Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lkj" data-source="post: 8367010" data-attributes="member: 18646">Just a note that DDB have spent substantial effort in upgrading and re-working their back end over the last year and a half to make it more flexible for adding new features. There was some huge upgrade to the back end on the character sheet side some months ago, and they've regularly talked about development on their 'general features' system which is supposed to add additional flexibility.  In other words, I don't think it's accurate to say that they're just building on a flimsy base and not addressing underlying structure. However, I do think it is fair to say that the retooling to add flexibility to that underlying structure has slowed down their feature development substantially. But it was almost certainly the right long term move. And it's not like they haven't been successful as a rules reference and character generation tool, even with the limitations (which, in my opinion, are pretty minor against the extreme ease of use).I do wonder if the FG-DDB comparisons are apt. I've used both (though I'll admit it's been awhile for FG).  FG is a better tool as a VT. Obviously. But I found DDB far better for character creation and rules reference. FG isn't trying to be DDB or vice versa. Now, we'll see what happens when DDB moves further into their 'shared game space'. (They won't call it a VT, and I think they have their reasons for that-- they are positioning themselves as a suite of tools rather than as a tabletop)  Right now that's just a die rolling log and some alpha an beta tools. They have a lot of work to do there. But I think they're in a good position, because a lot of people are already using DDB for game play. And FG tends to be a little more intimidating for folks who aren't a little technically savvy.  What we may see are FG folks saying 'But FG already did that!'  And they'll be right. But that's kind of how Apple did their thing-- do something others have done in a way that is just slick enough and just enough easier to use to bring in a bigger audience.I know people will point out that FG isn't that hard to use. Or Roll20. They're not. But, as a person with gaming groups with non tech savvy players, I can tell you that the barrier to entry does not have to be that high to bounce quite a lot of people.  There's a reason I'm not using Roll20 or FG much anymore. And it's not because I was having trouble using them. It's because adoption was much faster with DDB by the rest of my group. AD</blockquote>

Verification