Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 7678275" data-attributes="member: 37579">Take a look at <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2808-How-Much-Gaming-Took-Place-At-Gen-Con#.VcZCovlVhBc" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2808-How-Much-Gaming-Took-Place-At-Gen-Con#.VcZCovlVhBc</a> versus <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2800-Gen-Con-Has-Doubled-In-Size-Since-2010" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?2800-Gen-Con-Has-Doubled-In-Size-Since-2010</a>61,423 people were at GenCon but only 8,807 played D&D. That's 14.34% of GenConners. Of that <15%, maybe a few hundred were upset. So 5% of 14% of the people who attended the Con were seriously unhappy. 90% of the D&D players who attended were likely happy and going to be spreading positive word of mouth. That's going to have much more impact than the complaining. Now, keep in mind that the vast, vast majority of gamers don't go to GenCon. Again, D&D racked up almost 9,000 people, but the PHB sold to hundreds of thousands of people and there are millions of gamers out there. Heck, a large percentage of D&D fans don't even know of GenCon, let alone paid attention to the news. Lots of people happily buy the books and play but don't follow the game on Twitter or Facebook or visit ENWorld. They're not seriously invested in the hobby. We have a very skewed perspective. We're the small percentage of super dedicated fans who go online and discuss the game, and are aware of the issue even if we didn't attend. We're an anomaly, and it's dangerous to forget that and think that our community is a representative sample of D&D as a whole. Which it really is not. Again with the insults. *sigh* I don't disagree. It would be rude. But companies don't make money being polite. It would not be unheard of for companies to do just that, to shrug off the complaints with a "Sincerer apologies, we messed up, but we'll try harder next time and learn from this mistake". That wouldn't be an entirely unreasonable response. However, I don't think it's reasonable to expect a company to put themselves out of business issuing refunds when they do not have to. Asking someone to choose to lose their means of employment and ruin their finances for the rest of their life because some poor customer service is harsh. And, of course, they didn't. They found another way, and their licencing partner (and one of their partner's partners) stepped in and made things right. Which gets back to my original point: WotC did good here and went above and beyond. The point is that no one here had to do anything but they did anyway and tried to give people more than expected, more than just token reparations.They got what they they were told they were paying for but not what they were expecting to pay for. There's a difference there. Basically, you're asking the company to offer recompense for inflated expectations. Look at the site: <a href="http://baldmangames.com/gen-con/" target="_blank">http://baldmangames.com/gen-con/</a>D&D Next All-Access Pass (Low Track): Enjoy the best we have to offer at the show, along with some cool unique perks, with one easy ticket. This track is for players with characters levels 1-4. You will participate in DDEX2-16, DDEP-2, DDEX3-2, and DDEP-3. Play times are Thursday noon-4pm, Thursday 8pm-Midnight, Friday noon-4pm, and Saturday 8pm-Midnight.That's what was advertised. That's what people accepted. And that's what was delivered. The problem is NOT that the product wasn't what was advertised, the problem was that after last year, fans were expecting an early copy of an unreleased book. Which, likely because the convention was a half-a-month early, didn't happen.If the product isn't defective, I don't ask for refunds. Heck, it's not like I haven't been scammed or purchased a product I regretted. But I stand by my mistakes. If someone rips you off, you ask for a refund. If you rip yourself off with a foolish purchase, you only have yourself to blame. Learn a lesson for next time.</blockquote>

Verification