DDI September/October Update info

I think it's a lot of hyperbole to say that people doing the "subscription shuffle" are hurting the hobby.

People who subscribe give WotC money. After a certain number of subscribers (who are paying for upkeep and the initial set-up), it's pure profit.

If everyone subscribed for a month and then bowed out, it would probably just mean DDI wasn't worth the upkeep, and the thing would be dropped. Without really hurting the hobby, which was doing fine before DDI came along.

Since we're a year or so into DDI, and it's not gone yet, I'm betting the outlook is at least a little more optimistic.

There will always be marginal players. Pirates, shufflers, group-moochers, whatever. The losses you incur from trying to stop these marginal players have to be less than the potential losses you incur from simply letting them play at the edges with a sharp eye on 'em in order for it to be worth it.

In this case, I would not be surprised if it was worth it to stop them.

I mean, maybe it would be. I was wrong about Dark Sun. ;) Maybe I'm not conscious of where WotC is on this. Maybe the red-faced screaming about THOSE PEOPLE WHO ONLY GIVE US $10!!!!! is more than I'd guess it would be.

But it would still seem like there's more likely moves for 'em.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

As much as people who share their 5 downloads with their group? I hear this practice often, and it robs Wizard of 4 subscriptions.

I'm not sure that logic is sound. Many of these people would probably not buy their own subscription at all. They'd either only use the character builder when they get to the DM's house (which is another practice I've heard of) or they'd go without. I think very few of these "borrowed" subscriptions represent actual revenue loss.

And besides, it's almost like Wizards was asking for this to happen. I mean, allowing you to do the updates on five machines? How many people do you know that own (and actively use) five computers? I'm a computer nut, and I've only got two, my desktop and my laptop. Three, if you count my work machine (on which I'm not going to be installing the CB any time soon). Microsoft Office allows you to install their products on only three machines. Five updates a month is more than one person is expected to need. They could've easily said just one update a month and made you pay extra for more updates. Five is suspiciously close to the recommended number of people in a D&D group.

It may not be something they want to explicitly allow, but I also don't think they're going to be cracking down on it any time soon.
 

I'm not sure that logic is sound. Many of these people would probably not buy their own subscription at all. They'd either only use the character builder when they get to the DM's house (which is another practice I've heard of) or they'd go without. I think very few of these "borrowed" subscriptions represent actual revenue loss.
Yeah, I can only speak for my groups, but I think there are 3 other people I game with, between 2 groups that pay for a DDI subscription besides myself. My subscription covers myself and my wife (and the 4 computers we use between the two of us), and I know that many of the other players share subscriptions. If Wizards didn't pseudo-encourage this with their 5-PCs-per-account-per-update model, those people who are sniping DDI access simply wouldn't use DDI.
 

I only subscribe to DDI once in a while, and only to keep my CB updated. I haven't even bothered to download the Dungeon and Dragon PDFs. It's nice to have the material from the latest books, but I mainly do it to keep up with the errata. It seems to me it would be perfectly reasonable for WotC to go to some online-only model, but that would only be worth it to be if they have some very cheap player-only or CB-only subscription level. The 4e groups I have played in seem quite dependent on the Character Builder, but I don't think this would remain the case if every single player had to have a active subscription (or mooch someone else's) in order to use it. If WotC wants to keep CB being the default, they need to keep cheap options for those with less disposable income (and for ethical cheapskates like myself). I fear they will be lured by the siren song of only worrying about next quarter's income, and end up squeezing an ever shrinking pool of players for every greater outlays of cash to keep playing. (Note this last fear is based not on anything WotC has said or done, but on a general pessimism of the way large corporations operate).
 

2.) As much as people who share their 5 downloads with their group? I hear this practice often, and it robs Wizard of 4 subscriptions.

I think WotC are more concerned about the fact a cracked version of the character builder appears on torrents usually within a couple of weeks of any update they do to it.

Personally while they should be concerned about that, I think they should be far more concerned with keeping the subscribers they already have. The people I've heard cancelling their subscription, are often complaining about the dramatic drop in quality of Dragon/Dungeon, and the fact none of the additional tools in the Adventure Tools section have yet to appear after more than a year.

Then failing to deliver the update for Dark Sun on time just makes you more and more question why you pay a monthly fee. It's seems clear that the subscription fees they collect from D&DI aren't being invested back into the serve. Perhaps they are still paying of the debt for development on the tools that never appeared like the Game Table and Character Visualizer?
 

As a subscriber I would be pissed if they decide to use an online tool for it.

Wizards should combat piracy, not bug their customers.
 




Well, the compendium has been updated, and with a new look. I'm not sure if you could find all these in the previous compendium, but now there's a search for Backgrounds, Deities, Glossary and Traps.
 

Remove ads

Top