• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Liz Schuh on Dragon/Dungeon moving to the web

I just got another email:

Milton Griepp said:
FYI, we recently added a "note from the interviewer" to that article, since some people have apparently mis-understood one of our questions. You may want to take another look.
Milton

I think ICv2 ought to be congratulated on their quick response time and transparency on this issue.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

billd91 said:
And probably lost a lot of data in the process. I have Dragon Magazines that are over 20 years old that I can easily get to (whether or not they are boarded and bagged). What are the odds of being able to easily access DI stuff 20 years afterwards? If the other computer media and files I've that long are any indication... low.

I have Commodore 64 games well over 20 years old. They worked fine on the C-64 20th anniversary in 2002, despite being on rather fragile 5.25" floppies and being subjected to Florida wet heat, Colorado dry heat and cold, and years of storage. I admit, I haven't hooked up my C-64 in a couple of years, but as of the last time I did ('05, I think?), I actually hadn't lost one game.

I have word processor files that are going on 20 years old - I didn't have a word processor until the late '80s and my first x86 IBM-compatible, so I doubt they're quite that long-lived yet. They've survived transitions across a half dozen computers (to say nothing of innumerable backup disks, and later backup CDs). The last time I referenced one? January of this year. Needless to say, it worked fine and is still compatible with MS Word.

billd91 said:
WotC can make whatever choices it wants when it comes to the services it wants to provide but there are trade-offs they are making. Sure, the DI will be easy to access for people over a wide geographical area who have access to the internet, which implies a variety of other criteria as well. But a significant number of these factors are also pretty much necessary to ensure continuing access to the materials, even when already paid for.

Barring the near-total collapse of the industrialized world (in which case I, for one, expect to have considerably graver concerns than whether my D&D collection is safe), people who have computers now are unlikely not to have them in the future for more than a brief span.

Even if, by some imponderable chance, a substantive portion of the world's population lost access to computers but still had time and security enough to engage in 4-8 hour liesure activities, you could always have printed the material out and likely still paid less for it.

billd91 said:
Gaining access to the print media may also have requirements (knowing they exist and having contact information to get a sub or finding a reliable sales outlet being primary), but the bar is significantly lowered to have continuing access to the information. All I have to do is take reasonable care of it and I have the information as long as the paper survives. WotC may not ultimately care about that from a business model point of view since, once we buy the information, it's ours to deal with (one hopes). But as a consumer and long-time player of D&D, it is a concern I have and informs my preferences for format.

Me, too.

I've lost access to probably MILLIONS of printed words over the years because I didn't have the storage space for hundreds of books and magazines. I've lost maybe a hundred thousand digital words over the years because I was lazy about backing up my computers.

If you're speaking as a COLLECTOR, I can understand your objections and even sympathise with them. Insofar as magazine collections have value (and to be fair, a quick glance at ebay indicates they do), the Digital Initiative is a bad way to go. Insofar as having access to the materials for gaming purposes, however - I'm not seeing it, at all.
 

Mark Hope said:
Speculation it may be, but it's not unfounded or irrelevant. I used to be a journalist and I can tell you that this kind of thing happens all the time.

Of course, we have no way of knowing that you were ever actually a journalist, or even that your real name is Mark Hope.

Ain't the internet great? :\
 

wingsandsword said:
No, but when the original reason for listing the number of visitors to the site was to gauge the customer base for the DI, Magic players and random web visitors like those who follow a link on the hasbro main site really aren't likely customers of the D&D Digital Initiative.

I wanted to comment on these numbers a bit.

If 10% of the visitors to the site are actual, unique D&D customers...

... and only 10% of them sign up for the Digital Initiative...

... then DI would STILL have more subscribers than Dungeon and Dragon COMBINED, even with just 1% of the total recorded traffic to Wizards' site.
 

I think that this issue illustrates why it is difficult for WotC to give answers that satisfy a lot of people. If WotC can get suspected of calling fans "luddites" just because some interviewer said something about that in a question to them ...

... then of course they will wash their responses clean of every scrap of feeling, passion, enthusiasm, and just deliver the corp speak. Otherwise, someone will hang them out to dry for a misplaced comma.

/M
 

Biohazard said:
Of course, we have no way of knowing that you were ever actually a journalist, or even that your real name is Mark Hope.

Ain't the internet great? :\
Curses! My nefarious fraudulence is foiled again!!

:lol:
 

MojoGM said:
I've said it before, MANY of those who are so against this will be signing up with the rest of us when they finally announce what you get and what is the cost per month.

I suspect you may be right concerning people who were merely upset about the loss of the magazines and the way the announcement was handled. As I said, my response isn't emotional, it's preferential. I subscribed to Dungeon because I liked the content AND the format. I enjoyed getting a monthly gaming magazine. I'm not interested in downloading website updates in its place. I've seen no evidence that people who stated that position have begun to change their minds. I suspect most won't.
 

Maggan said:
I think that this issue illustrates why it is difficult for WotC to give answers that satisfy a lot of people. If WotC can get suspected of calling fans "luddites" just because some interviewer said something about that in a question to them ...

... then of course they will wash their responses clean of every scrap of feeling, passion, enthusiasm, and just deliver the corp speak. Otherwise, someone will hang them out to dry for a misplaced comma.

/M

QFT. And I, for one, don't blame them. I guess people here have forgotten that Russ had to go way, way out of his way to get a response from the WotC folks at all, that vile litte threats were sent to them by denizens of the 'net, and that, quite rightly, they don't want to be savaged in a public forum.
 

CharlesRyan said:
So let's set aside speculation over the honesty of this interview and whether or not this poster or that is a conspiracy theorist, and get back to the regularly-scheduled speculation over WotC's next move.

Agreed.

Folks, please note that overly-aggressive response to the industry has the general effect of making them disinclined to speak to us. Just a short while ago they were getting slammed for not giving the public enough information. Now, as they try to use various outlets for information, they get slammed again. If we make it so clear that there is no way to please us, then they will stop trying.

Please - be polite, be respectful, and apply the Golden Rule.
 
Last edited:

Insulting people immediately after a moderator warning is not usually a good course of action.

~ Piratecat
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top