WotC, really? No...really? You can't maintain a publishing schedule?

[Oldtimer]

So you would rather they hold to their schedule and put out a bugged CB update that (potentially) will break the CB as opposed to delaying the update to make sure that the bugs are fixed?

It's really sad if those are the only two options available from WotC.

 

[Ourph]

I may be naive in regards to e-publishing. I still don't understand why someone producing a professional magazine can't or, perhaps, wouldn't have their copy at a minimum of a week in advance, ready to go.

If they have an article ready to go, why in the world would they hold onto it for a week rather than posting it right away???

You seem to be complaining (maybe I'm misunderstanding) that this looser scheduling will result in content coming out in a less timely manner, but then you turn around and suggest that the answer is for WotC to sit on content for a week just to stick to some arbitrary publishing schedule.

I can only imagine the nerd-rage that would ensue if some people around here found out that WotC was holding onto finished content for weeks or months at a time rather than posting it as soon as it was finished just to provide a steady stream of content.

 

[billd91]

If they have an article ready to go, why in the world would they hold onto it for a week rather than posting it right away???

You seem to be complaining (maybe I'm misunderstanding) that this looser scheduling will result in content coming out in a less timely manner, but then you turn around and suggest that the answer is for WotC to sit on content for a week just to stick to some arbitrary publishing schedule.

I can only imagine the nerd-rage that would ensue if some people around here found out that WotC was holding onto finished content for weeks or months at a time rather than posting it as soon as it was finished just to provide a steady stream of content.

For good project management, including building in the ability to respond to problems that come up. Face it, there will be multiple people involved in pretty much any project going up to the web - the content writers, the editors, the graphic designers, and the web managers. The project should have deadlines spaced out so that everyone has the time needed to do the work they need to do on that project and others. Stable deadlines are a good way to facilitate an orderly and functional process, even if one or two projects really are complete ahead of time.

 

[Wicht]

If they have an article ready to go, why in the world would they hold onto it for a week rather than posting it right away???

Because that's how you manage a production schedule in such a way as to guarantee that you have something to release when you need or want a release.

The other method leads to large batches of material being published now and then with unpredictable stretches of time inbetween.

 

[Ourph]

The project should have deadlines spaced out so that everyone has the time needed to do the work they need to do on that project and others.

It seems to me that a small amount of built-in flexibility facilitates that goal much better than a rigid arbitrary deadline.

Stable deadlines are a good way to facilitate an orderly and functional process, even if one or two projects really are complete ahead of time.

Again, if we're talking about an online e-zine, why wouldn't you release the "complete ahead of time" articles when they are done, instead of sitting on them for days or weeks to stick to an arbitrary release schedule?

Because that's how you manage a production schedule in such a way as to guarantee that you have something to release when you need or want a release.

The other method leads to large batches of material being published now and then with unpredictable stretches of time inbetween.

So delaying the release of an article for a few days to make sure it's good and there are no problems with it = bad, unprofessional and lazy.

But delaying the release of a complete and ready to go article for weeks or months in order to stick to an arbitrary publishing schedule = good, professional and organized.

Yeah, I'm not buying it. I suspect that the people who have a problem with the current policy would throw an even bigger fit if they found that WotC was "withholding" finished content from subscribers by sitting on it for weeks or months at a time. I can just imagine how the thread title on ENWorld would read...

"Waaaaah!!! WotC is holding my content hostage! DDI is the devil!"

Followed by a thread full of posts by people who don't read the online periodicals and don't even subscribe to DDI complaining about a policy that doesn't affect them in any way.

 

[Wicht]

So delaying the release of an article for a few days to make sure it's good and there are no problems with it = bad, unprofessional and lazy.

But delaying the release of a complete and ready to go article for weeks or months in order to stick to an arbitrary publishing schedule = good, professional and organized.

Yeah, I'm not buying it. I suspect that the people who have a problem with the current policy would throw an even bigger fit if they found that WotC was "withholding" finished content from subscribers by sitting on it for weeks or months at a time. I can just imagine how the thread title on ENWorld would read...

"Waaaaah!!! WotC is holding my content hostage! DDI is the devil!"

Followed by a thread full of posts by people who don't read the online periodicals and don't even subscribe to DDI complaining about a policy that doesn't affect them in any way.

I will readily admit that I don't subscribe to DDI.

But I would also point out I am not actually one of those complaining. I regret the loss of the magazines but I deal with it. What I am doing is trying to point out how a properly managed release schedule works.

1) You have your articles/pdfs ready to go well in advance. You do not wait until the last minute to make sure they are ready.

2) You release things according to a schedule...
...delaying a release because it was not ready on time is bad. It looks bad and reflects poorly on everyone.
...delaying a release because you want to release your product on time is a good thing. Magazines do this all the time. They do not release a years worth of content in January. They pace themselves so they have something to sell each month. Doing so allows the customers to know what to expect and when. It guarantees that there is a continual revenue stream, which makes creditors and employees happy.

 

[shadzar]

But it doesn't, particularly when you have, as you say, conflicting deadlines. If you've got some products with lax deadlines and others with firm deadlines, do the products with lax deadlines get any better? Not really. The priority will always go to the firm deadlines.

What you really want are internal deadlines in advance of the final publication deadline with enough buffer time for late projects to be finished before the final deadline and add a means of escalating the priority of projects not making deadlines. That's where you get that extra day to polish up a piece while still maintaining a publishing schedule and providing good customer service.

I will go a step further even! Have the internal deadlines for say Bart Carroll to have an article a week. Do as many as you want in advance, but one is needed each week. This is a loose adaptation of the idea.

Then you work on the fixing and all that. They you have a stack/folder/disk of articles ready and build the calendar AFTER the articles are ready, and then hand the articles over to the web team to put into digital format to be delivered on the date the calendar says.

That way you aren't doing any last minute guessing if an article will be ready, but have the article ready even before you decide WHEN you are going to use it.

I will bet the "article" for Fortune cards was made and ready well in advance of the date it was posted by the CMS for people to read. If it wasn't then they reaqlly need to do what I suggest below and get their collective butts in gear and learn what they are doing.

So you would rather they hold to their schedule and put out a bugged CB update that (potentially) will break the CB as opposed to delaying the update to make sure that the bugs are fixed?

No I would prefer people stop using trash like Silverlight to begin with. HTML and Javascript and PHP can do everything they need it to do without 2 gigs of printer spooling of a BITMAP, BITMAP, printing to a BITMAP without just saving the file to the computer is stupid! Don't even print to a BITMAP. Don't needlessly print text to an image.

Printing text as text is a lot better for computers, people, and printers. There was no reason to use a. I expect them to get someone competent to use and work with a website, rather than trying to get people that build internal websites for companies to make a public front for them. But it seems they hired Randy Beuhler and his team back to continue screwing up with not understanding how simple it is to do things, and would rather get fancy rather than understand their stupid little artwork in no way shape or form is needed.

They need to fire the entire web team for DDi and get people in that can program, and leave them alone to do it right.

 

[Primal]

In how many other magazines do we know, weeks ahead of time, when articles are going to be published? (serious question...)

In all of the magazines that i have ever subscribed to or purchased over the past couple of years, you find out what will be in the next isssue when you get the next issue. You have no idea how many articles were late, how many were not ready for the month or anything like that.

Now, that being said, WotC *did* set themselves up for this to happen from the start by posting what was going to go up and when.

All the bigger magazines in my country have a list of articles for the next issue; the union (lit. 'The Union for Magazines and Periodicals') even lists submission deadlines, publication dates, and themes/articles articles for the whole year. So, most magazines and periodicals published over here *have* to know at least a year ahead of publishing schedule which themes each issue will deal with, and which kind of "major" articles they'll publish.

What puzzles me most is that if I recall correctly, WoTC claimed that three important reasons for going all-digital were:
1) Digital articles are not limited by wordcount, which means that they can publish longer articles they did in the print magazines.
2) The digital format makes editing easier, i.e. they have more time to comb out any errors before doing the compilation.
3) Cutting out the shipping and printing costs results in savings, which will be invested in better quality (more articles, higher production values, etc.).

Based on what DDI subscribers have posted, it seems to me that Dungeon and Dragon have far less content these days, and articles are not longer as promised. Also, apparently they didn't do any "proper" editing or quality control, at least according to what Steve Winter said on his blog. And regardless of those supposed savings, most articles and adventures have been written by WoTC staff members, right? Not invested in more material or paying freelancers to write the stuff that overworked staffers are struggling to squeeze into their already tight schedules; and if maps just consist of dungeon tiles haphazardly thrown together, I guess that money didn't go art budget, either.

Anyway, enough with sarcasm; I hope their new editing policy will result in better articles; at least the latest two have received better review here at EnWorld, so maybe they are actually paying more attention to content. But will 4-5 well-written, individually published articles per month make up for "killing" the magazines? And what I'm specifically interested in is that are they generic enough, and cover a wide enough range of themes and subjects, that I would find at least one or two articles (which I did back in the day with the print magazine) that I can/want to use in my games? Because with the print magazine I always knew that hidden among mediocre or uninteresting stuff every issue contained at least a couple of articles I found useful.

 

[Ourph]

I will readily admit that I don't subscribe to DDI.

But I would also point out I am not actually one of those complaining. I regret the loss of the magazines but I deal with it. What I am doing is trying to point out how a properly managed release schedule works.

1) You have your articles/pdfs ready to go well in advance. You do not wait until the last minute to make sure they are ready.

Again, "well in advance" of what? An arbitrary release date? That might be the norm for publishing dead tree materials where the product needs time to make its way through distribution channels so that it can be available at all retail outlets on the day of release. But that doesn't necessarily translate to online publishing. As long as there is a steady stream of content (and I see no evidence that WotC isn't planning on having a steady stream of content) why does it matter if article X is posted 4 days earlier than expected while article Y is postponed for 2 days beyond the original deadline?

2) You release things according to a schedule...
...delaying a release because it was not ready on time is bad. It looks bad and reflects poorly on everyone.

Agreed. Delaying a release because it was not ready on time is bad. I hope you will agree that releasing a flawed product on time is worse. I don't see any evidence that either of those is the case here. WotC are changing how they communicate the schedule of releases to their customers. I don't see any announcement saying that they are changing how they handle the supervision of writers and projects internally.

...delaying a release because you want to release your product on time is a good thing. Magazines do this all the time. They do not release a years worth of content in January.

They also don't have a year's backlog of material ready in January. And while print magazines may have some content started or outlined a few months in advance, most of that content won't be finished until it's actually being prepared for the current month's release. The difference between online publication and dead tree publication is that once an item transitions from started/outlined to finished for online publication, there is no need to hold it for weeks before publishing it. You can publish it as soon as it is done.

They pace themselves so they have something to sell each month. Doing so allows the customers to know what to expect and when. It guarantees that there is a continual revenue stream, which makes creditors and employees happy.

It seems to me that WotC recently announced that they were no longer going to be posting online content updates on a specific day of the week at a specific time of day because online distribution makes an arbitrary release schedule like that unnecessary and in some cases counterproductive. What in that particular announcement leads you to believe that they are not planning to have...

1. New content each month?
2. Announcements about upcoming content?
3. A continuous revenue stream?

 

[Crispy Critter]

As someone who used to work at a monthly magazine our content was planned well in advance, I mean 8-12 months in a lot of cases. This not only helped the editorial staff but the advertising sales staff as well.