Setting this feedback thread in advance for Randy's Digital Insider #8, due to go live later today.
Hi folks,
Setting this feedback thread in advance for Randy's Digital Insider #7, due to go live later today.
*cough*8*cough*:P
Can we get a feedback thread for this feedback thread? Seems the orginal poster does not know that #7 was last week.
Notice the notice on the typo contains a typo...
"I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do. If a lot of you are either confused or frustrated, then there is clearly something we could be doing better. Are the updates too hard to find? Is our schedule too difficult to follow? Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates? From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist."
This reminds me of about a couple months or so back when the forum was screaming for any information on D&DI and Gamerzero asked what format we want it in. He really missed the point of what we were asking for. We wanted info and updates the editing and format was immaterial.
Likewise with these questions I think its the same thing. All of these questions are side stepping the issues that we are asking and talking about.
The overall issue is stick to what you say you are gonna do. We will work around that but when you set expectactions we expect them to occur.
Are the updates too hard to find? Every article has their own thread. Its easy enough to find when they come out. You also have a table of contents that sometimes will have a link when an article comes out. But not always. that part gets frustrating because we really can't trust it.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow? This question really ****** me off but I'll try not to answer emotionally. No its not difficult for us to follow its M-W-F. Putting articles up at 11:59 pm technically follows the letter of the release schedule but not really the spirit. And I guess saying that its not really a schedule but that its something you try to do but may miss some takes some of the edge off but again it goes back to expectations.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
Expectations. If you have a list of what is coming out this month it really needs to come out that month.
Please do jump on this week's forum and let me know whether you agree and what you think we should do to make things better.
Do what you say and say what you do. I dont know why the forum has to keep saying this month after month.
I like how he says in order to get into the beta of the character maker, it will only be open to subscribers first.
But in this thread: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1090238
WotC_DM says: To be crystal clear, there are absolutely no plans to charge for the usage of the BETA version of the character builder.
Great update guys, at least you are being consitent with misleading your customers. No wonder you waited until 5 PM PST to put out this update, because you all knew the reaction it would get and did not want to face your customers.
Apparntly so, because WOTC is the ones not following it.
The two worst things about communications here are contradictions and unclear wordings. So much of what's gone on the last several months is due to both of those. The issue with the beta is an example.
This totally goes against what WotC DM said in my other post, that there was no plans at all for them to charge for the beta.
What one is it WOTC? But can we really trust your answer either way? This is really driving me away from the whole hobby, you misleading people. Is that what you want? to drive your customers away?
There is a very slight learning curve to figure this out, but once you know where to look, it becomes second nature. I would not lose any sleep over this at all.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
I hate the cocky way this was said above, but there is truth to it. Are you guys capable of following the MWF schedule? You did great to start, but the past month has been really sketchy.
For our part, the MWF schedule seems fine.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
This is the tricky one. There is a group of people who seem to have trouble grasping how the ToC is meant to work. For some reason, some people think that as soon as the ToC is up, every article along with the compiled magazine should also be available.
I don't know how to explain it properly myself. The closest I can get is that the ToC is sort of like the plans for a building that hasn't been built yet. As each article is released, its like a new floor has been added to the building until its complete. But the building doesn't instantly pop into existence just because you have the plans available.
Please do jump on this week's forum and let me know whether you agree and what you think we should do to make things better.
Here's the secret to giving delivery estimates... Lie!
Any true geek will remember the Star Trek:TNG episode where Scotty told LaForge the secret to looking like a miracle worker. Always lie when asked how much time you need.
Step 1: Figure out your best estimate for each unfinished project. Be as specific as you possibly can. Consider every possible downfall and drawback. Ask your developers for feedback.
Step 2: Whatever you came up with, Double it! Anytime my boss asks me for a time frame, I always do this, and even then, I usually only get it right about 2/3rd of the time. You guys don't have a lot of experience with this yet. You may even consider tripling your estimates.
Step 3: Take that padded timeframe, and post that on the page for each unfinished product. Make sure that you emphasize as strongly as you can that the dates are estimates. Every week, update these estimates until each product is released. With any luck, you'll deliver most things on or ahead of schedule.
I don't think so, but I have them coming to me via RSS feed. Perhaps point that out as a way to let people know. There are also the threads in the DDI Announcements and Dragon/Dungeon Article forums.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
The schedule is not hard to follow. M-W-F an article comes up. Some people comment that 11:59 on Wednesday night is not really wednesday, but I think that is a minor quibble. As long as three articles a week come out, that is what most everyone is looking for.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
The ToC is nice in that it teases things. That being said, I think that it is important to, if something is pushed off of the ToC, to let people know as soon as possible. For example, if it wasn't for the fact that it was mentioned in the podcast *why* the barbarian was delayed, we wouldn't have known. All we would have known is the cover change, and the ToC change.
Is what you are saying so clear, that a Moron in a Hurry would be able to understand it without confusion?
Disclaimer: I'm not saying D&D players are morons. I happen to think that 98% of the earth's population are morons. D&D players are no exception.
Link to #8 : http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/insidernews/20080924a
I like how he says in order to get into the beta of the character maker, it will only be open to subscribers first.
But in this thread: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1090238
WotC_DM says: To be crystal clear, there are absolutely no plans to charge for the usage of the BETA version of the character builder.
Great update guys, at least you are being consitent with misleading your customers. No wonder you waited until 5 PM PST to put out this update, because you all knew the reaction it would get and did not want to face your customers.
Except for the part where it says nothing about charging money.
"2) We are hard at work finishing up the beta version of our Character Builder. The free public beta test will include all the content and functionality necessary to build a level 1, 2, or 3 character. At first, access to the beta will be restricted to subscribers and other specifically selected playtesters, but it will be opened up to everyone who wants to participate well before we begin charging for access."
Bolded parts are my emphasis. Where in this is it misleading? Especially when it matter-of-factly states "... but it will be opened up to everyone who wants to participate well before we begin charging for access"?
Regarding the M-W-F releases: I'd recommend finding a way to make it clear to anyone looking at it that the articles are advance releases on the full issue (possibly as a notation on both the Dragon and Dungeon table of contents pages). I would not recommend that you place a specific date on them, just that some feature from the issue would be available on one of the release days. And as soon as that feature is available, that the table of contents be updated. [I personally don't care if it comes out at 11:59 p.s.t., but some others find that a solid sticking point.]
Without being clear on the fact that they are advances on the actual issue, I think it will continue to seem like a negative thing to a lot people as those people will probably end up feeling like they're being jipped in some way.
Are the updates too hard to find? No. I can navigate the website fine. On the other hand, I have heard more than one complaint about the navigation. I've got it figured out, though.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow? No, and you don't need to question our ability to understand the schedule you hope to meet. The problem is that Wizards has gone from delivering tremendously on the schedule (look at August - a release every M, W, and F just for Dragon) to just skating by, and acting puzzled when we notice.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? I don't mind it.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates? Really, come on. That's a silly question.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
Well, I don't necessarily have a problem with the content. I don't care at all about any of the editorials, ampersands, or podcasts, but that's me (in fact, the only thing I'm really interested in is the magazines; DDI software is completely irrelevant to me). The other stuff (actual game stuff) has been fine. Actually, with one exception: I think putting the Red Dragon Interview as an "update" was completely cheating to meet your schedule, but hey, it made me laugh anyway.
The problem isn't content, it's delivery. I've greatly enjoyed the articles that have been published during the trial period, but the reliability of delivery had a real bobble over the last three weeks, and it has really turned me off the whole thing.
I appreciate having a Table of Contents posted at the start of each month and eagerly anticipate checking every Monday, Wednesday and Friday for new content. If there is something, great, if not yet, maybe next time. I personally don't feel robbed or cheated if new content does not appear each and every opportunity.
My largest concern is with the archival compilations at the end of each month. I would love to see corrected versions of the individual articles included in these archives. By this I don't mean finished versions of playtest articles or totally rewritten articles, but ones with the typos, oversights, and layout glitches corrected. I realize that you are working with limited personnel and that this may not be possible. On the other hand, however, I do no wantto let a chance or possibility of seeing this happen be missed, just because no one ever asked. If there is some method by which the readers could better contribute to this effort and allow you to more strategically utilize your existing workforce, I am sure that we would all be willing to do so.
Please keep the lines of communication open.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow? No, and you don't need to question our ability to understand the schedule you hope to meet. The problem is that Wizards has gone from delivering tremendously on the schedule (look at August - a release every M, W, and F just for Dragon) to just skating by, and acting puzzled when we notice.
This.
It's a question of expectations. For issue 364, we had one or two articles released every M/W/F, and the interesting ones were spread out through the month so we didn't feel forced to wait but still had cool stuff to look forward to. For 365, we started with the Artificer, which was awesome, and good stuff was released right through the month. For both of those issues, the last trickle of articles came right at the end of the month; it was obvious you had a plan and were following it.
Then came 366. Everything seemed a bit slower. Cool stuff was released right along, but we started getting towards the end of the month and there were a lot of articles left, and there was a big rush to play catch up during the last week.
And now 367. This month it has been obvious you're way behind, that you're throwing out whatever you have to keep to the letter of your release schedule (but not the spirit) - it was a week into the month before an article that wasn't an editorial was released. And I really don't see how the cartoon can be counted as an actual release. Even now, with only three release days to go, about half the material is still unreleased. You set us up to such high expectations with the first two months, and then you seem to act surprised when we don't like it when the level of service takes a drastic drop.
The final thought I'll leave you with is that I love the material from the magazines - I just hate having to wait for it.
HURRAY ^_^ barbarian will be among the last free released articles!
...What? I must have missed something. I read it completely different. I read that we were NOT going to get the barbarian before they started charging. Am I crazy?
I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do.
Good. I'm glad that because you're not willing to argue, you see it is useless to try and twist the facts to make it look like you guys actually did what you said you would. Thank you for that. Now next time, why don't you just apologize for the poor release schedule?
If a lot of you are either confused or frustrated, then there is clearly something we could be doing better.
Not confused. We just don't want to be BS'ed. Frustrated... honestly? I'm serious. You DIDN'T that we were already frustrated?
Are the updates too hard to find?
No.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
Which schedule? The one that you tell us about or the one that you are actually using? The latter is horribly confusing.
Is our website navigation so confusing...?
The layout of the website is bad in the first place. It needs a revamp in a serious way. I'd love to see that happen.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
1st off. You sound really full of yourself. This coming from someone who writes their editorials and counts THAT as a part of useful D&D content. Sure, they're cool and all but they aren't what we're coming here for. You have some GREAT articles out there to be sure but the magazines aren't quite there yet IMO. Very close though. I would NOT count your editorials as content. While they're a good read, they aren't useful in terms of D&D gameplay.
I'm sorry, but as of now I am really disappointed with how you have decided to handle this. Especially since you're making some of your own look like absolute idiots (see WOTC_DM's quote in one of KM's posts in this thread). You're effectively barring many people from the BETA of the Character Builder and limiting the feedback you're going to get. It is just sad how things have shaped up around a product that received so much hype and had so much promise to it (The product being DDi). The more time goes on, the worse it is handled and the more WOTC seems to not care about their Customer Relations.
Just disappointing really. Just disappointing.
Are the updates too hard to find?
Not really hard. If I come to the Insider forums, I get links to the articles. If I go to the main Web site, I see one new article with a little picture. The ones with pictures are the most easily noticed, because they're bigger and colorful (obviously). Those times when you release an article along with something like "Ampersand" or an editorial though, the editorial is much harder to notice because it gets no large picture, just sort of snuck into the list on the right.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
I will agree with previous posters that this question is a bit aggravating to me. The concept of your schedule is not a problem. The implementation of your schedule is: the fact that it is not always followed, or only followed in the most literal way possible and not keeping with the spirit.
When you say "Updates on M,W,F" people expect actual content updates. Not to knock your editorials and little videos, but that isn't what people first think when they see "Update." Earlier in this trial period, releases were pretty good. Usually a Dragon article and/or Dungeon adventure were released on one of the days, and not at 11:59 p.m. at that (unless I'm hallucinating and nostalgic for a nonexistent past).
I would love for your M,W,F schedule to work. Periodic updates are good, because it gives reason to keep checking back with the site, gives us things to look forward to etc. However, there is the expectation that when you set an update schedule you should actually follow it.
I do not get terribly upset when I come to the Web site on Wednesday and there is no article up. I do get a little annoyed though.
What I would like to see is substantive updates going live on days that were denoted, and at REASONABLE times of the day. I would recommend you further refine your schedule to be something like "10 a.m. PST M,W,F" or "5 p.m. PST M,W,F" because it seems just a "day" is not nearly specific enough of a deadline for the authors/web people.
Articles should be "in the can" hours if not days or weeks before they are supposed to be released. This often seems like they come in at 11 p.m. and someone has to load them really fast before being able to go home. It's not really fair to the customers, nor the employee who is waiting to get the darned article so he can post it.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
I think it is a very good thing for everybody. I do not feel "teased" about upcoming articles.
You would have had almost no "uproar" about the postponement of the Barbarian playtest if someone simply stated it was pushed back, and the reasons (regardless of whether the reason was as simple as "we didn't feel it was ready").
The way it was "handled," was it was stated in several venues it would be out in September, the cover art reflected it, and it was listed in the table of contents. One day, it was no longer listed in the table of contents, and people noticed. Another day, the cover was changed to be something else less barbarian-like, and people noticed. At no point did anyone come to the forums and INFORM us of what they were doing and why.
You left an information vacuum for days (if not a whole week), and information vacuums get filled with conspiracy theories, complaints, and ill will. Announcing reasons on a Podcast is not really an acceptable solution, because it takes too long and not everyone listens to them immediately.
If there is a schedule change, or something needs to be pulled for whatever reason, you will get infinitely more respect and backing of your product if you are prompt and frank in your explanations. You would generate almost no ill will whatsoever, and possibly even gain more belief in the quality of your product.
All you have to do is tell one of the community managers to post a thread in the "Article Discussions" stating that the article is postponed until next month, for X reasons, and most people would be happy. Quite a minor concession to keep people happy and quiet.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
The actual Web site is confusing, or at least poorly made. That has been stated many times. I am aware of the table of contents, the updates etc. primarily from the Forums, which to date have been much clearer in their presentation.
My absolute largest complaint as pertains to the magazines is in the "Issue Archives" is that it is in no way intuitive to place the link for the Compiled Issue inside the cover picture. People simply do not expect to find links of any sort hidden in a PORTION of a picture, which they have looked at before, even though it now has a little green "button."
If you want to keep a "download complete issue" button there, then fine -- but also put a more "Mundane" link at the top of the table of contents area below it, so people can download it without having to even look at the cover to find it.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
I agree the quality is "high." I firmly believe however that you need better editing, which would push it even "higher."
Typos are present, sure, but I mean specifically things such as incorrect monster types, incorrect names of things, wrong rules being used (not using the errata'd rules) and the like. If you have an editor go over the documents before posting them (which honestly I am not sure I can believe), have another one also. One person can look for actual spelling and grammar, and another for purely rules elements.
P.S.
Thank you for continuing to post your Insider updates.
Except for the part where it says nothing about charging money.
"2) We are hard at work finishing up the beta version of our Character Builder. The free public beta test will include all the content and functionality necessary to build a level 1, 2, or 3 character. At first, access to the beta will be restricted to subscribers and other specifically selected playtesters, but it will be opened up to everyone who wants to participate well before we begin charging for access."
Bolded parts are my emphasis. Where in this is it misleading? Especially when it matter-of-factly states "... but it will be opened up to everyone who wants to participate well before we begin charging for access"?
I have said in another thread, the fact that if you have to subscribe to get into the early part of the beta, you are basically paying for the beta. Thats what was misleading IMO they are going to charge for the beta when WOTC DM said they were not going to charge for the beta. Bait and switch like they did with the barbarian playtest article.
I also find it funny how WOTC did not put this update on the main DnD page like they did with the other updates. Its like they did not want the public to see what was in this report. Interesting.
A) RELEASE Schedule APPROXIMATION
You wanted to deliver each M,W,F. Thus far, you failed to do it consistently. I don't care whether the articles are delivered 11:59 PM or 4AM. but it should be consistent, and most likely the articles should be ready before those deadlines. It's pretty obvious, that some of those articles really got ready like 11:58 PM and were posted soon after, just to meet the schedule. This cannot work for a product you want to sell. It forces people to check in often, sure. But this does not create happy customers.
when i check on time, i want the promised article to be there, and it's not like Dungeon and Dragon are entirely fan-driven magazines where you could say "ok, real life issues, personal issues have come up". To be able to deliver those articles, you should produce your online magazine as you would produce a print magazine - one month ahead. Else, you'll continue to fail expectations you set yourself.
B) The Content itself
is fine. i like what i'm getting, BUT: content is what is printed and usable in my D&D group. so: RPGA reports, Confessions, Ampersand, Editorials, Videos - They all make a good roundup to the print product, or the final PDF, but it is not considered content usually - at least not by me. Content is something i take and use in my game. So if the first articles up in a month are ampersand, confessions, editorial and interviews with the designers, this is NOT content, and likely to get people upset.
C) Beta Issues
I believe it to be a bad move to give out the beta to subscribers and non-subscribers at totally different times. for download reasons, it might be ok to differentiate this for one week, at most two. everything else just makes you look like you really want to charge for a beta product as well.
D) The Tone and Feel of your column:
please, don't do this again. you're sounding like a complete jerk, which i know you aren't. you're acting like from a high throne... we players (and soon to be paying customers) are not to be treated like peasants.
if you want us to buy something, go ahead and sell it, with the proper attitude. (the customer is king/always right)
I'm sure you didn't mean your article to get overly bossy etc - just have someone (previously they were called editors) go over the harsh passages and re-work them.
...What? I must have missed something. I read it completely different. I read that we were NOT going to get the barbarian before they started charging. Am I crazy?
I mean no direspect when I say this, but I think your pessimism was coloring your view as you were reading it because it is pretty clearly stated in the article.
...and thus we're including this playtest as one of the last free articles. It will be one of the first articles that we publish in October.
I have said in another thread, the fact that if you have to subscribe to get into the early part of the beta, you are basically paying for the beta. Thats what was misleading IMO they are going to charge for the beta when WOTC DM said they were not going to charge for the beta. Bait and switch like they did with the barbarian playtest article.
I also find it funny how WOTC did not put this update on the main DnD page like they did with the other updates. Its like they did not want the public to see what was in this report. Interesting.
I had this thought too, but I think - though it's not clear - that they mean they will open the "public beta" before they start charging for the DDI tools. That is, before they start charging $15 or whatever it is for the "Full Package."
So yes, to get in on the early beta, you need to subscribe, and in effect, pay for access. But if you don't subscribe, I think they'll let you use it during a public beta before they charge the premium for DDI tools.
I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do.
Please avoid this kind of tone. There may be some of your your customers interested in having some explanation (and WotC has been quite lacking in this field). The main cause of frustration has clearly been the continuous delay of a lot of the tools (builder, creator, virtual table) and some honest explanation would be welcome.
That aside I can say that I'm pretty happy about the magazines part of DDI and will subscribe from start. Just one question: why is the beta version of character builder limited to 3rd level? From what I can see a lot of the characters in real play are going to multiclass, often to cover missing roles in the party mix. The first power swap feat is available at 4th level and paragon multiclassing only at 11th. It would be good to be able to playtest them too.
I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do.
I wouldn't be either, if I were you. You know, because you haven't done what you said you were going to. There. Now we don't have to argue.
I have to agree with Whitebaron. What an insulting tone and feel of your column. It's almost like "Hey stupids! Figure out our product and start buying it already! Or are you too dumb to do that?"
It's almost, ALMOST, like you're trying to take WotC out of the defensive position it is in (you know, for screwing up royally with DDi, and mismanaging the magazine-I'd say magazines, but since your release schedule incorporates them BOTH it really seems like a single magazine with two differently named sections) and instead turn the defensive position onto the consumers: "You're all just a bunch of whiny babies! We're not to blame AT ALL! (And if you want to talk about if we are, well then, I'm just not interested in arguing about that.) Whiners!"
You want a solution? Here ya go. It's simple, elegant, and easily implemented.
Have ALL of the articles DONE before putting up the table of contents. Then automate their release at the BEGINNING of the day they are supposed to go live (instead of 11:59 at the end of the day, how's about 12:01 at the start?).
This is not a college paper that gets done five minutes before class starts. This is a professional magazine that you hope to charge for. Start treating it less like the former and more like the latter.
Also, once you do this (you know, actually have the content a month in advance like any respectable magazine...which should only take, you know, a month to get started), release either:
A. all at once
or
B. At an even rate.
I've been following these magazines since the beginning and all to often (Dungeon especially) your "comes out over the month" is actually "a giant bolus at the end of the month when everything finally got done".
So pick one. Either make it all at once, or evenly space the content. What you're doing now is clearly for YOUR benefit, not that of the consumer. It looks sloppy, like you're cobbling this together, like your editors are biting their fingernails at 11:30 hoping that the article gets uploaded in time for that 11:59 deadline. "Gosh I SWORE I wouldn't do this to myself again!"
Please note, I've been frustrated, (not really confused-except maybe to scratch my head and say, "Really, this is what we're to expect from them?") but your feedback article, your way of reaching out to us, the consumers, has truly inflamed me.
This rant has been a direct response to your condecension and unwillingness to actually admit faults and attempt to place it on us. Not good form. Not good form at all.
Link to #8 :
WotC_DM says: To be crystal clear, there are absolutely no plans to charge for the usage of the BETA version of the character builder.
Great update guys, at least you are being consitent with misleading your customers. No wonder you waited until 5 PM PST to put out this update, because you all knew the reaction it would get and did not want to face your customers.
There will be a closed beta for people who had the chance to sign up at DDXP earlier this year. It looks like they're extending that closed beta to subscribers as well (seems fair to me).
He also clearly states that the beta will be opened up to everyone who wants to participate before they start charging.
This has been the plan for a while now. Closed Beta (DDXP & Subscribers), Open Beta (Public), Release (Paid Access or Limited Trial for free).
Are the updates too hard to find? Only when they do not arrive as expected. That does not mean they could not be easier to find (see below).
Is our schedule too difficult to follow? This seems to be an internal question rather than an external one. I have seen no sign on the forums that people cannot follow the schedule. The debate is always about your ability to follow the schedule. However that said the greater the clarity you provide for the release schedule the better. (Also see below.)
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? The table of contents is good. (Also see below)
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
I know there is a table of contents but it is an irrelevant page after its first visit, and this I think is a problem.
The table of contents to my mind should be the driving force behind the delivery of Magazine content. I should be looking at it to learn what is has been delivered and is yet to be delivered, and get an expectation of when it will be delivered (by week would do).
I think some of the problem is that people are not familiar with considering the amount of content they used to receive in a print issue of Dragon or Dungeon and are thus not making accurate assessments of the DDI delivered content, a matter that could be addressed by making better use of the table of contents to inform and direct customer attention.
Flicking through a few old Dragon issues I see the table of contents is broken up into 3 sections: Features, Table Talk, Familiars - why was this presentation abandoned?
Features - print dragon typically had 4 or 5 feature articles. That would be a release schedule of 1 Feature article a week for Dragon, that should be fairly easy to regulate and predict.
Table Talk - print Dragon had 3 static elements to this section: Editorial, Letters, and Previews. Two of these are now defunct as the Forums and the general web site previews have subsumed them.
Familiars - print Dragon generally had 6 sections that fell within this category; Comics, Adventure Path Info (when relevant), Volo's Guide, Dragonmarks, Sage Advice, and Class Acts.
There is no apparent reason that at least Volo's Guide (now Realmslore), Dragonmarks (now Expeditionary Dispatches), Class Acts and Sage Advice could not continue essentially as is in the digital format. And why isn't there a static "Tidings of War" article to flesh out the player information for the Scales of War AP? I also see no reason that CS questions cannot be incorporated into the Digital magazine (it might make them easier to find the answers for and cut down on different CS staff giving different responses).
With 1 feature a week, and 1 "Familiar" a week from Dragon that leaves basically 1 Dungeon Adventure and one other Dungeon article a month to hit a 3 article a week release from the 2 magazines. The fact Dungeon seems to have lost content in the grand scheme of things (Campaign Workshop articles are where?) just makes the situation a little worse.
The thing I find most difficult with the web site is actually tracking completed issues and thus the back issue archive. Where is the link to the completed issues and their ToC? The ToC for the completed issues would seem to be a prime way of advertising that particular issue/product, to encourage subscription to the magazines.
I have said in another thread, the fact that if you have to subscribe to get into the early part of the beta, you are basically paying for the beta. Thats what was misleading IMO they are going to charge for the beta when WOTC DM said they were not going to charge for the beta. Bait and switch like they did with the barbarian playtest article.
I also find it funny how WOTC did not put this update on the main DnD page like they did with the other updates. Its like they did not want the public to see what was in this report. Interesting.
You still get in on the beta without paying. There are two stages to a typical Beta.
Closed beta - where you offer the software to a limited base. They're limiting to DDXP signups, and to subscribers.
Open Beta - Open means just that - open to anyone. It's for working out the final bugs in the system.
You're not paying for the beta - unless you specifically choose to signup for DDI for the closed beta and the closed beta only. That's your perogative.
I'd say magazines, but since your release schedule incorporates them BOTH it really seems like a single magazine with two differently named sections
Actually with the change in the format, and the current presentation this I think is a very valid observation. In considering a DDI subscription I do not feel that I'm getting 2 magazines, I cannot subscribe to only 1 of them for example. I feel I'm getting one "DDI Magazine" and it has two parts "Dragon" and "Dungeon"
I've not held a Dragon subscription since the early 90's, but subscribed to Dungeon for the Savage Tide AP, under all currently revealed plans I could not do that with the digital magazines. Further reinforcing the 1 magazine view.
This is also essentially a further extension of how the ToC is not being utilised to create product homogeneity and identity for the magazines. Its a look once and forget option, rather than a reference point. Instead the effective ToC is more often the front page of the site, where I can track what is new to the site today, which simply further subverts the actual ToCs you provide.
When you say "Updates on M,W,F" people expect actual content updates. Not to knock your editorials and little videos, but that isn't what people first think when they see "Update." Earlier in this trial period, releases were pretty good. Usually a Dragon article and/or Dungeon adventure were released on one of the days, and not at 11:59 p.m. at that (unless I'm hallucinating and nostalgic for a nonexistent past).
I have to object to the complaints about the articles being released at 11:59PM. You aren't the only one to say this Kouk. I've seen others say the same thing.
The articles have all been released before 6PM, pacific. If you are in a different time-zone, it may look like they are being put up at the very last minute of the day, but thats simply not the case. There's no call to complain about the time something was released.
I think the better argument is that they aren't releasing actual articles. Releasing a cartoon or an editorial is fine and all, but don't make that the only release.
I have to object to the complaints about the articles being released at 11:59PM. You aren't the only one to say this Kouk. I've seen others say the same thing.
The articles have all been released before 6PM, pacific. If you are in a different time-zone, it may look like they are being put up at the very last minute of the day, but thats simply not the case. There's no call to complain about the time something was released.
That's not entirely accurate, though? If they were released by 6PM pacific, they would have been out by 9PM Eastern, right? Not the case. I wish I could remember which ones, but I can distinctly remember at least 2 articles that came out either at or after midnight on the Monday, Wednesday, or Friday they were released.
I have a thread around here somewhere on it...lemme see if I can find it.
Edit: yeah, it's over in the "Um...new content this week?" thread - Oozes Slimes and Jello Molds came out after midnight, EST; mudbunny has also observed articles get pushed out really late for EST folks. Perhaps that's just some artifact of their CMS, but it doesn't help.
Edit: also removed the "that's not true" because I'm not accusing you of lying, it's just that we're seeing some sort of 6-hour lag, then, for some articles. They have been better lately - coming up in the evening instead of at midnight the last couple times.
Feel free to flame at your leisure.
*puts on his fire-proof undies*
I stand corrected.
Feel free to flame at your leisure.
*puts on his fire-proof undies*
Hm? No, no flames. Sorry if my tone was harsh; I just wasn't sure if people on PST are actually always seeing them before 6PM, while the East Coast gets some sort of odd lag (and if so, that is contributing to the perception that they're squeaking by, when they might be thinking, "What are you talking about? We publish by 6PM!")
Here in Central, it's almost always up by 6-9, depending (usually 6-7).
That's very...odd. Perhaps I'm conflating a few really late releases into a bigger problem than they've been, but that is strange.
I mean no direspect when I say this, but I think your pessimism was coloring your view as you were reading it because it is pretty clearly stated in the article.
Wow. I cannot believe I missed that. I'm very pleased with this though! But, I do feel like an absolute doofus. How in the world did I miss that...?
If you always had updates come up at X p.m. Pacific, people would get used to the schedule and stop complaining about it, eventually. Frankly, I don't get the fuss. It's no less useful to me if I get it on Thursday than on Wednesday (other than it decreases my confidence in your ability to deliver in general).
The tone of this was a tad snarky, frankly.
And, I do think the navigation and ToC are not quite as easy as they could be. I don't have a specific suggestion right now, as I should be working....
My Thoughts:
1. Decide whether it is one magazine or two.
- If one, call it Dungeon/Dragon and set things up accordingly. If not...
- Divide the forums again into separate magazines (maybe include general discussion and news in the same forum- e.g. Dragon General/Article Discussion)
- Create a release schedule that is not an either/or for Dungeon and Dragon.
2. The Release Schedule
-Make it regular and reliable. Have it done a month in advance. All print magazines need to do this. The move to the web is not an excuse for procrastination.
-Release Dungeon adventures on Mondays (so DMs can read it before the weekend).
-Release special Dungeon adventures prior to the event (e.g. don't release the Halloween one on Halloween or two days before, as was done in 2007) We want to play it on the event (or prior to it). We don't want to read it then. Playing a Halloween adventure in early November sucks a lot of the potential enjoyment out of it.
-Release Dragon stuff on the Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule.
-Set up a pattern for Dragon releases. I like this one:
Monday-Fluff (because dms are reading the adventure and players need fun too)
Wednesday-Crunch (so players and dm's can discuss it)
Friday-Editorials, Cartoons, Confessions (Mazzanoble) (because people are gearing up for games and this is when we don't need new game related material as much)
-Automate releases. Release them at midnight on the beginning of the day they should be released. It should be someone's job to check that this worked upon arriving at work that day. then, if there is a SNAFU, the article can be put up early in the west coast work day at worst.
-Don't release everything as a huge chunk at the end of the month. A good magazine has one of two release schedules, each with pros and cons. One option is the "all at once" release...this leads to more of a "magazine feel" but less of an ability or interest in reading it all, as it is harder to read on screen. The other option is to spread it out across the month. This leads to less of a magazine feel, but readers don't get bogged down with too much content all at once. The problem is that you've elected to do option 3. historically and this month, which is to put out a huge chunk at the end. This results in none of the benefits of option one or two, but all of the pitfalls.
3. Table of Contents
- The main page of the magazine should have the ToC for that issue and links to other issues' ToCs. It should not include links to the other articles.
- The ToC should be the main means of navigating the magazine.
- If you follow my above advice regarding the releases, (and why wouldn't you, it's great advice! :D ) , have the ToC tell us which articles go live when (i.e. have this posted at the beginning of the month, like "editorial - 9/26"). This would both enhance anticipation and decrease dissapointment. Right now the ToC teases. However, teasing is only fun when the content is then delivered. Teasing and then taking it away (I'm lookin' at you barbarian) is not fun but perceived as mean.
4. Understand your customers
- People are frustrated and confused because of a lack of reliability at this point. Consider what a person does on a daily basis who enjoys/wants to read your product. I need to go to the site on MWF multiple times to read the article (Sure I could just wait until TThSat, but that's not the expectation). I go multiple times, and I might or might not get it, it may come out after I have gone to bed, and I have to wait until the next day to read it.
- When I finally get the article, it could be a huge dissapointment to me. It might be something I was really hoping to get. It might be something I hate reading (there are a few of those) or it might be something I consider filler (there are a number of those). Suppose I really, really want just one particular article. What if it was the barbarian one? I check every MWF a few times, and then on TTh for those days that I went to bed before the article comes out. Each time, I roll the dice and it's not the one I really wanted, but maybe next time, right? Then it gets pushed to the following month because "it's not ready yet". Reliability and clearly set expectations that are consistently met would resolve all of this. (By the way, applause on making the Barbarian article free next month.)
I stand corrected.
Feel free to flame at your leisure.
*puts on his fire-proof undies*
LOL as one of the "11:59 pm" people I have no desire to flame you AsmodeusLore
Your responses are levelheaded. And I dont want to at like EVERY article comes out at the last minute because thats not the case. Most do come out at a reasonable time in the middle of the day. Lastily I should admit that 11:59 PM was an exaggeration. My point simply is that they can come way late in the day after all reasonable expectations have passed.
after just reading the new digital insider, in which the question "what can we do better?" was asked.
Step one. Don't bring down your forums in the middle of the day.
My main concern is with the release schedule with the magazines. Seeing the TOC in advance is great - gives me an idea of what to look forward to in the month. The timing of content actually dropping could be improved.
Dungeon is August was the offender with this. The Feature material is the meat of the thing, the portion I look forward the most with either magazine. Last feature for July went up on 07/30 - first feature for the new issue went up 28 days later. Little bit of a gap there, and one that, had I been a paying customer, would have been even more annoyed with.
It's not even as if the columns padded out the month properly. 9 days from that last feature we had the month's editorial. which was followed by 2 pieces on the same day, almost 2 weeks later.
For free content it's annoying. For what will be transitioning to a paid service in the next 30 - 40 days, it's enough to make a person consider, well, not subscribing.
Here's the secret to giving delivery estimates... Lie!
Any true geek will remember the Star Trek:TNG episode where Scotty told LaForge the secret to looking like a miracle worker. Always lie when asked how much time you need.
Step 1: Figure out your best estimate for each unfinished project. Be as specific as you possibly can. Consider every possible downfall and drawback. Ask your developers for feedback.
Step 2: Whatever you came up with, Double it! Anytime my boss asks me for a time frame, I always do this, and even then, I usually only get it right about 2/3rd of the time. You guys don't have a lot of experience with this yet. You may even consider tripling your estimates.
Step 3: Take that padded timeframe, and post that on the page for each unfinished product. Make sure that you emphasize as strongly as you can that the dates are estimates. Every week, update these estimates until each product is released. With any luck, you'll deliver most things on or ahead of schedule.
I loved that episode and it has much truth in it.
Don't worry, Kyros. You and me can feel like doofuses (doofusi?) together!
I think the term might be "doofi" for a plural doofus. But yeah! Totally! Go doofi!
I like the table of contents as currently presented, and definitely think the "tease" is a net gain. This does, of course, set expectations and as others have mentioned it should be quickly announced if something won't make press that month.
I've never had a problem with the website navigation, but I do IT for a living, so maybe that helps me.
One thing I'd like to see more of is editing of the final compiled piece. It would really be cool to have the noticed typos, etc..., fixed before each month is finalized.
Thanks for the continued updates.
The table of contents is a great idea and you should continue to publish it at the beginning of the month.
I think the frustration is that it doesn't seem like new content is always posted on Mon-Wed-Fri, and sometimes there will be a gap and then the only new content to be posted is an editorial or a column... not too exciting when everyone is keyed up for the latest SOW installment or some coolness from Dragon, like the Barbarian playtest. I agree, arguing whether that has or hasn't been the case isn't productive, but that's the perception.
The months also tend to feel a little backloaded (a glut of articles get posted right at the end of the month).
I don't know if its feasible to print the publish date at the same time as the TOC; it would probably mean adjusting your timelines for receiving submissions - but then people would know exactly when articles are scheduled to appear. That should make everyone happy. I check the site frequently, I feel like one of those lab rats in the psych experiments that randomly gets rewarded with a food pellet by clicking the refresh button on my browser. "Shhhh, if we don't tell anyone *exactly* when the articles are coming out, they have to check our site multiple times every Mon, Wed, Friday. Muhahaha."
If you don't set any expectations higher than - 'On the last day of the month, all of the articles will be posted' - I don't know you can avoid the fans acting like button-clicking mice looking for their random reinforcement... "I see something new, something new, what is it, what is it, Oh No! It's just a column... I guess I'll be back in a few days looking for game content..."
I've been in the camp that the articles have been high quality and I've been happy with both Dungeon and Dragon... maybe the only question I'd have is whether it'd be possible for subscribers to vote on future article topics or submit ideas for articles (as opposed to submitting manuscripts).
I honestly think you need to pitch the whole interface and move on to something more streamlined.
Maybe the only question I'd have is whether it'd be possible for subscribers to vote on future article topics or submit ideas for articles (as opposed to submitting manuscripts).
Great idea in theory. Poor in practice.
"Baker" was a voted on concept that took approximately a year to be published on the web after it was finalized. This was a single monster.
"Cross city chase" was the "best adventure I never wrote". It was done being voted on months before fourth edition mags came out. It was supposed to come out in third edition rules (I hoped for it to do just that). It was submitted with sufficient time to come out for this according to a poster who claims to have written it. It didn't and hasn't yet come out for fourth edition either.
I think that steering clear of all "vote driven content" might be wise for the forseeable future.
For the most part I have no problem finding the updates but occasionally the links do not work or link to the wrong article. A minor issue for me and usually fixed within 24 hours.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
As others have said already, the MWF schedule is fine and personally I have no issues with the timing of articles. I am on GMT here so I understand that your office day is not always over when I go to bed so I check back in the morning. Despite initial reservations, I am happy enough with the digital format and getting new material three times a week is actually more enjoyable than getting a print magazine once a month.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
This is a great initiative. The Table of Contents was always the first page I turned to in the print magazines and this works the same way. Having to wait for the articles doesn't really bother me once I know they're on their way.
Please do jump on this week's forum and let me know whether you agree and what you think we should do to make things better.
As I said, despite initial reservations over the digital format and the quality of product that would be produced, I am thoroughly impressed. The minor technical issues noted above need to be sorted but otherwise things seem to be working well for me.
I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do.
This comment is the single most annoying thing that D&DI have published to date. I am thoroughly impressed with the content as I've already said and I have no major problems with delivery. I was intending to sign up for a 12 month subscription but I may just go month to month now. You doing what you say you're going to do is precisely what I am interested in and what I would have been paying for. If you are uninterested in feedback about service delivery then I am not sure whether I do want to start shelling out large amounts of my hard earned cash for a long term subscription to D&DI. Afraid you've ruined my otherwise good impression of the articles published so far with one ill-considered comment.
Navigation: personally I'm not a fan of your site's layout with links strewn everywhere, I think a cleaner, more open layout would be better.
Material: you've had some good stuff and I like the digital format, the problem seems to be in delivering on time (as has been noted before this) and I think people are going to find it hard to justify subscribing to contents that may or may not be delivered on time.
Here's what I think you should do: forget the MWF schedule (since you can't meet it) and drop the old-style magazine subscription price and instead let people purchase the individual articles they want. This is the iTunes model we're all familiar with by now. I personally have no interest in anything to do with FR and so I don't want to pay for it. Some of the other articles are useful to me, many are not. As a result, I won't be subscribing. However, if you charged say $0.99 per article and I could pick & choose the ones I want then you would get money from me. Even better, let people submit articles for publishing and you offer them for purchase and download just like iTunes & the iPhone App Store do and kick back a good chunk to the author but keeping enough to cover your costs and make a small profit.
This business model is pretty well proven and known by now, I don't think I need to explain any more. But I think WotC needs to make their site a place to come to for a variety of D&D material (not just theirs) and let people buy just what they want knowing that satisfied customers will buy even more and now you can capture some income from those who won't pay for a subscription.
Are the updates too hard to find? Is our schedule too difficult to follow? Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
I think the biggest problem is the WotC site's confusing navigation. I don't like having to click a bunch of times to find what (if any) new content has been released every M/W/F, and I don't think anyone else does either.
I've got this page bookmarked – http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4arch/main, and I think it is the most useful page on the entire website. In an ideal world, the www.dndinsider.com domain would be a discrete site with IA designed to promote and provide quick and easy access to (1) Dragon and Dungeon content and (2) the D&DI applications being developed.
Other than that, there is an expectations problem. If you say you're going to post new content every M/W/F, people expect it M/W/F. But you're on the west coast, so that might mean publishing pretty late on those days. Maybe if you just stated new content will be available Tu/Th/Sa mornings, and if it's up late the night/day before all the better.
The TOC is nice but confusing. I just looked at the Dragon #367 TOC and it offers no reason why there is a link to the "Ecology of the Genasi" article but not the "Smart Swords" article. The blurb for the swords article says "Only in Dragon!" Well, evidently not cause here I am at Dragon and there's no link to the article, no explanation why and no note when it will be available.
Give each section (Dragon, Dungeon, Minis, etc) it's own distinct visual style, so that I can tell at a glance what kind of content I'm getting.
Don't boast about a MWF update schedule unless you can hold your writers to it. BTW, if you're gonna have a declared update schedule, we expect meaty updates; an "Ask Wizards" doesn't count.
Something else to consider: With respect the magazines, you're not working with print media anymore (it's the DIGITAL Insider, after all), so why drag in all the limitations of a physical, printed publication? Why publish all your article as pdfs? If you kept them online they'd be searchable via Google or your site search, you could add all kinds of multimedia (sound effects, video/aniimation) and they'd be available to subscribers from any PC. On the net, the distinction between issue 366 and 367 doesn't matter. What matters is that I can find the article I'm looking for. Word/page count doesn't matter because you're not paying for paper to print it on. You're not limited on the size and numbers of your illustrations. Deadlines don't matter. In a printed magazine, article x had to be done by y because it went to print on date z; with a digital distribution, you publish anything, of any length or content whenever you want.
In the end, what matters to us, the consumer and (eventually) paying customer is that we feel we're getting quality content (money's worth), we're alerted somehow when that content is made available, and we can find it again if we loose something or miss some updates.
As for your actual questions I would first like to say that your opening sentence for this paragraph
"I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do."
seemed designed to do nothing but antagonize and I expect is the reason for so much vitriol on the boards right now.
I don't think the that the articles are to hard to find, anyone with a little practice navigating a website can find them no problem.
I think the release schedule isn't to hard for your audience to follow, but it does seem that your writers/editors are having trouble with it. I am a technical writer by trade and can understand the pressures of working under a deadline but still don't think that this is an excuse for the sorry state of the updates. I agree with the previous posters that the articles really need to be in the can and ready to post at least a month in advance so that you can hit your schedule everytime. All print magazines need to have the articels finished with a decent lead time so why is it that a digital magazine is being treated like it doesn't require a lead?
The table of contents is a great thing, it goes a long way towards making me want to read the articles but, as with the barbarian, when it changes something needs to be posted as to why. How much effort would it have taken to have someone write a thread or a short article for the website letting us know why it had been moved?
I agree with you that the content has been great, when it comes out. I disagree with a number of the previous posters about needing every article to be game content, frankly Confessions and Ampersand are two of my favourite articles I love the insiders perspective on gaming and WOTC. I would be happy to get more articles in this vein.
In closing, I have found the content of the magazines to be great for a free service, I think if you want to start charging for it a greater level of consistency needs to be evident. You have had 3 months of issues to try and win us over and I think that having performed so poorly this month has likely cost you a lot of potential subscribers.
. . . drop the old-style magazine subscription price and instead let people purchase the individual articles they want.
That's an interesting idea, but I wonder if if would be a little harder to implement for a magazine than for a music store. How much is the Mindless Monstrosities article worth (5 page article, essentially 4 new pages of monsters; high crunch) compared to the "Characters of War" article (10 pages of PC backgrounds, high fluff) compared to "The Shadow Rift of Umbraforge" (a 50 page adventure, but as part 3 of a series, is only it's most useful when you have the other pieces) compared to the latest Ampersand?
Do we do one price point per article, regardless of content or length? Or does length, crunch vs fluff, preview/playtest factor into it?
I do love the App Store style submission idea. Could be a great way find some cool ideas for gaming, for amateur (and professional) writers to make a little scratch doing what they love. And Wizards gets a cut for their trouble.
Are the updates too hard to find? Yes and no. The website layout is extremely busy. Its designed to be pretty, not for utility or ease of use.
- Navigation to different places in the site is three seperate panes (to the left, top, and right of the main articles in the center). That's confusing for users--or at least distracting.
- There are 11 main categories to try and navigate through on the left side, it might be nice to consolidate those a little.
- There are 2-10 subcategories under each main category.
- Consider making website content user-configurable (like yahoo or google).
Is our schedule too difficult to follow? Yes. I know a minis article comes out on thursdays (and I usually don't care..would be nice to be able to not even see that content as I don't play minis). Other than thursdays it seems uncertain as to what types of articles appear on what days.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? Where is this on the website? Never noticed it with all of the other clutter.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates? I did know about updates, per repeated posts from WotC employees saying so. Did not know about table of contents. Yes, the navigation is too cluttered.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
To be clear, the article quality is mid to high for web-based content. The website experience is somewhere around mid-quality overall. The navigation of the site (including numerous broken links in the areas like RPGA) is low-quality.
You sound like a complete a-hole here, so I am going to also. Stop being an a-hole when you are talking to your customers. Here's a hint - people don't like to send their hard-earned money to a bunch of a-holes.
Are the updates too hard to find?
I don't know about everyone else, but I just go to the Archives part of the website every few days and read the articles since the last time I visited. Is there a better way? I have never found it.
I'm not an internet noob, but I am a casual WotC website viewer (once per week, on average), and I never felt the need to spend the time to figure out the appropriate way to search for information on your website. If it's not blatantly obvious (which it is NOT), then the website is poorly designed. Redesign it. Everything should be obvious.
Oh, and get rid of the automatic Flash BS that assaults me when I load the website. I never want to see that.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
I'll be honest, I never knew there was a schedule. Before this article, I had never heard that. I don't go on the Forums (until now), don't do podcasts (don't want to see you hairy weirdos), and don't feel like digging for information.
So yes, the schedule was too difficult to follow. Even as a casual visitor, I often was surprised by the lack of regular content.
As others have stated, I do not consider editorials, advertisements, previews etc., as content. I do consider articles that do not have game focus, such as Confessions, as articles, as the magazine may not be designed to purely release game mechanics, and these articles may have benefits.
However, I cannot stand Confessions or the author who writes it. She degrades women and sends them back to the '50s in a way that she is not even aware of (such as strongly reinforcing gender stereotypes). Please stop having those articles.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents...?
Where is the ToC? I have never seen it. Ever. If I couldn't find it, it's not obvious enough. Please someone point me to it.
I think it's a great idea, though. Keep it.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
I already answered this, but yes. Too confusing. Too many buttons and images and separate frames with stuff in them. The only thing that is easy to find are the product releases and the Ask Wizards. Everything else is rubbish.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high...
I think everyone agrees. The content quality is very high. No one has a problem with that. It's everything else.
In closing, I was initially really, super excited about DDi. But I haven't been to any conventions and haven't actually seen any of the things I was excited about (character builder and game table). I certainly am not going to start paying for something when the things I want aren't around, especially with all of the concerns around.
I'll repeat again, please try and be nice to your customers. Their concerns are valid, even if you think you are doing a great job. We only see the image you present, not behind the scenes, and sometimes it's disappointing (both in communication and in actual product). If you **** off your customers, they will leave you, regardless of how great you think you are. That is simply
business.
WotC is a professional company owned by a mega-corporation that acts like a college dorm. The leash needs to be tightened, such as with strict, advanced publication deadlines for articles, professional editing, and a customer relations person who speaks to the customers.
I got most from this article a reminder of the movie Office Space. You are an engineer, and you are not good at talking to customers. You need Bob to take the customers demands, and then give them to the engineers. He actually did do something! And then you need to actually make the engineers do something, too.
Otherwise, the D&D home page design is acceptable, given that it is the main page for Dragon, Dungeon, D&D Insider and several other things.
Other than that, I simply have the usual anticipatory jitters while waiting for the debut of the Character Builder. And, just so that I understand what is about to transpire, the Character Builder application will be based wholly upon the Wizards servers, the only aspect that will be based upon the client (my PC) will be how my character is stored. The Character Builder will be periodically updated as new source books roll off the printing press: Forgotten Realms' Players Guide, Martial Power, Player's Handbook 2, Arcane Power, Divine Power, Player's Handbook 3 and so on and so on.
I'd like you to try to get the more substantial articles out as early as possible, so we the readers have time to read them, and comment on them. This will give you a better chance of correcting typos and errors, which is going to occur in every book or magazine unless one has an army of editors reading though everything, and that would not be economically feasible.
The article coming out a day or two before the actual magazine arrives will probably not have had time enough for either us or you to find most of the errors, and will likely contain errors until they may be corrected in an FAQ if the error is grave enough.
So put out the substantial articles early in the month, and leave the editorials to the end of the month, since we'll be starting to look forward to next months articles at that point.
By the way, I think it was better to delay the Barbarian till next month instead of rushing to get it out this month with a lot of errors.
Here we are on the 25th of the month, only two more release days to go and still 7 articles left to release?
(or at least there are still 7 articles that do not have a link for the title in the table of contents)
Thanks For Listening
Jose
Blown timelines, smoke and mirrors comments from developers, and a pay before you play prospect which looks increasingly unrealistic to me or anyone in my group.
I will stay with 3.5, PCGen and CMP datasets for now---clunky as they are.
I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do. If a lot of you are either confused or frustrated, then there is clearly something we could be doing better.
I'm not super interested in paying for DDI if you're not super interested in sticking to your schedule. The only time people are confused or frustrated is when content is promised but not there. Otherwise, it's easy to find things when they're actually posted.
By the way, I think it was better to delay the Barbarian till next month instead of rushing to get it out this month with a lot of errors.
I agree. Which is why they should have either not put it into the table of contents in the first place or they should have worked hard to get it done this month.
Seriously? It's not a magazine...it's a collection of articles that they MIGHT get done if and when they get around to it...usually the last week of the month.
This isn't college. You don't get extensions if you have a rough night partying.
You give refunds if you don't deliver content. (once we, er, some people who aren't me, start paying...because I won't pay for THIS, not till it is better)
A fansite or two already has indexed this information in a searchable database on their own, so... yeah.
(Hire people)
1. I do not stay logged in, I have to do it every time.
2. Where is my account page? How can I change my email address? there is nothing on the insider site at all. Do you do it via gleemax or the DnD forums or what. The whole account set up is a mess.
The biggest issue I have with the way Wizards are treating Dungeon/Dragon is that they don't seem to know how to treat it. They started off treating it as informational updates, but they keep talking about it as if it was still a full publication.
Full publications have set deadline dates for writers and editors, and set publication dates for readers. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the same of any publication - web based or otherwise. If you want to keep releasing random blurbs piecemeal for free, by all means keep to a schedule that works for you. If, however, you want me to pay a subscription fee I'm going to want to know up front when I can expect to read my articles.
Finding the articles is not the problem, accessing the articles is not the problem, and the quality of the articles is not the problem. Let me restate that for emphasis: The quality of the individual articles is not the problem. My problem with your idea of a web-based publication is your notion of publishing whatever random pieces of the publication are ready at any given moment.
If you don't know what's ready to be released to the public from one week to the next, your writing deadlines are too close to the publicaton deadlines.
There's a critical shift in thinking between being a publisher of "one-off" books and a publisher of monthly subscriptions. As much as I enjoy and appreciate the amount and quality of what's been released so far, I still question the level of commitment and the level of thought that's being put into the organization and scheduling of the Dungeon and Dragon magazines.
To put it another way, I only need to believe in the content of a Wizards sourcebook to justify spending $X on it. In order to justify spending $Y per month I need to not only believe in the content, but the quality and consisteny of future content over the course of my subscription. And that requires a much higher level of trust in the publisher - trust that, in my case, needs to be (and remains to be) earned.
I have to agree with everyone that's mentioned you guys not keeping to the M,W,F deadlines, and while I think it needs to be addressed, I think it's got a relatively easy solution.
My biggest complaint, however, is the website. It's very confusing and not user-friendly at all. I've sent a couple friends to the website who were less computer savvy, and they couldn't find things I'd told them was on the website. After I'd shown them where to find things, they could then navigate it. Here are some critiques I've got:
Things are too incredibly hard to find (even for the second time).
Some reasons?
The website has too many menus and sub-menus.
It all starts once you get into the D&D section. On the left I have the large button menus. Every button menu, once clicked (such as "Home") has its own menu list to choose from underneath the button ("Features", "Galleries", "Podcast", etc), but the text is very small. Also, in the main part of the page, you find MORE menus which you can select (e.g. "WiiR", "Features" "Dunegon", etc) which all have their own set of content.
A lot of things on the website are unclear if you aren't already in the know.
For instance, the "Settings" button. Do you have any idea how long I thought it was something like settings for the Wizards website? Only until my curiousity got the better of me did I realize that it was "Campaign Settings". Also, it doesn't really say anywhere that "Dunegon" is mostly meant for DMs and "Dragon" is mostly meant for players. For a long time, I had no idea what the difference between the two magazines were.
Related information is scattered on the website and isn't always grouped together.
This stems partially from the "too many menus" issue. For my upcoming LFR game, I sent a player to the D&D website to pick his LFR starting region. I told him once he was there to click the RPGA button and access the "Living Forgotten Realms Adventures" section which includes the 12 starting regions for LFR characters. Well, he did...but he clicked the "wrong" RPGA button (the one in the center of the screen instead of the one on the left). After clicking around in frustration, he gave up. Once I showed him how to find it (this time using the one on the left), it was no problem.
Individual page load time for the website is too long
Part of this complaint complaints stems from the fact that broadband is unavailable in any form at my residence. Individual pages take FOREVER to load! Even when I'm able to use broadband (at work, etc), the pages on wizards.com take much longer to load than many other sites.
With that out of the way, I'd like to say that I've really loved the website and its updates (even the late ones). I've previously never read, much less subscribed to, Dungeon or Dragon magazines in my 5-6 years of D&D gaming, but the temporarily free content has definitely inspired me to subscribe to D&D Insider once you guys start charging for it.
Keep up the good work, Guys - I look forward to seeing what's around the corner. ;)
personally, no. not at all. I use the RSS fFeed, so all my aggregate updates fFor all of the D&D stuff is collected, moments after it is posted online, in one handy place. I LOVE RSS!!
However, since you ask, I especially use this because honestly, yes, the fFront page is very difficult to use.
fFor example. The table of contents right now lists:
"367: Epic Faerun NEW 09/22/2008
367: Mindless Monstrosities 09/12/2008
367: Ecology of the Genasi 09/09/2008
367: Sideshow 09/03/2008"
Well, ok, that's cool. If you happen to know what those are. While some of those are fFairly obvious, many articles every month have somewhat obscure titles. If i read a great article the value of humor in gaming, and i want to re-read it, then I need to be able to come up with the title somewhere in my brain. (That would be the 'sideshow' article. You'd never know it fFrom the title. see what i mean?)
I guess I'm saying, getting the newest articles is pretty convenient. Totally. But if I want to dig up an old article somewhere, it's a lot harder to do. Presently, I use the search fFeature inside my RSS reader to locate articles, but that's not 100% perfect either.
On a related topic: I really do hope my RSS reader will still work once the site is no longer totally fFree. Please please say it will!
Things are too incredibly hard to find (even for the second time). The website has too many menus and sub-menus.
Yes! thank you fFor saying exactly what I fFeel to be the case.
fFollowing up on my previous post: I realized I pretty much said that, essentially, the website is so difficult to navigate that i essentially don't use it. I use another piece of software to navigate the site, until I locate the article i want to read THEN i go to wizards.com to actually read it. That's a bad way to be. I'd really much rather have navigation be simpler on the site natively.
Yes. Clearer menus would be a world of good.
1) Magazine Content -
Dragon - Pretty happy with at the moment, however I would prefer Setting content be spread over 3 issues and adding more generic content, so that those of us who don't play the setting aren't bombarded with an issue or two with a majority of setting articles.
Dungeon - I would like to see more short "drop in" articles on traps, skill challenges, environmental hazards and the like.
Overall - Please do not consider editorials as content. Release editorials either on in-between days or in opposition to the other magazine getting content (such as a Dragon Editorial and a Dungeon Content release) on the same day.
2) Character Builder-
I really think you should reconsider how you are handling this. I personally think you should not charge for any DDi content until you have the visualizer up in a basic form (even levels 1-3) to let people test it for a week or two. Let them see the goods and how great it is and then say "now you know what you are paying for."
Frankly, the way this has all been handled with the huge underestimation of delivery date, the "all-or-nothing" and then "something-for-magazine" subscription flip-flop and the delays in general do not engender trust or excitement for your online content. You need to earn it back by letting people test drive the product. You will get a better end result with this tactic.
3) Character Visualizer/Digital Tabletop
These feel like a dim promise at this point. I really don't see this happening any time soon, so it is merely a figment to me. 2009? probably.
What really disturbs me is this concept of "digital miniatures." I am aware you are using a business model borrowed from M:TG, but I honestly feel that digital collectibles is as near a scam as anything I have encountered. The costs of creating a digital miniature are so insignificant, and the player owns nothing. An "expansion pack" type idea where you get a series of tools with a deliverable CD or something - maybe.
Anyhoo, that's it.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver ... we never promised a specific time of day for the updates nor did we ever promise feature articles every MWF. However, debating the semantics of what we said and how it was perceived isn't actually productive. I was trying to avoid being defensive and instead cut straight to the actually interesting part of the dialog: what *should* we be doing? The fact that folks are disappointed and/or frustrated (another point that i was attempting to concede but may not have communicated as effectively as I intended) means we're wrong. Ok, now how do we get better?
Anyway, clearly my intended tone did not come across and I apologize to anyone I offended. What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
Thanks,
Randy
http://thecoremechanic.blogspot.com/2008/09/randy-buehler-please-read-this.html
Anyway, my apologies too to Randy ... my response in no way was meant to slander or disparage the hard work you are doing (please see the comments section of the post).
dragon 366
8/1
8/4
8/6
8/8 *
8/11
8/15
8/18
8/20 *
8/22
8/25
8/26
8/28 *
8/28
8/29
9/2 *
dungeon 157
8/8
8/13
8/20 *
8/20 *
8/27
8/28
* marks the issues where no new dnd-"use in your game" content is within.
so we have: 7 content pieces for first half.
8 content pieces for second half. this is pretty ok.
dragon 367
9/5 *
9/9
9/10 *
9/12
9/22
9/24
dungeon 158
9/11 *
9/17 *
9/19
so: 2 content pieces before the half of the month. 3 in the second half and 5 still missing by 9/25.
this is not promising, not promising at all...
what you should do better, is get all the articles up front, and deliver them evenly distributed upfront. this might not be possible with external stuff, but scales of war and everything written by inhouse people, should be possible to get done before the month even starts.
about relese schedules and feature contents: well, this is what the people really look for - while i love shelleys column, it gives me nothing for my game, it's more like a weblog really - and there are many out there that are just as funny as dragon or dungeon editorials or ampersands.
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory. The initial draft ended with "because" and then the next sentence was supposed to be the point: I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver ... we never promised a specific time of day for the updates nor did we ever promise feature articles every MWF. However, debating the semantics of what we said and how it was perceived isn't actually productive. I was trying to avoid being defensive and instead cut straight to the actually interesting part of the dialog: what *should* we be doing? The fact that folks are disappointed and/or frustrated (another point that i was attempting to concede but may not have communicated as effectively as I intended) means we're wrong. Ok, now how do we get better?
Anyway, clearly my intended tone did not come across and I apologize to anyone I offended. What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
Thanks,
Randy
W00t! Go Randy! You Rule!
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory. The initial draft ended with "because" and then the next sentence was supposed to be the point: I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
Yes text only makes it a little hard to appear human or even involved.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver ... we never promised a specific time of day for the updates nor did we ever promise feature articles every MWF. However, debating the semantics of what we said and how it was perceived isn't actually productive. I was trying to avoid being defensive and instead cut straight to the actually interesting part of the dialog: what *should* we be doing? The fact that folks are disappointed and/or frustrated (another point that i was attempting to concede but may not have communicated as effectively as I intended) means we're wrong. Ok, now how do we get better?
"belief is error", as have been demonstrated the M/W/F time plan has not been met. A Wednesday article posted on Thursday with the Wednesday date does not make it posted on Wednesday. Oh as far as fact checking goes indeed someone from WotC did state it was planed goals, with a chance of missing planned goals rarely.
What can you do better is communicate with the community and those out there in print world. You should have articles for the ezines stacked up for next one at least 2 weeks before release of ToC and/or start of the next month. You should explain why an article is pulled from the ToC on the ToC why an article was pulled, you should not wait for something like a week to change the ToC and another week after to explain why ToC was changed (not sure both were 7 days gaps, but I saw a lot of discussion about the barbarian and the then change of ToC, then finally the explanation of why change was made, it was much longer then 24 hour period, that could be pushed out with web content format.).
One way to do it batter would be to indicate as a guideline you consider the Vids, editorials as meeting the M/W/F plan. I figured that out but from time to time try to explain this to others.
Oh you could get better by fixing your website as well, however the most important thing in my view is to appear to really care about comments posted. We had that short time with Ken Troop that was willing to answer a few questions then disappeared, compared to WotC_DM that has been active and answering what questions he can about once a week if not more. WotC_DM has a small fan club because more users knows he answers what he can. The few that remember that Ken Troop ever posted at all likely have a less kind view of him. I do understand you can not spend all your time on the forums, no one can, even the CM has to walk away from the computer from time to time. It though would help to appear more involved with gamer issues then product issues.
Anyway, clearly my intended tone did not come across and I apologize to anyone I offended. What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
Thanks,
Randy
Not sure that is the biggest issue, though the issue of charging for that segment clearly makes it a big concern about selling it.
The website is a disaster and has been for years.
The other DDI aplications kicked down the road a big issue.
Edit a big issue.
Printing a big issue.
Unanswered questions a very big issue.
As this is all sort of related I think, we are still waiting on the Compendium to be updated to include a few things things... like the Monster Manual, Adventurer's Vault, Player's Guide to Faerun, Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, the recent adventures...
A fansite or two already has indexed this information in a searchable database on their own, so... yeah.
(Hire people)
Yeah but fansites are free whereas D&DI will charge us for.....
DOH!
One thing I havent seen mentioned is in perceptions.
If you have an article come up early in the day like the Gnolls one was it shows it was prepared and completed ahead of time. Everything is going fine. There is more of a confidence level with the article.
When an article comes out in the late hours of the night I get the image of an author sitting alone at his desk after hours frantically typing something up to meet the deadline. Regardless of its quality it does bring up the question of why wasnt this deadline reasonably met. This goes back to my point in my first post that yes technically you are meeting the commitment of M-W-F but not really the spirit or giving the impression that everything is going well.
Also keep in mind that its all the little things that add up.
Gleemax is cancelled, D&DI is delayed, this whole M-W-F topic, and next month we are being charged for the magazine content.
Our frustration and anger also comes from concern for the game we enjoy playing and want to see thrive successfully. Not barely making deadline.
Oh you could get better by fixing your website as well, however the most important thing in my view is to appear to really care about comments posted. We had that short time with Ken Troop that was willing to answer a few questions then disappeared, compared to WotC_DM that has been active and answering what questions he can about once a week if not more. WotC_DM has a small fan club because more users knows he answers what he can. The few that remember that Ken Troop ever posted at all likely have a less kind view of him. I do understand you can not spend all your time on the forums, no one can, even the CM has to walk away from the computer from time to time. It though would help to appear more involved with gamer issues then product issues.
I'd like to touch on this comment as I think its important. Once again we are to expectations (which not only myself but several other posters have brought up).
Ken Troop said he would reply and communicate with us. That was shortly lived. I am sure Ken is a busy man and has plenty of things to do so I dont fault him for not posting. But I do fault him for saying he would post and then doing so. There werent promises made but does a person really have to say "I promise" when they say they will do something before people expect it to happen?
I agree with the WOTC_DM fanclub. We get little updates of X happened or what is really going on. Thats great! We dont need a power point presentaton but just some communication.
As this is all sort of related I think, we are still waiting on the Compendium to be updated to include a few things things... like the Monster Manual, Adventurer's Vault, Player's Guide to Faerun, Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, the recent adventures...
A fansite or two already has indexed this information in a searchable database on their own, so... yeah.
(Hire people)
They are trying:
http://hasbro.recruitmax.com/MAIN/careerportal/Job_List.cfm?szSearchType=Advanced&szSort=UpdateDate&szCachedSearch=1&szDirection=ASC&szCategory=21
Relevant Positions Available
Associate Visual Designer
Usability Researcher
Database Developer
Technical Analyst
Sr. Visual Designer
Web Developer - .NET
Sr. Technical Producer
Web UI Designer
Architect - Web Applications
Architect - Business Applications
The last two are rather intriguing. The free preview may be lasting just a bit longer than just the beginning of October.
Thanks
I'm not super interested in arguing about whether we're actually doing what we said we're going to do. If a lot of you are either confused or frustrated, then there is clearly something we could be doing better. Are the updates too hard to find? Is our schedule too difficult to follow? Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates? From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
Holy wow batman, could you be more condescending? And don't tell me about "internet", many of us are adults here, you can read this a mile away. No one, has an issue with your navigation, unless by navigation you mean the path Wizards is taking.
I plan to speak with my wallet, its the only thing you seem to listen to.
And I agree, the quality of the crunch articles (gnolls as an example) and the adventures is top notch, but sadly, its no longer a magazine. And I've ridden this "upcoming tool" wave before.
rather than linking it, I'll quote it. This is my solution.
They need to pull Dungeon and Dragon out of the DDI, and put a price tag on each. Make the DDI the tools only, and be done with it. Create a Wizards of the Coast account area where we can manage our forum account, our DDI account and our magazines subscriptions and online purchases.
They need to give us the option to "subscribe" to a digital copy of one, or both, of the magazines, to be delivered in full on a set date. They need to notify us, and then allow us to log in on said date and download our own copy (watermarked) of a completed magazine, and adventures as they move forward.
If they want to allow subscribers access to view articles as they get published, great, but they need to set, and meet, a publication date for the complete magazine...and honestly, the end of the month is not the right date.
On top of this, they need to continue to release some free articles, adventures and aids like they use to, errata, and commonwealth items to keep the populace happy and not feeling alienated. Taking everything away unless we subscribe just motivates us to go, acquire, our find tools elsewhere.
Drop the bonus tools from any subscription, those fall into the free commonwealth area. Please don't insult us by doing otherwise.
Any chance a PDF magazine subscription only will come about? I don't have a lot of chance to play any more but I like to read up on and keep informed of the D&D direction.
Thanks
That is one of the features asked for months ago that was not answered with a yes. At the time plan was one price fit all. Recent requests for revisit to this issue has not been answered.
The best answer in the past was ability to purchase individual issues at about 3.00 USD each as a plan.
Holy wow batman, could you be more condescending? And don't tell me about "internet", many of us are adults here, you can read this a mile away. No one, has an issue with your navigation, unless by navigation you mean the path Wizards is taking.
I plan to speak with my wallet, its the only thing you seem to listen to.
And I agree, the quality of the crunch articles (gnolls as an example) and the adventures is top notch, but sadly, its no longer a magazine. And I've ridden this "upcoming tool" wave before.
He clarified a few posts above you.
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory. The initial draft ended with "because" and then the next sentence was supposed to be the point: I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver ... we never promised a specific time of day for the updates nor did we ever promise feature articles every MWF. However, debating the semantics of what we said and how it was perceived isn't actually productive. I was trying to avoid being defensive and instead cut straight to the actually interesting part of the dialog: what *should* we be doing? The fact that folks are disappointed and/or frustrated (another point that i was attempting to concede but may not have communicated as effectively as I intended) means we're wrong. Ok, now how do we get better?
Anyway, clearly my intended tone did not come across and I apologize to anyone I offended. What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
Thanks,
Randy
He clarified a few posts above you.
Ya, thus my reference to the "internet" comment, I saw his clarification. I've done it before, you've done it before and Randy did it here. We know what were saying when we do it, and the tone. Any person that reads it knows our tone, but after we calm down and relax, we really wish we'd have maybe worded it different.
Trust me, I'm not claiming I'm angelic, but if you plan to be a professional representation of the company, this stuff shouldn't happen. I learned a long time to ago to write my response and sit on it for a few hours, then re-write it.
Unless of course, I want my response to sound the way it really did.
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory. The initial draft ended with "because" and then the next sentence was supposed to be the point: I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver ... we never promised a specific time of day for the updates nor did we ever promise feature articles every MWF. However, debating the semantics of what we said and how it was perceived isn't actually productive. I was trying to avoid being defensive and instead cut straight to the actually interesting part of the dialog: what *should* we be doing? The fact that folks are disappointed and/or frustrated (another point that i was attempting to concede but may not have communicated as effectively as I intended) means we're wrong. Ok, now how do we get better?
Anyway, clearly my intended tone did not come across and I apologize to anyone I offended. What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
Thanks,
Randy
Wow, I really didn't expect to hear from you again until #9. I'm glad you popped by to clarify what you meant.
I think your article quality is high as well but the delivery and expectation management is where you are stumbling. I don't have much to add that the previous posters haven't. I agree with most of the opinions that came before my post except that pay by article suggestion.
I would maybe add previews of a half or full page of each article before needing to purchase. You have not sold me yet, but I'd like to keep an eye on your progress once you move to the paid model. It seems odd to me but I haven’t sent any money in WotC direction since the print version of Dragon was shut down.
Ya, thus my reference to the "internet" comment, I saw his clarification. I've done it before, you've done it before and Randy did it here. We know what were saying when we do it, and the tone. Any person that reads it knows our tone, but after we calm down and relax, we really wish we'd have maybe worded it different.
Trust me, I'm not claiming I'm angelic, but if you plan to be a professional representation of the company, this stuff shouldn't happen. I learned a long time to ago to write my response and sit on it for a few hours, then re-write it.
Unless of course, I want my response to sound the way it really did.
Oh sorry, I have to admit I just read the first half sentence or so and then went into immediate replay mode.:embarrass
Anyways, I personally didn't find it condescending when I first read the article. I actually ended up properly assuming his reasoning. Now this can mean one of three things, either I wasn't paying attention, you take from the article exactly what you bring with you, or I'm developing the psychich power to understand what people are thinking when they say something on the internet.....you were thinking of either pie or moldy socks when you made this post!
As this is all sort of related I think, we are still waiting on the Compendium to be updated to include a few things things... like the Monster Manual, Adventurer's Vault, Player's Guide to Faerun, Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, the recent adventures...
A fansite or two already has indexed this information in a searchable database on their own, so... yeah.
(Hire people)
I have no comment on the above quote.
But they might...
Then, when the final version comes out, they should be moved to an archive somewhere (or completely removed) so they don't cause confusion.
That is one of the features asked for months ago that was not answered with a yes. At the time plan was one price fit all. Recent requests for revisit to this issue has not been answered.
???
Sure they have. Instead of the $10/month plan, you can get a basically-magazine-only subscription for $5/month. That's a little more than $3 — but then, it's cheaper than $6 for both Dungeon and Dragon.
Seriously, though, attacking anyone will not be helping anything get done any faster. I like the responses here that are (at least partially) constructive, but hey, look! People were right! A High-Level WotC Employee/Rep admitted "We Were WRONG," and "We didn't keep the update schedule as well as we should have, I'm SORRY," and, just like most of us predicted, people STILL want to attack him! Isn't life grand? How many Threads wanted this exact thing, screaming their fool heads off for an apology? Sheesh...
I assumed you didn't mean any offense, people usually don't when writing things, so it's best to try to read exactly the words and not infer a "tone of voice" if you think there is aggression.
Anyway, FWIW, "super" is not a good adjective to use in any sense not relating to a superhero, in 99% of all written work. It is frequently used as sarcasm and sets off bells. "Not interested" similarly has frequent connotations. Rewording in a more technical and/or 'positive' manner can sometimes be safer, such as "I would like to focus on X first" rather than what you would not like to focus on.
You might want to snag an intern to read something over if you have to write it up on short notice.
Er, anyway. Give WotC_DM a $5 raise.
Scheduled Releases:
The MWF schedule doesn't bother me one way or the other. Much of the time I'm still catching up on the latest Dungeon or Dragon magazine or actually PLAYING the game... yes, I believe in playing it so you can know about it instead of just harping.
Though I log in 3-5 times a week looking for updates as I'm looking for tools I have learned that my personal preference is to wait on the finished product that contains the full spectrum magazine of both Dungeon and Dragon. I save them to my hard drive and read the entire thing (yeah, so I skim some... but only because I'm trying to read it on a computer screen).
I wish there was a way to tell which people owned which products (without them being able to lie about it), so that we could tell who actually has good input and those that just want to argue or don't like how the game has progressed.
Having played a lot of games that involve multiple people both on the internet and in person I will say that I prefer games where the schedule does not override content. Please, please let Content be King. When you have good content it will sell itself. When you listen to beggars who are not buying the product and who probably only have a ripped copy of a PDF from Pirate Bay you are missing the market. I'm not saying that everyone on the forum is that way, but there are probably plenty.
I'll take a 6 month delay on any of the other tools, even if I have to pay for the entire 6 months and only get the Dungeon and Dragon magazines to get a quality roll out of all of the rest of the tools. I cannot wait for all of the electronic tools and I hope much of the online focus is on this portion.
Having played several generations of Tiny Adventrues, I like it as a diversion, but this in no way should have programmers diverted to it from the electronic media. I'm glad we are growing an audience, but you want to have good material to draw people to. Sometimes the "Coming Soon" has gotten annoying, because it has been saying that for ... a long long time now. But the books have been delivering the goods. My one wish is that the electronic side of the house will do the same.
As for playtesting, I think it is a fantastic idea. I like seeing behind the making of some of the characters. I may not play certain ones, but I like seeing what different ones can do. Also important to me are the concept tunings where a concept is developed out through the life of the character (I still think an Eladrin fits the teleporter character better, but a Tiefling choice opened my eyes to some possibilities in other areas).
Sorry if I have been Angsty myself, but what I like to see is meaningful feedback, so maybe when the developers see quality comments they will continue to put out quality products.
And I'm not sure why I'm rambling on, because I'm only halfway through my new copy of the Adventurer's Vault... so kill me now because I have my Cloak of the Phoenix and I'll be back!
Regarding content updates and schedules. I don't like having to remember when to check my favorite sites for updates. Like this webcomic is updated Mondays, that blog has new content on Thursdays, and Tuesday is when this podcast comes out. Nope, I like RSS, aggregate it all into one giant feed, and just check that daily to see what's new, and where. That's mainly how I've kept track of your releases, so I'm not sure what schedule you're actually on vs. what you're aiming for. I do feel slightly disappointed when the "completed" magazines, when put together as a monolithic PDF, aren't announced.
Is the site poorly organized? From one perspective, no, it's fine; if I know I want to look back at Dragon #365, it's easy enough to get there.
From a different perspective, though, yes, it's horrible. Sticking with the whole "magazine" interface metaphor imho is very confusing. Individually, I don't care about "updates". If I'm subscribing to a service, I want all the content merged and as easily accessible as anything else on the web. Sure, it's great that I'm reading about gnolls as the information comes out, but it's not as useful when I first see it as when I'd like to access it again to use it.
For example, I know there was something that recently came out about gnolls. It was a great article that went in-depth with story and background information, along with some suggested PC gnoll feats and options at the end. I don't remember what it was called, or which "magazine" it was in. So I set about trying to find it.
The easy thing to do would be to look at the ToC of the latest issues, but that will change every month, and I'd like a reliable method of finding it. So, I turned to the D&D Compendium. Well, tried to. It took me a while to find out where that was, from the main D&D page. I forgot that it's under the moniker "D&D Insider". So, I found it, thinking I'll just search for "gnoll", and everything relevant about gnolls will pop right up, and I'll just see what's there first, and maybe narrow down my search later.
Except there were 0 results for "gnoll". Zero. None. Not any of the new content I was looking for (which could be excused if it hadn't yet been merged in). No gnoll stats as PC races. Not even gnoll as a monster. Is the Compendium still in beta? I'd expect, at the bare minimum, a search for "gnoll" to come up with one entry that says see page XX of the Monster Manual.
I struck out there, but hey, there's always that search box up at the top of the page. Maybe if I look there, I'll find something that leads to something that leads to what I want. So I used that top searchbox to look for "gnoll feat". All that came up was Third Edition stuff, plus one hit for Magic: The Gathering. Not useful to me.
That's not the only way in which your digital offerings disappoint. The format of the "magazines" is frustrating, too. Rather than dynamic web pages, you're going with static .PDF files, that are still formatted for printing. While I suppose some people get the PDF, print it, and bind it themselves, for offline reading, I thought the aim of the whole thing was to move to easier online access. Three columns of text. To read that on my 15" laptop screen, I have to zoom in, and scroll up and down a little, then scroll over, then up and down a little, then over again, up and down a little, and that's just for one page! I don't mind having to do some kind of scrolling, but that much is a bit frustrating.
In closing, I have no doubt that you guys are producing some top-notch content, but you really really really need to work on organizing and integrating it better into a comprehensive service, instead of focusing on making individual products.
clearly my intended tone did not come across and I apologize to anyone I offended. What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
Thanks,
Randy
OMG did Someone at WOTC just apologize in a non condescending way someone slap me please I'm loosing my anger fuel. I don't really think you honestly misrepresented yourself but regardless I don't care. You have taken the first step to proper customer management. A simple apology makes a world of difference.
I don't understand why it is so hard for some but this makes a difference telling me that you feel your producing a quality product or whatever else is meaningless In the Words of The Rock IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK. What I expect and what you deliver may well be 2 different things, and that's ok I can chose not to pay you. What you tell me to expect though is your problem it hurts your customer confidence levels when you fail to deliver.
Here are my personal issues with the magazines
A) Content while its good stuff most of it's stuff that A used to be regular website updates B I'm going to be seeing again in a book I purchase. C Is not something I'd Pay for AKA Play testing articles or adventures.
B)Get your act together as many have said before me You should be meeting your deadlines without to many major problems as you should have the articles ready a month in advance If you intend to charge for something You can not treat it like a hobby.
Thanks again for your apology I will be keeping an eye on things and hope to join you guys with my money if you ever have the Full D&DI available.
Second, this is not the first message from Randy B. that I have thought was talking down to me. I understand about the "internet" thing, it's happened to me. However, I am not a professional speaking to the public. I believe an editor might be needed.
Third, the website is hard to navigate. It's frustrating. I usually just click through the center tabs. Features, Dragon, Dungeon, RPGA. And then read the Q&A. And click the Insider tab.
Fourth, please stop saying things are going to show up when they aren't.
I know things can happen but let's make a list of things that have been pushed back.
- Virtual Table Top. ( the whole reason I got into 4e since August of last year.)
- Character Builder. ( Something that would tide me over to the VTT)
- Monster Builder. (wasn't this supposed to be out soon, about 3 weeks ago?)
- Barbarian. ( This was handled very badly. Just be upfront and honest)
Fifth, the schedule worked fine for a month. It's slowly becoming less and less reliable. I like the idea of seeing things Monday, Wednesday, Friday, but I don't stress it now. I have an RSS feed set to show me what's new. I don't have to search or wait. When it updates, I read.
Sixth, I am not happy with paying for something that isn't complete.
I've loved Dragon and Dungeon for many many many years. About 20. Why should I pay extra for the magazines if I'm actually paying for magazines and not-done "bonus tools".
Seventh, the content is good. 4.5 outta 5, I would say. Better editing and you get 5 stars. I've sent 13 emails so far to DDI. And I'm just one person and that's just 3 months. I'll happily work for you for very cheap.
- The compendium not updating with the errata (and it is errata, it's not updates, stop treating us like children, please).
- The Haunting of Kincep Mansion PDF has a Heroic 1-10 logo on it. It should be a Paragon logo 11-20.
- Link Broken
- The text in the link on the front page about Dragon Magazine Role vs Role is from last month still about the goblins and should instead be about the snaketongue cultists.
- That link in the sidebar under the D&D Insider Header does not go anywhere. Just to the help section.
- The Complete Magazine pdfs do not download. Once done it says it is broken and loads nothing.
- Cookies are working, but it won't save my user name and password.
Every page I go to, I have to sign-in again. - Typo in H3 Preview
- I try to download a pdf since Friday and get "The file is damaged and could not be repaired." I have tried July Dragon, July Dungeon, and the newest article about the Eladrin Citadel.
- Can we get the Drow and Genasi added to the Stat builder?
- The description for the below excerpt from the main page is still the old excerpt from the Figurines of Wonderous Power from last week.
- Wrong credits for the Authors.
- This link goes to Faerun Epic. But it says The "Bloodghost Syndicate".
Eight, the ToC.
It's buried. I would love to check it each month to see what's coming, but I don't. It's so many click, or at least it appears to be. Put it as the main page of the Dragon or Dungeon magazines. When you click away from the front page, either through the side bar or the center buttons, make the ToC what pops up. You can put all other links on the ToC page. No need to have all those other links.
Ninth, you are online. Utilize it. Link things. Make them screen shaped. Automate things. Why keep the magazines separate? Just include the adventures in your Dragon/Dungeon magazine compilation and be done with it. There is no difference except people have to search 2 different places. Combine the 2. Put the articles online. If you have to be a subscriber, let people be able to search for things. Or make a database for people to search that will tell them what issue something is in. The idea that we are electronic and I have to look through all my issues to find something is ridiculous. Take advantage and embrace the digital-ness of the DDI.
Tenth and Finally, listen to the community. Not everything is constructive but all of it comes from people who are playing and participating in this hobby. Your job is to make our hobby fun. Our hobby makes your jobs. If one of us slacks, we all lose.
If one of us slacks, we all lose.
If people don't want so see all the adventure info, then they shouldn't be worried about turning to certain pages, and the same for nonadventure stuff.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver
Most people consider this release schedule to be "stuff on the ToC will be published that month." As the Janus Gull and Barbarian articles have shown, this isn't the case. As has been said ad nauseum, if you don't know 100% that you can publish an article, don't put it on the ToC. To me that seems the clearest message from this thread, and I'm a tad worried by this quote that you don't seem to have gotten that from the thread.
A High-Level WotC Employee/Rep admitted "We Were WRONG," and "We didn't keep the update schedule as well as we should have, I'm SORRY,"
That wasn't what I read.
I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
The truth is that we think we have in fact delivered the release schedule that we set out to deliver ...
He instead says "we have kept to the update schedule."
???
Sure they have. Instead of the $10/month plan, you can get a basically-magazine-only subscription for $5/month. That's a little more than $3 — but then, it's cheaper than $6 for both Dungeon and Dragon.
As I indicated answers were from months ago, before "web content" was offered. At that time there was an indication they might start charging for part of DDI before are was ready.
Right now "web content" part of DDI is going fee. One big question that has not been answered is when all of DDI or even more of it goes fee will the "web content" package be renewable.
The only recent answer indicates if you purchase "web content" and more comes online for fee you can apply unused credit toward the higher fee. There appears that there would not be a requirement to purchase the more costly package.
So as it stands as far as answers go, you can in effect buy a one year subscription to both ezines with some other content added in. We do not know if after a year you can purchase another year of "web content" only, nor can you purchase a subscription to jut one ezine.
It is quite possible that as DDI fee increases you can only renew at the higher DDI price. WotC however did and still does retain the right to revisit pricing plans and might decide to offer two DDI level pricing plan. Or perhaps offer different plans altogether, types of plans like one ezine has been asked for many times so far no one at WotC indicated they were considering going to that model. Until there is a more current answer I stand by my last post. There has been no announced plan to offer ezine subscription only at this time announced.
I don't like the website's layout, as said many times before it's a mess and not very intuitive to use. It does the job but could be better.
Paypal would be great, as I'm paying with pounds sterling.
I like the ToC, so long as it all comes out :D The release schedule is meaningless once outside the time zone (I'm UK) but I like the gradual release of articles better than the all at once approach. Some expected date would be nice.
I'm very happy with the quality of the articles (although the adventures really need to come with battle maps I can print and quick summery lists of important features/encounters). Over all 4/5.
I have one request: the pre-final individual articles should be marked as "draft" (perhaps even with a watermark).
As an RPGA member - I really like that idea.
Then, when the final version comes out, they should be moved to an archive somewhere (or completely removed) so they don't cause confusion.
2. The Release Schedule
-Make it regular and reliable. Have it done a month in advance. All print magazines need to do this. The move to the web is not an excuse for procrastination.
-Release Dungeon adventures on Mondays (so DMs can read it before the weekend).
-Release special Dungeon adventures prior to the event (e.g. don't release the Halloween one on Halloween or two days before, as was done in 2007) We want to play it on the event (or prior to it). We don't want to read it then. Playing a Halloween adventure in early November sucks a lot of the potential enjoyment out of it.
-Release Dragon stuff on the Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule.
-Set up a pattern for Dragon releases. I like this one:
Monday-Fluff (because dms are reading the adventure and players need fun too)
Wednesday-Crunch (so players and dm's can discuss it)
Friday-Editorials, Cartoons, Confessions (Mazzanoble) (because people are gearing up for games and this is when we don't need new game related material as much)
I'd also add release the more crunchy articles with lots of new powers feats and playtest stuff near the beginning of the month so that there is ample time to get decent feedback and error checking before it's updated for the final complied PDF at the end of the month. Confessions, Cartoons and more fluff type articles should be toward the end of the month.
Plus, the "good stuff" at the beginning of the month would increase confidence, and toward the end of the month, people would start getting excited about next month.
I think right now they have it set up to "ramp up" to the good stuff...probably in the hopes that people will become more excited about the magazine over the course of the month.
What's happening, though is the opposite. People are becoming worried and skeptical as to whether we'll even get the good stuff. Also, all the good stuff comes out bunched together (adventures, I'm looking at you here) and so when we finally get all that crunch, we might not have the time to read it that we would have if it came out over time.
Instead of looking forward to the next month (yay October's almost here, new mag coming!) we're dreading it (end of September, here's hoping we get all the content they said we would...then when October comes, I don't expect much for the first couple of weeks). Psychologically, these expectations could be improved with your idea.
The web site could be better. My main complaint is the plethora of tabs all over the place. Tabs along the left divide the web site into dragon, dungeon, minis, etc., but those same divisions are in the middle of the page. It's confusing as to which one is the 'real' one. Personally, I think I like the middle tabs better, but they feel too cramped. You can't fit, for example, the dungeon or dragon table of contents in them (which makes me worry that those tabs don't have all of the web site content, which they don't).
After a few months, I think I've got it figured out that the middle tabs are some kind of news feed area, and if I click on each one I'll eventually find whatever dungeon/dragon update happened yesterday. The tabs on the left are still basically a horrible pit of fear and despair, though. I'm usually pretty safe clicking on the main tabs, but if you expand them and click on one of the sub-levels you usually end up in some awful unfriendly scroll-box list of doom.
As for the updates, automate it for 12:01 am M W F. I know you can do it, I've done it for webcomics. When you say something is up on Monday, they expect it to be up whenever they feel like checking on Monday. If a video game store put a game for sell on Tuesday, but didn't get any shipments in until 7 pm Tuesday, their customers would get mad. Same deal here. Up on Monday means "I can check the website on Monday and get new content".
I also think you should make two schedules, one for dungeon and one for dragon. They are different magazines, they have different content, they're for different demographics. Dragon readers especially are probably pretty bummed when today's update is "some dungeon article".
I'd like it if you could release things in the order that they are in the table of contents, but I've been told you can't.
-Hatsuma
I'd also add release the more crunchy articles with lots of new powers feats and playtest stuff near the beginning of the month so that there is ample time to get decent feedback and error checking before it's updated for the final complied PDF at the end of the month. Confessions, Cartoons and more fluff type articles should be toward the end of the month.
That's a really good idea.
No.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
No.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
Table of Contents is fine.
What's Not Working For Me
* The idea of all content being "core" was (is) a very exciting idea, however I find myself skipping the Forgotten Realms features due to what I see as saturation/overkill. It may be fantastic content, and you guys may really, really want it to be "core," however we homebrewers don't feel compelled to read Forgotten Realms article after Forgotten Realms preview feature after Forgotten Realms article. If it were Eberron or Spelljammer or Planescape, we'd have the same issue with it. Right now, I feel it's a variety issue.
* The Compendium has yet to become practical. Let's say I'm looking for Human adversaries for my game (true story). I type in "Human" and I get 165 entries in the Monsters area, none of which are actually human. I type in "Human Rabble" hoping to get the entry from the MM, but nothing comes up. I fiddle around with it trying to get my desired result, but usually I give up and go to one of the core books.
* While homebrewers can sort through the articles and adventures to get stuff we want, this is less useful for us than, say, the article on Warforged or the article on Gnolls or the article on Artificers or on Barbarians. That stuff is great -- it just seems to come so very rarely.
I don't plan to subscribe to DDI right now because I don't think the current magazines have enough content for my game; they have A LOT of content, and the content itself is pretty good... it's just not the right kind of content. Once more of the tools go online, I'll take another look. I hope they work well. I only hope that I don't also have to pay for the magazines along with them, if the pattern is going to be world-stuff, world-stuff, world-stuff with a different world every year. The world stuff is cool, there's just so dang much of it I lose interest after the first couple articles/features/previews.
1. RSS feeds for the table of contents and a notification of when new articles are posted. Don't really care much about the schedule as long as everythings out in a month, but would like to not have to keep checking the website.
2. When you compile the full issue at the end of each month, it's noce to have it all in a single issue, but if you stick up a zip file with each article as a separate pdf as well that would be good, so I could easily file them away under various categories. I know it's possible to download each one separately, but I prefer just to do a single download monthly.
I'd also add release the more crunchy articles with lots of new powers feats and playtest stuff near the beginning of the month so that there is ample time to get decent feedback and error checking before it's updated for the final complied PDF at the end of the month. Confessions, Cartoons and more fluff type articles should be toward the end of the month.
I too agree.
If the articles released are intented to be in need of editing and proof reading and then cleaned up in the compilation that is fine. But we need time to play with it and review it.
Once it gets into the compiled pdf it will never get edited or updated so it has to be caught before then.
This reminds me of about a couple months or so back when the forum was screaming for any information on D&DI and Gamerzero asked what format we want it in. He really missed the point of what we were asking for. We wanted info and updates the editing and format was immaterial.
Likewise with these questions I think its the same thing. All of these questions are side stepping the issues that we are asking and talking about.
The overall issue is stick to what you say you are gonna do. We will work around that but when you set expectactions we expect them to occur.
Y'know, I'm one of the people that 4th ed brought back into the fold, I played some 1st and a whole lot of 2nd ed back in the day but sat out for 3rd ed, mostly due to the fact that there were an infinite number of books and everyone I encountered playing 3rd had taken the term power gamer to ridiculous levels.
Rhianni, who I quoted above really sort of captures my impression of what's going on within WotC. From someone returning to the game after more than 12 years away from it, I'm almost struck by how similarly chaotic things are to the failing days of TSR. I hate to draw that comparison and I hope things are much better than that.
Thanks for the DDI Updates, and your post in this thread.
Here is my feedback...
RE: MWF schedule - I think you've gotten the message ;)
I agree with others that crunch-heavy articles should go up early in the month to take advantage of editing before the final compilation.
I don't mind editorials or cartoons as counting as content, but I think the problem is the ORDER in which they are being released. Too many back-to-back without more substantial articles in between, or too early in the month. I love the idea that when a Dungeon article gets posted, a Dragon editorial gets posted to keep the non-DMs happy.
RE: Dragon and Dungeon
I disagree with previous posters - keep the magazines separate entities. WotC already took enough flack for turning these venerable magazines digital, don't compound it by merging them.
I also disagree with people that prefer webpages instead of .PDFs. I like to print them out to read and archive, and pdfs work exceptionally well. You can add links to pdfs too, if you want to leverage the power of digital medium. My only complaint about printing them is the landscape format - I need to find a landscape binder somewhere! Landscape is good for reading online though, so I can see you have a dilemma.
RE: Content
Content is good - I don't think this is an area of concern, as long as it keeps up. Getting the content a month in advance would be a good idea, so you can refine your release schedule.
RE: Navigation
It isn't horrible. I've learnt where everything can be found (for the DDI, at any rate).
Some suggestions for improvement though. Could you include the level ranges for adventure in the text of the link in the archive list so that a DM can find appropriate adventures to run? Right now, you have to click and load each adventure to find out what level it is good for, or go back through all the tables of content. A table that is sortable by level would be very helpful, especially as the catalogue of adventures continues to grow each month.
Also, on numerous occasions I've found that links on the table of contents are not activated when the article is posted.
Articles linked to from the table of contents should be updated with revised versions of the article. The work has already been done for the compiled version, so it shouldn't take much to replace the individual pdfs with the updated versions at the end of the month.
RE: Character Builder Beta
I don't have a problem with the way it is scheduled to be released (private beta, public beta, final release with demo version). I do, however, think you'll be missing out on valuable feedback if you restrict the beta to levels 1-3. It is at the higher levels, where characters become more complex, where the system is most likely to break (assuming the broader foundation is stable out of Alpha)
Thanks for reading, and I think as you and your crew work through the learning curve Dragon and Dungeon magazines will continue to improve. I know that is your goal, because you love the hobby as much as we do.
Verys Arkon
1. RSS feeds for the table of contents and a notification of when new articles are posted. Don't really care much about the schedule as long as everythings out in a month, but would like to not have to keep checking the website.
http://www.wizards.com/rss.asp?x=dnd
The RSS feed has been up forever.
I find the proposed schedule of M-W-F to be great...in practice it seems to be falling apart. I'm not going to pretend that I know what's happening on your end as developers; there's probably a million things that go on behind the scenes that can contribute to a delay. I think the catch is, the stuff you guys are releasing is VERY good. People are VERY interested in seeing it, so when you guys don't make a release time (for whatever reason) people are upset. I know I am. I log on faithfully on M-W-F for the releases, and am disappointed when they aren't out. Now, I'm not going to go all emo and angry; after all, I'm sure you guys *want* to release this stuff on time. All I can suggest is that maybe take a look (assuming you haven't yet) at what's causing the delay, and work to rectify it. Maybe that means putting the releases down to only a Tuesday-Friday release schedule to give yourselves more time; I don't know. Just take heart that people (at least some of us) love the stuff you're releasing, so it's natural that we are frustrated when you don't meet the release schedules that you propose.
Anyways, that's my two cents. Other than that, I love the stuff put out (even if I don't use all of it), and keep up the great work. I'll definately be subscribing when the time comes.
RE: Dragon and Dungeon
I disagree with previous posters - keep the magazines separate entities. WotC already took enough flack for turning these venerable magazines digital, don't compound it by merging them.
I don't think anyone WANTS them to become one magazine. I think that most of these comments are that WotC is TREATING them like one magazine.
If, say, Time and Newsweek had a MWF release schedule for an online version of their magazines, I wouldn't expect Time to "count" as having had an article if Newsweek puts one out. (Not a great metaphor, but I think you get my point).
The way it is now, these magazines are:
1. bundled into a single purchase price.
2. articles for either/or count toward the release dates
3. both are set up in practically the same way
4. The are not described in any meaningful way as to what makes one different from the other (no mission statement). If I didn't know anything about these magazines, I wouldn't know what made them different until I started becoming familiar with them by reading several articles. Even so, some of the columns in Dungeon are more Dragony historically, so reading the articles alone doesn't create that distinction easily.
I think that right now, they may as well BE one magazine. I don't they it should be this way, but that does seem to be the case.
I like it, but you could try to give estimates on when which article will be released,maybe go for "this week" "next week" "in 2 weeks" or something. No need for a hard date, but an approximation.
I think this is a great idea. Let us know which articles are coming out on which week and there will be a buzz for the ones that people are really excited for right before it comes out.
They are trying:
http://hasbro.recruitmax.com/MAIN/careerportal/Job_List.cfm?szSearchType=Advanced&szSort=UpdateDate&szCachedSearch=1&szDirection=ASC&szCategory=21
What scares me is the heavy use of FileMaker. I'm working with a client who is wedded to it. Ugghg. Makes me shudder.
I also have mixed feelings about recruiting architects with Agile development experience. Agile is defined by its frequent, fast delivery of working software. Well, the first problem is we haven't seen fast, frequent delivery of working software. Problem two is by definition Agile delivers builds that iteratively progress on short-term goals and specifications. When a deadline approaches and a build isn't likely to meet the desired requirements, Agile teams don't deliver a non-functioning incomplete piece of software. Instead they roll back the specifications until they get a stable, working build. That works great for internal development or for when you have a few key external stakeholders who have bought into the project.
But that's not the case here. When you have a large community who have not bought into the project, it's very risky. It's a notoriously difficult development method when it comes to communicating to your customers when and what will be released. While I generally like a company that openly communicates with its customers, I think DDI might be too open about it's planning process. Quit telling us stuff in advance when there's a real good chance it won't happen or will be delayed.
Regarding most of Randy's questions on the user-friendliness of the site. I think it's great to be asking the community for feedback. I also got a usability survey a couple weeks ago, which is good (although I found some of the question phrasing and options to be flawed). The third tool should be web analytics, but I skimmed the website HTML and didn't see any web analytics code (e.g. Omniture and the like). Maybe you have a logfile analysis tool instead. Either way, that data should go a long way towards answering some of your questions. Pay my relocation expenses and I'll help ya. :D
Some of this may be a bit repetitive, so bear with me... I've got a slew of suggestions here. These aren't criticisms so much as what I'd like to see in an ideal setup as a customer.
Scheduling/Release:
- I'd like to echo the "have it ready in advance" sentiment. To use this month as an example, all of the content should have been received (and most of the editing done) prior to Sept. 1st. If not, it should be in the ToC.
- Frankly, this is not the first "subscription" I've had (or will have, in the case of the PDF editions...). One of the things that comes along with the subscription is an "in advance" feel - you get the September issue 2 weeks early, and it hits the newsstands on 9/1. With the current setup, the presentation is quite the opposite. Even changing the month listed on the issue might help with some of the psychological frustration with the average reader.
- You may not have set up a specific time for releasing articles, but as someone who works with websites day in and day out, you should. Users will not care if the time is arbitrary or even in a given time window (i.e. "between 1 and 3pm PST on M/W/F"), as long as you 1) tell them when it is and 2) tell them when you're not going to deliver on time. A quick note of "Article ABC has been delayed - check back at 5pm PST" shows the community that you're being responsive to their needs and the expectations you've set for them. You're dealing with a world of constant online access, where people get very irritated when their webcomic is posted 30 minutes late. Try to keep that in mind.
- As far as what to release when, I highly recommend spreading your rules-related content across the month. If you know you have 9 features between Dragon and Dungeon, one should reasonably expect to see 2 per week. Likewise with the columns.
- Lead and close your months with your strongest content. For example, Adventure Path material towards the front end, preview and playtest material at the back end.
- Keep new product tie-ins towards the middle Wednesday or Friday (just after the new products come out) to provide immediately useful "Insider" content to enhance the new purchase.
- Slice larger content up into chunks - more, but smaller, bites for the customers. This would work very well for the Adventure Path. But if you do this, don't do it at the expense of getting the other magazine to the public.
Table of Contents:
- Keep it - I find it useful.
- Keep it updated - links should be there as soon as the article is available. Before it's announced elsewhere, in fact. There have been numerous occasions where I've seen it take days (if not weeks) for the ToC to be accurate.
Announcing Updates:
- The priority of announcement should be, in my opinion: ToC, RSS feed, main page. All of them should be checked for accuracy (I've found and reported several errors over time).
- An option for subscribers to get new article/issue notifications via email.
- Clearly mark updates to articles when they're made (for whatever reason).
I think that about covers it for now.
~Drax
Two initials come to mind when I read the "I'm sorry" post above: BS. I'm beginning to wonder just how high WotC can pile their crap before it hits the ceiling fan.
Face it, WotC, you dropped the ball. To reiterate the last few months: You took a game system that needed only a few minor tweaks and screwed it up, ticking off a large portion of your customers in the bargain.
Then you took 2 time-honored magazines that were perfectly functional and screwed them up exceedingly well (Sure, some of the content is still good, but everything else - not so good. At all.).
Then you took a website that wasn't broken but could have been a little better and screwed it up even further.
Then you took a digital gaming idea that was potentially pretty good and screwed it up beyond all recognition.
Then you dropped any pretense of respect, appreciation, or understanding for your customers and screwed up your customer relations completely.
And on top of it all, you totally screwed over 30 years of gaming tradition and the sense of community that went with it.
In my book, that pretty much means you've messed everything up.
My suggestion? Fix it. Tell everyone you're sorry and quit making promises you can't keep. Admit you screwed up and go back to what was working. Then adjust as necessary to make it better. But whatever you do, don't give us the continuing line of crap we've been subject to for the last several months. Many of us just aren't buying it anymore.
And note: I'm still here on the WotC site posting this. That means that no matter how much you've ticked me off in the last few months, WotC, I still have an interest in your product. That should tell you something. D&D players, in spite of their ranting, can be very patient when it comes to the game we all love. But that patience is not infinite, especially when we're subjected to a continuous stream of condescending (or at least seemingly condescending) announcements, insulting forum posts, and downright demeaning comments from WotC employees on this and other websites.
Get it right for once, WotC. Please. And quit feeding us BS.
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory. The initial draft ended with "because" and then the next sentence was supposed to be the point: I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
Can I say start by saying how much I appreciate that WotC staff take the time to respond on these forums. One of the great things that I love about the gaming community (and there are many) is the way that senior staff members in a variety of companies are prepared to get involved with debates and to admit when something goes wrong.
That said, I am seriously concerned by two things in this post. Firstly, understanding the Internet as a communication tool is key to a lot of jobs these days, including mine. The comment made was bound to upset customers and should have been identified as likely to do so if the update was proof read even once.
Secondly I am concerned that the intention was to state that WotC is unsure what it is they are supposed to be doing. The charging period begins next month and, if I read this right (and I am happy to be corrected) WotC is not sure what they are supposed to be delivering. I have to say that this is staggering. How can you start charging people for a product when you are unsure what standards you are going to deliver the product to. Surely there is a legally binding contract being entered into here as soon as people start paying. If you don't know what you are going to deliver, how will the customer know what to expect.
I will repeat it again, because it is worth repeating, I am impressed with the content. I am less than impressed with the attitude of WotC to meeting customer expectations. Personally, I do not want to sign up to pay for something long term (12 months) if the delivery standards could change during that period.
I think we need, and deserve, some reassurances that a standard of delivery will be set before the paid subscription period begins and that it will be stuck to. Not much to ask IMO.
I agree that the RSS feed is the best way to retreive the updates and other information. wizards.com is not a particularly user friendly web site; probably due to the huge amount of information. I personally got no problem with the website but the best DM I know have no computer skills and finds it hard to get the information he seeks. I installed and configured an RSS reader for him and now he doesn't miss nothing anymore.
Therefore, I also suggest you to promote the RSS as a way to keep informed.
That being said, the primary tools that I and my player base would be interested in (D&D gaming table/Character Builder/Dungeon Builder), won't be available for several months. This is understandable as they are all worthy and time consuming products that should be polished til they gleam, but without them I have no interest in subscribing to a demo version. The D&D magazines are a fun boost to the game, but to me and mine, not worth the $5/month. When the Online Gaming Platforms are released, I will most likely cancel my $15/month subscription to MMO's and sign on with ya'll instead.
Looking forward to more news updates, and I hope you guys really make your software products shine!
RSS Usage
I agree that the RSS feed is the best way to retreive the updates and other information. wizards.com is not a particularly user friendly web site; probably due to the huge amount of information. I personally got no problem with the website but the best DM I know have no computer skills and finds it hard to get the information he seeks. I installed and configured an RSS reader for him and now he doesn't miss nothing anymore.
Therefore, I also suggest you to promote the RSS as a way to keep informed.
Does someone want to explain what an RSS feed is to us technologically, uh, naive, individuals?
What it does is WotC places a tag on a section, and anything added to that section is automatically pushed out to the web-pages that monitor that page for changes.
RSS readers are free, and you can get a really good one through Google Reader (https://www.google.com/reader).
Anywhere you see the image below (or something similar) on a web page, you can get an RSS feed for it.
[indent]Web feeds have some advantages compared to receiving frequently published content via email:
* When subscribing to a feed, users do not disclose their email address, so users are not increasing their exposure to threats associated with email: spam, viruses, phishing, and identity theft.
* If users want to stop receiving news, they do not have to send an "unsubscribe" request; users can simply remove the feed from their aggregator.
* The feed items are automatically "sorted" in the sense that each feed URL has its own sets of entries (unlike an email box, where all mails are in one big pile and email programs have to resort to complicated rules and pattern matching).
A "Feed Reader" is required for using Web Feeds. This tool works like an automated e-mail program, but no e-mail address is needed. The user subscribes to a particular web feed, and thereafter receives updated content, every time updating takes place. Feed Readers may be online (like a webmail account) or offline. Recently a number of mobile readers have arrived to the market. An offline web feed is downloaded to the user's system. Feed readers are used in personalized home page services like iGoogle or My Yahoo or My MSN to put content such as news, weather and stock quotes appear on the user’s personal page. Content from other sites can also be added to that personalized page, again using feeds. Organizations can use a Web Feed Server behind their firewall to distribute, manage and track the use of internal and external web feeds by users and groups. Other web-based tools are primarily dedicated to feed-reading only. One of the most popular web-based feed readers at this point is Bloglines, which is also free. Opera, Safari, Firefox, Internet Explorer 7.0, and many other web browsers allow receipts of feeds from the tool bar using Live Bookmarks, Favorites, and other techniques to integrate feed reading into a browser. Finally, there are desktop-based feed readers, e.g. FeedDemon, NetNewsWire, Outlook 2007, Thunderbird.[/indent]
Another goosd site to look at:
http://rss.softwaregarden.com/aboutrss.html
Every RSS work to same way: You must provide the news source and the update frequency. I remember that wizards provide 4 differents RSS news channel (maybe it changed). I personnaly only use one : http://www.wizards.com/rss.asp?x=dnd
Put this address in an RSS reader application and it will retreive D&D news as they come.
I just want to say this couldn't have been better timing. One of my players and I were just discussing yesterday the problem with WoTC owning DND. Up until last month there was no set payment plan customers could look at to decide if they wanted to get DND insider when we had to start paying. So here is how it works, hey guys check this out. Well how much is it, Um we arn't sure yet but we will let you know the day we start to charge. On top of that, you are planning on charging for stuff that you dont even have finished yet, does anyone remember e-tools that came out with the 3e phb. Probably not cause it was a demo version that was insanely buggy and i don't believe it was ever finished, i could be wrong though. I have no problem paying for DND insider as I no longer subscribe to MMO's but seriously. Give us a page that says what it will cost for what products. Do we truely have to pay for each virtual mini we want to create using the character creator that isn't even complete yet? This may not be the feedback you were looking for, but seriously look into important things before asking if a MWF schedule is to hard for someone to follow. Most of us are nerds, we can figure out how to navigate the site without you holding our hands.
All of the qeestions you said were not answered, have been answered.
Full package price plan has been announce many moths ago.
The smaller "web content" price was announce at least a month ago and IIRC closer to two.
The plan to sell Vminis does not exist at this time also announced perhaps two or three months ago.
There is no plan to charge for full package announced at this time, though some wonder if only those paying for "web content" will be the only ones allowed to beta test aplications not ready for fee.
I think I got all of your main points in what you appear not to have known.
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory. The initial draft ended with "because" and then the next sentence was supposed to be the point: I'm attempting to admit that we're doing something wrong. I'm not convinced I understand yet what precisely it is that we should be doing, but I'm acknowledging that folks are frustrated and I'm genuinely interested in reaching out to understand where precisely the frustration is coming from.
Randy,
Thank you for coming to the forum to apologize. It means a lot. Because of your apology, you have inspired me as well.
I am sorry for being a jerk in my carefully written, well thought out, extensive post in this thread. Like you, I seem to have had an "Oops, the internet!" moment.
2. When you compile the full issue at the end of each month, it's nice to have it all in a single issue, but if you stick up a zip file with each article as a separate pdf as well that would be good, so I could easily file them away under various categories. I know it's possible to download each one separately, but I prefer just to do a single download monthly.
I think this idea has merit. I'm also one of those that likes to file the .pdfs by category/type.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow? You are evidently having trouble following it, so yes. Also, your irregularity (do I visit in the morning, afternoon, or the next morning to find the new content?) made me stop bothing to come here. Again, I wait for the RSS feed... and you lose all that valuable advertising page count as a result.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative? You guys are posing ToCs? For real, I didn't know that. If I saw one, I would think it were cool.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates? Er, right. Your navigation is so bad I wait for ENWorld links to the content or RSS feeds.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
Well, your seat is clearly behind a filter of some sort. This was supposed to be a trial to get the kinks worked out of the delivery mechanism and to show us what to expect in the final product. Alas, the content is below the bar set by Paizo and some articles - like Mithrandain - are virtually unreadable to someone who understands how words are used to stuff page count or someone who understands editing. The repetition and poor turns of phrase in that article are mind-bogglingly bad... and even articles by our beloved Hellcow expose where the editor polishes his solid work... because all we seem to get is his solid work.
You had three months to show me what I would get if I paid... you have shown I will get poorly-edited content delivered at irregular times.
[/INDENT]
Are you the guy to ask about the web design? If you are, Fix it! The D&D website is emberressing. the e-zine section is one of the worst offenders There's an archive, there's a postage stame size place on the dragon page to view. OK, what's up with that? see that little "(Archive)" link (wait you didn't know it was a link) That should give me a full page archive page. not two collumn craptastic view of the same data on the preievous page.
Well Mr. Buehler, no, as a matter of fact I didn't know there was table of contents or thrice weekly updates. I probably should have figured it out by EN World links, which is how I find out about most of the things here. I found the ToC, here's a hint, make that the first thing you see when you click the Dragon link from the sidebar. Here's another one I'll give you for free, if you are going to give me teasers on the D&D main site the bigger banner in the peek window should take me to the main mag site. When I click on it twice and nothing happens grrr, i get frustrated.
Sticking with specifics fix those. But seriouslly if I'm going to pay for content I don't want to have to hurt myself to get over poor design issues. Hire a secret shopper service to investigate your site. Then follow all of those suggestions. Or read a web Gui book like: http://www.usabilityfirst.com/websites/index.txl Please, please, please, work on this. On a plus side the forums are getting better, I've noticed the little changes in structure, format, and content, it has become I place I'm coming to daily.
1: Will the update schedule be consistent and reliable? At the present it does not seem like the schedule is either. It seems like the magazine (if you want to call it that) is being published piecemeal because that is how it is being completed. I am also concerned with how you can write an editorial for a magazine that isn't done yet. And, if the magazine is done, then why can't you release all of the content at one time?
I like having the articles in separate PDF's so I can just download the ones I'm interested in. But I can't predict, at this time, when which article will be out. Nor can anyone else, as far as I can tell. Personally, when I read the (good) old Dragon and Dungeon magazines the Editorial, letters to the editor, those kinds of "content" were the LAST thing I read, if ever (personal choice/preference). So, why should I check the website 3 times a week (or 4 or 5, hoping for an update) and then see "oh, the update for today was the editorial for magazine X and article about something that I don't care about". If the magazine is completed ahead of time it should be easier to put a date next to each individual portion of the magazine like such
(dates completely made up because I'm sleepy)
Dragon #468
Editorial - October 10, 2010
Ecology of the Dire Drow - October 8, 2010
Arcane Armory - October 12, 2010
Secret Life of a Game Designer - Ocober 15, 2010
And then stick to that (which would be easy to do IF you finished the magazine on time)
2: Content should be content. What I mean is things like the Editorial to me (and apparently to others on this thread) aren't content. In some ways, I think the editorial should be a tease to get people into the magazine, like "Hey, you non-subscribers, check out all the COOL STUFF that you're missing by not being a subscriber! When I edited it I thought it was AWESOME!" (sorry, again I'm a little tired). If I'm paying for something, I want it to have lots of crunchy fluffy bits that I could (potentially) use in a game. Ecology of... or new feats, powers, or even races and classes, are the kinds of things I mean. A cartoon is cute, but with all of the free webcomics out there (same thing with the podcasts, etc) it's not something that should be subscriber only.
3: The DDI toolkit. How long has it been since 4th edition was released, and these tools aren't close to being done yet? Or at least aren't done enough to release them to the public for our consumption (abuse). Don't get me wrong, I think they're all great ideas, but unless implemented correctly they won't be worth the subscription fee, or worth additional fees based on the cost of the magazine. For example, the character visualizer. I love this idea. But will it be like the character creator in (to use MMO's, the closest thing) say, City of Heroes/Villians or like in EQ1? In other words, will there be enough options, sliders, toys, etc, for me to make my character (like CoX) or will I have a very small set of options with a couple of pallet swap options (like most other MMOs). I don't expect it to be an infinite toolkit, but the more options the better, and the more likely I'll be willing to pay for it...and what about unusual PCs? What if I want to play a goblin? Or a hyena path gnoll (loved that article btw, like most of the Ecology articles)? The more complete it is (and the more often it's updated to keep pace with new source books) again plays into my perception of the product. And I won't even get into my concerns with the Virtual Game Table (and the potential to have to buy virtual miniatures) ...
I will draw this to a close, because wall of texts are bad and I don't want to start rambling. But I wanted to be complete.
THAT'S FROM THE DELUXE PLAYER'S HANDBOOK PRODUCT PAGE.
What does that mean? Do they get a free month or something? What about my preordered PHB? Because I bought in early I get nothing? Com'on now, that's not fair.
Don't worry I'll be paying for the content, but this seems a little like the "special introductory rate" given to new customers and not the long time ones.
I've been using the internet constantly for over a decade and I have trouble navigating this place.
How to improve it? Compare your website to every other popular and user friendly site on the net. Imitate that.
The layout for the magazines and everything else is...different...and unintuitive.
I'd love to see a central table of contents as the primary means of navigation for every magazine, and then perhaps some sort of index of past articles, sortable by date and/or name.
As for the website, I was thrilled by this suggested redesign of the website. It struck me as both more useful and more aesthetically pleasing than the current model.
Also, a strict schedule of updates would be most appreciated.
1. TOC
I agree that the TOC should be one of the first things updated if the main web format is going to be kept. I'm completely baffled by why people think it is hard to find as when you expand the plus on the main section you want, it is at the top of the list.
2. Content and Editing
Though I think that some people are under the assumption that they think they should be helping WotC write the content, there is a valid point that putting the important articles up at midweek and spread throughout the month has merit. Whether the editing, polishing and oversight should come internally or externally is more of a staff decision. We should be able to help with proofreading (because obviously we have lots more people on our side that want to tear stuff apart), but policy should be decided internally.
3. Magazines
As a DM and a Player, please keep the two magazines seperate. They are a tried and true method of getting out extra articles in addition to the core. For some of us they are inspiration to either include this material in our campaigns or to use portions in a way we had not thought of.
Regardless of whether you use the Flash and Bang that people are requesting is really irrelevant. People that are only browsing this occasionally want to see video and other content. D&D has always been a reading and thinking players game and should remain that way for the most part.
Should they evolve? Yes. And I'm sure as we all hang on for the ride we will see that it continues to evolve. And if you ever think it won't, pull out your original boxed set of Dungeons and Dragons (got mine in 8th grade from my parents... major mistake for them, but great for me). Pull out your Advanced Dungeons and Dragons books and read through some of the character options and see if you like being a Druid or Ranger as much as you do now.
Story Arcs. I'm glad you have multiple story arcs even if I don't know that I will have enough time in my life to implement half of them as well as they like or like half of them as well as they deserve. Regardless of setting, a good story is a good story. Though I like Forgotten Realms in books, I don't play it at the table, but if there is something good that comes out and I want to use it, the name change is easy enough to accomplish.
4. Schedules
Wouldn't life be nice without schedules? Having been involved with publishing and all of the nightmares and scheduling tables that are involved I want to say that I'm glad it is not on my shoulders to handle this load. No matter what you do some people will not be happy. There have been some good points in the list so far and I don't think I should repeat the good or the bad as it should be self-evident.
I think there is a tremendous amount that has to be accomplished each month, and though I hate to take away budget from the tools programming, perhaps there should be a little more emphasis placed on getting this out in the manner you predict it will happen. At the same time I feel sorry for the person that has to learn how to herd cats in order to accomplish this.
Coming from a publishing background it would seem that lessons previously learned would come in handy. At one time all Dragon and Dungeon articles had to be finished a long time before anyone ever read them. I think the last few months have been a big sigh of relief for some of the writers, but perhaps it is time for our erstwhile Cat-Wrangler to tighten the reins and make sure content is delivered internally on a better time budget so that the content will flow more smoothly. The spice must flow...
5. Subscriptions
I for one will be buying a yearly subscription. Personally, I do not think you are charging enough, as the amount of effort involved in either the Dragon or Dungeon magazine costs you more than that. Granted, there are no costs to print the media anymore, but it takes quite a list of writers to develop what you put out every month, not to mention the artists that have contributed greatly to the ambiance of the entire 4th Edition experience.
The bonus tools are not something I currently use as it is easier for me to use the core books to develop out either characters or encounters. Largely this is due to the amount of deskspace I have limited myself to (downgrading the massive desk was still a good idea), so this is no reflection on the tools themselves but my own preference. I do see that there will be people that will use them.
Once the other content comes online I will be utilizing it. I anticipate spending many hours in using all of the advanced tools. I have friends that are looking forward to being able to play again even though we live hours apart due to life events. We eagerly await the day that all of it is in place.
6. Interaction with Staff
Regardless of the flame wars and microscopy, I am personally pleased by not only the attention that the developers and staff are giving to the public, but that there is a relevancy to what is addressed. Keep up the good work and some of us apologize for the vitriol you have to endure on the forums. Take your blood pressure medicine and always make sure to type out what you feel at first, save a draft and close it out... walk away for an hour and then rewrite what you want to say. The wolves are hungry and there is no reason to feed them when you don't have to.
7. D&DI vs. RSS
Regardless of how many people use RSS, I hope you will continue to develop the D&DI side of the house. Some of us bookmark and log in to the site multiple times per week (if not daily). The first thing I check personally is the updates on D&DI. Some weeks I'm looking at the articles from the TOC, but if there is a recent article on D&DI, I read it first. Depending on what I read often determines where I look next.
Again I'll state that you should make sure that the product is working very well prior to releasing it. If I am paying for magazines only for a while I am ok with that because a poor release will send people away. You can look at the MMO segment to see what happens on a poor release. And no matter what you do there will still be bugs. Anyone that has played an MMO from opening day will tell you there are more changes in the first six months as things are balanced than there will be in the next several years. That is to be expected. I think previewing it at some of the conventions should have helped in getting ready for the Betas. Again stick with what is proven in the marketplace, particularly MMOs... which is what it appears that you are doing, and ignore people that do not understand the process.
8. Thanks
I know you guys hear what a great job you do at the conventions, though I'm sure you hear more than enough of other topics as well. Personally, I want to thank you for the time you put in on a project that affects a lot of peoples lives. Sometimes we do not stop to say Thanks for a job well done and we should more often. Based on what I have seen in the two preview books, the core books, the first module series, the Vault, and the two magazines, I am glad to be a part of 4th Edition. It is by far the best edition to come out. I think a lot of good thought has been put into where the game needs to go and you had the guts to take it there. To Team Scramjat and Flywheel we are deeply indebted to seeing a vision and being able to bring a new dimension to D&D. I like many had my doubts when I first saw the content, but tactical content has been increased to such a new level that our roleplaying has improved. I never expected that. Thank you for making a player from the early days glad to still be playing today. Even if it does make my AD&D player campaign terribly drudging to go to as some people are just too old-school, but sometimes being friends is more important. And basically that's what all of this boils down to... spending good quality time with good friends and making new ones. Thanks!
Are the updates too hard to find?
Now that the Table of Contents is continuously updated with the corresponding articles, I can find them easily. The small index in each magazine tab is time saving and really useful. However, I would move the magazines link on the right panel to the bottom of the panel itself. Now it is in the middle of the regular print schedule, and, in my opinion, it is out of place there. One other improvement you could add is an archive by level of published adventures.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
Yes, because there is not a set release schedule of the articles. I think that a simple estimate date after each article description in the Table of Contents is what you need. When the article goes live, you can simply remove the estimate date and post the link as you are doing right now. If an article is delayed, you can declare the new estimate date and so on.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
I always like to know what is coming in the next issue, and after the first half of the month, I would really interested in a preview of next month issue.
Finally, I would like to add a suggestion on the sage column. I am missing the questions about D&D rules. I think that a regular column with frequent updates could improve our understanding of the game.
Ciao,
Maurizio
The other point is the one about typos. I'm not a native englishspeaker, and I'm sure that there are many more that I don't get, but it "irks" me a lot to see that there are some that even I can detect. I seriously hope that, once you charge us hard-earned money for your content, a part of it will go to professional editing.
Another way to do it could be to post draft versions on the TOC a week earlier for the comunity to correct, that way it'll be a win-win situation where you can concentrate on game mechanics and we do the boring work while getting the content earlier. You just need to update the content during the week as it gets typo feedback and then you can finally plaster an "Aproved" seal on the TOC. If you think that feedback would be too spare, one last way to correct all this would be to make a "TYPO HUNT" contest, where the best "hunters" can get discounts on their D&DI subscriptions or some freebies.
About all this on "expectations", sometimes I wonder if you truly understand how much power you have when you create those expectations for your core fanbase. To put myself as an example, I've been playing D&D for more than 20 years and you managed to make me so exited about this new 4th edition and its digital side that I bought my first laptop ever just to experience everything that was going to come (I don't need it for anything else). Now, understand that this was six months ago, and while I don't regret having instant access to D&DI during play to solve some tricky rules conflict, it's clear that in other aspects it has been a let down. The laptop has been an (expensive) addition to my gaming sessions that I was eventually going to make anyway, but if I knew what I know now, I would have waited and got a better one later (or the same one at half its price).
Anyway, I just LOVE this game and as with real relationships there are highs and lows, but everything will be alright as long as the love stays. On the whole picture you are doing a great job, so please continue!
Are the updates too hard to find?
There is a very slight learning curve to figure this out, but once you know where to look, it becomes second nature. I would not lose any sleep over this at all.
Well it would help if things consistently appeared in the order they appeared on the dated parts. I'm pretty sure I read the halls of the frost thing on thursday first, but it's dated 9/26 and now shows as newer than the swordmage article (which then gets pushed out of sight).
The date listing should work for anyone going to the site regularly, you shouldn't have to check the ToC MWF just to make sure you're not missing anything.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
I hate the cocky way this was said above, but there is truth to it. Are you guys capable of following the MWF schedule? You did great to start, but the past month has been really sketchy.
For our part, the MWF schedule seems fine.
I like the schedule, but would also like to see it met. It would also be nice to see stuff spread evenly across the month. At the start of 9/24 there were only 3 MWF days left in the month, but 11 Dragon and Dungeon articles left to release - that's 3-4 each day. (It seems like you put out token updates early in the month to meet shcedule then scramble at the end)
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
This is the tricky one. There is a group of people who seem to have trouble grasping how the ToC is meant to work. For some reason, some people think that as soon as the ToC is up, every article along with the compiled magazine should also be available.
I don't know how to explain it properly myself. The closest I can get is that the ToC is sort of like the plans for a building that hasn't been built yet. As each article is released, its like a new floor has been added to the building until its complete. But the building doesn't instantly pop into existence just because you have the plans available.
I like the ToC - assuming you don't change it during month like was done for the last TWO (out of what? four?).
Janus Gull got bumped from August to September and the Barbarian got bumped from September to October.
To put it simply, if this is the period that you're trying to sell us on buying a digital Dragon and Dungeon and you can't keep your schedule - how do I know that it won't get worse when you have my money?
The problem with digital over print is that there is the temptation to overpromise or muck with things you've commited to.
I'll be honest, I'm leaning towards paying for a year, but if articles promised at the begining of the month start sliding once I'm paying, you can count on me demanding a pro-rated refund.
It's not that hard - it it's on the ToC on the first day of the month, it damn well better get released that month. If you not sure, you shouldn't be trying to release it that month.
To me, the articles have been coming along fine until this past issue where it seems like something happened that put everything behind schedule. The Dungeon 158 issue is out without a Table of Contents linked and it's close to the end of the month. I had an idea for keeping on schedule. Make a month ahead and stay ahead. It may be hard to do considering that you're already on schedule so I'm not sure how this would work, but you could be working on next month's while releasing the current one.
As for the Table of Contents, it's nice, but it is a lot of teasing. It's a good and bad thing. However, content changes needs to be addressed when something is going to be pulled, because there's going to be a few people that see it before it's changed. What then was a cheerful announcement becomes a sour one and then a discussion about it happens where it boils and stews for a while until there's an explanation. The problem is that those bitter feelings don't really go away, or at least that fast. To prevent it, it needs to be addressed, quickly.
I look forward to the upcoming content and will be subscribing to DDi.
I'm sure people have already brought this up, but here's my feedback: when I start paying for the magazines, they better update content every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday without fail, or I will be effing livid.
Sadly though, they have stated over and over, they have made no "legal" committment to this and once you've already paid, really...does it matter?
They have made a generalized comittment to have the full PDF out every month, the rest is just "we hope to's". If your ok with that, pay way.
Sadly though, they have stated over and over, they have made no "legal" committment to this and once you've already paid, really...does it matter?
They have made a generalized comittment to have the full PDF out every month, the rest is just "we hope to's". If your ok with that, pay way.
Well I know it wasn't "legal" but didn't they say that's what they'd do? If I misread and they said they'd try, I'll get over it, but I was under the impression that was a sort of promise to us that they haven't kept. Of course, I'll still pay for it, because the content is well worth the proposed price, but it seems pretty lame to me that they wouldn't be able to keep such a schedule considering printing and distribution are no longer an issue. It's one thing to give us free content and not keep to a hard schedule; that doesn't bother me since it's free. If we're paying for it, though, I'd like either a monthly e-zine or regularly scheduled articles. Honestly the part that bugs me is never knowing when the articles are going to go up; I almost missed the Swordmage Class Acts.
I love 4th edition and the content I've seen is mostly great (some of the writing quality is subpar to me, but that's a separate issue). I'm just disappointed in several aspects of Wizards as a company, and their frequent inability to stick to their timelines is one of them.
Cheers,
Kyle
Well I know it wasn't "legal" but didn't they say that's what they'd do? If I misread and they said they'd try, I'll get over it, but I was under the impression that was a sort of promise to us that they haven't kept. Of course, I'll still pay for it, because the content is well worth the proposed price, but it seems pretty lame to me that they wouldn't be able to keep such a schedule considering printing and distribution are no longer an issue. It's one thing to give us free content and not keep to a hard schedule; that doesn't bother me since it's free. If we're paying for it, though, I'd like either a monthly e-zine or regularly scheduled articles. Honestly the part that bugs me is never knowing when the articles are going to go up; I almost missed the Swordmage Class Acts.
I love 4th edition and the content I've seen is mostly great (some of the writing quality is subpar to me, but that's a separate issue). I'm just disappointed in several aspects of Wizards as a company, and their frequent inability to stick to their timelines is one of them.
Cheers,
Kyle
M/W/F was announced plan, with a saving clause "we might not always meet the plan".
Completed PDFs were promised for the transitional that has not been met.
With 4th, end of month has an odd definition and commitment was shortly after month was complete the completed PDF would be available.
Honestly the part that bugs me is never knowing when the articles are going to go up; I almost missed the Swordmage Class Acts.
Ironically, until I read your post I HAD missed the Swordmage Class Acts, because three things had been released that day!
Well I know it wasn't "legal" but didn't they say that's what they'd do? If I misread and they said they'd try, I'll get over it, but I was under the impression that was a sort of promise to us that they haven't kept. Of course, I'll still pay for it, because the content is well worth the proposed price, but it seems pretty lame to me that they wouldn't be able to keep such a schedule considering printing and distribution are no longer an issue. It's one thing to give us free content and not keep to a hard schedule; that doesn't bother me since it's free. If we're paying for it, though, I'd like either a monthly e-zine or regularly scheduled articles. Honestly the part that bugs me is never knowing when the articles are going to go up; I almost missed the Swordmage Class Acts.
I love 4th edition and the content I've seen is mostly great (some of the writing quality is subpar to me, but that's a separate issue). I'm just disappointed in several aspects of Wizards as a company, and their frequent inability to stick to their timelines is one of them.
Cheers,
Kyle
Ouch.
So they've made no real commitment of any kind as to the amount of product they're actually going to produce?
Maybe that's a good place to start prior to asking people to pay.
Personally I think the pricing is too high. I would sign up if the reduced rates were for all of DDI including the tools not yet added. I'd even sign up before the tools were finished. But I do not want to pay 120 dollars a year to use all of the online content. It's too expensive for something I will not be able to use all of the time.
Umm, no, if you pay for a Year Subscription, it's 60 bucks + Tax.
Umm, no, if you pay for a Year Subscription, it's 60 bucks + Tax.
I think he was referring to the client application package pricing that we have seen which ends up at something like 9.99 a month if you pay for a year subscription. I can't remember if 9.99 per month is the exact price, but at most I think I'm only a dollar off.
Ouch.
So they've made no real commitment of any kind as to the amount of product they're actually going to produce?
Maybe that's a good place to start prior to asking people to pay.
I believe back at DDXP they promise 80+ pages per magazine, and it seems to me they're hitting that.
What they have *not* set in stone is the delivery schedule. M/W/F is a goal - and a semi-firm one at that, but I know many people (myself included) would like to see it set as a hard/guaranteed target.
Good to see you back, by the by.
As I indicated answers were from months ago, before "web content" was offered. At that time there was an indication they might start charging for part of DDI before are was ready.
Right now "web content" part of DDI is going fee. One big question that has not been answered is when all of DDI or even more of it goes fee will the "web content" package be renewable.
[...]
It is quite possible that as DDI fee increases you can only renew at the higher DDI price.
[...]
This is an excellent point. WotC, please keep the magazine-only option.
I believe back at DDXP they promise 80+ pages per magazine, and it seems to me they're hitting that.
What they have *not* set in stone is the delivery schedule. M/W/F is a goal - and a semi-firm one at that, but I know many people (myself included) would like to see it set as a hard/guaranteed target.
I agree they're hitting 80+ pages right now. However, there are two problems with this as a measure:
1. Is this a promise? I've heard that word bandied about many times. I've myself used it and other posters have said that WotC never said "promise". Even if they actually use the word "promise", does that legally bind them? Is there anything to prevent them from putting out, say a 70 page magazine? All too often they've said one thing and done another. I just don't know if this is any different in terms of accountability to their customers.
2. Page count is not the best way to measure amount of content. I've been told this repeatedly. (Font size, margin size, etc. can all be changed. Art can be used...or reused....from other sources to pad the mag). Heck anyone who had trouble in highschool trying to write a "20 page paper" knows the tricks. Word count is a bit better since it is what they pay for themselves. Even then, there can be issues such as: are the articles all filler articles with no crunch? (By the way, amount of content, including word count, has been good so far, not necessarily counting September, since it is not done yet).
I too would like to see the M/W/F schedule set in stone. I'd like to see a "contract" of sorts with us when they ask us to pay. "What you will get with your subscription" kind of thing. A true (legally binding) promise, that if they don't meet it, they refund that month's subscriptions.
I also want to know the basics on what each magazine will contain. Dungeon should be pretty easy. Dragon doesn't yet seem to have regular crunch columns that are entrenched. It does seem to have regular fluff columns- that is: the cartoon, editorials, save my game, confessions. These are the least valuable to me as a reader.
Good to see you back, by the by.
Thanks. :D
Oh, you mean for all the tools and everything once they're done? Depending on quality, 120 a year isn't horrible, not for Magazines AND good Tools, but we'll see.
It's horrible for me. The "tools", no matter how good they are, won't run on my operating system and even if they did wouldn't be at all useful for my game. I play with a bunch of computer people, and half of the point is to get away.
I don't begrudge WotC trying to sell the things, but I really don't want to have to pay for them in order to get at the magazine content.
Plus, I want the magazine content to continue to be high-quality. For that to happen, it's important for it to continue to make money on its own. Otherwise, it could become "bonus content" with no effort put into it.
I'd like to see a "contract" of sorts with us when they ask us to pay. "What you will get with your subscription" kind of thing. A true (legally binding) promise, that if they don't meet it, they refund that month's subscriptions.
I can see why you'd want this, but it seems a bit unreasonable to me. Do other magazines do this? If I have a subscription to Popular Mechanics, do they give me some sort of guarantee that their magazine will have at least 80 pages, and 5000 words? Do they guarantee that they will always have these regular articles? What if they want to change the layout? Do they need to send out a legal notification?
To the best of my knowledge, the only guarantee other magazines give is that they will deliver the magazine on a monthly basis. Thats the only guarantee that Wizards has made so far too. Everything else that they've tried to do has just been bonus stuff, as they test out the digital waters.
I can see why you'd want this, but it seems a bit unreasonable to me. Do other magazines do this? If I have a subscription to Popular Mechanics, do they give me some sort of guarantee that their magazine will have at least 80 pages, and 5000 words? Do they guarantee that they will always have these regular articles? What if they want to change the layout? Do they need to send out a legal notification?
To the best of my knowledge, the only guarantee other magazines give is that they will deliver the magazine on a monthly basis. Thats the only guarantee that Wizards has made so far too. Everything else that they've tried to do has just been bonus stuff, as they test out the digital waters.
All in all yes the delivery of a mag is required, could be 4 pages if that is all they have to put out. Setting expectations though is a selling feature and the promotional ads and the free trial period does set some expectations, that should be met.
As far as DDI goes, the debate clearly can start on the one issue of monthly delivery and it appears (and has been stated) that how they define a month ending is different that a reasonable person would consider a month ending.
In general users have been offered a test drive and by now should know goals benchmark that were set and that sooner or later WotC will compile a complete ezine for the last few months , all of 4th Edition. Users are on notice based on their history this month's ezine will be compiled sometime next month, that not all articles listed the first of the month will be included, that edit needs might not be in final compilation.
In general users have been offered a test drive and by mow should know goals benchmark was set and that sooner or later WotC will compile a complete ezine for the last few months , all of 4th Edition. Users are on notice based on their history this month's ezine will be compiled sometime next month, that not all articles listed the first of the month will be included, that edit needs might not be in final compilation.
. . . What?
. . . What?
Did a typo edit of a few words, if you are confused on other please let me know.
Basic point I was going for is what they showed for free the last few months, appears to be what they will soon be providing for fee.
Not correcting typos, errors in rules and not providing a complete ezine at the end of the month as defined by the Christian/Roman calender.
To the best of my knowledge, the only guarantee other magazines give is that they will deliver the magazine on a monthly basis. Thats the only guarantee that Wizards has made so far too. Everything else that they've tried to do has just been bonus stuff, as they test out the digital waters.
Looking at the DDI homepage, under the D&D Magazines entry, this is the first sentence:
"Subscribers have full access to roughly 160 pages of D&D content every month, in the form of two online magazines — Dragon and Dungeon."
That looks like a pretty firm statement of the amount of content. So whether other magazines do that or not is rather irrelevant to WotC using such in their advertising.
And it would appear they are making that more than they are the monthly basis schedule.
Of course both problems would go away if they actually start producing their e-zines ahead of time rather than having the deadline for articles be the day of posting, or even the previous month (if that much).
Are the updates too hard to find?
ANS: No, I have no problem finding the updates.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
ANS: Yes, the schedule is a bit confusing. I check the website MWF for update and do not see an update I get irritated. People are creature of habit make a schedule, stick to the schedule as closely at humanely possible, and people will keep coming back every week.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
ANS: ToC is nice to see what is coming up.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
ANS: The ToC is pretty obvious, but the thrice-weekly content is not very clearly presented.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high, and I want to avoid any issues of presentation and expectation becoming a problem for us where one doesn't need to exist.
ANS: I agree the quality of the content is very good. I do believe the you should when releasing articles you need to give both the player and DM's something to read. Fluff like dragon interviews should not counted as articles. The only thing about the onllne magazines that make me grit my teeth and I find really really annoying is the fact the articles are formatted in landscape instead portrait. One of the reasons I would subscribe to these magazines is so I could print out the articles and bring them to the table. Of course there are way around this annoyance but I find them to be kluge fixes. How about a test offer the magazine pdf in both formats and see which format is the most popular and then stick with that format.
Otherwise keep up the good work, and I will be back next week!!
1. Magazines
.. as mentioned by many others and myself on varoius occasions, digital mags are not my stuff. I was a heavy reader of both Dungeon and Dragon for the last 25 years but I did not ready one article since they are digital. The reason for this is that I dont like to consume readables on PC but like to have mags in my hand, take them to the beach, the plane or the loo :-) to read.
So with respect to this content - it is of little value to me and therefore no reason to subscribe.
2. DDI
.. I´d love to see a Character Builder that allows to build a character including every published material from day one. And yes, if that tool is fine, it would make me subscribe. Alas I have´nt seen anything yet that makes me confident that CB will cover my needs. And I doubt that I will be part of the beta as I never recieved any response from WotC on any of my attempts to be included on any playtest or beta - maybe WotC is not really interested in their customers once they are outside the US or native English speaking countries...
3. Bonus tools
.. What I ve seen so far is completly useless and therefore not compelling.
4. Compendium
.. useless to me because our game table is over cramped with battle maps, minis, drinks and munchies and leaves no more room for 8 active notebooks or even one. Notebooks are not my style at the gaming table.
5. Virtual Gaming Table
.. as above: Useless on our gaming sessions. Actually it lacks the digital equipment to make that really an exiting experiance. Maybe I will invest in a MS Surface table sometimes but until then having beamers and 22 inch LCDs on the gaming table... never!
Virtual Gaming might be interesting to have gaming sessions with fellow players outside our bi-weekly sessions. We´ll see.
This may have been addressed in a statement somewhere but I can not find it on the wizards web site.
Will the magazines be available for purchase as separate entities from DDI? Maybe from RPGNow, alongside the other D&D books?
This may have been addressed in a statement somewhere but I can not find it on the wizards web site.
It was stated as a plan at one of the gathers that there would be non member sale at 3.00 each. I have not seen the statement in print from WotC, however this has been discussed for months on the forum and no one from WotC has not said that the plan was misreported.
As to how the sale will be handled, likely with the same payservice that will handle subscriptions.
Sometimes I really hate the Internet as a communication tool ... my intended tone with the "I'm not interested in debating this point" line was conciliatory...
I also appreciate the apology, and more importantly the willingness to fix whatever might displease customers (like me). However...
What this thread does highlight is something I already thought was true but was trying to stay neutral on so as not to bias the thread: our biggest issue is the lack of a regular release schedule, esp. for the feature articles. Got it.
With respect, I don't think you do quite did get it.
What this thread highlights is that lack of a regular release schedule is a big issue -- but that does not demonstrate that it is the biggest. Other issues (specifically, details about content) are explicitly off-limits.
So you're really not being as conciliatory as you imply. A great many feel their are some serious content failures, though WotC remains "convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high." While I agree that is true, that doesn't mean it's the content that we want.
Wouldn't it be useful to ask us what we want, rather than how we want it?
Regards,
Jack
I can't seem to find the map that it worked with, but one of your adventures in August had this ability. When you can highlight only the labels on the map with the text cursor, then it's possible to click the map when the mouse is a cross and copy the map image without the labels. At least, it works this way in Abode Reader 8.
If your adventures are going to be prepared in a way that evolves for the digital age, they should support multiple digital uses.
I do have one suggestion/question. Has Wizards considered creating an email subscription so that new articles would be dropped in subscribers' inboxes when they're published? I don't know what's involved in this, technologically, but I live in a part of the world where my network connection isn't always reliable, and email tends to give me less trouble than full-fledged web traffic.
My largest concern is with the archival compilations at the end of each month. I would love to see corrected versions of the individual articles included in these archives. By this I don't mean finished versions of playtest articles or totally rewritten articles, but ones with the typos, oversights, and layout glitches corrected.
I quoted this and I find this to be my biggest complaint and concern about the magazines themselves.
I thought the feedback on the issues was looked for by WoTC with the first Dungeon adventure, and plenty of typos, confusing parts, and layout issues were commented on by many in the community to help with the AP release. There was a general belief at that time that the compiled issue would include a corrected and edited version of the adventure. When this did not happen and no attempt to fix the adventure was apparent, much disappointment ensued.
Please consider editing the articles, especially the adventures, as there is much community support for giving useful feedback on improving what is put out. Being able to do this is one of the few advantages I believe the digital format has over the paper one.
rooster
No I think they are pretty easy to find. The only comment I have (and others have made it as well) is more consistent linking to the TOC would be helpful.
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
No and I don't mind if articles are occassionally late, but as others have pointed out when occassionally late articles areadded to some days with only cartoons and editorials, some people may feel sleighted. If I am understanding things it appears articles are not completed very far in advance. This seems strange to me. If the article was done a week or two in advance (including editing) then there should be no problems. Now it may just be you don't have a pipeline of articles built up yet and that over time these issues will go away.
As for the 11:59 issue. While I guess it's not a big deal, if the articles were done ahead of time, then they could be posted in the morning (say 10 AM Pacific) rather than at 6 or 7 or 8 PM Pacific.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time
Definitely, I like having the TOC ahead of time.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
No it is not confusing at all. But it could usea revamp. Perhaps it is an issue with my browser configuration but the news and sage advice blocks at the bottom of the main page are just black boxes. I can't see whay is there until I put my cursor over it.
From my seat, I remain convinced that the quality of the content we're generating is quite high
I agree with you 100%. The quality of the content has been quite high. I think that the problem that is frustrating so many people is the perceived lack of communication. People feel that deadlines are not being met on a consistent basis, add to that the fact that we were all expecting the tools before now, and you can kind of see where the frustration is coming from.
But let me just say this. I recognize that DDi and the electronic magazines are still really new and I believe that many of the problems (most notably the occassional late article) are things that can and will be worked out over time. I look forward to the new content every M-W-F.
Regarding the "Is our website navigation so confusing?" question Randy asked in his column, way back in posting#22 of this thread, Kouk had this to say:
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
The actual Web site is confusing, or at least poorly made. That has been stated many times. I am aware of the table of contents, the updates etc. primarily from the Forums, which to date have been much clearer in their presentation.
My absolute largest complaint as pertains to the magazines is in the "Issue Archives" is that it is in no way intuitive to place the link for the Compiled Issue inside the cover picture. People simply do not expect to find links of any sort hidden in a PORTION of a picture, which they have looked at before, even though it now has a little green "button."
If you want to keep a "download complete issue" button there, then fine -- but also put a more "Mundane" link at the top of the table of contents area below it, so people can download it without having to even look at the cover to find it.
(bolding mine for emphasis)
I cannot agree more with the validity of this comment. In fact, I'd like to invite anyone of the WOTC staff responsible for designing, maintaining, and updating content on their website to try a little experiment. Viewers at home can play along too:
1) From the default home page of your Web browser of choice, go into the Tools/Options section, and TURN OFF IMAGE LOADING. Do this BEFORE accessing the public WOTC D&D page.
2) Refresh your browser or close it down then reopen it. Navigate to the WOTC D&D pages. You should notice a whole lot of white space, and a bunch of icons indicating image placeholders. If you're using Internet Explorer, you might see the Flash animation. Firefox users probably won't see it.
3) Click the “dragon” link on the left-hand side of the page. In the sub-menu that drops in, click “Issue Archive”.
4)Again, notice the tremendous amount of white space. Scroll down to see the info on the various completed issues.
5)Click on the link for any issue. Try Issue 365 for a start.
6)Once again, notice the big white space where the cover photo should be.
7) Now look at the entire page on your screen. Examine it really closely from a visual perspective, from top to bottom. Do not use your mouse. Notice anything missing from this visual inspection?
Here endeth the experiment.
Did you see what was missing (or NOT see it, as the case may be?)
There is NO download link immediately visible at all. NONE. That is to say, there is no text link indicating downloadable content. If you want to find the download link, it's indicated by one of the nondescript image placeholders at the top left corner of the box where the cover image should be. Move your mouse over each of those placeholders – one of them should indicate a link.
Even in this day and age, there are some people who choose not to automatically load images when a page loads because it saves a lot of time and resources. In addition, there may be times when the image is broken and not visible to those who DO load images.
In these situations, it is extremely difficult to locate the download link. Short of mousing over every single image placeholder, it is impossible to find it at all. This is the “intuitive” aspect Kouk was referring to. Viewing the page like this, it is not at all intuitive to locate the download link. Why? Because there is no text link to the content.
Two of the most basic principles of website design are:
-- never assume that your viewers have the same technical capacity (or sense of logic) that you do when it comes to placement of elements on a page.
-- always aim for text redundancy. If you're going to use an image (or part of an image) as a link, you should always include a separate and easy-to-find text link for the same content.
WOTC's web designers might see it as perfectly logical to bury/embed a download link inside a picture (even one that features a “button” image saying “Download Complete Issue Now!”), but not everyone will see this at all, or interpret it as a link. Even now, more than a decade since the Web first came to the public's attention, people are still used to seeing pictures as pictures, and hypertext links as highlighted/differently colored/underlined text. It's what we're trained by experience to do, as it's been the common practice since Day One.
When images become or contain links, it is not always safe to assume that people will notice. The fact that there have been multiple postings on these boards asking “where's the link” in reference to this content is proof that some people AREN'T noticing.
Interestingly enough, the download page for Dragon#366 does include a text link to the download, albeit a low-bandwidth version (whereas the image link goes to the high-bandwidth version). Kudos for recognizing the issue and offering an alternative link; however, I'm willing to guess that many people (especially first-time viewers) more readily spotted and identified the text link provided as a link than they did with the image link -- a testament to the enduring usefulness of text links.
So, after all the above, here is my suggestion:
In designing the website for maximum ease of use and navigability, the WOTC web design team needs to defer to the redundancy factor, if nothing else, in order to:
(a) include either a “mundane” text link to the downloadable content in addition to the image link; or
(b) provide a text instruction indicating that the “Download Complete Issue Now!” image is the link.
The first option is preferred, the second is acceptable in the absence of the first.
This will go a long way toward avoiding some of the confusion inherent in the site design and navigation issues.
Anyway, that's just my 2cp worth.
I can see why you'd want this, but it seems a bit unreasonable to me. Do other magazines do this? If I have a subscription to Popular Mechanics, do they give me some sort of guarantee that their magazine will have at least 80 pages, and 5000 words? Do they guarantee that they will always have these regular articles? What if they want to change the layout? Do they need to send out a legal notification?
To the best of my knowledge, the only guarantee other magazines give is that they will deliver the magazine on a monthly basis. Thats the only guarantee that Wizards has made so far too. Everything else that they've tried to do has just been bonus stuff, as they test out the digital waters.
You are correct, IMO. The reason I would want this is and why I think this situation is unique is because of two things:
1. WotC is essentially "starting" these magazines. They are only just beginning to get them going in any kind of a standardized format, still with bugs, snafus, and missed deadlines, deleted items from the ToC, etc. Established magazines have a long period of publication, such that precedent shows what you are likely to get. I can feel confident in getting a Popular Mechanics subscription. I can't feel confident in getting this one. Your Popular Mechanics example also applies to the print versions of these very same magazines. When they were printed, I knew what I was getting. I did subscribe, and I got what I expected. With WotC's current production of these magazines, I'm not confident I know what to expect, which I think (given the responses of others in this thread) is not a unique situation to be in. As others have stated, their "precedent" for what they are putting out (from their "trial period") has been shaky and erratic. I don't want to pay for something shaky and erratic.
2. WotC has a long history (especially recently and especially regarding the emags) of stating "promising" one thing and delivering another. The argument of "don't complain, it's free" is one I've heard with some frequency. OK. Now it's not going to be free anymore. I want some assurance that they can't continue this pattern. I expect that the best way to get that is with some sort of "official" promise with a moneyback guarantee. I want there to be some pressure on them to actually meet deadlines. Although goodwill (the economic/accounting goodwill) doesn't appear to be a primary driving asset(given the state of these forums, the mess with insider, etc.) I AM confident that cash will be. I think we might just get everything on the ToC if they have to refund every single person's monthly subscription upon failing to meet that. I don't thing we have that guarantee if they don't have a true penalty.
I want my damn online gaming table. That's it. Everything else, you can keep as "fluff".
Since it's clear that's not ready, I want to know a DATE CERTAIN that I can just HOPE for it to actually be ready by. Are we talking about January 2009? January 2010? How are things unfolding. What funcionality disasters are in store for us? Hell, if there are problems, it would satisfy me to know what the evolving problems are. I mean, you've probably got about 50% of the world's most computer savy techno-dorks just sitting here waiting to help out for free!
A good calendar with ETAs is what's needed to abate the hate.
I live 40 minutes to an hour away from my nearest game store. I have an irregular schedule, I cannot commit to a weekly game, because my schedule changes on a weekly basis.
I love D&D, and have loved it since I laid my hands on the Fiend Folio when I was about 11 years old. 19 years later my gaming shelf is full of 3.X / 4.0 books, along with miniatures, rules/minis for other games, etc.
I want to play. The gaming table is my best chance of getting anything even remotely resembling a "regular game time" in at the moment.
So...where is it? What's going on? Some communication about WHY these tools aren't ready yet, why they aren't available, would be nice. I understand that coding and testing takes time, but there was a lot of buzz generated based around the availability of these tools.
The fact that they aren't ready yet, and only now is 1 of them even being talked about being worthy of a beta (with no idea what it's going to be capable of actually doing to the general public) causes concern in your customer base.
Concerns that you aren't able to deliver on your own hype.
Concerns that "promised" tools are going to go up in smoke and become nothing more then a forgotten dream.
Concerns that WotC is not willing to communicate clearly with their customer base.
I would consider myself a very web and tech savy person, as I'm a CompSci major and have done some small work with websites. I had NO CLUE there was a table of contents, nor that the updates were being posted on a M/W/F schedule. Frankly I think the layout of the magazines on the website is pretty bad. It needs to be much more user friendly. As things have stood since DDI has launched, I don't think I'll be subscribing. I have some spare time now and then to browse websites, and I usually come here about once a week... for 15 minutes before I go somewhere else to read something easier to navigate. I'd make this your number one priority to fix.
EDIT:Also, I read the magicthegathering.com webcontent, as I am a card flopper as well as a dice chucker. Over there, they have a daily (M-F) release schedule for articles and the articles go live every night at 12am EST. Now, I understand that the content we get for D&D and the articles that go up on mtg.com are vastly different and require different levels of work, but it would be really nice if your content release worked the same way. Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 12:00am an automated service would load that days content. I think, especially since we're going to be paying for this content, that shouldn't be too much to ask. It goes with what others in this thread have been saying, people are expecting content on certain days, they log on and its not there. If I went to mtg.com every day and the content was not there (without an explanation for why it was missing) I'd feel less inclined to check it every day. Thats essentially whats happened to me with this website. I know that there is a good chance if I check this site on a M/W/F that the content won't be up yet, so I don't bother.
That's my two cents.
I'll give you feedback.
I want my damn online gaming table. That's it. Everything else, you can keep as "fluff".
Since it's clear that's not ready, I want to know a DATE CERTAIN that I can just HOPE for it to actually be ready by. Are we talking about January 2009? January 2010? How are things unfolding. What funcionality disasters are in store for us? Hell, if there are problems, it would satisfy me to know what the evolving problems are. I mean, you've probably got about 50% of the world's most computer savy techno-dorks just sitting here waiting to help out for free!
A good calendar with ETAs is what's needed to abate the hate.
Good luck with getting dates. Wizards won't give dates until they know what is going to be ready. After they found out how we responded to their HORRID handling of the lack of DDi release, I don't think they're even willing to give us dates.
What still erks me though is they knew MONTHS in advance that DDi wouldn't be ready and STILL didn't even hint at the fact that it'd be late. They mentioned it in the tiny ampersand, and on the forums. They told no one outside of the people who commonly visit the WotC community.
One example is the original issues of Dragon/Dungeon released during 3.5. They are still not compiled into single pdfs as was plainly stated (if not "promised") that they would be. It is now something like 6 months later and it still hasn't been done.
Do I personally care about those? No, they are 3.5 and not too useful to me right now.
However, it is one more thing hanging over you guys' heads that has been promised and not delivered -- and seemingly it is an exceedingly simple thing to do, something that could be done in half an hour (hell, some only have 2 articles). Just shoring up on those numerous "small" problems goes a long way to erasing the perception of ... not delivering things.
One suggestion that I think would be really helpful, would be to list content that may be DM specific as just that. Maybe these articles have a spear or a staff or another insignia. The reality is that many of us are all new players & DM's right now living in a brand new 4th Edition world. I am a new DM in this world, and many of the players visit the site regularly. When you issue great new ideas, they all know about it. So while the article on Gnolls was an awesome read, and I plan on using it, it's a tough thing telling all my geek friends that are totally caught up in the new 4th Ed release not to read that article because I plan on using it. They respect that enough, but what happens when I don't see it first? I know we're all grownups and also are totally stoked for the newness and that many groups may not be like mine, but when I say not to read the new articles, they all listen. To tell them going forward not to read any articles that are in the DM section, or articles that are listed with a spear next to them, would be very helpful.
Again, I want them all to enjoy the new content as much as I do. I just want to have first dibs on certain articles you write. They all have been dying to get their hands on the Monster Manual but are following my direction when I say not to until the campaign is thru because the impact will be greater and the games will be more fun as we'll learn this on the fly & share in this newness together. And that next time, we can all use all books and articles. It's simply that this time, the first time around, is special and we should make it like when we first played and had no clue how anything worked or how any monsters or traps worked. You only get that once.
Get rid of the black decorative border on the top of the page! Please!!! I prefer to read a printed copy and all the border does is waste ink. I just blew out my black cartridge today printing out "Children of Darkness", and that was even on Fast Draft setting. Copying, pasting, and reformatting into word is a, well, bad word that rhymes with "itch" when you're trying to keep charts and illustrations near where they're relevant.
PLEASEPLEASEPLEASE!!! Lose the black border!
Other than that, hugs, kisses, and squeals of glee!
I would like to see it made easier to find archived articles. And I think it'd be cool if, for paying subscribers (which I'll become, probably*) there were e-mail reminders at the end of the month when the issues are collected.
*as a Mac user, I'm willing to pay in the realm of $5-7 a month for the mags, as is currently discussed. The old version of a greater cost that included all the applications made me unlikely to join, because I don't like paying for stuff I can't use.
Since it's clear that's not ready, I want to know a DATE CERTAIN that I can just HOPE for it to actually be ready by. Are we talking about January 2009? January 2010? How are things unfolding. What funcionality disasters are in store for us? Hell, if there are problems, it would satisfy me to know what the evolving problems are. I mean, you've probably got about 50% of the world's most computer savy techno-dorks just sitting here waiting to help out for free!
There's always augmenting existing open source technology for virtual game tables, or building your own?
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
I would answer both of these questions with the same answer. Put a release date on each item in the TOC. This allows a person not interested in some articles to know when to check back for the one he wants. It also gives us a way to know when something will be posted. If you worry that the article will not be done in time, The only answer I can give to that is to have all articles done before the month starts. Leave only tweaking and minor editing to be done during the month. This is how most other publications work.
As an aside about the articles. Some may find that the personal experience of one of the writers in a certain game session interesting, it is not something I would constitute a "Article". I say this because while the quality has been good most of what has been released is useless to me. Dragon is nearly useless other than as an idea source for my own games, this is due to my desire to do my JOB as a GM and make my own adventures. And Dragon only ever has one or two articles that have any bearing on the game as a whole. I would strongly suggest to either increase the amount of content so as to increase the chance of something useful to everyone, or if more is not an option at least cut out a lot of the stuff that does the general gamer no good. Examples from this current Dragon are as follows
Confessions of a Full-Time Wizard By Shelly Mazzanoble
Shelly talks about how what she learned as a DM made her a better player.
While this is something that could help some gamers, it is a singular point of view. This kind of subject would be better left for the general D&D website for those that have not subscribed to Insider. Maybe with an encouragement for them to join Insider to get more helpful articles.
RPGA Report By Chris Tulach
This month, Chris tells us more about the Living Forgotten Realms campaign and how you can get involved.
This kind of thing should never be on an Insider only source. It is saying to the public that they have to join Insider to play in the RPGA. While it is your hope that people would join Insider to get all the stuff that it will give, it should not be a requirement to be able to follow what is happening in the Living Forgotten Realms.
These were just the first two that stood out to me. I felt it was better to give examples than it would be to just say what I felt and leave it at that.
I do have one suggestion/question. Has Wizards considered creating an email subscription so that new articles would be dropped in subscribers' inboxes when they're published? I don't know what's involved in this, technologically, but I live in a part of the world where my network connection isn't always reliable, and email tends to give me less trouble than full-fledged web traffic.
Have you considered subscribing to the RSS feed? Its not Email, but it does tell you when something new has been released.
RPGA Report By Chris Tulach
This month, Chris tells us more about the Living Forgotten Realms campaign and how you can get involved.
This kind of thing should never be on an Insider only source. It is saying to the public that they have to join Insider to play in the RPGA. While it is your hope that people would join Insider to get all the stuff that it will give, it should not be a requirement to be able to follow what is happening in the Living Forgotten Realms.
These were just the first two that stood out to me. I felt it was better to give examples than it would be to just say what I felt and leave it at that.
I agree here, however, I've noticed that, since this (and Shelly's article which you also mentioned) aren't PDFs they don't currently require a login to be read.
My speculation is these kinds of "crunch-free editorials" will likely remain free. Especially as the RPGA has the stated goal of remaining a free-of-charge benefit. I suspect that we'll hear more than a few complaints in the RPGA forums if we can't get our monthly updates without being paid subscribers.
Admittedly, I don't think the PDFs require a login at the moment, but I still hold hope that these "non-downloaded" articles will be free to the public, just as the "preview" of an article (that page that has a single-paragraph blurb and the download link) should be (after all, you want to entice people with an article description to get them to signup for the goods. . .).
1) The RPGA stuff in particular should be free, its bad enough that you need someone in your RPGA group to have a subscription to keep up to date with the options that come about, without putting RPGA specific content in a subscription service.
2) I really don't want free stuff rolled into stuff I'm paying for.
I agree here, however, I've noticed that, since this (and Shelly's article which you also mentioned) aren't PDFs they don't currently require a login to be read.
What's annoying is that you do have to be logged in to view the printer friendly versions of those columns.
-the page is cluttered, I never saw the ToC, i have trouble to find new and old stuff, I can only easily follow what is put in the front page. I'm kin web savvy and do websites for a living. Make tha page clean, or at least make the page configurable.
-the ToC should stay, and should have the precise date for each article. Magazines are made in advance. You don't deal with real time content. If for any reason the article is removed, make a guy post saying why, and post anything to fill in. Even a new monster, a series of Q&A, anything.
-For the schedule, make it daily. 2 days for dragon content, 1 day for Dungeon content, 2 days for cartoons and editorials and stuff. I rather have something new every day in a online mag, than have 1-2 days of nothing than see 3 articles.
-Yes, cartoons, editorial, RPGA and these kind of stuff are not content. Don't count then.
-Use html. We are digital. PDF is only cool if you download. Use hyperlinks, javascripts and everything. You said that D&D are going digital. Make it so.
-All the failed promises are very bad. You announced the 4th Ed with the Game Table and the Character Visualizer. Were are they?
-Maybe you are really needing these income, but I don't think you are quite ready to charge. To many thing to improve.
Ah! And the content is nice. Maybe some more articles for the DM that aren't adventures. And maybe more new options articles for players.
Usually no, but lately there has been the habit of having two or so articles go live at the same time, and sometimes when they do they are out of order from the release time. I noticed this with the Class Acts: Swordmage article it will be listed below other articles that came out earlier while the Hall of the Frostmaiden article hogged the preview space. Thus I only found out about the Class Acts article the other day
Is our schedule too difficult to follow?
Oh definitely not, and I must say I love it. I come on and check every day even still though because sometimes other things on the website change and I'm really digging this new edition and love any material I can get on it. However, lately the MWF scheme seems to have glossed over a little tardy, maybe that's why people are feeling off. But hey, this is new, I like to write a lot and I know that finishing an article can be a pain. Once this stuff goes live that's it, game over articles finished. I'd rather have a completely finished article than an extra page on unattractive errata. That having been said, an errata section of the magazine going over some things from the last magazine might be nice, for instance does the Shadow Slime from the Bestiary in issue 367 have "Shadow Jump"? Tying up little loose ends like that would be great. And frankly, I love reading about why something was created the way it was, so it'd be great to maybe hear a little about what Shadow Jump was supposed to be and why it was omitted from the final draft. I love that stuff.
Is it good to see the Table of Contents ahead of time because it promotes interest and discussion, or is the tease a net negative?
For me, it's good, heck its great. I have two groups and we're just switching over to forth edition after trying out a bi-weekly five session H1 game. The ToCs let me look ahead for whats coming, so if say Casey's human cleric dies and he wants to make a new gnoll warlord, I can say "Hold on Casey, a new article is coming out that is bound to have some info on how to play a 4E Gnoll, and I bet it has some new rules." So instead of Casey making his gnoll warlord, working out a build and then reading the other article and erasing and arguing with himself about which build he should ultimately use we can save the negative time and let him build the character he wants right away. The ToC really comes in handy after the party has leveled, sometimes I tell them to put off leveling if I see an article they might like is coming out between sessions. It's saved some hassle let me tell you.
Is our website navigation so confusing that you didn't even know there was a Table of Contents or thrice-weekly content updates?
I don't think so, the link is right on the left side of the page and I think most people find it pretty easily. As for the thrice-weekly update, most people probably don't know about that. I have only seen in mentioned in your newsletters and mentioned in a podcast. Most people who come on the website, devoted though they may be to the website probably don't feel they have much time to devote to absorbing what may be considered as an "extra", like your newsletter and the podcasts, and even possibly Ampersand. Most people these days have a lot to do and an even shorter time to do it in, and as far as gaming goes if the article is all fluff no crunch it runs the risk of being missed. And I think that's what has happened with the Digital Insider thrice-weekly message. Perhaps it would help slightly if Chris "Can I Play a Troll" Youngs to mention it in an editorial more people would receive the message.
At first, access to the beta will be restricted to subscribers and other specifically selected playtesters...
A lot of people seem to be confused about this statement. I assume some of these playtesters are the ones who signed up at Gen Con, yes?
Thank you for another thrilling look into DnDI, and I hope to hear more later.
Still not payin till most of the dndi features become active *cough cough* gaming table *cough cough* ...
i see links to download whole Dungeon or Dragon magizines for the first few issuses but what about the last one ? I dont see a link to download the whole months worth of stuff. Whats up ?
Which last one??
What issue?
ps: good to see that most of the issues brought up by the community in this thread was handled in already the next dnd insider
Thank you.
Thank you for your weekly updates and your very clear willingness to both listen to and implement feedback.
Again,
Thank you.