WoTC in the Frying Pan

[Merkuri]

More often than not, working 80-hour weeks in a job where you're mostly paid to think is going to result in your product getting later, not closer to done. Especially if it's for more than a very short period.

No arguments here. I was using it as an example of what not to do (rush your developers and force everyone to stay late so you can release your product at an arbitrary point in time not dictated by the state of the software).

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Basically, what I'm saying is if the products aren't ready yet then WotC shouldn't release them. I'm glad they're smart enough to wait until they have a good product to show it to us. We saw how well the alpha testing of Gleemax went.

I agree with your first statement….

BUT WotC should have had AT LEAST a working character generator available for the 4E launch, seeing how they touted the DI as a “Cornerstone of the 4E experience.” To not have at least that much online by launch is a travesty, in my eyes, and does nothing to bolster my hopes on future projects.

As to the thread on Gleemax? I have mixed feelings. While I appreciate the honesty, I think it may even be TOO much so. In particular, this statement left me a bit cold…

I look at D&D Insider and whether people should like it or not, believe in it or not, pay for it or not, very simply...at a certain point we will decide D&D Insider is ready. Or enough elements of it are ready that we think have enough value to players to charge them for it. At that point, players will decide if, indeed, those elements do have value. They will then pay for it. Or they won't. It's a fairly simple calculation.

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Nothing to see here.

Stupid double-posts!

 

[Dacileva]

The loss of Dungeon and the un-readiness of DDI is a perfect example of ego's at WotC trying to DO IT ALL. They can't do it all obviously and have no business (IMHO) not contracting it out to someone competent (or as it stands, someone who has the motivation to get it done).

DUNGEON: 'nuff said about the "less" that it has been. Again, they need to man-up and let 3rd parties come in and have a crack at doing DUNGEON-style magazines official to D&D.

So...

It makes business sense to let a third party, who might have chosen not to go to the new version of your game at all, continue to publish the magazine intended as direct support of your game's current version?

I loved the Paizo Dragon and Dungeon. I was sad to see them go.

I'd have been sadder to have seen any of these events:

• the magazines devolving into blandness due to anticipation for 4e
• conflict between the PTB at Wizards and Paizo resulting in a bitter and hostile breach harming both parties, and likely permanently closing Paizo's doors
• either company slavishly hanging onto magazines with dwindling readership due to supporting content for what some would see as a lame-duck edition
• subtle hostility for the new edition in the magazines' editorials, reviews, and other content, resulting in published versions of some of the vitriol we've been subjected to on these boards and the far, far worse realms of other online boards

You don't keep publishing ad copy for a product you intend to replace.

People would have been MORE hostile, and more accusations of deception would have been thrown. Wizards made what I feel was probably the best call, all things considered.

 

[darthkilmor]

More often than not, working 80-hour weeks in a job where you're mostly paid to think is going to result in your product getting later, not closer to done. Especially if it's for more than a very short period.

More than an hour or so a day's overtime = overly tired developers = more bugs = more time spent debugging and lower quality code. This is a very well documented phenomena.

I don't know about you, but I don't waste my time writing bugs

I actually do my best coding between 7-11pm. Everyone is out of the office so no one bothers me, and I can rock out some music as loud as I want.

 

[Shemeska]

*sigh* I would have posted a question over on that thread, but two "unspecified errors" later, I gave up trying to log in.

 

[Khairn]

Scott, can you promote Ken to being the head of the PR department? Lidda too?

WotC has a PR Department?

They do have a lot of departments that generate negative PR on a regular basis. I suppose having someone around to actually communicate with customers might be a good idea.

I 2nd the nomination of Ken to the PR department.

 

[drothgery]

I actually do my best coding between 7-11pm. Everyone is out of the office so no one bothers me, and I can rock out some music as loud as I want.

After hours, you have a quiet, private office. That's very good for productivity. It probably more than offsets what you're losing from tiredness (also, if you're planning to be working in the evenings, you're probably showing up later, and/or doing less mentally demanding work during normal business hours). Though if you're like most people, playing music in an otherwise quiet office is really a net negative to productivity (even among people who are convinced that's not true for them).

Okay, for some reason reading software engineering and software/IT management books is a hobby of mine; it seems more relevant in the long run than reading about NEW_LANGUAGE_DE_JOUR.

 

[Moonshade]

I'd have been sadder to have seen any of these events:

• the magazines devolving into blandness due to anticipation for 4e
• conflict between the PTB at Wizards and Paizo resulting in a bitter and hostile breach harming both parties, and likely permanently closing Paizo's doors
• either company slavishly hanging onto magazines with dwindling readership due to supporting content for what some would see as a lame-duck edition
• subtle hostility for the new edition in the magazines' editorials, reviews, and other content, resulting in published versions of some of the vitriol we've been subjected to on these boards and the far, far worse realms of other online boards

You don't keep publishing ad copy for a product you intend to replace.

People would have been MORE hostile, and more accusations of deception would have been thrown. Wizards made what I feel was probably the best call, all things considered.

I don't think that if Paizo had still been publishing the magazines they'd have been so unprofessional as to be hostile to 4E in the magazine content when it would have been their job to promote it and they would have expected to use its OGL in the future.

If Paizo had continued to publish magazines, maybe they would have received access to 4E rules and inspired WOTC to deliver other publishers the 4E information they'd promised instead of dragging it out past deadlines? In which case Pathfinder might be going 4E right away instead of moving on with 3E and making the best of the situation since it got to the point where they could no longer sit around waiting for 4E rules. Who knows in what form Pathfinder would even exist if Paizo hadn't needed to find a replacement product for Dragon/Dungeon and been able to commit fully to it with the mags no longer requiring the time of their staff?

The content of the magazines, especially Dragon, would have offered another opportunity to promote 4E. If even as much 1/3 would have been devoted to promotion (of the rules, previewing the DDI versions of the mags), there's no reason 2/3 couldn't have provided quality content, whether in the form of 3E support or less edition-specific articles. Why would it have led to more accusations of deception if the first 4E announcement had noted that Dragon and Dungeon would continue in print until 4Es release when they'd move online? Why would people have been more hostile (to DDI, WOTC) if they'd had magazines to read instead of the current situation in which the lack of online Dragon/Dungeon (accompanied by claims that WOTC were too busy working on 4E) puts into question WOTC's ability to commit to continued article/adventure support that's worth getting the DDI for?

Since they have such a bad reputation when it comes to online projects, I expected something more than this "it'll be good next year, promise" approach. I doubted WOTC's ability to create a good online product when I first heard about DDI. The fact that Dragon/Dungeon were all but ignored for months and parts of the DDI still won't go live tells me that I shouldn't put too much faith in them getting it together and providing a reliable product worth paying for. Convincing people to pay for DDI (and thus make WOTC/4E more successful) should be a major priority. Instead there's delay after delay.

 

[Jack99]

$15/mo when it goes live, if ever?

Not even...

These folks already have the online gaming tool:
http://www.fantasygrounds.com/

Projects for adopting 4e in particular:
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8459
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8078

So... why pay $15/mo just to get branding?

$15/year... maybe...

Yes, because your $10 a month buys you only access to the virtual table-top. Yes. I mean, it is not like you get Dragon, Dungeon and a whole long list of other things..














Stop comparing apples and oranges.