There's a decent sized interview with Scott Rouse, Bill Slavicsek, and Chris Perkins about the move at http://www.enworld.org/!
Dang, they neatly dodged the topic of whether dead campaign settings will see any support.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Damn, that was weak.
Not just weak, it pissed me off.
And I'm one of the few people not raging about a WotC boycott.
I have absolutely no intention of paying for their electronic versions of Dragon or Dungeon. Their current online offerings aren't even worth my time to read, so I'm not sure why they would think their new offerings would be worth my time AND my money.
Seriously, WotC, you guys suck ass. I'm disgusted.
Edit: Damn am I pissed. That was the most worthless bunch of non-commital mealy mouthed jargon ever puked out by a company rep. I've been sitting here saying "Don't worry guys, I'm sure WotC has a plan, I'm sure their heads are only temporarily lodged in their asses and are recoverable" and now they come out and basically say "Our heads are planted firmly in our asses, we enjoy the smell, you all should try it too."
Damn, that was weak.
Not just weak, it pissed me off.
And I'm one of the few people not raging about a WotC boycott.
I have absolutely no intention of paying for their electronic versions of Dragon or Dungeon. Their current online offerings aren't even worth my time to read, so I'm not sure why they would think their new offerings would be worth my time AND my money.
Seriously, WotC, you guys suck ass. I'm disgusted.
Edit: Damn am I pissed. That was the most worthless bunch of non-commital mealy mouthed jargon ever puked out by a company rep. I've been sitting here saying "Don't worry guys, I'm sure WotC has a plan, I'm sure their heads are only temporarily lodged in their asses and are recoverable" and now they come out and basically say "Our heads are planted firmly in our asses, we enjoy the smell, you all should try it too."
Sebastian.... you are the last person I would have expected to have that reaction.
It was very carefully worded and wordy, but without saying much of anything. The stated plan to compile and print the material at semi-regular intervals makes me happy. But the suggestion that the portability ability won't be around (the type of DRM to use was in question, not whether they would use DRM) bugs me a lot. I don't like feeling like I don't own something I've paid for.... computer licenses bug me for the same reason.
- Ashavan
I've been sitting here saying "Don't worry guys, I'm sure WotC has a plan, I'm sure their heads are only temporarily lodged in their asses and are recoverable" and now they come out and basically say "Our heads are planted firmly in our asses, we enjoy the smell, you all should try it too."
You are awesome. That's pretty much how I feel. I just didn't ahve much confidence if WotC's plan to begin with.
OK, so I read the interview too...with a careful eye to the commentary on DRM. And that is one thing that bothers me and makes me even less likely to be interested in the WotC digital model. I subscribe...I get x number of digital "issues." Then I let my subscription lapse, and it really sounds as if they are saying, in a veiled manner, that "portability" (i.e., the ability to re-open/access/whatever) said content will go the way of the dodo or the archaeoptrix.
I was unhappy with things before.
The unhappiness grows.
I realise I had less use for the magazines in the post 2E world as I have remained running a bastardised version of 1E/2E because it's what my players like, but they were still of use for ideas and motivation and stuff...I'd pick them up off the shelf in bookstores, as I don't really have a FLGS.
I will not pay for digital content that I have to continue to pay to access. If I can't download it to my hard drive for retrieval and reading decades from now, I ain't going to pay to read it in the first place, because what happens when Wizards folds?
If I don't back up my hard drive, that's my fault.
I may not use ANY material from Pathfinder for years down the road, but I subscribe in confidence knowing that the printed material is there for me decades from now when I am ready to use it.
The potential of interactive content to enhance the tabletop experience is tempting, but it is not THAT tempting.
I subscribe...I get x number of digital "issues." Then I let my subscription lapse, and it really sounds as if they are saying, in a veiled manner, that "portability" (i.e., the ability to re-open/access/whatever) said content will go the way of the dodo or the archaeoptrix.
Dodo. The achaeropterix died out on it's own. People killed the dodo.
this didnt make me feel any better and they said nothing ..and as i do not use online content helps me not
<sigh> Ya know, I provided more information on a local board reporting the existance of the EN World article than WotC provided in the article itself...
The thing that ticks me off the most is Bill Slavicsek assuming that any announcement of just what WotC's online content will be will somehow diminish Paizo's final few issues of the license. Not gonna happen. Paizo has generated enough good press over the past couple weeks, in addition to the strong loyalty of their regular customers, that I predict that the last issues of Dragon and Dungeon will share the title of best selling gaming magazine ever
So let's see, who do you prefer (as if this is a fair betting question): the company that has been upright and open from the moment of the announcement, or the company that has continued to dodge and spin since they announced the cancelation?
|
"Don't worry guys, I'm sure WotC has a plan, I'm sure their heads are only temporarily lodged in their asses and are recoverable"
Well, bro,...I've been a ravening spiteful lunatic (for me) and you've been all "wait and see what the future holds" Pollyanna (for you) for the first few days of this horrifying debacle. Surely you had to know something was amiss!
Seriously, I'm frankly astounded at myself for the raw powerful emotions I have about this issue. I can't find any logical ground to base an opinion on; I'm too bent out of shape.At enworld they've had to really slap the ban hammer down on folks, so I guess I'm not alone; I'm just closing in on middleage and the testosterone fueled rancor doesn't hit me as hard as it used to. I doubt it has much to do with wisdom of age.
I subscribe...I get x number of digital "issues." Then I let my subscription lapse, and it really sounds as if they are saying, in a veiled manner, that "portability" (i.e., the ability to re-open/access/whatever) said content will go the way of the dodo or the archaeoptrix.Dodo. The achaeropterix died out on it's own. People killed the dodo.
Well, point being that they both became extinct, but I certainly understand your clarification :-)
|
They keep saying that they have big plans, but an awful lot of their answers sounded to me like, "well...what would you want to see in the new online offering."
I don't know if it's reality, but they sure seemed less like they were hiding stuff and more like they have nothing worthwhile or original to hide.
I think I'm going to be happy with my decision to spend my gaming dollars on Pathfinder rather than Dungeon online.
I am wondering if in their pursuit of the $3 billion pot Blizzard identified using their game that is often described in the press as Dungeons & Dragons-like, Hasbro is going to turn their valuable commodity in the area (aside from the name) into a feeder for Stormreach and similar ventures.
Their main asset is mountains and mountains of descriptions of their worlds. It appears that they are going through their holdings and updating all their brands, like Monopoly, Life, My Little Pony, and Transformers. They like fast and they like computers (desktop and embedded) in the mix.
I would think the long plan would be to morph current publications and other print into game-guides or plug-in instance modules. That way you sell subscriptions to the online world, plus sell add-ons. The fact that a description I read on these boards of a new adventure had cookie cutter monsters and locked-down setups. Not how most people here play, but describes to a T WoW style mechanics, because that's what the system dictates. Not as flexible, but it allows people to read about a new dungeon or monster, buy it, and let the server DM for you or your group.
You can't do this if someone else prints the mags, because you want people to see the dungeon or monster, click the link, buy it, and play it.
Just my crackpot theory. But for a market the size of Hasbro's entire online sales, I don't think WotC execs get to make the decisions on this any more, not if D&D is the next on Hasbro's "to revitalize" list.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I've been rereading it, trying to figure out part of why this pissed me off so much. Part of it is their total non-responsiveness in a substantive way to any of the questions asked. They might as well have just re-relased the press release rather than reformat it in a fake question and answer style. So, part of it is the fact that they show such disdain for us that they can't even be bothered to talk with us instead of to us. But, I think more to the point is this snippit:
What can an online platform offer to the customer that a magazine cannot?Chris: We have a lot of ideas that we’re happy with, but let me turn the question around. What would you hope for? What would make this exciting and useful for you? Another question for the community: How much of the magazine content were you able to use in your campaign? How much work did you have to do to accomplish that? If this new incarnation of the magazines could encompass anything you could want, what would that be?
You spineless a!**~&! Chris Thomasson. I know that you probably just had your PR person write this shit and then you attached your name to it, but couldn't you have at least tried to answer the most important question floating around the D&D internet these days?
Guess what - I don't work at Wizards. You're the one that just killed the magazines I loved. Why don't you tell me what the f$&+ you're going to do now. I'll tell you what I want: I want the magazines back and I want them in Paizo's hands. I want you to explain to me how you're going to do a better job than them given the fact that they have made the magazines many times better than they were when you were in charge of them. I want you to tell me that you actually know what the f$~+ you're doing and not that you're just now getting around to soliciting my input. You want my input - f*** you.
Damn I'm pissed.
Edit: Aubrey, Fatespinner, all the other people sticking by WotC, talk me off this ledge, show me what hope there is in this "interview."
|
I've been rereading it, trying to figure out part of why this pissed me off so much.
---Compressed for space---
Damn I'm pissed.
I could kiss you now, Sebastian. Come join the rest of us.
Actually, I am happy you took the longer stance in this. I am happy that there are some people who aren't cheerleaders one way or the other just out of hand, but are willing to set back and look at what has unfolded pretty damn objectively... and then get pissed off.
I am happy that there are some people who aren't cheerleaders one way or the other just out of hand, but are willing to set back and look at what has unfolded pretty damn objectively... and then get pissed off.
LOL!!! I'm still trying to be objective, but that interview didn't inspire a lot of confidence. I'm glad that Dungeon and Dragon magazines will continue, though. They have some hellacious shoes to fill and I'm going to reserve judgement until their online initiative is fully revealed and in use and tested.
|
|
---Another question hidden here is why don’t we have our plans ready now to share with the audience, just like Paizo did? Paizo needed to have information available now to discuss things important to their subscribers, such as what happens to their money. That’s a much more important and timely message at this moment than what WotC plans to do down the road. We will tell you. Have no fears about that. But the message has to come at the right time, and that time isn’t today.---
I read this statement and got fired up. To me this statement reads, "We are a big company and don't have to treat our customers right like Paizo does. We can screw them over time and again and they will just keep coming back."
Yes Paizo needed to be able to let us know what would happen with our subscriptions, but they didn't "have" to give us daily blogs with information about the new setting and AP. They didn't "have" to spend days and most of their nights on the forums answering our posts, assuring us that they had our backs after that huge kick in the gut. They didn't "have" to be so open and honest with us about the future of Paizo. But they did. They didn't tell us "We know something you don't know."
Paizo is a model company in my opinion. If more companies were like Paizo the business world would be a better place to be in right now.
Amen!
is it me or were the answers they gave REALLY VAGUE?!
|
That did nothing to make me feel better.
What WotC doesn't get is that I will not tolerate getting screwed so they can make more money.
I paid $35 for Demonweb Pits because (i) Wolfgang wrote it and it's dang good, and (ii) unless I get robbed or my house burns down I have it in my possession.
I utterly refuse to pay $X dollars for their bright idea (even if Wolfgang writes in it) because I do not trust that they have my interests in mind.
It's been a week and I'm still unreasonably upset...but I'm done with them and their "I know better" attitude.
|
I'm not too worried about them not answering specific questions. I understand the legal issues as I have worked as a Public Relations Specialist for 10 years. I'm not worried that much that they didn't address specific issues. The one thing that worries me above all else and has me more disinterested than when I first heard about DI is the following:
We have not come up with a solution for “portability” of content after your subscription has ended but we are discussing ideas with in our development team. We do not have a DRM solution yet but have a range of options available to us.
You have got to be kidding. Sometime last year, you guys got together with Paizo and agreed to let the licensing run out and go the online route. That's fine adn I understand the corporate stance on saving cash frompublishing magazines.
But, someone in your office had to know it would be a huge concern to your customer base about keeping the materials published online that they had access to during their membership, and that they would be able to take this material with them when they decided to drop their subscription. To say that in quite a few months, you still don't have a solution to something that is a major concern is very disheartening.
What it sounds like is you guys haven't put alot of thought at all into anything besides, "Hey, wouldn't it save some money to drop the physical mags and put all that info on line?" I will reserve further judgements for the next four months as you decide to release info. As of now, there is nothing you have said that would even remotely interest me i n subscribing to an online version.
|
|
I understand that in order to make money, Wizards has to persue new customers, and they believe that this is done best through online content.
I also hope they read the trends on these boards and see how many people out of a community that supports this hobby industry do not like the new model and indeed most will not put their money into it.
I don't want to buy files that I may not be able to access when my 'subscription' runs out. I don't want to play an online game with buyable dungeons so that the computer can be the DM, as has been suggested farther in the future. That's still just a MMORPG, and doesn't touch the same level of social interaction that tabletop gaming does.
I like (or perhaps should say 'liked') WotC when they put out Magic:TG, and especially when they bought and remarketed D&D, and the format of 3.5 suits me and my fellow players very well. But I'm simply not going to pay for the ability to view new content on their website.
*doomsday rant below, you should probably skip reading it*
I just had a terrible vision of the future, where a few years down the road WotC makes a few mechanics changes to 3.5 (such as the "sense" skill). To 'reach a broader audience', they will market most of the changes through online text, which is substantially cheaper to make than printed products. In order to satisfy their loyal customers who demand print, WotC will benevolently provide that, too. At a much higher markup of course, because selling a small print run is more costly than selling print to all their customers.
The result will probably be that prices for core gaming supplements will become unreasonable except in an online format. If that is the case, Paizo, Green Ronin and other OGL companies can expect a slightly larger part of my gaming budget, because they can provide quality printed products at a good price. Will WotC then look into ways to curb that competition?
The industry may suffer as a whole because of the slightly lower priced material available online which you don't actually own, you just pay for viewing.
Sigh.
That interview didn't turn out too well for them.
Like Michael Brock and others above I too am concerned about their lack of portability. Hypothetical situation based on the lack of information so far: If you have to continually pay just to access stuff that has been out for a year, instead of being able to download and print it out yourself, then it becomes a complete and utter rip-off. I certainly hope they have more sense than to try that, but we'll see. If they do they won't be getting my money, no matter if the content is as awesome as they keep saying.
So, let me get this straight... it took 3 of the senior WoTC staff almost a week to put together that pile of BS?
This brave new "Digitial Initiative" might be the best thing ever... but judging by the crap spewing forth from the senior guys in charge of it, I doubt it.
Did they really expect that "interview" to do more than anger or annoy those that are already mad at them?
|
|
Ok this is what gets me.....
"Given that you have a new online content plan which, presumably, is set to “replace” the licensed magazine format, do you feel it was a good idea, publicity-wise, to announce the end of DRAGON and DUNGEON before, if not the imminent launch of the new service, but even any serious promotion or marketing of it?
Bill: The decision to make the announcement at this time was worked out with Paizo, and at their request. Paizo has subscribers, printers, advertisers and circulation partners who all needed to know what was going on. As for the WotC part of all this, we never had any intention of launching our efforts before Paizo’s run with the magazines was complete. And, while we cannot yet share all the details of what’s to come, more information will be revealed before the last issues of Dungeon and Dragon magazines hit the stands."
Now I have seen the arguement by people on these boards that this whole new online thing was to reach people not into the game, that the idea of a online deal would bring them in. So if WotC arent talking to advertisers like Paizo did, how the f%^& they ever gonna reach anyone, let alnoe the new people. And if they decided to do like a compendium, dont they have to let their printers and circulation people know cuz thats not exactly something you can do overnight...
Damn Weasels of the Coast!!!
Hmm. Someone pursuing academia could make very interesting case study for Economics about this whole thing...
I think it was without information due to the simple fact, that they do not have any. Like they said much is still in the flux, they even asked AGAIN, what they wanted the users to see.
I programm (Intra-)Net applications, if they are not already deep in developing they will have a mayor problem come September. ;-)
Have you read the question:
"Will the large quantity of regularly updated, excellent free content on the official website be affected by all this?"
Was this intended to be an ironic question? When I first looked at the WotC Site I kept serching for an hour before realising I had already seen their High-quality content.
I programm (Intra-)Net applications, if they are not already deep in developing they will have a mayor problem come September. ;-)
I'm a programmer too, and I was thinking the same thing. Maybe they plan to beta test (or even alpha test) with paying subscribers? I believe that's a very real possibility.
|
|
Aubrey, Fatespinner, all the other people sticking by WotC, talk me off this ledge, show me what hope there is in this "interview."
I haven't seen it, and as I'm at work I can't get to it. However, the excerpt presented is certainly a transparent bit of unhelpful news-management, rather than a substantive reply. I suspect that they have some plans, but possibly they haven't been approved at a high level, and so can't make a formal public announcement in case they then have to retract. I suspect departments are not talking properly, someone in IT and maybe the legal department (sorry Seb) are being unhelpful, and they hoped to actually thrash out the details internally over the coming months rather than be pushed to say something now.
I expect they didn't imagine the furore that would ignite from the loyal Paizo purchaser-base (which must be one of the key targets for this initiative). In that case, it might have been better not to say anything, but maybe they hoped to do some damage limitation by coming out with something (i.e. to show they are not hiding in shame). That appears to have backfired.
The issue of the portability of the content, and the non-reply, is redolent of departmental bunfights. I suspect there is a lot of conflict going on between the actual gamer staff who write the stuff, the accountants, IT and legal people. I mean, why not just do it as a pdf and email it to subcribers - anyone with any brains will find a way to copy it and violate their copyright, so why sweat blood over it and annoy the potential customers? Do the bare minimum to stop the average Joe from doing it, and that should be enough. It just hasn't been thought through, and I think they expected to have much more time to do so. Sounds like a fiasco - heads should probably roll.
|
|
The main question I have, and the question that was never addressed, was this: why can't a Paizo print product AND a WOTC net product peacefully coexist? If the internet can theoretically reach so many more people, what threat to that cash flow is a print magazine or two?
I don't see how the two formats are mutually exclusive.
Speculation Warning!
Maybe they were already toying with the idea of online paid content.
As a completely unrelated matter, at the negotiation table with Paizo, WotC wanted more money to continue the license. This was not agreeable to Paizo, and hence the following quote:
More than a year ago, after much discussion, WotC and Paizo mutually agreed to let the contract expire at the end of the current license.
WotC then merged the two ideas together and voila! Roll your Digital Initiative, but you don't get to act until the next round because you are flat-footed.
|
|
The main question I have, and the question that was never addressed, was this: why can't a Paizo print product AND a WOTC net product peacefully coexist? If the internet can theoretically reach so many more people, what threat to that cash flow is a print magazine or two?
I don't see how the two formats are mutually exclusive.
That's easy! There is nothing WotC can produce that can compare! And there is even less hope for WotC support and customer service to be able to compete.
Paizo is a small group of people who care about the game and love what they do. WotC is a huge disconected corporate entity (should be it's own creature type). Sure, there are some great people at WotC and they produce some good stuff. As individuals they probably even love the game. But ultimately they have to answer to a larger cause that is more interested in customers than people.
|
|
They keep saying that they have big plans, but an awful lot of their answers sounded to me like, "well...what would you want to see in the new online offering."
Yeah, that bugged me too. It was mentioned more than once that "we'd love to know what you all think!" Seems to me the right time for that is, well, before now. It sounds a lot like "Don't worry, we've got a great plan! By the way, what do you all think our plan should be?"
|
|
I'm a programmer too, and I was thinking the same thing. Maybe they plan to beta test (or even alpha test) with paying subscribers? I believe that's a very real possibility.
Hah! What a GREAT customer experience that would be! If they think such an experience is going to endear their offering to subscribers they are on crack! I would think that the stability of this new part of their enterprise should be their number one priority if the goal is to convince the audience that online will fit its need just as well as the magazine ever did.
My first instinct is to say that their business people cannot be that stupid. But then I guess they did just slap the growing customer base of these two magazines right in the face. And I agree that they did not make it seem like they were very far along in the search for solutions to the particular problems of the medium they've chosen.
But they are excited!!
|
|
Speculation Warning!
Maybe they were already toying with the idea of online paid content.
They definitely were - about a year ago, I participated on a survey that was all about what would I like to see online and how much would I pay for this and that.
I indicated very little interest in pay-per-view approaches. Online character tools sounded fascinating (I'm a programer) but I will not pay $X a month to keep my half-elf Favored Soul online. He lives on a piece of paper I printed from a link found on these forums!
Ironically, in the late 90's, after TSR put all the 2nd edition rulebooks out electronically on CD-ROM (remember?), I ran my game from my desktop computer. I set it up in my spare bedroom and put our gaming table in there (I was single, there's no way I could do that now). I was enamored with the ability to use the html links and search feature to find rules and look up monsters, etc.
I started running 3.5 in 2004 using my laptop and soon found that I hated it. I ditched it and now run the game w/o a computer at the table, except that I sometimes (as a player) use my PDA and its folding keyboard to take campaign notes.
Of course, I use the hell out of a computer when doing game prep, from writing up campaign notes to printing out stat blocks on 3x5 cards. I used E-tools and my wife likes Heroforge for her character sheets.
Having said that, it'll take a heck of a cool "online initiative" from Wizards to convince me to take my laptop back to the gaming table. I'm willing to pay for tools that save me time doing game prep, but I know for a fact my players won't pay for the privilege of keeping a character online, even if it simplifies the math and game prep for them. Some might if it's only a couple of dollars, but I think most RPGers are fond of "rolling up a character" using dice and a real character sheet. I know that I am.
This interview is on par with every other "spin" interview from every company or governent official since the beginning of time. They say things like "Gosh we sure are glad to be here" and "thanks for letting us get our awesome message out.". Then they proceed turn aside every question with ridiculous non-answers which make no real sense and answer no questions. How can you answer a question with a question? It's like watching the President answer questions on TV. Does he actually answer any of them? Mostly no. It's insulting, it's laughable, it pisses us off. But what do any of us really expect from huge corporations? Think about the one you work for (if you do). Have any of the huge layoffs or changes they do ever been spun differently. Haven't they force fed you thier BS by sugercoating it first? The changes are always great and the future is always bright, as long as you're not one of the poor slubs hit by the corporate hammer. But hey, I expect no less in a country where the bottom line is the only line and companies try to squeeze every last dime out of a product and quality and consumers be damned.
No thanks WOTC I will not take a drink of the Kool-Aid your pouring. It was a very disappointing interview. It was their first opportunity to try and mend the bridges they burnt, but instead they put their heads in the sand and avoided the tough questions we all really wanted answered while trying to promote products there all very excited about but can’t talk about right now.
WOTC I’m no longer angry at you I’m just not interested anymore…good-bye.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
For what it's worth...
I think this is a poor choice on Wizards' part. And I think the poeple there are handling it even more poorly.
But over the years, I've liked a lot of their on-line content. I've learned a lot about design and (especially) development from Mike Mears' essays, and Wolfgang Baur's six-part series on Adventure Design from a year or so back. And several others. The rare adventures that they publish on-line -- like the 3.5 updates for Tomb of Horrors and White Plume Mountain, the return to the Temple of the Frog, and Monte Cook's short adventures -- have been pretty fun.
I disagree with the posters here who assert that nothing on WotC's website is worth the electrons it's printed on. If you sift through the "articles" that are ads for upcoming projects, and the rambling Sharn Initiative stuff, there's some good ideas to find.
Then again, there was the fiendish gelatinous cube Monk....
I particularly like the line that went something like: "Sure, that's a great idea! In fact, that's been part of our plans all along." Bullshit.
So, as things stand right now, it would be like my subscription running out on Dungeon and Paizo sending someone to collect all my magazines and take them away because I'm no longer sending money to the company? No, thanks.
Oh, and if that closing comment is right and the Paizo people play D&D with the WotC people- TPK them!
The subtext of the interview seems to be that they really don't know what they're doing. Since they still appear to be hiring people for this online initiative of theirs, I doubt this project will be more than an alpha before it hits their prospective new "wired" customers smack in the face.
While I have liked a few of the articles available on the wizards site, it's nothing I would pay money for, especially if they have Digital Restriction Management on them.
As for playing using digital tools? Storytelling and dice is all I need. And this is coming from a totally wired computer geek who owns all the gadgets and spends a large chunk of time online. WotC is making a huge mistake here, and it will come back to bite them in the donkey.
I programm (Intra-)Net applications, if they are not already deep in developing they will have a mayor problem come September. ;-)
If you are familiar with the history of Magic online, you will find that Wizards has a history of thinking that money and hope will make a digital product come together on time.
The company as a whole is launching their 'Digital Initiative', though, and they are hiring a LOT of software people. Hopefully, in a year or two, some of their software guys will get into a position where they can actually say 'No, we can't do that in six months' or refuse to change specifications a month out from deadline. Until then, we have to deal with the suits thinking that online content is easier than publishing.
WotC's website isn't worthless: there's good stuff on there, but only about once every too weeks. I check everyday, but most of the updates are worthless. Dungeon and Dragon were way better.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
It's funny you should mention that line Saern I bet that has been in thier minds. My suspicious mind has come up with another reason WotC might have been interested in reclaiming the Dungeon / Dragon Licenses.
What is the likelihood of seeing new online material being compiled in hardcopy format - perhaps an annual magazine, book or compendium?
Sounds like a great idea! In fact, it’s been part of our plans all along.
WotC will also be able to print material from the last 5 years. So perhaps they'll be bringing out more volumes in the Dragon Compendium or additional Dungeon Classics. Age of Worms and Savage Tide? I don't now what the licensing for the Shackled City looked like but I am more than certain WotC will be able to make a great deal more money by publishing the subsequent Adventure Paths in house.
So I guess my question is: Is this a good thing or a bad thing? I'm certain that anyone involved in writing the APs will be happy to have thier work published in the more durable format but what about the boycotters?
Until then, we have to deal with the suits thinking that online content is easier than publishing.
Yeah. People have no idea what it takes to put a robust, integrated, user-friendly and stable application online. "You can have it done well, done cheaply and done quickly. Pick any two."
I would say: Pick one. ;-)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I haven't seen it, and as I'm at work I can't get to it. However, the excerpt presented is certainly a transparent bit of unhelpful news-management, rather than a substantive reply. I suspect that they have some plans, but possibly they haven't been approved at a high level, and so can't make a formal public announcement in case they then have to retract. I suspect departments are not talking properly, someone in IT and maybe the legal department (sorry Seb) are being unhelpful, and they hoped to actually thrash out the details internally over the coming months rather than be pushed to say something now.
Goddamn bloodsucking attorneys.
I agree, this post shows that there are business people running one way, creative people running another way, and nobody has their shit together enough to post something coherent. I have been taking it on faith that WotC had a plan and a vision when they took back these licenses, but when I hear this half-assed, we-don't-really-have-all-the-details-nailed-down whining, it really shakes that faith.
Whoever is running this iniatitive is incompetent, plain and simple. They're garnering all sorts of bad will, failing to show leadership, and generally pissing around. Who knows, maybe they're launching the best thing since polyhedron dice, but they're not making that launch any easier with shit like this.