how is it that Dragon and Dungeon would be better than a media source that made $10 million annualy (TimesSelect) for $50 per year subscriptions or $65 million (Wall Street Journal) for $99 per year subscriptions.
DDI already looks like it will range around $10-$30 per month meaning it will be $120-$360 per year...
does this mean that the articles from those former magazine will be better and worth more money that the two previous mentioned media sources?
i wonder if WotC is heading into this at the end of the era where people and mainstream publishings are willing to pay for online subscriptions to a collection of articles.
and if the current ones are any indication of quality, then i used the term articles very loosely. as their content seems more like advertisement for 4th edition concepts.
will this component of 4th edition really be worth the money they suggest when compared to their former forms and those other online sources that are or possibly soon going to become free?
with recent developments of many news services including the possibility for the Wall Street Journal to go to a free online use vs subscription based...
how is it that Dragon and Dungeon would be better than a media source that made $10 million annualy (TimesSelect) for $50 per year subscriptions or $65 million (Wall Street Journal) for $99 per year subscriptions.
You are comparing apples and oranges. People go to those places to get daily news coverage. There is no way on earth that a reasonable person would be able to look at online news services like the WSJ and others, and try to make a valid comparison to DDI.
DDI already looks like it will range around $10-$30 per month meaning it will be $120-$360 per year...
Those places, as well as many other free news services all have advertising to defray the costs, as well as thriving print sides to help pay for the costs as well.
does this mean that the articles from those former magazine will be better and worth more money that the two previous mentioned media sources?
Oh. My. God. You are actually trying to compare Dungeon and Dragon to news. That is in no way a valid comparison. Not only do they have vastly different target audiences, and vastly different readerships (orders of magnitude in difference), but they don't serve the same service in the slightest. Dungeon and Dragon are entertainment, pure and simple. The websites you refer to in "comparison" are news providers.
and if the current ones are any indication of quality, then i used the term articles very loosely. as their content seems more like advertisement for 4th edition concepts.
I am shocked!! Shocked!! that WotC would dare try to use their website to provide us with information about 4e!!will this component of 4th edition really be worth the money they suggest when compared to their former forms
That remains to be seen. Personally, I am cautiously optimistic about the quality of the articles, but I am slightly skeptical that they will be able to provide a continual flow (3 updates a week, I think they said) of quality articles over the long term.
and those other online sources that are or possibly soon going to become free?
Can't compare them. Apples and oranges.
You are presenting a straw-man argument comparing it to a free news website. Why not compare it to a subscription based website and see if the content compares?
Those places, as well as many other free news services all have advertising to defray the costs, as well as thriving print sides to help pay for the costs as well.
have you not seen any of Wizards site without spyware blockers?
the pages are riddled with google ads all over the place.
so if what you say is true, then why should someone pay to see those ads they dont want.
looks like wizards already has advertisement supported areas, so what is to stop them from doing it with DDI?
have you not seen any of Wizards site without spyware blockers?
the pages are riddled with google ads all over the place.
so if what you say is true, then why should someone pay to see those ads they dont want.
looks like wizards already has advertisement supported areas, so what is to stop them from doing it with DDI?
The sheer difference in number of viewers between the news sites and the WotC site makes for all the difference in the revenue that they get from their advertising. As for DDI, there is nothing stopping them from doing it. Heck, it might not be a bad idea for them to have some advertising to defray the costs of a subscription to DDI.
The sheer difference in number of viewers between the news sites and the WotC site makes for all the difference in the revenue that they get from their advertising. As for DDI, there is nothing stopping them from doing it. Heck, it might not be a bad idea for them to have some advertising to defray the costs of a subscription to DDI.
please provide exact numbers of viewers from both the news sites as well as all sites under the WorC umbrella of their 3 nameservers.
Thanks.
I realize the suggested tie-in to 4E, but we are moving this to the D&Di forums.
Thanks.
thanks. so many forums now only Loki or Odin knows where to find them all.
please provide exact numbers of viewers from both the news sites as well as all sites under the WorC umbrella of their 3 nameservers.
Why?? You are the one that made the initial claim that they are the same, it is your responsibility to provide numbers and other facts to back up that claim.
However, just for kicks and giggles, I decided to do your work for you. (Took me all of about 5 minutes, and i spent more time copy/pasting/link-inserting than actual searching.)
Link!!!
(Article published Sept 18, 2007)
The Wall Street Journal Digital Network, (which includes WSJ.com, MarketWatch.com, Barrons.com and AllThingsD.com) attracted 17.9 million unique visitors, in August alone.
Linky!!
(Article published Sept 18, 2007)Timesselect (from the NY Times I believe) had no numbers available that I could find, but the NY Times free site has approximately 13 million unique visitors each month.
Linky!!
(Published May 03, 2007)The WotC website, OTOH hand, gets approximately 13 million unique visitors in a year.
So, the WSJ sites get more hits in a month than the WotC site gets in a year, and the NY Times website gets in a month what the WotC site gets in a year.
In other words, the WSJ sites get (about) 16.5 times more unique visitors per year, and the Times site gets about 12 times more unique visitors per year.
price per month per customer of them, and gave recent annual earnings from them.
you coudl have done the math any way you choose to derive the little numbers monthly by customer or however else.
the point is if those companies see fit that they with their much greater visitors and higher income for the website than WotC makes on D&D annauly see fit to make their services free, then how is the WotC insider section going to provide comparable material of a much higher quality for its readers, than those of the news sources in order to neccessitate the costs for them?
i gave numbers.
price per month per customer of them, and gave recent annual earnings from them.
you coudl have done the math any way you choose to derive the little numbers monthly by customer or however else.
The numbers you gave were pretty much useless for figuring out traffic or anything else. It would be like if I asked someone how their car's gas mileage was, and they told me that it has bigger wheels, and more people drive one.
the point is if those companies see fit that they with their much greater visitors and higher income for the website than WotC makes on D&D annauly see fit to make their services free, then how is the WotC insider section going to provide comparable material of a much higher quality for its readers, than those of the news sources in order to neccessitate the costs for them?
Anyone with an ounce of common sense would be able to tell you that you can't compare the two.
Those sites provide news. WotC is Entertainment.
Those sites have daily print versions. WotC doesn't.
Those sites have competitors who provide similar services for free. WotC doesn't.
Asking the WotC site to provide similar services to the news sites is like asking a VW Bug to be able to off-road like a fully tricked-out military-grade Hummer. While they both are cars, they are designed for two completely different things.
the only people able to use those other services would be those who paid for them.
the price doesnt give you limited use to them.
that only matters when figuring the bandwidth costs and we know nothing of the 3 on that matter.
we could guess based on the packages of what Network Solutions offers to see what WotC pays, but they may have a special rate that gives them a discount, but we dont know. and the same goes for the other two.
it wasnt so much then would it make any profit for WotC, but would the cost for the customer yield a better quality that is provided by the other two when compared to WotC, when the other two become free services and WotC is left as a pay service.
traffic doesnt matter.
Traffic is everything. The advertising revenue that you get from a website is, most of the time, based on two things: Traffic and click-throughs. The more people that visit your website, the more that you can charge for advertising. The more people that visit your website, the more people are likely to click on one of the ads on your site, which gives you some $$$.
the only people able to use those other services would be those who paid for them.
Wow, some real brain surgery there. Of course if it is a pay-subscription site, the only people who will be able to see it are those who pay for it. That's the whole point of a subscription site.
the price doesnt give you limited use to them.
Of course it doesn't give you limited use. Again, it isn't brain surgery. If you pay for access to the site, most sites will give you unlimited access to the content on the site. (Barring network outages, down-time for maintenance, or similar stuff)
it wasnt so much then would it make any profit for WotC, but would the cost for the customer yield a better quality that is provided by the other two when compared to WotC, when the other two become free services and WotC is left as a pay service.
Again, for the third or fourth time. You can't compare the two.
Those sites provide news. WotC is Entertainment.
Those sites have daily print versions. WotC doesn't.
Those sites have competitors who provide similar services for free. WotC doesn't.
Asking the WotC site to provide similar services to the news sites is like asking a VW Bug to be able to off-road like a fully tricked-out military-grade Hummer. While they both are cars, they are designed for two completely different things.
Traffic is everything. The advertising revenue that you get from a website is, most of the time, based on two things: Traffic and click-throughs. The more people that visit your website, the more that you can charge for advertising. The more people that visit your website, the more people are likely to click on one of the ads on your site, which gives you some $$$.
again i am not talking about jsut the revenue for the company.
and when paying for a service you expect not to be many of those ads.
look all over the web and see how the free portions of sites have ads in place, and a donation or subscription will remove those ads for a period of time.
so what i am talking about if for the subscribers.
can WotC compare with what those two news sites offered to begin with?
WotC already will be more expensive that either of them.
$50 < $120
$99 < $120
so for the subscribers will the product be worth the price in comparison to other journalists productions?
and with those two possibly going free even after making all that money from subscribers, what will make WotC so much better to necessitate a subscription fee?
WSJ has the online and the hardcopy product.
TimesSelect im not sure if it has one real hardcopy product.
WotC will onyl have the only as they killed their hardcopy product.
so again the other two have other sources for revenue and outlets for people to get their content.
WotC having solely the online component will have to give some really good articles in order to be comparable to the other two.
from what we have currently seen of the articles is their standards quality and quantity enough to substantiatie the cost?
and what of what we have seen is intended for pay only subscribers?
we have seen DDM previews, and the podcasts, etc all appear in the archives.
how will people know when the time comes what will be included in the subscription?
so far the things that look like the free portion seem to be more valuable content than those that would be considered part of the pay services.
So, if D&D Insider does have the ads, I will do what I did with both Dungeon and Dragon magazines; read the ones that catch my interest and ignore the rest. Sounds fairly simple to me.
the only thing you do get with your subscription is the articles. all other things can be paid for independantly. the only bonus the suite offers is the databases from the suite being locked into your account. meaning you will be able to import data directly fromt he articles and physical product books into the suite and sve them.
only DMs need to be subscribers, or more than only subscribers can be DMs in the virtual tabletop.
so this data being linked to a subscriber accounts will be how much of to total cost worth?
how much does it cost for online storage space? because that is what you get with the subscription other than the articles.
D&D is very different. Somebody did make it up. Somebody does own it. It can be copyrighted. If you want official D&D content, WotC is the only source. There's nobody else who can offer it for free, so WotC can charge for their content without the fear of losing customers to competitors. Because, in the world of D&D content, there aren't any competitors.
In capitalism, the price of a good or service is not decided by its worth, but by how much the seller can charge versus how much the buyer will pay.
If you think capitalism is evil this way, then just tell yourself that the money goes to the teams of people who sit there and make this stuff up. Reporters just describe what they experience vividly; designers create it from scratch and then describe it equally well.
The Digitial Initiative isn't just news articles related to D&D. It's an entire media frenzy including adventures, web enhancements, and an actual D&D virtual client (which does cost money for current versions) with constant updates.
You are presenting a straw-man argument comparing it to a free news website. Why not compare it to a subscription based website and see if the content compares?
I agree. Also, news services are not creating something from scratch. They are reporting the news. With the digital content there is a huge creative component.
I would like to see all the people who complain create something on the level that WotC creates. Also, when are talking price I am sure that I paid as much or more for both my magazines every month plus shipping and handling.
the etools suite as someone called it is not exclusive to subscribers of the insider however.
I beg to differ! It has been said many times that the DDI and all it's tools will come under the need of a subscription. Right now the Insider is free to anybody with a forums account but that will change some where between January and May of next year.
As found here
Q: Dear Ask Wizards
What is the subscription price for D&D Insider?
A: A final monthly subscription price has not yet been announced. At Gen Con, we did state that the price would fall somewhere between the cost of a single print issue of Dragon magazine and the monthly fee of a MMORPG (in other words, between $10 and $15).
With this subscription, users will have access to both online Dragon and Dungeon magazines, as well as the online suite of tools (D&D Gaming Table, Character Creator, DM Toolkit, plus the Character and Campaign Vault pages). Some of these tools were first previewed at Gen Con, others have yet to be introduced. More information will be provided on this website in the days to come.
I agree. Also, news services are not creating something from scratch. They are reporting the news. With the digital content there is a huge creative component.
I would like to see all the people who complain create something on the level that WotC creates. Also, when are talking price I am sure that I paid as much or more for both my magazines every month plus shipping and handling.
Are you outside the US? cuz if you had a subscription inside the US you didn't pay anything for shipping & handling, and subscriptions to the pair of magazines was I think $80...which is significantly less than $10-15/month. Now if you ordered both magazines from paizo.com and paid for shipping costs every month...wow...you paid much more...and would be the poster child for "A fool and his money are soon parted".
You are actually trying to compare Dungeon and Dragon to news. That is in no way a valid comparison. Not only do they have vastly different target audiences, and vastly different readerships (orders of magnitude in difference), but they don't serve the same service in the slightest. Dungeon and Dragon are entertainment, pure and simple. The websites you refer to in "comparison" are news providers.
This brings up a very good point, Wizards has to think about their readership. I'm a young guy still in college and I'm getting married at the end of the year. Fortunately I have an awesome fiance that also plays and we both want to have access to the online content. However I can't justify paying 200-300 dollars a year just for a gaming site, that doesn't include what we spend in books or minis. For 10-12 dollars a month we'll have to see, but I must say that the content had better be flippin' awesome for that price.
That being said, I tend to agree with the original point of the post; isn't pay-for-content an obsolete website model? I consider myself a hardcore fan & I had a subscription to Dragon, but I have no intentions of paying 10 dollars a month to read a webpage. Sorry.
My hat is off to those who did use the stuff though. Sorry you lost your resources.
Personally, I'll admit, I value print materials much more than web. I can take a print magazine anywhere. With a web magazine, I need to find a printer and use expensive ink. I'll also admit I had a subscription to Dungeon Magazine, and sorely miss it.
I wonder at some of Wizards' arguments for web being better than print. In the Ampersand editorial, I believe, the authors stated "that's all the room I have"... that is, word limits are still imposed on authors, so the articles will not necessarily be better quality or longer on the web. Indeed, the quantity also appears diminished- since overall instead of finding content on Wizards' site for free, in Dungeon and in Dragon, our only option is Wizards' site.
Now, I never quite saw the economic sense of Wizards offering adventures for free on their website (though it was very much welcomed), but I find it frustrating that the new Dungeon and Dragon magazines are disappointing in terms of quantity and timely releases (I realize that the "october" edition is in reality an "october/november" edition). The whole execution of Dragon and Dungeon thus far does not appear to be very professional.
A final statement; I'll admit, I do like some of the new ideas for 4th edition, but I have one plea- please don't waste pages on useless information such as "description on what an elf looks like"... or "elf society" unless a book such as "The Elf" is released. The trend in Wizards' books for a 3 page PRC was completely unnecessary and unneeded, as were trends for longer monster entries. 1 page per monster, and 1-2 pages per PRC is more than enough and allows new innovative ideas to be expressed. Admittedly, 3E was wearing thin and Wizards needed to stretch the length of its products. I can only hope that 4E starts as 3.5 did- a quality product.
Downloadable games for PC/360 sell but they're cheaper than a normal game. RPGnow seems to be able to sell PDFs but once again they're cheaper than D&D books.
I'm not gonna pay shelf price for PDF Dragon/Dungeon magazines. I started reading them long before I had a credit card. How to younger gamers access is who may or may not be abke to use ther parents credit cards/paypal.
If you don't like the price, don't buy it. A lot of people (myself included) never even picked up a copy of Dragon or dungeon and did just fine.
This seems like the logical solution. You could also buy Kobold Quarterly, which has a print edition for D&D gamers. A lot cheaper than DDI, too.
This seems like the logical solution. You could also buy Kobold Quarterly, which has a print edition for D&D gamers. A lot cheaper than DDI, too.
You tempt.
Kobold Quarterly is awesome! And not just because I had an article in #2 and will have one in #3 - though that doesn't hurt. ;)
Yeah, it was a good article too. I have a subscription to Kobold Quarterly. When I got the 2nd issue pdf I didn't read much, but once the paper version came I read it cover to cover.
You know, I almost never remember to check the Dungeon and Dragon Interred for new articles, even though it's still free (or was last I checked). Usually like now when I do recall I'm in a hurry and don't have time to check it out.
Prior to Dragon magazine coming on-line WOC had some great articles, "Elite Opponents" was absolutely great.
The articles presented more recently, really nothing great. If they want people who previously subscribed to articles, then I think they need to present some very strong articles.
Second, if you never previusly subscribed to Dragon, and you do not plan on doing it now, then I'm sorry, your opinion isn't necessary. I don't mean to bash you, but your not who they are trying to get. They haven't gotten you yet and I doubt they're going to get you now.
So what I'd like to see, two major articles a month, an interesting creature presentation, ecology of (And get some interesting monsters here), the editorials are good (Some better then others), and maybe unique magical items.
Unless the content increases and the new folks in charge make themselves as approachable as the Paizo staff was previously, this is sadly going to end up a gross commercial failure IMO (PR has been poor, feedback on proposals has been slim to nonexistant and seems to be on the backburner to 4e, and the business model is on shaky ground already without those compounding issues).
I'd like it to succeed, but I see the DI being a financial bath for the company.
Given my experience so far I am not inclined to pay any amount of money unless I see a drastic increase in content. Not to mention the quality!
Just my thoughts...
Second, if you never previusly subscribed to Dragon, and you do not plan on doing it now, then I'm sorry, your opinion isn't necessary. I don't mean to bash you, but your not who they are trying to get. They haven't gotten you yet and I doubt they're going to get you now.
Just to clarify, I have never subscribed to Dragon however, I have been a longtime subscriber to Dungeon. Does my opinion matter or am I not their audience either?
October was good for me but since then... In the whole month of November there were no Dungeon Adventures - just a bunch more articles that could have been in Dragon and Dragon was light on real content. Now maybe that is because 4th Edition is looming on the horizon so Dragon does not have a lot to put out until next spring or summer so all they really have to give us is a lot of design information but I want some meat if I am going to pony up and buy the content.
At the end of November was the first time I have had a negative feeling about the whole situation. I never got upset about the magazines going and away and defended WotC on these boards during the initial blowback from that. I never got upset about going DI (and actually thought it was a great way to get my information) but I am not seeing the content and that is sad for me.
I do not think I will pay for DI unless the site delivers in the next few weeks... 4e??? The jury is out - I will buy the core books and see what I think but I (as an oldtimer) am interested in some of the changes I hear about but unhappy with others. I of course cannot make a decision until I see the whole thing.
Just to clarify, I have never subscribed to Dragon however, I have been a longtime subscriber to Dungeon. Does my opinion matter or am I not their audience either?
Yes your opinion matters. I really wasn't directing this at any one in particular, I used to work in a gaming shop and my biggest pet peeve was always people who complained about something they never purchased.
I guess it would matter more if instead of saying, "I never purchased before and I'm not purchasing in the future" if it came out as, "I never purchased before, but this is what what I would purchase in the future." Construstive vs destructive criticism.
I do not mind paying for the content at all. And I am not worried about the price as long as it is not outrageous. What will most likely stop me is that we were promised a full Dragon and Dungeon Magazine each month.
The last quoted price was 10.00 to 15.00 per month. So I guess my question is, "What is outrageous?"
The last quoted price was 10.00 to 15.00 per month. So I guess my question is, "What is outrageous?"
My Dragon subscription cost $3/month. Paying three to five times as much for the same product would be outrageous. Paying three to five times as much for less is unconscionable.
Basically at this point I'd say this was a poor attempt at taking a good product (two mags for a great price) to promote a bad one (the DI).
Now maybe that is because 4th Edition is looming on the horizon so Dragon does not have a lot to put out until next spring or summer so all they really have to give us is a lot of design information but I want some meat if I am going to pony up and buy the content.
Why not just publish some good fluff in Dragon? I wouldn't mind reading an issue just of Shemeska's submissions.
I completely forgot about Dungeon and Dragon Interred. If not for this thread reminding me, I wouldn't have looked again in I don't know how long. Getting rid of the print magazines was an enormous mistake--then I had a monthly reminder. Of course since the DDI is heading more and more toward 4E material, there soon won't be any point at all for me in checking it out, and Wizards did me a favor by killing Dragon before killing 3.5.
I just wish they hadn't done that. Kill the magazines when they kill the game, not before.
Somebody on the boards here said something a while back when DI was announced and still really vague, that he was a software developer, and if you want to run a paid online service, then the best approach is to take a briefcase full of $100 bills and throw it in a bonfire, because it has the same end result. I think we're beginning to see the beginning of that end result in this test case.
I wonder if they're actually trying to get rid of the D&D franchise by eliminating demand, or if they're sincerely trying to make good business decisions, but failing miserably. I for one went from addicted to D&D to repulsed by D&D because of the magnitude of the changes and the way they were presented. In retrospect, I feel D&D peaked in the late 80's and has only occasionally stepped up to the old standard of quality from time to time since, with a general decline overall.
When will large companies (and this goes for all industries) actually understand their customer bases, and produce decent products instead of trying to force a paradigm shift on a few million people?
Dragon and Dungeon should have been allowed to continue in print with Paizo's standards until the edition changed. The online content has gone from great (circa 2003) to horrible (I can't even get to most of it these days and we didn't even get a Dragons of Eberron map gallery).
And if FR requires such huge changes for it to work in 4e, then they should either stop making products for it (let's face it, FR lost its charm when they came up with the Time of Troubles), or make it an exception to the points of light philosophy. Eberron needs to keep its 3.5e mood - no points there, either. And please, please, PLEASE don't let them change Dark Sun, Spelljammer, Mystara, Greyhawk, Al Qadim, Kara-Tur, or Dragonlance. Leave them alone, they are great but I'd rather they sit and age well rather than get resurrected, retconned, and forced down our throats. We don't want to have waited 10 years for the campaigns to return just to receive a "Sigma 6" or "Phantom Menace" version of the original.
And I HATE the concept of a magazine like format for the core books. I want a Britannica-looking format, or even better yet, a look similar to a college textbook from 1910.
[/rant]
Okay, I admit I'm a Generation X grognard who prefers quality over stylishness. Obviously not in their core demographic.
The last quoted price was 10.00 to 15.00 per month. So I guess my question is, "What is outrageous?"
To me that is not outrageous. I would probably pay more if I was getting what I want. I am not worried about the Dungeon content but if we have months with no content then that does not work for me. I do not mind paying at all but I do not want to pay and then not get any content for a whole month.
I say, let's wait it out. If it does not add to the game, then don't buy it. It is as simple as that. And you can't judge the DDI by what they are putting out now. There are two huge factors you aren't considering.
1. They can't reveal too much about 4E until it gets closer to the release date. Too much, too soon and the demand will go down. Right now, most fans have a burning desire to see 4E in all its so-called glory. Feed it too much and you lose sales. Starve it too much and you lose fans. I agree with those who think that the last issues of Dragon and Dungeon pretty much sucked. But unlike you, I expected it. They have to keep dangling the carrot for six more months.
Why did they cancel Dragon and Dungeon print editions so early then? My guess is money. Apparently there were not enough of us buying them. I know I certainly wasn't. I would peruse it at the library and check it out if it was any good, which it usually wasn't for me. The sales were not large enough to continue printing the issues.
Also they needed to get more of their writers to focus on tweeking 4E and getting ready to sell it. This is what I expect to happen: As we get closer to the release date, they will throw more and more stuff out there. (much like they did with 3E)
2. Nobody over at WOTC is doing anything with 3.5 anymore. So they don't have any material to fill a single issue of Dragon, much less 6 months worth. True, they could hire outsiders or fill it with fluff, but ultimately the brand would suffer. That is why they closed Dragon and Dungeon down. All of the so called 3.5 things they are releasing have been in the "can" (or finished) for months. The silence is deafening on 3.5. This would have only been more obvious with a really crappy 6 months of print issues.
So where does that leave us? Back where we started. Don't judge the online content for either magazine until we get closer to 4E's release. If I am right, then the spigot will turn and the stream of info will increase. If I am wrong, then just don't use it. The Boards are still free and many things I find there are better than the magazine was. But I will hold out hope that the quality and quantity of the new online stuff will be worth the price of admission. If it is more of the last two months, then you can count me out. But I don't think it will.
Later, people.
Did Paizo hire the writers of the articles or was WOTC still in charge of content? Because if all the material was coming from WOTC, then my conclusions are still viable, with one exception, if they were not losing money, then it is still division of resources. WOTC wanted all its people on the release of 4E and having them still doing 3.5E articles took away their focus on 4E. Which means this release had better be worth SIX FRIGGIN' MONTHS of work. But it is still too early to judge the final outcome.
Also I am still unsure at how Paizo publishing the magazines actually worked. Did WOTC pay them to do it? In other words, if the magazines were operating at a loss, who takes that loss? Paizo or WOTC? If Paizo was getting paid even if the magazines weren't selling, then OF COURSE they would want to continue to publish the magazine.
Also, how many other mags is Paizo publishing? Dragon and Dungeon could be the feathers in their cap, and worth it even if stale sales and declining readership were starting to kill the titles. So they can point to Dragon and say, "See, we're the company who publishes Dragon for DnD. We can do the same for your magazine." If they are using that selling point, then they have a vested interest in concealing the decline of the magazines.
But I do agree that they might have squeezed a couple of months worth of magazines of it before shutting it down. Half a year is a long time to wait. You can keep the coffee perkalating for a extra 15 mins and it is still good but leave it there for 3 or 4 hours and all you have is a caffeine headache and a bad cup of joe.(I am sorry, that was a TERRIBLE analogy)
Which leads me back to my second point of my first post.
They aren't doing anything with 3.5 anymore. Nothing. Zip. I was here for the transition to 3rd Edition and it was much smoother than this. They were still doing 2E right up to the release date. I don't care if it is fluff, but do something. More Ecology articles. Those don't involve stats or crunchy bits. Do a "Best of the Boards" contest or just select the best magical items and put that together. Maybe even a best of 3.5E article. What was the things that the designers liked about 3.5 that they wanted to save?
So I am in agreement that they are wasting a valuable opportunity and may in fact lose people up to the release date which the release may not be able to win back. Time will tell, but that is what I think about it. Just wait and see. If I am right, they will pick up the pace as we close to the release date. I just hope it is all worth it.
Paizo did it all, and they really outdid themselves in their final issues. Those were some of the best issues ever.
What do you mean? they "did it all"? Does that mean they were financially on the hook if the magazine bombed? Or does it mean they handled all the content? If it just means they handled the content, then my original assessment stands. Or my ammended original statement, rather. But if all WOTC did was grant Paizo their license to use the DnD brand and all the stuff therein, then maybe you guys have a point. Because there would be seperation and Paizo could continue to do their thing until March or April of this year and WOTC could focus on 4E. Now everybody is in a state of limbo until June or near-June because they shut down the magazines too early.
Because that doesn't make any business sense at all, I am going with there is some financial relationship between the two and WOTC decided to cut costs by eliminating the mags. I still don't like it, but I can accept that. Or they underestimated the value of a monthly periodical to keep fans going. They certainly have been stingy with material for the online stuff. But I explained why that is in my first post (see above). Well, I'm done. I will wait and see, like I said. All in all, however, this transition has been handled very, very poorly.
But the online stuff may get better leading up to the release date and may be worth my money to subscribe. Time will tell.
Have a have new year!
If I were going to offer a preview of anything with the intention of hoping to entice customers to pay for it on a subscription bases at a later date I would make certain that it was, to be honest, some of the best material I ever produced. After all I’m trying to create a buzz, make my potential customers thirsty for more and ultimately draw people in so I can part them from their hard earned gold pieces. That’s common business sense and even I know that (and I hate business!).
If I were to have planned the announcement of 4th edition I would have followed up the new web sites release with an almost instantaneous explosion of stuff to show off what quality my customers could hope to receive in the future if they stuck with me. I would certainly not make statements like “in the coming months…”. If you wait for “coming months” your momentum and any impact you could have hoped to achieve will stall. You need to hit your customers hard and fast with a solid body blow of good material and then a kidney punch of even better material in quick succession to silence any doubters on the forums (forge yourself some positive feedback, dont just hope it will come your way!).
What I’ve seen thus far has been a very disappointing and painfully slow drip feeding of, lets be perfectly honest here, highly watered down material. I would go so far as to say the release has been ill-conceived and even ill-timed.
Why release the 4e statement when you have nothing substantial, ready in hand, to pass onto your customers as a taster of what is to come? Why have you not been holding white hot material back so you can poor it upon the sceptics as they swarm at your castle door?
It feels very rushed, almost as though the decision was made to make the statement at gencon no matter what. I would say that while this is a charming ideal its by no means a necessary one. Sure it would be a nice thing to do, but it’s not really necessary, your customers are after all global not gathered in a single building. While I’m certain that if you released it at a later time those who attended gencon would have said “OMG why didn’t we hear about it at gencon?!1ONE!!1” but surely its far far better to make sure you are not all talk and no trousers than appear overly secretive to a fraction of your thralls. From what i've gathered the reception at gencon was one of underwhelment anyway!
My opinion is that they were obviously behind from their original projections, which in itself is no great crime, after all this is a major work we are talking about and as with most complex projects delays are inevitable. The real crime is not having the brass balls to say to yourself “you know what were aren’t ready to quite deliver that big impact yet, lets put it on hold”. The guys (and gals) who go to gen con are the kind of hard core fans who will be checking your web site so its unlikely that they wont hear about it if you make the announcement at a later time when you have the substance to back up the bold new world that your proposing.
I would like to end my rant, for which I’m sorry (though I hope it’s of interest to those who have endured it) by saying that I’m excited about 4E none the less. 3.5 has had systemic errors that I think we can all agree feel rather clunky and outdated, so with luck we will be able to kiss them, as a gaming group, goodbye. My statement is more a bashing towards the marketing and product on show/offer at the current moment in time… for none can say what it will/may be in the future.
Will I sign up to DND insider? Nar… I don’t think from what I’ve seen it will be for me,
Will I look into 4E? Yes I think so, for bold new worlds are the ground upon which us gamers inevitable dream of walking.
They certainly have been stingy with material for the online stuff. But I explained why that is in my first post (see above).
Assuming you're referring to lack of writers... that part is also incorrect. Over 90% (and maybe over 95%) of the material in Dragon and Dungeon came from freelance writers who do not work (directly) for WotC. Absolutely, WotC hired some of the folks who wrote for the mags (Amber Scott, Nick Logue, Gregg Vaughan, Rich Pett, and Tim Hitchcock all come to mind). But the two were entirely independent.
In addition, Paizo had enough material in their slush piles that they could've gone at least a year for some columns such as Spellcraft and Bazaar of the Bizarre without getting another article. In my limited experience (myself as well as writers I know), WotC rejected most of the articles that were previously accepted by Paizo, for various reasons.
In short, there was more than enough material available to easily fill the magazines.
Happy new year to you also.
Assuming you're referring to lack of writers... that part is also incorrect. Over 90% (and maybe over 95%) of the material in Dragon and Dungeon came from freelance writers who do not work (directly) for WotC. Absolutely, WotC hired some of the folks who wrote for the mags (Amber Scott, Nick Logue, Gregg Vaughan, Rich Pett, and Tim Hitchcock all come to mind). But the two were entirely independent.
In addition, Paizo had enough material in their slush piles that they could've gone at least a year for some columns such as Spellcraft and Bazaar of the Bizarre without getting another article. In my limited experience (myself as well as writers I know), WotC rejected most of the articles that were previously accepted by Paizo, for various reasons.
In short, there was more than enough material available to easily fill the magazines.
Happy new year to you also.
Hey Zherog! Happy New Year. Following me around the boards?! :D Good points, by the way. You've mentioned the slush pile before but I'd forgotten about it. I'm sorry but not surprised to hear that they've rejected most of it. I see though that you've gotten another piece in Kobold Quarterly. Congratulations! I downloaded it but I probably won't read most of it until I get the paper edition, maybe next week.
I do indeed have another article in KQ3. I'm turning into one of Wolfgang's regulars. :D I hope to also have an article in KQ4 (it's pending review now).
Hope you enjoy the article in KQ3! You might also be interested in Wolfgang's new site for the mag --> http://www.koboldquarterly.com/ . The site is, essentially, an "open beta" but he has the ability to place orders right on the site, forums, etc. Good stuff, in my opinion.
Happy new year to you, also!
I do indeed have another article in KQ3. I'm turning into one of Wolfgang's regulars. :D I hope to also have an article in KQ4 (it's pending review now).
Hope you enjoy the article in KQ3! You might also be interested in Wolfgang's new site for the mag --> http://www.koboldquarterly.com/ . The site is, essentially, an "open beta" but he has the ability to place orders right on the site, forums, etc. Good stuff, in my opinion.
I actually still have an article under review with Wolfgang too. That's great that you have a third one. I'm starting to teach again Monday so I have prep work to do and I'm really not ready to start back up again, so I probably won't get to the new KQ until it comes in paper form, probably next week.
Thanks for the website url. I created an account there and posted something brief.
I stand by my assessment.
Did Paizo hire the writers of the articles or was WOTC still in charge of content?
Paizo hired writers.
Also I am still unsure at how Paizo publishing the magazines actually worked. Did WOTC pay them to do it?
The other way around. Paizo paid WoTC for the luxury of being able to make Dragon and Dungeon.
They aren't doing anything with 3.5 anymore. Nothing. Zip.
WoTC might not be doing 3.5, but Paizo has other sources for content.
Paizo hired writers.
The other way around. Paizo paid WoTC for the luxury of being able to make Dragon and Dungeon.
WoTC might not be doing 3.5, but Paizo has other sources for content.
Paizo is continuing to crank out 3.5 Pathfinder books. Wizards has refused to give them an advance look at the 4e rules, like they (or more accurately, the old crowd at Wizards) did for 3rd Ed, so Paizo has to continue making its Pathfinder series 3.5. At this point there's even a chance that Paizo won't switch to 4e at all but will stick with 3.5 or perhaps make some minor modifications of their own and call it 3.75.
I also think it is rushed and could have waited until only 3 months before release instead of 8 months. Now we have to wait, like kids at Christmas for 6 more months before we get to see the final product.
They certainly have been stingy with material for the online stuff. But I explained why that is in my first post (see above).
No, actually, I was referring to the fact that if they reveal too much too soon, the anticipation factor will go down. I am hoping like I originally stated. (like 4 posts ago)
Also they needed to get more of their writers to focus on tweeking 4E and getting ready to sell it. This is what I expect to happen: As we get closer to the release date, they will throw more and more stuff out there. (much like they did with 3E)
Now true, I WAS referring to the connection between WOTC and Paizo, but if what you are telling me is true (and I have no reason to believe it isn't) then WOTC was scared of 3.5 stealing 4E's thunder. Why switch when 3.5 is still a viable game? No, rather, quit 3.5E all together. With no official 3.5E material out there and no hope for any more, everyone will be waiting to see what 4E looks like. But patience is not a gamer's virtue. Already we hear the sounds of discontent.
This was a bad decision all over. I would like Andy Collins or someone like that to explain why they did what they did and what can we expect from the next six months. Throw us a bone or something. Give a timetable, or something like that.
Waiting sucks!
I also think it is rushed and could have waited until only 3 months before release instead of 8 months. Now we have to wait, like kids at Christmas for 6 more months before we get to see the final product.
It's not clear to me here if you're referring to 4e, or the digital mags. If you're referring to 4e, then you're wrong - they pretty much had to announce it when they did. Books hit places like amazon.com a year or so before they come out. WotC waited as long as they could to let that cat out of the bag; if they had waited any longer, the books would've appeared on Amazon without them having made an announcement, and the community would be even more hissed off.
Now, if instead you're referring to the mags... I agree. They could've let the print run go a bit longer. Here's one thing to consider, though. What if WotC went to Paizo and said, "We'll give you six months more, but no longer." Would Paizo have wanted that? I don't know. I can certainly see both sides - I can see why they would, and I can see why they wouldn't.
Also they needed to get more of their writers to focus on tweeking 4E and getting ready to sell it. This is what I expect to happen: As we get closer to the release date, they will throw more and more stuff out there. (much like they did with 3E)
Now true, I WAS referring to the connection between WOTC and Paizo, but if what you are telling me is true (and I have no reason to believe it isn't) then WOTC was scared of 3.5 stealing 4E's thunder. Why switch when 3.5 is still a viable game? No, rather, quit 3.5E all together. With no official 3.5E material out there and no hope for any more, everyone will be waiting to see what 4E looks like. But patience is not a gamer's virtue. Already we hear the sounds of discontent.
As to the bit where you quoted yourself... WotC's writers very rarely wrote for the magazines. Andy had his regular "Sage Advice" column. Mike Mearls cranked out a lot of cool stuff before he worked for WotC. Every once in a while, somebody from within would write an article. Otherwise, the magazines were populated with freelance writers and Paizo staff. And as far as I know, the entire development for 4e is being done in-house; that is, no freelancers are being utilized for it.
As for your second bit... I suspect you're correct, at least in part. I don't know that "scared" is the right term, but they most definitely don't seem to want a lot of new official 3.5 material out there. There's few books, there's very little in the D&DI other than adventures. That certainly tells me that the lack of material being released is intentional - because they certainly had enough material to produce the magazines going forward.
So the question, then, would be why? Is it fear? Is it jealousy? Is it just that they don't have the staff available to produce 3.5 material, since everybody is working on 4e? I don't know the answer.
This was a bad decision all over. I would like Andy Collins or someone like that to explain why they did what they did and what can we expect from the next six months. Throw us a bone or something. Give a timetable, or something like that.
You can find lots of comments from the developers over on the 4e forums. I rarely check there myself, but it's my understanding that the development team regularly pops on-line nowadays to answer questions and such.
My hat is off to those who did use the stuff though. Sorry you lost your resources.
I don't consider it "lost resources". My income level was such that I could afford to pay for it, and still meet all my mandatory needs for the month. Oh, and look, when I get a new paycheck, anything I spent in the past is moot. As long as I continue to work, I continue to have an income, so the resource is not finite (unlike, say, fossil fuels).
And besides... the thing about money is this: It is nothing more than a collection of paper and/or metal or more likely these days a bunch of 1's and 0's... it has no value whatsoever unless it is being traded for goods or services (such is the purpose it was derived for).
If you don't want to pay for the product. Don't pay for it. And, since no one complained if they didn't buy Dungeon or Dragon, then shall no one complain if they don't subscribe to DDI.
Simple.
EDIT: I should note that the free articles are only from past issues and not the current one. But I don't see that as having much bearing on the issue.
i have also been enjoying the supplimental content that this web site use to produce every day i would come home and see what has been posted
since dragon& dungeon was canceld i have not seen anything that would make me even want to stay here at this web site much less purchase new material
i own everything from the box set to 3.5 D&D
if what i see is any indication of what is to come then i want no part of it
one year ago i had all the supplimental content i could ever wanted i have not seen anything that has to do with the version i am playing since the demise of dragon & dungeons magazine
listen up wizards i have stuck with D&D when my entire family thought i was a satanic spell casting baby eating deviant. i have followed this game through trails and tribulations because i loved the feeling you get when your players discover new mysteries items monsters places and abilities. if your web site is going to ignore the players and not provide new content to those of us who are not play testing 4e
i have been patient waiting for some kind of semblance to new content for what we are playing then i think it is time for me to lay down the torch
P.S.-name book i own it
dragon magazine i got it
dungeon well i own them to
your preview books dont want them cant play the game with them
ddi has failed to produce anything i can use in my game
P.S.S.- 4e dosent exist untill it is released
we play 3.5 until june get with the program wizards
your preview books dont want them cant play the game with them
They are interesting, though, and if you care about this game as much as you profess then I fail to see why you wouldn't at least take a look at them. I'm cautious about accepting 4e too, but then I didn't ever want to change over from 2e either. But I like the look of some of the 4e material that has been released - and some of it I don't like. That will always be the same, and you've always got the right to use what you like and ditch the rest. Hell, nobody is forcing you to switch to 4th Edition. If you own as much material as you claim then you should have more than enough to be going on with. You could ignore everything that is released for 4e for the next decade and still have enough material to continue with an interesting campaign in whatever incarnation of D&D you choose to play.
P.S.S.- 4e dosent exist untill it is released
That is where you're wrong. As is obvious to anybody who is paying even the slightest bit of attention, WoTC no longer cares about 3rd Edition. That's fine. They've been working on 4e for over 2 years now, and they are finally able to share it. Admittedly the switch could have been handled better - I seem to remember Dragon and Dungeon still producing 2nd Edition content while hyping up 3e, but that content became less and less the closer we came to the 3e launch (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong; all my back issues of the magazines are at my other house so I can't check them).
we play 3.5 until june get with the program wizards
I'll continue to play it after June as well, just as I still play 2e when I feel like it. I may or may not play 4e as well; I may play a strange hybrid of all three and call it Pangalactic's Orgasmic Dancing Miniatures Game. I'm well within my rights to do so. Nobody is forcing you to stop playing 3.5 once 4e is released. OK, so WoTC won't support the old edition anymore. Big deal. As I've already said, you should have more than enough 3e material to use. And with this wonderful thing called the internet, new material is only a mouseclick away. Some of the fan-generated stuff I've seen on these boards far surpasses anything WoTC have released to date. Admittedly there's also a lot of crap to sift through, but if you really own every splatbook ever released then your book collection will be in roughly the same boat.
i have followed this game through trails and tribulations because i loved the feeling you get when your players discover new mysteries items monsters places and abilities.
Then stick with them through this. Your players can still uncover all of those things. Maybe now is the time to try your hand at developing some of your own ides, if you haven't already? Just because the website is less than useful for some of us at the moment is no reason to write off WoTC completely. They may yet surprise us all. And if they don't, there will still be 3rd party publishers and loyal fans churning out new material. Paizo's Pathfinder seems to be pretty good, and I'm sure there's plenty more where that came from. All is not yet lost.
Those sites provide news. WotC is Entertainment.
Those sites have daily print versions. WotC doesn't.
Those sites have competitors who provide similar services for free. WotC doesn't.
Asking the WotC site to provide similar services to the news sites is like asking a VW Bug to be able to off-road like a fully tricked-out military-grade Hummer. While they both are cars, they are designed for two completely different things.
I think you can compare them though they are apples and oranges.
First off for the news services the web site is an extra added value that has some content, the print versions are not just something else they are the something that the business is. The print service writes articles that they need to pay writers for that usually get good pay. Then the articles need to be set and printed even with all that the final cost is still real cheep for a newspaper because of how many they make. With the E versions of the news the articles are already being paid for by the primary business they are just being reprinted just for the cost of the print & we all know that print on the Internet is server (cheep likely less than the cost of 2 writers) plus bandwidth (real cheep much less than the cost of a single writer) in effect the internet versions don’t have an over head like the paper version or Like D&D because D&D does not have a paper version to pay for all the production.
The rest is basic math what’s more $8 subscription time’s a million subscribers or 12 million subscribers that they can earn 2 bucks a off each from adds. Because D&D does not have viewer ship of a daily newspaper and because the demographic is very different (people reading a daily news paper are a lot more likely to have or want job, house, car, gas or many other products while people on this site are more likely to be still in school and have less money to spend generally, not all are but on average. Because of this there’s no real reason for a car company as an example to hit this site with an add blitz because even if there was as many hits here they would produce far less sales from those hits making how much a company can pay for advertising much lower. So D&D may only be able to make $0.10 - $0.50 per unique versus say $10 for a subscriber means you need to have 20-100 times more people come if it’s paid for by adds.
That having been said I would guess that some time in the future the cost of DDI will go down if not be free totally. First before they can make advertising on their site a commodity they need to have a user base and the demographic of those users, both things they cannot have till it is released.