Interview with Scott Rouse, Chris Perkins & Bill Slavicsek

[Kid Charlemagne]

That's a non-issue for me.

The same argument could be applied to the D&D printed products.

In my case, the argument doesn't apply, as I use E-Tools with add-on packs for most of my sourcebooks, so that I don't need to bring any books to my game. In fact, I almost never bring any D&D books to games that I run; I rely on the SRD and preprepared stablocks created (mostly) in E-Tools.

 

[Roman]

I think they actually answered quite a lot of questions - ranging from possibility of freelancers to contribute, to the print compilation and lots in between.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Yeegads, they can't win, can they? If they say they don't need input, they're ignoring the fans, but if they ask for input, they don't know what they're doing.

And then people wonder why they're not hanging out around here.

Asking for input and having ideas of their own are not mutually exclusive. Showing at least one of the cards in their hand would have allayed a lot of people's concerns.

As my father likes to say, this ain't rocket surgery.

 

[Ry]

I can't help but feel really disappointed in what I've just read. I was hoping I'd see Wizards coming clean, revealing details, and so forth. Honestly, I was hoping that we could get some straight talk, i.e.:

1) Tell us the details.
or
2) Admit Wizards doesn't have a sufficient plan for what it's doing.

Sounds like the DI is behind schedule, nebulous, and could easily turn out to be a total disaster. And for this, they cancelled my favorite magazines? This is just dumb. If the DI isn't up to snuff, all this anger they've created is going to get rekindled when they try to release it. I am so bummed that I put as much money as I did into Wizards products in the last 2 years. I feel like a sucker.

 

[freyar]

Morrus, thanks for compiling the questions, and also thanks to Scott, Chris, and Bill for taking time to reply.

I was myself a little disappointed in the lack of some specifics in terms of answers, but I'll still tell them some things important to me...

• Make sure various OS can use this. Not just Mac & PC, but Linux too.
• Keep the DRM low. Watermark on PDF is good...
• Before I subscribe, I'd like a preview period. Maybe a week with the DI open to the public for free before subscriptions are required (yeah, I know, not likely ). Or else some kind of limited content that we can browse w/o a subscription. Otherwise, how will I know if I'm interested?
• It sounds like you want to keep the value of the magazines. That's good -- unless it's really spectacular, we won't want to pay a whole lot.
• Once subscriptions are done, we should really be able to keep the content we paid for. That's a must.
• Print compilations will be good!

Thanks again!

 

[Riley]

Thanks for turning up and having something to say, if only a very little. You didn't in any way address the need to eliminate the printed magazines in order to make the online model work, but I understand that you are not allowed to give much if any ground in your official capacities. I'm still very unhappy with the cancellation of the magazines, and I don't see a limited access, DRM-encoded DI with limited permanence or portability to be any kind of replacement for magazines like the 400 or so I've got on my shelves for ready access. Fortunately, Paizo is willing to give me a partial replacement for what you've taken away, even if you aren't.

As for your DI, I want it to be great, and I want it to be something I would want to pay for. I don't care about online character generators or other shiny gadgets. What's important to me is to have pretty, printable articles and adventures with inspiring illustrations. Also, if I'm going to pay for it, I want to be able to keep what I've bought. Any DRM'ing beyond watermarking would be an absolute non-starter. I own five computers, and I'll own new computers in the future. I will not tolerate keys or licenses or any of that nonsense.

So good luck, I wish you the best in winning me as a customer for your new endeavor. Keep coming around to visit, and I'll be glad to hear what you have to say. Or, if you ever get your message board's search function working, I'll be happy to come over to your place to find what, if anything, you've posted.

 

[Ranger REG]

In my case, the argument doesn't apply, as I use E-Tools with add-on packs for most of my sourcebooks, so that I don't need to bring any books to my game. In fact, I almost never bring any D&D books to games that I run; I rely on the SRD and preprepared stablocks created (mostly) in E-Tools.

Yay for you. So, what's better for you is better for me? :\

 

[Joël of the FoS]

I agree. It's one of the big flaws with the magazine format: portability.

Cheers!

And it's one of its greatest quality too - that you are able to read it anywhere, anywhen, without batteries involved

---

The question of multiple point of access by the same account is important, or ease of saving / printing, since not all DMs plays in their own house.

Joël

 

[blargney the second]

Print compilations would be really really good. I hate printing things myself if I can avoid it. (I have a lousy printer.)

 

[Mindseye]

Thanks to Morrus for putting this together.

I'm dissapointed that we waited on this all week. No content whatsoever. To have a decision in the works for over a year and have the announcement made in the manner it was is unbelievable to me.

I want to give their new plans a chance, but I'm having a difficult time thinking it will be any sort of a viable replacement for the print mags for me.