|
And I agree that the toxic batteries and ill-gotten metals are not ideal, but until someone invents the solar-powered, replicator-built Star Trek reader, I'll take the less-ideal solution.
The problem is, environmentally speaking, that you cannot read PDFs unless you have a device that uses leech mined metals. There are literally BILLIONS (Trillions?) of electronic devices, all of which use some form of leech mined metals, on this planet, and, frankly, the environmental impact is much worse than using a paper sourse that renews itself inside of five years.
So, please don't use that as a "pro" for PDFs. Convenience? Sure. Portability? Absolutely. Environmentally sound? Not even remotely.
Just to answer the question: No PDFs have not curtailed my buying of books. They tend to be used as a back up when I'm at a computer, but generally I prefer the books because I'm to the point I can just open to the page I want, the PDF requires clicking and figuring out where the page is still, and the screen is still a bit harsher on my eyes than the book.
|
So, please don't use that as a "pro" for PDFs. Convenience? Sure. Portability? Absolutely. Environmentally sound? Not even remotely.
I was thinking about something similar. Ihave a feeling that the environmental friendliness of PDFs is marginal at best. Paper copies require trees to be cut down at some point, but what are the environmental impacts of PDFs? Everyone that has a PDF has to have a computer to view it. Depending on desktop vs. laptop, a computer is 5-50 pounds of plastic, glass, and metal, not to mention the 250-750 Watts to power it. My computer might not be on all the time viewing PDFs, but you bet Paizo's servers are up all the time (or very nearly so) such that we can download it anytime at our convenience.
Paper copies might kill trees, but once they've printed, they're done. The only environmental impact after that is if, heaven forbid, it ends up in a landfill.
Just some thoughts.
-Skeld
|
|
I was thinking about something similar. Ihave a feeling that the environmental friendliness of PDFs is marginal at best....Paper copies might kill trees, but once they've printed, they're done. The only environmental impact after that is if, heaven forbid, it ends up in a landfill.
Just some thoughts.
-Skeld
Also, recycled paper is a big business now ( and you'd be surprise to learn how much paper was recycled before anyone thought that was cool). On average, according the the government, less than 20% of any paper product you are likely to use contains virgin fiber. Logging is not a strip mine process; it's a crop that the industry takes great pains to care for and replenish.
According the US Forest Service, the US has 22 million new cubic feet per year of wood growth versus less than 17 million cubic feet of harvest; that equals 36% net increase per year.
I love trees.
However for all you guys worried about your so called "Foot Print" I should point out A. Global Warming is a complet myth, an SUV is not stronger then the sun (and now out here in CA. they are thinking of outlawing Black and/or Dark Colored cars, no joke). B. Its been my experince that a gamer waste far more paper with PDF's then they ever do with a book.For the record, human-accelerated climate change is quite clearly in progress, and trying to diminish or ignore it will not "make the bad weather go away". A Californian really ought to make an effort to know better. Long before the faults rupture, the desert will likely swallow the state whole. And when the cheap gas runs out in the next 20-odd years, I think you'll find it difficult to manage the freeway on a bicycle.
As for PDFs, while laptops/monitors do suck a good deal more electricity than reading lights, the e-Ink screens on modern ebook-readers (incl. Kindle & Sony's reader) only use battery power when you turn/change the page. So unless you're a really fast reader, you are...
Really? Cool, I'll make sure I'll leave my computer on, at home and work. Put it this way the extream gloom and doom guys think its allready to late, so lets enjoy the end of the world. On the other hand if you point out to people that the world has been getting colder for the last ten years, they'll start yelling see see look globle warming has casued globle cooling!
Sorry I know I'm rude and offensive, but I simply don't agree with you. Yeah its sunny and nice out here in the middle of winter, but 90% of the US is frozen solid this last winter.
As for the Kindle its simply too cold, and inpersonal of an object to really enjoy. I used it once, its a personal thing I know, but there's no joy in it or PDF's. Useful maybe, the way of the future? Hope not. But in either case a very cold object compaired to a book.
TTFN DRE
P.S. for the record I'm all in favor of Hybrid/Electircal cars, not for the Earth (to s**** the Earth, I just don't like giving my money to certain nations who want to use it to kill Americans) If using a Hybrid helps make those nations go backrupt in the long run all the better. So you see we're not actually that far apart, are means are the same, only our goals differ.
|
|
...If using a Hybrid helps make those nations go backrupt in the long run all the better...
//Threadjack follows//
Even if the West is able to go oil-free in the next 20-50 years, the rest of the world likely will not, especially in developing countries and upcoming oil-hungry nations like China. This means there will, strategically, need to be a Western, balancing influence --whether it's Soft Power or Military Power-- in the Middle East and elsewhere.
//Threadjack ends//
Paper copies might kill trees, but once they've printed, they're done. The only environmental impact after that is if, heaven forbid, it ends up in a landfill.
Well, it takes energy to harvest the wood and you have to spend energy to ship the books around, but I agree that buying an extra appliance just to read books doesn't sound like a huge environmental savings.
|
|
I buy both PDFs and the hardcopy of a book. I may go PDF only for a scenario as that is something I can print off and use once.
I get more chance to read PDFs than hardcopy (I can read PDFs on my mobile phone and at work in my lunch hour) and so the advent of PDFs means I get through my books quicker and thus buy more.
I mostly have print versions. I do have a few PDF only books, but these are usually free downloads or fringe supplements that I will not likely use whole cloth. A few are out-of-print books.
For myself, unless the PDF is searchable, I find that print books are easy for reference.
Also, print media will typically outlast digital media. My fiance is a librarian and we have discussed the pros and cons of digital media. Digital media has much stricter requirements than print media to prevent degrading. Additionally, print media can be repaired, if digital media gets corrupted, there is little you can do.
If y'all haven't been following the news, many print mags and newspapers are folding (pardon the word choice) as consumers obtain more and more of their information on-line.
The reason for this is pretty simple. If you can get all the same information in an easy to access format from home or work and for FREE, why pay for it? As others have pointed out, newspapers and most magazines are going to be irrelevant in a short time any way, so you are just pay for something you can get for free online anyway, and you'll just throw it away in the end (unlike a gaming book hopefully).
That makes me wonder: are y'all buying more of your rpgs -- whether core or supp -- as a pdf, or do you still buy the deadtree version? Or do you buy both?
As others had said, I prefer a hardcopy (though having a pdf also is nice). I have purchased a few pdfs for items that I couldn't get any other way. But generally, I don't think pdfs are worth the money or the electrons they are printed on. Most gaming pdf products are things that can't compete in the print market because they are inferior, made by some guy in his basement over a weekend. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not going to waste my money on it.
//Threadjack follows//
Even if the West is able to go oil-free in the next 20-50 years, the rest of the world likely will not, especially in developing countries and upcoming oil-hungry nations like China. This means there will, strategically, need to be a Western, balancing influence --whether it's Soft Power or Military Power-- in the Middle East and elsewhere.
//Threadjack ends//
//Threadjack follows//Actually Andrew, for most new technology, developing countries have an easier time implementing them than established countries like the US. This is because when you already have a system in place it is harder to justify abandoning it for a minimal increase in efficiency, while if you don't have yet a system full established it is easier to choose the more efficient system.//Threadjack ends//
But generally, I don't think pdfs are worth the money or the electrons they are printed on. Most gaming pdf products are things that can't compete in the print market because they are inferior, made by some guy in his basement over a weekend. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not going to waste my money on it.
You hit the nail on the head ("not worth it", i.e. the price is too high), but inferior quality is a red herring. Each format (physical copy vs. PDF) has its advantages and disadvantages. It's just a matter of whether the price point is set in the right place for a given individual to tolerate the disadvantages of a given format. On the other hand, inferior quality affects a customer's willingness to buy a product regardless of whether it's a physical copy or a PDF, so it's not a matter of format.
I'd buy way more Paizo PDFs if they were cheaper; likewise, I'd probably buy more Paizo books if there were cheaper, too.
|
|
//Threadjack follows// Even if the West is able to go oil-free in the next 20-50 years, the rest of the world likely will not, especially in developing countries and upcoming oil-hungry nations like China. This means there will, strategically, need to be a Western, balancing influence --whether it's Soft Power or Military Power-- in the Middle East and elsewhere. //Threadjack ends//
//Threadjack follows//Actually Andrew, for most new technology, developing countries have an easier time implementing them than established countries like the US. This is because when you already have a system in place it is harder to justify abandoning it for a minimal increase in efficiency, while if you don't have yet a system full established it is easier to choose the more efficient system.//Threadjack ends//
//open threadjack// I don't mean to be argumentative, but where in the world did you hear that? Logically, I would agree with you, but practically, absolutely not. It takes money first, and education/desire second. Maybe we're not talking about the same thing. //suspend threadjack//
You hit the nail on the head ("not worth it", i.e. the price is too high), but inferior quality is a red herring. Each format (physical copy vs. PDF) has its advantages and disadvantages. It's just a matter of whether the price point is set in the right place for a given individual to tolerate the disadvantages of a given format. On the other hand, inferior quality affects a customer's willingness to buy a product regardless of whether it's a physical copy or a PDF, so it's not a matter of format.
I'd buy way more Paizo PDFs if they were cheaper; likewise, I'd probably buy more Paizo books if there were cheaper, too.
While I agree to a point, we also need to realize that it is easier and cheaper to get a pdf made than a print product made (excluding perhaps PoD). Thus it is less likely that a print product will be of much more inferior design than a pdf will be, in general because the entry into the field is much harder to do.
//open threadjack// I don't mean to be argumentative, but where in the world did you hear that? Logically, I would agree with you, but practically, absolutely not. It takes money first, and education/desire second. Maybe we're not talking about the same thing. //suspend threadjack//
I believe the first time I heard it was around 1999 when they were talking about the whole Y2K thing and that China and India and other places weren't going to have the same problems as the US because by the time they got into computers being widespread the problem was already dealt with, while the US had a much older system and many places could not justify the expense of dumping the entire thing for a new system.
Also consider the costs of technology. When new technology is first introduce it is usually extremely expensive, but as time goes on the cost often drop significantly (see laptops, flat-screen TVs, hybrid cars, etc). Thus it is often cheaper to jump on a bit after the fact than right at the beginning. In this case being "behind the curve" actually saves money for those developing countries. Also they don't have to pay for the R&D, they just break the design.
|
|
Well, it takes energy to harvest the wood and you have to spend energy to ship the books around...
Yes, my point was that once those things are done, the environmental impact of the book is essentially done (until/unless it goes to the landfill, if it isn't recycled). The PDF is an ongoing energy/resource cost since you need a computer to view it (and if you print it out to read it, well, you might as well have just bought the hardcopy).
-Skeld
Well, it takes energy to harvest the wood and you have to spend energy to ship the books around...Yes, my point was that once those things are done, the environmental impact of the book is essentially done (until/unless it goes to the landfill, if it isn't recycled). The PDF is an ongoing energy/resource cost since you need a computer to view it (and if you print it out to read it, well, you might as well have just bought the hardcopy).
-Skeld
Not only that but if you reside in the US it is highly likely that the very energy/electricity you are using to access the pdf was produced by a coal fire power plant. It is because of this that electric cars are a scam when doing it for environmental reasons in the US at least. All you are doing is transfering the environmental impact from the gasoline in your car to the coal fire power plant.
...If using a Hybrid helps make those nations go backrupt in the long run all the better...//Threadjack follows//
Even if the West is able to go oil-free in the next 20-50 years, the rest of the world likely will not, especially in developing countries and upcoming oil-hungry nations like China. This means there will, strategically, need to be a Western, balancing influence --whether it's Soft Power or Military Power-- in the Middle East and elsewhere.
//Threadjack ends//
Very good point,I must agree.
Its also the reason why I find most of our Gov. Eco laws to simply be insane. The US accounts for only 5% of world emissions, of that what could CA be, say 20% of 5% of the world. Even if we went hourse and buggy It'd wouldn't have much of impact.
But this really is off topic, bottom line one way the other, I'm for books.
The problem is, environmentally speaking, that you cannot read PDFs unless you have a device that uses leech mined metals.
Not for argument's sake, but just for edification, can someone define for me what "leech mined metals" are? I think I have an idea from the term itself, but I want to be sure.
Most gaming pdf products are things that can't compete in the print market because they are inferior, made by some guy in his basement over a weekend. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not going to waste my money on it.
So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that gaming slop conceived by someone in a cubicle who happens to work for a large enough entity that it gets good production values ("in print") is intrinsically better than what may be a good gaming idea (I would suggest you check out Phil Reed's company, Ronin Arts, for good examples of gaming PDF's confined to a single idea) that may have inferior production values ("PDF") because it was written by someone whose day job is something other than "game designer?" I can think of several reasons why a person would argue that PDF's are inferior to print, but that one seems a bit... odd.
|
|
Not for argument's sake, but just for edification, can someone define for me what "leech mined metals" are? I think I have an idea from the term itself, but I want to be sure.
The problem is, environmentally speaking, that you cannot read PDFs unless you have a device that uses leech mined metals.
"The recovery, by chemical leaching, of the valuable components of a mineral deposit without physical extraction of the mineralized rock from the ground. Also referred to as 'solution mining.'"
Basically, you're using a harsh chemical (they use cyanide, typically, though it has been banned in a lot of places - I wonder why?) to extract ore from a vein of mineral. It's cheaper and less dangerous (for the workers) than digging a hole, but it isn't easy on the environment. The most common leach mined ores are gold, silver, copper (all used in electrical wiring and circuits) and uranium.
Here's a site that describes uranium mining.
I prefer books to PDF. But since I live in Mex and books are far more expensive to buy... lately (last 2 years) I have purchase LOTS of PDFs... but those books I really want, I always try and get'em on paper. Also the PDFs option made me aquire tons of out-of-print or hard-to-get old stuff. I have nothing against PDFs but I enjoy a lot more a good hand-held, color printed (or at least nicely printed) book.
My 2 pesos
My 2 pesosWhich, the way things are going, will soon be worth 2 cents. :-(
And yes, PDFs are great for OOP.
Don't you mean 2 dollars? Two centavos would be two cents if we achieve parity with Mexican specie via hyperinflation.
I must say tha Matthew is more wright about 2 pesos beign close to 2 cents... species are overrated :P
I must say tha Matthew is more wright about 2 pesos beign close to 2 cents... species are overrated :P
True, but I think what he was getting at is that the upcoming wave of inflation would make Pesos equal in value to US dollars.
I know when I lived in El Paso it was 8 Pesos/ 1 Dollar, is it worse now?
Not for argument's sake, but just for edification, can someone define for me what "leech mined metals" are? I think I have an idea from the term itself, but I want to be sure.
The problem is, environmentally speaking, that you cannot read PDFs unless you have a device that uses leech mined metals."The recovery, by chemical leaching, of the valuable components of a mineral deposit without physical extraction of the mineralized rock from the ground. Also referred to as 'solution mining.'"
Basically, you're using a harsh chemical (they use cyanide, typically, though it has been banned in a lot of places - I wonder why?) to extract ore from a vein of mineral. It's cheaper and less dangerous (for the workers) than digging a hole, but it isn't easy on the environment. The most common leach mined ores are gold, silver, copper (all used in electrical wiring and circuits) and uranium.
Here's a site that describes uranium mining.
Thanks for the link, Derek. I assume some of the problems come from groundwater and other contamination issues? Does some of the cyanide or whatever remain in-ground and affect plant and animal life living above the vein?
On the link, it does say that leach mining is considered to be the most enviornmentally acceptable form of mining... now, of course this does not mean that it is, in fact, environmentally acceptable, but it does seem to be one of those "best of a bad situation" things. Certainly better than a copper mine in Utah that you can see from space.
Also, isn't copper commonly recyclable? I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I do know that several vacant homes near my area have been vandalized by removing copper piping, and it is assumed that recycling value was the reason.
Sheesh, the lengths we'll go to for our gamey goodness...
Not only that but if you reside in the US it is highly likely that the very energy/electricity you are using to access the pdf was produced by a coal fire power plant. It is because of this that electric cars are a scam when doing it for environmental reasons in the US at least. All you are doing is transfering the environmental impact from the gasoline in your car to the coal fire power plant.
- Electrical cars are more energy efficient than gasoline powered cars, as are large powerplants compared to small ones. Less pollution is produced overall by centralized power plants powering electric cars than thousands of individual gasoline motors, even when burning something as filthy as coal. Further, this pollution is centralized and can be (theoretically) scrubbed, sequestered, or otherwise processed to be as harmless as possible (and at the very least can be released away from population centers, as opposed to the fumes released by cars that by necessity are within cities themselves.
- In some areas, hydropower or other 'clean' energy is available, and can be used to power electric cars.
So while electric cars are not magic, they are not a scam. (Hydrogen cars are a scam: All they are is a less efficient electric car.)
Thanks for the link, Derek. I assume some of the problems come from groundwater and other contamination issues? Does some of the cyanide or whatever remain in-ground and affect plant and animal life living above the vein?
The used-up solution is highly toxic and has to go somewhere. Depending on what you're mining, too, it can be filled with other heavy metals (such as lead) that you weren't mining that make it even more deadly.
On the link, it does say that leach mining is considered to be the most enviornmentally acceptable form of mining... now, of course this does not mean that it is, in fact, environmentally acceptable, but it does seem to be one of those "best of a bad situation" things. Certainly better than a copper mine in Utah that you can see from space.
Usually, leech mining still requires strip mining the ore in the first place. Its merely that it wastes the least material coming out of the mine.
Also, isn't copper commonly recyclable? I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I do know that several vacant homes near my area have been vandalized by removing copper piping, and it is assumed that recycling value was the reason.
Copper is valuable because of how much humans use it. The first copper tools came from near-pure copper ores that could be found near the surface. Those are gone. Now, we use so much that it is financially viable to extract trace amounts of copper compounds from soil instead.
Yes, copper is valuable as scrap (virtually all metals are heavily recycled), but unlike, say, soda cans, it is not heavily used on disposable things designed to come back. Copper wires and piping are usually considered permanent.|
|
Not for argument's sake, but just for edification, can someone define for me what "leech mined metals" are? I think I have an idea from the term itself, but I want to be sure.
The problem is, environmentally speaking, that you cannot read PDFs unless you have a device that uses leech mined metals."The recovery, by chemical leaching, of the valuable components of a mineral deposit without physical extraction of the mineralized rock from the ground. Also referred to as 'solution mining.'"
Basically, you're using a harsh chemical (they use cyanide, typically, though it has been banned in a lot of places - I wonder why?) to extract ore from a vein of mineral. It's cheaper and less dangerous (for the workers) than digging a hole, but it isn't easy on the environment. The most common leach mined ores are gold, silver, copper (all used in electrical wiring and circuits) and uranium.
Here's a site that describes uranium mining.
Thanks for the link, Derek. I assume some of the problems come from groundwater and other contamination issues? Does some of the cyanide or whatever remain in-ground and affect plant and animal life living above the vein?
On the link, it does say that leach mining is considered to be the most enviornmentally acceptable form of mining... now, of course this does not mean that it is, in fact, environmentally acceptable, but it does seem to be one of those "best of a bad situation" things. Certainly better than a copper mine in Utah that you can see from space.
Also, isn't copper commonly recyclable? I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I do know that several vacant homes near my area have been vandalized by removing copper piping, and it is assumed that recycling value was the reason.
Sheesh, the lengths we'll go to for our gamey goodness...
The link is to a site run by people in the nuclear energy field, so weigh their environmental claims with that in mind. I just put it up to show what the process involves.
|
|
Rulebooks - I like having a physical copy. It's much easier to flip through a physical player's guide than search a PDF, however, if the PDF is bookmarked it's not as bad.
Everything else - PDF all the way. I especially like the way Paizo has it set up, where I'm not limited to the amount of downloads (or timeframe for downloads) which means I have access to my books anywhere. So if I'm at work on a break and need to post an update to a PbP I run, I can look it up and post (I'm certainly not lugging all my RPG books around with me to work every day).
The link is to a site run by people in the nuclear energy field, so weigh their environmental claims with that in mind. I just put it up to show what the process involves.
Gotcha. Thanks.
Usually, leech mining still requires strip mining the ore in the first place. Its merely that it wastes the least material coming out of the mine.
Well, the site I looked at conveniently left that little tidbit out.
I am curious as to whether we have any alternatives to this stuff, environmentally friendly or otherwise. Obviously, copper being the big-use item it is, demand is not going to go away.
Does anyone have a Star Trek-type transporter handy? Only problem there would be subsidence...
I know when I lived in El Paso it was 8 Pesos/ 1 Dollar, is it worse now?
Then I got it backwards... but the only currency getting strong is Euro.. maybe the dollar is getting weak against it but the peso is getting weaker.
Right now 1 dollar = 14.3 pesos... soooo darn expensive
Does anyone have a Star Trek-type transporter handy? Only problem there would be subsidence...
If we had that we could just go out to the asteroid belt and leave the mining to the rock jock robots. Then there would be no environmental issues, since asteroids have no environment worth worrying over ...
I know when I lived in El Paso it was 8 Pesos/ 1 Dollar, is it worse now?Then I got it backwards... but the only currency getting strong is Euro.. maybe the dollar is getting weak against it but the peso is getting weaker.
Right now 1 dollar = 14.3 pesos... soooo darn expensive
Yikes! So a Peso has seven cents buying power now? Man I really want to go get some cane-sugar Coca Colas right about now in those sweet glass bottles .....
Yikes! So a Peso has seven cents buying power now? Man I really want to go get some cane-sugar Coca Colas right about now in those sweet glass bottles .....
a 500 ml glass bottle goes for 6 pesos :D
Yikes! So a Peso has seven cents buying power now? Man I really want to go get some cane-sugar Coca Colas right about now in those sweet glass bottles .....a 500 ml glass bottle goes for 6 pesos :D
or 42 cents US? Sweet I'll take 100!
Most gaming pdf products are things that can't compete in the print market because they are inferior, made by some guy in his basement over a weekend. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not going to waste my money on it.So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that gaming slop conceived by someone in a cubicle who happens to work for a large enough entity that it gets good production values ("in print") is intrinsically better than what may be a good gaming idea (I would suggest you check out Phil Reed's company, Ronin Arts, for good examples of gaming PDF's confined to a single idea) that may have inferior production values ("PDF") because it was written by someone whose day job is something other than "game designer?" I can think of several reasons why a person would argue that PDF's are inferior to print, but that one seems a bit... odd.
Obviously you do not understand me correctly, as your statement of "intrinsically better" demonstrates. I did not say all print products were better than all pdf products. I said the bar is higher to get into print than it is to get into pdf publishing. Thus only the serious (excluding PoD) are going to print. Now typically someone who takes a job seriously is going to do a better job then someone who just makes a hobby out of it. Is this true in every single case? Absolutely not, but I seriously doubt that most people believe that professionals on average do a worse job than hobbiests.
Obviously you do not understand me correctly, as your statement of "intrinsically better" demonstrates. I did not say all print products were better than all pdf products. I said the bar is higher to get into print than it is to get into pdf publishing. Thus only the serious (excluding PoD) are going to print. Now typically someone who takes a job seriously is going to do a better job then someone who just makes a hobby out of it. Is this true in every single case? Absolutely not, but I seriously doubt that most people believe that professionals on average do a worse job than hobbiests.Most gaming pdf products are things that can't compete in the print market because they are inferior, made by some guy in his basement over a weekend. Nothing wrong with that, but I'm not going to waste my money on it.So if I understand you correctly, you are saying that gaming slop conceived by someone in a cubicle who happens to work for a large enough entity that it gets good production values ("in print") is intrinsically better than what may be a good gaming idea (I would suggest you check out Phil Reed's company, Ronin Arts, for good examples of gaming PDF's confined to a single idea) that may have inferior production values ("PDF") because it was written by someone whose day job is something other than "game designer?" I can think of several reasons why a person would argue that PDF's are inferior to print, but that one seems a bit... odd.
Thanks for the clarification, pres man. I think I have a better idea of what you meant now and, in general, I agree with you. However, I believe there are enough exceptions on both ends (do you remember how many print d20 hairballs came out of the first couple of years of 3e?) that that I'm still willing to look for the better PDF's in order to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Thanks for the clarification, pres man. I think I have a better idea of what you meant now and, in general, I agree with you. However, I believe there are enough exceptions on both ends (do you remember how many print d20 hairballs came out of the first couple of years of 3e?) that that I'm still willing to look for the better PDF's in order to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
True, but what was the state of the pdf market at the introduction of d20? Anywhere near what it is now? I doubt it. If it had been at the level it is now, then I would wager that many of those lower quality print products would have not even bothered with printing, they would have done pdf. At the time, the only real option was to print or do nothing, so everyone printed, even if they stank. And what happen to most of those stinky print product companies? They died a quick death, because they couldn't compete in the print market, but they might have been able to compete in the pdf market where you don't have to sell nearly the same number to stay in business (you don't have a warehouse of unsold product to worry about, hell you don't even have to store it on your own server).
Obviously you do not understand me correctly, as your statement of "intrinsically better" demonstrates. I did not say all print products were better than all pdf products. I said the bar is higher to get into print than it is to get into pdf publishing.
It depends what you mean by "print". Joe Blow could photocopy a few pages of whatever for almost as cheap as he could whip up a .pdf file.
To directly answer the topic: Not at all. Mainly because I prefer having a physical object in my hands. No, not some print-out I did on my crappy home printer where the quality fades because ink started running out towards the end. I mean a good, professionally bound tome on good paper from a really good printer. Only an art book looks better than a well done RPG, in my opinion.
So yeah, my FLGS still makes a good bit of money from my visits.
|
I hope someone from Paizo sees this, but one of the deciding factors for me subscribing to all the Pathfinder materials is the ability to have both the PDF version of the product as well as the physical product (in the end... it costs Paizo a not completely insignificant but very small amount to give away a pdf with the physical product). Since many times the place where I play D&D isn't necessarily the place where all the D&D books are housed (and sadly the majority of my friends who play aren't the most legal in the sense of buying books, considering if they want to hold the product they head to our place), having a PDF of the book is almost a necessity for most of my old D&D products as well as new ones. Lugging around a bookshelf just doesn't work so well... trust me. Past that PDFs work great in certain cases (I have a mac, spotlight + PDFs equals amazing... "Now which book was that feat in...?"); online D&D, working with 10 books at a time, etc. etc.
I actually wonder if Paizo has thought about the possibility of including a PDF + print price for normal, non-subscription products. Maybe a dollar extra? This would possibly even "fix" the problem I think some people see with subscribing to a Pathfinder RPG-esque thing when they may only want one or two products... but would love both the PDF and the print version.
In the end, if I had to choose it, I'd prefer the print over the PDF. But I think it would be a hard choice, simply because my bookshelf might already be breaking from the burden... (And I bet I don't have nearly as much as some people do).
To directly answer the topic: Not at all. Mainly because I prefer having a physical object in my hands. No, not some print-out I did on my crappy home printer where the quality fades because ink started running out towards the end. I mean a good, professionally bound tome on good paper from a really good printer. Only an art book looks better than a well done RPG, in my opinion.
So yeah, my FLGS still makes a good bit of money from my visits.
So price would never enter into it at all?
To take a real life example, I bought the War of the Burning Sky adventure path PDFs for $12. On the other hand, I could've bought the beautiful hardcover book for $200. The book looks terrific, but the price savings made the PDFs look more practical in my case.
So price would never enter into it at all?
To take a real life example, I bought the War of the Burning Sky adventure path PDFs for $12. On the other hand, I could've bought the beautiful hardcover book for $200. The book looks terrific, but the price savings made the PDFs look more practical in my case.
The Hardcover costs $200? Whoa! 0_0
Anyway, back to the question. No, price rarely comes into it for me. If I see something I like, be it RPG, Book, DVD or whatever, price only effects is when I get it, not if and what format. There are exceptions, however. In the case of your example above, yes it would effect my decision because a $188us (I live in Australia so it would be even more!) increase is pretty ridiculous, even if the book is absolutely huge! Of course, I have never seen the War of the Burning Sky so I can't really judge it properly. That's another thing I don't like about PDF's: you can't always browse through them before you buy, like you can with a physical book in a shop.
I should also point out that I am a single guy with a decent amount of disposable income, so I don't have many of the financial responsibilities others may have.
EDIT: Another exception: for novels I usually wait to buy them in softbacks, but this is more to do with preference than price: I read in bank and post office queues a lot and a softback is just so much easier to handle.
I am a much more "tactile" collector of things:
books > PDFs
CDs > MP3s
DVDs > video downloads
That being said, I love having PDFs for gaming, be it for rules searching or designing modules. If I like the game enough, I will buy a copy of both the book and the PDF. I am under the opinion that a publisher should offer both together as a package deal. But then again, I guess that is what scanners/CD-DVD ROMs are for. (For personal use only; I despise piracy.)
I also agree that for out-of-print/never-were-in-print/hard-to-find copies of RPG books, PDFs are sometimes the cost-effective solution.
Thanks for the clarification, pres man. I think I have a better idea of what you meant now and, in general, I agree with you. However, I believe there are enough exceptions on both ends (do you remember how many print d20 hairballs came out of the first couple of years of 3e?) that that I'm still willing to look for the better PDF's in order to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater.True, but what was the state of the pdf market at the introduction of d20? Anywhere near what it is now? I doubt it. If it had been at the level it is now, then I would wager that many of those lower quality print products would have not even bothered with printing, they would have done pdf. At the time, the only real option was to print or do nothing, so everyone printed, even if they stank. And what happen to most of those stinky print product companies? They died a quick death, because they couldn't compete in the print market, but they might have been able to compete in the pdf market where you don't have to sell nearly the same number to stay in business (you don't have a warehouse of unsold product to worry about, hell you don't even have to store it on your own server).
As you seem to be aware, the gaming PDF market didn't really exist at the advent of 3e, so you're probably right that at least some of the yak that came out during that period would have been PDF based if it had been an option. However, I stand by the latter half of my original statement -- I feel it is better to sort through the market, even if one finds a few duds, than not to deal with it at all. After all, isn't that what most do with print products?
As you seem to be aware, the gaming PDF market didn't really exist at the advent of 3e, so you're probably right that at least some of the yak that came out during that period would have been PDF based if it had been an option. However, I stand by the latter half of my original statement -- I feel it is better to sort through the market, even if one finds a few duds, than not to deal with it at all. After all, isn't that what most do with print products?
Oh, I agree in principle. The problem of course is what has already been mentioned in this thread by others. You can go to a book store or local gaming store and page through a print copy and decide if it is worth the price, even if you end up purchasing it online. With pdfs you rarely have an equivalent option, so unless it is from a source that you have come to respect already, you are just gambling with your money that it might be worth the cash you spent on it or not. Of course you can read reviews, but ... well those have their own issues.
Oh, I agree in principle. The problem of course is what has already been mentioned in this thread by others. You can go to a book store or local gaming store and page through a print copy and decide if it is worth the price, even if you end up purchasing it online. With pdfs you rarely have an equivalent option, so unless it is from a source that you have come to respect already, you are just gambling with your money that it might be worth the cash you spent on it or not. Of course you can read reviews, but ... well those have their own issues.
You're right, that is one drawback of PDF shopping, though there are some sales sites that enable previews, so you may be able to get SOME idea of what's in the package. And I definitely have a few clunkers that I wish I could delete from my memory, much less my collection. But overall, I feel it's been worth it.
|
|
As you seem to be aware, the gaming PDF market didn't really exist at the advent of 3e, so you're probably right that at least some of the yak that came out during that period would have been PDF based if it had been an option. However, I stand by the latter half of my original statement -- I feel it is better to sort through the market, even if one finds a few duds, than not to deal with it at all. After all, isn't that what most do with print products?Oh, I agree in principle. The problem of course is what has already been mentioned in this thread by others. You can go to a book store or local gaming store and page through a print copy and decide if it is worth the price, even if you end up purchasing it online. With pdfs you rarely have an equivalent option, so unless it is from a source that you have come to respect already, you are just gambling with your money that it might be worth the cash you spent on it or not. Of course you can read reviews, but ... well those have their own issues.
I agree, you don't have to commit to a book if it doesn't live up to the purchaser's standards. You just put it back on the shelf at the store.
With PDFs, however, the only way to check them out them before purchasing is to illegally download it. Not an ideal situation, and if someone would DL it illegally anyway, they probably wouldn't go ahead and purchase a product they've already stolen.
Frankly, a lot of the "crap" print products from the 3x days never left the shelves. People looked at them, said "Meh", and moved on. And quite a few FLGS problems with overstock is from purchasing agents and store owners following a trend and figuring if it said "D20" or "OGL" it would sell, rather than actually taking the time to judge the quality of a product.