Mournblade94
Hero
One of the innovations of 4e was the DD Insider. This feature alone will allow 4e to out compete the other games. Things in DDI should not be free, but there is some content that SHOULD be free.
I just read the interview with James Wyatt from Dungeon Mastering. Within the text, was a link to a column that James Wyatt wrote, concerning the perception that characters do not have as many options in 4e as they did in previous editions. I happen to think that the options are in fact less, but that is besides the point. I clicked on the link, and (I should have known) I could not read the article because I am not a DDI subscriber.
There are many perceptions I have from DMing the game at its debut for five months or so, and most of these perceptions are enough to make me choose Pathfinder or M&M over 4e.
I debate in the Gamestore over editions all the time (and they are always much friendlier than the debates on the web), and I definitely am not a fan of 4e. I am however a fan of Darksun, but due to my perceptions of 4e I do not find myself investing the time into a system I already tried.
Some things on DDI should be free. Like the Column by James Wyatt for example. I certainly would not expect game content to be free, nor would I ask for it. Thoughts by Bill Slavisek, and columns by the designers about the game itself I honestly think should be free for the gamer community.
From the James Wyatt Interrogation entry of Dungeon Mastering, James Wyatt says,
"There is an extent to which I despair because I’m not sure that- like the story telling chapter in DMG2 – are the people who say that D&D is not an RPG anymore even going to see that and be aware that it exists?"
The answer is simple, no they won't know because they cannot read the posts of the 4e designers. For the record, I am not of the school of thought that 4e is not an RPG, it is just the aspect for which James Wyatt chose to comment.
It seems like the DDI columns of this sort are preaching to a choir. IF someone is convinced that ITEM A is not a problem in 4e, and they are reading a column about how ITEM A should not be seen as a problem by the dissenters, that person is just going to have their ideas reaffirmed. No potential customer gained. If however the article was open to people like me who do not play 4e, and have developed convictions of our own, there could be a potential gain in customers.
If WOTC wants to demonstrate how they can prove certain perceptions incorrect than they should at least make these blog posts viewable by the public.
I just read the interview with James Wyatt from Dungeon Mastering. Within the text, was a link to a column that James Wyatt wrote, concerning the perception that characters do not have as many options in 4e as they did in previous editions. I happen to think that the options are in fact less, but that is besides the point. I clicked on the link, and (I should have known) I could not read the article because I am not a DDI subscriber.
There are many perceptions I have from DMing the game at its debut for five months or so, and most of these perceptions are enough to make me choose Pathfinder or M&M over 4e.
I debate in the Gamestore over editions all the time (and they are always much friendlier than the debates on the web), and I definitely am not a fan of 4e. I am however a fan of Darksun, but due to my perceptions of 4e I do not find myself investing the time into a system I already tried.
Some things on DDI should be free. Like the Column by James Wyatt for example. I certainly would not expect game content to be free, nor would I ask for it. Thoughts by Bill Slavisek, and columns by the designers about the game itself I honestly think should be free for the gamer community.
From the James Wyatt Interrogation entry of Dungeon Mastering, James Wyatt says,
"There is an extent to which I despair because I’m not sure that- like the story telling chapter in DMG2 – are the people who say that D&D is not an RPG anymore even going to see that and be aware that it exists?"
The answer is simple, no they won't know because they cannot read the posts of the 4e designers. For the record, I am not of the school of thought that 4e is not an RPG, it is just the aspect for which James Wyatt chose to comment.
It seems like the DDI columns of this sort are preaching to a choir. IF someone is convinced that ITEM A is not a problem in 4e, and they are reading a column about how ITEM A should not be seen as a problem by the dissenters, that person is just going to have their ideas reaffirmed. No potential customer gained. If however the article was open to people like me who do not play 4e, and have developed convictions of our own, there could be a potential gain in customers.
If WOTC wants to demonstrate how they can prove certain perceptions incorrect than they should at least make these blog posts viewable by the public.
