Scoop: Dungeon/Polyhedron Changes

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Definitely sounds like a positive move so far!

 

[NiTessine]

There is great coolness in this scoop.

It occurs to me that ten years from now, the few issues with the subscriber section will be collectibles. Hmm...

 

[Alchemist]

There was a subscriber-only section? I thought I was getting the same think the people buying it off the stand were getting.

So what all have I received then? I was completely unaware of this advantage I have/had...

 

[KenM]

My only concern is if the removal of subscriber content is going to result in less content for me (a subscriber) or in more content for those who purchase the magazine in the store.

People that buy Dungeon in a store will now get the same magazine that subsribers get. They have been putting in "subscriber only adventures", this made alot of people that did not subscribe mad that they were not getting the whole magazine. This is a good change, now that they are getting rid of subscriber only stuff.

 

[diaglo]

it is a step in the right direction.

still a long way to go.

get rid of Poly.

 

[Vaxalon]

I will be buying only those issues that contain minigames, or minigame content that connects with minigames I like.

In the end, I think this will be a good thing, because I won't be spending as much money for what I want.

 

[nikolai]

Fantastic, this is all a step in the right direction.

Dungeon changes...
2. Poly now in back. The "flipped" format caused more trouble than it was worth. Trust me on this one. The Poly cover will still appear in the interior of the magazine, and all pages will face the right side up.

This is the best of the lot as the flipped format was just horrid. On an similar note: is there any good reason for the 2 magazines in one gimmick? Is it just there for historical reasons? Why not scrap it totally, the "poly" content can be kept (as they seem determined to do), but they should concentrate on putting a single unified magazine together. The whole doubling up, 2 front pages etc. thing just seems silly.

nikolai.

 

[Vaxalon]

Personally, I liked the "Flipped" format. I only used the Poly content, and I could keep them Poly-side-up.

As for the "two magazines in one" format, that's because neither of them would be as successful on their own.

 

[Sanackranib]

I have always liked dungeon mag. now maby there will be more stuff I can use in it

 

[nikolai]

Personally, I liked the "Flipped" format. I only used the Poly content, and I could keep them Poly-side-up.

As for the "two magazines in one" format, that's because neither of them would be as successful on their own.

Sorry, I didn't express myself as clearly as I should have.

At the moment there are two facets to the mag. Dungeon (adventures) and Poly (minigames etc.) and this happened because they merged two originally seperate magazines together. Hence the flipped gimmick, two covers, etc.

Now - given that Poly content is included in the mag - is there any sensible reason for the split sides? Isn't is just there because there used to be two magazines? Does it serve any useful purpose? Shouldn't they just publish a normal magazine without the split, and integrate the "Poly" content with the "Dungeon" content in a single package. The "split" presentation seems to me to be a silly presentational gimmick.

nikolai.