It must be easy, its just a PDF - Forked Thread from What's new with the GSL?

[catsclaw227]

Forked from: What's new with the GSL?

This particular statement irked me the wrong way, and since it was off topic in the original thread, I thought I would fork it.

And while Dragon and Dungeon may be good they are not particularly difficult to implement. They are PDF's.

Have you ever put together a monthly periodical? Sorry, I don't intend to sound like I am passing judgment, but if you haven't, then your opinion about its level of difficulty doesn't carry much weight.

Making a blasé comment and hand-waving it as "not particularly difficult" shows little respect for all the periodical publishers, small press or not that toil each month over this process.

Sure, "saving as PDF" is easy. But designing an appealing and useful layout, writing copy, getting it edited, finding art, coordinating articles, coordinating writers and subcontractors, putting it all together and maintaining some semblance of a consistent editorial calendar is not easy.

Then, consider that instead of a month to have the issue ready, you slow-roll the articles out every other day, making the previous paragraph's list of tasks even more challenging.

Then, in come the interweb fanboys, trolls, normals and lurkers all throwing each word under the microscope. You have the 100's maybe 1000's of people that will nerd-rage almost anything that is published, smearing the writers and artists at any opportunity (but calling them, collectively, WOTC), others bemoaning reused art or how it is different in their campaign and therefore WOTC (writers, artists, editors) is screwing them.

[side note] I'd love to see some of the angry mob, amateur, internet critics sit down in a room with Scott Rouse, Rich Baker, Bill Slavicsek, Chris Youngs, and all the editors, writers, bizdev staff, and others that do all the hard work on our hobby products. I'd love to see if they can criticize like they do online, right there in front of them, with all the hyperbole, all the vitriol, all the nerd-rage that comes with the bravery of being out of range.[/side note]

For many months, Dungeon and Dragon was Paizo's ONLY primary publishing responsibility. With the exception of eventually adding and maintaining an online storefront (a troublesome responsibility as well), publishing Dungeon and Dragon was their company's primary FULL TIME job.

And WOTC has much, much more going on than just Dungeon and Dragon.

Yes, admittedly, there are some additional steps to take the final layout product and get it into print (and the headaches that come along with that), as well as customer service issues (which WOTC has as well), but a huge part of the work is done at that point.

Getting it to the final product is not trivial.

If Eric Mona is reading, I want to ask if Dungeon or Dragon "weren't particularly difficult to implement"? I would ask him if he had any long days, long nights or stressful deadlines that kept him up at night.

Maybe instead of helping my wife, I should just tell her that fixing her dying computer isn't particularly difficult, it's just parts. She should be able to do it without problem.

sorry for the rant ... again, it's not intended to single out Monkey Boy. I've been seeing this kind of attitude a lot lately and it is painfully obvious that some of us have become overly spoiled with really high quality stuff, and it breeds a kind of entitlement that reminds me of whiny, 5 year old adults.

whew..... finally I got that off my chest.... I feel better now.

 

[Jack99]

Dragon is better than it has been in many years, and while Dungeon still has some ways to go, it's steadily improving. Calling them dead makes little sense, IMO.

 

[Kelanen]

I laughed when I read the post you have quoted. Dragon is better than it has been in many years, and while Dungeon still has some ways to go, it's steadily improving. Calling them dead is just plain silly and uninformed. Or good old fashion nerd-rage.

I agree. Dragon is far better now than it has been in a long time. Dungeon is decent but needs some work to get it back to where it was.

 

[El Mahdi]

I agree with the OP on this. The only thing that a pdf format helps with is eliminating printing costs. The actual production of the magazine is unchanged. All of the creative and editorial problems are still there, same as any print magazine, with the exception of not having to include advertisements in your layout decisions.

 

[tomBitonti]

... text omitted ...

For many months, Dungeon and Dragon was Paizo's ONLY primary responsibility, except maybe for their store; i.e. It was their company's FULL TIME job.

... text omitted ...

Probably not quite yet time to feel better. "except maybe for their store" shows the same lack of respect that you claim for the original post. I dare say that running a store is quite a chore.

Respectfully,

tomB

 

[catsclaw227]

Probably not quite yet time to feel better. "except maybe for their store" shows the same lack of respect that you claim for the original post. I dare say that running a store is quite a chore.

Excellent point, and one that I unintentionally misrepresented. I will edit my original post to clarify that the store, while not part of the production Dungeon and Dragon, is still nothing to scoff at. I have been responsible for online stores before, I know what a PITA they can be.

EDIT: FYI, I wasn't minimizing the storefront, stating that it is an easy breeze. I simply clarifying that Dungeon and Dragon were, at one time, the only publishing responsibility they had - and it's a TOUGH job. Not, as stated, "not particularly difficult to implement".

BTW, I don't know when they added the storefront and I don't know when they added their Titanic Games imprint for boardgames.

 

[RodneyThompson]

Perhaps Chris can come in here and correct me if I'm wrong, but creating a PDF for publication here at WotC is pretty much the same as creating a print product, at least up to the point where the book leaves typesetting. The only difference, as far as I know, is that the files that would normally be sent to the printer are, instead, sent to the web team for posting.

Dragon and Dungeon both go through the same process as the books do here, for the most part, and require all of the same steps as any print product, up to the point where the files would normally be sent to the printer (after which point, of course, all the work is being done by the people at the printing house, and not by anyone here at Wizards).

Books still require people to handle shipping, fulfillment, etc. but at that point the design process is completely done.

 

[kenmarable]

Looking back at the post in question in the other thread, I took it to mean that on the technical side, Dragon and Dungeon aren't that much. Monkey Boy was talking about all of the problems with the digital side of things, and as far as the technical side of things go, Dragon and Dungeon appear to be the least technically challenging aspects of DDI.

At least that's my reading of the post and granting a bit of the benefit of the doubt - and something I think is pretty obvious. Looking at the technical challenge, Dragon and Dungeon were the low hanging fruit, and most likely the easiest to implement.

Of course on the Design and Development side, they are (or at least should be) as difficult as any print product. But again, that should also be obvious. Thinking that Monkey Boy's post argues against that sure seems like a misreading when you look at the whole post and not just the one sentence.

So, yeah, compared to the rest of the DDI, Dragon and Dungeon are easy... to code.

Maybe I'm missing the posts by others that have set you (catsclaw227) off, but I certainly don't see all that much hand waving of "Dragon and Dungeon should be so EASY" around here - and especially in Monkey Boy's post. But maybe I'm not reading the right threads.

 

[catsclaw227]

Thanks for the reply Rodney.

Ken, here's what set me off. I admit (after letting my jets cool a bit) that the comment, in it's context, may not have been what was intended.

But the comment was still very minimizing. I don't necessarily agree that Dungeon & Dragon are the easiest products to get right and are the low hanging fruit. It doesn't require the same programming requirements, nor the same processes as a software app, but I wouldn't say it was much "easier". The skill-set is just different.

I am a .NET developer that has done web-based and rich client apps, running over Oracle and SQL Server, built REST and SOAP based web services, and implemented numerous cross-platform SOA applications. For me, the Character Builder would be the low hanging fruit, not the issues of Dungeon or Dragon -- they would be the tough ones. So it's just a matter of perspective.

I have been part of projects that have been completed early, and some that missed deadlines by a longshot. There are a myriad reasons why this happens, but when the product comes out, if it's good, the wait is often worth it.

Ultimately I am frustrated and tired of people hiding behind the anonymity of the web, claiming that this or that should be easy, WOTC must just plain suck, and using terms like "utter fail". I agree that the launch deadlines have been missed badly, but UTTER FAIL? That's just jabbing with the intent to hurt, because it isn't true.

Claiming that Dungeon & Dragon don't count towards the success of DDI is either ignorant or disingenuous. Those who are complaining so loudly oftentimes have never had to manage or execute a similar project in the past.

 

[malraux]

I agree with the OP on this. The only thing that a pdf format helps with is eliminating printing costs. The actual production of the magazine is unchanged. All of the creative and editorial problems are still there, same as any print magazine, with the exception of not having to include advertisements in your layout decisions.

One minor difference is that there's effectively an open review period as each article is posted but before everything gets compiled into the final product.