| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some simple math: 4,000 books at $40 a book would equal about $160,000 in expected sales. That's probably multiple staff members salaries right there.
Assuaging your personal displeasure over a product you've apparently never actually read probably isn't worth eating a $160,000 loss in expected sales.
(I'm guessing the actual loss would be less than that, but probably still worth a staff member's yearly salary. Paizo's going to prioritize their bottom line over placating a handful of posters on the message boards, and they'd be fools to do otherwise.)
Yeah, based on this thread if someone who was potentially interested in the book and decided to post on the forum to get some insight, it would be about 10 minutes before they became hesitant on the matter.
And really I have yet to see a persuasive argument on how releasing the errata before the reprint would hurt the sales of the first edition. Seems mostly to be driven on the premise that Paizo deserves to earn money for the work they put into their products. I agree with that concept, it's just the stretch to Paizo will lose money if they don't withhold the errata that sort of has me lost. As I said before, I like the book but I would feel a lot more comfortable recommending it to other players if I knew it was something that they could use for play without much trouble.
|
Well, I'll contribute to the expedition of the process should another hardcover sale become available. I have been wanting to get that book. All the same, I wish that subscriptions were not the only way to get free pdfs when you own the books, but alas, there is no other recourse.
I am in earnest more curious of the potential for a Mythic Adventures errata, as that, it would seem, needs it more than any other hardcover to date, though I could be mistaken.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some simple math: 4,000 books at $40 a book would equal about $160,000 in expected sales. That's probably multiple staff members salaries right there.
Assuaging your personal displeasure over a product you've apparently never actually read probably isn't worth eating a $160,000 loss in expected sales.
(I'm guessing the actual loss would be less than that, but probably still worth a staff member's yearly salary. Paizo's going to prioritize their bottom line over placating a handful of posters on the message boards, and they'd be fools to do otherwise.)
1- The numbers I mentioned are completely arbitrary. I have no idea how many books Paizo sells or how many they have in stock. I was merely illustrating a point.
2- I have read the book. Multiple times. And I found it extremely lacking... And I'm obviously not the only one who thinks so. I doubt it's onky "a handful of forum posters". I personally know 3 guys who returned the book for store credit and many others who simply decided to not buy the book after seeing it. None of them post in these boards.
3- Like I said, they are free to do as they please with their errata policies... And I'm free to do as I please with my money. And I surely won't spend it on a subpar product. If Paizo prefers to have a subpar product rather than get my money, I'm totally okay with that. Pathfinder isn't exactly a basic necessity.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Local game stores are also our customers, and invalidating their inventory on a just-released title is not good for them.
I don't think releasing Errata constitutes invaliding their inventory. But even if it did, technically speaking retailers are just middle men. The consumers who buy your books are the people you should be most concerned about.
Keep in mind that, as someone moving away from printed books where possible, I have zero intention of buying any printing of the ACG, meaning I have no personal stake in this. I'm just speaking from a "business school case study" perspective when I observe that maintaining a laser focus on delighting customers nearly always pays off in the end. If it were my company, I know what I'd do. But hey, armchair quarterback. :)
Keeping your distribution chain happy is important though. It would be bad news for Paizo if stores decided to stop stocking their books because they feared that they can't move the product before Paizo releases another print. It does beg the question though, has Paizo consulted with retailers and have there been any specific objections to errata being released too early.
I wouldn't be all that happy if that were the driving force behind this policy though it would be a little more understandable at that point.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Keeping your distribution chain happy is important though. It would be bad news for Paizo if stores decided to stop stocking their books because they feared that they can't move the product before Paizo releases another print. It does beg the question though, has Paizo consulted with retailers and have there been any specific objections to errata being released too early.
I wouldn't be all that happy if that were the driving force behind this policy though it would be a little more understandable at that point.
I'm not saying their position is wrong, exactly; merely that I believe it puts the focus in the wrong place. But again, Paizo hasn't hired me as a consultant, it's not my company, and so it's not my skin in the game. :)
I will say that, in the cases I have studied, companies don't seem to lose sight of great customer service overnight. Instead, it often happens through a series of small, seemingly well-considered decisions that gradually chip away at the customer experience over years (or even decades). I'm not saying this is definitely one of those decisions -- though I suspect it might be -- I'm saying that if it were my company, it is certainly something I'd keep in the back of my mind.
To me, supporting your customers first and foremost is always the right answer.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Local game stores are also our customers, and invalidating their inventory on a just-released title is not good for them.Wouldn't it be more customer and company friendly to simply release the errata as .pdf once is ready? (Similar to patches/hotfixes for computer games)
So...you're operating under the logic that:
A.) Nobody who shops at a game store has access to the internet.
and
B.) Releasing a document saying "These are the changes that will be made to the book" invalidates the inventory...which also benefits from the errata document regardless.
Not to be rude but I don't think you thought this statement out very well.
Releasing an errata PDF is a win for the customers. They can buy the first print, and still have all the necessary updates.
It is a win for you, because more people will be willing to buy a broken product with a fix than a broken product with no fix.
Nothing changes for the game store. People either buy the books or they don't.
Well in a truly perfect economy the interests of retailers and consumers align perfectly because the invisible hand wills it so and consumers get exactly the product they desire for a price they consider fair and producers and retailers both profit according to their proportionate value in the market. Then afterwards we all get together and celebrate with tea and cake.
Unfortunately non-imaginary economies are a little more messy and the parties involved have to deal with being unhappy at some point. Naming the interests of one particular member in this system as being irrelevant isn't the way to go about it in my opinion. Sometimes there are compromises that benefit everyone involved, other times there aren't. Based on what's been posted I'm not sure what the case is here.
|
Local game stores are also our customers, and invalidating their inventory on a just-released title is not good for them.Wouldn't it be more customer and company friendly to simply release the errata as .pdf once is ready? (Similar to patches/hotfixes for computer games)
So...you're operating under the logic that:
A.) Nobody who shops at a game store has access to the internet.
and
B.) Releasing a document saying "These are the changes that will be made to the book" invalidates the inventory...which also benefits from the errata document regardless.
Not to be rude but I don't think you thought this statement out very well.
Releasing an errata PDF is a win for the customers. They can buy the first print, and still have all the necessary updates.
It is a win for you, because more people will be willing to buy a broken product with a fix than a broken product with no fix.
Nothing changes for the game store. People either buy the books or they don't.
I would rather have a book that didn't have to have a few extra pages of errata sticking out. If I knew that a new printing was pending, I would wait to buy it until I knew for sure I was getting was the most recent printing.
So, in this case, your desire to have this errata document before the next printing comes out means that I won't buy the product.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, even if that WERE the case for the majority of buyers (and I'm not so certain it is...especially if first printings are discounted), I wouldn't particularly give a damn. I have little to no sympathy for Paizo in this scenario.
They messed up. Badly. As far as I'm concerned every excuse they make for not both owning up to aid mistake, and taking steps to fix it, especially ones as flimsy as this, just erodes any community goodwill they may have built up over time. And rightly so.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a thread discussing these mistakes?
There's a thread where community members have been posting the ones they've found (it's in this same subforum, and it looks to have been also recently bumped, so should be visible). I've collated those with the ones I found and some others from elsewhere, discussed with the design team, and sent design errata over, but editing needs to collate those with other editing errata and track copyfitting (aka, can the errataed text fit on the page or do we need to change something else too to make it fit) and a few more things before anything further can happen.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, even if that WERE the case for the majority of buyers (and I'm not so certain it is...especially if first printings are discounted), I wouldn't particularly give a damn. I have little to no sympathy for Paizo in this scenario.
They messed up. Badly. As far as I'm concerned every excuse they make for not both owning up to aid mistake, and taking steps to fix it, especially ones as flimsy as this, just erodes any community goodwill they may have built up over time. And rightly so.
+1
While I understand that they are a business, I absolutely do not understand how having an eratta PDF available invalidates the purchase of the book. If you're really worried, simply do not integrate it into the full book PDF until the old inventory is sold and call the eratta a "work in progress", updating it in-place until a real release occurs. This means the eratta could be trumped up as "not ready yet" by the FLGS but Paizo could still maintain good will amongst the players who pay attention to that sort of thing. Call it a transparency effort if you have to.
Point is, there has to be a way to resolve this that both meets the bottom line *and* keeps the player-base happy.
PS: I'm not sure how much selling existing inventory of ACG books matters when many of those that bought ACG may avoid buying the next book(s) for fear of the same lack of support. Myself included. Seems a bit counterproductive.
I would rather have a book that didn't have to have a few extra pages of errata sticking out. If I knew that a new printing was pending, I would wait to buy it until I knew for sure I was getting was the most recent printing.So, in this case, your desire to have this errata document before the next printing comes out means that I won't buy the product.
I think the basic point of those advocating for early release of the errata is the fact that it shouldn't mean that a second printing is imminent. For all we know based on current stock the release of the second printing could be two months from now or it could be two years.
I think at this point anyone who frequents the forum knows that a revised edition will be released. Speculation about the timing of that release based on the release of an official errata is inevitable but it could also be entirely out of sync with the reality of the situation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've disliked Paizo's errata policy for years, and have always felt that it was as much an excuse to abandon products that will never see reprints (pretty much all of the 32 and 64 page books) as it was about not hurting the sales of existing physical product. To me, it seems that the real reason for tying errata to the physical print runs is to avoid spending developer and editor hours on fixing existing products instead of on creating new products. And I had thought that Erik's comment meant that the policy was being set aside for the ACG, but perhaps I misunderstood that.
It also seems to me that that policy hurts sales in the long run. People see the product quality getting worse over time and become more cautious about buying the next book, or stop buying a line of books altogether. Some people will decide that they're going to stop buying all the hardcovers until the second printing, even if that means waiting a year (or three). Some people will decide not to buy any more Campaign Setting books after Sacred Geometry somehow gets printed. Some people will just stop buying the books and use the internet instead.
Personally, I'm making due with my GM's copy of the ACG until an errata is released. I don't care if I wind up buying a first or second printing, but until the issues with the book are actually addressed, I won't be buying it.
|
Errata is released when we start shipping a new printing. It will be available on the PRD, as a PDF download, and the PDF of the product itself will be updated all on the same day. I assure you that once this is publicly available the announcement will be difficult to miss.
So wait, there WILL be a 2nd printing for sure? Because, I'll be honest I refuse to buy the first printing of the book (unless I buy only the PDF which I do plan to do as long as I know 2nd printing is already on the horizon) with all I've heard. My gaming budget is very tight already, so buying a book I know is crap (sorry, but...) just to assure that a new version that is not crap can exist... others might be able to throw money away like that, I cannot.
The book really isn't crap. Conceptually it's actually one of my favourite hardcovers but the execution was very sloppy. Like I said up thread, it's great for a home game where the kinks can be ironed out by reasonable people but between table variation and not fully knowing what errata will bring, parts of it are close to unplayable for PFS.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The book really isn't crap. Conceptually it's actually one of my favourite hardcovers but the execution was very sloppy. Like I said up thread, it's great for a home game where the kinks can be ironed out by reasonable people but between table variation and not fully knowing what errata will bring, parts of it are close to unplayable for PFS.
Yeah, just from what I've read on these forums and the d20pfsrd site and Archives of Nethys, that's way too damn much work for the GM to have to 'iron out' all of those kinks.
House rules are all fine and dandy, but when house rules are required to make a product playable, I'm sorry that really is a crap product. Concept is not everything... if the execution is sloppy, then the execution is sloppy and the product is crap.
I love Paizo, I really do and this isn't making me stop buying Paizo books, but it is making me not buy THIS book (until the second printing...) Future books will get the same treatment...
As an example, Laurell K. Hamilton's novel "Incubus Dreams" wasn't edited (in fact, she literally fired her editor over the terrible editing job... who was her husband! Then hired another editor to re-edit it for the paperback copy). I have the hardcover, but I bought it prior to knowing how badly edited it was... had she had a policy like Paizo and I hadn't already bought the book, well... I still wouldn't own the book probably.
I know calling the book 'crap' isn't exactly constructive criticism, but that's just me being honest about how I feel. As I said and I will clarify, I love Paizo, I love Pathfinder, and this doesn't change how I feel about Paizo overall as a company, but... I just see no way how I can be constructive in this case. Brutal honesty about my feelings is all I've got.
Also I will point out that I am running a Reign of Winter game two Wednesdays a month, and I have a Shaman and an Investigator in the party. So it's not that I and my players don't like the book conceptually, just the opposite.
I should clarify that my earlier post was simply to indicate our general policy concerning the logistics of actual distribution of an errata document/implementing errata into our online formats and its announcement. I'm really not in a position to provide further detail or elaborate on this particular release (because my job has a very specific focus in this process). Sorry if it came out sounding otherwise.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once again, feel free to lock it, as my intent was not to do this again. There are plenty of threads for complaining about the APG or discussing the Errata policy.
I am curious about one thing, though. I too was under the impression that there would be Errata out prior to the 2nd printing. When did that change, and if it's not too much, why? Did it change?
Once again, feel free to lock it, as my intent was not to do this again. There are plenty of threads for complaining about the APG or discussing the Errata policy.
I am curious about one thing, though. I too was under the impression that there would be Errata out prior to the 2nd printing. When did that change, and if it's not too much, why? Did it change?
I to am very curious about that. I believe someone earlier stated that Eric (?) posted something to that tune.
How would you suggest voicing displeasure in the result? Vic is saying, afterall, that to get the fixed print version, you must buy it twice, essentially. It's a gun to the head scenario. "Give us what we want or else you don't get updates to the product you already paid for." He simply couched in terms of needing to get rid of existing product. That's a poor policy in general no matter how reasonably it is communicated. Secret Wizard's wording could have been better, but it's a perfectly valid complaint.This is the type of thing that is not helpful and makes the staff not want to respond, but then when they don't respond people want to play the victim. "Oh woe is us. Why do they ignore us now? What did we do?"
I am not saying I agree with the policy. I am saying I disagree with some of that antics that take place from some of the forum members.
I would suggest voicing displeasure by being civil, and not being insulting. It is not like an insult is going to help. It might not help a particular case, but overall if we don't throw temper tantrums online it is more beneficial to the community as whole.
Well, perhaps, but he have a point. Would you personally recommend to other people to buy the book so the errata comes faster than otherwise?Because everyone should have a chance to look at this editing trainwreck.As Ashram pointed out, if everybody waited for the next printing, that printing would never come out.
This is the type of thing that is not helpful and makes the staff not want to respond, but then when they don't respond people want to play the victim. "Oh woe is us. Why do they ignore us now? What did we do?"
I am not saying I agree with the policy. I am saying I disagree with some of that antics that take place from some of the forum members.
What are you talking about? I never said I agreed with their policy so how can I say "Go by the book"?
I should clarify that my earlier post was simply to indicate our general policy concerning the logistics of actual distribution of an errata document/implementing errata into our online formats and its announcement. I'm really not in a position to provide further detail or elaborate on this particular release (because my job has a very specific focus in this process). Sorry if it came out sounding otherwise.
Nah; I, for one, took it only as you providing a general statement of policy to the best of your knowledge. Don't take it personally -- your job is hard enough as it is. ;-)
I have a honest question... I get why they wouldn't want to release the errta'd print copies while they still have the faulty ones... But why not release the digital errata and update the .pdfs? What reason there is other than forcing fans to buy a poorly made product?
If they released the digital errata, buying the faulty copy wouldn't be that bad... But the fact that Paizo refuses to release even that before they run out of their current print edition makes it seem like they really don't give a damn if their fans got a bad product, after all, they already have their money.
You can buy an updated PDF for _____, or you can buy a hardcopy that cost a lot more?
Which one are you going to buy?
Just to be clear I am not agreeing with the policy, but I see why they are not updating the PDF until the hardcover books are released.
PS: I am aware that some who buy the new pdf will also buy the new hardcopy(2nd printing), but I doubt many will buy the old hardcopy, which cuts into their profits.
You can already buy a non-updated PDF for 1/4 of the price, so the price doesn't seem to be a factor when it comes to buying hardcover.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also why is this discussion assuming the hard copy is viable? Almost nobody I know considers it to be a viable release and wonders how something like this got printed. I've seen multitudes of people put it back down after viewing it at the game store and I know my LGS owner isn't happy with it on her store shelf either.
I purchased the PDF at 12am-ish the day of release and by 12:30am I knew this book wasn't worth the 10$ I paid. It was a sad moment and I knew that I could never buy a first printing hardcover from Paizo ever again.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Local game stores are also our customers, and invalidating their inventory on a just-released title is not good for them.Wouldn't it be more customer and company friendly to simply release the errata as .pdf once is ready? (Similar to patches/hotfixes for computer games)
So...you're operating under the logic that:
A.) Nobody who shops at a game store has access to the internet.
and
B.) Releasing a document saying "These are the changes that will be made to the book" invalidates the inventory...which also benefits from the errata document regardless.
Not to be rude but I don't think you thought this statement out very well.
Releasing an errata PDF is a win for the customers. They can buy the first print, and still have all the necessary updates.
It is a win for you, because more people will be willing to buy a broken product with a fix than a broken product with no fix.
Nothing changes for the game store. People either buy the books or they don't.
I'm operating under the logic of there's more factors involved here than a simple "fix it, print it, ship it". Game stores (generally speaking) can't return product once they've bought it, so immediately having a new edition of a book in distribution channels renders their current stock obsolete. (And no, not everybody who walks into a game store has reliable Internet access to get errata PDFs.)
Then there's a question of internal work flow. Do we make corrections to older products in favor of new products? Are we willing to let books slip on the schedule for it? What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable? There are only so many hours and people in the day to get these tasks done (and yes, we've said this numerous times before).
Now, to clarify my point further, I know that folks would like updates and erratas more frequently—that is certainly understandable, and I think we all want that. It's just that's a lot more to it than saying "fix it, fix it, fix it!"
|
|
I to am very curious about that. I believe someone earlier stated that Eric (?) posted something to that tune.Once again, feel free to lock it, as my intent was not to do this again. There are plenty of threads for complaining about the APG or discussing the Errata policy.
I am curious about one thing, though. I too was under the impression that there would be Errata out prior to the 2nd printing. When did that change, and if it's not too much, why? Did it change?
I believe this is what they are referring to. It is what I meant, but don't want to speak for others.
We'll have an ACG errata sooner rather than later. The book has almost sold through its first print run, so we won'
t even need to do it "early."However, in the meantime I am having the entire book re-proofed to catch as many errors as we can. I know there is an unacceptably high number of errors that involve rules elements, but the book has more typos and other sloppiness in simple running text than I'm comfortable with, and I want to make sure we fix before we reprint. Some of that stuff will reveal more errata material, I suspect.
So, soon.
The thing is that was from 30 Oct 2014, and as far as I know, it kind of just ended there. Obviously, "soon" is kind of out the window. But I'm not sure if/when the idea of full errata being out well before the 2nd printing changed. I know Onyx Path (White Wolf/CCP) has been doing this recently with their new books like Vampire the Masquerade 20th edition, releasing an almost finalized PDF out to backers, which is both a reward for backers/preorderers, but also they ask people to double check editing, as its the fans that will spot issues and errors the best editing team misses. And it works fantastic.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Local game stores are also our customers, and invalidating their inventory on a just-released title is not good for them.Wouldn't it be more customer and company friendly to simply release the errata as .pdf once is ready? (Similar to patches/hotfixes for computer games)
So...you're operating under the logic that:
A.) Nobody who shops at a game store has access to the internet.
and
B.) Releasing a document saying "These are the changes that will be made to the book" invalidates the inventory...which also benefits from the errata document regardless.
Not to be rude but I don't think you thought this statement out very well.
Releasing an errata PDF is a win for the customers. They can buy the first print, and still have all the necessary updates.
It is a win for you, because more people will be willing to buy a broken product with a fix than a broken product with no fix.
Nothing changes for the game store. People either buy the books or they don't.
I'm operating under the logic of there's more factors involved here than a simple "fix it, print it, ship it". Game stores (generally speaking) can't return product once they've bought it, so immediately having a new edition of a book in distribution channels renders their current stock obsolete. (And no, not everybody who walks into a game store has reliable Internet access to get errata PDFs.)
Then there's a question of internal work flow. Do we make corrections to older products in favor of new products? Are we willing to let books slip on the schedule for it? What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable? There are only so many hours and people in the day to get these tasks done (and yes, we've said this numerous times before).
Now, to clarify my point further, I know that folks would like updates and erratas more frequently—that is certainly understandable, and I think we all want that. It's just that's a...
Of all that I can answer one question.
"What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable?"
Yes definitely. If your two choices are to release a sub-par book or to miss Gencon then I know every player would prefer you miss Gencon.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Liz, I think most of the comments in this thread are predicated on the idea that the ACG errata is done (or nearly so), and the outstanding question is simply whether it should be held until the first printing of the book is sold-out. I know my mine were.
In a more general sense, of course more errata would be nice, but I appreciate that resources are not infinite.
Errata is sent to the editors and layout I believe. It's already "complete" and occasionally Mark adds a sticky note with a newly found error to it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of all that I can answer one question.
"What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable?"
Yes definitely. If your two choices are to release a sub-par book or to miss Gencon then I know every player would prefer you miss Gencon.
Your opinion has been noted, but I doubt you speak for all players and GMs.
Liz, I think most of the comments in this thread are predicated on the idea that the ACG errata is done (or nearly so), and the outstanding question is simply whether it should be held until the first printing of the book is sold-out. I know my mine were.
In a more general sense, of course more errata would be nice, but I appreciate that resources are not infinite.
Much like Chris, I have no insight onto the status of errata for the Advanced Class Guide (or any other book), but sometimes even our best plans to get things out in a timely manner are laid low (no matter which department it's in).
@Errata progress—As I mentioned previously on this page, it isn't done yet. It is through one step of the process, though. To draw a parallel, however, if being through the design team meant something was "completed" and released, then Occult Adventures would be releasing very soon (this doesn't change anything for OA; it's still releasing when it's releasing, just using as an example). As you can see from Erik's post quoted above, Erik also ordered an entire reproof as well. That will need to be added on top of the development errata the PDT took care of and may be equally as substantial, if not more so (I don't know, I only know what our team's looked like since I was tasked with consolidating it).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Then there's a question of internal work flow. Do we make corrections to older products in favor of new products? Are we willing to let books slip on the schedule for it? What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable? There are only so many hours and people in the day to get these tasks done (and yes, we've said this numerous times before).
Yes. I'm very upset that they "Made their GenCon release" when they published the ACG. I feel that a fair amount of people would agree with me that rushing to get the product out is one of the main factors to it being poorly done. I can easily imagine a lot of talk at GenCon about Paizo was about the poorly done ACG. Which wouldn't be the kind of talk I image they are wanting.
Also I personally would like a little more time spent at fixing rather than making new. Because right now lets say it's 20% fix 80% new. That means we're roughly getting 4 errors for every one fixed. That or keep the same-ish percents but make sure the final releases are very polished to not need much fixing or clarifying. Otherwise we just get an increasing pile of stuff we want fixed.
@Errata progress—As I mentioned previously on this page, it isn't done yet. It is through one step of the process, though. To draw a parallel, however, if being through the design team meant something was "completed" and released, then Occult Adventures would be releasing very soon (this doesn't change anything for OA; it's still releasing when it's releasing, just using as an example). As you can see from Erik's post quoted above, Erik also ordered an entire reproof as well. That will need to be added on top of the development errata the PDT took care of and may be equally as substantial, if not more so (I don't know, I only know what our team's looked like since I was tasked with consolidating it).
I see. To be clear, my opinion was simply that ACG errata shouldn't be held for a 2nd printing. A resource constraint in the production pipeline is an entirely different matter.
@Errata progress—As I mentioned previously on this page, it isn't done yet. It is through one step of the process, though. To draw a parallel, however, if being through the design team meant something was "completed" and released, then Occult Adventures would be releasing very soon (this doesn't change anything for OA; it's still releasing when it's releasing, just using as an example). As you can see from Erik's post quoted above, Erik also ordered an entire reproof as well. That will need to be added on top of the development errata the PDT took care of and may be equally as substantial, if not more so (I don't know, I only know what our team's looked like since I was tasked with consolidating it).I see. To be clear, my opinion was simply that ACG errata shouldn't be held for a 2nd printing. A resource constraint in the production pipeline is an entirely different matter.
I agree. I believe that a show of good will would be really nice.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable?
For those of us who have never and will never be able to go to one, GenCon is of no more interest than the national holidays of a nation on the other side of the planet. I know that it's a huge convention, but do GenCon attendees really make up a significant portion of the player base?
For those of us who have never and will never be able to go to one, GenCon is of no more interest than the national holidays of a nation on the other side of the planet. I know that it's a huge convention, but do GenCon attendees really make up a significant portion of the player base?
Probably not, but that likely doesn't mean missing a big GenCon release wouldn't be problematic from a marketing, scheduling, or sales point-of-view.
Edit: Also, if you do someday get the chance to go to GenCon, take it. :-)
What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable?For those of us who have never and will never be able to go to one, GenCon is of no more interest than the national holidays of a nation on the other side of the planet. I know that it's a huge convention, but do GenCon attendees really make up a significant portion of the player base?
It's as much about the attendees as it is being the place to premiere new releases, like E3 for video games, Essen for board games, etc.
I agree. I believe that a show of good will would be really nice.@Errata progress—As I mentioned previously on this page, it isn't done yet. It is through one step of the process, though. To draw a parallel, however, if being through the design team meant something was "completed" and released, then Occult Adventures would be releasing very soon (this doesn't change anything for OA; it's still releasing when it's releasing, just using as an example). As you can see from Erik's post quoted above, Erik also ordered an entire reproof as well. That will need to be added on top of the development errata the PDT took care of and may be equally as substantial, if not more so (I don't know, I only know what our team's looked like since I was tasked with consolidating it).I see. To be clear, my opinion was simply that ACG errata shouldn't be held for a 2nd printing. A resource constraint in the production pipeline is an entirely different matter.
Hey guys,
One thing I pushed for (that we did, which made me happy!) was releasing trios of errata that answered questions about the ACG on FAQ Friday instead of the/as the FAQ for a few weeks, which also took care of all three of the ACG questions that were high on the number of FAQ requests. The problem was that many other forumites (I know it wasn't you guys—you guys on this thread have been consistent in the past in being more interested about ACG errata) said that they preferred getting the top FAQs over less-FAQed ACG errata, and they had a good point. Last week we took care of the #1 most requested FAQ (566 FAQ clicks, with #2 at 142 FAQ clicks) and I'm trying to make sure we keep this momentum and cover the top issues for a little while. So let's try to make everyone happy (I know we can't, but maybe this will at least help) if you have a big ACG question, please make a FAQ thread and get some FAQ clicks. If it becomes a highly requested FAQ, we'll answer it, like those other two weeks when we did. Does that work guys?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
FAQs are cool and all, but I have a feeling the stuff that I really want to know (Pummeling Style, Daring Champion, and many others) are specifically on the errata sheet.
Aside from that a botched release and FAQS are completely separate issues. One is a freak and frightening occurrence from a major publisher that lost a lot of trust while the other is just something you guys do everyday.
Saying you'll keep doing requested FAQs is like having your employer get your car towed by accident then making it up to you by saying "well don't worry! You still can always have your lunch breaks!" they are pretty far removed.
FAQs are cool and all, but I have a feeling the stuff that I really want to know (Pummeling Style, Daring Champion, and many others) are specifically on the errata sheet.
Aside from that a botched release and FAQS are completely separate issues. One is a freak and frightening occurrence from a major publisher that lost a lot of trust while the other is just something you guys do everyday.
Saying you'll keep doing requested FAQs is like having your employer get your car towed by accident then making it up to you by saying "well don't worry! You still can always have your lunch breaks!" they are pretty far removed.
Based on my experiences, I personally feel that FAQs and errata are extremely linked, but I also completely respect your opinion that they are not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's as much about the attendees as it is being the place to premiere new releases, like E3 for video games, Essen for board games, etc.What about missing GenCon releases, the biggest hobby show of the year? Is that acceptable?For those of us who have never and will never be able to go to one, GenCon is of no more interest than the national holidays of a nation on the other side of the planet. I know that it's a huge convention, but do GenCon attendees really make up a significant portion of the player base?
Isn't E3/Gencon for premiering future products? Like how Paizo announced Occult Adventures this time or ACG last time. It doesn't follow that a product announced during Gencon has to be released specifically on the next Gencon. If taking an extra month of internal playtesting and review were what it took for Paizo to release an A+ quality book then I know your players would be patient enough to wait an extra month.