Magazine Survey from WotC

[Ryujin]

I put in a bid to have at least one comic strip, just like the print magazine used to have.

"I'm Bored Flak, the magic user, and I rarely miss at this range."

 

[Zaukrie]

You know, I've seen a lot of these complaints of late, and I'm not so sure I agree with them. My biggest issues, quality wise, have been the lack of editing of some specific content (usually fixed in the compilations). But in terms of genuinely good articles, there actually has been (at least in my opinion) an improvement in recent months.

The major weakness is the lack of any game-changers that really knock it out of the part, of which there were a decent number early on. (Domains of Dread, Codex of Betrayal, the Gladiator articles, etc.) That said, some of the recent stuff has come close - the Ecology of the Scarecrow article in November was absolutely fantastic.

Overall, the article in the last few months have had a great focus on flavor and most of the discussion of seen on the actual articles is pretty positive. But I keep seeing comments about how weak the overall quality of the magazines has become, and I'm wondering what is the actual cause. Even the adventures seem to improving - the most recent one, Lord of the White Field, seems to have been exactly what people have been asking for.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with anyone who is concerned about the quality of the magazines. But my suggestion would be that specifics might be more useful. Simply saying one is upset over the quality doesn't much help - why do people feel the quality is lacking, and what about these recent articles is actually a problem?

Edit: And, just to clarify, I wasn't specifically objecting to the above post (which actually does a good job of listing specific concerns, including ones that I tend to agree with!) but more the general 'lack of quality' comments that seem to be showing up everywhere of late.

I actually agree that the quality is up the last couple of months (in the crunch articles having fluff again), but the quantity (and quality of the adventures in particular) is way down. Also, does Schwalb write every other article? I love his work, but there are thousands of gamers out there, there must be more good ideas and articles just waiting to be found and published (and Dramm, I obviously want more of your work).

 

[fanboy2000]

I feel a strange pull, an odd desire to read this thread. Hmmmm...

I certainly hope you're able to read this from the H. M. S. Fanboy.

Ah! I see I have been summoned.

1. Fanboys are a lot happy lot. It's nice to be happy.

2. Fanboys, like everyone else, pay for what they want and don't pay for they don't want. It's just that we're happier with a wider range of stuff.

3. A fanboy's fun is linked to what happens at the table, not what some corporation sells me. The books, the software, and everything else is just topping.

4. Fanboyism is like reverse trolling, But it's better than regular trolling better because no one bans you for saying a company is awesome.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Note that the following is not based on an actual page count, but simply on how the development feels like:

Old:
A class acts article was 10 pages, with 2 pages fluff and 8 pages game rules

Change to shorter article length:
Shorter but more article meant that a class acts article was 5 pages with 1 page of fluff and four pages of game rules. But we now got twice as many class acts per month

Recent development:
Class acts are still 5 pages, but now they consist of 4 pages of fluff and only one page of game rules and also we get less of them


The old ratio meant that when there was an article about your class, you had a good chance to like/use at least one of the many new rule items that were included. With the new ratio you can look really forward for the upcomming class acts about your class and after reading 4 pages about history of Nerath or whatever you see two lonely feats none of which happen to be of interest to you. Sure, the nothing of interest for you could have happened before too, but with 4 powers and 5 feats it was just more likely to find at least one thing amog them to add to your character

This is a nice example for why you sometimes only ask the current subscribers and not just lapsed or potential.

If you ended your subscription 6 months ago, you might not know the current format. You couldn't say whether you like what is currently in the magazine, since you have not seen it yourself.

Maybe someone left beause he wants more fluff and finds all the powers and feats useless. The description above from Mirtek might hit exactly what he wants (while clearly not that great for Mirtek ). But if you ask him now, he could only answer "More fluff, less rules". By which WotC would have to consider that you actually want rules-less articles. But that might be wrong, the magazine as it is might be perfect to you, but you just don'
t know.

Without knowing the baseline of what you actually critisize or evaluate, feedback can be misinterpreted.

 

[Wednesday Boy]

On the poll: I told them I'm a regular reader, but as I read them from the same website, I don't see the necessity for 2 magazines. That said, I told them some of their articles were rather dry and a few were beginning to be just plain bad.

That's just what I told them too. Accessing it through the website means I never pay attention to whether it's a Dragon or a Dungeon article. (And that I haven't been wowed by articles lately.)

 

[Drammattex]

I actually agree that the quality is up the last couple of months (in the crunch articles having fluff again), but the quantity (and quality of the adventures in particular) is way down. Also, does Schwalb write every other article? I love his work, but there are thousands of gamers out there, there must be more good ideas and articles just waiting to be found and published (and Dramm, I obviously want more of your work).

I think Rob sold his soul to the devil in exchange for the ability to write like the wind. It's also his job-job, whereas I am a menial 9-5'er.

Ever since my boss pointed out that I can check every web site I read in Google Reader from my Gmail (effectively streamlining my non-work work activities--he's a smart guy), I've just been clicking those to check my sites. Thus, I usually only realize whether something's in Dragon or Dungeon in hindsight (and told the survey that). I guess I wouldn't mind if it was all one big thing--it wouldn't make a difference to me in the way I read it.

 

[Aegeri]

I feel a strange pull, an odd desire to read this thread. Hmmmm...

Everyone just has to keep picking on you.

 

[Scribble]

For my part I put:

I would like to see them keep doing pdfs. I like the landscape format.

I would also like to see them do ipad format (although in the comments I noted by choosing this I was using it as a catchall for just wanting various formats, like ipad, kindle, android, nook, etc...)


No interest in print on demand, since I can already do that. (Although if they meant non subscribers could print on demand articles at will that would be cool.)


I indicated that I print articles by article, and never as a whole compiled issue.

I also indicated that I didn't mind the dragon/dungeon layout, but it didn't really effect me much, since I never print out the articles as a whole magazine.

As such, it really only seems like a categorizing element on a web page- and if there was a better way to do it, go for it.


For content I can't remember if I choose DM tips or Background material as most important... Both are important to me, but I think I ended up choosing background material.


I took it the other day- so I can't remember much more detail.

 

[Solvarn]

Good points

I feel a strange pull, an odd desire to read this thread. Hmmmm...

Ah! I see I have been summoned.

1. Fanboys are a lot happy lot. It's nice to be happy.

2. Fanboys, like everyone else, pay for what they want and don't pay for they don't want. It's just that we're happier with a wider range of stuff.

3. A fanboy's fun is linked to what happens at the table, not what some corporation sells me. The books, the software, and everything else is just topping.

4. Fanboyism is like reverse trolling, But it's better than regular trolling better because no one bans you for saying a company is awesome.

You are totally right. I shouldn't be letting my dissatisfaction with current offerings drag other people down. I also shouldn't be criticizing other people because they are satisfied. I have voted with my dollar, so to speak.

I just wish that projects were managed at a higher standard. I have discretionary income that I would gladly be giving to WotC if they would provide the services I want.

At the end of the day though, as you pointed out, I just need to have my fun at the table. For the first time in awhile, I've had a mechanical pencil in the bag with my dice. It's different, and I'm using paper sheets, but I'm not having any less fun. And the books are still done well.

Thanks for the well reasoned rebuttal.

 

[Sunseeker]

That's just what I told them too. Accessing it through the website means I never pay attention to whether it's a Dragon or a Dungeon article. (And that I haven't been wowed by articles lately.)

Exactly. Unless it's printed, it is, for all intents and purposes, the same magazine to me.

I certainly hope you're able to read this from the H. M. S. Fanboy.

I disagree with the entire premise of your statement. There are plenty of people out there that would pay even more than current subscription prices for a more functional character builder (or one that is as functional as the one we had three months ago) and quality online publishing.

The last CB was more functional and people were barely willing to pay for it at all. With this at least I challenge you to say that people will pay more for more. The average customer, no matter how good the deal they're given, will always demand more for less. The new CB could have been twice as good as the old one, and people would still complain it is too expensive.

If people are truly willing to pay more for better quality content or software, then they need to TELL Wizards that, instead of only telling them they want more for less.

There are ways to make these things happen, but they require talent, vision, and an ability to outsource work to talented people that don't need to be concerned that after you fix it they will steal it right back (here's looking at you Paizo). In theory I'd love to work at Wizards of the Coast, but as I'm sure the people soon to be laid off this month can attest, winters are stressful at WotC and it's just not my scene.

I will continue to assert that outsourcing is NOT NECESSARY. Winters are cold at any business. Profits slow down towards Christmas and then explode at the last moment. Many, MANY companies are laying people off, not just Wizards. So I can hardly fault them for wanting to make do with what they have, isntead of taking a risk on someone else.

IMO, Wizards would do well to take the EA approach, find someone who is good at making software, and bring them in-house. The amount of control you have on your product when it's kept in-house is massive compared to when you outsource it.