Even though I grew up in the instant gratification generation, I think the polish is worth the wait. Take your time (but hopefully not too much) and if you keep us in the loop, we appreciate it.
Okay, well, replace everything we with I or me - I just very much hope others feel the same way.
Personally, I don't remember any articles that were of "lower quality."
The quality of the magazine overall has declined a lot. It dropped significantly in word count as well.
We are March 21st, and there is not a single Dragon article out yet its what readers look for. I hardly see how the system has improved or where are the slow and steady progress is but its disgressing and its been more than 80 days.
Also, your readers want Dragon/Dungeon compiled back and have told you in different medias and fashion.
Stay with us
EDITED
not everyone wants the compilations back. In addition, i care more about the errors getting corrected rather than getting it exactly right the first time. That's not a bad goal to have. But its not feasible with a system this complex.
The problem is, even with the new review process, in both January and February we still had several articles in need of updates - the same sort of minor fixes they needed before.
I mean, for myself, I do applaud the effort to try and have a greater review process. But I did not feel the previous content had any truly major mistakes, and the fact that they could fix those mistakes mitigated any problems even further.
As it is, Trevor talks about publishing several articles last year that failed to live up to their standards. And yet, I can't imagine anyone who prefers the current situation over what we had last year. As it is, if they really want to have a better review process, they should accompany that by developing a backlog of material, so that they aren't trying to finish content right before it is posted. If they could establish a backlog, they could have a regular schedule, regular content, and time to catch and fix problems in the articles.
That said, I'm certainly willing to wait and see if it gets better. But given that we were told pretty much the same thing in January, and it has only gotten worse since then - and even if they get on schedule, we will still be receiving reduced content with no reason given as to why - my optimism fades by the day.
But, even with all that, I am glad to see communication from them and acknowledgement of the situation, and for that I do want to thank Trevor.
not everyone wants the compilations back
True. But many people do, enough to pay for the effort, and very very few people would complain about a compilation. (more would complain about compilation if it meant individual articles weren't updated, but the update process still seems to be broken anyway)
I've been tracking Dragon content for a while:
The huge decline between 387 and 388 is pretty easy to see, but you'll also notice a steady drop off from 388 on (skipping the assassin article).
And you'll see a pretty bad drop off between 395 and 396 too.
Obviously, no red dragon, so I'll have to ask others to compile stats for 397 so I can update the chart, but currently you've got one article from 396 (chart is based on calendar months more than dragon issues) and ... ... ..
So we'll see if they can pull this month up from a goose-egg to something noteable. But either way, Dragon content has been failing for months and months now. It's not just this month.
(From what I can tell, Dungeon Content is doing great. I think it's gotten significantly better over the last year in terms of quality of content. It's just Dragon that's gone to pot. And the Character Builder. And the Monster Builder. But mostly Dragon)
not everyone wants the compilations back. In addition, i care more about the errors getting corrected rather than getting it exactly right the first time. That's not a bad goal to have. But its not feasible with a system this complex.
Honestly, I can't see someone actively NOT wanting them to do compilations, unless they are just wanting to be jerky about it.
Not caring if there is a compilation yes, but saying "I don't want the compilations back"?
this scared the hell out of me, i thought it was going to be more vt delays
Great, there's another hour of waiting added on.
...
Look, thanks for letting us know the reason for the delays. It is definitely nice to hear some insight into the process, though I can't help but feel we heard this a month or two ago. The problem is (at least for me), this isn't like when a book gets delayed. The book still costs the same amount if it comes out now, or in 2 months. We aren't buying by the article though; we are paying a subscription. Every delay and month of extremely low content is not just us having to wait, it is us paying the same amount and getting virtually nothing.
I'm really trying here. I love this game, and I love to see new content and support. I am willing to pay to support it. I'm just getting really frustrated here.
The first year of the magazine felt like a very reasonable approximation of the old titles, and I really enjoyed reading them. I've stopped reading the content, as I stare at an LCD screen at least 10 hours a day and don't really enjoy reading them now except on my iPad. I can compile myself, but won't do it. That seems unreasonable to me.
I'm still subscribing, but the last 6 months of slips are making me question the value. I see some good signs with the other tools though and truly hope you guys can pull this off. Best of luck, and please do recompile. I just want one monthly pdf, and for me that's a bigger deal than how you go about correcting errors.
The last tool was released a year and a half ago. Only magazine articles and content update (which SHOULD be minimally time consuming if your articles and books are created with a content management system, which they appear to be) to the Character Builder.
-Online software is not sufficient. I play offline, I travel and am offline for hours and hours a week that I try to use as my "me" time. i.e. time I do gaming stuff.
- If I ran my engagements with customers as you have for new software development, I would not expect to be paid. For example, where's a release schedule?
- Why release a suite of tools (Adventure Tools) and only ever have a single tool? You had the encounter builder online for a bit, you should have atleast put that into the tools.
- You've stopped updating the Monster Builder, so now you have no tools.
- Two online magazines are not worth it to me. I never really read them anyway. I subscribed for software to help me game.
And now with effectively no magazines and very little new content, I'm done. What am I supposed to be paying for? Cause I'm not getting it.
We'll see if you actually release Adventrue Tools online tomorrow. Maybe it will just blow me away and I'll renew my subscription. But your track record to dte is dismal.
And while I appreciate the heads-up, I'm not entirely buying into it. Initially, yes. There would be a ramp-up time to get caught up. But eventually, the QC would be flowing as it had in the past. I.e. if it took 1 month to clear an article for release, and it now takes 6 weeks, I would expect a bit of a delay up front, then back on schedule after that two week bubble.
As to more details or a further peak behind the curtain - this is what we have guys. They're doing their best to get you those articles - nobody is happy about the delays. Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March, so hopefully after that we'll see a return to the monthly content.
So what caused this sudden lapse in QC? This wasn't an issue 12/24 months ago. Why the last 6 months? If there is an admitted quantity/quality issue going on, why are we still paying premium price for the DDI service?
And while I appreciate the heads-up, I'm not entirely buying into it. Initially, yes. There would be a ramp-up time to get caught up. But eventually, the QC would be flowing as it had in the past. I.e. if it took 1 month to clear an article for release, and it now takes 6 weeks, I would expect a bit of a delay up front, then back on schedule after that two week bubble.
I'm beginning to lose ground in my fight of disbelief against the 5e rumors.
I just don't see any plausible explanation for all of these delays other than: something else is taking up the developers' time.
Of course 5e is just a rumor, and please take my coment toung-in-cheek (I have NO knowledge about what is really happening behind the curtain), but there is most certainly something more going on here than meets the eye. Of that much, I am certain!
I can't actually take too much credit for the post, at least not beyond making sure we got more information. I actually stole these words from the desk and mind of Chris Perkins.
As to more details or a further peak behind the curtain - this is what we have guys. They're doing their best to get you those articles - nobody is happy about the delays. Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March, so hopefully after that we'll see a return to the monthly content.
I try to avoid negative posts. But I'm finding it harder and harder to resist. Care to comment on the fact that the are 9 articles planned for this months dragon magazine while the average this time last year was ~22? Less than half the content (most of which is editorials) is not acceptable.
I can't actually take too much credit for the post, at least not beyond making sure we got more information. I actually stole these words from the desk and mind of Chris Perkins.
As to more details or a further peak behind the curtain - this is what we have guys. They're doing their best to get you those articles - nobody is happy about the delays. Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March, so hopefully after that we'll see a return to the monthly content.
I try to avoid negative posts. But I'm finding it harder and harder to resist. Care to comment on the fact that the are 9 articles planned for this months dragon magazine while the average this time last year was ~22? Less than half the content (most of which is editorials) is not acceptable.
They have already said a month ago there is going to be less content. However, that is a very deep drop.
I can't actually take too much credit for the post, at least not beyond making sure we got more information. I actually stole these words from the desk and mind of Chris Perkins.
As to more details or a further peak behind the curtain - this is what we have guys. They're doing their best to get you those articles - nobody is happy about the delays. Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March, so hopefully after that we'll see a return to the monthly content.
Thanks Trevor. We know R&D work hard but lack manpower i guess. March being on time would actually be a good start. There's only a week and a half left to fill Dragon up though. C'mon guys, you can do it ! ;)
Also, any word on the compile back ?
I can't actually take too much credit for the post, at least not beyond making sure we got more information. I actually stole these words from the desk and mind of Chris Perkins.
As to more details or a further peak behind the curtain - this is what we have guys. They're doing their best to get you those articles - nobody is happy about the delays. Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March, so hopefully after that we'll see a return to the monthly content.
“ They're doing their best to get you those articles -
If an organization consistently fails to meet deadlines or basic customer expectations then the problem is one of three things.
- The deadlines and expectations are not realistic
- In this case the deadlines and expectations used to be met
- Staff is not up to the task
- In this case the staff has shown itself to be able to provide
- Quality content
- A reasonable amount of content
- A meeting of deadlines
- Basically happy customers.
- In this case the staff has shown itself to be able to provide
- Not enough resources are being utilized on the project
Appropriate resources along with decent management would mean that deadlines and quality would be up to at least minimum standards, standards that the organization keeps dropping.
In my opinion this all comes down to one thing. How much of my subscription is used to develop and publish content (including character builder and the other pieces) , and how much of what I pay is used to create profit or subsidize other areas of the business.
nobody is happy about the delays.
Trevor, One very important difference is that Chris and his staff are being paid to not be happy about the delays and the subscribers are paying to be unhappy about the delays.
“Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March,”
I hope that if all of March’s content is indeed published in March that it is not seen as a success or victory. At best it is meeting the lowest level of expectation and in my opinion not something for the staff to feel proud of or of the subscribers to celebrate as anything more than your company and your staff meeting the minimum obligation. An obligation, that as earlier posters have visually shown has dropped significantly.
You talk about quality control being the reason for delays, yet in character builder the staff was unable to get the Eladrin Knight entered correctly, even after 2 and a half months. That is a great example of a delay that happened and it appears that it happened without any effective quality control.
I suspect that will what happen, following the trends and patterns that WOC has shown in recent months, is that the minimum expectations will keep dropping until they become impossible to not meet.
You used to put out a product that in my opinion you could be very proud of, and one that offered strong value for the cost.
I try to avoid negative posts. But I'm finding it harder and harder to resist. Care to comment on the fact that the are 9 articles planned for this months dragon magazine while the average this time last year was ~22? Less than half the content (most of which is editorials) is not acceptable.
They have already said a month ago there is going to be less content. However, that is a very deep drop.
Just to be clear, those numbers don't give a truly accurate reflection of things either. Remember, this time last year was when they had just switched to a new approach of filling Dragon with many, many very short articles.
Looking over the magazine in the beginning, we would see 7-10 Dragon articles a month for subscribers. I'm only counting actual DDI content here, not free content like Editorials, Ampersand, Design and Development, etc. Even though, interesting, that used to be pay content, and is now free content.
Now, we also tended to have longer articles, as opposed to the 3-4 page material we received in 2010.
As it is, we are looking at 5 Dragon subscriber articles this month. No idea on how long they will be - though February's articles were at least of moderate length, so we may have a minor improvement there.
All that said, we are definitely looking at significantly reduced content, and I'd love to have Trevor - or anyone - offer us a reason why. But the reduction is not nearly as clear as simply comparing number of articles alone.
But the reduction is not nearly as clear as simply comparing number of articles alone.
Which is why my graph, above, counts "Pages of Player Content". That excludes the columns and previews, but includes pure-fluff articles about being a halfling. (There have been a few setting articles with NPCs and the like that have been put into Dragon as player content. I've tended to exclude them as not really player content. But a pure flavor article for players (focused more on culture than adventure hooks, for example) will get counted as player content).
By my counting of that metric, Dragon was running around 65 pages from 382 to 387, and is running more like 40 pages now (although the last two months have have come in a 33 and 35)
Do we really need official explanations? This is a business. If they reduce content you have a few choices, maybe a mix of those.
-Not enough income, so they reduce spending.
-They want to raise profit, so reduce spending.
-Resources are needed elsewhere. /cough 5th /cough
-Only a few DDI subscribers actually download the emag articles. So they are willing to sacrifice content.
I am just curious why they do not have a back log of already writen and checked articles.
well, they tend to pair up the articles with what recently came out (and old stuff), so it's hard to have a back log of articles for newish content.
Do we really need official explanations? This is a business. If they reduce content you have a few choices, maybe a mix of those.
-Not enough income, so they reduce spending.
-They want to raise profit, so reduce spending.
-Resources are needed elsewhere. /cough 5th /cough
-Only a few DDI subscribers actually download the emag articles. So they are willing to sacrifice content.
I am just curious why they do not have a back log of already writen and checked articles.
well, they tend to pair up the articles with what recently came out (and old stuff), so it's hard to have a back log of articles for newish content.
Hard to believe that though when they clearly know many months in advance what "what recently came out" will be. My perception is that they just aren't viewing the "magazines" from a print media standpoint, but more like a glorified blog. That's not meant to be insulting, just how it feels.
I'm somewhat happy to see that Trevor (aka Chris in this case) knows there is a significant problem, but disappointed that they don't seem to know how to get a handle on the lack of content. I'm assuming the chunks they'll take from the cancelled books will get them back on track. Hopefully soon, and I can't believe I'm saying that since we've been repeating it off and on for 6+ months.
subscriptions aren't down (but people who unsubscribe are still part of the group)...
Um? I was removed from the group both times. I'm not aware of anyone, other than DMaple right now, who unsubscribed and was not removed from the group. Sometimes it just takes a couple of weeks.
subscriptions aren't down (but people who unsubscribe are still part of the group)...
Um? I was removed from the group both times. I'm not aware of anyone, other than DMaple right now, who unsubscribed and was not removed from the group. Sometimes it just takes a couple of weeks.
So what you are saying is that there are people that have unsubscribed that are part of the group. Thanks for clarifying.
With all due respect (and I do mean that sincerely), while I appreciate the numbers and graphs, there is just no way to solidify their accuracy, particularly when they defy the logic that abounds. The product is degrading. When products degrade, sales and subscriptions take a hit. They don't increase.
If the sales actually do increase, it would be in the 1% of businesses that succeed while producing inferior product. More likely, the numbers are inaccurate, or padded for posterity.
That you are aware of...
Correct. But I find it more plausible that I would have heard of counter examples than not, given the interests of those aware of counter examples.
they defy the logic that abounds. The product is degrading. When products degrade, sales and subscriptions take a hit. They don't increase.
Oh, how I wish that I could believe that.
Personally, I'm about one more bad product away from calling up, cancelling, and demanding a refund back trhough January.
The new approval process made the daily content calendar untenable. We in R&D needed more flexibility to ensure that we were satisfied with the quality of each article. We felt the overall quality of the magazines would improve if we set a monthly timeframe within which articles would appear, as opposed to a weekly or daily timeframe. In January, we started redirecting people from the daily content calendar to the Table of Contents webpages for monthly content summaries. In effect, we shifted our focus from “Here’s what’s releasing today” to “Here’s what’s releasing this month." Unfortunately, this message has gotten lost, leading to confusion and anger in the community, which is never our intent.
I wonder how it got lost....
Perhaps when Trevor said...
"We still get article content every week day, and we should find out every week what articles to expect."
So it got lost somewhere between the meeting that decided it when R&D took over and the post that Trevor made telling us of the change?
And then no one noticed during the last three months that the idea of a just monthly schedule was lost even though while WotC_Bart kept giving us weekly schedules?
This is not a miscommunication it is another change in policy because you've yet again failed to meet the targets you've set yourselves so you are just widening the goal post again.
not everyone wants the compilations back. In addition, i care more about the errors getting corrected rather than getting it exactly right the first time. That's not a bad goal to have. But its not feasible with a system this complex.
Honestly, I can't see someone actively NOT wanting them to do compilations, unless they are just wanting to be jerky about it.
Not caring if there is a compilation yes, but saying "I don't want the compilations back"?
I agree - the original articles were all viewable independently outside of the compiled edition, if players preferred. So I don't see how restoration of compilations would impact those players at all, while being of great benefit to players (like me) who don't want to download every individual article and prefer to have the entire issue.
I flat out do not believe that there's anyone who would say "I don't want there to be compilations" unless they were concerned about piracy - which is made more difficult but by no means stopped by leaving them as individual articles. Pirates are willing to scan an entire hardback book themselves to get it online. Inconvenience does not stop them, and this new policy actually enables them to skip content that isn't directly game related like the Confessions Columns and Editorials.
There is a valid concern about bringing back the compliations (something I'm all for) where the errata is done. Some people find it better to have it with the article page and not in the final compliation. That about the only valid reason for not bringing them back.
Here's an intersting point. Does the compendium link to the original article for source?
Compare Break the Bonds (Dragon 386) correctly linked with Draconic Form (Dragon 388) not linked at all.
Command Undead and Hasten the Rot (Dragon 395) both link to Monster Vault for some bizzare reason.
There is a valid concern about bringing back the compliations (something I'm all for) where the errata is done. Some people find it better to have it with the article page and not in the final compliation. That about the only valid reason for not bringing them back.
And yet compilations are not forced upon anyone. With compilations, both forms of access were available. For someone to say that they don't want compilations is to say that they don't want the people that want compilations to be happy. It's really nothing more than being spiteful considering that they get absolutely no increased value or features by them being removed. It feels a heck of a lot more like a "Nyah! Nyah!" than anything.
There is a valid concern about bringing back the compliations (something I'm all for) where the errata is done. Some people find it better to have it with the article page and not in the final compliation. That about the only valid reason for not bringing them back.
Here's an intersting point. Does the compendium link to the original article for source?
Not interesting enough to check for yourself and report back your findings, though.
So looks like we've found another thing that use to work but now doesn't.
But no one for more than a week or so. And thus I believe the dndinsider group serves as an accurate proxy for the number of members.
Only members with forum accounts.
There's talk in the "Forum predictions fail" thread about a spike just after the online character builder was announced. I'm betting that spike was helped along by the influx of <10 posts posters who registered to the forums to voice their displeasure. (The alternative view is that the online character builder inspired more DnDi members...)
There is a valid concern about bringing back the compliations (something I'm all for) where the errata is done. Some people find it better to have it with the article page and not in the final compliation. That about the only valid reason for not bringing them back.
The fix to that was to update the individual article at the same time the magazine was compiled. Not to get rid of the compilations. Removing the compilations is a net loss no matter how you look at it. If you didn't download them, then you don't care. If you did, you lost something for no good reason. Taking something away is never going to make the customer happy.
Add to that the drastic drop in content, but online and in print... I guess I'm on the side of the fence that would like more than less. Honestly, just let the player play test the content before it becomes cannon, then everyone's happy.
By the end of the month, we’ll be caught up with promised content.
Riiiiiight. Sure you will. Just like in January? And February? Right?
I think they should turn Dragon over to a third party, and let it go to town with fluff. Then make a quarterly new DDI "tool" that gives out new builds, new feats and so on. That way they can be assured of syncing it up with the online tools and the quality should be improved. Right now, if they had a payment option plan that would let me use the tools only without the magazines, I'd go that route in a second. I find the magazines to be a waste of time. Wizards could then redeploy the R&D from them to help work on the DDI tools to make them work better.
Personally I think they should just do away with Dragon/Dungeon all together. I don't think there is really any need for them anymore. When I first started playing back in the eary 80's Dragon was a great resource. Mostly because they didn't come out with a new book every month. I think it was only like one a year or something like that back then. What made Dragon great was that it had all sorts of new things that weren't in the books. Now, we get a book or two a month and all Dragon does is add scraps from the floor.
I think they should turn Dragon over to a third party, and let it go to town with fluff. Then make a quarterly new DDI "tool" that gives out new builds, new feats and so on. That way they can be assured of syncing it up with the online tools and the quality should be improved. Right now, if they had a payment option plan that would let me use the tools only without the magazines, I'd go that route in a second. I find the magazines to be a waste of time. Wizards could then redeploy the R&D from them to help work on the DDI tools to make them work better.
So you are saying that you actually don't want Dragon/Dungeon eliminated, just put into hands that are better suited to provide it to us. Gotcha. ;)
Personally I think they should just do away with Dragon/Dungeon all together. I don't think there is really any need for them anymore. When I first started playing back in the eary 80's Dragon was a great resource. Mostly because they didn't come out with a new book every month. I think it was only like one a year or something like that back then. What made Dragon great was that it had all sorts of new things that weren't in the books. Now, we get a book or two a month and all Dragon does is add scraps from the floor.
I think they should turn Dragon over to a third party, and let it go to town with fluff. Then make a quarterly new DDI "tool" that gives out new builds, new feats and so on. That way they can be assured of syncing it up with the online tools and the quality should be improved. Right now, if they had a payment option plan that would let me use the tools only without the magazines, I'd go that route in a second. I find the magazines to be a waste of time. Wizards could then redeploy the R&D from them to help work on the DDI tools to make them work better.
So you are saying that you actually don't want Dragon/Dungeon eliminated, just put into hands that are better suited to provide it to us. Gotcha. ;)
Now that you mention it like that, I guess that is what I'm saying. Of course the biggest problem is with the online CB not having any way to house rule things. Once they get that working, let Dragon/Dungeon go to someone that wants to run them. They can make up anything they want, since it no longer would have to go through the official R&D team and if players like it, they could import it into the OCB with the house ruling.
Personally I think they should just do away with Dragon/Dungeon all together. I don't think there is really any need for them anymore. When I first started playing back in the eary 80's Dragon was a great resource. Mostly because they didn't come out with a new book every month. I think it was only like one a year or something like that back then.
Well it seems like they are trying to get back to those early days since they have cut the number of books they are publishing dramatically. Not getting a new book every month anymore so surely Dragon/Dungeon become more relevant?
By the end of the month, we’ll be caught up with promised content.
Riiiiiight. Sure you will. Just like in January? And February? Right?
At this point they have 4 business days to release the remaining 5 Dragon articles. I can't tell how many Dungeon articles, as the links are broken again.
I'm not sure if I want them to make their deadline at this point as I don't want the quality to suffer, but the constant failures to meet deadlines sure are frustrating.
Edit: Looking at the Dungeon archive, it seems there are 5 unreleased articles for this month there as well.
If we don't get two articles this afternoon, that would leave them five articles to upload over four days -- something I have never seen them do with crunch filled articles.
As a month with nearly five working weeks, I thought this would be an excellent chance for them to catch up -- but it is not looking good right now. The next such month is June.
By the way -- I trust that they did not waste a lot of time reviewing the "crunch" in Shelly's article. While she occasionally slips some crunch in (such as her familiar "Oso de la Fez"), that is the exception rather than the rule.
By the end of the month, we’ll be caught up with promised content.
Riiiiiight. Sure you will. Just like in January? And February? Right?
At this point they have 4 business days to release the remaining 5 Dragon articles. I can't tell how many Dungeon articles, as the links are broken again.
I'm not sure if I want them to make their deadline at this point as I don't want the quality to suffer, but the constant failures to meet deadlines sure are frustrating.
Edit: Looking at the Dungeon archive, it seems there are 5 unreleased articles for this month there as well.
There are only 2 remaining Dungeon articles for the month - the remaining adventure, and Eye on Dark Sun.
Currently, Eye on Dark Sun and one of the Dragon articles are theoretically scheduled for today, so those could be up by this afternoon.
Assuming that is the case, that leaves them with 4 articles for next week, which is doable. Keep in mind, they didn't schedule pretty much any content for the start of the month, so presumably they have been spending that time reviewing it.
But... yeah, if they fail to post it by the end of the month, that will be quite disappointing.
Since, oh, last August or so, Dragon has been completely devoid of new content.
And I know for a fact it's not the author's fault, as the preview articles would have interesting content in them.
And then the edited versions would be released, and all the crunch would be removed, with just fluff remaining.
This is the main reason why I cancelled my DDI account.
That's why people started putting deadlines on a calender in the first place, hundreds of years ago. So they could keep track of things and they wouldn't accidentally slip past. And to motivate them to get those things finished.
As much as I would love for them to be back on track this month, I have to say I don't have very high hopes that they'll be able to get out the last 7 articles in 4 days this month. If I was still a subscriber I would also be quite mad that there has only been one insider only dragon article out so far this month. That's pretty unacceptable. For someone to come on the forums and basically say "Sorry things have been messed up, we've just about fixed them and everything should be ok," and then not deliver a few weeks later is pretty terrible.
thats a pretty big if. i find it sad that you cancel your sub and are still tormented by ddi. good luck.....be brave
As much as I would love for them to be back on track this month, I have to say I don't have very high hopes that they'll be able to get out the last 7 articles in 4 days this month. If I was still a subscriber I would also be quite mad that there has only been one insider only dragon article out so far this month. That's pretty unacceptable. For someone to come on the forums and basically say "Sorry things have been messed up, we've just about fixed them and everything should be ok," and then not deliver a few weeks later is pretty terrible.
thats a pretty big if. i find it sad that you cancel your sub and are still tormented by ddi. good luck.....be brave
I'm not tormented by it, I'm just really dissapointed. I subscribed from the very beginning of DDI, let my subscription lapse in January, and really want a reason to resubscribe. I had actually been considering resubscribing next month if they have truly gotten their issues under control, but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case.
I don't get this mentality that only paying subscribers should be allowed to talk about DDI, I would think Wizards would want to have as many paying customers as possible, so I am letting them know what they could do to get at least one more. I really don't see how that effects you in the slightest, and why you felt the need to make a post for purely the purpose of trying to insult me.
I can't actually take too much credit for the post, at least not beyond making sure we got more information. I actually stole these words from the desk and mind of Chris Perkins.
As to more details or a further peak behind the curtain - this is what we have guys. They're doing their best to get you those articles - nobody is happy about the delays. Chris expects that all of March's content will hit in March, so hopefully after that we'll see a return to the monthly content.
Seven articles in four days? I'd like to see that happen... I estimate we see no more than four of them before April.
There is a valid concern about bringing back the compliations (something I'm all for) where the errata is done. Some people find it better to have it with the article page and not in the final compliation. That about the only valid reason for not bringing them back.
The more I think about it, and people make comments like this that I realize WotC must not use a content management system. If they did, making compilations and updating the articles and compilations with the errata would be automated by a workflow. I know it's possible, one of the products that I consult for does it.
As others have mentioned, something more is going on. Any one hear if their have been recent shifts at WotC inmanpower? leadership? re-org? The corporate confusion and such that often result from such would match what we are seeing (lack of quality, production, inconsistant messages to the customers, etc).
As much as I would love for them to be back on track this month, I have to say I don't have very high hopes that they'll be able to get out the last 7 articles in 4 days this month. If I was still a subscriber I would also be quite mad that there has only been one insider only dragon article out so far this month. That's pretty unacceptable. For someone to come on the forums and basically say "Sorry things have been messed up, we've just about fixed them and everything should be ok," and then not deliver a few weeks later is pretty terrible.
thats a pretty big if. i find it sad that you cancel your sub and are still tormented by ddi. good luck.....be brave
I'm not tormented by it, I'm just really dissapointed. I subscribed from the very beginning of DDI, let my subscription lapse in January, and really want a reason to resubscribe. I had actually been considering resubscribing next month if they have truly gotten their issues under control, but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case.
I don't get this mentality that only paying subscribers should be allowed to talk about DDI, I would think Wizards would want to have as many paying customers as possible, so I am letting them know what they could do to get at least one more. I really don't see how that effects you in the slightest, and why you felt the need to make a post for purely the purpose of trying to insult me.
I agree with this.
I have been very clear on my own position in a few other D&Di threads (I unsubscribed due to lack of funds, but now that I have funds again I will not be resubscribing due to dissatisfaction with Wizards, BUT if they change x, y, and z around, I'll gladly pay them again for content), and I've been mocked, ignored, told to buzz off since I'm not an actual customer (not an actual customer? You guys are already paid up, they could stop putting out content tomorrow and they'd still have your money; it's the people who might pay that companies care about attracting), or otherwise treated like someone whose opinion doesn't matter just because I'm not currently paying Wizards of the Coast anything.
What's ironic is that the people who chase away people like us--who come onto the forums with lots of ideas and suggestions for Wizards of the Coast on ways they could get us to pay them money--are the people who are subscribed to D&Di, i.e. the people who WANT Wizards to succeed.
People who want Wizards to succeed chasing away customers waving cash in one hand and lists of suggestions in the others? A hilarious contradiction in goals, and a rather distinct example of cases where human beings are incapable of thinking what they're saying through before opening their pie-holes.
I have been very clear on my own position in a few other D&Di threads (I unsubscribed due to lack of funds, but now that I have funds again I will not be resubscribing due to dissatisfaction with Wizards, BUT if they change x, y, and z around, I'll gladly pay them again for content), and I've been mocked, ignored, told to buzz off since I'm not an actual customer (not an actual customer? You guys are already paid up, they could stop putting out content tomorrow and they'd still have your money; it's the people who might pay that companies care about attracting), or otherwise treated like someone whose opinion doesn't matter just because I'm not currently paying Wizards of the Coast anything.
What's ironic is that the people who chase away people like us--who come onto the forums with lots of ideas and suggestions for Wizards of the Coast on ways they could get us to pay them money--are the people who are subscribed to D&Di, i.e. the people who WANT Wizards to succeed.
People who want Wizards to succeed chasing away customers waving cash in one hand and lists of suggestions in the others? A hilarious contradiction in goals, and a rather distinct example of cases where human beings are incapable of thinking what they're saying through before opening their pie-holes.
Bloody hell, Dieff! Such reason and forethought has nothing to do with a forum post.
But yes, you are absolutely right. People like that are offering free market research to WotC. Feedback from individuals who are proven potential customers is worth quite a lot in other businesses.
1. The core D&D fanbase. D&D isn't just a game anymore. It's a part of our culture. And this group forms the foundation of that culture. These are the people who playtest everything, dress up as their characters at conventions, buy virtually every book the day of release, and send daily e-mails to D&D with bugs, errata, and suggestions. These people know exactly what they want, and not all of them want the same thing.
2. The modern gamer. Not nearly as invested as the core, but still avid. These people may also have their eye on WoW, RuneScape, or even FarmVille, for crying out loud. It is for this group that D&D develops things like the impending Virtual Table, for example. This group expects D&D to be able to compete with more modern-medium roleplaying games, as opposed to the core, which is still quite comfortable with all the sourcebooks. So, on these two alone so far, the developers have to split their focus- the same crunch and fluff they've done in the past, and developing new tools for the incoming generations.
3. New gamers. These are people who don't game much, but have heard so much about D&D (part of the culture, remember) that they now want to try it out. This is what the "Essentials" line was more geared towards- which is why the characters have so fewer options.
What I tend to see in the forums also appears to be split along these three lines somewhere. Essentials v. AEDU (New v. core); online CB/AT/VT v. continued support for the old CB/AT (core v. average). Even within the core group, there were people who strongly preferred 3.x, and those who strongly preferred 4E.
While I like some decisions D&D has made, and not others, I at least understand their dilemma. I am willing to overlook quite a few things that are not to my personal preference, because I am only one type of gamer, not the half-dozen or more they need to appeal to.
Here's an idea: I recognize that posting your cancellation of subscription on the forum is a form of feedback to D&D. But instead of multiple threads D&D would have to hunt down and read individually to get this feedback, how about one big megathread? Call it the "Unsubscribe/Unrenew Megathread" or something. The point would be to state in an adult, reasonable fashion what your reason(s) for cancelling or not renewing or such are. D&D can read this one, long list, and get their feedback swiftly and easily, and can spend more time responding to it. Since I'm not in that group, I wouldn't feel right starting such a thread, but hey, it's worth a shot, right?
P.S. Please keep it as mature as possible. D&D will be more likely to listen to mature adults than rants.
It is sometimes sad even to me that I keep paying. But the Compendium remains the most useful and reliable feature. It would be hard for me to go back to the days of "that obscure feat you picked? Okay, let's get out the books and see where you found it..."
I'd like Wizards of the Coast to meet their deadlines and to do things right, for a change. I has been a while since D&D Insider didn't seem like it was run by only three blind mice.
It is sometimes sad even to me that I keep paying. But the Compendium remains the most useful and reliable feature. It would be hard for me to go back to the days of "that obscure feat you picked? Okay, let's get out the books and see where you found it..."
Uh, you can use that function even if you are not DDI subscriber.
Trevor has also told us that WotC doesn't want to treat the magazines as magazines, and that each article has its own scheduel. (See here). The problem is taking this approach is counter productive to releasing content in a timely manner and meeting the customer's expectations.
Having a deadline of "the day before the 1st of the month" for articles and sticking too it is far more likely to produce the results the customers apparently want (plenty of content delivered as promised each day/week/month/year).
Further taking staff away from making this happen to write free columns isn't a good plan. WotC's priority should be getting the content people are paying for done first, and the free content second. Right now that isn't what we appear to be getting.
The thing is this is an appearences game.
WotC needs to keep up appearences, that's how they get customers to keep paying their money.
Men(and Women) of DDI, my brothers(and sisters)! I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me! A Day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day. This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this earth I bid you stand!"
Trevor, this isn't something that's just been happening in the last two months.
Since, oh, last August or so, Dragon has been completely devoid of new content.
This... isn't true at all. The reduced content, removal of compilations, and severe delays began in January 2011.
December, admittedly, was also mostly a failure of a month, with almost no actual player content, and most of that being in the rerelease of the Executioner (which, it turns out, wasn't a finished product), plus the vastly disappointing runepriest article and the highly contentious 'Taking Names Not Lives' article.
Prior to that, though, content was perfectly respectible. While still slightly diminished from the previous standard, it still readily met expectations, and August through November each had plenty of useful articles with player content.
As always, folks, if you really want WotC to pay any attention to what you say, keep your criticisms reasonable and legitimate. The more you exaggerate a problem, the more chance you will find your concerns dismissed entirely.
As it is, WotC failed to release two of the articles scheduled for last week, so odds seem low that they will actually deliver the full content by the end of the month.
Uh, you can use that function even if you are not DDI subscriber.
I was referring to being able to read the stats on the compendium, not just seeing a given rule item's source. I rarely look up something just to know what book it's in. It's possible that I don't own the book, but I would still like to see what the rule thing does.
And while you don't need a subscription to view eratta, the compendium does make all of that much easier.
I'm hinging my re-subscription mainly upon the Class Compendium articles, so please get this right. I'll be using community reception as a measuring stick.
So... does anyone think they'll actully get March's content out on time, "as planned"? It's after 1:00pm Pacific Time, and there isn't even a weekly release "schedule" up yet.
I'm hinging my re-subscription mainly upon the Class Compendium articles, so please get this right. I'll be using community reception as a measuring stick.
My optimistic, "have faith in Wizards" side says "Yes." My trained, learned response says "Not a chance." The fact that we have to have this discussion says way more about the situation than the actual release of content.
When PHB I came out we had about 15 dragon articles a month, 10 races and 10 classes. If you were playing a core PC from the POHB, you had 1 or 2 articles, on average, for your PC each month.
Now, we have 30+ races and 50+ classes to support (and even more if you factor in hybrids) and less articles per month to do it. If you're running certain combinations of class and race, you may have gone 8 or 9 months without seeing a Dragon article that supports your PC.
My expectation for WotC is no less than 1 article that is relevant to each of my PCs every other month in Dragon, on average. That would basically mean 10 or so race articles a month and 20 or so class articles if they're even distributed by class and race. If not, it could mean a lot more.
Is this an unreasonable 'demand'? Perhaps. Maybe it is too much work to expect out of WotC. However, it is a threshold level for me to consider Dragon and Insider - at the cost that they are asking - to be worth it to me. If the tools turn out to be a heck of a lot better I might be more forgiving on the lack of content, but so far the 'new' tools are nearly useless to me. The limited exposure I've had to them has been very disappointing.
Something to consider related to the reduction in the amount of game elements / crunch: WotC - by introducing more classes and races, spreads itself thinner and thinner in terms of what they need to support..
Or they have more and more options of what to write about each week. This doesn't really excuse the lack of content, especially with almost no print books coming out this year.
Something to consider related to the reduction in the amount of game elements / crunch: WotC - by introducing more classes and races, spreads itself thinner and thinner in terms of what they need to support..
Or they have more and more options of what to write about each week. This doesn't really excuse the lack of content, especially with almost no print books coming out this year.
I was not trying to make an excuse - quite the opposite. I was pointing out that to maintain the same level of support for a PC that they had been providing, WotC needed to INCREASE the number of articles they produced each month, not decrease it. They decided to release a massive number of classes, races and options - now they are struggling to support a fraction of it.
Something to consider related to the reduction in the amount of game elements / crunch: WotC - by introducing more classes and races, spreads itself thinner and thinner in terms of what they need to support..
Or they have more and more options of what to write about each week. This doesn't really excuse the lack of content, especially with almost no print books coming out this year.
I was not trying to make an excuse - quite the opposite. I was pointing out that to maintain the same level of support for a PC that they had been providing, WotC needed to INCREASE the number of articles they produced each month, not decrease it. They decided to release a massive number of classes, races and options - now they are struggling to support a fraction of it.
I think there is some small truth to what you say... but it is still a relatively minor part of the overall equation. Even if they can't support everything each month, they could still provide an amount of content each month that would likely please many subscribers.
There are also plenty of ways to write more expansive articles. I often find myself pointing back to the Gladiator article from the early days of DDI - themed articles like that could support multiple classes at once. This month's article on familiars provides potential content for all Arcane characters. Etc.
They also don't need to support everything that has come out thus far. Fighters have ludicrous amounts of content already available. That support has already shown up in the past - thus, they can be left aside while DDI provides content for less supported classes.