I have to preface this comment with a little bit of context: I have more than five years of software development experience with Fortune 500 companies, and several years more as a hobbyist/student.
The online tabletop is supposedly four months from release. This is a set of applications that makes pretty heavy use of 3D graphics, as well as networking, almost certainly a database engine, and in theory some sort of authentication to ensure players are subscribers, which requires encryption etc. Obviously (hopefully) they aren't trying to write all this themselves, but even with extensive use of libraries, there is a *lot* to integrate and test there.
The point? In order to have a shot at a smooth roll-out, they would need to be in beta right now, quickly moving toward some sort of open test that would push the software on a larger scale. Which as far as I can tell, isn't happening. Nor have I seen any evidence that WOTC has the caliber of people that would be required to do this job at all, let alone in the time they have left. Let's not forget the stellar history of Wizard's in-house development efforts.
So, imo there is NO WAY we are going to have a functional tabletop with the features they have promised in June. As much as I'd LOVE to be wrong, I seriously doubt it.
Thoughts? Someone please convince me I've overlooked something...
I have little knowledge of such matters.
But I have participated in beta testing for several games and have looked for DDI's beta....
Alas! Nowhere to be found.
And this saddens me because I am across the world from my fellows gamers--the online tabletop would seem to be great for someone like me.
I have to preface this comment with a little bit of context: I have more than five years of software development experience with Fortune 500 companies, and several years more as a hobbyist/student.
The online tabletop is supposedly four months from release. This is a set of applications that makes pretty heavy use of 3D graphics, as well as networking, almost certainly a database engine, and in theory some sort of authentication to ensure players are subscribers, which requires encryption etc. Obviously (hopefully) they aren't trying to write all this themselves, but even with extensive use of libraries, there is a *lot* to integrate and test there.
The point? In order to have a shot at a smooth roll-out, they would need to be in beta right now, quickly moving toward some sort of open test that would push the software on a larger scale. Which as far as I can tell, isn't happening. Nor have I seen any evidence that WOTC has the caliber of people that would be required to do this job at all, let alone in the time they have left. Let's not forget the stellar history of Wizard's in-house development efforts.
So, imo there is NO WAY we are going to have a functional tabletop with the features they have promised in June. As much as I'd LOVE to be wrong, I seriously doubt it.
Thoughts? Someone please convince me I've overlooked something...
Not involved directly in the industry, but have a lot of friends working at the coalface of these kind of projects, and I have to agree- I have severe doubts that the DDI/online can be delivered as promised.
I have my doubts as well. Something more than what we've seen should be somewhere on the agenda by now. :(
I have my doubts as well. Something more than what we've seen should be somewhere on the agenda by now. :(
Nooooo! You guys are supposed to be convincing me I'm wrong! :P
I like a lot of what they're trying to do with 4E, but lately I've found myself being very critical of WOTC's decisions and execution. I can only imagine how someone less-than-impressed with the their goals may feel...
I hope they pull it off, I really do. But the closer we get to release day, the less confident I feel. Blah. Maybe I'll be running Crimson Throne after Runelords after all...
Maybe I'll be running Crimson Throne after Runelords after all...
and what's wrong with that?
Nooooo! You guys are supposed to be convincing me I'm wrong! :P
Sometimes it just works out that way. Conversation enabling isn't always easy.
I agree with Kruelaid in that I didn't wish death upon this concept. I was concerned about the fees and the moneytizing, but I also thought this could be a great tool for some people.. and a natural extention of the technology we have.
Maybe I'll be running Crimson Throne after Runelords after all...and what's wrong with that?
Nothing is wrong it, I had just hoped to be playing shiny new 4E after ROTRL. I dumped my Gamemastery modules subscription because I figured I'd never use more 3.5 material...now I'm starting to wonder.
Not all companies have public beta tests. I've worked for a few major computer game companies, and they would usually beta test in-house. So the fact that you guys can't find a public beta doesn't mean that they aren't in beta.
So there. Something to reassure you all.
Of course, I believe the original poster is right. WOTC isn't a software company, and this is a major task. I'm not super-hopeful.
But for all we know, they outsourced this, are having beta testing now, and have a great product on the way.
|
I've been playing the "No meat space, no tabletop" DnD for a while now. It has really cool graphical interpratations of your characters, takes care of all the rolling for you, tracks your spells, automatically advances your characters when you reach enough XP to level. Its one of the best things I've seen in a long while. During the last upgrade they even added Teiflings, though they call them Drenai. If you want to get in on the action the beta is over, you can download the full version at www.worldofwarcraft.com
lol
I've been playing the "No meat space, no tabletop" DnD for a while now. It has really cool graphical interpratations of your characters, takes care of all the rolling for you, tracks your spells, automatically advances your characters when you reach enough XP to level. Its one of the best things I've seen in a long while. During the last upgrade they even added Teiflings, though they call them Drenai. If you want to get in on the action the beta is over, you can download the full version at www.worldofwarcraft.com
lol
Not sure I'm buying that +22 diplomacy you list in your profile there, Sterling. ;-)
Don't want to stir the pot, (Kruelaid this may interest you) but I've been playing online since Sept. using Maptool virtual tabletop software (not 3d but designed by MIT gamers and works well)that can be played over the internet or LAN and we use Skype voice chat (recommended by the Maptool people) for live game dicussion, but maptool has a chat window for dialog. We've found it faster to use the voice chat to supplement the text (mostly due to my slow typing speed) but in all aspects it's as if we sit around the same table, though in 3 different time zones (the only thing you can't do is throw cheesy poofs at the DM for bad puns)for examples check Ayronis runs Rise of the Runelords in Campaign journals (I'd post a link but I suck at technology stuff) btw: I'm the dead elf sorcerer (though I think the journal casts me in an unfavorable light, I was role playing my low wisdom)..maybe I can get the Ayronic one to weigh in....
Don't want to stir the pot, (Kruelaid this may interest you) but I've been playing online since Sept. using Maptool virtual tabletop software (not 3d but designed by MIT gamers and works well)that can be played over the internet or LAN and we use Skype voice chat (recommended by the Maptool people) for live game dicussion, but maptool has a chat window for dialog. We've found it faster to use the voice chat to supplement the text (mostly due to my slow typing speed) but in all aspects it's as if we sit around the same table, though in 3 different time zones (the only thing you can't do is throw cheesy poofs at the DM for bad puns)for examples check Ayronis runs Rise of the Runelords in Campaign journals (I'd post a link but I suck at technology stuff) btw: I'm the dead elf sorcerer (though I think the journal casts me in an unfavorable light, I was role playing my low wisdom)..maybe I can get the Ayronic one to weigh in....
Wow, I just grabbed that and played with it for a few minutes...very, very impressive work. This will warrant another look when time permits me to really dig into it...
Thanks for the tip!
There's a number of virtual tabletop out there already: OpenRpg, Maptools, ScreenMonkey, Fantasy Grounds, Kloogewerks. You don't need no stinkin DDI.
There is also GlitterComm.
For those of you who are interested . . I seem to rememeber that there wasa podcast that just recently had an episode about some of the various on-line tools and such for running a game.
I think it was Accidental Survivors podcast.
Now remember, I am a company man and all, but from what I've seen of the virtual table top it's going to be really great.
Right now I'm running an Age of Worms campaign on Fantasy Grounds II...and I really like that program. That said I can't wait to move my game to the WotC virtual tabletop.
I also think June is right on target.
Stephen
Developer Dude
I've been playing the "No meat space, no tabletop" DnD for a while now. It has really cool graphical interpratations of your characters, takes care of all the rolling for you, tracks your spells, automatically advances your characters when you reach enough XP to level. Its one of the best things I've seen in a long while. During the last upgrade they even added Teiflings, though they call them Drenai. If you want to get in on the action the beta is over, you can download the full version at www.worldofwarcraft.com
lol
WOW nto DnD silly!
With the new restrictive OGL, or whatever they are calling it, will you be able to use these with 4e?
Sure. Maptools, for example, is just a program that let's you have a map, tokens, and dice-rolling. No rules in the game at all, you can use it play anything.
Kloogewerks, same deal. It does have "definition" files which define a character sheet and can have game info in it - so that might be hard to distribute but you can create them yourself if worse comes to worse.
Now remember, I am a company man and all, but from what I've seen of the virtual table top it's going to be really great.
Right now I'm running an Age of Worms campaign on Fantasy Grounds II...and I really like that program. That said I can't wait to move my game to the WotC virtual tabletop.
Why?
Personally, from what I've seen of it (which is all of the 20 seconds from the GenCon demo), it sucks. No game rule knowledge to keep things moving quickly, monthly fees for the DM and players make it cost prohibitive.
Now remember, I am a company man and all.... I also think June is right on target.
Stephen
Developer Dude
4 months.
Hehehehe.
If anyone else is familiar with Magic Online, it took TWO YEARS after its original release to get to its current borderline acceptable level of stability. Fixing the rules engine only took one year, because they apply work-around after work around. However, the only reason it released on time at all was it was contracted out. Magic Online v3, the new overhaulled complete rebuild, done in-house by WotC, was originally supposed to be released over a year agp. We're still waiting.
Also, this is where I should put my plug for MapTool, because it is awesome and the developers are awesome. That is all.
Well considering they have been looking to hire a "D&DI Lead Software Developer Engineer" since the announcement of DDI...I'm not holding my breath.
|
I have my doubts as well. Something more than what we've seen should be somewhere on the agenda by now. :(Nooooo! You guys are supposed to be convincing me I'm wrong! :P
I like a lot of what they're trying to do with 4E, but lately I've found myself being very critical of WOTC's decisions and execution. I can only imagine how someone less-than-impressed with the their goals may feel...
I hope they pull it off, I really do. But the closer we get to release day, the less confident I feel. Blah. Maybe I'll be running Crimson Throne after Runelords after all...
Okay, you are wrong. How was that???
Nooooo! You guys are supposed to be convincing me I'm wrong! :P
I like a lot of what they're trying to do with 4E, but lately I've found myself being very critical of WOTC's decisions and execution. I can only imagine how someone less-than-impressed with the their goals may feel...
I hope they pull it off, I really do. But the closer we get to release day, the less confident I feel. Blah. Maybe I'll be running Crimson Throne after Runelords after all...
I can try to provide some hope. Wizards claims to have had this project in development prior to last summer; they were performing internal beta testing at the time of the 4E GenCon announcement.
Wizards of the Coast has licensed with an outside developer (I don't remember the company) to design the programs and applications; it's not a completely in-house project.
They plan to be able to roll out a public beta after D&D Experience. In fact, I think I read somewhere that the beta sign-up is supposed to be held at the event itself.
Hope this is what you've been looking for.
Wizards of the Coast has licensed with an outside developer (I don't remember the company) to design the programs and applications; it's not a completely in-house project.Just a note, they fired that outside developer about two months ago. So it is currently all in-house at Wizards.
-Lisa
Whoa! So, after half a year or more, there was something so grave that they fired the developer, half a year prior to release date? And now, I guess, they try to pick up the pieces? In that case, I would not hold my breath for a timely release (not that I intended to, but that is another matter...). That does not bode well at all.
Stefan
So, imo there is NO WAY we are going to have a functional tabletop with the features they have promised in June. As much as I'd LOVE to be wrong, I seriously doubt it.
Oh, you are wrong. wizards' virtual tabletop will surely be released in june as a stable program.
In related news, Duke Nuken Forever is about to go gold and will be shipped before the month is over.
:P
I think all the makers of existing online tools should get together, wait until the inevitable tabletop disaster, and start an ad campaign.
"Tired of waiting for a way to play RPGs online? Get one of these programs: Some are free, some require a one-time fee, but they have two things in common that the "official" tool hasn't: There are no monthly costs, and THEY WORK!"
:D
Okay, okay, I should wait for the project to fall onto its beak before gloating.
See you in a couple of months.
Yep - too little time to much to build. No matter - I am on a Mac so its not gonna grace my screen regardless.
Ooooooooooo
Everything becomes clear now...I understand the reason why Crosswiredmind is so pro-4th Edition :
He's got a mac !
;)
|
Yep - too little time to much to build. No matter - I am on a Mac so its not gonna grace my screen regardless.Ooooooooooo
Everything becomes clear now...
I understand the reason why Crosswiredmind is so pro-4th Edition :
He's got a mac !;)
LOL - Yep 3E is a PC for sure. :P
quick edit - I am actually not pro-4E. I just don't want to play 3E anymore so its 4E or WFRP for me.
|
|
Firing your software designer half-way through a major project does not normally bode well. Actually, this (DDI) could be quite good, though whether it will justify the cost is moot. I might check out some of those suggestions above, and see how they work, since I know at least one of my online players would rather commit seppuku than subscribe to DDI (Fakey, I'm looking at you).
|
|
Firing your software designer half-way through a major project does not normally bode well. Actually, this (DDI) could be quite good, though whether it will justify the cost is moot. I might check out some of those suggestions above, and see how they work, since I know at least one of my online players would rather commit seppuku than subscribe to DDI (Fakey, I'm looking at you).
Staring back at ya, nodding my head vigorously. BTW I own FantasyGroundsII(no, I refuse to rent software) but have never had a chance to play on it yet. If you planned on doing some online stuff like that I would be down for it, whether with that or some other Virtual Tabletop, even just as a test run.
My main issue is whether I could access them at work (probably not) but then I could probably print a map and go paper-based (like we are at the moment) during working hours (heaven forbid I actually do any work). I'll give it some thought.
I understand the reason why Crosswiredmind is so pro-4th Edition :
He's got a mac !
So you see parallels between Mac Disciples and 4e fans?
Yeah, I can see that. :D
|
Some new information from the designers: Q&A
"The design team had play-tested Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 extensively and it was clear that the game needed to evolve. Since there were things we wanted to do digitally, like the Digital Game Table and the Character builder, it became clear that we should create a new, fully integrated system, with rules that would support our online applications. There were so many system improvements that the team really felt that the time had come to revamp the game. I don't imagine that our customers would have been satisfied with a version 3.75."
So when the online tabletop has problems, it will have a direct impact on the rules.
LOL - Yep 3E is a PC for sure. :P
quick edit - I am actually not pro-4E. I just don't want to play 3E anymore so its 4E or WFRP for me.
No offense, CWM, just joking ;)
I actually respect your calm and moderation when confronted to anti-4Eders.Although i am not sure to share your point of view, i appreciate debates without flames.
Take care :)
Firing your software designer half-way through a major project does not normally bode well.
You're right, that doesn't good.
|
|
Some new information from the designers: Q&A
"The design team had play-tested Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 extensively and it was clear that the game needed to evolve. Since there were things we wanted to do digitally, like the Digital Game Table and the Character builder, it became clear that we should create a new, fully integrated system, with rules that would support our online applications. There were so many system improvements that the team really felt that the time had come to revamp the game. I don't imagine that our customers would have been satisfied with a version 3.75."
So when the online tabletop has problems, it will have a direct impact on the rules.
I don't see that in this quote at all. I see that they considered both real and virtual gaming when the worked on the core mechanics but I do not see a linkage between fixes to the virtual tabletop spilling back into the real rules.
|
|
I don't see that in this quote at all. I see that they considered both real and virtual gaming when the worked on the core mechanics but I do not see a linkage between fixes to the virtual tabletop spilling back into the real rules.
The rules are intended to support the online applications.
If the rules do not do that, if they can not do that because the programming can not be made to work, which side will give? The online side that can not be forced to do something, or the tabletop version that can be altered with errata?The basic statement itself has established that elements of the virtual tabletop have spilled back into the real rules. Why would you not expect it to continue to do so?
I know I keep bringing up Magic Online, but it's a good parallel in this case, in that its a digitization of a tabletop game and is run by WotC.
Magic's rules are strictly non-deterministic. They make a very long, very legally-written document that would not make for a salable product. They have several full time employees whose job is the make sure that every new card works with the rules and that new rules changes make sense. They have done this since before Magic Online, because tournaments needed uniform rulings. However, even with this setup, Magic Online has a bunch of spot-fixes and special cases, because the games rules are way, way too complex for a software designer to understand all at once. This does not mean its impossible, just that it is very, very hard and they haven't gotten it yet.
Dungeons and Dragons rules are a lot more loose and vaguely defined, and the DM has a lot more authority to fix corner cases on the spot. Software cannot hope to emcompass such a system. Even if 4E ends up being as tightly defined as Magic's rules, which I doubt, it is doubtful that WotC will be able to completely and correctly implement the rules for the digital tabletop (assuming the digital tabletop has rules support). In D&D, I can take actions not described by the rules, as long as the DM and I agree on what's going on (Want to swing on the chandelier? Burn down a building? Flood a tunnel? The rules don't describe how to do any of these things.) If the rules support is hardwired, it'll hamstring the game. If 4E decides to make the digital rules 'complete', it'll mean eliminating the ability to do things not explicitly covered by the rules. In which case, it's not D&D. It's an elaborate dice game.
If the digital tabletop has no rules support, then it's no better than any other solution that exists (and is probably worse, since it'll cost more and WotC wants to charge for digital minis).
|
|
The basic statement itself has established that elements of the virtual tabletop have spilled back into the real rules. Why would you not expect it to continue to do so?
My sense is that the core mechanics and framework have already been designed to operate in both the virtual and real tabletops. I do not get the sense that future incarnations of the virtual table top will vary from the core mechanics as they will be laid out in the 4E core books. My sense from the slashdot article is that all of the virtual/real sync up is done. It was an integral part of the 4E design process and is unlikely to see any radical shift until 5E.
|
|
Ross, that's a very insightful post. My intuition is that the scenario you suggest in your final paragraph is the one that will materialise - a glorified version of the other existing electronic battlemats, with an "official D@D" tag on it. I see nothing very sinister in this - just good business sense and an attempt to derive more revenue from hitherto unexplored (by WotC) possible revenue streams. Of course, whether it is worth paying for is another matter when free ones already exist.
I had been under the impression that there was to be no rules implementation in the virtual tabletop. I thought I had read a quote from one of the designers essentially to the affect that 4E was not tied to the virtual table top (nor vice-versa) and that 3E, 2E, 1E, or even a non-DnD game could be played on the VTT if so desired. Am I wrong?
I had been under the impression that there was to be no rules implementation in the virtual tabletop. I thought I had read a quote from one of the designers essentially to the affect that 4E was not tied to the virtual table top (nor vice-versa) and that 3E, 2E, 1E, or even a non-DnD game could be played on the VTT if so desired. Am I wrong?
I believe you are correct.
|
|
I had been under the impression that there was to be no rules implementation in the virtual tabletop. I thought I had read a quote from one of the designers essentially to the affect that 4E was not tied to the virtual table top (nor vice-versa) and that 3E, 2E, 1E, or even a non-DnD game could be played on the VTT if so desired. Am I wrong?I believe you are correct.
Ah, they must be talking about stuff like NWN. Ok, I get it.