Sell the fluff, pimp the crunch

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don't think this is viable or a reasonable expectation.

Could they vet things and check for errors better before publication? Yes. Could they prevent all needed errata? Hell no. I just don't see that as possible given the multitudes of permutations possible. Until those permutations are revealed, they have no feasible way of identifying them before publication. Therefore to maintain a balanced game, errata is inevitable. And I, for one, welcome that... I just don't want to have to pay for it in the form of redundant books.

But if all crunch is digital, then it ceases to be a problem.

A much smaller gaming company called Task Force Games had a solution for this long before the Internet: nearly every product they released for Star Fleet Battles included errata for previous products. And every once in a while, they'd release a book containing both the accumulated errata and the latest revisions to the game.

It wasn't as fast as what DDI lets WotC do, but waiting a month wasn't so bad. Besides, the they took a LOT of care making sure they didn't have a lot of errata to deal with: a typical release contained fewer than 2 digest-sized pages of corrections.

 

[Quickleaf]

I don't think this is viable or a reasonable expectation.

Considering how PHB has 22 pages of errata and HotFL has 1 page errata I see nothing unreasonable about it. WotC made more of a design effort to polish the content in HotFL. That's a good thing, but that's something I hope they'd endeavor for from the get go. For example, Green Ronin's recent Dragon Age rpg has 1 page of errata (and consensus is that it's a well designed game). And they're a smaller company to boot.

 

[Gronin]

<SNIP>

So how does WotC make money? Some people might not care about this, but to me, the continued vibrancy of the hobby depends on WotC's survival and D&D being a profitable venture. At some point, people have to realise this or we will all lose out in the long run.

<SNIP>

It seems to me, then, that selling fluff books and pimping the crunch through DDI is the perfect solution for everyone, including us as consumers. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that Dungeon & Dragon magazines should no longer be PDF's and solely be presented as web pages. I'd even go further and say that they should be presented as web pages that can't be copied or printed.

<SNIP>QUOTE]

To the first point quoted .... I'm not so sure that the end of WOTC would mean the end of D & D. In fact I would be willing to bet that someone would pick up the slack. It has happened with other games (Battletech, Shadowrun and Earthdawn are all still around and FASA shut there doors in 2001).

And to the second point --- I am already irritated that I can't download Dragon and Dungeon as a complete PDF if it got to the point where I had to go online in order to read it that would be the end of DDI for me. If I can download them then I have bought them --- if I have to go online then they are rentals and more importantly they can be taken away from me. It may sound a little paranoid but my trust for WORC doesn't extend all that far.

 

[Kzach]

Considering how PHB has 22 pages of errata and HotFL has 1 page errata I see nothing unreasonable about it. WotC made more of a design effort to polish the content in HotFL.

PHB was the first book out, HotFL is recent, of course it's going to conflict with less and have less errata. It's an evolving game. The designers are trying to make everything work with everything. It's not an easy task and you can't foresee everything, therefore errata is inevitable.

Green Ronin as an example is a poor one because it has 1/100th the material to make compatible with it. In fact, the fact that it has a page of errata is possibly a really bad thing given that if you put them both on a fair and even scale, comparing time from publication to amount of additional material the system has to be compatible with, it possibly represents more errata than the PHB.

Comparing D&D to any other system is comparing apples to oranges. Even the playing field before any comparison is made.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The sheer amount of text may be a reason to have mistakes, but it's no excuse. How many lines of code go into a MMORPG? How many pages are there in the US gov't's annual budget?

Mistakes get made, to be sure, but all that means is that someone needs to take a reasonable amount of time to proofread it. With live eyes, not just editing software spelling/grammar checkers.

In lawmaking, it also means analyzing what changes were made and why, and what are the most likely effects (intended and unintended) In gaming, the process should include playtesting.

One of the big complaints leveled at Kevin Sembieda by those who used to work with him is that he didn't do much proofreading or playtesting. And RIFTS is a huuuuuge system. And that lack shows.

Do you really want to give WotC license to slack on the pre-release end because they can "clean it up in post?"

I certainly don't.

Take too little time exercising your due diligence and it will come back to bite you in the ass.

 

[Quickleaf]

Green Ronin as an example is a poor one because it has 1/100th the material to make compatible with it. In fact, the fact that it has a page of errata is possibly a really bad thing given that if you put them both on a fair and even scale, comparing time from publication to amount of additional material the system has to be compatible with, it possibly represents more errata than the PHB.

And 1/100th of the staff too. The point was about level of care and, as [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] points out, due diligence.

Anyhow, the points you raise about the troubles facing publishers today are spot on. I just disagree with your assessment about the nature and handling of errata (and about piracy too it seems! ).

 

[Echohawk]

Not to derail this or beat a dead horse, but not everyone has internet access fast enough to DDI. We all do, or we would not be posting here so much, but not everyone does.

WOTC needs to think of those people who absolutely cannot do things online only.

I don't think it makes terribly much business sense for WotC to worry too much about customers who do not have fast enough Internet access to use DDI.

And I say that as some who lives in rural Africa, and who is dependent on dodgy wireless access to connect to the Internet. I can only (sometimes) get fast enough Internet access to use DDI comfortably, if I sit on a chair balanced on top of a table at the end of the drive. (It now strikes me that this post really needs pictures...)

Obviously, I'd personally prefer it if WotC did worry about customers like me, but I'm pragmatic enough to realise that if you are in the content distribution business, assuming that the vast majority of your customers do have high speed Internet access all the time, is increasingly a sensible business decision.

 

[delericho]

I don't think this is viable or a reasonable expectation.

Could they vet things and check for errors better before publication? Yes. Could they prevent all needed errata? Hell no.

It's not reasonable to expect them to eliminate all errata, but it is reasonable to expect them to reduce needed errata to a minimum, and WotC haven't been doing that. They haven't even reduced it to the minimum possible given the available resources.

Three methods by which they could reduce the amount of errata. Note that two of these would be simple, and wouldn't require any additional resources:

1) Do a better job editing before publication. This requires either hiring better editors or (more likely) just giving them more time to actually do their jobs. Some more playtesting effort would also help. Of course, all of this is expensive.

2) Errata, don't revise. A lot of what WotC are doing isn't the fixing of errors, it's actual changes to the game. Magic Missile is the most obvious example of this. The thing is, when you revise something, you potentially then have to errata the revision, you may well have to revise a whole bunch of other things to match, you have to revisit the errata to anything that was changed to balance with the old version, and you may well have to errata a bunch of new things to balance with the new version.

Cut the revisions, and a whole bunch of changes just disappear.

3) Adopt a policy that you won't errata something twice in quick succession. If you find you've errata'd something and it's still not right, either live with it, or remove it from the game until you can fix it properly. Otherwise you're liable to find yourself constantly tinkering with it, never getting it quite right, and issuing minor errata to the same area every month.

(Of course, if something new comes out six months down the line and breaks it again, it's reasonable to have to fix it again. Hence my saying "in quick succession".)

 

[Gronin]

IWhat does everyone say about DDI? Get a month of it, download everything, then quit it.

And that is on WOTC for setting it up that way. I wouldn't think it would be all that difficult to set permissions such that you only have access to files that were uploaded after your DDi join date.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I don't think it makes terribly much business sense for WotC to worry too much about customers who do not have fast enough Internet access to use DDI.

You are correct, and the same also applies to those who cannot use electronic payment methods...unless & until they are considered to be a goodly portion of the markets you're trying to get a foothold in.

Or to put it differently, as a brand manager, you have to ask yourself: what is the expected growth potential of D&D in the USA (where the hobby has a 40 year history)? Now, what is the expected growth potential of D&D in the developing world (where the game may not yet exist in the native tongue of tue local populace)?

While developing nations are adopting the Internet at a furious pace, books and electronic formats that don't depend on an Internet connection are still going to be more convenient.

And I say that as some who lives in rural Africa, and who is dependent on dodgy wireless access to connect to the Internet. I can only (sometimes) get fast enough Internet access to use DDI comfortably, if I sit on a chair balanced on top of a table at the end of the drive. (It now strikes me that this post really needs pictures...)

Yes, yes it does.

3) Adopt a policy that you won't errata something twice in quick succession. If you find you've errata'd something and it's still not right, either live with it, or remove it from the game until you can fix it properly. Otherwise you're liable to find yourself constantly tinkering with it, never getting it quite right, and issuing minor errata to the same area every month.

A.K.A., George Lucas Syndrome.