2/7 DDI Update

[SSquirrel]

I second the MSE, altho I haven't updated my files in a long time. I just picked up a DDI sub this month after 2 years of not getting to game. I've filed several bug reports so far and just filed a new one for Far Spell last night. My new DM won't be picking it up until campaign editor options get added so he can add more optional races and classes to Dark Sun

 

[Quickleaf]

Fair enough, [MENTION=20323]Quickleaf[/MENTION]. To be completely fair on my own behalf, I should have clarified and said I wasn't directing my criticisms 100% in your direction - just sentiments a lot like yours. I've seen a lot of people who are justifiably unhappy with the CB, Adventure Tools, and DDI in general. Many of them make similar comments to your own, but it seems like sometimes WotC gets it coming and going - they have a litany of problems they can't fix fast enough for many people, and when they actually try to make some headway, it's not enough.

They do have a litany of problems with DDi, and not limited to software performance either. I guess it's hard to empathize with a department of people who my only way of knowing is via (poor) Internet communication, when the problems they're fixing are ones they made.

I enjoy D&D in it's current edition, I think the WotC crew is a friendly hard-working group if folks, the old MB made DMing sooo much easier. But in regards to DDi as a whole and the online CB specifically, my attitude is "Ive been less than impressed; show me something great, really wow me, and I'll communicate just how cool the new feature is. Right now that's not the case.

(Also, I don't want any "first blood." I don't have any beef with you, or anyone on this board.)

Thanks.

The worst thing about it is that not one of the changes has improved the experience for the customer. Eventually, one hopes, it will; but customers don't pay for what they will get in 18 months, they pay for what you are offering them today.

Thats how I feel too, but we are long time gamers who also have experienced the old CB not to mention 3rd party stuff like Masterplan. Maybe it's different for people joining rhe hobby now and signing up for DDi (though that's usually the generation with the greatest tech demands).

As for the pay-it-forward business model, What about the patron work of Open Design? Apparently that's a working model even in the periphery of the rpg business.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I am annoyed that my gnome assassin will have to sit in storage until the spring, since I want to be able to re-build him with the Essentials stuff. (I'm playing an Essentials Mage right now, and it's about 100x more fun than a PHBI Wizard. )

It's a mild annoyance. Certainly there are other strikers I can build when my time comes around to play a Striker again. But it was expected, and it sucks that this one article has been fraught with so many punctuality issues, since I've been excited about it since I heard it was in development.

Not cool, guys. Not cool.

Other stuff is basic. Bringing it slightly closer to up to par is good. Adding the rest of the content is solid. Still a lot of issues. Still missing content. Still riddled with problems.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Can't speak for [MENTION=20323]Quickleaf[/MENTION] , but I would have preferred they released a CB that had, at a bare minimum, the functionality of the old CB. I'm happy they're making progress, I'm happy they're addressing important issues, but I do think there's still criticism warranted.

Indeed. Especially as they are charging for this material. I believe it was a similiar number of bugs crushed last time. At that huge number of issues, the beta status of this release is pretty much pounded into its forehead.

Newer players who never had the old CB or those who've decided to just grin and bear it because its not that big a deal to them probably won't be as annoyed but others who are continuing to pay for it may still feel the bite of wonder that WoTC continued to charge for this beta release and are still not quite to the previous level of utility that the former CB had.

Me? Still waiting to hear more aweosmeness about the online CB before WoTC gets any cash from me.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Yeah, poor wording on my part, and is what I actually meant to say. Basically I'm arguing that the functionality "framework" be taken care of before adding content. That way, when you go to add, say, Dark Sun themes, well the functionality already exists and you don't have to retrofit it.

The difficulty in that is in anticipating that functionality. It would be nice if they could work with a system that could easily be expanded, but I don't think D&D (in any iteration) is such a system.

In fact, they probably tried to get away with doing it on the cheap, and that outcome should have been obvious too.

Regardless of the strategy involved, this is the major problem. I end up saying it in every DDI thread I post in, but I'm certain that the DDI side of things is tremendously underfunded/understaffed. I would not be surprised in the least to learn that only one person is coding the CB, and that the entire department is only four people.

 

[moxcamel]

The difficulty in that is in anticipating that functionality. It would be nice if they could work with a system that could easily be expanded, but I don't think D&D (in any iteration) is such a system.

Certainly. But I'm not saying for them to anticipate the future. (well, they *should* anticipate the future, but that's not part of my argument) I'm just saying to do what any normal development shop would do: draw a line in the sand at where the old product left off, and create a framework that handles that baseline functionality. Implement that framework, and then pull the content into that framework. What you wind up with is a brand new product that has, at a minimum, the functionality and content of the old product. Now you can move forward.

What WotC have done, it seems, is to provide part of the framework that existed in the previous product, yet still try to keep up with the same content plus new content. It can only lead to disaster.

I'm certain that the DDI side of things is tremendously underfunded/understaffed. I would not be surprised in the least to learn that only one person is coding the CB, and that the entire department is only four people.

Oh I'd wager money you're right. And my heart goes out to the DDI team, because as frustrated as we are, I'm sure they're a hundred times that. So just to be clear, I don't see this as a problem with the team, I see this as a problem with leadership.

And again, I just really don't think WotC should be in the business of writing software. Hire a company to write an API for the back-end databases, and release the API to the community. The community will create character builders and other applications that WotC could never in a hundred years develop. The community will come up with fantastic new ways to interface D&D with social media and other outlets that can only be good for the game. In the meantime, DDI will sell subscriptions because of it, more people will be exposed to D&D, and WotC can get back to their core abilities of producing quality content.

 

[twilsemail]

I can't access the WotC boards at work. Has Trevor (or another WotC employee) come out and clarified if this was a mistake or not. it'd be more than a bit disappointing if the most substantial Dragon content for 3 months running was just filler from HoS. There's no mention of "Playtest" in the 394 article.

I'm a bit peeved about this change. That might just be a lack of caffeine though... I should fix that.

 

[Nullzone]

If you're referring to the Executioner, yes, Trevor confirmed that it will not be implemented until Heroes of Shadow.

 

[twilsemail]

If you're referring to the Executioner, yes, Trevor confirmed that it will not be implemented until Heroes of Shadow.

Are you talking about the post mentioned earlier in this thread where Trevor said it was a playtest, or has there been a follow up to that statement since it was made?

 

[Nullzone]

He confirmed it on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/#!/Trevor_WotC/status/35093505185415168