Unhappy about the VT Announcement.

[Bagpuss]

Exactly including fluff, and adventure and counters with the Monster Vault means that when (if) they are added to the Monster Builder the product still has value.

 

[Bagpuss]

Which in short means you think he was
a) lying
b) mistaken
c) inept

d) They change their plans to revisit the VT.

I kind of think the priorities have changed, for what reason I don't know. Perhaps they have a very good reason.

It doesn't in anyway assume that the Campaign Builder isn't under production. It kind of hints that they may be announcing that soon too.

The team is very small we have seen they struggle to keep updates and meet deadlines with just the projects we know about, and you think there is two or three more projects going on as well?

 

[DEFCON 1]

The team is very small we have seen they struggle to keep updates and meet deadlines with just the projects we know about, and you think there is two or three more projects going on as well?

Do you know how small the team is? And do you know how many projects they can work on at one time? You might be guessing that they can't do more than one or two things at the time... but I imagine you don't know.

So to get all up in arms about things you have no idea about is a waste of time and energy on your part. Of course, you're welcome to waste it all you want... just like we're welcome to point that fact out to you.

 

[mysticknight232]

(cross-posted from Wizards boards)

Sorry but I'm not happy that yet again more resources are going to be wasted on a Virtual Table. Perhaps Wizards of the Coast have a really short memory, it's clear as a company they don't learn from their mistakes.

It was only April last year that the results of the D&DI survey were announced. Unfortunately those results appear to have since been removed from wizards site, but thanks to the power of the Internet I can quote them for you here.



In response to that WotC_Trevor said...



They got as far as Monsters, and we got the Monster builder.... and eventually abandoned it in a half-working state. Now we've learned after doing that, they went back and redesigned the Character Builder (into a half-working state) so it could be online to protect their IP better. After that they've gone back to the VT, the VT that was 5th on the desires of subscribers and 4th on the wants of non-subscribers.

The only thing that has changed since that survey is that now there are multiple VT's available both for free and for one off payments, which have been getting better and better.

Where the heck is the encounter builder, map builder, and other campaign management tools they said they would focus on, because we said it was what we wanted?

Don't waste resources on the VT until you can actually get the stuff we want working.

Doesn't it stand to reason that they could be tackling #1 & #5 with their version of the VTT? #1 says manage adventures and the like. Perhaps their version fo the VTT will not only do this but will also allow players to play via the interwebs.

I for one am excited by all the stuff they're doing for us. The CB isn't perfect, in fact there's a lot missing. But in 2 weeks or a month we'll have something new to complain about anyway. In 6 months, we'll all be complaining about how much the VTT doesn't have and in 9 months, 25% of subcribers will be using it in the weekly games. In 12 months, it'll be 50%.

My point is, we don't really know the inner workings of WotC, just what they show us. We rarely praise them for what they do so I for one am offering WotC praise for all the hard work they've done to make this game fun for us over the last 30+ years. I expect more out of the, but I know in time, they will give us the best gaming experiance ever. Either that or they will be out of business and I'm not putting any money on that wager.

 

[Bagpuss]

Do you know how small the team is?

Six people, until very recently now seven and not all of them programmers.

And do you know how many projects they can work on at one time? You might be guessing that they can't do more than one or two things at the time... but I imagine you don't know.

Each person can only do one thing at any one time. As to how many projects they could have running concurrently they could have 20 but you can be certain if they do those projects won't get the same amount of attention than if they had say four.

 

[nerfherder]

Six people, until very recently now seven and not all of them programmers.

Each person can only do one thing at any one time. As to how many projects they could have running concurrently they could have 20 but you can be certain if they do those projects won't get the same amount of attention than if they had say four.

Also, parallel development can introduce configuration management overheads. For example, say you have multiple projects that utilise the same database. You have to control changes that you make to the database structure so that at some point you can apply all the changes to all the project code. It's easier to control this when one project follows the other than it is with projects whose deployments into different environments overlap (it is normal to have a minimum of 3 environments - development, test and production; you often have many more. Each environment needs to have the code and database configured for the particular product release).

In one way, it's a good sign that the VTT does not currently integrate with the CB. They can continue developing the other parts of the VTT while the CB becomes more stable and less likely to change, then work on the integration.

 

[malraux]

Do you know how small the team is? And do you know how many projects they can work on at one time? You might be guessing that they can't do more than one or two things at the time... but I imagine you don't know.

So to get all up in arms about things you have no idea about is a waste of time and energy on your part. Of course, you're welcome to waste it all you want... just like we're welcome to point that fact out to you.

The dev team has said repeatedly that at best they can only doing one thing at a time.

 

[Sunseeker]

Some people are never happy.

Look into almost all the posts preceeding the release of the Online CB, what do people want? Most of them wanted a VTT.

What did Wizards give? A VTT.

Now what do people want? Something else.

I think I'm beginning to detect a trend.

 

[malraux]

Some people are never happy.

Look into almost all the posts preceeding the release of the Online CB, what do people want? Most of them wanted a VTT.

What did Wizards give? A VTT.

Now what do people want? Something else.

I think I'm beginning to detect a trend.

Look at the actual survey data. A VTT is one of the least wanted things. Now I agree that the people who wanted a VTT were very vocal, but choosing to ignore reasonable data in favor of anecdotes isn't solid methodology.

FWIW, I've always felt that a WotC VTT was a bad idea.

 

[fanboy2000]

Wait, you think it's a mistake to sell something over half your current subscriber base wanted 18 months ago?

67% is nothing to sneeze at!