Status of D&D Game Table?

[Charwoman Gene]

Bill Slavicsek's latest D&D Insider column basically says...

"We admit we screwed up and overpromised. We have produced a good character generator. We are now rethinking the rest of the project. All promises are now off."

Digital Insider #20

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I will expect it when I see it. I agree with the earlier poster who said that the GenCon and subsequent videos showed an app that seemed solid;

That what got my hopes up, too. But then... Duke Nukem Forever also had a few screenshots and videos that promised a lot.

Bill Slavicsek's latest D&D Insider column basically says...

"We admit we screwed up and overpromised. We have produced a good character generator. We are now rethinking the rest of the project. All promises are now off."

Digital Insider #20

I am afraid I share this interpretation. I don't like the message, and hope I am wrong, but I think that's the core of it.

Well, at least the character generator gives me hope they can actually get it done, even if not this year.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Then why not fix the REAL problem and make it cross-platform compatible from the start?

Because the reason they gave that it wasn't going to be cross-platform was that they cut development time dramatically by recycling a Direct3D engine that Hasbro owned due to being created for another project. They needed to make some modifications to it, but a 3D engine is not something that is easy to code from scratch. Direct3D is also not porting friendly. Which means they'd pretty much have to start from scratch in order to make it cross-platform friendly.

And when you can save maybe a year of development time and all the money that goes with it, you take it. Especially when the people you lose are such a small percentage of the market.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I will expect it when I see it. I agree with the earlier poster who said that the GenCon and subsequent videos showed an app that seemed solid; the fact we haven't heard anything more about it could simply mean that they've diverted resources to other parts of the insider package.

Yeah, it looked pretty good. The couple of things I've read tell me this:

-One of the GenCon previews mentioned that there would be a dedicated "Game Table" area in the RPGA room at GenCon where WOTC reps would be demoing actual games of 4e using the Game Table for the entire con. It would be 7 computers all around a table specifically for this purpose, but it was mentioned that it would be running only in select slots.

-The Game Table area never appeared at GenCon and they only let people play with the Character Visualizer and Character Creator

-I read one blog where someone asked the WOTC rep at GenCon about where the Game Table was, since he had read the preview. The WOTC rep told him they were allowed to let people look at it if they specifically asked, but they were not supposed to bring it up. The WOTC rep mentioned that it was because a number of the features didn't work yet and there was a lot of things that would cause it to crash, so a rep was supposed to watch someone using it the entire time. He said he tried it out and it was really cool, but after a short while it did crash and the WOTC rep put the character creator back up on the screen.

 

[Lizard]

I think it is really strange how they pimped the Game Table so much early on, and now they never talk about it. I understand they have focused efforts onto some other products... but come on... the Game Table is what people really want.

They showed off a very early version of the Game Table a full year before D&D 4e launched. Even at that very early state it looked like the progress was coming along VERY well. Most of the essentials looked in place. Sure, it was unpolished but I'd say it looked halfway to beta status. Here we are all these months later (how long? 18 months? more?) and they never say so much as a word about it. It's very discouraging.

Do what I did: buy Fantasy Grounds II.

Yeah, well, back around February or March of 2008, I said that if Game Table was in alpha in December of 2007 (which was when it was previewed and claimed to be 'in alpha'), no way was it going to be ready for launch, and Scott Rouse basically did the "Are you saying I'm a liar? You talking to me? I don't see anyone else here, you must be talking to me." routine, so I basically shrugged and said, "Fine, you're the one who sees the code every day, if you say it will be here by May, who am I to say otherwise?" (Well, I'm the guy with 20+ years experience working on complex software projects and who knows Cheops Law, but I wasn't going to bring that up.) And here we are closing on a year later, and it still doesn't look like it will be here any time soon. If it makes it by May -- a year late -- I'd consider that a triumph for WOTC.

I repeat what I said back then: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo. The fact you can "show off" features -- or, as I am beginning to suspect was the case, have them "shown off" to you (management) by your development team -- is no evidence of a product anywhere near to shipping. The distance between "We have the program working for one set of data hard-coded into it so we can show it off" and "We have the program working for all the data it's supposed to work with, including full load/save/edit" is very, very, long.

I do not think Scott -- or anyone at WOTC -- has ever lied about when the software would ship. I think they told the truth as they knew it. Problem is, they have very little experience with software development and did not understand just how much they needed to get done. Hasbro slashing staffing for DDI couldn't have helped matters. (And programmers ALWAYS lie to marketing. GOOD programmers lie by saying it will take longer than they think it will; BAD programmers lie by saying it will take less time than they think it will. The best software companies do not announce a release date until the program has pretty much gone gold. The worst software companies announce release dates before the spec has even been written.)

 

[CharlesRyan]

Bill Slavicsek's latest D&D Insider column basically says...

"We admit we screwed up and overpromised. We have produced a good character generator. We are now rethinking the rest of the project. All promises are now off."

Actually, that's not at all what he said. A more accurate interpretation would be:

"We admit we screwed up and overpromised. We are rethinking the timing on the rest of the project and don't want to make any more promises on release dates."

Specifically, he actually added:

"I look forward to the day when the whole grand plan comes together."​

Reports of the DDI Game Table's death are greatly exaggerated.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Yeah, well, back around February or March of 2008, I said that if Game Table was in alpha in December of 2007 (which was when it was previewed and claimed to be 'in alpha'), no way was it going to be ready for launch, and Scott Rouse basically did the "Are you saying I'm a liar? You talking to me? I don't see anyone else here, you must be talking to me." routine, so I basically shrugged and said, "Fine, you're the one who sees the code every day, if you say it will be here by May, who am I to say otherwise?"

You accused him of lying when he said he had palyed a game on it. He was challenging your assertion that he had played a game on it. The release was not in question.

 

[Lizard]

You accused him of lying when he said he had palyed a game on it. He was challenging your assertion that he had played a game on it. The release was not in question.

If that's how it was interpreted, I must have been unclear, and I am sorry. It was not my intent. My comments were entirely based on the claim it was going to be released in time for the 4e release, which seemed improbable to me based on the "It was at alpha in December" comment. Five months from alpha to release of a networked, 3-d game platform incorporating rules still under development just didn't make sense to me then, and it certainly seems that my instincts were correct.

His statement about playing a game on it seemed, at least to me, to be evidence in support of the larger claim that the program would be good to go by the release of 4e, which struck me as very unlikely. If I was wrong in that interpretation, then I apologize. My experience is that a program can be, or seem, "functional" in a controlled environment and still be a very long way from finished. The ability to use a program to do exactly what the developers have set it up to do, with them watching over you to make sure you only enter the right values and don't do anything "wrong", is not evidence that the program is going to work well in the real world. The fact that the game table "demo reel" we've all seen looked good and complete, but game table is still in limbo with an unannounced new release date, should be proof of that.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

If that's how it was interpreted, I must have been unclear, and I am sorry. It was not my intent. My comments were entirely based on the claim it was going to be released in time for the 4e release, which seemed improbable to me based on the "It was at alpha in December" comment. Five months from alpha to release of a networked, 3-d game platform incorporating rules still under development just didn't make sense to me then, and it certainly seems that my instincts were correct.

His statement about playing a game on it seemed, at least to me, to be evidence in support of the larger claim that the program would be good to go by the release of 4e, which struck me as very unlikely. If I was wrong in that interpretation, then I apologize. My experience is that a program can be, or seem, "functional" in a controlled environment and still be a very long way from finished. The ability to use a program to do exactly what the developers have set it up to do, with them watching over you to make sure you only enter the right values and don't do anything "wrong", is not evidence that the program is going to work well in the real world. The fact that the game table "demo reel" we've all seen looked good and complete, but game table is still in limbo with an unannounced new release date, should be proof of that.

I think Scott probably did misunderstood you - and maybe he had little chance of really understanding you because he lacks this software background.

I totally understand this - it depends on the size of many factors, but it's true - even if you already used a product and did a few (or maybe many) key tasks with it, it is still far from finished. A prototype can seem very powerful, but its foundation can be very weak, it's unstable and certain elements just "appear" to function.

I remember an anecdote from one of my co-workers. His team has taken over the software from an external software firm, and as they investigated it and developed it further, they stumbled upon one piece of code that didn't do anything useful except waste time. It was connected to a button that said "Enhance Image". Having no clue how he should do that, but having found a note that this button HAD to be included in the release, the original programmer added the button and added an eventhandler/actionlistener that would just get the hourglass turning. But the original customer believed the button would work...

 

[D'karr]

I got to play with the game table software at GenCon 2008. It had a lot of features and showed a lot of potential. But it also had many quirks. It was difficult to handle and creating an adventure for it was not very intuitive. It definitely needed more work on it. But that was me working with it with no experience, no manual, and no instructions at all. I also got to see the demo of the game table at DDXP that same year. It had some problems but at that demo the developers where the ones showing off the software and they knew what they were doing. Was it a rigged demo? I doubt it, specially after seeing how it worked at GenCon.