Interview with Scott Rouse, Chris Perkins & Bill Slavicsek

Morrus said:
1) Specific previews will be coming before Dragon/Dungeon end - i.e. in the next few months.

I look at this and have a hard time considering it news. It seems obvious that they'd preview their new product before the last issue of the old. Almost as obvious as having something concrete to show when announcing said new product and cancellation...

Morrus said:
2) The decision was made more than a year ago.

This is new info, and makes me very nervous. They had a year to prepare this announcement and this was the best they could come up with?! We're in for a bumpy ride folks...

Morrus said:
3) Content has not yet been decided.

See above answer.

Morrus said:
4) Some Dragon/Dungeon features and columns will continue.

Again, seems like a no-brainer and not really news.

Morrus said:
5) Accounts will be user based; payment options without credit cards will be available; content will be "previewable" before purchase.

Maybe it's just because I'm a credit card slinging American, but not having a credit card to pay for your online purchases seems ludicrous. As far as it being previewable, this is something that again seems like a no-brainer. I'm not going to whip out said credit card without having an idea of what I'll be getting.

Morrus said:
6) Content will be released in frequent small bursts and then collected together.

Definite news.

Morrus said:
7) DRAGON and DUNGEON, as brands, will continue to exist; implication being that this doesn't replace the magazines, it's the evolution of them.


News, but I doubt that anyone thought they would dump titles with the name recognition of Dungeon and Dragon.

Morrus said:
8) Hardcopy compilation is a part of the plan.

Again, seems like a no-brainer. Paizo had been doing this with their hardcovers already.

Morrus said:
9) Freelancers will still be used.

This is nice, but not something that I'd imagine the majority of Dungeon/Dragon readers was worried about.

Morrus said:
10) There is some suggestion that the Dragonlance issue isn't as clear cut as Margaret Weiss portrayed it.


News, but not really related to the issue at hand, IMO.

Please understand that I appreciate your efforts to have these questions answered. I'm just dissapointed with the information that was actually provided.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad

Thanks everyone

First Post. :)

I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read. I appreciate the comments and suggestions.
 

Christoph the Magus said:
I
Maybe it's just because I'm a credit card slinging American, but not having a credit card to pay for your online purchases seems ludicrous. As far as it being previewable, this is something that again seems like a no-brainer. I'm not going to whip out said credit card without having an idea of what I'll be getting.

I don't think it's anything to do with your nationality, and a lot more to do with 14 year-old D&D players. I was playing at 10 years old, and I sure as hell didn't have a credit card for another 8 years!
 

Christoph the Magus said:
Please understand that I appreciate your efforts to have these questions answered. I'm just dissapointed with the information that was actually provided.

Being disappointed with the answer is not the same as the questions not being answered.

We know more than we did before. Their responses contained some real substance.
 

Vigilance said:
Being disappointed with the answer is not the same as the questions not being answered.

We know more than we did before. Their responses contained some real substance.


We'll have to agree to disagree, because substance is the last thing that I would attribute to the responses.
 

Mouseferatu said:
How about at least some acknowledgment that the people who are trying to answer our questions, to the best of their ability, have their hands tied by people higher up in the company? How about at least some acknowledgment that WotC isn't a faceless, monolothic entity, and that the real people who are being insulted and denegrated across the Internet are fellow gamers, fans of D&D, writers and developers, most of whom had no say in this decision at all?

To answer your question, I DID thank Chris, Bill and Scott for their answers, so there is acknowledgment.

Further, I think there is a paradox in what you're saying from my point of view because INDEED, I do believe that Chris, Bill and Scott are trying to manage this situation despite having their hands tied, but I do also believe that this is BECAUSE of this type of situation that INDEED WotC is a perceived as faceless, monolithic entity.
 
Last edited:

Scott_Rouse said:
First Post. :)

I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read. I appreciate the comments and suggestions.

And thanks for coming into the lions' den, so to speak. When folks in the industry come to fan-sites, it gives everyone (well, most everyone) a happy feeling to that we are appreciated and being listened to.

Later
silver
 

When Wotc says it's going to include something or even suggest it's looking at including something in a product, and then doesn't include it, people get upset. Not "you killed my childhood" upset, but unhappy enough to talk about how WotC "lied" to them and suggest the product is not worthy buying.

I've seen this before. This is one of the big reasons we authors often don't say much about our books until they're in print. Even if the book is written, developed and edited, something may get cut at the last moment for all sorts of reasons. I've had whole sections cut from books days before it gets printed because layout didn't quite manage to squeeze it in, or another book turned out to be a better match for the information, or a license changed, or a late playtest report discovered a serious problem, or a piece of art failed to arrive in useable condition, or someone came up with a better idea at the last moment, or because it turned out to overlap or contradict information from another book in production I never got to see. So I try not to talk about what's going to be in any book until I at least have a preview.

Now, the DI isn't a book, but there are certainly lots and lots of reasons why anything in it might change in the half-year between now and when it goes online. Even if WotC is waaay ahead of schedule developing it, they might change their mind about any one factor. So if they give you any solid details at all, they're forcing themselves to either stick with an idea even if they think of something better or risk further disappointment and anger by taking away something they mention then change.

Because this isn't a book, there just isn't as pressing a need for lead-time. You don't need to know if you're going to pay for this now. Retailers don't need to decide to carry it. WotC doesn't need to convince the book trade to pre-order a few thousand. In fact, WotC doesn't need to "print" them at all, so they have even more time to get it ready than Paizo does Pathfinder. Ultimately, WotC only needs to have everything in place 1 hour before their go-live deadline.

Paizo, however, does need all that lead time. In fact, they needed it before THIS WEEK so they could present what they needed at the GAMA Trade Show. They need to be able to explain what Pathfinder is, and why a retailer might want it. They need to convince people to use leftover subscription money to buy Pathfinder, and find out how many the book trade is going to want. They need time to deal with customers who are losing something Paizo has been selling them. Paizo -has- to be ready starting now. From a practical standpoint, WotC just doesn't.

WotC extended the license to Paizo would be able to finish their existing adventure path. Obviously Paizo has known about this for some time, but no one is upset they waited until the last possible moment to tell us -- the week before GAMA. The fact Paizo had a lot of details isn't a sign of corporate incompetence or some hidden agenda on WotC's part. It's a sign WotC wanted to let Paizo do everything they needed to for this transition to go easily for Paizo, even though WotC isn't ready to reveal details yet. The chance of two companies having all their ducks in a row on two separate projects at the same time is really low. So WotC let the announcement go out now, when Paizo needed it.

If people want WotC to have not said anything until they were ready to give us details, they're likely wishing WotC had made life very difficult for Paizo. I, for one, am glad they didn't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Scott_Rouse said:
First Post. :)

I just want to say thanks for all the responses so far. I am only at about 50 into the thread and so far but so far it's been a great read. I appreciate the comments and suggestions.


Thanks for the responses, Scott.

And please feel free to come by as soon as you *can* say more so that we can have another Q&A with you to get all the details.
 

Morrus said:
I don't think it's anything to do with your nationality, and a lot more to do with 14 year-old D&D players. I was playing at 10 years old, and I sure as hell didn't have a credit card for another 8 years!

That's a good point. At 31, the net obviously wasn't around when I started playing at 14, but I remember bugging my mom enough that she got me a subscription to Dragon. I'd imagine that the same things still happens now, not to mention prepaid debit cards are pretty common.
 

Remove ads

Top