Liz Schuh on Dragon/Dungeon moving to the web

[Mistwell]

I read the interview, same as you. WotC is a large firm, a professional firm. I contend that they know and are responsible for their interviews. Please do not assume that my opinion is informed by not having read the interview in question. I certainly would not imply that yours isn't.

Jim was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you couldn't possibly mean the thing that you do in fact now seem to be saying.

You are actually blamming WOTC for the content of the interviewers questions. And your reasoning is that you think, without any evidence at all to support this beyond your own personal speculation based on a CBC report about some news reports on television, that the questions asked of WOTC were fed to the interviewer by WOTC.

I think that's nuts.

 

[Mistwell]

Why would you contend that?

Someone asks a question, they respond as best they can. It's not like WotC gets approval over what an interviewer asks. I'd have a much bigger problem with that than with one boneheaded interview question.

Is WotC really so insane in your book that they would bother to criticize those who aren't onboard with their new thing?



Well, they've said they're still very dedicated to print products. And that releasing a compendium of the "best of the web" or something is likely in the works alongside this.

So, really, what they're saying is "Instead of getting $4 out of you for a handful of usable pages every month, we're going to collect $35 from you for a library of useful material that has been very popular every year."

So the answer to the question of "Why not both?" is "Why would you want both? Between the DI and our print stuff, Paizo'd have a bit of a tough sell with their product. We'd much rather part ways with them amicably and give them a chance to do their own thing than drive them out of business."

All they had to do was give that answer, or any responsive answer. Instead, the question that was asked was not actually answered. And the person answering even starts by acknowledging that it's a good question. If it's such a good question, doesn't it deserve an answer that actually responds to what is being asked in the question?

 

[Twowolves]

I wish the interview had gone this way:

Q: Why are the two channels mutually exclusive--why couldn't you do both?

A: That's a good question. We really just feel at this point that the Web is a better delivery system than a printed magazine.

Q: I'm sorry, maybe I wasn't clear in my question. I'll try again. Why couldn't you do both?

A: We really just feel at this point that the Web is a better delivery system than a printed magazine.

Q: Yes, I understand that you think one delivery system is superior to the other, but that doesn't address the question of why you couldn't do both rather than just the one you think is a better delivery system.

A: <crickets>

You forgot A: "We're really excited about our future products!!"

 

[Twowolves]

You are actually blamming WOTC for the content of the interviewers questions. And your reasoning is that you think, without any evidence at all to support this beyond your own personal speculation based on a CBC report about some news reports on television, that the questions asked of WOTC were fed to the interviewer by WOTC.

I think that's nuts.

I can't speak for CB, but if nothing else, the InterviewEE should have addressed the intentional snub. I realize the interviewER is working for a website/online magazine him/herself, but letting this person take a backhanded slight to your intended customer base go unchallenged is not good.

 

[Black_Swan]

My magazines can go to work (for lunch break), on the bus, or in the bathroom with relative ease. Not so even a laptop. This isn't the best possible business decision, IMHO, but time will tell.
RC

blackberry's, cell phones, and other hand held devices can go where ever you go. If the DI accomidates those types of devices then you will be able to take it with you.

I think that the benefits of having an online repository of information out-weigh the benefits of having shelves full of magazines or in boxes. That's just my opinion tho..and I let my subsription to Dragon lapse a long time ago.

Then again..I haven't read up on all the benefits of the DI so I can't be 100% sure but if they have even the most basic functions...such as a search feature, linking between articles, and the ability to print then this will be a huge success and worth the money.

 

[freebfrost]

I realize the interviewER is working for a website/online magazine him/herself, but letting this person take a backhanded slight to your intended customer base go unchallenged is not good.

An excellent point.

And it's been a while Twowolves, so let me commend you on the very nice avatar.

 

[I'm A Banana]

All they had to do was give that answer, or any responsive answer. Instead, the question that was asked was not actually answered. And the person answering even starts by acknowledging that it's a good question. If it's such a good question, doesn't it deserve an answer that actually responds to what is being asked in the question?

You're right. The corporate double-speak is a bit maddening, especially because we don't know much of any substance.

I think they were caught not really expecting the question, so they didn't have a good answer, though. They might not be as good at thinking on their feet or at spin control...they might not also know.

I'm kind of assuming that what I posted is similar to the reason they opted out of it. Also, the excitement is something of a reason...if they're really pumped about what they can do online, they might not be really able to see why people wouldn't be pumped about it, and so why people who could wouldn't jump onto the DI.

 

[Mark CMG]

I think I feel closer to Twowolves than freebfrost, avatarily speaking.

so i'm a luddite b/c i don't do pdfs.

wow. i guess the 15 message boards/bulletin boards/ newsgroups / discussion lists/ etc... i belong(ed) to don't count for me keeping on top of the times.

Chalk and slate doesn't count, Flintstone.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

So you blame WotC for a statement the interviewer made? That's...well, let's say it makes no sense at all.

At this point, all I'm left with to say is that you and I arrived at fairly different conclusions as to the motive behind and method of dissemination of the interview in question. I've no idea which of our opinions on the matter is correct but I can certainly agree to disagree with you (or you, Mistwell) as to the why of the interview. I hope you'll extend that courtesy to me without jumping to conclusions as to the "sanity" of my opinion.

That said, I leave you all to your discussion.

 

[Mark CMG]

That said, I leave you all to your discussion.

Good question? I'm really excited about the future of this thread?