Liz Schuh on Dragon/Dungeon moving to the web

[pawsplay]

Saw this interview on the ICV2 website from Liz Schuh, Wizards of the Coast Brand Director for Dungeons and Dragons Publishing :

http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/10496.html

One thing stands out to me from the interviewer:



5 or 10? I think the interviewer sadly underestimates those who prefer reading in print, and they all aren't "Luddites." Preferring to read things in print doesn't mean you are against electronic options. Certainly not a question coming from an unbiased interviewer.

I read irony in the question.

 

[Mark CMG]

I read irony in the question.

There's room for someone to believe the interviewer was baiting the spokesperson, as well.

 

[Twowolves]

An excellent point.

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

So THAT'S where my other wolf got off to!

 

[Twowolves]

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 can pay $8 and have my Dungeon magazne with me camping in the mountains. AND I don't have to pay hundreds of dollars for a piece of electronics that is required to access my magazine. And I don't have to pay for a monthly service just to have the privelege of having access to something I have already bought, and that's a big IF there will be access at all to the DI once a paid subscription runs out.

 

[Jim Hague]

There's room for someone to believe the interviewer was baiting the spokesperson, as well.

Or, maybe hopping on the anti-WotC bandwagon in an effort to be hipper-than-thou? Who knows, really? I mean, it's an asinine question, but ascribing some grand conspiracy to it is just plain silly.

As I said - I'm not happy with WotC's decision to part ways with Paizo and can the magazines, which are assuredly a part of gaming culture and have been for decades, but tacking this kind of Illuminati-esque attitude onto them is just ridiculous. Making unsupported statements about vast media conspiracies implies that WotC would even want to do such a thing, which is highly unlikely. Again, apply Occam's Razor here - the simplest answer, likely that the interviewer was posturing for their allegedly tech-savvy audience - is the most likely to be true.

So yeah, I agree with you on this, Mark; the interviewer was baiting. I leave the discovery of conspiratorial nonsense and media manipulation to those with apprently much stronger psychic abilities than my own.

 

[Vigilance]

The question that still comes back to me is why not both. I will accept the numbers they give and even concede that the DI is a promising business venture. What I don't understand yet is why they have to cancel the magazines to do this. It seems like given thier numbers there should be enough room for both, and even more room because I bet there would be a bunch of overlap customers willing to pay for both.

I think competing with a licensee (Paizo) is bad business and would be a bad idea for Wizards, but mostly for the licensee.

So they could bring the magazine back in house and run it in addition to the web content, but Wizards has shown absolutely no desire to be in the magazine business.

So they wouldn't want to compete with a licensee, and they don't want to be in the magazine business themselves.

That's my guess.

 

[Agamon]

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.

I'll go a step or two further. I do sometimes do PDFs. I also run an online virtual tabletop game. But I'm still a Ludite for wanting my mags in print...

 

[Piratecat]

Gang, a pre-emptive comment: please don't turn this into a discussion about the definition of "luddite." It's not the purpose of the thread, someone is bound to get offended, and is doesn't particularly matter.

Thanks.

 

[Dark Psion]

Some of her responses just don't make sense to me.

We really see it an evolution of delivery system more than anything.

Dragon magazine is delivered to my mailbox, it is delivered to magazine racks, bookstores and game stores every month.

The internet is not delivered anywhere. I have to choose go to the site.

EnWorld does not come to me, I go to it, and then I have to click on the message boards, choose the thread and then participate. If I did not know EnWorld existed, I could not play there.

There are a lot more eyeballs on the Web. We look at our own Website, and we have over 13 million unique visitors in a year. That's a lot of eyeballs; that's a pretty powerful way to reach people.

Yes, but you're preaching to the choir. How many kids got their first exposure to D&D just by "seeing" a Dragon magazine on a magazine rack or borrowing one from a friend? For D&D to continue to exist, new gamers have to be introduced to the game, but most of those hits on the WotC website are already gamers.

Once again, the internet is a personal experience. The only other eyeballs on my screen is the person looking over my shoulder. A magazine can be seen by anyone anywhere. I read mine at work while eating lunch, others have mentioned reading while traveling. Gaming is a shared experience between people.

In many ways the Internet is an Illusion, created by carefully arranged mirrors called servers. But there are many ways this illusion can fail; viruses, hackers, and power outages. Plus in my household, this illusion can only be seen in one room. If I walk to the kitchen, the illusion is lost.

Is there going to be a specific Dragon or Dungeon area of the site, or is it just going to be part of the umbrella Website?

We're still working out a lot of the details of the plan, but yes, it's a very good chance that you'll see specific areas of the site that have familiar content.

It does not matter what content is on the site to those who cannot see it.

I work at a True Value Hardware store and recently one of my bosses wanted to add a high dollar line of paint. She wanted to tap into the home decorating market, but I advised against it. Why? Because people who buy $50 cans of paint don't shop at the "feed store". You can't sell to a customer who never walks in your door. And having that $50 can sends a message to other customers that you may not want them to come to you any more.

Two weeks ago, they had people vote on what the Oklahoma state quarter would look like, but there was a problem. The voting was on the internet and it is estimated 80% of Oklahoma is not online. Most by choice and some in the western parts because there is no service. I know people who don't have a TV in their home, you really think they have the internet? And I know many parents who restrict or prevent their kids from having access to the internet, but would have no problem with them playing D&D and subscribing to Dragon or Dungeon.

Does WotC not want these people to play D&D anymore?

I'm sure there are probably five or 10 people out there who are Luddites who prefer the portability or the experience of reading a print rather than on the Web, what do you say to them?

I think it's important to note that we're not moving away from printed product at Wizards. That is going to remain the bedrock of our business, it always has been, and it always will be. We're going to put out lots and lots of printed products. For people who prefer ink on paper, they'll always have a wide variety of choices.

First, there is money. Laptops cost money, cell phones cost money and printing out web content costs money. For a majoity of people it is not that they don't want to embrace new technologies, they just can't afford to. And I would add, if I had an emergency right now, the internet would be the first thing to go. But a magazine subscription would continue as it is already paid for and is not contingent on another pay-to-use service.

Second, a magazine is real. I can hold in my hands. I can share it with others. Right now I can reach up and grab any Dragon from #89 to #355 and read it. I am not dependant on any other technology to access it. I can read them in a power outage or an electrical storm. And the magazine does not become unreadable after a few years. Remember all those free pdfs that Drive thru RPG used to give away? When I tried to access them recently, I found that I could not, the DRM had locked me out of them. I don't know why and I don't have the expertise or time to try to undo it. But if I had payed for them, then I would have been a little pissed.

And Third, we are not talking about WotC books, of course they are going to keep publishing, Duh!

What we do not understand is why Dragon & Dungeon have to die to create this web initiative. It's apples and oranges to most of us, Dogs and cats, ....well no it is not.

It is Dogs and Goldfish.

One can go anywhere with you and do a lot of things together with you.

The other you just sit a watch in one room of your house.*

*Additional fish cost extra.

 

[Glyfair]

What I don't get is that up until the DI, the refrain was that regular Internet users accounted for a very small percentage of players. Now it's so huge?

The numbers before were justifying a cautious approach to entering the electronic market. Now they are trying to justify a jump into that market, at the expense of the print market. Statistics can imply what you want them to imply if you have enough data and imagination. We know a roleplaying game company doesn't really lack for imagination

I read irony in the question.

Also bad policy in an interview, unless 100% clear as irony, especially one that is supposed to serve as PR for the initiative (ICV2 is a series of publications aimed at retailers). Then again, I feel the first question is pretty poorly worded from a professional point of view (for example, I don't want to hear a question from WotC, I want answers).