{DRAGON] Will there be a DRAGON Annual this year?

[Talaysen]

Well, Johnny, it's obvious that you've made up your mind about this and no amount of complaining will bring back the Dragon Annual. I, for one, rather liked the d20 Special, and would have offered support had it not been for the fact that I've made a conscious decision to avoid most of the whining I hear on such subjects.

But let me ask you something. A few months ago you hiked up subscription prices. This, as I recall, was before Paizo took over and certainly before the "No More Annuals" policy was instituted. So - now that you're saving money by not publishing the Annual, how about lowering those prices again so those of us with subscriptions up for renewal don't feel cheated?

 

[Dr. Zauberei]

You know, this thread is a perfect example of what Mr. Wilson is talking about. The rampant negativity of cranky gamer-fans. Wilson isn't the first to lose heart and make business decisions based on an overwhelming flood of negativity that did not necessarily represent the majority opinion.

Some points:

1) A subscription is NOT a contract. And I've subscribed to Dragon long before the Annuals began and NEVER was I promised that the Annuals would continue into perpetuity. When the Annuals were being produced the advertising of course included them. Just like the subscription advertising now mentions the latest free d20 book that comes with a subscription to the magazine.

2) The Annuals were a BONUS. Just like the current offer of receiving a free d20 book is a BONUS. A bonus to promote people buying subscriptions. A bonus that did NOT work out for Dragon Mag. Wilson would be stupid to continue to push something for the mag that was not working.

3) I loved all the Annuals, including the d20 Special. However, they were a bit redundant. They were simply (other than the last one) one more issue of Dragon. Which was cool, but a more worthwhile bonus to me would be something different that what I get every month anyway.

4) I am personally disapointed that the annuals are no longer happening. But to get all ranty and to accuse the Dragon staff of "ripping us off" or being unprofessional, that's just crap. I have never witnessed Wilson or any other staffer showing rude or unprofessional behavior, IMHO (and yes, I've read Wilson's posts in this thread).

5) Someone above whined about Dragon catering to closely to the D&D release of the month implying that Dragon staff is out of touch with readers. While I personally liked all of the tie-in articles, the Dragon staff DOES listen to reader feedback and they ARE moving away from D&D book tie-in articles . . . and have stated so numerous times both online and in the magazine itself!

5) I remain a loyal and happy subscriber to both Dragon and Dungeon and I applaud the staff for making the mags better and better each year. The Dragon staff are gamers, cool guys & gals, professional, listen and respond to POLITE reader feedback, and put out a damn fine magazine.

Sorry (somewhat) for the ranty tone of my own post. But I just get so sick and tired of whiny, cranky gamers shoveling around overly negative opinions formed on lack of information and substance.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Well put Dr. Zauberei.

 

[Ranger REG]

I may show obvious display of negativity toward his business decision to cancel this year's Annual, but I'm not negative to what the magazine department has put out since it was under the Wizards' management last year, and under Paizo Publishing's management this year thus far.

I know there are longtime subscribers to Dragon before the Annual were circulated, and while you may consider them as a bonus, some consider this as part of the sweet deal (in addition to the already low subscription price) to lure new subscribers, that and the free gift like like the Hell in Freeport supplement.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

As I've been saying, I wish the positive commentary held more weight than the negative. The positive vastly outweighs the negative.

 

[Glyfair]

Sorry if this is going to sound harsh, but you gotta ask yourself why you subscribe/read Dragon (or even Dungeon) in the first place:

- to get an annual
- to feel appreciated

I subscribe to alot of magazines, and I don't know when the last time Newsweek, Computer Gaming Monthly, Maxim, FHM, Stuff, Dungeon, Dragon, PC Gamer, Electronic Games Monthly, Playboy, Computer Games Magazine, Official Playstation Magazine, PSM Magazine, Official Xbox Magazine, Newtype USA, Wizard, Premiere, Entertainment Weekly, World War II, Vietnam, Military History "appreciated" me, since I just get them for the info or entertainment value, but I guess I should look forward to that day?

What if you subscribed to Sports Illustrated and they told you that since there were so many complaints about the Swimsuit Special they were cancelling it this year...and not replacing it with another issue? Would you complain because you weren't getting what you paid for, or just live with it?

I think the lesson the publishers at the time should have learned from this is that the d20 market & the Dragon market are not the same. There is at the very least a significant miniority (a very possibly a majority) who have no interest in what was in the d20 Special. Instead of considering that it might have been a mistake to include it as an issue of Dragon (albeit an "annual"), they have decided to be offended at the complaints. They failed to realize that to some subscribers it would be like filling the annual with a special "GURPS" Dragon Special. They had about as much interest.

Personally, I liked the Special. At the same time, I didn't feel it measured up to the previous Annual. There was too much I would never use.

Also, when I subscribed to Dragon Magazine, I subscribed for the 13 issues of Dragon published in a year; the twelve monthly issues and the annual. I didn't look at it as a "premium." It's not something that was only given to subscribers. It was a special issue of Dragon released to the newstands as well as subscribers.

I don't mind they decided to cancel it. If it was a purely monetary decision, that would be mostly fine with me (i.e. I would be disappointed not to recieve it). However, it seems to have had some other motives involved, and that I'm somewhat offended by. I'm particulary offended at the POV that I would be out-of-line to expect something that was advertised as being part of the subscription offer when I subscribed.

David A. Blizzard

 

[Falcon]

I will continue to subscribe to Dragon and Dungeon. I know that not every issue will have 100% that I can use, and quite, frankly, that is fine with me, because I can leaf through all the issues now and then and get some great ideas that I hadn't come acprss in my first reading of the issue. I don't expect a Masterwork of Civilization in every issue, and every business needs to make economic adjustments, especially now.

Welcome to the world of business, folks. What bothers me is that most of what people do in this industry is a labor of love, and that they get crapped in general, it seems, if it isn't exactly what you (out of how many gamers???) wanted. If you don't like it, move on, if you do like it, keep subscribing and let the publishers know that you like what they are doing.

I thought the discussed annual was interesting, if not entirely useful, because I got exposure to the panorama of d20 goodies out there right now.

And I am with Colonel Hardisson on this one. Positive reinforcement and feedback gets you a lot farther than whining.

 

[Ranger REG]

Here's for positive reinforcement: I love what you guys did for Annuals #1 to #5, so please continue to make more of that same format?

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Well, while I'm all for positive reinforcement, my main point is that it seems that positive reinforcement should bear more weight than the negative, especially when the positive clearly outweighs the negative. That is, negative comments get noticed by publishers (actually, by just about anyone who posts) seemingly much more than positive comments. Or at least that's how it seems to me.

 

[Talaysen]

I'm sorry. I'm having trouble giving anything resembling "positive reinforcement" here. See, for me, it all comes down to the numbers. I was paying $34.95 for thirteen issues a year. I am now expected to pay $37.95 for twelve issues a year. Heck, at this point, I might be willing to accept another slight price increase if that's what it takes to get back to thirteen issues, but if I wanted something that was more expensive but less filling, I'd go to a trendy restaurant.