D&D Insider - Pay tomorrow for what you get today for free?

[I'm A Banana]

Ok, so we agree if you look at it logically. If you want the extra stuff you got to pay more. This is opposite your argument?

No. My argument is that, if they stop releasing many of these updates for free, WotC are being cheap bastards and using sales techniques that drug pushers uses as they are rescinding their community goodwill.

The counter-argument, AFAICT, is that giving us less stuff for more money is either inevitable, or that it represents some sort of kind act of unwarranted compassion on WotC's part, and thus they're not being cheap bastards, just honest businessmen trying to make a little money off of some kids having fun with their hard work.

YOu find me one... just one receipt, book or disclaimer that says that when you pay 40 bucks for this wotc book it comes with a stocked website to support it.

Sure, just as soon as you take a course in economic-social theory.

Then I will show you any reciept, and you will see that my $30 went to pay for everything from Hasbro's new line of GI Joes to WotC's website to the paycheck of that kid who rung me up to the loggers chopping down trees to make the paper.

The web content is a privilege ...the book, the thing you purchase, is the requirement. That statement just sounds awful spoiled. Prior to special editions, the bonuses were a priveldge, however when I buy the special edition, it is required that they have more than the original.

No. Nothing WotC gives me is a privelege. Everything they give me, I (and everyone else buying their stuff) have paid for. Those special edition DVD's are paid for by eveyone who went to see the studio's new big release, not just by the people shelling out $5 more at the register.

WotC never gave this stuff away out of the goodness in their own hearts. I don't think Mearls was doing these columns when he *wasn't* being paid for them. So when he was paid, his money came from Hasbro. Hasbro's money comes from the people who buy Hasbro's stuff and the people who invest in Hasbro's stock. In other words, from us. From me. From you. From your cousin's kid who just baught a Pokemon deck, to the family who just purchased the new Transformer's toys for their kid for Christmas, we've already paid for this.

 

[Scribble]

Anyone know if they actually plan to "charge" for the subscription?

Perhaps it's simply a subscription in a similar way that you subscribe to say, hotmail, or this site...

Just a way for them to tailor their marketing towards the people actually looking at it since you'll most likely have to give them a bunch of info about yourself.

 

[Jim Hague]

WotC never gave this stuff away out of the goodness in their own hearts. I don't think Mearls was doing these columns when he *wasn't* being paid for them. So when he was paid, his money came from Hasbro. Hasbro's money comes from the people who buy Hasbro's stuff and the people who invest in Hasbro's stock. In other words, from us. From me. From you. From your cousin's kid who just baught a Pokemon deck, to the family who just purchased the new Transformer's toys for their kid for Christmas, we've already paid for this.

I believe Wired has a lovely article that sums this up best:


http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,72119-0.html?tw=rss.index

Specifically:

The Majority Stockholder

Seems to believe that $15 a month buys you a seat on the board of directors. Doesn't realize that a hundred thousand other people are ponying up the same amount.

Sample Quote: "I've e-mailed the developers several times telling them that Fire Paladins should have the axe-throwing skill. They haven't changed it, but they're still taking my money!."

Or, in this case, the idea that buy the book gives one free and unlimited access to every single thing WotC puts online. "I paid for my book, I want all the supplementary material, which WotC pays people to write and post, for free!"

I'm not saying WotC's doing the right thing, the wrong thing or, for that matter, anything; nobody has any real information. But the sheer sense of false entitlement is just astounding to me.

 

[Umbran]

...WotC are being cheap bastards...

Please tone down the level of invective rhetoric. It doesn't exactly make folks agree with you more, you know.

 

[Glyfair]

The red stuff is what I remember as "new." New crunch. Not reworked rules, or gaming advice.

That's a pretty limited view. I know that the Eberron fans wait with anticipation for Keith's Dragonshard articles which don't fit your limited view of "new." Keith has stated he has several articles waiting for publication which haven't appeared, and specu;lated they are waiting for the "premium content" to launch.

I definitely have seen a major decrease in content the last few weeks. For example, Monday typically has 2-3 Eberron specific articles. Recently they have had one each week.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I believe Wired has a lovely article that sums this up best:\

That Wired article is about MMORPGs. Until such time as someone can play WoW or EQ1 without paying for monthly bandwidth fees or that D&D requires more than books, dice, pencils and paper, it's a really iffy comparison.

The WotC Web site is a marketing tool in its current incarnation and we don't have to go far to find people who have bought WotC products because of something on the Web site. I certainly have.

We don't know that the new site will be dramatically much more than the current plus Web tools (the survey specifically lists product previews, which are absolutely marketing materials), so it's not a sense of entitlement that has people being irritated at being (potentially) asked to pay for, in large part, the opportunity to be marketed to.

I think the people who have a very different reaction to the upcoming WotC plans and have a vision of it being more full-featured than that.

The people against this aren't entitled brats: They're people who suspect WotC is going to ask for money from them for mostly advertising.

The people in favor of this aren't poundfoolish fanboys: They're people who think WotC is going to provide a product of useful Web content that will be worth paying for.

If everyone can stop attacking people for disagreeing with them, I think everyone will be better off.

 

[Jim Hague]

That Wired article is about MMORPGs. Until such time as someone can play WoW or EQ1 without paying for monthly bandwidth fees or that D&D requires more than books, dice, pencils and paper, it's a really iffy comparison.

I think there's a lot more parallels than you're admitting - I see those same types of people in tournament games, at cons, and spoken about right here on ENWorld.

The WotC Web site is a marketing tool in its current incarnation and we don't have to go far to find people who have bought WotC products because of something on the Web site. I certainly have.

Same here. And I won't begrudge them for marketing.

We don't know that the new site will be dramatically much more than the current plus Web tools (the survey specifically lists product previews, which are absolutely marketing materials), so it's not a sense of entitlement that has people being irritated at being (potentially) asked to pay for, in large part, the opportunity to be marketed to.

I think the people who have a very different reaction to the upcoming WotC plans and have a vision of it being more full-featured than that.

The people against this aren't entitled brats: They're people who suspect WotC is going to ask for money from them for mostly advertising.

The people against this aren't poundfoolish fanboys: They're people who think WotC is going to provide a product of useful Web content that will be worth paying for.

If everyone can stop attacking people for disagreeing with them, I think everyone will be better off.

And yet I can point at specific posts here that speak loudly of entitlement and everything else you mention. We don't know diddly about what the 'premium' site is going to offer; many of the concerns brought up here are ones I share. But implying that WotC should do anything more than try to satisfy the customer and their bottom line is ridiculous; they're a business, they make money, their products are competitively priced for the quality, IMO. To say that you've bought a book and that entitles you to endless free support is as ridiculous as if WotC were to offer nothing more than their free Web enhancements they have up now and charge for it.

As an earlier poster put it, it'll need to be a value-added package to justify the cost...but at the same time, WotC is under no obligation to endlessly support products for free or (by running an unprofitable website) actually lose money doing more than releasing FAQs and errata. IMO, YMMV. We know next to nothing, but people are sure ready to pillory WotC for even approaching the idea...

 

[DonTadow]

Sure, just as soon as you take a course in economic-social theory.

But your whole thing is based on a theory? My argument is based on fact. My receipt says 40 dollar book. I got a 40 dollar book. That theory fails because you are not entitled to everything the company makes because you buy one product. All wotc has to give you is any errata to the book.

Why are you entitled to content that they could save and compile into another book to sell for 40 bucks?

 

[Jim Hague]

But your whole thing is based on a theory? My argument is based on fact. My receipt says 40 dollar book. I got a 40 dollar book. That theory fails because you are not entitled to everything the company makes because you buy one product. All wotc has to give you is any errata to the book.

Why are you entitled to content that they could save and compile into another book to sell for 40 bucks?

[Nitpick] Theory in this case is used in the scientific sense - a hypothesis borne out by testing. And your 'fact' is nothing of the sort, Don, it's simply your opinion. There's no need to go picking fights.

 

[DonTadow]

[Nitpick] Theory in this case is used in the scientific sense - a hypothesis borne out by testing. And your 'fact' is nothing of the sort, Don, it's simply your opinion. There's no need to go picking fights.

let's see. I go to the store and buy something. My receipt says I bought a 40 dollar book and...voila... whats in my bag a book with the msrp of 40 bucks. Now if I try to return this book and tell the person that I have the opinion that the book is 120 dollars, they will present the fact that the receipt says 40.

That sounds a awful lot like facts to me. Now, a theory is a theory whether its science, math or economics. The reason why something is still a theory (and not a fact) is because it has not been proven true. I'm not picking a fight, but just pointing out facts. The theory presented is not legal. Again, I can't go into kbtoys and start pocketing gijoes because i bought the complete scoundrel.

It just sounds like a lot of people are spoiled off the free content. The content is good enough to beg to keep free, but its not good enough to pay for?