Liz Schuh on Dragon/Dungeon moving to the web

[Raven Crowking]

One is better for what I want. Insofar as Dungeon and Dragon are useful to me, and online content offers me none of the elements that I want. I don't think I am alone in this. I also think that the predictions for the success of the DI are vastly overblown, and WotC will bitterly regret eliminating the print version of their magazines.

I don't know that I believe WotC will "bitterly regret" eliminating the print versions of the mags, but otherwise I pretty much agree with Storm Raven.

Somebody, help me!

 

[Storm Raven]

I don't know that I believe WotC will "bitterly regret" eliminating the print versions of the mags, but otherwise I pretty much agree with Storm Raven.

Somebody, help me!

It's about time you realized that I am always right.

 

[Raven Crowking]

It's about time you realized that I am always right.

Hey....I've actually agreed with you a lot lately. Weird feeling.

And I do appreciate your arguments when you use reason (as opposed to courtroom bamboozlement and obfustication).

 

[Ghendar]

Yes. And we also have to look at why the successful are successful, and what alternatives there are, and so on so forth. Just pointing at the rack saying "hundreds of mags indicates WotC is wrong" is not really useful as an observation.

I don't believe I ever used the words "hundreds of mags indicates WotC is wrong." My point was that WotC may in fact be misguided about comments made like the one by Rouse where he said "people tend to go online for this content." It certainly wouldn't be the first time a corporation made the wrong decision, but I guess time will tell whether this decision is right or wrong.

If we want to compare Dragon and Dungeon to every other magazine out there, then why not also look at those closest to it in terms of content? If we are to use the existence of other magazines to try to figure out something about Dragon and Dungeon, I think it also follows that we look at other gaming magazines that are successful and not.

You can look at them sure I just don't know what useful data that will yield. The only longterm gaming mag I know of that might even be comparable to Dragon in terms of longevity, reader base, and quality might be White Dwarf, not some fly by night mag that limped along for 13 issues and then died.

There is a lot of noise on the internet about people wanting paper magazines, but when they are offered them, they just don't buy them. The general vote is against paper rpg magazines, as the many, many, many failed efforts is evidence of.

It is once again a question of us as a community (not us as individuals) saying one thing ("we want paper rpg magazines") and then doing something else (ie, not buying the ones that are offered).

I agree.
There is a lot of say one thing and do another going on. The one thing that irritates me is those completionists who feel the need to buy everything WotC releases regardless because, well, they are completionists. I'm not citicizing those folks (I was one of them a couple years ago until I realized that I had a shelf full of books that never got used.) but to blindly buy everything send the wrong message to the company. It sends the message that they can release any old thing and people will still buy it. But I guess that's a discussion for another thread.

Sure, Dragon and Dungeon are different. But that is also why I think it is problematic to point at a rack of general magazines saying "these guys believe in print, so WotC should too". We as a collective have shown the industry again and again that we don't want paper rpg magazines.

/M

Then how do you explain how Dragon has remained in print (minus the six month blip when WotC took over) for 30 some odd years? Or that Dungeon has also remained in print since 1987?
No, this isn't about WotC not believing in paper mags, it's all about mazimizing profit and the e-model is the way to do that.

 

[Ghendar]

Paizo might be the ones to break this pattern, but they're up for a hell of a fight.


/M

I also think they have an uphill battle before them but what works in their favor is their reputation they have built up over the last few years on Dragon and Dungeon. That will help them tremendously, I think.
Will it translate into success? Stay tuned. <shrug>

 

[Ghendar]

One is better for what I want. Insofar as Dungeon and Dragon are useful to me, and online content offers me none of the elements that I want. I don't think I am alone in this. I also think that the predictions for the success of the DI are vastly overblown, and WotC will bitterly regret eliminating the print version of their magazines.

No, you most certainly are not alone, but us dinosaurs are now SOL.

On the other hand, if the DI fails, paper mags might just come back. Both are huge "ifs" though.

 

[Maggan]

Then how do you explain how Dragon has remained in print (minus the six month blip when WotC took over) for 30 some odd years? Or that Dungeon has also remained in print since 1987?

Because they contain official D&D material. And we want more D&D material. The people who want all official stuff buys them, and since D&D is so big, that's always been at least a minimum base of readers to sell to. So Dragon and Dungeon might very well have existed that long because a certain percentage of D&D players want a complete collection.

Let's put it another way. What's most important for the purchasers of Dragon and Dungeon?

It's not reading about other rpgs. Why can we say that? Because no one bought the other mags that had that content.

It's not reading about d20 system rules. Why can we say that? Because no one bought the other mags that had that content.

It's not reading reviews of d20 stuff. Why can we say that? Because no one bought the other mags that had that content.

Is it the paper format? I don't think so. Why? Because I believe that if WotC had pulled the official stamp of approval from Dragon and Dungeon, and they would have published the same rules under the d20 license, those magazines would have gone bust, paper or no paper format.

It's down to the magazines being the containers of official D&D stuff.

And if magazines are such a great thing, why don't we have more magazines on the market? Why can't the gaming community support more than two magazines, which only covers one game?

Why have everyone failed with every magazine except Dragon and Dungeon?

Because magazines aren't that hot with gamers. Unless there's D&D stuff in them, in which case they are lukewarm, a shadow of their former selves.

I still love the magazines, it's just that I've seen the complexities of trying to get gamers to buy rpg magazines first hand, and all the comments from industry people I've read or heard confirm it. Gamers don't buy magazines.

Of course, the rebuttal to that is "I do!", but I'm not speaking about individuals. Evidence points to 15 000 subscribing to Dragon, so of course there are gamers that do buy Dragon. But I don't think they'd keep on buying if it weren't official D&D, even if the same rules were package in the same paper format. And if 15 000 people are buying it every month, then a couple of million aren't.

Please note that I don't think that the DI will skyrocket and pull in millions of subscribers. I do think it was a bad move for WotC to cancel the mags, and I would have liked them to come up with a strategy that kept the mags after launching the DI.

It's just that I have worked in the industry since 1989, and rpg magazines have been a pain to sell for as long as I can remember.

/M

 

[Raven Crowking]

Because they contain official D&D material. And we want more D&D material.

I don't give two figs if material is official or not. I only care that material is usable and inspirational. I think EN World Gamer was a great value (I have the complete run) and I buy both Dungeon & Dragon (admittedly, more Dungeon than Dragon).

Where do I fit in?

 

[Ourph]

Let's put it another way. What's most important for the purchasers of Dragon and Dungeon?

It's down to the magazines being the containers of official D&D stuff.

Two points...

First, Dungeon didn't contain "official" rules, it was a medium for adventures and GM advice. So it's a stretch to claim that the magazine's popularity and continued existence had anything to do with containing "official" content.

Second, Dragon and Dungeon were at their most popular when all content in them other than published errata and Sage Advice was considered unofficial. Again, it's a stretch to link popularity with "officiality" in light of that fact.

 

[Maggan]

Where do I fit in?

Over there in the corner. Just next to the guy with the OD&D box clutched to his chest.

No, I don't know where you fit in, I don't know enough about you to pin-point you as an individual. It sounds from your description that you belong to a minority group of gamers, in respect to your purchasing habits re magazines.

Is that so surprising?

If EN World Gamer would have been a smash hit with a huge following, it would still be around, wouldn't it?

/M