I miss the pretty pages

[Vanuslux]

Woo...this has me interested in checking out Dragon again. I don't mind some stylishness, but Dragon had been really overdoing it by the point I decided "Bleh...enough of this." I dropped Dragon solely because its style was grating on my nerves so bad that I couldn't appreciate the content anymore.

 

[Ranger REG]

My gripes? As stated earlier, the retro 60's title logo belongs on a Beatles album but not on the D&D magazines.

Also, while I don't mind the white background, I don't like to see a lot of it at the beginning of some articles. It's as if the top margin is set at least 5.5 inches, not counting the article title and byline (see #323, page 24, Under Control column). I want them covered up in useful game text, and if you can't fill those white spaces, get new companies to sponsor new ads.

BTW, the article title font is better than the one on the cover, but I guess they don't want their magazine to be mistaken with Dragonstar, although any comic book fans would recognize those typefaces to associate with The Wolverine series.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I agree. I don't like the new Dungeon logo. BUT, I think the mag itself is vastly improved so I can overlook it.

 

[Ranger REG]

I wouldn't use the adjective "vastly." I thought it was vastly improved when they did the Campaign Classics theme in #315.

 

[rounser]

Any graphic art or design should be all about -- and only about -- the enhancement of the delivery of content.

I really don't agree with that. I mean, sympathy with your point of view, sure - straight to the other extreme just because (it appears) you've been really frustrated with it in the past...ehhhh...

J_D makes some good points, but the whole "all game info, all the time" kinda is overdoing it a bit.

What you said.

 

[thepriz]

Wow, I am really confused. I would think that more fantasy players would hate the new look. It was just down right plain. What really interested me in the magazine was the creativity that was put into the design. Now it is just a techno-geek looking thing. It is sure a different story over at Paizo. Most of the messages on there messages board support the fact that the new design is just plain bad.

As far as content I am not impressed so far either and I am half way through the magazine. If this is the direction Dragon is going I will not renew my subscription when it comes up.

 

[jasper]

ugh. Pretty pages are unprofessional. Read time, newsweek, Jet, Ebony, people,. How many of those are totally black with white text etc. Combine the art back ground with glossy pages, I have skipped entire articles because the background made the text hard to read.
Jasper shakes JD. Grabs is long handle pewter spoon and looks at Dire Bear. Interest and artistic text and background. I'm forty it hurts us eyes.

 

[Ravellion]

Good! Haven't seen it yet, but I like bringing selected photocopies of Dragon to sessions instead of entire magazines... hence, black-on-white = good.

Rav

 

[Gez]

J_D's list is impressive. Me, I just "hate" unreadable fonts. I stopped buying Casus because they let their layout artists go on a rampage and turn the whole magazine into a super-edgy art piece that looked more like postmodern art than like a bunch of pages with text on it.

They also committed most of the sins listed by J_D, except in the News page.

 

[The Sigil]

FWIW, count me among those that like the "clean" new design. A lot. And among those who like that Dungeon is back to being Dungeon and has dropped Poly.

Only one thing now keeps me from re-subscribing: the whole s-bomb and f-bomb fiasco back around the issues when they published a snippet of Martin's story. Their attitude towards the criticism that accompanied (not just ignoring it, but "putting down" the "close-minded folks" {my term, not their exact words} who dared even raise the issue) along with the decision to maintain a policy which would today leave those words in an issue of the magazines means I will not be going back to Paizo until I see an apology and policy change that they will at least keep their language as clean as Time, Newsweek, and similar "respectable" magazines. I don't consider myself too picky; I don't like seeing a--, b-tch, and similar, but I can tolerate them; however, I draw the line at inviting "s-bombs" and "f-bombs" into my home. Until Paizo guarantees me that I won't see those words if I invite their magazine into my home, I can't in good conscience subscribe.

So, IMO Paizo has taken HUGE strides in the right direction, I'm just waiting for the one last little step that will let me welcome them back with open arms.

--The Sigil