|
No disparagement against my profession, but Hasbro and WotC aren't like the military, where the guy with an MA in English-Lit manages the hospital. I would venture to say that the professionals at Hasbro and WotC are qualified to do their jobs...it's a business, and mistakes aren't tolerated for too long in a corporate setting; if you don't know what you're doing, people figure it out pretty quickly and you're 'replaced'...just my two cents.
No disparagement against my profession, but Hasbro and WotC aren't like the military, where the guy with an MA in English-Lit manages the hospital. I would venture to say that the professionals at Hasbro and WotC are qualified to do their jobs...it's a business, and mistakes aren't tolerated for too long in a corporate setting; if you don't know what you're doing, people figure it out pretty quickly and you're 'replaced'...just my two cents.
While i see the statement you make as valid, the only thing that comes to my mind is what the hell was TSR issue then for X years... LOL ; )
|
|
No disparagement against my profession, but Hasbro and WotC aren't like the military, where the guy with an MA in English-Lit manages the hospital. I would venture to say that the professionals at Hasbro and WotC are qualified to do their jobs...it's a business, and mistakes aren't tolerated for too long in a corporate setting; if you don't know what you're doing, people figure it out pretty quickly and you're 'replaced'...just my two cents.While i see the statement you make as valid, the only thing that comes to my mind is what the hell was TSR issue then for X years... LOL ; )
And, of course, therein is an example of a poorly managed corporate model with self-perpetuating management issues--obverse, I would be very comfortable buying stock in Hasbro....
I posted on EnWorld (and it seemed some people just didn't get it) that the decision to cancel the magazines can not reflect the will of the people who used the magazines unless those were the people surveyed. I don't recall seeing such a survey.
I took part in those surveys ::Shrug:: and the current descision certianly doesn't reflect my will... in survey after survey I told them that I would not pay of online content.
|
What I don't understand is why people are continuing to gnash their teeth over this decision. It is a done deal, let's move on already. All the vitriol in the world won't get the magazines back and although a boycott might have an effect, has anyone stopped to think that Paizo might be ready to move on from WotC and would not go back under the WotC umbrella if it was offered?
How many of you out there have had a job you thought was great, but after 5 years or so you really came to loathe it. You saw all its flaws and drawbacks, it became a grind and you yearned to make a change, but you didn't because it offered security and you did the job well. And then suddenly your employment situation changed. Maybe you were laid off or re-assigned to a role you found unbearable. After a period of worry you left, changed companies and found a much, much better job. Looking back on it, you wonder why you didn't leave the old job sooner.
My guess is that Paizo is at that point. Sure Dungeon and Dragon were great and they put the food on the table, but as the Paizo folks have said over and over, costs are always increasing and publishing even a successful magazine profitably is very difficult and demanding. Paizo is full of talented editors and developers, they love their market and they understand their customers. WotC pulling the license may very well save Paizo in the long run, if not financially then from a corporate sanity standpoint. Look at the effort they are putting into their new products, their desire to make their company the best OGL company in the marketplace. They are not treating Pathfinder or their GameMastery line as some sort of corporate bomb shelter. They are not "turtling" and seeing if they can hang on without WotC. Paizo is going full out to turn this change in their business world into the best thing that has ever happened to them. I would lay cash on the table, betting that 4 people in 5 at Paizo right now - hell 9 in 10 even - would not accept an offer from WotC to restore the license as if nothing ever happened; they want to see if they can make it work without the 800lb gorilla in the suit holding their hand. The rewards for success or even for trying, once nebulous and unobtainable, are floating right in front of them, and all they have to do is reach out and take them.
Those of you out there that are not entrepreneurs may not understand this feeling. I do. I have been there (more than once), and I can absolutely assure that there is nothing sweeter both financially and mentally than taking an apparent defeat and turning it into a huge success. It is a powerful feeling to head out into the deep water without anyone to aid you and find that not only can you survive, but you can swim like a shark.
Let the issue go. Let Paizo take their shot at doing things their way. My money is on their success; they have what it takes.
|
|
Dude. People are still "just finding out."
My homeboy Yemaj, who posts here some, just found out Friday.I remember being so mad I could hardly post nice. I was mad.
I was hysterical.Give people time, and understand it's all right to be angry. I have a right to my own emotional state.
Heathansson, i am assuming (always a bad thing) that your comments are related to my post above the one I quoted here. If so, here is my response.
I actually agree with you with regard to those that are just finding out. I understand their feelings; I had them as well and I think venting those feelings (within some basic parameters) is actually a good thing. But the initial tone of this thread seemed to be one of snide bitterness, resorting to ad hominem attacks that not only obfuscate the real issues but may very well be opposite of what Paizo desires now that the initial decision has been made to pull the licenses. This thread isn't gut reaction stuff upon hearing the news, it was at its outset intentionally inflammatory and in the end this approach serves no real purpose. I am not saying that those who took this news hard should be happy about it, only that they need to find ways to express their grief that are constructive to the situation and take into account not only their own needs (or their "rights", though that is a seperate debate), but the needs and likely views of Paizo as well now that our much-beloved publisher is reinventing their business model.
|
No disparagement against my profession, but Hasbro and WotC aren't like the military, where the guy with an MA in English-Lit manages the hospital. I would venture to say that the professionals at Hasbro and WotC are qualified to do their jobs...it's a business, and mistakes aren't tolerated for too long in a corporate setting; if you don't know what you're doing, people figure it out pretty quickly and you're 'replaced'...just my two cents.
Yeah, like the guys at the top of Enron! They weren't tolerated, and were replaced, and, uhhh, oh. Yeah.
Maybe a few that aren't really qualified to do a job do get through.
|
|
Right on, lich loved. (the reply button doesn't work for me)
I just get ticked when I hear people telling me to get over it. I'll get over it when I get over it. Productive, counter-productive, I don't care; pissed is pissed.
I see your point, though. I TRY (myself) not to get all pissy about stuff. It's just aggrivating.
Yeah, like the guys at the top of Enron! They weren't tolerated, and were replaced, and, uhhh, oh. Yeah.Maybe a few that aren't really qualified to do a job do get through.
Well, if you have a few dirty politicians and a corrupt accounting firm on your side, you can cover a multitude of sins. Or is that, you can multiply a multitude of sins?
Right on, lich loved. (the reply button doesn't work for me)
I just get ticked when I hear people telling me to get over it. I'll get over it when I get over it. Productive, counter-productive, I don't care; pissed is pissed.
I see your point, though. I TRY (myself) not to get all pissy about stuff. It's just aggrivating.
You should really get that reply button looked at Heathy . . .
I understand people getting upset over the whole thing, and WOTC brought a lot of this on themselves, but I don't feel 100% okay with singling out people and making them the fall guy for the whole situation.
|
|
Yeah, like the guys at the top of Enron! They weren't tolerated, and were replaced, and, uhhh, oh. Yeah. Maybe a few that aren't really qualified to do a job do get through.
Well, I think the troubles at Enron are miles away from typos in an RPG book and canceling a couple magazines...
Don't get me wrong, these two magazines have been my absolute favorites since childhood, and I don't frequent the _Nat'l Geo_ message boards, but I doubt the decision to discontinue the license equates to manipulating the NYSE and stealing 401Ks...that would be my 2 1/2 cents worth...
I took part in those surveys ::Shrug:: and the current descision certianly doesn't reflect my will... in survey after survey I told them that I would not pay of online content.
I posted on EnWorld (and it seemed some people just didn't get it) that the decision to cancel the magazines can not reflect the will of the people who used the magazines unless those were the people surveyed. I don't recall seeing such a survey.Maybe they eliminated responses from everyone whose name didn't include a vowel ... ;)
-- George Krashos
I am pretty sure I took the surveys under my actual name of C. Wesley Clough :P
|
I consider myself an avid gamer. I was gaming about 50 hours a week, the summer after high school. (I've slowed down a bit since then. You can only keep that pace up for so long, and that was 1982). I've never played at a convention, and while I am an RPGA member, I've never had the opportunity to get involved in a "Living" campaign.
But... what exactly "is" an avid gamer? Your definition could be very different from mine, or Liz's, or Gary Gygax's. Sounds like the folks at Paizo have me beat hands-down. Does that mean they're avid and I'm not?
Maybe Liz really loves the game, has played with the same 4 people since High School, and never really liked either Dungeon or Dragon. (I have described two of my own friends with that statement. They don't care that the magazines are going away, and it won't affect their buying patterns at all.) If that's Liz, then the "don't care" translates (for a Marketing Exec) to "can my company make more money without them?" The answer there is "probably yes".
If you don't like what's going on at WotC, complain there. Vote with your pocketbook. If enough people do it, they'll notice. I don't think that their recent decisions (bad or not) will impact a large enough segment of our already fringe population group for them to feel like we're hurting them.
Me, I buy from whoever I want. If WotC is selling something I like, I'll buy it. If Paizo is the one, I'll buy it. Shoot, I'd buy from Shmendrack Gaming Corporation, LTD. if they had the product for me.
They all need to feed their kids, from the megalithic, unfeeling corporate devils at WotC, to the guy over at Shmendrack, publishing out of his basement.
I've read this whole thread.
You know what I'm mostly taking away from it?
Sebastian is a brain in a jar... Which explains a few things.
Deimodius, you've nailed it. My concern is that whether Liz actually games, but if she is in tune with the gameing community. I thought tha if someone could substantiate some the of the claims that Liz makes in her statments and mini biography that it would show that she does in fact understand and interact with the gaming community. It certainly doesn't seem that she does.
You bring up a good point about the survey. It is a strong tool for product management, but it must be created properly and used in a particular manner. A product or brand manager should never start their quest for user behavior or clients needs with a survey. The first step in the process is to speak with your customer base and interact with them. Find out their like and dislikes and new things they may be looking for. A survey is used to confirm or disavow the information gathered from the initial group that was approached. The survey casts a wider net on the customer base and it is important that the customer base is aware of the survey so that they understand that not only is the producer of the product actively soliciting feedback, but that the customer has the ability to participate before any changes to the product take place. The structure of the survey is very important as well. It should never give the survey taker choices that are black and white. For example in this case the survey should not say would you rather had the Dragon and Dungeon content presented in a magazine or online format. The problem here is that the consumer knows what the magazine is, but the online content can mean many things to alot of people. The survey should ask multiple questions ab out content layout, time of delivery, what the content should be, and when do you read the content. The answers to thoses questions should determine the format in which the product is delivered.
Needless to say if there was a survey I'm not sure who was sent to. Probably a focus group of kids who play miniatures and card games that Wotc wants to convert to D&D play. Whatever happended to the magazine that was deadicated to cards? Oh yeah its gone.
|
I think I make a valid point. If she claims to be a gamer lets hear from someone who has gamed with her. I highly doubt we'll get many posts to that effect. I think it is important for everyone to understand who is steering the ship over at Wotc for the Dungeons and Dragons product. From what I have seen so far she grants interviews with individuals who describe traditional pen and paper gamers as luddites, has not articulated a coherent plan for the future of both Dungeon and Dragon magazines, and makes claims in her biography that I believe are undfounded. I beg this audience to try and prove me wrong.
Oh come on... I mean who are you? You are obviously not a gamer either. I have never gamed with you. So therefore you must be a useless has been wanna be poser.--- see how your quest to find if she games is a bit ill conceived. I mean for that matter I have never gamed with Gary Gygax, Monte Cook, nore Eric Mona. So I suppose these guys are just a bunch of poer wanna bes as well.
I think I have proved you wrong.
You haven't proved anything. The point I am trying to make is that Liz is out of touch with gamers. The other reason I started this thread was to discuss my theory that we have arrived at this state (the cancelation for Dragon and Dungeon magazines) because of Wotc managments poor management in regards to creating and maintaining products for the RPG market.
|
You haven't proved anything. The point I am trying to make is that Liz is out of touch with gamers. The other reason I started this thread was to discuss my theory that we have arrived at this state (the cancelation for Dragon and Dungeon magazines) because of Wotc managments poor management in regards to creating and maintaining products for the RPG market.
And as many on the thread have stated....She didn't make this decision alone. A board, panel or group of execs over at WotC decided to do this and as others on this thread have stated, trying to get her to give proof that she is a gamer is a ridiculous attempt at mud-throwing.
I think anyone who helped pull the plug on the magazines is an idiot.
I think WotC has made a huge mistake.
I will vote with my cash to show WotC how I feel.
I will send well-worded commentary to anyone over at WotC as to my feelings.
I will not try to find a scapegoat to drag into the streets with a self righteous yell of "You did this!!" to beat to death.
If you want to complain to Wizards and all that, please don't try to throw people you "suspect" to be wrong into the fire. Unless you were at a meeting you don't know who controlled the fate of the magazines. You are speculating. A pres, VP, or the budget department could be to blame for all you know.
Also I personally would rather you not be part of the voice representing the people affected in this change, including me. I just don't see anything you have said to be worded very intelligently and most of what you do say is a bunch of poo-throwing.
I suggest you stop trying to crucify one person and focus on the real issue: WotC doesn't seem to care what alot of customers want.
FH
Hm, so just do the American-thing and seal it with duct-tape, close the doors, lock it and throw away the key then wave a magic wand and tell people,"It was never said. Nothing happened."
Reminds me of the Imus incident.
I think it should be noted why the OP was angry. I don't think people's feelings should be censored. Sure, it's hectic right now and a lot of people said things they "shouldn't" have said, but it's been said and covering it up doesn't solve the problem.
But these aren't my forums. I know if I did, freedom of speech would be definitely practiced, and throroughly too.
Other than the removal of a couple of words that formed a pretty personal attack, how has anything been censored? I've seen a lot of people exercise their own freedom of speech to disagree with the original poster's contention that ONE person should bear the brunt of the decision about the magazines and that they should be singled out as having to prove their gaming credentials.
I guess I don't see free speech and being able to make a comment and then not having anyone challenge it.
Before these posts flaming TK start to get out of hand and more personal than they have, I should like to change the direction of the thread, and I hope TK won't mind because as I said previously, I think perhaps his original post did not make clear exactly the point he was trying to make to us. Also, _I_ have said some pretty not-nice things on this board after the announcement was made, and I said them in a moment of extreme anger. Not an excuse, just an explanation. I apologised for it, and I think TK's original post should be read with this is mind.
Now, that said, let's change the course of discussion a bit. Many people have said that it was probably a group decision to cancel the mags. This may very well be correct, but given the way big business works it is also equally possible that some big wig looked at the numbers and made the decision him/her self. This might have been Liz, it might have been someone else. THE POINT is that unless we know otherwise, the point is moot and we should let it lie.
I believe the intent of TK's original post was to suggest that the company made a decision claiming to know what _we_ want, (or perhaps telling us what we want), and THAT is what we should be focussing on, or we should just let the conversation end.
So the real question is, do you think WotC knows what it's customers want, or are they making their decisions based on what they _think_ we want? Forget about Liz, forget about blaming people. I am not asking this question to crucify anyone at WotC, I am asking a question about the way a company treats its consumers.
I should also like to point out that there is a big difference between knowing what _all_ D&D players want, and what D&D magazine consumers want, because as I have posted before, the decision to cancel the magazines _only_ affects people who were consumers of the magazine, so asking non-magazine consumers if they want DI _instead_ of magazines skews the results.
PLEASE stop posting about TK's original post and wether or not it matters what sort of gamer Liz is. We've already debated that point. Let's discuss whether or not WotC knows what MAGAZINE CONSUMERS want.
M.
Let's discuss whether or not WotC knows what MAGAZINE CONSUMERS want.
Well, if you ask avid readers if they want their favorite magazine no longer produced, the result is pretty obvious. Do Harley-Davidson fans want the production of their bikes discontinued ? (Just to use one example that came to my mind this second.) Of course not. Same goes for the mags. Those who buy them or even subscribe to them would not do so if they did not mind whether these mags are produced or not - if I don´t care for product, I won´t buy it.
So, I´d say that WotC either does not know or does not care about the magazine consumers. If they don´t know, that would be bad market research - something hard to believe given that they are a subsidiary to Hasbro, and most probably know the importance of good market research. (even if I have to admit that the statements from WotC themselves don´t appeal to me and seem bad marketing to me.) But it cannot be ruled out.
If they don´t care, there have to be other reasons behind the decision to cancel the mags. What might these be? According to Erik Mona, the magazines were doing well, so it does not sound to me that paizo had a problem with the mags from a financial PoV. The licence gives WotC a small but steady revenue, I´d guess. OTOH, many ads in the mags were from WotC, so this might - just might - be one reason to cancel the whole show: If WotC neither gains nor loses money from the mags, as the revenue is canceled by the costs for ads, then why support them any longer? It is more work to them, as they have to approve the contents of each and every issue. Just an idea.
And if they based the decision on an online query only, then I could only call this a stupid move. Ask car drivers if they care if Harley-Davidson continues to produce or if they want more extras for their cars - most wont give a damn for the bikes, aside from those few who happen to have a bike as well as a car. Every poll says only something about those polled and about those polling - and if the setup is faulty, the results will become skewed.
Stefan
Once again Deimodius, you are right on target. Those who have missed my intent are the type of people who get tweaked when a name is mentioned because they themselves fear others making statements about them. The kind who wanted Imus fired. These are the people who think its OK to attack people that say the emperors not wearing any clothes. They are called cowards.
I think everyone who's attacking my statement should use their real names on the board as I have. I'm willing to accept criticism and I agree that I could have communicated my point better, but I think the people on this board should get off their liberal high horses, stop worrying about who says what about whom, and focus on the point which is that Wotc is ignoring the pen and paper RPG community.
If you defend Liz then you probably believe that the Nazi's should be forgiven since they were only following orders from Hitler. I am a senior executive at a company on the same level as Liz and she had the power to do something other then cancel Dragon and Dungeon magazines. If I am wrong about how much control she has over the Dungeons and Dragons brand then she must just be a figurehead controlled by a brain in the jar called Hasbro.
By the way have you seen the size of my Brain!
*sigh* Please don´t use any nazi comparisons. It is never warranted, in no way. I´m offended by these comparisons, and others are as well.
And, no, I won´t tire of reacting to these comparisons.
Stefan
Once again Deimodius, you are right on target. Those who have missed my intent are the type of people who get tweaked when a name is mentioned because they themselves fear others making statements about them. The kind who wanted Imus fired. These are the people who think its OK to attack people that say the emperors not wearing any clothes. They are called cowards.
If you defend Liz then you probably believe that the Nazi's should be forgiven since they were only following orders from Hitler. I am a senior executive at a company on the same level as Liz and she had the power to do something other then cancel Dragon and Dungeon magazines. If I am wrong about how much control she has over the Dungeons and Dragons brand then she must just be a figurehead controlled by a brain in the jar called Hasbro.
Well, this will be the last post I make in this thread, because I am well and completely convinced that logic and reason are not what this thread was suppose to be about. This was clearly about whipping up a mob and handing out the pitchforks and torches, and I'm not interested.
First off, you have NO idea whatsoever what my position on the Imus situation was, nor do you have any idea about any of the other people in the threads thougths on any given issue. With good reason. Its not cogent to this situation. However you view that particular issue, that is a matter of free speech versus the portrayal of racial and gender stereotypes, and oddly enough, probably a more important and far reaching topic that this one will ever be. Trying to cite it here seems to be an attempt to make this issue more pressing than it is by associating it with a wider (but completely unrelated) issue.
You keep saying that your defenders are correct in saying that you really mean to say that WOTC is out of touch, but then you dive right back into trying to "lynch" Liz Schuh. You also seem to miss the point that I HAVE critisized WOTC, here and in other threads, and my main problem is with singling out ONE PERSON and with assuming that you know that they didn't have any research to back up their decision. While we don't know what they did to research this, and they may not have done anything at all, this seems very unlikely, and one way or the other we don't know. All we know is that they have upset the magazine readership, and we don't know for sure what percentage of total D&D players this accounts for. All I am asking is to not try to make broad sweeping statements as definitive fact when you don't know that they are indeed fact.
As far as changing the direction of the thread, why? There are a thousand other threads here that we could have this same conversation in, and the only reason to do it here would be to repair the OP's reputation by saying that we are discussing all of this in his thread, when the thread caught most people's attention because he opened it with a personal attack.
If you had said most of the things you said about WOTC in general, and not made sweeping statements about knowing what all gamers want because YOU must be more in the know than WOTC, then I could care less what you say about WOTC. They did screw up, and it will take a lot to fix what they did here . . . but why make it personal and why try to escalate everything. Why try to ascribe motives and facts that aren't in evidence? Why isn't it enough just to know what they did and to say that you aren't happy about it?
The Nazi comment is just the final staw. That is why many of us that might agree with a good amount of your arguement don't want you to be point man on this. Its out of line and rediculous and is just handing people an excuse to ignore you becuase the comment is out of proportion to the situation.
Oh, by the way . . . my name is Jared Rascher.
Gary, I hope you'll forgive me one last post if only so I can distance myself from TK's last missive.
I do not support his final position. I had hoped we could steer the conversation to something constructive, apparently I was wrong.
I can no longer try to defend TK. There was line, it was crossed, and I don't want any splash damage on me. My apologies again for the extra post.