Gleemax is Dead

[GlassJaw]

- This change is a very very good thing, as it allows us to focus on Magic Online and D&Di, both of which deserve our attention and resources.

NIGEL: I think he’s right, there is something about this, that’s that’s so black, it’s like; “How much more black could this be?” and the answer is: “None, none... more black.”

DAVID: I think, like you’re, like rationalizing this whole thing like into something you did on on purpose. I think we’re stuck with a very, very stupid and a very, very dismal looking album, this is depressing.

 

[Khairn]

The idea was one I supported, but the execution was pathetic from the beginning. I am not surprised.

Agreed.

The Gleemax concept was one that I really liked, but I agree thta the execution has been completely pathetic.

This decision is hardly a surprise. Just another example of WotC's inability to properly manage their online content.

 

[Vanuslux]

ahem....


HHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I seriously thought of posting the exact same thing because of my initial reaction to seeing the thread...but restrained myself. I love 4th edition, but lately I've had to find WotC's troubles with online stuff to be comedic to help divert my feelings of rage that they haven't at least given a passable character generator yet.

 

[Obryn]

but I couldn't figureout why a person would post to Gleemax instead of posting to the regular WotC boards

Am I missing something?

I thought the Gleemax boards were the WotC boards, and vice-versa.

Were there separate Gleemax boards, too?

-O

 

[Michael Morris]

What happens now?

 

[Son_of_Thunder]

Hmmm? Interesting.

I've got a hunch that this is just WotC tightening up its belt. Despite the good sales of 4e I've got a feeling that we're going to see more fat trimmed and hopefully it will be enough so that we don't see the whole brand get shelved or sold off.

 

[mhensley]

Okay, I am not "dancing in the streets" about it, but really, Gleemax was a decent idea that was so poorly implemented (in my opinion) that I always felt it was doomed to die.

here's a couple of sites that didn't devote millions on development and have done a much better job of building general gaming communities-

http://www.penandpapergames.com/forums/index.php
http://rpgbomb.com/

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Okay, I am not "dancing in the streets" about it, but really, Gleemax was a decent idea that was so poorly implemented (in my opinion) that I always felt it was doomed to die.

Now, honestly, I haven't stopped by since the first horrible ugliness that was Gleemax, but when I did it was so awful looking, clunky, slow, and just plain "ugly" in every sense a website can be ugly that I doubt much of that improved.

I don't know about anyone else, but I also think that WotC has completely blown in with DnD Insider (STILL not ready) and the Dungeon and Dragon online magazines are a pale shadow of Paizo's issues.

If they have finally admitted that Gleemax is, well, going nowhere, does anyone have any faith in DnD Insider? If I recall, DnD Insider code is being written by the same folks as Gleemax.

Patrick

I also recall WotC stating at the Gleemax announcement that it had full corporate backing and that despite naysayers WotC was fully committed to this. It seems now that DDI has full corporate backing as well. At this point I don't trust any statements coming out of WotC.

 

[racoffin]

Well, with luck this means they will commit more resources/time/effort into the DDI and other projects. I'll refrain from laughing and simply wait to see what good comes from this.

 

[Noumenon]

I couldn't figureout why a person would post to Gleemax instead of posting to the regular WotC boards

Especially since they didn't migrate your username over to the Gleemax forums, effectively beginning their program with an "opt in" instead of an "opt out."

I was at GenCon when they launched this thing, I did the demo to get the sticker and I still didn't understand what they were trying to do. This thread did a better job of trying to explain that.