Why did you stop subscribing to DDI?

[Arlough]

I dont think supporting all editions would be problematic or "unreasonable". If they have a stable and working database that can pull these things from, and the VTT ever gets finished, then pulling things from that database could allow ANY edition to play in it with at least existing support.

No new material would need to be added, just the database updated with existing material.

<snip>

All that would be needed is a data entry person to fill in those databases with the material and use the existing compendium for the most part with slight changes per edition, to support older editions. Nothing new really need be created for them, as so much already exists.

From a technical standpoint, I agree. It would not be that difficult, technically. From a business standpoint I can't see a strong case being made for them to do so.
I did have quite a bit of reasoning why typed up, but then I realized that I was getting way off topic, so I went to start a new thread. But that is when my battery decided to die, and I lost all that work and am too tired at the moment to summon it forth again.
But, I do find this topic interesting. If you feel like you can make a strong business case of it, then please start a thread and put a link in here to it so we can discuss.

But I am going to posit that, for this discussion, we assume that WotC is going to stick with 4.x exclusively, until 5.0 comes out.

P.S. If this comes out hostile or garbled at all, please forgive me. I am falling asleep at the keyboard and really need to go go bed.
Goodnight all.

 

[the Jester]

...and it makes us all really good as basic addition.

Sadly, my experience has been that this is not at all true.

 

[the Jester]

I dont think supporting all editions would be problematic or "unreasonable". If they have a stable and working database that can pull these things from, and the VTT ever gets finished, then pulling things from that database could allow ANY edition to play in it with at least existing support.

Why on earth would they put the effort into making out-of-print editions usable databases?

Can you imagine how many man-hours it would take to enter up all the 2nd edition versions of spells, then go back and do it all again for the 1st edition version and then do it AGAIN for the 3rd edition version- and AGAIN for the 3.5?

Even just converting existing online info is a ridiculous amount of work for something that doesn't promise even moderate returns.

The whole clamoring for support for all editions is, imho, completely unrealistic. One of the big lessons WotC learned from TSR's failure was not to try to support multiple versions of the same game. That said, it would be cool.

 

[Abstruse]

I stopped because I was no longer running an ongoing campaign. The tools were the main reason I subscribed. The articles from Dragon and Dungeon aren't worth the subscription on their own. I haven't used it since long before the change to online-only tools, but even if I get my campaign started in two weeks like I plan, I'm probably not going to bother because of all the bad things I've heard. Plus I've had serious problems with billing when I canceled and Wizard's Customer Service was useless to help, so I'm not even going to bother signing up just for a month to give it a try because it's not worth the hassle to me.

 

[shadzar]

P.S. If this comes out hostile or garbled

Not in the least, at least not to me. Tired also, would not be good for me to try to start a thread on it tonight either.

Why on earth would they put the effort into making out-of-print editions usable databases?

Can you imagine how many man-hours it would take to enter up all the 2nd edition versions of spells, then go back and do it all again for the 1st edition version and then do it AGAIN for the 3rd edition version- and AGAIN for the 3.5?

Even just converting existing online info is a ridiculous amount of work for something that doesn't promise even moderate returns.

The whole clamoring for support for all editions is, imho, completely unrealistic. One of the big lessons WotC learned from TSR's failure was not to try to support multiple versions of the same game. That said, it would be cool.

I would assume since they made 3rd edition and the SRD/OGL, they have most of that they could copy and paste from the EPS files for anything made after 2000 and before 4th edition. It would have been foolish to destroy that because copying some description for later use isn't that big a deal.

2nd edition AD&D was a large part already typed up from the books, so again a copy and paste from that work.

1st edition start with the 2nd edition spells, then alter them to follow the proper format. So here would be a bit of work.

Rules Cyclopedia shouold cover enough of older D&D editions, Not sure what was used or if acutal files are in WotC or HASBRO possession, but something must exist that oculd be copied and pasted. If not being black and white, scanning in and OCR wouldn't be too hard. Was that ever for sale in PDF format? That would mean a PDF to copy and paste from.

I am not talking all material in existence, as that isn't what it takes to support. Technically if rules are turned off for the VTT, it will support older editions as well as other games, but not enough to make mass amounts of people to flood to DDi for it.

Here is a server, here is older D&D with its databases, let's not let it crash and be down and POOF support for older editions and a reason for users of them to have a DDi account. With the retro-clone movement it woudl go a logn way for WotC to get some money from that jsut by having a seat at the table to offer up something for those players.

TSR didnt have the advantage of the internet as exists now to tap the potential of supporting multiple editions. Maybe whet the whistle of older edition players if someone feels like it and add a new accessory every once in a while like a group of monster from a module or something. Still nothing new has to be made to support older editions as the plethora of plethora material exists enough for people to join.

Remember the stated goal of GLEEMAX! was to have a place for all gamers. Well that failed miserably, do DDi took over to focus on D&D, but it is missing a chance to get money form people of older editions by not offering anything for them.

While securely locked onto the WotC servers, well as secure as the 4th edition material is; this will also give them control over it to "stop the piracy", and be able to generate revenue for a database that just sits there and is checked for performance issues.

In the short run the costs will be there, but at $10 per month or whatever the costs would dwindle if done smart to get the information form the places that require the least work to input into a database, or even have the database populate itself with a script to read the existing formats so a human doesn't have to copy and paste each thing.

How much money are they making now on older editions? How much does $10 a month form those players generate?

Money in LARGE amounts was wasted on GLEEMAX!, but older editions databases are not something that nobody has any idea what is, not is it something people didn't ask for. They jsut have to decide the best way to get the database built and filled, and decide if they are looking for quick return or if slow return is ok.

Think once the VTT comes out, if it connects to a database to help show things; what advantage it would have to recapture older edition customers, if they could import things from an older edition database to play the game.

We know the VTT is actually coming sometime in the next 10 years. We know MANY people have DDI accounts for the Rules Compendium and/or Character builder. So if 4th edition players have DDi accounts still for just Rules Compendium and the hope of a VTT, What is to say older edition players wouldn't do the same if the edition in questions had a Rules Compendium?

 

[Abstruse]

Here's a question...if they're not using a collected format anymore, why the hell are they still releasing Dragon and Dungeon articles in PDF format?! It'd be EASIER to edit if it was a regular website. Stat block for a monster change? Swap out that particular image and leave the rest of the article alone. Get the wrong DC for a check? It'd take literally less than a minute to edit and have that edit go live. Worried about piracy? Hell of a lot more work to pirate a website than it is to just click on the "Save" icon and throw on a file sharing site.

All it does is slow down or occasionally crash my web browser by introducing Adobe's memory sink on top of Firefox's memory sink. Saving the articles to read offline (does anyone actually do this aside from the collected issues?) doesn't come into play with broadband and mobile browsing being so prevalent. Also, ever tried to read a PDF document on an iPhone? Pain in the ass is an understatement.

And I'm not sure why they think that the collected issues WOULDN'T be downloaded less. An article's up, I'm going to view it in the web browser. I want to look at it again a few days later, I'm going to view it in the browser again. That's two downloads. However, I'm only going to download each collected issue one time since it's a much larger file that fits lovingly in a directory on my hard drive next to character portrait images I've stolen off the web and various character sheets.

The more I think about it, the more I'm not sure if I should be mad at Wizards for being so stupid with so many obviously intelligent people working there, or feel sorry for them because the execs at Hasbro have no idea how to market a product for an audience with the age range that D&D has (Youngest player I've ever seen was 11 and the oldest was in his 60s or 70s) but keep sticking their fingers in telling them what to do.

 

[El Mahdi]

The whole clamoring for support for all editions is, imho, completely unrealistic. One of the big lessons WotC learned from TSR's failure was not to try to support multiple versions of the same game. That said, it would be cool.

A large part of TSR's failure (along with just horrible administration) was trying to support the publishing of multiple versions of the game. That also involved the development of new products for multiple versions of the game. Development and publishing are the most significant expenses involved with a product line. Both of these factors are not present in DDI support of previous editions.

Once the initial compilations and development is done (the data bases created), with the exception of a bit more server space, nothing really changes from what they have now. Maintenance of the system would not be significantly increased by the addition of extra data-sets, but the amount of subscribers could double (or more).

A simple fact is that there are as many (or more) potential customers (players of other editions or game systems that used to purchase D&D products) that don't play 4E or buy any current D&D products. The only way to get these people to pay for a DDI sub is to offer material they will use. And, as has been talked to death, a DDI subscription is a perpetual source of income that has the potential to make magnitudes more profit than print products. They may call Essentials an "evergreen" product, but WotC's true evergreen product is DDI.

DDI subscriptions are always going to be only a percentage of players. Even if the site and material was perfect, it's never going to get everyone who plays as subscribers. A large portion of players will simply share subscriptions, or feel they just wouldn't use it enough to be worthwhile, or any other number of reasons - even if the applications were perfect. Improvement to DDI will get some of these 4E players to come back, and could likely net a few who didn't previously subscribe, but for the biggest potential increase in subscribers they have to look to players of other editions. To get those players, they have to offer support for other editions. Nothing else will draw them in.

WotC is the only entity capable of effectively tapping that customer base, and it's a very large untapped pool of potential customers.

 

[Arlough]

...<snip>
Now, asking WotC to support all editions of D&D is a little unreasonable...

I dont think supporting all editions would be problematic or "unreasonable"...

From a technical standpoint, I agree...

Why on earth would they put the effort into making out-of-print editions usable databases?...

I would assume since they made 3rd edition and the SRD/OGL...

A large part of TSR's failure (along with just horrible administration) was trying to support the publishing of multiple versions of the game...

I have moved this discussion to the thread Discussion on the feasability of WotC supporting all editions in DDI where we can continue this facinating conversation without derailing this thread.
Thanks

 

[Dausuul]

I would assume since they made 3rd edition and the SRD/OGL, they have most of that they could copy and paste from the EPS files for anything made after 2000 and before 4th edition. It would have been foolish to destroy that because copying some description for later use isn't that big a deal.

2nd edition AD&D was a large part already typed up from the books, so again a copy and paste from that work.

1st edition start with the 2nd edition spells, then alter them to follow the proper format. So here would be a bit of work.

Rules Cyclopedia shouold cover enough of older D&D editions, Not sure what was used or if acutal files are in WotC or HASBRO possession, but something must exist that oculd be copied and pasted. If not being black and white, scanning in and OCR wouldn't be too hard. Was that ever for sale in PDF format? That would mean a PDF to copy and paste from.

Have you ever tried to convert raw data into a working database?

It's not that simple. It is nowhere near that simple. Take it from someone who's done it, what you propose is a LOT of work and would cost a pile of money.

 

[Arlough]

I have moved this discussion to the thread Discussion on the feasability of WotC supporting all editions in DDI where we can continue this facinating conversation without derailing this thread.
Thanks

While this is a great topic, it now has its own thread, so please move that discussion over there. The thread is only about an hour old and already there is vigorous discussion about the difficulties and hurdles that would be faced regarding this endeavor.
Thanks.

Back to the topic of this thread.

Potential solution for the problem of the Non-compiled Magazines
[*]One idea I have that would reduce or eliminate the irritation of the non-compiled zines, for me at least, would be if they were delivered to me. This could be to my kindle (or kindle for pc, kindle for ipad, etc.), or my nook (for pc, for ipad, etc.) or any other method that made it so I didn't have to visit the website every day just to see if there was any content. I'd even say distribution via email, but I doubt WotC in their current IParanoia would accept that. Of course, this doesn't address the lack of valuable content in the magazines, merely their distribution.

Potential solution for the lack of valuable content in the magazines Dungeon. (We will address these seperately.)
This will be more complex, because I have spent quite a bit of time thinking about what I would want out of Dungeon in order to feel that it was of value to me as a DM. So here are things that I would value.

1. Encounter of the month. Actually, I think this should be an encounter a month per tier, with rotating levels to cover the entire tier. Include, perhaps, a basic map that has no textures, just line of sight/effect/movement blocking and enemy placement, thus allowing a DM in a hurry to skin the map to whatever terrain his players happen to be in. Provide, also, a full description of monster tactics as they would work in that particular group. And please, choose monsters that would be likely to be in a group. The suggested encounters in the MM1/2/3 tend to be somewhere between absurd and stupid, unless you are just providing bags of XP for your players to harvest.
2. There's more than one way to re-skin a _______. Basically, this is a monthly excercise in taking one creature from the published sources, and reskinning it to fit a different situation or setting. This would have two advantages.
   1) New DM's would be made more comfortable by the idea of changing flavor (and made aware of the difference between flavor and crunch in the process).
   2) Even experienced DM's could find some of the reskinning ideas interesting and useful
3. Dungeon Master's tale A section where they ask for submissions from DM's to write in and tell a story about a game. This could be a funny story, a tale of caution (don't give your players the ability to fly) or even a just a recounting of a short adventure.
4. Rules clarification / Official Q&A This is where a DM can submit a rules question, and we can all learn from the official answer.
5. Setting enhancement Give me some content, not just rules. What is the personality of the current Patriarch of Canneth? What's on those islands in the Sea of Stars? What dark ambitions might the village leader of Waishiki hold that I could use in my campaign? Or even, what events surrounded the last sighting of the Lady of Pain?

Potential solution for the lack of valuable content in the magazines Dragon.
Here is a list of things that, again, I would value in a magazine.

1. New ways to use powers This could be anything from a flavor change, to a tactical gambit.
2. Themed character builds A Storm Wizard, Spear Fighter, Reactive Ranger, or Sliding Bard. These should cover at least a tier's worth of leveling.
3. Test character options I feel like most of the powers, feats, etc. in Dragon were test powers, but nobody weeded the overmighty ones out. I would like them in there, but with a more explicit statement of "potentially unbalance" as well as some form of dialog/feedback so that players and DM's can point out the exploits of these powers before they are published. Hopefully this will cut down on the amount of errata produced.

That's all I have right now. Feel free to tear this apart, but please be civil in doing so.