Why did you stop subscribing to DDI?

[Plaguedguy]

I cut off my subscription after the builder/DM tools were moved to an online-only format. With a downloadable version I was more in control of the costs for using and updating the software. I also got to keep what I had paid for up to that point.

Dungeon/Dragon aren't nearly sufficient for me to keep a subscription and the Compendium was useful to me only while I was planning sessions (I don't drag a laptop around with me everywhere.)

The virtual tabletop is meaningless to me, as the primary fun I derive from tabletop RPGs is the active in-person participation.

 

[Arlough]

I cut off my subscription after the builder/DM tools were moved to an online-only format. With a downloadable version I was more in control of the costs for using and updating the software. I also got to keep what I had paid for up to that point.

Dungeon/Dragon aren't nearly sufficient for me to keep a subscription and the Compendium was useful to me only while I was planning sessions (I don't drag a laptop around with me everywhere.)

The virtual tabletop is meaningless to me, as the primary fun I derive from tabletop RPGs is the active in-person participation.

Okay, so we will also need offline tools. How would these be implemented soas to give WotC the warm fuzzies about DRM and an ongoing revenue stream?

As for the Compendium... useless, less usefull, already fantastic. I like the idea of the Compendium in both the "subscribers can pull up any rule" as well as a master index of WotC 4e D&D products. I just wish the references also included page numbers.

 

[Phat Lute]

I was a subscriber for a while, and continued to subscribe until it was clear they weren't going to provide us with Dark Sun updates for the original tools. Several things bothered me about the whole ordeal that took place late last summer and through the fall:

• The "pee on my leg and tell me it's raining" spin about updates, and their reluctance to say that we wouldn't actually ever see the Dark Sun updates in the original DDI tools. It was pretty easy to come to the conclusion that they relaunched a fan favorite setting that a lot of people had been waiting for, with new mechanics that may or may not have been able to be integrated into the old CB (I can think of several different approaches) right before their Essentials experiment, and then intended to bundle support for the two together in a new software package to more or less push everyone into Essentials. I don't blame them for being in business or wanting to make money. I do, however, dislike that they just can't be honest about it. We know you're not our friends. Most of us don't actually live in our parents' basements, and probably work for corporations ourselves. Many of us can interpret what we're reading without help. Some of us can even read between the lines. We also don't believe in the tooth fairy.

• DDI is online only now. It's not as useful to me now. I would at least want to store my own characters and sheets locally, and view them without a connection.

• The Dungeon and Dragon content wasn't particularly amazing. Look, I think I like Dungeon Tiles enough for my own personal use, but six adventures featuring different configurations of them with monster and room descriptions isn't exactly breathtaking.

• Support for pre-Essentials D&D seemed to be vanishing, and the rules stuff seemed unbalanced, unoriginal, or just too specific or weird to be useful. Some of the stuff looked like it was leaning toward Essentialized versions of things I'd already paid for, and other stuff looking like it was going down the road where we'd eventually see articles like, "Orphaned Crossdressing Dwarven Pyromancers of the Nentir Vale" in terms of specificity. I exaggerate a little. But still.

• In terms of what was being previewed for what I'll call Essentials DDI, it looked like my options and choices were being limited compared to what already existed. This is a good parallel to actual Essentials, but in this case I'm talking about tool options: house rules, the ability to decide which rules to exclude and then share those restrictions with players, interface options, etc.

• Unnecessary hand-holding and simplification in use of tools. Seriously, if someone knows what D&D is, seeks it out online, signs up for a subscription for the tools that support the tabletop game, and goes to make a character, I think it's safe to assume that they know enough about it that they don't need as much assistance in creating a character as it seems is available (and is the default to creation) in DDI now.

• There are so many other things I could be spending that money on, and so many other games and sources of content and inspiration that I just couldn't see paying for something I'd be this disappointed in, especially after all the doublespeak and the feelings of being talked down to.

 

[generalhenry]

I subscribed for quite some time, until I got a full time job and simply didn't have the time for it.

But it's the kind of thing I pick up and put down (like my wow account)

As things are now. . . I'm unlikely to pick it back up.



I'd need:

Open technology, html5 so it works on any platform.
and full PDFs, all the books, all the magazines.

There really is no excuse not to put things out in the open for anyone to use.

Piracy is not the enemy, obscurity is.

 

[Aegeri]

I stopped subscribing at the end of last year with the whole monster builder fiasco. I wrote a letter to Wizards (which I publically posted on this board as well) and I think that got my extension extended. I've actually had quite a few months now of free DDI, but sadly the first few months weren't very great. This month though looks to be the beginning of a great resurgence for DDI. If they can keep this up, I would definitely resubscribe.

 

[Quickleaf]

I stopped subscribing at the end of last year with the whole monster builder fiasco. I wrote a letter to Wizards (which I publically posted on this board as well) and I think that got my extension extended. I've actually had quite a few months now of free DDI, but sadly the first few months weren't very great. This month though looks to be the beginning of a great resurgence for DDI. If they can keep this up, I would definitely resubscribe.

What kinds of improvements are you noticing?

When I let go of my subscription October last year I didn't look back - there was no doubt in my mind that I had made a mistake in prepaying. Content just got worse each month. If I were to sign up for DDi again, it would be on a month-by-month basis.

 

[jeffh]

There were a number of factors making me consider not renewing - perceived dishonesty about what was going on with DDI, disappointment with the online character builder, failure to address some serious bugs in the offline monster builder - but in the end I decided my decision would hinge on whether the new online monster builder was an adequate replacement for the old one; conveniently, it was coming out a few weeks before the end of my subscription.

You can probably guess how that went. I knew there was a strong possibility it would fall short of the functionality available in its predecessor, but in my most pessimistic imaginings I never dreamed of just how far short it would fall. I would never have guessed WotC would dare to release a monster builder that couldn't actually be used to build monsters! We're not talking about a mathematical error here and an ill-considered default value there, the thing simply has none of the basic functionality you would reasonably expect it to have.

It didn't help that the e-mail notifying customers it was being released out and out lied about what it was capable of.

I set my subscription not to renew that very day. There wasn't enough time left on it to bother with requesting a refund.

 

[eamon]

I don't think I'd consider subscribing (or really buying pretty much anything) until some variant of 4.5 comes out. The problems are simply too large, and too fundamental.

It seems that rather than look at what the ideal world for the customer would be and than asking how do we turn that into a business plan? they've decided they want a subscription model and asked themselves how do we pressure our customers into paying?

What I'm waiting for:

• Powers shared amonst classes; each power is distinctive.
• Feats exist only as general feats, and no two feats have the same effect but different prereq's. Each feat should be distinctive; non-combat feats and racial etc. feats belong in a different category.
• Greater variety in characters by allowing freer combination of the above, rather than very limited predefined "builds" as now.
• Less focus on perfect balance, and more on fantasy and fun.
• Conversely, if you're going to make people choose from just 5 options when they level at least make sure those are actual real options, not traps.
• Fewer solo's, fewer elites, more wacky monsters. Less rigorous adherence to artificial numbers that make no sense for a particular monster. The stats for a monster should reflect the monster more than it's level+role. Basically, I want the fluff of the monster to accurately predict it's mechanical abilities. When that doesn't work, omit the monster rather than printing nonsense.
• Rules cleanup: get rid of a bunch of rules & conditions. With fewer powers, these can often be in the power itself, and be more elaborate and appropriate. Get rid of marking as a general mechanic; it makes no sense (e.g. the knight's aura is much better). Defender classes don't need some formulaic mechanic to perform their function. Get rid of absurd restrictions on free action attacks (ugly hack), and don't make those kind of powers in the first place. Get rid of limitations on OA's on your turn. etc. Keep it Simple!
• Dramatically reduce the number of Immediate reactions+interrupts: these slow down gameplay.
• Power durations: the current system was supposed to be simpler, but it makes no sense and interacts poorly with delay and ready. This needs some kind of revamp; certainly for save-ends effects, and likely the whole thing.
• Better support for third-party content. Sorry guys, I just don't trust you (Wotc). I didn't really trust you after you dumped the OGL, and you've proved those doubts justified. Obviously you need the occasional refreshing breeze and constant competition, so if you cut that out, you'll make crap. Don't do that.

Basically, I want a system with far fewer rules elements, but which can interact more freely. That way each can be fully fleshed out, with actual fluff, and new releases need only contain very few new rules to remain interesting.

I've got 4e, and I seriously doubt more of the same will ever convince me to fork out cash. They need something new. But who knows, maybe they'll make something brilliant...

The OGL point is more of a meta-point. I really don't think Wotc is exuding competence, and I'd feel much more safe buying into their next system if they didn't try to lock me in forever. Their need to lock out competition doesn't speak of great confidence in the quality of their own product either. They're just coasting on the brand.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think you confused the title of this thread with: why I don´t like 4e...

although, your points about the game structure is indeed valid, and I would also like a 5th edition with your points adressed... Right now I am happy enough with 4e after essentials though... and my players actually like the system...

 

[eamon]

I think you confused the title of this thread with: why I don´t like 4e...

although, your points about the game structure is indeed valid, and I would also like a 5th edition with your points adressed... Right now I am happy enough with 4e after essentials though... and my players actually like the system...

But that's kind of my point! 4e is finished. My issues just won't get fixed by some revamp in D&DI. I can happily continue playing 4e without D&DI - and any new rules will likely just make the mess worse. So as to the question what would make you subscribe? Well, a new edition .
The sooner the next edition comes along, the happier I'll be.