Lax editing standards as long as updates are free?

[Nifft]

In reviews of several supps I was interested in, the reviewers pointed to numerous spelling errors, typos and, heck, even inconsistent rule usage that should have been caught in editing. The publishers responded and promised to make updates in future editions and provide them for free.

Many buyers are pleased with the responses. Thus, I wonder if there's some sorta growing tacit agreement among buyers and sellers these days that it's okay if there are errors in the product as long as corrections are made and the updated product is sent free of charge.

This response may have been conditioned by the software industry, especially certain large publishers who are rather infamous for releasing low-quality "1.0" versions and then patching them until they are halfway acceptable.

Updates are important, and bugs are inevitable, but that shouldn't ever be used as an excuse to ship shoddy work.

Cheers, -- N

 

[WhatGravitas]

I believe Monte's wife is a professional editor, and worked on most if not all of the Malhavoc products.

Also, apart from the awesomeness that Sue Cook is, Monte is, well, one guy. Professional gaming books are often collaborative efforts - that increases the chances for miscommunication, misunderstandings, clashing schedules etc.

Working in a two-person team (i.e. author + editor) with the layout following probably provides a much tighter editing and control over the consistency/typographical correctness/style of the work.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Clarabell]

I figure if you don't have time to do it right the first time, when do you have time to do it over? And if you have time to do it over, why didn't you have time to do it the first time?

Seeing as I'm probably going to end up being a publisher myself at some point, I don't think i would tolerate such things. If its going to be used by someone it better be correct.

Now, I can hardly spell myself. But that's why I use a spell checker. Even just on forums, where this post might be read five or six times (maybe more), i see no sense in not caring and leaving things misspelled, using improper grammar, or (someone shoot me if i do this) using net-speak.

 

[JustKim]

After a few years I lose track of errata, I forget that rule X was revised in book Y, and then I only have the print book to fall back on. Already the 3.5 errata is a jumbled cloud of house rules, Sage Advice and customer service replies in my mind. I could not tell you what the differences were between the original and revised 2E rulebooks, except that the latter had black borders.

Out of curiosity, joela, what were the books that were so riddled with errors?

 

[jaerdaph]

Unless it is really extensive to the point the product becomes useless, typos, misspellings, syntax and grammar errors really don't bother me that much. Same goes with errata for game mechanics. RPGs don't live in a vacuum on a shelf - they live at the table with actual play.

If publishers were replacing new print copies for free, that would be impressive, but I don't think anyone is doing that or could afford to do that.

As for free PDF updated copies, honestly I expect that from every PDF publisher already anyway. It's kind of the point of PDF publishing.

There is one publisher that really impressed me - I bought the original Colonial Gothic PDF from Rogue Games, and a few years later they gave me a free PDF copy of the second edition of the game - Colonial Gothic Revised.

 

[Beginning of the End]

Many buyers are pleased with the responses. Thus, I wonder if there's some sorta growing tacit agreement among buyers and sellers these days that it's okay if there are errors in the product as long as corrections are made and the updated product is sent free of charge.

I saw the writing on the wall when Mongoose released a Conan RPG that was virtually unplayable due to the poor editing. It was so bad that they almost immediately released a revised edition. And then they offered to let people who had bought the original so-awful-we-had-to-immediately-redo-it edition purchase copies of the revised edition at a reduced price which still made them a profit on every copy sold.

And people thought this was great customer service on the part of Mongoose.

Now, I can hardly spell myself. But that's why I use a spell checker. Even just on forums, where this post might be read five or six times (maybe more), i see no sense in not caring and leaving things misspelled, using improper grammar, or (someone shoot me if i do this) using net-speak.

And yet you never capitalized the word "I" in your post. Was this deliberate satire?

 

[Nifft]

Now, I can hardly spell myself. But that's why I use a spell checker.

And yet you never capitalized the word "I" in your post. Was this deliberate satire?

Man, what?

 

[Clarabell]

I'm used to typing in word...it auto capitalizes I, whereas firefox does not, which makes me very sad...

 

[Scribble]

The advent of cheap digital video has also made people less critical of getting takes. When you're shooting on film (which costs literally thousands of dollars per unit more than high-quality digital video), people rehearse everything two or three times, then shoot it. You get two good takes from perhaps five or six and move on. Because excellent digital video is now so cheap, it's common to not rehearse and shoot everything--you still get two good takes, but that might be out of fifteen to twenty takes. To me, shooting that many takes that are not going to be used is a waste of time (not to mention the editors, who will have even more options to pore over, increasing the time required to edit the picture).

I wouldn't say it's a waste of time... I mean technically you're still practicing for those 2 good takes, you can just afford to also film it (and every so often get lucky with an unexpected good take.)

I also found it sometimes helped people be more, relaxed, when ever I would do digital projects and just film it all. With the film projects they concentrated too much on getting it "right" instead of just getting something good.

Shrug.



As for the editing mistakes... I wonder if this is a sort of hold over from video games... Seems like nowadays games are just released before all the final bugs are ironed out just to meet a deadline. Then the player just downloads a patch to fix the remaining bugs before playing.

 

[joela]

After a few years I lose track of errata, I forget that rule X was revised in book Y, and then I only have the print book to fall back on. Already the 3.5 errata is a jumbled cloud of house rules, Sage Advice and customer service replies in my mind. I could not tell you what the differences were between the original and revised 2E rulebooks, except that the latter had black borders.

Out of curiosity, joela, what were the books that were so riddled with errors?

I'd rather not name names, JustKim.