition and they claim their own tools.
Then the lead up to 4th we see the video's of the VTT, the Character Visualiser.. the DDi website claimed they where coming.. and the adverts and even tv spots.. their own press releases etc etc..
Comes launch day where's the DDi stuff?
that's right doesn't exist.
6 months later we get a working compendium
a few months later a working character generator
and of course their 'web tools'
which we can not use off line noooo that would be SMART.
Now we get sorry VTT is on hold.. Indef, and you wonder WHY people are up in arms. WOTC Lied about what they had plain and simple.. go look at the you tube video's or the press releases or even your own 4th Ed Core Books.. none of their promised stuff was finished and if you've put up with WOTC in the past you know that once they put things on hold.. it tends to stay ON HOLD until it ends up CANCELED.
Honestly I'm surprised WOTC and Hasbro haven't had lawsuits for false advertising when 4th ed came out but that's just me.
I'll believe the visualiser and VTT exist the day they actually Come out.. until then FG will do though I shouldn't HAVE to use a 3rd party tool for something WOTC promised.
Nice, I agree (except for FGII, I don't have time or will to mess with that one).
I mean even if its not on hold and only set to the side or something. They took ONE and A HALF years to get the CB out and running relatively nicely. Now instead of finishing the VTT which according to them was actually in development, they are now going to do something called Campaign Tools. They haven't even said what it is yet. So if it takes another 1.5 years for each campaign tool with three tools that's FOUR and A HALF years before they even get back to the VTT. So the VTT IF it gets picked back up won't be out reasonably based on WotC's track record until 2015. I don't know about you, but I'm not waiting that long. I'm putting my money where my mouth is and not buying another WotC product (except once very 6 months the DDI subscription so I can download all the dragon & dungeon mags and update the CB then cancel) until I see a freakin' VTT outta them.
4.0 for me was a huge disappointment. They turned a game that was being simplified and decided to revamp almost the whole game. Which in turn didn't simplify anything it just made it more like a MMOG. If i had purchased a subscription when they first offered it I would seriously think on calling for a class action lawsuit against WotC / Hasbro. \
Please don't take this as me just ranting. I have been a D&D player since the beginning. I just hate to see good gamers get left out for the cost of a few $$ a company may or may not lose out on. There is a reason they sell Millions of books world wide and if they only get $1.00 US then that is still MILLIONS in the bank! So they should keep their offered promises.
I've been playing for 25+ years and bought into 4th Ed partly because of the promises made by WotC but mainly because my usual group all live in different parts of the country. Unfortunately I now believe the VTT will be canned because it's not profitable enough for WotC. However, I think there's room for WotC to do a licensing deal with the makers of Fantasy grounds. Distribute the 4th Ed campaign in multiple formats opening up the game to more players conversly selling more books.
Do this and the masses will be clammering to purchase PHB 7 ;)
BTW, has anyone mentioned Bioware? These guys did Baldurs Gate and NWN. Surely it wouldn't be hard for them to develop a VTT and Visualiser under Licence?
Before you go bs.
here is why, the Dungeons and Dragons Computer license is held presently by Atari has been for a while now.. Bioware was an Independent Company when it happly made NWN.. and then Obsidian made NWN2 (which has actually gotten to be as good as NWN finally).. However about 1 1/2 years ago Bioware entered into discussions with Electronic Arts and then where Purchased by EA.. hence why Mass Effect has EA Games at the start.
This means that Bioware is now owned by the competition to Atari.. I do not see Atari happly sitting by and letting WOTC break their license agreements..
Now Obsidian you might get to do it (the former Black Isle Staff) but at the same time.. a lot of the Black Isle Staff have REASON to be peeved at WOTC and Hasbro.. after all it was HASBRO who killed off Black Isle, their IN HOUSE game production company... when they where trying to cut costs.
-Rob
Yes they lied, but I don't think it was their fault. THey had these brilliant ideas, were getting them working and then... problems. problems that they didn't expect. This is the flaw in most such undertakings, the more complicated it is the more likely it is to fall flat on its face.
Can someone post a link to any official statement from WotC to explain WHY it has been cancelled.
I do feel that WotC have made a bad call in cancelling the Virtual Table Top, It was THE NEXT BIG THING according to their own publicity machine when 4th Edition was announced. It was the main reason to subscribe to D&DI when it was announced (the option to use software to create your character, download new material was a nice OPTION).
Can someone post a link to any official statement from WotC to explain WHY it has been cancelled.
There is no such statement because it has not been canceled. Some people believe it has, and they're welcome to their opinions, but it has NEVER been stated by WotC as such.
What they've chosen to do is to work on one tool/software at a time, and ONLY one tool/software at a time.
They then, through assorted polls and other channels of customer feedback and (presumably) market research, set themselves a new set of priorities.
As it happens their research indicated that tools for DMing would be a better fit or were more in demand than the Game Table - so those are the tools they're working on now.
When the Adventure Tools (starting with the Monster Builder due out "soon") are finished they will re-evaluate again to see if the Game Table is picked back up at that point, or if, instead, there is some other need they should fill with a different tool.
As a result there's no comment to the effect of "we've canceled the Game Table because we think nobody wants it" - they know (believe me, there's LOTS of feedback on these forums) that people still want the Game Table (myself VERY heavily included), they've merely decided to work on other projects first.
Is it possible that the Game Table will get canceled? Sure - anything's still possible. Right now they've given reasonable indicators that they hope to return to it[1], they simply don't know when.
Hope that helps cut through some of the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt).
--------------------References---------------------------------
[1] See the following quote from lead R&D Mike Donais:
Hey WhiteBaron, can you point me to the post that says they are indefintely canned so that I may correct it please.
I don't think that is the message that we are trying to get across.
Thanks,
Mike.
There is no such statement because it has not been canceled. Some people believe it has, and they're welcome to their opinions, but it has NEVER been stated by WotC as such.
What they've chosen to do is to work on one tool/software at a time, and ONLY one tool/software at a time.
They then, through assorted polls and other channels of customer feedback and (presumably) market research, set themselves a new set of priorities.
As it happens their research indicated that tools for DMing would be a better fit or were more in demand than the Game Table - so those are the tools they're working on now.
When the Adventure Tools (starting with the Monster Builder due out "soon") are finished they will re-evaluate again to see if the Game Table is picked back up at that point, or if, instead, there is some other need they should fill with a different tool.
As a result there's no comment to the effect of "we've canceled the Game Table because we think nobody wants it" - they know (believe me, there's LOTS of feedback on these forums) that people still want the Game Table (myself VERY heavily included), they've merely decided to work on other projects first.
Is it possible that the Game Table will get canceled? Sure - anything's still possible. Right now they've given reasonable indicators that they hope to return to it[1], they simply don't know when.
Hope that helps cut through some of the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt).
--------------------References---------------------------------
[1] See the following quote from lead R&D Mike Donais:
I don't know which quote I saw it in, or where its from, but I remember them saying something along the lines of "..if and when we pick up the game table...". That's clear indication that they probably won't pick it up. Anyone know the quote I'm talking about?
I don't know which quote I saw it in, or where its from, but I remember them saying something along the lines of "..if and when we pick up the game table...". That's clear indication that they probably won't pick it up. Anyone know the quote I'm talking about?
I don't think it was "if and when", but there was a quote from WotC Trevor in one of the many threads related to the GameTable that said that they were not working on the GameTable at the moment and (near as I can remember the direct quote) "we don't know when we will start working on it again."
Edit:
Sorry, Lokiare, you were correct. Here is the original quote from WotC_Trevor (found in this post)
I think I've done this. We're not currently working on the Game Table. I'm not sure when or if we will turn our development attention back to the Game Table. I wish there was more information to share - I really do want to make you as informed as possible. But in reality, I've given out all the information that we're able to share.
(emphasis added; Lokiare's memory was accurate)
Because of the communities tendency to take ANYTHING that's even remotely hinted at and take it as a declaration of "set in stone fact" WotC and its representatives are taking EXCESSIVE pains to underpromise on everything at this point.
Even if the DDI team knew with 99% certainty that they were going to return to the Game Table - because there's even a 1% chance, WotC is setting expectations very low, and yes, even preparing us for the worst.
I personally feel they're doing it to the extent of overkill at this point - but given how things have played out to date, I don't blame them.
However, I also note that when people make claims that the software IS a dead project - or even likely to be a dead project, they correct those statements on a fairly regular basis.
The point is, they're walking a fine line. They're absolutely not going to come out and guarantee that the project is going to happen, not until they're in the midst of programming for it once more (the skeptic in me says we may not even hear about it at the restart - and might, in fact have to wait until they are cruising along). Too many people have been too upset in the past for them to do so. They're not going to sit idly by and allow people to claim it's definitively dead either, however - as that's equally untrue.
The truth is what they've been stating - that it isn't being worked on now, and that when the current project(s) is(are) done, it will be re-evaluated[1].
I can tell you that it's my personal experience in talking with assorted WotC people (off the record and deliberately unverifiable - hence it being personal) that I get the very clear impression that they want to (and I dare say even expect) to return to the Game Table and Visualizer.
But at this point it's all about expectation management - so best to low-ball so that if/when they can/do announce the return to working on the Game Table people can be pleasantly (or even skeptically) surprised, than to be accused of teasing people and dragging them along all this time.
[1] - This re-evaluation might come in the form of an outright cancellation, a re-prioritization between the VTT the Visualizer or another project, how much code to keep/scrap, or even if they should make the Game Table Mac Only. I'm sure that whatever form it takes it will be a thorough "from the ground-up" examination of where they stand and where they want to be.
VCL Powa!
Perhaps WotC_Trevor is talking out of school, and really shouldn't have said that, but it does give a little support to the "could be never" group (of which I freely admit I am one -- I have no animosity toward anyone over it; I just think it might be never, which would be sad).
Well, I believe that everyone working on this DDI thing really wants the GameTable to be released into the wild, and I hope they get their wish, but as far as I'm concerned, that quote pretty much nails down the "indefinitely postponed" end of the continuum.
Perhaps WotC_Trevor is talking out of school, and really shouldn't have said that, but it does give a little support to the "could be never" group (of which I freely admit I am one -- I have no animosity toward anyone over it; I just think it might be never, which would be sad).
While I agree that they could pull off some grand miracle and resurrect the VTT/GT, at this point it lies more at the dead end of the spectrum. With all of the evidence that people keep blasting these forums with about how 3rd party VTT's are so much better (minus the 3D) than the WotC VTT is supposed to be, I can see how it would make sense not to continue it.
The only problem is that they are not licensing out to these other 3rd party VTTs and therein lies the problem. So now everyone has to manually (or scanually) enter in the info, and much of the mechanics just aren't available because its protected as WoTC IP.
So to me they either need to go ahead and work on it and get it done, or license it out to 3rd party VTTs so it'll at least be available.
So to me they either need to go ahead and work on it and get it done, or license it out to 3rd party VTTs so it'll at least be available.
You're excluding the middle option, though: they don't need to do either of those things; they could just let the matter drop and allow people to go on with their 3rd party VTTs the way they're going now. That's the lowest energy state, so to speak: do nothing.
I mean, I'm sure they want the GT out there, and that plenty of people are disappointed in its current status. But if they decide that neither resuming development nor licensing it out is a good business decision, then that's the way it is.
Edit: and, although mechanics can't really be protected as IP, if WotC gets a bug in its snoot about some VTT that lets you add power information or roll some dice that have a d20 in 'em or whatever, they'll send out a C&D letter, and the person doing the VTT will have to decide to comply, or to give them the proverbial finger. Until that point, they don't have to do anything or spend any money on it at all, which probably suits them fine at this particular moment.
You're excluding the middle option, though: they don't need to do either of those things; they could just let the matter drop and allow people to go on with their 3rd party VTTs the way they're going now. That's the lowest energy state, so to speak: do nothing.
I mean, I'm sure they want the GT out there, and that plenty of people are disappointed in its current status. But if they decide that neither resuming development nor licensing it out is a good business decision, then that's the way it is.
Edit: and, although mechanics can't really be protected as IP, if WotC gets a bug in its snoot about some VTT that lets you add power information or roll some dice that have a d20 in 'em or whatever, they'll send out a C&D letter, and the person doing the VTT will have to decide to comply, or to give them the proverbial finger. Until that point, they don't have to do anything or spend any money on it at all, which probably suits them fine at this particular moment.
Well, doing nothing might suit them fine, but it is making a portion of their customers extremely annoyed.
I have just spent two hours of my time reading this forum and I have gleaned the following:
1. There are a lot of people out there that want a Virtual Tabletop et al.
2. The VTT is on indefinite hold, some people say cancelled, some say not.
3. There is a possibility that the WOTC development team will work on it again.
4. Currently the WOTC dev team are only working on one product at a time
5. That product is a Campaign Manager.
Well frankly people I wouldn't give fig for a Campaign Manager.
How about WOTC stops working on the products they would be fun for them to do and start working on the product that we, their customers, want.
I do not want a dime-a-dozen character generator.
I do not want online tools that could be better implemented with speadsheets.
I do not want this previously unmentioned campaign manager.
I WANT A VIRTUAL TABLETOP!
Too many time people fall into the the trap of trying to create things that they think will be fun but not what their customers are crying out for. Next to bad testing it is THE primary software development trap.
So, I say to WOTC, stop developing what we do not want and start developing what we do! The Virtual Tabletop.
So I say to the readers of this forum, post and tell WOTC that you want the VTT as the primary and foremost development project.
And I ask politely of the moderators of this forum to bring this to the attention of those in WOTC that can do something about it.
Perhaps I am being naive in thinking that this little speech can bring about a change, but unless you make a noise you will never get heard. Please post and be heard.
Thank you.
*bows, steps down from soap box*
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have just spent two hours of my time reading this forum and I have gleaned the following:
1. There are a lot of people out there that want a Virtual Tabletop et al.
2. The VTT is on indefinite hold, some people say cancelled, some say not.
3. There is a possibility that the WOTC development team will work on it again.
4. Currently the WOTC dev team are only working on one product at a time
5. That product is a Campaign Manager.
Well frankly people I wouldn't give fig for a Campaign Manager.
How about WOTC stops working on the products they would be fun for them to do and start working on the product that we, their customers, want.
I do not want a dime-a-dozen character generator.
I do not want online tools that could be better implemented with speadsheets.
I do not want this previously unmentioned campaign manager.
I WANT A VIRTUAL TABLETOP!
Too many time people fall into the the trap of trying to create things that they think will be fun but not what their customers are crying out for. Next to bad testing it is THE primary software development trap.
So, I say to WOTC, stop developing what we do not want and start developing what we do! The Virtual Tabletop.
So I say to the readers of this forum, post and tell WOTC that you want the VTT as the primary and foremost development project.
And I ask politely of the moderators of this forum to bring this to the attention of those in WOTC that can do something about it.
Perhaps I am being naive in thinking that this little speech can bring about a change, but unless you make a noise you will never get heard. Please post and be heard.
Thank you.
*bows, steps down from soap box*
I agree, if we just shut up they will move on, but if we don't they will have to eventually create it.
While I'm not against the CTs, I'm only about 12% enthusiastic about them. They would be nice to have as far as speeding up preparation, but without the VTT they are nearly worthless to me. If I can't play I don't need to prepare so why do I need CTs?
I can't wait til the CTs are done so we can be told they are going to work on something else instead of the VTT, at that point I'll burn my books and go find something else to do, and whenever I hear something about WotC or D&D I'll start off on my rant about how they lied to everyone and got everyone's hopes up and basically manipulated us out of our money.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have just spent two hours of my time reading this forum and I have gleaned the following:
1. There are a lot of people out there that want a Virtual Tabletop et al.
2. The VTT is on indefinite hold, some people say cancelled, some say not.
3. There is a possibility that the WOTC development team will work on it again.
4. Currently the WOTC dev team are only working on one product at a time
5. That product is a Campaign Manager.
Well frankly people I wouldn't give fig for a Campaign Manager.
How about WOTC stops working on the products they would be fun for them to do and start working on the product that we, their customers, want.
The flaw here is that you assume that just because you (and I, and a handful of others) would prefer the VTT first that we're a representative majority.
Polls were done, market research was launched, and other measurements taken. What was found was that MORE people wanted the campaign tools than wanted the Game Table. This is backed in measurable ways. For one such methodology used, see the results of the multi-site poll they undertook: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20090414
I do not want a dime-a-dozen character generator.
I do not want online tools that could be better implemented with speadsheets.
I do not want this previously unmentioned campaign manager.
I WANT A VIRTUAL TABLETOP!
Too many time people fall into the the trap of trying to create things that they think will be fun but not what their customers are crying out for. Next to bad testing it is THE primary software development trap.
So, I say to WOTC, stop developing what we do not want and start developing what we do! The Virtual Tabletop.
So I say to the readers of this forum, post and tell WOTC that you want the VTT as the primary and foremost development project.
I agree here - and encourage people to write to customer service (http://www.wizards.com/customerservice) to voice their opinions. However, I caution anyone writing not to assume that WotC made the decisions they've made lightly and without consideration.
For example, claiming they're programming what they think is fun (instead of what they've demonstrated people to want) to program isn't likely to lend much weight to your post/letter.
And I ask politely of the moderators of this forum to bring this to the attention of those in WOTC that can do something about it.
Assuming you mean the VCLs (we're not moderators - not in the traditional sense), believe you me - we've told them, and they post here often enough to know what's being said.
Perhaps I am being naive in thinking that this little speech can bring about a change, but unless you make a noise you will never get heard. Please post and be heard.
Thank you.
*bows, steps down from soap box*
No worries about not being heard, or about people's requests not causing change. It's late at night (or, in truth WAY too early in the morning) for me to give a concrete example, but posts in these very forums have been know to create change before. There's no reason to believe that's suddenly going to stop.
The flaw here is that you assume that just because you (and I, and a handful of others) would prefer the VTT first that we're a representative majority.
Polls were done, market research was launched, and other measurements taken. What was found was that MORE people wanted the campaign tools than wanted the Game Table. This is backed in measurable ways. For one such methodology used, see the results of the multi-site poll they undertook: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20090414
It's also easier, quicker, and thus cheaper.
Knowing a bit about programming I can say that making the tools to simply interact with data and auto crunch some numbers is a lot easier the making a full fledged VTT like the one they originally planned. Plus they already got a monster builder tool so this looks to be an upgrade combined with simply adding in all the compendium data.
I bought a subscription because everything I saw on the website said that it was coming soon. Everyone in my game waited patiently for it. I even started learning more about DMing when my first game broke up so I could run a game and use ti to attract some friends to play. I don't get on these forums much, usually just to drop a comment or two, or let my friend who brought me into this ask a question on my behalf. With what is out now and in development I don't feel like my voice was heard at all. I never got one of these emails about surveys, or was asked to comment on the direction of development. I get on to check out the magazines and help my skills as a player and DM. I look for new stuff to try out, or at events going on in the DDI emails. Where was the one saying come tell us what you think we should work on?
I can speak only for me and I purchased all the stuff I did because I thought I was getting a full experience. I hadn't played D&D before because I honestly didn't have the time for all the research and writing before ever sitting down to play. WIth Wikipedia I instantly learned enough about Eberron to say I could handle playing. I borrowed old books from friends to get a feel and run my game to start. But I did all this work because I kept hearing Character visualizer is coming, Game table is coming, this things were touted as triumphs over the old ways, to bring people like me in. Now I feel rather hosed. And I'm sorry to WolfStar, but no amount of telling me to go buy another item from a 3rd party that I have to manually enter info to, and then learn programming stuff just to get things to work over the net is going to work. I don't have time, and its not my expertise. Not to mention these things were advertised. At no point did I get a letter or email saying "We are deeply sorry for the ads that were unfortunately sent out or posted by Wizards Of The Coast, Hasbro, or its affiliate companies. At this time the Following software is not in development or will be delayed for ____ amount of time. Please contact our customer service department to get a partial or full refund of your purchase"
Something that simple would have been no chore. You may decry that as expensive if everyone did it, but have you ever wondered how much an auto recall costs? I know from first hand experience, and would hate to see the alternative, which I am sure will be a string of fraud related lawsuits. The Legal ramifications of they have done are in fact a bait and switch, and false advertising. You can not legally create the market for a product through advertisement and marketing to drive up revenue and then suspend its release through stall tactics or "redirected development" so that you never have to produce the product. If you do this you either have to provide a refund, or produce all or in part the product. If you don't every subscriber, or purchaser is allowed legal recourse. I don't plan to sue personally. I don't really even want my money back. But I'd like the company not the development staff, or the staff of these forums to explain why after such effort was made to dangle this fruit in front of first time players and DM's like me, they decide to go back on their words and "switch focus" to something that I had never even heard of till I got on here today and saw this thread.
EDIT: I might add that I've never played anything but 4th edition and as a writer I find it easy to role play in the powers and feats and items as opposed to what I hear of older versions. I guess you can call me a fan of 4th edition
Now I'm done.
Thank you.
At this time the Following software is not in development or will be delayed for ____ amount of time. Please contact our customer service department to get a partial or full refund of your purchase"
While it's unfortunate for ALL of us that the game table isn't available yet - the reason no refund has been offered is because nobody has been charged for the game table yet.
Remember - the original pricing for the "entire suite" of DDI softwares, as planned, was going to be $10 - $15 a month depending on subscription length.
While the game table and visualizer were indeed advertised as coming soon - there was still no promise that (had they released by now) they would be available to early subscribers without a price increase or upgrade fee.
Instead, you were charged for what WAS available at the time (magazines, Compendium, a couple of the Bonus Tools). If you subscribed early enough, when the Character Builder was added you also got that put on your account for free.
So, put simply, there's no refund because you weren't charged for the game table.
Now, lest people put words in my mouth - this doesn't mean you can't/shouldn't be disappointed in the lack of a game table. Even though I do/have play(ed) with a couple of Virtual Table Tops - I want the Game Table at LEAST as much as anyone else here. Be assured of that. Your disappointment is my disappointment as well.
As for using 3rd party tabletops - if you haven't the time to enter monsters, I get that. Though I find that adding monsters is a minimal part of prepping to GM an online game. Making maps, or even importing them is far more time-consuming in my experience.
I have yet to see where the DDI: Game Table is going to greatly reduce that time.
As for learning to program to use those tables - I know ZILCH about programming, but there are pre-made modules/rulesets/scripts (depending on which VTT you run) that mean you shouldn't have to learn ANY programming to run a 4E game.
Of course, if you haven't the time - you haven't the time. But that's a risk we ALL face in this hobby - virtualized online play, or face-to-face online play.
Something that simple would have been no chore. You may decry that as expensive if everyone did it, but have you ever wondered how much an auto recall costs? I know from first hand experience, and would hate to see the alternative, which I am sure will be a string of fraud related lawsuits. The Legal ramifications of they have done are in fact a bait and switch, and false advertising. You can not legally create the market for a product through advertisement and marketing to drive up revenue and then suspend its release through stall tactics or "redirected development" so that you never have to produce the product.
Except, again, you've never been charged for the product in question, and you were never guaranteed that product.
Had the option, at subscription, been "Or pay an additional $X.00 and get the game table!" and you (and others) paid that cost - THEN you would have a cause for a refund, and if that refund wasn't an option, for a lawsuit.
Of course, I'm not a lawyer, but so far for all the discussions of lawsuits, bait & switch, fraud, and false advertising - nothing has come of it (to the best of my knowledge).
Remember, if you feel these are valid and legitimate claims, it's your right to contact an attorney-at-law. However, I'd personally think it's an uphill battle at best.
It's worth repeating here one last time:
NONE of this means I think you can't or shouldn't be disappointed. *I* am disappointed that the Game Table isn't priority #1. I want nothing more than to start organizing a TON of online games (mostly RPGA games, but that's just my particular kettle of tea), and having one "default" Game Table - and the "official" Game Table at that - would make that SO much less of a hassle.
I want to run games for friends and strangers alike, all using a shared, single experience instead of running "this" adventure on "that" VTT, and "that" adventure on "this" VTT because different people use different VTTs. So I'm fully with EVERYONE who wants the Game Table to be numero uno.
The Game Table (and the Character Builder) are the two features I wanted when DDI was announced. Sure, I have half of my "wish list" - but it IS, frankly, the smaller half as far as my "daily useage" would be concerned.
It's also easier, quicker, and thus cheaper.
Knowing a bit about programming I can say that making the tools to simply interact with data and auto crunch some numbers is a lot easier the making a full fledged VTT like the one they originally planned. Plus they already got a monster builder tool so this looks to be an upgrade combined with simply adding in all the compendium data.
If we assume that the Game Table as programmed to date has to be (effectively) scrapped and started over from scratch? I'm FULLY with you, and I'm not even a programmer.
However, I've had a hands-on demo of the Game Table, and it was pretty far along when I saw it. Was it done? Absolutely not. It still had known (and fairly major) crash bugs. It was, IMHO, almost ready for a closed/private early alpha test.
If they can salvage any/most/all of that code and just pickup where they left off, I think that if/when the Game Table goes back into development, it won't take more than a few months of dedicated coding to push it out the door.
But, that's a lot of ifs. ;)
I'll second that!
I don't post often, but for once...and maybe my drop in the giant bucket will be noticed...who knows?
I want to state for the record that I truly respect and appreciate the moderators and volunteers on the forums. They have a job that's incredibly hard, and they do it with a passion for gaming, and professionalism that I feel is rarely rivaled.
Now. I want to say that I don't feel that I'm one of the primary gamers that WOTC/Hasbro aims their products at. I'm in my forties with kids. I game a lot less than I used to. Unfortunately I feel after talking to other gamers that Wizards may have missed an opportunity here. Older gamers with families.
I have seen tons of older gamers quit after kids and more responsibility came along. Because they have to stay at home, they can't game unless it's on their PC. They can't spend hours away from their families.
I saw/see the DDi tabletop as a godsend for that area. When I saw the interviews and demos, I was amazed. I would finally be able to play D&D with real gamers online. I talked with more people who said that if it really happened, they loved the idea of returning to playing D&D. There's so much more it could offer them than MMO's.
Now I hear that it has been delayed for a Campaign Manager. It kills me. For me,the main draw of 4E was the online aspect. I like it, but I want to play it. (Yes I know about the online options, but they are nowhere near the same, when all factors are taken into account.)
I have friends who own almost every 2e-3.5e book out. These same friends are now playing MMO's only because they can't play D&D on the online tabletop. These people have good jobs. We have the cash to buy the new books...if we have somewhere to use them. All the money going to other companies would be paid to WOTC. Every day delayed is money lost from my point of view. (example...I have a friend who dropped over two hundred bucks on video games the other day, all the while angrily complaining about how much he misses playing D&D!)
Anyway, that's my rant. I understand business concerns, but 4E was touted as being designed with the virtual tabletop in mind. I looked forward to playing Living RPGA games on the tabletop. For now, 4E looks petty bleak to me. (Not putting the system down, but the inability to enjoy it.) For now, my buying will go on hold, at least until I can use what I buy.
You spoke for an entire generation out here in cyber space, Aoibin. Wizzard's bait and hook approach reminds me of the old carnaval's baiting you with amazing sights you will see inside the tent for just the price of admission.....
Their is a thing called justice, and Class action law suits when money is involved. Wizzard can't just move on down the road when the evening is done like a carnaval. You will be held accountable.
If we assume that the Game Table as programmed to date has to be (effectively) scrapped and started over from scratch? I'm FULLY with you, and I'm not even a programmer.
However, I've had a hands-on demo of the Game Table, and it was pretty far along when I saw it. Was it done? Absolutely not. It still had known (and fairly major) crash bugs. It was, IMHO, almost ready for a closed/private early alpha test.
If they can salvage any/most/all of that code and just pickup where they left off, I think that if/when the Game Table goes back into development, it won't take more than a few months of dedicated coding to push it out the door.
But, that's a lot of ifs. ;)
Yea it wasn't even alpha yet from what I understood. In programming all Alpha stage means is that you have all the functionality in the program. It often won't look that nice and will have tons and tons of bugs many of which are serious problems like crashing, locking up machine, and etc.
Depending on the software and the extent of the bugs the Alpha stage can take a long time. Given the amount of stuff the VTT should do I don't doubt they could spend at least a year in alpha. Trouble shooting and tracking down bugs is not as easy as you might think. In simple code it often is but code that is millions of lines and developed by lots of people can be hard.
Plus sometimes problems arise unrelated to your code but are a result of the coding language, OS, or hardware. An example is someone I know is working on a game for XBOX Live. Well he wrote the whole thing and was pretty much complete but silly him he forgot to test it on XBOX and was only testing it on his PC. Well turns out a not so small problem arose from the way XBOX handles memory. Which meant he had to go back and rewrite a large portion of the code.
These kind of technical nightmares are the reason for a lot of delays when developing any software that has to be compatible over multiple systems. And often the reason why some people have problems with their paticular setup upon release and need a patch. While most other people have it work perfectly fine.
Also the Alpha stage is longer then Beta in most cases. And the Beta stage is more arbitrary as there isn't as clear of a defined point. Each company will have it's own standards on when a piece of software hits beta. But it usually means most of the serious bugs have been remove but many minor ones might remain. Also they are polishing up the UI, art, and etc for final release.
As for WoTC plans, I don't know if they ever plan to get back around to the game table but finishing up the other tools first is probably a good idea. Because remember the VTT was suppose to interact with all the other tools which means they have to be up and running and complete for the VTT to truly be complete.
Importing your characters was only one aspect of the VTT. The DM has to be able to import monsters and create monsters. That looks like what they are currently working on for the first item in the "Adventure Tools" with the ability to create and edit monsters.
I don't know how much they had done on the VTT but all I really ever saw was videos of cool 3D models moving around on a flat board with decent lighting effects and some dice rolling. The UI was very minimal and at most it looked more like a basic prototype a group of college students could make. Cause honestly I have seen college students in programming degrees do on par or better then that.
Most of the more fancy stuff was in the character visualizer which allowed you to change the shape and equipment of a character. Now that was very impressive as it requires a bit of 3D modeling coding to be able to morph things like that. And while that was going to be a separate program it was still going to be tied into the VTT since you can import things.
I guess the point I'm trying to get at is I don't think they were as far along with the VTT as it seems many seem to think they were. I think because of their very early demo people think it was like 1/2 to 3/4 done and they simply dropped the ball. But in reality I think it was probably more like 1/4 done if even that. I mean had they even started on network code for internet play? Cause in the end a lot of the time comes down to bug swishing and tweaking things. So even though something looks far along it might have a long way to go.
You spoke for an entire generation out here in cyber space, Aoibin. Wizzard's bait and hook approach reminds me of the old carnaval's baiting you with amazing sights you will see inside the tent for just the price of admission.....
Their is a thing called justice, and Class action law suits when money is involved. Wizzard can't just move on down the road when the evening is done like a carnaval. You will be held accountable.
An entire generation?
I disagree with his statements, so I'm curious what ENTIRE generation he speaks for.
I'll thank you not to put words in my mouth. Just because you feel strongly on something doesn't mean all your peers agree.
(FYI - I was born in 1976, if it helps to define my generation. I think I'm right on the Generation X/Generation Y cusp)
[EDIT]
Interesting. Apparently "Gen Y" is really a subset of "Gen X" and not the chronological successor as I'd always assumed. So I *am* on the X/Y cusp, since I'm both. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Y
The flaw here is that you assume that just because you (and I, and a handful of others) would prefer the VTT first that we're a representative majority.
Polls were done, market research was launched, and other measurements taken. What was found was that MORE people wanted the campaign tools than wanted the Game Table. This is backed in measurable ways. For one such methodology used, see the results of the multi-site poll they undertook: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20090414
I think that if you crunch some numbers you can see that the margin for error is + or - 1.55% assuming this poll was 95% accurate (which I doubt since its run was so short). This means that for non-subscribers it comes down to just a few percentage points. Assuming subscribers are subscribing because they are happy with what they are getting, which of course means they don't want the VTT at all really. So of course those numbers are going to be way off, but they are only off by 10%-20% which means even the subscribers want the VTT. I'd like to see what the total poll wanted, instead of what WotC marketing wanted us to believe.
If we say that there are more than 10 million D&D players (a very conservative estimate based on book sales), then our accuracy drops to 40% which means our margin for error rises to unholy levels which essentially means that this poll shows nothing. Rather this poll shows that of the 10,000 + D&D players only 40% decided to participate and of those 4,000 + internet users that decided to answer the poll the difference between the choices was 10%-20% for subscribers and less than 10% for non-subscribers.
I really don't see a more accurate way to poll the D&D fanbase except maybe to leave the poll in a prominent place for several months and hope for a larger portion of the players to participate. Also the questions weren't worded in the way the answers were displayed.
In order to match the way the answers were displayed the questions would have to along the lines of "Which future software product would you like to see out first a. this product, b. this product, c. this product" and so on. I took part in the survey and the questions did not take this form.
I think that if you crunch some numbers you can see that the margin for error is + or - 1.55% assuming this poll was 95% accurate (which I doubt since its run was so short). This means that for non-subscribers it comes down to just a few percentage points. Assuming subscribers are subscribing because they are happy with what they are getting, which of course means they don't want the VTT at all really. So of course those numbers are going to be way off, but they are only off by 10%-20% which means even the subscribers want the VTT. I'd like to see what the total poll wanted, instead of what WotC marketing wanted us to believe.
The part that I bolded above is where you are making a *very* large error in logic. That fact that someone is subscribed tells you that they think that, for the current price, they are getting their moneys worth. It is in no way an indication that they are not interested in anything else being developed.
If you dig through the DDI General forum, look for the original thread discussing the results of the poll. There is a poster in the thread (the name draws a blank at the moment) who actually did the calculations for Margin of Error, and found that the results of the poll are quite meaningful.
Your expectation that the poll represents the wishes of everyone who has ever played D&D is, to be honest, quite unrealistic. No pollster in the world attempts to gather a sample size that is a significant portion of the total expected audience. Once you get past a certain number of people who have responded, the percentages aren't likely to change at all.
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.
An example is "Do you favor playing D&D online or face to face?"
This question (which I am unsure if it was on the survey) would lead to many saying no, not because they didn't want to play online, but because the majority of players don't play online.
If the question was straightforward such as "If you could play D&D online using a WotC virtual table top would you?"
This question would garner a more accurate response.
I think that if you crunch some numbers you can see that the margin for error is + or - 1.55% assuming this poll was 95% accurate (which I doubt since its run was so short). This means that for non-subscribers it comes down to just a few percentage points. Assuming subscribers are subscribing because they are happy with what they are getting, which of course means they don't want the VTT at all really. So of course those numbers are going to be way off, but they are only off by 10%-20% which means even the subscribers want the VTT. I'd like to see what the total poll wanted, instead of what WotC marketing wanted us to believe.
I'm going to confess - I absolutely SUCK at math, so I can't explain how/why this works.
However, it's always been my understanding that your confidence margin in statistics is based on your sample size - REGARDLESS of how large a slice of the population your sample represents.
In other words, if 4,000 people gives a 1.5% margin of confidence, it doesn't matter if you're representing 6 million people (which, by the way is the number usually bandied about as the global D&D audience - though I don't know if that's adjusted across all versions or just the current version) or your own number of 10 million.
Again, I'm in NO WAY a mathematician or statistician, but that's always been one of those factoids that's stuck with me.
Of course, it's irrelevant anyway if you're going to refuse to believe the math and science presented.
Not to be a jerk or anything, but once you start tossing out claims like "what marketing wants us to believe" you start to become a borderline conspiracy theorist.[1] WotC is many things, but I honestly don't think they're THAT manipulative.
Frankly, even if I believed WotC wanted to be that manipulative, if they're incompetent enough to flubb the DDI this bad, why should I believe they're competent enough to hide it so well? Seems a disconnect in logic to me.
[1] - What I mean by this is, it becomes awfully convenient for the person making that statement to then continue to argue their opinion ad nauseum, because little things like facts and data are just hand-waved away if they don't support the "conspiracy theorist"'s opinion.
If we're just going to start ignoring the available data, I have no reason to continue to discuss the topic, because it effectively means the person I'm speaking with has decided that their opinion/interpretation of events/stance is more important that finding the truth.
There's no point in having a discussion of differing views when you're dealing with that sort of person.
In short, if we're playing by the "We can't trust anything official/stated by WotC, but I know my opinion is perfectly correct" rules, I'm done with this conversation and almost certainly any others.
Yes, but you fail to address the question format which plays a bigger part than margin of error. If a question is asked incorrectly it can lead to bad answers that don't really represent a population.
An example is "Do you favor playing D&D online or face to face?"
This question (which I am unsure if it was on the survey) would lead to many saying no, not because they didn't want to play online, but because the majority of players don't play online.
If the question was straightforward such as "If you could play D&D online using a WotC virtual table top would you?"
This question would garner a more accurate response.
As I recall the question asked was to the effect of:
Which of the following tools would be of use to you (select all that apply):
Tools to play online
Tools for campaign management
Tools for creating monsters
....
The exact wording for each answer was however it appears in the poll results.
Not to be a jerk or anything, but once you start tossing out claims like "what marketing wants us to believe" you start to become a borderline conspiracy theorist.
I don't think there is any borderline about it. Once anyone starts says "what _____ wants us to believe" they have crossed that line and are now deep in conspiracy theorist territory.
Err it doesn't matter what the sample size was, it was a self selected poll... it's worthless.
At worst the self-selection adds bias, it doesn't make the poll worthless.
If we're worried about self-selection, we have to ask what bias is being added.
In this case the self-selection was people who wanted to be polled about DDI - so the bias is toward, shockingly, people with an opinion on DDI.
I wouldn't consider that a worthless bias. It means the results may be weighted toward those who have a strong opinion on what they want from the service, and we're therefore not getting a sample from people who don't feel strongly either way.
Where self-selection becomes an issue of adding undue and heavy bias is, for example, an opinion poll. If the poll is "Do you think is doing a good job?" - you'll get drastically different results (all from self-selection adding INCREDIBLE amounts of bias) depending on if the site is a conservative/republican site, or a liberal/democratic site. The site of the opposing party will steer heavily toward no, and of the supporting party toward yes, because only those interested in proving their opinion to be correct are going to answer.
Yes, but you fail to address the question format which plays a bigger part than margin of error. If a question is asked incorrectly it can lead to bad answers that don't really represent a population.
An example is "Do you favor playing D&D online or face to face?"
This question (which I am unsure if it was on the survey) would lead to many saying no, not because they didn't want to play online, but because the majority of players don't play online.
If the question was straightforward such as "If you could play D&D online using a WotC virtual table top would you?"
This question would garner a more accurate response.
The question was in the format:
Which of the following would you use:
And then it gave a list (1/2 a dozen options I think). People could choose as many as they want from the list.
In this case the self-selection was people who wanted to be polled about DDI - so the bias is toward, shockingly, people with an opinion on DDI.
Wasn't it also that they were questioned about whether they were ...currently playing D&D.?
Being a prospective player, during that poll I said I was not currently playing and the poll ended pretty much right there. This would automatically remove a group people who may have opinions on D&Di developments and whose future playing may depend on those developments; for example, in the case of the VTT, either past or prospective players who either have lost touch with their old group through moving (past players) or new players who either haven't found a group or have but they aren't close or...etc. These groups may have prioritized the VTT but were not polled.
In my own opinion this exclusion that took place this basis does open the question of procedural bias.
(I will add in that I am a (ready-to-submit thesis) postgraduate research physicist analysing space weather data and so sampling errors and confidence intervals are a small but significant part of what I do.)
Wasn't it also that they were questioned about whether they were ...currently playing D&D.?
Being a prospective player, during that poll I said I was not currently playing and the poll ended pretty much right there. This would automatically remove a group people who may have opinions on D&Di developments and whose future playing may depend on those developments; for example, in the case of the VTT, either past or prospective players who either have lost touch with their old group through moving (past players) or new players who either haven't found a group or have but they aren't close or...etc. These groups may have prioritized the VTT but were not polled.
In my own opinion this exclusion that took place this basis does open the question of procedural bias.
(I will add in that I am a (ready-to-submit thesis) postgraduate research physicist analysing space weather data and so sampling errors and confidence intervals are a small but significant part of what I do.)
I'd disagree that that introduces undue bias, however.
If you're not currently playing SOME version of D&D - the odds of you having an informed opinion about 4th Edition, and especially about D&D Insider (which supports ONLY 4th Edition) are slim. I think, further, that the DDI toolset is intended to be a service for current players, and not (necessarily) a tool to entice new/lapsed players (see the analogies drawn by WotC to a DVD with bonus features. The DVD is D&D, the DDI is the bonus features).
What removing non-players from the pool has done is reduce the need for a "Don't know/Don't care" option in each question. I'd think that would actually give more meaningful results.
That said, I don't know if I agree with the choice - and I've already stated I suck with math and am NOT a statistician by ANY measure, so my knowledge is maybe just above that of your average layperson (because I'm interested and try to be at least partially informed).
The short version is - I don't see the harm, by far and large, of limiting out non-players.
Time permitting I will read up on procedural bias, so I'll know if I'm talking out my arse or not.
A quick googling produces this:http://www.experiment-resources.com/research-bias.html which I doubt is what you're referring to. I don't think you mean to imply undue pressure was applied?
I'd disagree that that introduces undue bias, however.
Depends on the question you are asking. If you are asking "What do our current customers want?" then you are right, the bias may well be exactly what you are looking for. If you are asking a wider question like "what do people who are interested in OR are playing what to see?" then you run into troubles.
I think it is a group that is omitted at peril. Why? Because to even get to the poll you had to be part of the wider gaming community. You may even be able to focus that down further. I just have a memory of it being opened up in places like Enworld and so on as well as the main D&D page.
If you're not currently playing SOME version of D&D - the odds of you having an informed opinion about 4th Edition, and especially about D&D Insider (which supports ONLY 4th Edition) are slim. I think, further, that the DDI toolset is intended to be a service for current players, and not (necessarily) a tool to entice new/lapsed players (see the analogies drawn by WotC to a DVD with bonus features. The DVD is D&D, the DDI is the bonus features).
And what if the reason that you are a lapsed player, or a player who has not yet begun D&D gaming, is due to a reason that the tools in DDi may specifically address? The moving away type lapsed player is a perfect example of this. Excluding people because they don't play now is, to my eyes, possibly worrying as it does not take account of why they don't play. People can and do stay informed about 4E without playing it.
The short version is - I don't see the harm, by far and large, of limiting out non-players.
On this, I am afraid, we will have to disagree. Fair enough though.
A quick googling produces this:http://www.experiment-resources.com/research-bias.html which I doubt is what you're referring to. I don't think you mean to imply undue pressure was applied?
No, not pressure. My query is based around what that page refers to as "Omission Bias".
I don't think there is any borderline about it. Once anyone starts says "what _____ wants us to believe" they have crossed that line and are now deep in conspiracy theorist territory.
If you believe that you have absolutely no clue what a marketing department is. Their job IS to make you believe what they want you to believe.
Do you think there would be a McDonalds on every corner if they didn't have a marketing department?
"What I'm gonna stop for a hamburger that's not even made of beef? This crap is nasty tasting!"
My only other gripe is that the questions didn't match the issue.
Issue: What software product should we work on next.
Poll Questions: Which software products would be useful to you [list of potential products].
The problem is that the issue can only have one clear software product as an answer. The poll on the other hand lets you check off as many things that might potentially one day be useful to you. Which is why you get all of the weird percents (I mean weird in that they don't add up to 100%).
I suggest for the next poll, that they do this:
"Which software product would you like to see WotC produce next?
a. Game Table - Allows D&D play over the internet with people spread across the globe.
b. Character Visualizer - Can be used to create 3D models of characters including their gear.
...etc etc...(for choices)
Which would you like to see after that?
a. Game Table - Allows D&D play over the internet with people spread across the globe.
b. Character Visualizer - Can be used to create 3D models of characters including their gear.
...etc etc...(for choices)
Which would you like to see after that one?
a. Game Table - Allows D&D play over the internet with people spread across the globe.
b. Character Visualizer - Can be used to create 3D models of characters including their gear.
...etc etc...(for choices)"
This would allow the poll to actually fit the problem. Also don't cut people out of the poll because they say they currently aren't playing, it is already very selective being that people have to visit the D&D site to get to it.
- so the bias is toward, shockingly, people with an opinion on DDI.
Yeah, no.
It was a poll of people that chose to respond to a poll about DDI and even then it wasn't all of those people.
Self selected polls are good for entertainment purposes only. Period.
This would allow the poll to actually fit the problem. Also don't cut people out of the poll because they say they currently aren't playing, it is already very selective being that people have to visit the D&D site to get to it.
Actually I think they should do a poll that has people rank items. I've heard that those tend to give a more accurate representation of what people think of stuff. Mainly because someone may really want one thing but they have something else that is a close second which isn't reflected in the pick one type polls. And example question would be.
Place in order from most desired to least desired which software product would you like to see WotC produce next.
a. Game Table - Allows D&D play over the internet with people spread across the globe.
b. Character Visualizer - Can be used to create 3D models of characters including their gear.
...etc etc...(for choices)
Or polls that have you rank each item individually. With the Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. With questions like say, "Would you subscribe to DDI if it supported a Game Table software?"
It's been a while since I did anything with marketing, surveys, and etc. But as I recall both of those methods tend you yield more informative results then standard pick your favorite.
I am really suprised by this. I love dnd and I do like the changes with 4th ed. What I had hoped was that the character visualizer would be up and running as well as the digital table top. Now that I read that it is put on hold that dissapoints me. I live in an area where there isn't a lot of dnd playing. The only group that is here is only for teenagers, and I am teacher. I am too old to play in that group. I was looking to play on the digital table top so that I can play dnd. I was also looking forward to the character visualizer but that is on hold to. This bugs me because I know that this was part of their main advertaisment for the game, and now it is on hold. I really like dnd, but I wish that they would finish what they started, and keep their promise. I really do hope it is only on hold and they do fullfill their promise.
Why are you too old to play with teenagers? I would bet you were a teenager playing this game once. We have a group that ranges from 11 to 44 in age. We dont have any problems.
Why are you too old to play with teenagers? I would bet you were a teenager playing this game once. We have a group that ranges from 11 to 44 in age. We dont have any problems.
Well he said he was a teacher so I think he means some of the people in the group might be his students. And because of all the "paranoid" people out there it is considered "inappropriate" for a teacher and their students to hang out in activities outside of school.
Even in college it's not considered "appropriate" as my professor in college said he couldn't come over to a big LAN party the students were having even though he was really into gaming because it wasn't allowed by school policy.
Even if you exclude any policy conflicts cause by his job as a teacher there is still the "paranoia" issue. As people get suspicious when a much older person starts hanging out with a bunch of teenagers.
Well he said he was a teacher so I think he means some of the people in the group might be his students. And because of all the "paranoid" people out there it is considered "inappropriate" for a teacher and their students to hang out in activities outside of school.
Even in college it's not considered "appropriate" as my professor in college said he couldn't come over to a big LAN party the students were having even though he was really into gaming because it wasn't allowed by school policy.
Even if you exclude any policy conflicts cause by his job as a teacher there is still the "paranoia" issue. As people get suspicious when a much older person starts hanging out with a bunch of teenagers.
Crap, you know what this means?
I have to stop hanging out with teenagers. Oh well I guess I will have to relinquish the title "Frag King"...
Not in active development
Until that changes there will not be any news.
The Adventure Tools are under active development, and it isn't until that suite of software is done that we'll see any potential for change.
Have to say as a GM the Character Builder is the best bit of digital wizardry to come my way for quite some time, The original Character Generator that shipped with D&D 3.0 had a great interface but it never was completed, and E-Tools was just awful.
I GM for my two sons and their friends, as well as my own friends. Having the Charater Builder is a fantastic time saver and printing completed character sheets always puts a smile on the players face. (and saves me straining to read other ppls handwriting lol)
Just installed the Adventure Tools too and the Monster Builder is also just as good. If WotC keep the quaility of the other tools as high then the wait for the virtual table top will be worth it.
Kudos to the team!
Considering that you could release the modules straight from dragon & dungeon into that plataform (ready to play) every GM would have to be nuts not to be a DDi user.
Current status:
Not in active development
Until that changes there will not be any news.
The Adventure Tools are under active development, and it isn't until that suite of software is done that we'll see any potential for change.
What other features are planned for the Adventure tools ?
What other features are planned for the Adventure tools ?
Monster Builder (BETA is out already)
4 more...
I guess (and hope) it's trap/hazard, encounters (with tile mapping), adventures (with Mastrerplan-like flowcharts and maybe timelines and loc-based adventure support) & campaign (kinda wiki with links to all previuos tools).
Current status:
Not in active development
Until that changes there will not be any news.
The Adventure Tools are under active development, and it isn't until that suite of software is done that we'll see any potential for change.
In other words don't hold your breath for the next 5 years.
In other words don't hold your breath for the next 5 years.
Hmm, so we'll have a VTT for 5E?
Hmm, so we'll have a VTT for 5E?
If you look at their track record. Its one program every year or so. It'll take about 4 more years for them to get the adventure tools out. Assuming they immediately pick up the GT as the next project (which is not at all likely) it'll take them 1-2 years to get it out in some kind of workable form.
Unless they deviate from their past and hire several more programmers and some other software support staff, I don't see them going any faster.
By then they'll be well on their way to making 5th edition because of the power imbalance of expansion products.
So in summary we MIGHT see the GT around the time they are talking about releasing 5th edition.
If you look at their track record. Its one program every year or so. It'll take about 4 more years for them to get the adventure tools out. Assuming they immediately pick up the GT as the next project (which is not at all likely) it'll take them 1-2 years to get it out in some kind of workable form.
Unless they deviate from their past and hire several more programmers and some other software support staff, I don't see them going any faster.
By then they'll be well on their way to making 5th edition because of the power imbalance of expansion products.
So in summary we MIGHT see the GT around the time they are talking about releasing 5th edition.
Hmmm. 4E isn't yet to years old, and we have two softwares now (or will in a couple months, depending on how you want to classify the Monster Builder Beta that's out now).
How is that one every year? At worst it's one every *tries to do quick math on a Monday* 8 months.
You also don't know (nor do any of us) what the workable status of the existing Game Table code is. Having played with it at GenCon last year - unless they have to scrap ALL of it, it was actually coming along really nicely, I'd be surprised if it would take more than 6 months to put the final polish on it and get it out the door (again, assuming they don't have to scrap the code due to changes in the way the tools (will) integrate).
At GenCon 2007 when they announced 4E they stated (during the Q&A in front of a few thousand people) their intention was to design a game system that could last 10 years. That's no promise, no guarantee, but it is a goal I'd be quite surprised they don't make every effort to keep.
So far, while there's been some power creep, I don't see anything hugely unbalanced - in fact the game still scales quite nicely across all 30 levels.
Hmmm. 4E isn't yet to years old, and we have two softwares now (or will in a couple months, depending on how you want to classify the Monster Builder Beta that's out now).
How is that one every year? At worst it's one every *tries to do quick math on a Monday* 8 months.
You also don't know (nor do any of us) what the workable status of the existing Game Table code is. Having played with it at GenCon last year - unless they have to scrap ALL of it, it was actually coming along really nicely, I'd be surprised if it would take more than 6 months to put the final polish on it and get it out the door (again, assuming they don't have to scrap the code due to changes in the way the tools (will) integrate).
At GenCon 2007 when they announced 4E they stated (during the Q&A in front of a few thousand people) their intention was to design a game system that could last 10 years. That's no promise, no guarantee, but it is a goal I'd be quite surprised they don't make every effort to keep.
So far, while there's been some power creep, I don't see anything hugely unbalanced - in fact the game still scales quite nicely across all 30 levels.
Actually I think it was mentioned somewhere that they would have to take the GT and start over from scratch. Ok, say your right and its 8 months per tool that's still 32 months (2.6 years) before the adventure tools are done. Then tack on another 8-16 months (because the GT is massively more complex than the ATs) and you get 4 years.
So at minimum its going to take 4 years to get the GT out. Imagine how many people are choosing not to buy WotC books because they haven't got the GT out. Now imagine how many books that is. Now do some math. If there are even 100 people that are choosing not to purchase WotC books until the GT comes out. There is what one book per 2 months or so which is 6 books a year (I'm sure they come out more often). Each book is sold around $30.00. So WotC is losing out on $18,000.00 of profit because they are passing up the GT and working on some adventure tools. Whatever they've made their decision. Let them reap the losses.
So at minimum its going to take 4 years to get the GT out. Imagine how many people are choosing not to buy WotC books because they haven't got the GT out. Now imagine how many books that is. Now do some math. If there are even 100 people that are choosing not to purchase WotC books until the GT comes out. There is what one book per 2 months or so which is 6 books a year (I'm sure they come out more often). Each book is sold around $30.00. So WotC is losing out on $18,000.00 of profit because they are passing up the GT and working on some adventure tools. Whatever they've made their decision. Let them reap the losses.
But WotC also has to take into account the lost revenue that they would incur if they put out sub-standard pieces of software. IMO, the potential losses by rushing out buggy software are more than outweighed by the gains they are getting by putting out software that is the quality of the Monster Builder and Character Builder.
But WotC also has to take into account the lost revenue that they would incur if they put out sub-standard pieces of software. IMO, the potential losses by rushing out buggy software are more than outweighed by the gains they are getting by putting out software that is the quality of the Monster Builder and Character Builder.
Not to mention the fact that it would probably cost them well over $18,000 to develop it. Coming from a background of working with 3D computer games I can tell you that the development cost will be well over that.
A lot of people have pointed to demonstrations of the VTT and wondered how it could have required large amounts of work to finish. My best guess would revolve around the art assets. It is very easy to setup a demonstration using a dozen different models. Unfortunately when you go back and have to try to code up a system that allows new character models to be generated 'on the fly' as it were (something the VTT was suppose to do) the complexity of the programming suddenly increases a great deal.
Likewise the demo was probably using a handful of specific maps. Adding in the ability for DMs to create their own maps and suddenly you have to make sure the code is much more bullet-proof (if there is a rendering problem with a specific map you can sort it out for the demo but you can't rely on that for a final product), add in an editor, and add in a way to send those newly created maps from the DM to the players. That's an enormous amount of additional complexity that you didn't have in the demo but that you can't do without in a final product.
So now you are looking at a serious amount of work for your programmers to go from demo to final product. Maybe you could find a coder to work for a few months who turns out code that does the job without crashing and that is maintainable by future coders. Just throwing out a quick (and wildly optimistic, imo) Fermi calculation you would pay such a person the equivalent of $60,000 a year for 3 months of work or $15,000.
Ok. $15,000 is less than $18,000 so it's a win. Except for the fact that you don't have any art assets yet. You need to hire 3D artists to create base character models. Just using PH, PH2, Eberron, and Forgotten Realms you have 19 races. Since there are male and female versions of each race that's 38 models. Each model has at least 6 types of armor to choose from. If you're clever you don't have to design 218 different suits of armor because you make the various character models related so that the armor for one can be distorted to fit another but that is still a lot of work.
When you're finally done with the characters you move onto all the models for the monsters. All in all it is a lot of work.
Not to mention the fact that it would probably cost them well over $18,000 to develop it. Coming from a background of working with 3D computer games I can tell you that the development cost will be well over that.
A lot of people have pointed to demonstrations of the VTT and wondered how it could have required large amounts of work to finish. My best guess would revolve around the art assets. It is very easy to setup a demonstration using a dozen different models. Unfortunately when you go back and have to try to code up a system that allows new character models to be generated 'on the fly' as it were (something the VTT was suppose to do) the complexity of the programming suddenly increases a great deal.
Likewise the demo was probably using a handful of specific maps. Adding in the ability for DMs to create their own maps and suddenly you have to make sure the code is much more bullet-proof (if there is a rendering problem with a specific map you can sort it out for the demo but you can't rely on that for a final product), add in an editor, and add in a way to send those newly created maps from the DM to the players. That's an enormous amount of additional complexity that you didn't have in the demo but that you can't do without in a final product.
So now you are looking at a serious amount of work for your programmers to go from demo to final product. Maybe you could find a coder to work for a few months who turns out code that does the job without crashing and that is maintainable by future coders. Just throwing out a quick (and wildly optimistic, imo) Fermi calculation you would pay such a person the equivalent of $60,000 a year for 3 months of work or $15,000.
Ok. $15,000 is less than $18,000 so it's a win. Except for the fact that you don't have any art assets yet. You need to hire 3D artists to create base character models. Just using PH, PH2, Eberron, and Forgotten Realms you have 19 races. Since there are male and female versions of each race that's 38 models. Each model has at least 6 types of armor to choose from. If you're clever you don't have to design 218 different suits of armor because you make the various character models related so that the armor for one can be distorted to fit another but that is still a lot of work.
When you're finally done with the characters you move onto all the models for the monsters. All in all it is a lot of work.
Actually since the Game Table wasn't going to use physics and didn't really need a lot of collision or real-time effects it would be much cheaper than a full 3D game. I am myself a programmer and I could put out a basic 3D GT in about a months time just working in my free time, but not something as complex as the one WotC has been designing. Now as to the art I tend to agree with your initial assessment. Art costs money, but they would be shaving at least some of the cost off by using the CAD drawings from the more recent releases of the miniatures. To start out they wouldn't need a million monsters. They already said they would give out 2d tokens that could be used with it. So it could still be released with the 2d tokens which would take less than a week to gather every monster and create a token texture from the pictures (once you got the process down, it would be a matter of macroing it into an art program).
I just pulled the number 100 out of the air. Lets look at the survey 68% said they wanted the GT. So out of a 4000 person survey 2720 people want the GT. Lets say 25% of those people are voting with their wallets (a conservative estimate) 680 people. So if 680 people are not purchasing WotC books, you lose out on $489,600.00 in sales for books over the course of the 4+ year period. Now those numbers are just educated guesses based on the poll and the average times it takes WotC to do something. I could be completely off, but it makes you think.
Now since we agree that the GT is much more complex than the ATs or CB, then it might conceivably take much longer than the 16 months I allotted for it. This means even more sales loss.
What is the loss in sales if they don't put out the ATs in order. I can't speak for everyone but I don't see a huge loss in delaying the ATs because they only make things you can already do easier. They don't provide a completely different functionality.
Now since we agree that the GT is much more complex than the ATs or CB, then it might conceivably take much longer than the 16 months I allotted for it. This means even more sales loss.
What is the loss in sales if they don't put out the ATs in order. I can't speak for everyone but I don't see a huge loss in delaying the ATs because they only make things you can already do easier. They don't provide a completely different functionality.
The only problem as I see it with doing things the other way (GT then the ATs) is that the GT will be (I am guessing) pulling in a lot of info from the various tools that it will interface with. By putting the tools out first, the designers of the GT have a very clear idea of what variables they are going to be pulling in, and can code to those specifications. To put the GT out first, and then release the ATs, you run the risk of either limiting the ATs based on a limitation in the GT, or having to go back and re-do parts of the GT in order to accommodate the data being pulled from the various tools.
Now this is just my opinion. I don't know what WotC is taking into account when they made their decision. Is money a apart of it, yes. However, a big part of it is also certainly providing tools for DMs to use as part of the DDI suite of goodies.
I would be surprised if you were able to create all of those from scratch within a month. Obviously if you were to use a solution such as Ogre3D or Torque you could probably get a good renderer and editor solution up within a month but now you've added licensing issues WotC might not wish to deal with.
As for using the CAD files for the figures, those might help a little but I am sure they are miles away from being a 'magic bullet' solution. You would still need textures and material definitions as well as face optimization.
You yourself give an estimate of 12-16 months for such a project (which I suspect is actually a lot lower than it really would be). If you had a team of 6 people (most likely more) earning $50,000 a year you are going to spend between $300,000 and $400,000 just in salaries. That doesn't include equipment costs or facilities, so in the end you will spend at least as much, if not more than your estimates.
Yes, you could cut a lot of corners and have lots of 2D tokens, more generic models for players, and less terrain to build adventures, but now you run the risk of backlash for pushing a poor product out the door.
I actually wasn't including physics into the programming. I was simply focusing on the aspects of creating a 3D rendering engine, user interface, network stack, and necessary editing tools as well as necessary testing time and proper documentation to support future coders.
Most of that can be done nowadays by 3rd party engines that are pre-built. its just a matter of getting them to work together. The editing tools, testing time, and proper documentation might take much more time.
I would be surprised if you were able to create all of those from scratch within a month. Obviously if you were to use a solution such as Ogre3D or Torque you could probably get a good renderer and editor solution up within a month but now you've added licensing issues WotC might not wish to deal with.
There are no licensing issues with products like Ogre3D and Irrlicht. You can use them however you want as long as you don't try to claim copyright on the actual engine/code from the engine itself. You don't in some cases even have to mention that you used the engine. Seriously no licensing issues with most of these products. I can throw together a good renderer in Irrlicht in just a couple of hours. I can put together a decent program in about a month or two.
As for using the CAD files for the figures, those might help a little but I am sure they are miles away from being a 'magic bullet' solution. You would still need textures and material definitions as well as face optimization.
Yes, this has been discussed before. You can still use some conversion and optimization programs and easily make a model without texture in less than an hour. Afterward you will have to manually optimize it and make a texture, but it drastically reduces the effort that has to be put into the model.
You yourself give an estimate of 12-16 months for such a project (which I suspect is actually a lot lower than it really would be). If you had a team of 6 people (most likely more) earning $50,000 a year you are going to spend between $300,000 and $400,000 just in salaries. That doesn't include equipment costs or facilities, so in the end you will spend at least as much, if not more than your estimates.
Yes, you could cut a lot of corners and have lots of 2D tokens, more generic models for players, and less terrain to build adventures, but now you run the risk of backlash for pushing a poor product out the door.
It depends on the amount of detail and whether they use licensed engines (which game companies use all the time with no problems) to do the difficult work. After that its just a matter of telling it to load the models and what to do with the camera and models and what information the network engine should pass around. There wouldn't be that many corners to cut. it just mainly depends on the features that they would want to include. The tiles and models are simply artwork more of the artists problem. Which is a whole other issue. I do think if they started over they would need to take longer to get it done. Probably a year to two minimum.
If they are earning $50,000 a year they better have 10+ years experience and be versed in a dozen or more languages. I'm talking about some programmers with 3-5 years experience and in depth knowledge of 1-2 languages. More like $30,000+ each which significantly reduces the budget.
The character visualizer would be used to create the player models. I'm assuming it would output the model in the format that the GT would use.
Yes, game companies do license engines all the time. They also pay for those licenses which adds to the expense. My background doesn't equip me with enough knowledge to know why they typically avoid using free engines such as Ogre3D but the fact that larger projects do would make me believe that WotC would likewise do the same.
I can, however, talk with experience about reusing art assets and I think you overestimate how much the CAD models would reduce the workload on the artists. One of the big subjects batted around my office is one of motion capture and I think it proves an excellent example. Some people wish to use motion capture as a sort of 'push button' solution. We do a mocap session and all the animators have to do is a little work to clean it up. Other people feel that mocap produces terrible results. Well, the truth is that if you try to use it as a push button solution it does. To get really good results out of mocap the animators have to spend almost as much time cleaning it up as they would if they animated by hand.
So why do something like using mocap in the first place? Because it allows your artists to spend more time concentrating on the fine details and lets them skip over the rough blocking. In the end you get a better product but if you don't put in the time (i.e. try to use it as a push button solution) you get a bad result.
A good example of this would be a skeleton. Because the image on the screen is probably going to be more than 1" high what seems acceptable as a miniature would probably be absolutely awful as a 3d model. Legs and arms would be far too thick, the ribcage would be a solid mass, etc.
As for the Character Visualizer creating the player models, actually I was assuming that to be the case. The Character Visualizer will still need all the base parts to assemble the model, however, which is where you get the 38 character models each able to wear 6 different suits of armor. Of course you'll also need all the different weapons, a variety of poses, and some ability to customize the characters (hair styles, beards, etc.).
Lastly, to say that there wouldn't be too many corners to cut and to say that the models and tiles are simply artwork misses the point, I think. The majority of the work that needs to be done is the artwork. My theoretical team of 6 for 12 to 16 months wasn't 6 programmers all working on the problem. As you said the coding side isn't too terribly difficult. It was one or two programmers and four or five artists. Most of the corner cutting would probably be in the range of art assets to cut.
In the end, however, we are both kind of whistling in the dark. Since we can only guess at what the people at WotC deem to be the minimum acceptable requirements for a product they can release it is very hard to determine how much they think it will cost. My original point was that I think you are underestimating the time and effort required to hit what I assume is their minimum standard but perhaps your goal is different than mine.
The salary range of $30,000 for someone with several years of experience seems a bit low to me. I have to admit to just making an educated guess for the $50,000 but after a quick Google for 'average salaries programmers' I'm pretty comfortable standing by it.
Yes, but we are talking about GAME programmers. Do a search and you'll see they are one of the most underpaid segments of programmers.
Yes, game companies do license engines all the time. They also pay for those licenses which adds to the expense. My background doesn't equip me with enough knowledge to know why they typically avoid using free engines such as Ogre3D but the fact that larger projects do would make me believe that WotC would likewise do the same.
I think if you Wikipedia Ogre3D and Irrlicht you can find several examples of where they were used by big name companies to make games. I could be wrong because I haven't checked, but I do know they were used.
I can, however, talk with experience about reusing art assets and I think you overestimate how much the CAD models would reduce the workload on the artists. One of the big subjects batted around my office is one of motion capture and I think it proves an excellent example. Some people wish to use motion capture as a sort of 'push button' solution. We do a mocap session and all the animators have to do is a little work to clean it up. Other people feel that mocap produces terrible results. Well, the truth is that if you try to use it as a push button solution it does. To get really good results out of mocap the animators have to spend almost as much time cleaning it up as they would if they animated by hand.
Its quite possible you are right about this as I'm not an artist, but any speedup would be helpful. Also they don't have to start out with 1,000 3D minis. Just a handful and add to it each month.
So why do something like using mocap in the first place? Because it allows your artists to spend more time concentrating on the fine details and lets them skip over the rough blocking. In the end you get a better product but if you don't put in the time (i.e. try to use it as a push button solution) you get a bad result.
A good example of this would be a skeleton. Because the image on the screen is probably going to be more than 1" high what seems acceptable as a miniature would probably be absolutely awful as a 3d model. Legs and arms would be far too thick, the ribcage would be a solid mass, etc.
Probably true, I have no way of knowing.
As for the Character Visualizer creating the player models, actually I was assuming that to be the case. The Character Visualizer will still need all the base parts to assemble the model, however, which is where you get the 38 character models each able to wear 6 different suits of armor. Of course you'll also need all the different weapons, a variety of poses, and some ability to customize the characters (hair styles, beards, etc.).
I'm not sure what you are saying here. I do know that Irrlicht can composite 3D models and save them into a new file as part of the engine itself. So the character visualizer if made with something with similar capabilities would simply need to save the 3D model and then the game table would just load it up without having millions of little pieces.
Lastly, to say that there wouldn't be too many corners to cut and to say that the models and tiles are simply artwork misses the point, I think. The majority of the work that needs to be done is the artwork. My theoretical team of 6 for 12 to 16 months wasn't 6 programmers all working on the problem. As you said the coding side isn't too terribly difficult. It was one or two programmers and four or five artists. Most of the corner cutting would probably be in the range of art assets to cut.
In the end, however, we are both kind of whistling in the dark. Since we can only guess at what the people at WotC deem to be the minimum acceptable requirements for a product they can release it is very hard to determine how much they think it will cost. My original point was that I think you are underestimating the time and effort required to hit what I assume is their minimum standard but perhaps your goal is different than mine.
Well I was giving it a minimum time frame. Maximum we are looking at another 2-3 years just for the CV and GT. This means about on the outside 7 years wait for the GT (since the CV would need to be made first). Which means its even closer to 5th edition than I postulated earlier.
I wouldn't really call the companies working on the projects listed by Wikipedia A list companies, though Runic seems to have some good talent (not sure what their financing is like).
What I was saying about the Character Visualizer is that while it is not too terribly difficult to make an engine build a composite model you still need the initial parts for the composite model to be assembled from and that is a lot of pieces. Added to that is the fact that composite pieces are trickier to build than ordinary models. On a normal model you need to design a suit of chainmail that fits the model and looks good. For something like the Character Visualizer you need to make the suit of chainmail so that it can be distorted to fit 19 or 38 different models (depending on whether the item is gender specific) and still look good. It will need to be able to be worn with a wide variety of other equipment (backpacks, cloaks, scabbards, bows, quivers, gloves, arm slot items, head slot items, boots, etc.) and be constructed so that the artists can generate modified textures (hopefully something more than just tinting) for all the magical variations without requiring a totally separate texture for each one (trim areas that can receive separate texture maps, for example). Now add in the fact that that armor needs to hold up in a variety of different poses (if the models carrying two handed swords stand like the models carrying bows it's going to look pretty bad) and I think you can begin to appreciate how much work is required on the part of the artists.
All in all a pretty serious undertaking and not something you want a bunch of brand new programmers/artists to be attempting.
Again, you can always cut corners (one pose, arm slot items aren't visible, a single texture for each armor tye so all chainmail suits look alike, etc.) but at what point will releasing such a cutdown product cause more problems than it solves?
My own experiences with game programmers haven't really shown them to be underpaid, but I will admit my experience has been primarily with a single company (and not EA which does have a rep) so it's possible that most other game companies tend to underpay. Competition tends to be pretty fierce in the industry.
I wouldn't really call the companies working on the projects listed by Wikipedia A list companies, though Runic seems to have some good talent (not sure what their financing is like).
What I was saying about the Character Visualizer is that while it is not too terribly difficult to make an engine build a composite model you still need the initial parts for the composite model to be assembled from and that is a lot of pieces. Added to that is the fact that composite pieces are trickier to build than ordinary models. On a normal model you need to design a suit of chainmail that fits the model and looks good. For something like the Character Visualizer you need to make the suit of chainmail so that it can be distorted to fit 19 or 38 different models (depending on whether the item is gender specific) and still look good. It will need to be able to be worn with a wide variety of other equipment (backpacks, cloaks, scabbards, bows, quivers, gloves, arm slot items, head slot items, boots, etc.) and be constructed so that the artists can generate modified textures (hopefully something more than just tinting) for all the magical variations without requiring a totally separate texture for each one (trim areas that can receive separate texture maps, for example). Now add in the fact that that armor needs to hold up in a variety of different poses (if the models carrying two handed swords stand like the models carrying bows it's going to look pretty bad) and I think you can begin to appreciate how much work is required on the part of the artists.
All in all a pretty serious undertaking and not something you want a bunch of brand new programmers/artists to be attempting.
Again, you can always cut corners (one pose, arm slot items aren't visible, a single texture for each armor tye so all chainmail suits look alike, etc.) but at what point will releasing such a cutdown product cause more problems than it solves?
I agree that it would take a lot of artwork assets to get it done in perfect form. Of course not quite as much as what your indicating. If you don't think it is possible or even quick, check out the time that it took to add a type of armor to the Neverwinter Nights editor. Not very long and not many artists (check on the update not the entire game). Really its just a matter of matching custom nodes within the 3D object (armor) to other custom nodes within the 3D object (character), and resizing to match. Heck they could even do some kind of math for the distance between two points to get the scale difference. Its more important to note the amount of detail they want to put into it. If it is highly detailed then it might be more difficult and require more artists and more time. If it is low detail, then it might not take much time at all.
The programmers I'm talking about aren't programming gurus, but at the same time they are far from being beginners. Most will have had college and at least a couple of years working in the field. So they will know what they are doing in their respective fields.
Armor holding up in a variety of poses is relatively easy. If it mirrors real armor then it can be easily made to look good in any pose. If it doesn't, the only thing that needs to be done is making sure each segment of armors edge matches the next parts edge (which is easily done by binding two point on the 3D model together).
Well, let's think about this for a moment. What in essence, does WotC gain by screwing its entire fanbase over for something that doesn't amount to more than a quick buck?
The answer is they don't.
I think some people have been a bit tough on Wizards for 4e. But I think people are being a wee bit selfish in their rants and a bit short sighted. First off, the delay in part might be blamed upon the recession, that hit hard last fall. It has for sure, hurt my ability to purchase the Draconion and Manual of the Planes. I can only imagine how much this must have cut down Wizard's budget for the project, as well as the sales that they might have been hoping to of made with the new edition.
Wizards took a massive gamble when they decided to put an end to 3e and start 4e, especially with a fanbase that had already invested so greately in their previous edition. Simply slapping one new rules to the old genre would be percieved as nothing more than money grubbing and more so with the fact that 3.5 had been released not so long ago. Further risk is further induced due to two other factors; WoW and the recent fantasy explosion and the fact that Wizards is a big time company.
It's rather obvious that Wizards has been inspired to some degree to use some of the methods that WoW has put forth to streamline their system...but that doesn't mean they want to make a cheap copy. Doing so would easily be spotted and revealed to be what it is. And not only would Wizards lose its fanbase, but their product may look so identical to a more established and somewhat "cooler" product that they've gained nothing. But then again, it's also silly not to use a good concept for your game. It's basically calling car designers cheap con artists because they use wheels in their designs rather than coming up with their own shapes.
Add this together with the big company look for Wizards and you've got a hostile fanbase and no gain.
And I think the response from some of the fanbase is rather unfair in this manner. Wizards has gone out of their way to offer us an olive branch. They supplied us with Dragon and Dungeon Magazines for a few months to let us have a feel for what sort of quality they have to offer us. They came out with silly cartoons to appeal to our humor and let us know they don't per say consider this the comign of Christ. It's good, but they want to have fun with it. They let us in on the designs of what's going on and not only give us teasers, but teasers full of lore that makes us want to scream for more. And they promised us not only a brand new system for better game play (or at least a new spin on it), but a way to do so over the internet with a great program that will make it as close to the real thing as possible.
And you know what?
They ****ed up.
They ****ed up big time.
For some reason, something in the planning or developing stages just didn't go well and now we're over a year behind for what they promised us. But you know what? People, even big companies (especially big companies) make mistakes. Major ones.
But at no point have any of you been cheated. To an extent, they have failed you, but they didn't cheat you. Your all sitting around blowing your hornes of how you can apparently do this in six months (or some equal) and go about beating Wizards over the head for it. There is a massive difference between the doctor who gave your old grandma sugar pills while telling her it will cure cancer and the doctor who promised that he'd save your dad from death, but despite everything he tried, it just fell apart.
I think Wizards falls into the later. They have nothing to gain from putting out a new system with the promise of a great new product to go with it only to recall on the later. It ruins their reputation and without it, their chances of making a profit off of D&D hits Nessus and the company itself is shamed.
As it is, they look pretty bad. Their new product still isn't out...one that they made a fairly big deal about. But they are clearly trying to keep what part of the deal they can. We still have new Dungeon & Dragon Magazines coming out with amazing quality, continuity, and dedication. The people who write these articles clearly care about their job and are putting all they reasonably can into making it good. And look at the Character Generator; sure we don't have full models yet, but the generator itself is working well and is of good quality. It even allows me to upload pictures for characters. As it is, it is a stand alone product that someone might buy for a cheap price. And then there's the Monster Builder, which thus far looks amazing. Granted, it would be nice if I had some pictures and perhaps even a bit of Knowledge check fluffs, because at times I don't even know what I'm looking at for new monsters or how they work within the new edition. However, the monster generator works pretty well and the monsters are the real McCoy (save for a few mistakes that people point out and the issue with getting Tiamat to work in the system).
In short, they're trying and while we haven't been given what we're promised, we are getting what we pay for and we get it with quality. Now, if they wanted to cheat us, they'd give us a cheap program. Basic character sheets with little style and incredibly dull design that gets the job done with all the joy of filling out tax forms. Or the monster builder could just have basic monsters from MM1. Hell, they could get away with just adding in MM2.
But that isn't what they're doing. We have stats for creatures from the Dragon's magazine, Open Grave, Dungeon, and just about every sourcebook out there. They're giving us a massive database. A good one.
I think that some of us should stop acting like hostile customers and give Wizards a break. Yes, they messed up and they did so at one of the worst times a company can, but despite this they haven't given up. Recent articles are still good, well written, and inspiring. Content quality control is well kept and they work hard to give us our money's worth, even if it isn't the product we (or they, that's important to remember) were hoping for.
What I'm trying to say is that instead of grabbing mounds of dirt and trash to build our moral high ground, we should be supporting Wizards. Oh don't get me wrong, you don't have to like 4e or be a part of them at all. But if you want their products and you like what they sell, screaming about how much they suck doesn't help. It just makes them not want to do business with you anymore. We can be wary in our customer relationship with Wizards, but we shouldn't be treating them like they're the enemy. These people deserve better than what they've been dealt by portions of this community (be it intentional flamming or an knee-jerk response to the issue at hand).
We are the consumers and if we provide a reasonable support for Wizards when they need it, they will learn that we are of value to them and they'll work with us. But no one is going to return affection if they are being told of how much they suck because things didn't go as planned.
Anywho, I didn't mean for this rant to go on and I don't intent to insult anyone here, but I just want people to stop taking a rather self-absorbed perception of the situation and just cool down a bit.
And to Wizard's team; thank you for working as hard as you are to keep this goal from dying and thank you for the quality product (if incomplete) that you are supplying us with. Good luck getting this to work.
Wow, now this is a bit of a deep creek, isn't it?
Well, let's think about this for a moment. What in essence, does WotC gain by screwing its entire fanbase over for something that doesn't amount to more than a quick buck?
The answer is they don't.
I think some people have been a bit tough on Wizards for 4e. But I think people are being a wee bit selfish in their rants and a bit short sighted. First off, the delay in part might be blamed upon the recession, that hit hard last fall. It has for sure, hurt my ability to purchase the Draconion and Manual of the Planes. I can only imagine how much this must have cut down Wizard's budget for the project, as well as the sales that they might have been hoping to of made with the new edition.
Wizards took a massive gamble when they decided to put an end to 3e and start 4e, especially with a fanbase that had already invested so greately in their previous edition. Simply slapping one new rules to the old genre would be percieved as nothing more than money grubbing and more so with the fact that 3.5 had been released not so long ago. Further risk is further induced due to two other factors; WoW and the recent fantasy explosion and the fact that Wizards is a big time company.
It's rather obvious that Wizards has been inspired to some degree to use some of the methods that WoW has put forth to streamline their system...but that doesn't mean they want to make a cheap copy. Doing so would easily be spotted and revealed to be what it is. And not only would Wizards lose its fanbase, but their product may look so identical to a more established and somewhat "cooler" product that they've gained nothing. But then again, it's also silly not to use a good concept for your game. It's basically calling car designers cheap con artists because they use wheels in their designs rather than coming up with their own shapes.
Add this together with the big company look for Wizards and you've got a hostile fanbase and no gain.
And I think the response from some of the fanbase is rather unfair in this manner. Wizards has gone out of their way to offer us an olive branch. They supplied us with Dragon and Dungeon Magazines for a few months to let us have a feel for what sort of quality they have to offer us. They came out with silly cartoons to appeal to our humor and let us know they don't per say consider this the comign of Christ. It's good, but they want to have fun with it. They let us in on the designs of what's going on and not only give us teasers, but teasers full of lore that makes us want to scream for more. And they promised us not only a brand new system for better game play (or at least a new spin on it), but a way to do so over the internet with a great program that will make it as close to the real thing as possible.
And you know what?
They ****ed up.
They ****ed up big time.
For some reason, something in the planning or developing stages just didn't go well and now we're over a year behind for what they promised us. But you know what? People, even big companies (especially big companies) make mistakes. Major ones.
But at no point have any of you been cheated. To an extent, they have failed you, but they didn't cheat you. Your all sitting around blowing your hornes of how you can apparently do this in six months (or some equal) and go about beating Wizards over the head for it. There is a massive difference between the doctor who gave your old grandma sugar pills while telling her it will cure cancer and the doctor who promised that he'd save your dad from death, but despite everything he tried, it just fell apart.
I think Wizards falls into the later. They have nothing to gain from putting out a new system with the promise of a great new product to go with it only to recall on the later. It ruins their reputation and without it, their chances of making a profit off of D&D hits Nessus and the company itself is shamed.
As it is, they look pretty bad. Their new product still isn't out...one that they made a fairly big deal about. But they are clearly trying to keep what part of the deal they can. We still have new Dungeon & Dragon Magazines coming out with amazing quality, continuity, and dedication. The people who write these articles clearly care about their job and are putting all they reasonably can into making it good. And look at the Character Generator; sure we don't have full models yet, but the generator itself is working well and is of good quality. It even allows me to upload pictures for characters. As it is, it is a stand alone product that someone might buy for a cheap price. And then there's the Monster Builder, which thus far looks amazing. Granted, it would be nice if I had some pictures and perhaps even a bit of Knowledge check fluffs, because at times I don't even know what I'm looking at for new monsters or how they work within the new edition. However, the monster generator works pretty well and the monsters are the real McCoy (save for a few mistakes that people point out and the issue with getting Tiamat to work in the system).
In short, they're trying and while we haven't been given what we're promised, we are getting what we pay for and we get it with quality. Now, if they wanted to cheat us, they'd give us a cheap program. Basic character sheets with little style and incredibly dull design that gets the job done with all the joy of filling out tax forms. Or the monster builder could just have basic monsters from MM1. Hell, they could get away with just adding in MM2.
But that isn't what they're doing. We have stats for creatures from the Dragon's magazine, Open Grave, Dungeon, and just about every sourcebook out there. They're giving us a massive database. A good one.
I think that some of us should stop acting like hostile customers and give Wizards a break. Yes, they messed up and they did so at one of the worst times a company can, but despite this they haven't given up. Recent articles are still good, well written, and inspiring. Content quality control is well kept and they work hard to give us our money's worth, even if it isn't the product we (or they, that's important to remember) were hoping for.
What I'm trying to say is that instead of grabbing mounds of dirt and trash to build our moral high ground, we should be supporting Wizards. Oh don't get me wrong, you don't have to like 4e or be a part of them at all. But if you want their products and you like what they sell, screaming about how much they suck doesn't help. It just makes them not want to do business with you anymore. We can be wary in our customer relationship with Wizards, but we shouldn't be treating them like they're the enemy. These people deserve better than what they've been dealt by portions of this community (be it intentional flamming or an knee-jerk response to the issue at hand).
We are the consumers and if we provide a reasonable support for Wizards when they need it, they will learn that we are of value to them and they'll work with us. But no one is going to return affection if they are being told of how much they suck because things didn't go as planned.
Anywho, I didn't mean for this rant to go on and I don't intent to insult anyone here, but I just want people to stop taking a rather self-absorbed perception of the situation and just cool down a bit.
And to Wizard's team; thank you for working as hard as you are to keep this goal from dying and thank you for the quality product (if incomplete) that you are supplying us with. Good luck getting this to work.
Actually there is a whole segment of people that were "cheated". Let's see what cheated actually means. Wikipedia says this about cheating
Cheating is an act of lying, deception, fraud, trickery, imposture, or imposition. Cheating characteristically is employed to create an unfair advantage, usually in one's own interest, and often at the expense of others.[1] Cheating implies the breaking of rules. The term "cheating" is less applicable to the breaking of laws, as illegal activities are referred to by specific legal terminology such as fraud or corruption.
When WotC definitely lied when they said the VTT would be out by release (regardless of whether they went back and changed their story), they lied when they said they would have the character visualizer out by release, they lied when they said they would have a code in the back of the books that would allow the owner to access a digital version of the book online. Even though they came back later and said the stuff would be delayed, or that they were putting it "on the side to work on something else" (i.e. its dead), they still initially lied. Therefore those of us that believed them and bought into D&D4E were tricked by lies. Yes they said it would be delayed by a few months, but once again that turned out to be a lie (even though they later corrected themselves at the time it was a lie). So a lot of the people that bought the books at the 4E release or pre-ordered them thinking "oh its been delayed a few months" and then got shafted were tricked by lies, and therefore me and those like me were cheated by WotC. It may not be pretty, but its true.
Now are they cheating us right now? I'm not so inclined to agree, because they've cleaned up the way they communicate. They no longer tell us release dates or what features a product will have until the product is in beta. This is good for them. Of course a lot of us would like to see a reverse release date instead, so we can gauge the minimum amount of time it would take to see the product. Something along the lines of "you won't see this product for at least 1 year."
So in short they did cheat a lot of people, but they are currently not cheating anyone that I know of.
And this would be why I'm glad that I didn't subscribe to DDI yet. I'll just wait until the game table is operational.
Thats why I didn't spend any money on it. I wanted the Table. So glad I didn't wast any Cash.
When WotC definitely lied when they said the VTT would be out by release (regardless of whether they went back and changed their story), they lied when they said they would have the character visualizer out by release.
They may not have met that goal, but it wasn't lying if they expected it to be true when they said it.
they lied when they said they would have a code in the back of the books that would allow the owner to access a digital version of the book online.
They announced SIX MONTHS before the release of the books that this concept had been dropped.
Even though they came back later and said the stuff would be delayed, or that they were putting it "on the side to work on something else" (i.e. its dead), they still initially lied. Therefore those of us that believed them and bought into D&D4E were tricked by lies. Yes they said it would be delayed by a few months, but once again that turned out to be a lie (even though they later corrected themselves at the time it was a lie). So a lot of the people that bought the books at the 4E release or pre-ordered them thinking "oh its been delayed a few months" and then got shafted were tricked by lies, and therefore me and those like me were cheated by WotC. It may not be pretty, but its true.
My turn to pull out a dictionary reference:
[indent]lie
1 /laɪ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [lahy] Show IPA noun, verb, lied, ly⋅ing.
Use lie in a Sentence
–noun
1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.[/indent]
See that part about a DELIBERATE INTENT TO DECEIVE?
If WotC has been unable to meet goals - yes, they've failed. And that's a disappointment for everyone (us the customers *AND* them the sellers).
However, if they've been honest with us about their goals and expectations - that's a far cry from lying.
It may be indicative of other problems (poor project management, over promising, lack of foresight re: economy, etc) - but it isn't lying.
Seriously, does anyone here actually believe that the big wigs actually approved of something so stupid? Yeah, they're out to make a profit and they might to less then admirable things sometimes, but I don't think Dispater runs the entire department.
They may not have met that goal, but it wasn't lying if they expected it to be true when they said it.
According to your own quoted definition of a lie it was a 'falsehood', one of the three definitions of a lie. Sure it may not have been intentional but they still lied.
They announced SIX MONTHS before the release of the books that this concept had been dropped.
I'll agree to that, however that doesn't change the fact that it didn't come to pass as they said it would, and therefore it was a 'falsehood' and a lie. Even if they come out later and changed what they said.
My turn to pull out a dictionary reference:
[indent]lie
1 /laɪ/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [lahy] Show IPA noun, verb, lied, ly⋅ing.
Use lie in a Sentence
–noun
1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.[/indent]
See that part about a DELIBERATE INTENT TO DECEIVE?
If WotC has been unable to meet goals - yes, they've failed. And that's a disappointment for everyone (us the customers *AND* them the sellers).
However, if they've been honest with us about their goals and expectations - that's a far cry from lying.
It may be indicative of other problems (poor project management, over promising, lack of foresight re: economy, etc) - but it isn't lying.
Each of those sentences is a separate definition of 'lie', therefore 'a falshood' is still a lie. So by your own evidence they lied. Now I didn't say they did it on purpose or that it was malicious, but it DID happen.
As to what is happening now, they don't appear to be lying about anything (well with the exception of what the current status of the GT is). Which is making me begin to believe that someone there actually cares about something other than money.
the fact is that we are all very disappointed that the VTT is not available yet.. but truth is that we have managed for 30 years without one and we just have to manage for a few more..
I would love to see the VTT but for now I will make due with the myriad of tools that are available (masterplanner and maptools come to mind)
but I think even currently for $10 USD D&Di subscription it is well worth it! I'm a DM and having all creatures of the compendium at my finger tips and not to mention the awesome character builder.. and now the latest Monster builder.. Not to mention Dungeons magazines and the adventures that comes with it.. (as I'm running the scales of war campaign)
For me, D&Di subscription even in its current state is a no brainer worth every penny..
and over the next couple of years if they roll out more things the value will just explode.. and if in a few years they do roll out the VTT, well that would be awesome and be the crown achievement..
but till then,
let the dice roll and let your imagination be your guide.
If they are earning $50,000 a year they better have 10+ years experience and be versed in a dozen or more languages. I'm talking about some programmers with 3-5 years experience and in depth knowledge of 1-2 languages. More like $30,000+ each which significantly reduces the budget.
Nonsense. The average salary for a game programmer is in the mid 50s. *I* have 10+ years experience and I have a 6 figure salary and for the record I've never been paid less than $50k a year, even when I first started. I would have laughed at someone offering me $30k.
The information is easily available. It astounds me why you would just make something like that up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_programmer
Nonsense. The average salary for a game programmer is in the mid 50s. *I* have 10+ years experience and I have a 6 figure salary and for the record I've never been paid less than $50k a year, even when I first started. I would have laughed at someone offering me $30k.
The information is easily available. It astounds me why you would just make something like that up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_programmer
Well since Wikipedia is the end all be all of knowledge, I'll have to bow out and admit that I may have estimated on the low side. The places that I got my estimates www.gamasutra.com and other places that are similar say otherwise though.
I'm still pretty new, and this arguing about the meaning of words etc, what is really the point?
the fact is that we are all very disappointed that the VTT is not available yet.. but truth is that we have managed for 30 years without one and we just have to manage for a few more..
I would love to see the VTT but for now I will make due with the myriad of tools that are available (masterplanner and maptools come to mind)
but I think even currently for $10 USD D&Di subscription it is well worth it! I'm a DM and having all creatures of the compendium at my finger tips and not to mention the awesome character builder.. and now the latest Monster builder.. Not to mention Dungeons magazines and the adventures that comes with it.. (as I'm running the scales of war campaign)
For me, D&Di subscription even in its current state is a no brainer worth every penny..
and over the next couple of years if they roll out more things the value will just explode.. and if in a few years they do roll out the VTT, well that would be awesome and be the crown achievement..
but till then,
let the dice roll and let your imagination be your guide.
What a really pleasant way to say "shut up about the GT" in a thread about the GT.
Nonsense. The average salary for a game programmer is in the mid 50s. *I* have 10+ years experience and I have a 6 figure salary and for the record I've never been paid less than $50k a year, even when I first started. I would have laughed at someone offering me $30k.
The information is easily available. It astounds me why you would just make something like that up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_programmer
I'd just like to add, that I one day wish to achieve a 6 figure salary in the game programming field.
Well since Wikipedia is the end all be all of knowledge, I'll have to bow out and admit that I may have estimated on the low side. The places that I got my estimates www.gamasutra.com and other places that are similar say otherwise though.
No you didn't. You're backpedalling and making stuff up.
2007 Salary Survey from Gamasutra: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18212
Show me the $30k for a programmer. If you're going to make claims on numbers back them up. Show evidence.
I'd just like to add, that I one day wish to achieve a 6 figure salary in the game programming field.
Actually I didn't mean to imply that I was a game programmer. I have no desire to be. I am however a (senior) software engineer.
Software engineer salaries are comparable across the market. The point I was making was that at no point in my career, even a fresh out of college newbie, would I have accepted a $30k a year job, not today, and not 12 years ago when I started. Especially not in an industry with a reputation for death marching it's coders.
No you didn't. You're backpedalling and making stuff up.
2007 Salary Survey from Gamasutra: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18212
Show me the $30k for a programmer. If you're going to make claims on numbers back them up. Show evidence.
Actually I didn't mean to imply that I was a game programmer. I have no desire to be. I am however a (senior) software engineer.
Software engineer salaries are comparable across the market. The point I was making was that at no point in my career, even a fresh out of college newbie, would I have accepted a $30k a year job, not today, and not 12 years ago when I started. Especially not in an industry with a reputation for death marching it's coders.
I was about ready to concede the point, but then you had to link to an average. lets say 1 senior programmer makes $100k per year and two programmers just starting out make $30k whats the average of that? 53k averaged. Is that accurate? probably not. I have been told throughout college that game programmers have a harder job and make less money than programmers in other fields. If you can supply some actual facts that are not skewed I will gladly concede the point, until then I'll wait for facts.
that is a real bummer, that was one of the reasons I paid for one year of D&DI.
oh well.
steve
well i sold all my 3.5 stuff just because i thought they were going to be doing this soon...now they cancel it and im disappointed with 4th along with many other ppl here in town...but i would had been happy for the dig table to be done soon...now you say its been placed on hold...well i think im going back to 3.5...really sucks ppl are out for money they have to keep bleed ing you with more and more books..all the other editions all you really needed was the PH, the DMG and the MM now if you want basic classes from the other editions you need all 3 PHs probablly all DMG and we will have mass quanity of MMs but the MMs arefine by me....
I agree and had nearly the same thing happen to me. The problem is I really like 4E (flaws included), but without the GT I'm just wasting time that could be better spent on an MMO where I can actually socialize with other people through the internet while I play.
For instance, Wizards of the Coast did advertise the digital tabletop before 4e was even released. They were using it as a major selling tool for their content and for the DDI subscription. Now, no, they didn't screw anyone over, they probably got screwed over themselves, but yes, we did get a promise made to us that wasn't delivered to us on the tentative schedule that was given. Many people invested money into DDI and D&D 4e in general because they wanted to play online. Yes, there are other online options, good ones, but they are not as easy to learn and accessable as we have been taught the digital tabletop will be.
DDI does have a lot of additional content that does give it value, but why defend WotC and/or try to convince people in general that they are wrong for being upset at WotC because they promised something and didn't deliver? I understand the logic that some have given, but I find some of the positions people are taking as rather selfish and insensitive to others. Just because you find value in DDI doesn't mean everyone else will, as we are all in different situations, and in my mind, if someone says buy x and I'll give you y soon, then y becomes part of the the informal contract / agreement for me buying x. Does that really make such little sense? I'm not interested in the legal ramifications of that statement, I'm just talking about one honest person dealing with another.
WotC made a mistake. There's no sense glossing it over or defending them for it. It wasn't just about a 3rd party dropping the ball, WotC did as well with their marketing plan for DDI. They promised something and didn't deliver. As some have stated they have all the resources they need to deliver, but they don't want to diminish profits by hiring on additional developers, even as contractors. In essence they've chosen that their bottom line is more important than keeping their word and satisfying customers, or arguing perhaps in a rather dishonest spirit that they never gave their word and used wording like 'coming soon' which is relative and subjective and suits their needs whatever the situation.
No doubt there are good people working at WotC and Hasbro that deserve to be given credit, but at the end of the day executive/management decisions are being made that are in the best interest of Hasbro's shareholders, not in the best interest of the customers. Is that standard today? Unfortunately yes, but just because it's standard does not make it right, nor does it undermine in any way the justification of customers feeling angry, frusterated, ripped off, or deceived.
I also want to say I agree wholeheartedly with some of the family-aged people who are posting. My books mainly serve as paper weights because I don't have the time to spend hours away from my family, nor do I know enough people in my local area who would play D&D face to face. I don't know that having the digital tabletop would allow me to play any more often than having maptools, but it definitely would be nice to have something I was promised when I paid for DDI, which was also the main reason I paid for it as well.
Now I'm not of the mind that Hasbro needs to be boycotted, or that D&D has ripped me off, and that I've lost faith in the brand. I enjoy D&D, it's still the best rules set out there in my opinion, and I have faith that the average joe who works at Hasbro/WotC is more interested in getting me and you the digital table top as fast as possible moreso than they are about Hasbro's bottom line despite how tired they might feel about hearing the criticism. This is how this world is today. Modern business ethics are not very altruistic in any regard, despite the fact that many people who work for companies may be fine people. Hasbro is going to charge us as much as they can get away with, and exhaust as little resources as they can get away with. That's just how it rolls these days. It's all about maximizing revenue and minimizing expenses right? So I see little purpose in taking this out on Hasbro or WotC. It would only serve to hurt the product I love, and as a religious man, I trust the man upstairs to separate the wheat from the chaff when all is said in done, that's not my job here on earth.
So I guess what I'm saying is this: WotC screwed up. Don't defend that. It was not intentional, but they haven't made any effort whatsoever (that I can see) to make up for their screw up. So don't defend that either. People paid for something and only received a part of what they were promised, so don't try to convince them they are wrong for feeling cheated, they aren't. Just because you have a great use for the parts of what was promised that you do have, doesn't mean everyone does. Don't contend that Hasbro is not a greedy corporation. Greed is rampant in this world, and just because they are no different than the majority does not make them any less greedy. If they weren't greedy they'd have taken a cut in profits in order to keep their word and satisfy the people who make them rich.
That's about all I have to say.
I think both sides are making valid points and refuse to acknowledge some of the valid points made by the other side.
For instance, Wizards of the Coast did advertise the digital tabletop before 4e was even released. They were using it as a major selling tool for their content and for the DDI subscription. Now, no, they didn't screw anyone over, they probably got screwed over themselves, but yes, we did get a promise made to us that wasn't delivered to us on the tentative schedule that was given. Many people invested money into DDI and D&D 4e in general because they wanted to play online. Yes, there are other online options, good ones, but they are not as easy to learn and accessable as we have been taught the digital tabletop will be.
DDI does have a lot of additional content that does give it value, but why defend WotC and/or try to convince people in general that they are wrong for being upset at WotC because they promised something and didn't deliver? I understand the logic that some have given, but I find some of the positions people are taking as rather selfish and insensitive to others. Just because you find value in DDI doesn't mean everyone else will, as we are all in different situations, and in my mind, if someone says buy x and I'll give you y soon, then y becomes part of the the informal contract / agreement for me buying x. Does that really make such little sense? I'm not interested in the legal ramifications of that statement, I'm just talking about one honest person dealing with another.
WotC made a mistake. There's no sense glossing it over or defending them for it. It wasn't just about a 3rd party dropping the ball, WotC did as well with their marketing plan for DDI. They promised something and didn't deliver. As some have stated they have all the resources they need to deliver, but they don't want to diminish profits by hiring on additional developers, even as contractors. In essence they've chosen that their bottom line is more important than keeping their word and satisfying customers, or arguing perhaps in a rather dishonest spirit that they never gave their word and used wording like 'coming soon' which is relative and subjective and suits their needs whatever the situation.
No doubt there are good people working at WotC and Hasbro that deserve to be given credit, but at the end of the day executive/management decisions are being made that are in the best interest of Hasbro's shareholders, not in the best interest of the customers. Is that standard today? Unfortunately yes, but just because it's standard does not make it right, nor does it undermine in any way the justification of customers feeling angry, frusterated, ripped off, or deceived.
I also want to say I agree wholeheartedly with some of the family-aged people who are posting. My books mainly serve as paper weights because I don't have the time to spend hours away from my family, nor do I know enough people in my local area who would play D&D face to face. I don't know that having the digital tabletop would allow me to play any more often than having maptools, but it definitely would be nice to have something I was promised when I paid for DDI, which was also the main reason I paid for it as well.
Now I'm not of the mind that Hasbro needs to be boycotted, or that D&D has ripped me off, and that I've lost faith in the brand. I enjoy D&D, it's still the best rules set out there in my opinion, and I have faith that the average joe who works at Hasbro/WotC is more interested in getting me and you the digital table top as fast as possible moreso than they are about Hasbro's bottom line despite how tired they might feel about hearing the criticism. This is how this world is today. Modern business ethics are not very altruistic in any regard, despite the fact that many people who work for companies may be fine people. Hasbro is going to charge us as much as they can get away with, and exhaust as little resources as they can get away with. That's just how it rolls these days. It's all about maximizing revenue and minimizing expenses right? So I see little purpose in taking this out on Hasbro or WotC. It would only serve to hurt the product I love, and as a religious man, I trust the man upstairs to separate the wheat from the chaff when all is said in done, that's not my job here on earth.
So I guess what I'm saying is this: WotC screwed up. Don't defend that. It was not intentional, but they haven't made any effort whatsoever (that I can see) to make up for their screw up. So don't defend that either. People paid for something and only received a part of what they were promised, so don't try to convince them they are wrong for feeling cheated, they aren't. Just because you have a great use for the parts of what was promised that you do have, doesn't mean everyone does. Don't contend that Hasbro is not a greedy corporation. Greed is rampant in this world, and just because they are no different than the majority does not make them any less greedy. If they weren't greedy they'd have taken a cut in profits in order to keep their word and satisfy the people who make them rich.
That's about all I have to say.
I applaud your post.I was about ready to concede the point, but then you had to link to an average. lets say 1 senior programmer makes $100k per year and two programmers just starting out make $30k whats the average of that? 53k averaged. Is that accurate? probably not. I have been told throughout college that game programmers have a harder job and make less money than programmers in other fields. If you can supply some actual facts that are not skewed I will gladly concede the point, until then I'll wait for facts.
Umm the conversation WAS ABOUT THE AVERAGE SALARY. I love the lengths people go to on the internet to backpedal when they're shown to be wrong.
I've provided actual facts, or as close as we're going to get. You've provided anecdotal evidence that's worth nothing, especially in the face of actual data. ESPECIALLY from the SOURCE where YOU claimed to have gotten your information. A source which you are backpedalling away from once you were proven wrong.
You've been vastly under-representing what a project like this would involve. Clearly you don't have the experience or knowledge to have an opinion on the subject. Here's a tip for you: If you REALLY want to make 6 figures as an engineer learn to admit when you're wrong and try listening to people with actual experience. You'll get much further in the field...and life in general.
Give it up.
Umm the conversation WAS ABOUT THE AVERAGE SALARY. I love the lengths people go to on the internet to backpedal when they're shown to be wrong.
I've provided actual facts, or as close as we're going to get. You've provided anecdotal evidence that's worth nothing, especially in the face of actual data. ESPECIALLY from the SOURCE where YOU claimed to have gotten your information. A source which you are backpedalling away from once you were proven wrong.
You've been vastly under-representing what a project like this would involve. Clearly you don't have the experience or knowledge to have an opinion on the subject. Here's a tip for you: If you REALLY want to make 6 figures as an engineer learn to admit when you're wrong and try listening to people with actual experience. You'll get much further in the field...and life in general.
Give it up.
No, the conversation was on the cost of a development team, we got off on a tangent about how much those people make, usually you will have a highly paid lead programmer or project lead (sometimes they do both at the same time). These are the ones that will be paid a lot of money, but it is not uncommon to have 1 programming lead per 6-10 programmers. After that they usually like to group them with more programming leads, but not always. So my example is still very valid. If 1 programming lead is making 100k and the rest are making 30k-40k your average is going to look like 50k or higher. Which is why the report you linked to MAY be wrong. I could be completely wrong about it (really I hope I am as I am going to try to enter that field soon). However I won't just roll over and change my view when a stranger says 'you should think this' without at least some facts. If you could find one of those summary studies that supposedly show you how much your supposed to make it would be more accurate (if it includes senior programmer and programmer instead of lumping them into a single category as the link you provided did) I would gladly admit that I was wrong and tell you that you were right. I have done this numerous times. It is not 'backpedaling' because I'm honestly admitting that I am wrong. 'backpedaling' implies dishonesty or trying to save your reputation. I don't do that. I simply ask for relevant proof.
you mean they were complaining about money thats why they dropped....& all that money WoTC makes esspecially from card games(magic-the death of RPG games) and so many other things..they r sitting there like bill gates and they know it
That goes back to the 'what motivates corporations' argument. I'm sure if you scroll back up you can find it pretty easy.
you mean they were complaining about money thats why they dropped....& all that money WoTC makes esspecially from card games(magic-the death of RPG games) and so many other things..they r sitting there like bill gates and they know it
That goes back to the 'what motivates corporations' argument. I'm sure if you scroll back up you can find it pretty easy.
Yeah, so the new forums are up? anyone else got a new argument to add?
I'm sorry to get into this so late but the virtual tabletop was the main selling point for me. And i feel like a dumb ass for subscribing to DDi but oh well they say one of us is born every minute. And the character builder and adventure tools are a good start.
I too have a group that lives all over the country and using the GT to play together once a week online was a key selling point for 4E and DDI. Fortunately for me I didn't subscribe to DDI until the Character builder was fully released though.
Now I'm an old gamer coming off the back of 25 years or so play. My group uses the core books and generally feels the additional books are just money spinner regurgitating the same crap with a slight imbalance but in a shiny new guise (for those that remember... Unearthed Arcana).
Anyhow, I digress. My point is that once my subscription to DDI runs out I've already got everything I need until the arrival of a GT so I wont be renewing. Which makes me wonder how many other people will feel the same?
I too have a group that lives all over the country and using the GT to play together once a week online was a key selling point for 4E and DDI. Fortunately for me I didn't subscribe to DDI until the Character builder was fully released though.
Now I'm an old gamer coming off the back of 25 years or so play. My group uses the core books and generally feels the additional books are just money spinner regurgitating the same crap with a slight imbalance but in a shiny new guise (for those that remember... Unearthed Arcana).
Anyhow, I digress. My point is that once my subscription to DDI runs out I've already got everything I need until the arrival of a GT so I wont be renewing. Which makes me wonder how many other people will feel the same?
Exactly what I'm doing.
I too have a group that lives all over the country and using the GT to play together once a week online was a key selling point for 4E and DDI. Fortunately for me I didn't subscribe to DDI until the Character builder was fully released though.
Now I'm an old gamer coming off the back of 25 years or so play. My group uses the core books and generally feels the additional books are just money spinner regurgitating the same crap with a slight imbalance but in a shiny new guise (for those that remember... Unearthed Arcana).
Anyhow, I digress. My point is that once my subscription to DDI runs out I've already got everything I need until the arrival of a GT so I wont be renewing. Which makes me wonder how many other people will feel the same?
Exactly what I'm doing.
And me.
Initially the VT was a big seller for me, and the fact that it's taken a back seat torqued me for some time. Only now am I getting into 4E, and yes, I have subscribed to DDI.
I haven't found Dungeon or Dragon to be particularlly useful as of yet, and there is a lot of back issues to go through... so the fact that I have found little of interest is disturbing.
That said, WOTC has made up big ground with the Character Builder and the Monster Creator. As a DM I found these tools to be indespensible. One of the main things is it takes the onus off of me to have every source book available just so I can say yay or nay to a character idea. Players buy rule supplements all the time and want to use the ideas presented there... and rightly so... they bought the book. But trying to keep track of every feat and power is an impossible task for someone with a life (dad, husband, work, etc). Now, I can make a reasonably informed decision on a rule without having to take out a second mortgage on my house. 3.5 was bloated with feats, skills, prestige classes, etc. and it was endless the things players would want to incorporate into their characters as a campaign progressed.
The rules reference is also handy for this reason as well.
As for the VT... I much prefer to game around the table anyway... I want real flesh and blood folks around me to make me laugh and interact with. If I can get them together I don't need the VT.
It's sad that WOTC hasn't man-upped and admited their error and spoke with some clarity on the issue, but they have done is work very hard to provide us some very useful and powerful tools for the game. As long as that continues they've got my monthly subscription (that is as long as it remains reasonably priced).
Initially the VT was a big seller for me, and the fact that it's taken a back seat torqued me for some time. Only now am I getting into 4E, and yes, I have subscribed to DDI.
I haven't found Dungeon or Dragon to be particularlly useful as of yet, and there is a lot of back issues to go through... so the fact that I have found little of interest is disturbing.
That said, WOTC has made up big ground with the Character Builder and the Monster Creator. As a DM I found these tools to be indespensible. One of the main things is it takes the onus off of me to have every source book available just so I can say yay or nay to a character idea. Players buy rule supplements all the time and want to use the ideas presented there... and rightly so... they bought the book. But trying to keep track of every feat and power is an impossible task for someone with a life (dad, husband, work, etc). Now, I can make a reasonably informed decision on a rule without having to take out a second mortgage on my house. 3.5 was bloated with feats, skills, prestige classes, etc. and it was endless the things players would want to incorporate into their characters as a campaign progressed.
The rules reference is also handy for this reason as well.
As for the VT... I much prefer to game around the table anyway... I want real flesh and blood folks around me to make me laugh and interact with. If I can get them together I don't need the VT.
It's sad that WOTC hasn't man-upped and admited their error and spoke with some clarity on the issue, but they have done is work very hard to provide us some very useful and powerful tools for the game. As long as that continues they've got my monthly subscription (that is as long as it remains reasonably priced).
I agree, I would much rather sit around a table with a bunch of smelly nerds and laugh at star trek jokes than play over the internet through voice chat and a virtual table, unfortunately like most who have a problem with the GT not being released, we don't have this option.
I agree, I would much rather sit around a table with a bunch of smelly nerds...
Lol.... That's what the incense is REALLY for. 
Initially the VT was a big seller for me, and the fact that it's taken a back seat torqued me for some time. Only now am I getting into 4E, and yes, I have subscribed to DDI.
I haven't found Dungeon or Dragon to be particularlly useful as of yet, and there is a lot of back issues to go through... so the fact that I have found little of interest is disturbing.
That said, WOTC has made up big ground with the Character Builder and the Monster Creator. As a DM I found these tools to be indespensible. One of the main things is it takes the onus off of me to have every source book available just so I can say yay or nay to a character idea. Players buy rule supplements all the time and want to use the ideas presented there... and rightly so... they bought the book. But trying to keep track of every feat and power is an impossible task for someone with a life (dad, husband, work, etc). Now, I can make a reasonably informed decision on a rule without having to take out a second mortgage on my house. 3.5 was bloated with feats, skills, prestige classes, etc. and it was endless the things players would want to incorporate into their characters as a campaign progressed.
The rules reference is also handy for this reason as well.
As for the VT... I much prefer to game around the table anyway... I want real flesh and blood folks around me to make me laugh and interact with. If I can get them together I don't need the VT.
It's sad that WOTC hasn't man-upped and admited their error and spoke with some clarity on the issue, but they have done is work very hard to provide us some very useful and powerful tools for the game. As long as that continues they've got my monthly subscription (that is as long as it remains reasonably priced).
First, they have come and admitted their error, and have apologized, several times. They bite of more then they could chew, had vendor issues, and were hit by the economy, forcing them to reduce staff. However, don't expect them to have to keep apologizing. Several times is enough.
When they assessed the situation, they made the choice to put the table and character visualizer on hold, with no firm date on when they will get back to it, and decided that they need to work on tools that will help make the game easier to play, namely tools for the DM.
The first was the Monster Builder, which is pretty awesome. As a DM, it's made making adventures for my group pretty quick.
They are still committed to a digital aspect of Dungeons and Dragons, and at GenCon, they said they are still planning on bringing it out. Other then that, no other details were given. NONE. So if you ask, when, the answer is, don't know. If you ask will it come in blue, the answer is don't know.
Initially the VT was a big seller for me, and the fact that it's taken a back seat torqued me for some time. Only now am I getting into 4E, and yes, I have subscribed to DDI.
I haven't found Dungeon or Dragon to be particularlly useful as of yet, and there is a lot of back issues to go through... so the fact that I have found little of interest is disturbing.
That said, WOTC has made up big ground with the Character Builder and the Monster Creator. As a DM I found these tools to be indespensible. One of the main things is it takes the onus off of me to have every source book available just so I can say yay or nay to a character idea. Players buy rule supplements all the time and want to use the ideas presented there... and rightly so... they bought the book. But trying to keep track of every feat and power is an impossible task for someone with a life (dad, husband, work, etc). Now, I can make a reasonably informed decision on a rule without having to take out a second mortgage on my house. 3.5 was bloated with feats, skills, prestige classes, etc. and it was endless the things players would want to incorporate into their characters as a campaign progressed.
The rules reference is also handy for this reason as well.
As for the VT... I much prefer to game around the table anyway... I want real flesh and blood folks around me to make me laugh and interact with. If I can get them together I don't need the VT.
It's sad that WOTC hasn't man-upped and admited their error and spoke with some clarity on the issue, but they have done is work very hard to provide us some very useful and powerful tools for the game. As long as that continues they've got my monthly subscription (that is as long as it remains reasonably priced).
First, they have come and admitted their error, and have apologized, several times. They bite of more then they could chew, had vendor issues, and were hit by the economy, forcing them to reduce staff. However, don't expect them to have to keep apologizing. Several times is enough.
When they assessed the situation, they made the choice to put the table and character visualizer on hold, with no firm date on when they will get back to it, and decided that they need to work on tools that will help make the game easier to play, namely tools for the DM.
The first was the Monster Builder, which is pretty awesome. As a DM, it's made making adventures for my group pretty quick.
They are still committed to a digital aspect of Dungeons and Dragons, and at GenCon, they said they are still planning on bringing it out. Other then that, no other details were given. NONE. So if you ask, when, the answer is, don't know. If you ask will it come in blue, the answer is don't know.
Yes, and thank you once again for minimizing our concerns. We know all this. We also know that WotC is just hoping the GT fanbase will just let it disapear into the ether without a passing thought. Most of us are simply not willing to let this happen.
Also WotC doesn't seem to be capable of learning from their mistakes as we see from every single peice of software they touch. These boards are a prime example. The monster building not being crossplatform is the other. They simply continue on oblivious to everything around them. About the only thing we can do is decide not to fund such a beast.
Personally, having used both of the new tools extensively at this point, think what WOTC has done is awesome. For YEARS we've been saying, "Make the DM's job easier and the game will grow."
Well, darn it, they are doing it... and you're not "going to fund such a beast" ??
Well, I fully intend to, and am looking forward to what they do next. Great job WOTC... I've supported D&D for 30 years now, and while I was out of it for a while (actually playing 1e 
), I'm now in full support of 4E. There are still the 2E hold out that I gave up on a long time ago, and some 3.5E folks that just don't get what 4E has done... and I didn't either until the tools hit.
The game is very balanced, playable, smooth, and its a lot of fun to play! For the first time in 30 years I would say the game system fully realizes the true potential of fantasy adventure simulation in a very cinematic way... what we've always wanted it to do... at least myself. I've always RAN cinematic... which meant a lot of homebrew rules to compensate for system short falls.
Isn't this why you support a game??
Personally, having used both of the new tools extensively at this point, think what WOTC has done is awesome. For YEARS we've been saying, "Make the DM's job easier and the game will grow."
Well, darn it, they are doing it... and you're not "going to fund such a beast" ??
Well, I fully intend to, and am looking forward to what they do next. Great job WOTC... I've supported D&D for 30 years now, and while I was out of it for a while (actually playing 1e ), I'm now in full support of 4E. There are still the 2E hold out that I gave up on a long time ago, and some 3.5E folks that just don't get what 4E has done... and I didn't either until the tools hit.
The game is very balanced, playable, smooth, and its a lot of fun to play! For the first time in 30 years I would say the game system fully realizes the true potential of fantasy adventure simulation in a very cinematic way... what we've always wanted it to do... at least myself. I've always RAN cinematic... which meant a lot of homebrew rules to compensate for system short falls.
Isn't this why you support a game??
I agree. Even the Character builder makes my job easier.
For consumable items, I can print out the items card, and I hand it to the player. The rule is, hold on to it, and when you use it, hand it back. No need to add it to your character sheet. Same for any magic item. If the players get an item in the middle of an adventure and want to use it, they don't have to look it up, and can add it later.
Personally, having used both of the new tools extensively at this point, think what WOTC has done is awesome. For YEARS we've been saying, "Make the DM's job easier and the game will grow."
Well, darn it, they are doing it... and you're not "going to fund such a beast" ??
Well, I fully intend to, and am looking forward to what they do next. Great job WOTC... I've supported D&D for 30 years now, and while I was out of it for a while (actually playing 1e ), I'm now in full support of 4E. There are still the 2E hold out that I gave up on a long time ago, and some 3.5E folks that just don't get what 4E has done... and I didn't either until the tools hit.
The game is very balanced, playable, smooth, and its a lot of fun to play! For the first time in 30 years I would say the game system fully realizes the true potential of fantasy adventure simulation in a very cinematic way... what we've always wanted it to do... at least myself. I've always RAN cinematic... which meant a lot of homebrew rules to compensate for system short falls.
Isn't this why you support a game??
I agree that 4E is better designed than the other version. I also agree that both the Character Builder and Monster Builder are both excellent programs and provide great functionality. They simple do it on the Window$ PC only. That leaves out all of the Mac, Linux, BSD, and all the other operating systems out there. Heck if they had learned their lesson we would have people creating monsters on their iPhones by now, but they didn't learn their lesson.
No matter how optimistic you'll have to agree that there were problems with the "forums", or this faceWiz, myWiz or whatever you want to call their community site. From actual legal questionability to things like black on white and tiny text, getting rid of BBCode, and mony more things that would take 3-4 pages to list.
Personally, having used both of the new tools extensively at this point, think what WOTC has done is awesome. For YEARS we've been saying, "Make the DM's job easier and the game will grow."
Well, darn it, they are doing it... and you're not "going to fund such a beast" ??
Well, I fully intend to, and am looking forward to what they do next. Great job WOTC... I've supported D&D for 30 years now, and while I was out of it for a while (actually playing 1e ), I'm now in full support of 4E. There are still the 2E hold out that I gave up on a long time ago, and some 3.5E folks that just don't get what 4E has done... and I didn't either until the tools hit.
The game is very balanced, playable, smooth, and its a lot of fun to play! For the first time in 30 years I would say the game system fully realizes the true potential of fantasy adventure simulation in a very cinematic way... what we've always wanted it to do... at least myself. I've always RAN cinematic... which meant a lot of homebrew rules to compensate for system short falls.
Isn't this why you support a game??
I agree. Even the Character builder makes my job easier.
For consumable items, I can print out the items card, and I hand it to the player. The rule is, hold on to it, and when you use it, hand it back. No need to add it to your character sheet. Same for any magic item. If the players get an item in the middle of an adventure and want to use it, they don't have to look it up, and can add it later.
That's a neat idea, I'll have to implement that when I can afford to buy more ink for my printer. How do you get them to come up without creating a character?
I too have a group that lives all over the country and using the GT to play together once a week online was a key selling point for 4E and DDI. Fortunately for me I didn't subscribe to DDI until the Character builder was fully released though.
Now I'm an old gamer coming off the back of 25 years or so play. My group uses the core books and generally feels the additional books are just money spinner regurgitating the same crap with a slight imbalance but in a shiny new guise (for those that remember... Unearthed Arcana).
Anyhow, I digress. My point is that once my subscription to DDI runs out I've already got everything I need until the arrival of a GT so I wont be renewing. Which makes me wonder how many other people will feel the same?
Exactly what I'm doing.
And me.
lol. me too. Seems the most logical course of action.
the online tabletop has been scrapped. it takes too much time in manpower for too little return in revenue. rather than giving us something revolutionary that will pull us away from our youtube feeds and casual gaming on facebook, wotc thinks a smarter strategy is to give us little scraps of goodness in a constant-flowing stream through D&DI. not sure i'm going to continue my subscription when it's time to renew because it's like drinking from the firehose -- sounds awfully fun before you put your lips to the water, and miserably difficult to handle after over a year of constantly flowing content. when i was a kid, we had 3-5 books that lasted us 10 years. nowadays, it's a new book a month and frankly, I'm not willing to tithe $50/month in my income to wotc for books and D&DI, no matter what their bean counters think. if it weren't for my OCD i'd be in a happier mood and my bookshelves wouldn't be groaning under the weight of a dozen too-thin hardbound 150 page splatbooks.
btw, i love the character builder. it's worth $45 a year. but $120? nope, i don't think so.
the online tabletop has been scrapped. it takes too much time in manpower for too little return in revenue. rather than giving us something revolutionary that will pull us away from our youtube feeds and casual gaming on facebook, wotc thinks a smarter strategy is to give us little scraps of goodness in a constant-flowing stream through D&DI. not sure i'm going to continue my subscription when it's time to renew because it's like drinking from the firehose -- sounds awfully fun before you put your lips to the water, and miserably difficult to handle after over a year of constantly flowing content. when i was a kid, we had 3-5 books that lasted us 10 years. nowadays, it's a new book a month and frankly, I'm not willing to tithe $50/month in my income to wotc for books and D&DI, no matter what their bean counters think. if it weren't for my OCD i'd be in a happier mood and my bookshelves wouldn't be groaning under the weight of a dozen too-thin hardbound 150 page splatbooks.
btw, i love the character builder. it's worth $45 a year. but $120? nope, i don't think so.
Actually it wouldn't take that much manpower. It would take time though, and they can't hook everybody and keep them interested without monthly content long enough to get the GT (Game Table) out. They are also unwilling to license it out to a 3rd party like mapTools, or any of the other proven 3rd party GT software companies.
I also agree about the books. Not only can't I afford $50.00 per month, even if I could I would be unwilling to pay that much every month for content me and my group is unlikely to use.
I also think the character builder is a worthy accomplishment, they just need to port it to other platforms. Your right $45 a year for it isn't that bad, but $120 is just outrageous. The Dungeon and Dragon magazines are a nice bonus, but they are not worth raising the price to $120 either.
I am finally seeing more and more people that have done the same things and have the same reasons for jumping into 4e... unfortunately we miss judged the depth and did a handstand in the 3' instead of a cannon ball in the 12'!!!
I see that some people are arguing about salaries of programmers, hers what I think about that:
if you sit on your behind and whine about deadlines, your not doing real work and should not be paid over 30k a year... I know someone is cussing me at saying this, but maybe 50k is more realistic.
there are other fields of work that do not make anywhere near that much and definitely deserve it, i.e; your line cooks!! making $12/hr avg. + 40/hr week = >25k/yr... and that's if you can even find a job!!!
and thats why I wanted the game table with my DDI subscription, I cant buy every book anymore... so when I could have all my DnD stuff together in one package and be able to play with my group all over the world... i said hell yeah!!!
i was looking at the 4e books in the store earlier too see if we should switch from 2nd but didnt get the rules in that short time, saw the ad in the back of the book, so i just signed up not but 2 hours ago for the sole reason of checking out the game table and getting some of the rules explained visually when lo and behold they cancelled it? wtf? this blows
i was looking at the 4e books in the store earlier too see if we should switch from 2nd but didnt get the rules in that short time, saw the ad in the back of the book, so i just signed up not but 2 hours ago for the sole reason of checking out the game table and getting some of the rules explained visually when lo and behold they cancelled it? wtf? this blows
My story is that they announced it would be out with 4E.
Then I preordered the books.
Then they announced it would be delayed.
Then my books came.
I read all the books and played with my nephews (while certainly D&D, not as entertaining as playing with peers my own age).
Then they announced they put the GT (Game Table) and the CV (Character Visualizer) on the "back burner".
I lost it and got a lot of reported posts and closed threads in the forum.
They announced they were working on the AT (Adventure Tools) after doing a hokey poll that was skewed.
I *******************************************************. (edited so this thread doesn't get closed).
They announced that maybe sometime in the distant future they might decide to pick up the GT and work on it.
I got put on anti-anxiety medicine. Haven't had a thread closed on me since.
doesnt that suck...you buy all the books and you are hoping that you can play with your friends back home when you got time off from work and you live so far away due to either military or some other bussiness..then they hipe you all out at gencon...then they give you sneak peeks and a sample characters to play...then once the game comes out they drop the dig table like its a hot turd....well i thought TSR was running this game into the dirt but WoTC is doing a great job themselves at that....so everyone give WoTC a big applause for screwing up a great game....THANK YOU WoTC
Maptool (or other VTT) plus Skype (or other VOIP) really work well. Don't give up on remote gaming because we don't have an official Wizards product for it.
There are campaign structures that generous gamers have built out there for 4E (you have to put in your own powers etc. so that there is no copyright infringement), so getting started is not hard. Just do it incrementally as required.
Now, if only Wizards would give us downloadable maps for all published adventures without the placement of traps and enemies revealed on them! Put that under DND Insider and it would be another reason to subscribe.
Maptool (or other VTT) plus Skype (or other VOIP) really work well. Don't give up on remote gaming because we don't have an official Wizards product for it.
There are campaign structures that generous gamers have built out there for 4E (you have to put in your own powers etc. so that there is no copyright infringement), so getting started is not hard. Just do it incrementally as required.
Now, if only Wizards would give us downloadable maps for all published adventures without the placement of traps and enemies revealed on them! Put that under DND Insider and it would be another reason to subscribe.
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
That's only required if the DM wants to use the macros (or whatever the software uses) to do all the calculations for you. All of them come with, AFAIK, basic die-rolling tools that could be used to replicate the rolling that would be done around a table.
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
Meh, I do it for maptool, and I wouldn't really call it a disaster.
well it looked really cool..they showed the lighting on the character and the player could his piece...sounded really good...i dont see y ppl would not want to complain about that...i am devestated that they are doing away with it...
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
Not true - Masterplan downloads everything for you, if you have an Insider subscription.
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
Not true - Masterplan downloads everything for you, if you have an Insider subscription.
Which many of us do not!
Which many of us do not!
Which is not the fault of masterplan. Which is a third party program which does what you say it cannot... at a small price to you To WotC
Maptool (or other VTT) plus Skype (or other VOIP) really work well. Don't give up on remote gaming because we don't have an official Wizards product for it.
There are campaign structures that generous gamers have built out there for 4E (you have to put in your own powers etc. so that there is no copyright infringement), so getting started is not hard. Just do it incrementally as required.
Now, if only Wizards would give us downloadable maps for all published adventures without the placement of traps and enemies revealed on them! Put that under DND Insider and it would be another reason to subscribe.
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
Not finding it disastrous myself...
Holy cow this is awesome: blogs.msdn.com/surface/archive/2009/10/1...
This is D&D played on the Mircorsoft surface. WOTC, are you guys involved with this at all? Is this what you had in mind when you launched 4th edition? This is such a cool integration of gaming and technology.
Sorry boardmasters if I posted this in the wrong place. I will try a few other forums here also.
that is cool...however WoTC will never do that!!!
Just speaking as someone in the game industry, according to the latest survey, and entry level game programmer (that is someone with less than 3 years of experience) makes an average salary of $59,375. Having 3-6 years experience will net you an average of $75,526. While 6+ years you are looking at $98,571. And that is ith out looking at the program lead or technical director positions which obviously demand further still.
Then for the art/animation side you are looking at $45,985 for less than 3 years, $59,017 for 3-6 years, and $79,221 at 6+ years.
I'll assume that they already have competent designers, and producers in house, though they'd still likely have to hire audio engineers, and quite possibly QA testers.
Make of these numbers what you will, but as was mention before, people in the gaming industry tend to make less that the same skills, and quality of work would fetch in other industries.
There never needed to be "every rule in the book" built into this game. There just needed to be a referee who could place terrain tiles and place/move monster icons, and players who could be tagged with an icon and move it. If you wanted to get fancy, you could add effect template overlays and an initiative cycle that the referee could override.
This was doable within months of the showing I saw at GenCon, and what's more, it would have been useful for all manner of games, not just D&D.
That they stopped, indicates to me that whoever started it quit and left their code in crap shape, or that they simply mismanaged the dev effort.
In either case, WotC bears the brunt of this, and the marketing goons who decided to pretend to the rest of us that this was a potentially viable outcome.
Which is, contrary to some opinions expressed here, fraud.
T
Maptool (or other VTT) plus Skype (or other VOIP) really work well. Don't give up on remote gaming because we don't have an official Wizards product for it.
There are campaign structures that generous gamers have built out there for 4E (you have to put in your own powers etc. so that there is no copyright infringement), so getting started is not hard. Just do it incrementally as required.
Now, if only Wizards would give us downloadable maps for all published adventures without the placement of traps and enemies revealed on them! Put that under DND Insider and it would be another reason to subscribe.
As I've reiterated a billion times: All of the 3rd party tools require you to (if you wish to remain legal) enter manually all of the information that you use from the books. For players this might not seem to bad, but for DMs its disastrous.
Call me crazy, but http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Canon+-+CanoScan+Flatbed+Scanner+with+Z-Lid+Expansion+Top/9239594.p?id=1218077784413&skuId=9239594&st=scanner&cp=1&lp=10
T
Okay, guys, let's simplify this.
There never needed to be "every rule in the book" built into this game. There just needed to be a referee who could place terrain tiles and place/move monster icons, and players who could be tagged with an icon and move it. If you wanted to get fancy, you could add effect template overlays and an initiative cycle that the referee could override.
This was doable within months of the showing I saw at GenCon, and what's more, it would have been useful for all manner of games, not just D&D.
That they stopped, indicates to me that whoever started it quit and left their code in crap shape, or that they simply mismanaged the dev effort.
In either case, WotC bears the brunt of this, and the marketing goons who decided to pretend to the rest of us that this was a potentially viable outcome.
Which is, contrary to some opinions expressed here, fraud.
T
It's quite exasperating, especially as a new player. I'm very interested in some of the offerings that D&Di provides. For some people it's a good value. However, despite that, I know that even just the three Core books (DM's Guide, MM, and PH1) alone provide more content than I'll ever, EVER get through in my life time. The virtual tabletop though was what would have gotten me to sign up.
I would have loved having access to a all encompassing tabletop program that would have let me keep playing with my current group all year round. I would have loved to be able to set a virtual game up without spending hours setting up the maps, making sure all the monsters, items, terrain, and everything else worked properly. I would have loved to not have compatability issues, or to try and explain tech support for a network connection problem over the phone.
Let me reiterate: I would have really liked having a official program that made playing the latest edition online with my friends very easy.
Rumor has it in pittsburgh that a couple of students at CMU have building build a virtual table top specificly for D&D in mind, with the use of the new Windows Surface. boingboing.net/2009/10/29/dd-on-multi-to... for anyone who is interested.
So... I made an adventure for Maptool.
First I downloaded Maptool, then I downloaded some tokens and the Tokentool
Then I made some tokens and a map out of pictures and maps I had from previous.
I wrote in all the stat lines for the monsters on the first floor
Then I watched a "how to" video and exclaimed "So that what Macro's are for!"
Then I wrote in Macro's for all the tokens on the first floor.
Then I downloaded Veg.lib
Then I redid all my Macro's.
Then I spent most of the night digging for pics on the Wizards website for more tokens.
Then I finished the adventure.
Then I figured out how to add a rider text to power macros, so things like the Stormclaw Scorpion might work the way their supposed to.
I'm ready for the WotC Game Table now. Seriously any time.
Wow, really Wolf? No offense, but that's extremely hopeful and/or naive of you. Shelved software products have this alarming tendency never to be finished. I certainly can't remember the last decent offering that got shelved, then picked back up that ended up well. At the very least it would mean any work that WAS done on it would need to be redone from scratch. Who are they going to get to pick that up? Moreover, see the other people's point of view. Hasbro/WoTC spent the better part of a year or more now marketing a product to us that, frankly, didn't exist, and if you're saying it's shelved indefinitely, that means for the forseeable future probably WON'T exist. Yes, it sucks. Yes, people are unhappy about it. They've got every right to be. I'm sorry if you don't like whining on your boards, but that's kinda going to happen. Hasbro has changed a number of things about the franchise, not the least of which was slamming the price of the books through the roof immediately because they knew they had a hardcore fanbase who was willing to pay to get their 'fix'. Dropping these tools that had already gone out through their marketing department as an incentive to purchase a subscription to Insider just shows more of the same. Once with this problem when the original character builder was semi-released with the books was bad enough. Now this second shortfall is just ridiculous. While I see your point, and trying to maintain hope, I honestly have to say it looks extremely bad, and I think pumping money into D&D in it's current state is a big mistake. I won't go dramatic about it, but it is a damn shame to go through picking up this new service with overdone promises of new tools, better experiences, and GENERAL COMPETENCE OF THE COMPANY TO FULFILL CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS, only to be let down, and told that 'well. our 3rd party software developer may have dropped the ball'. or, excuse me, not told that, because I highly doubt anything I've heard on here was from a rep. Oh wait, they haven't said anything except that it's delayed. Indefinitely. I dunno. maybe that's just me, but that sounds like EXTREMELY poor planning on the part of the officials overseeing the D&D project as a whole. Proper implementation would have had 2/3+ of this software suite done by now. Before people start saying I don't know what I'm talking about, I work in distribution sales for software and hardware implementation, speaking daily with guys who do exactly this. I've seen rollouts of software platforms intended to allow remote management of systems in the 10,000+ qty pushed faster than this. Frankly, it's a damned shame. I think a good gaming table made by the franchise itself would have pulled people back in droves to the game, besides my own happiness. Not to mention I'd hoped being connected to a large company known for gaming products would have done some good. Ah, well. Live and learn.
Very well said. What worries me most about a lot of this, is how they seem to make the same mistakes as they made at the start of 3.0, with the character builder that ended up being e-Tools, the interactive atlas and such.
Initially the VT was a big seller for me, and the fact that it's taken a back seat torqued me for some time. Only now am I getting into 4E, and yes, I have subscribed to DDI.
I haven't found Dungeon or Dragon to be particularlly useful as of yet, and there is a lot of back issues to go through... so the fact that I have found little of interest is disturbing.
That said, WOTC has made up big ground with the Character Builder and the Monster Creator. As a DM I found these tools to be indespensible. One of the main things is it takes the onus off of me to have every source book available just so I can say yay or nay to a character idea. Players buy rule supplements all the time and want to use the ideas presented there... and rightly so... they bought the book. But trying to keep track of every feat and power is an impossible task for someone with a life (dad, husband, work, etc). Now, I can make a reasonably informed decision on a rule without having to take out a second mortgage on my house. 3.5 was bloated with feats, skills, prestige classes, etc. and it was endless the things players would want to incorporate into their characters as a campaign progressed.
The rules reference is also handy for this reason as well.
As for the VT... I much prefer to game around the table anyway... I want real flesh and blood folks around me to make me laugh and interact with. If I can get them together I don't need the VT.
It's sad that WOTC hasn't man-upped and admited their error and spoke with some clarity on the issue, but they have done is work very hard to provide us some very useful and powerful tools for the game. As long as that continues they've got my monthly subscription (that is as long as it remains reasonably priced).
I agree, I would much rather sit around a table with a bunch of smelly nerds and laugh at star trek jokes than play over the internet through voice chat and a virtual table, unfortunately like most who have a problem with the GT not being released, we don't have this option.
Our group would still use it even face to face, I would DM form my laptop for the maps etc.. and just plug it into the HD big screen so we didnt need to hover around the table and move markers on a map (that get bumped etc..) cuz I cant afford all the minis etc..
Im still hoping this will happen someday in the fairly near future. Im getting older and it would be nice to sit in a comfy high back chair with a clipboard and a big screen all the players can see.
just my 2 cents and checking back to see how things have progressed is all.
So... I made an adventure for Maptool.
First I downloaded Maptool, then I downloaded some tokens and the Tokentool
Then I made some tokens and a map out of pictures and maps I had from previous.
I wrote in all the stat lines for the monsters on the first floor
Then I watched a "how to" video and exclaimed "So that what Macro's are for!"
Then I wrote in Macro's for all the tokens on the first floor.
Then I downloaded Veg.lib
Then I redid all my Macro's.
Then I spent most of the night digging for pics on the Wizards website for more tokens.
Then I finished the adventure.
Then I figured out how to add a rider text to power macros, so things like the Stormclaw Scorpion might work the way their supposed to.
I'm ready for the WotC Game Table now. Seriously any time.
I lol'd at this. Not in a making fun of you way, but in a simpathetic way. I did something similar. Although I didn't jump in right away on building stuff. I really did quite a bit of homework after the initial "what? I can do more with these things called frameworks?". I took some time to figure out how it worked, what options I had etc. Again, not making fun.
I will say though that I can't see the DDI VTT being as robust as we want it to be. I really do see it as a visual tabletop that has some basic stuff, such as lighting, character management, etc, but not much in the way of automation. Maybe I'm wrong, but...
Maybe someday WotC earns enough money with us DDI Subscribers for finishing their former promises. Or maby someday no one will re-subscribe until the do so...
I know the frustration of the vtt. It is the biggest reason to get DDI for me. But I can't see people not resubscribing. There are good things about DDI, and the price is reasonable for what you get at this point. If not, people wouldn't be there now.
No luck for me.
No more of my money for them. Sure, there are other good resources here, but that's not what I gave them my money for. Those that enjoy it, more power to ya, I'm happy for you. I just didn't get anywhere near what I was expecting and have been unhappy since.
Your feelings are yours. I meant no disrespect. My main reason for D&Di was/is for the game table as well. The CB, MB, Dungeon and Dragon mags were, and still are good tools, but not my main reason for getting the product. But they are enjoyable, and useful.
I think my real point is that you are getting value for the dollar. It's not for everyone, to be sure, but you are getting what you pay for.
People here talk about how they like to get VTT so as to play with others online. I want it so I can play solo. In August, the Castle Ravenloft Boardgame will come out. One of the things that is said about it is that it can be play solo. I guess that will make me happy, but I feel that a VTT will offer greater freedom of creativity.
People here talk about how they like to get VTT so as to play with others online. I want it so I can play solo. In August, the Castle Ravenloft Boardgame will come out. One of the things that is said about it is that it can be play solo. I guess that will make me happy, but I feel that a VTT will offer greater freedom of creativity.
Darn I hop on here every 4 or 5 months to see if there is any news about the VTT. I still see that the demoed version from either 2 or 3 years ago still isn't finished. I subscribed for a year my self. That is long since cancelled. I really am waiting for this. I don't have time to work, spend time with my kids, and drive all over the place to play. The VTT would allow me to find time to play. Shoot I'd even kill my WoW subscription if I could just plop down on a simple to use VTT with pregen adventures or a good DM and just play.