|
4 years ago ::
Apr 21, 2009 - 8:25PM
#111
|
|
|
Okay, Mudbunny, I think I see the disconnect we have - I think it's entirely possible that the GameTable could be cancelled entirely (or indefinitely shelved to make way for other higher-priority things). You don't seem to think that's a significant possibility.
To each his own, of course - we'll find out sooner or later whether either of us were correct.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 21, 2009 - 8:53PM
#112
|
- Want Cheese With That Whine?
Date Joined:
Apr 27, 2005
|
A lot of people misunderstand Wizards' stance on DDi.
Wizards sees DDi as a service.
A lot of people see DDi as a collection of products.
This is why there is a subscription model. Wizards views DDi as a constantly-updated and constantly-improved service that includes two magazines, a database of D&D rules, and a character creator. These are, in fact, being constantly updated and improved, and are good value. I don't really think I've heard anyone seriously say that the services currently offered are bad value.
The other applications are just extensions to the existing service, and so are a lower priority than making the existing applications work. Wizards will add them as they work on them, and they (thankfully!) don't seem concerned with rushing shabby products out just so they can. Think of the Builder - there were a lot of problems originally, but the beta was pretty stable and was very usable, and it's improved a lot since then.
You may not agree with this approach to DDi, but that is simply the way Wizards sees it.
(it's also worth pointing out before someone challenges me on proof or somesuch that I do in fact know this to be the case; PM me if you really care about it)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 21, 2009 - 9:09PM
#113
|
Date Joined:
Feb 23, 2009
|
OK, so I have been through a great many injustices with this company and its handling of the DDi greatness. While I am ultimately short tempered over the lack of respect that I have been treated with. Before and after the great DDi crash last year in which I was unable to retrieve my original login...
I see logic in releasing this Campaign Manager, if they can actually deliver, as the VTT had a portion of said ingredients already incorporated into it. These functions were most likely the reasons for a great portion of the bugs with the VTT...
As for the character visualizer, while I understand that players want to be able to see the character that the envisioned upon creation. They want their own set of tools to use on DDi, but thy fail to realize that the Character Generator was created for the players even if the DMs had to buy the subscription in order for the players to use it. So technically it should be the DMs turn to have an application of their own...
Man if only I had a penny for every time I saw someone crying that someone who works for WotC should come out and say something about the tools that they promised to the world, good or bad...
It's not going to happen! I have come to terms with this plain and simple truth. The most that is actually going to happen is that some WotC paladin will do everything they can to keep us bloodhounds off the scent of our quarry...
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 22, 2009 - 6:18AM
#114
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2005
|
That is a silly question to ask, as WotC has stated, in numerous interviews, that they do not plan on returning to selling pdfs.
I wasn't asking the question, I was making a point.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=Rhetoric
they do not plan on returning to selling pdfs.
Ergo they will never ask about it in a survey, ergo they don't care what customers want.
Ergo I have little faith that this survey result posted here on this thread matters one iota in terms of customer wishes. And if ever I thought I was wrong on that point, all I needed to do was peruse the thousands of disappointed customer postings here asking two simple questions:
1. Where's the Character Visualizer?
2. Where's the Virtual Game Table?
Those two simple questions, from WOTC's silence, there are two simple answers.
1. They don't know and
2. They don't care.
(What's the difference between ignorance and apathy?)
Have I *ever* said that you guys don't deserve to be frustrated? I have been pretty clear in saying that I understand why people are frustrated.
Mudbunny, the point I'm going to make here is subjective. It cannot be proven objectively, so I want to go on the record as saying this is my personal impression of your interactions with the community. Unless I miss my guess, there are others who agree with me.
My impression every time I read a post of yours is:
1. WOTC is right.
2. The rest of you guys are wrong and can go suck it.
It's worded more professionally, more kindly, more subtlely than that, but that's the impression I get.
Now I haven't followed all of your posts religiously, so you may have said, "You're right, I agree! How frustrating!" any number of times without being an apologist for WOTC. I am not saying you have never said that, I'm only saying that the impression left with me after reading those posts of yours I've seen is that WOTC is right and paying customers like me can go suck it.
If you don't know where I could possibly have gotten this impression, let's use a brief and recent example:
1. Customers would like .pdfs.
2. WOTC doesn't want to use .pdfs.
3. WOTC is right and the customers can go jump in a lake of .pdfs for all WOTC cares (or those who speak on their behalf).
By this point, I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts.
They have. Numerous times in podcasts and various postings.
In January's Ampersand, for example:
We had grand plans and we were overly ambitious in what could actually be accomplished in the time we had. We don’t want to overextend or overpromise anymore.
I have also heard them, in podcasts, say the same thing.
While I am sorry that I missed that, nothing in that quote has a bit of contrition to it. You see, an actual apology contains such admissions as:
1. We were wrong.
2. We're sorry.
3. Here's what we'll do to fix it.
The above quote has a kind of version of the third, but instead of promising delivery, it just promises to make fewer/smaller promises.
To see why this is troubling, and not in the least bit satisfying (or apologetic!), put the same attitude in a different context.
1. A husband vows to be faithful to his wife.
2. Husband cheats on his wife.
3. Husband "apologizes" by saying the wedding vows were too ambitious for him to follow.
4. Since those vows were too ambitious, husband will address his lack of fidelity by avowing not to make any more grand promises of fidelity.
5. Husband never mentions that actually being faithful would be the proper course of action.
I realize the metaphor doesn't line up exactly, so you'd be wasing time pointing out to me every flaw in it. No metaphor is ever perfect.
But suffice it to say on a lesser scale, in terms of customer relationships and customer trust, this is the attitude WOTC has had in response to the customer backlash:
WOTC:Doing the right thing is too ambitious. From now on, we'll set our standards lower. Okay?
Customer: 
This latest survey is having the same impact on a lot of customers, if the feedback on this thread is any indication whatsoever.
As I said before, suppose we take this on good faith that it means we'll have excellent products (if not the ones we originally were promised and still want), then we're only back where we were a year ago!
Round and round and round.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 22, 2009 - 6:40AM
#115
|
Date Joined:
Sep 28, 2006
|
Ergo I have little faith that this survey result posted here on this thread matters one iota in terms of customer wishes. And if ever I thought I was wrong on that point, all I needed to do was peruse the thousands of disappointed customer postings here asking two simple questions:
1. Where's the Character Visualizer?
2. Where's the Virtual Game Table?
Those two simple questions, from WOTC's silence, there are two simple answers.
1. They don't know and
2. They don't care.
Or the third simple answer - They aren't ready to tell us anything about it yet. The repeated statements that all say "we are continuing to work on all of the announced DDI tools, and will tell you more information when we can" in one form or another made that pretty clear. Or at least they did to me.
Mudbunny, the point I'm going to make here is subjective. It cannot be proven objectively, so I want to go on the record as saying this is my personal impression of your interactions with the community. Unless I miss my guess, there are others who agree with me.
My impression every time I read a post of yours is:
1. WOTC is right.
2. The rest of you guys are wrong and can go suck it.
It's worded more professionally, more kindly, more subtlely than that, but that's the impression I get.
Now I haven't followed all of your posts religiously, so you may have said, "You're right, I agree! How frustrating!" any number of times without being an apologist for WOTC. I am not saying you have never said that, I'm only saying that the impression left with me after reading those posts of yours I've seen is that WOTC is right and paying customers like me can go suck it.
That is your prerogative to take that impression of my postings. However, as you yourself have admitted, you haven't followed all of my posts in this forum, so I suspect that the view that you are getting of my posts is skewed.
1. Customers would like .pdfs.
2. WOTC doesn't want to use .pdfs.
3. WOTC is right and the customers can go jump in a lake of .pdfs for all WOTC cares (or those who speak on their behalf).
I am curious as to how you could have gotten that impression of me from that. Other than the one post I made above about how WotC is no longer selling .pdfs, and no longer plans on selling pdfs, I have been silent on the issue. Do I think that it is a mistake for them? Based on the information that we have, yes. But I don't think that we have nearly enough information to make any sort of reasonable judgement on their decision. WotC obviously feels that the selling of pdfs is a bad business decision for them in the current climate.
Does anyone have saved pages or text from the survey? Because I am mighty curious how these questions were phrased.
IIRC, the question was in the form that people could pick more than one choice. I think it said something along the lines of "Which of the following tools would you use" (Note that this is a paraphrase of a dim memory of the question.): Included among the choices were (at the very least):
* Tool to create and manage campaign info
* Tool to customize and print monsters
* Tool to customize and print pre-made adventures
* Tool to create character portraits
* Tool to play tabletop D&D over the Internet
There may have been more, I don't recall. I know that the question explicitly stated that people could choose more than one answer, and could pick as many as they like.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 22, 2009 - 8:46AM
#116
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2007
|
Why would anyone pay for a campaign manager when they could use Obsidian Portal for free?
I'm really surprised that the game table didn't rate hire. You know considering how many people are vocal on the forums about it.
Also character builder and customized minis are low to? Hmm I'd much rather have unique tools like that then something I could do with pen and paper and a book.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 22, 2009 - 9:26AM
#117
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
- Dragon Slayer
- D&DI News Guide
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2005
|
Why would anyone pay for a campaign manager when they could use Obsidian Portal for free?
For me - it would depend on how much integration can be offered.
Obsidian Portal is great, make no mistake.
However, if I can, say, load all the PCs of my players right from the CB, build an encounter/adventure tailored to their current configuration, then dump all that Data from the Campaign Manager into the (eventual) Game Table - that's a huge incentive.
Yes, I could manually do that by flipping between assorted tools and the Portal, but having it all integrated would be sweet.
I don't know if that's what's planned, but given the integration they originally wanted in their tools, I'll be surprised if it isn't a goal. 
I'm really surprised that the game table didn't rate hire. You know considering how many people are vocal on the forums about it.
Well, part of the poll data comes from at least one other site (ENworld). There's a different audience there - and they often react differently to various bits of news that how the community here reacts.
I forget what the recent example was, but there was a clear case of WotC announcing something to do with DDi - and most of the posts here were up in arms. Taking a look at ENWorld the reaction to the same post was "Wow - look at the cool things they ALSO talked about!"
Make no mistake the people who want the Game Table are ADAMANT. But just because they're vocal doesn't mean they represent more people than themselves.
When The DDI Suite of tools was first announced, I recall there being quite a few posts with the theme of "Game Table? Pfft. Why would I play D&D over the Internet when I can play face-to-face with my friends?"
The people with that perspective would likely be the ones who "voted up" the other tools.
I'm surprised the Game Table is as low on the list as it was - but not overly surprised that it wasn't #1. (Surprised it wasn't #2, however)
Also character builder and customized minis are low to? Hmm I'd much rather have unique tools like that then something I could do with pen and paper and a book.
~shrug~ I'm not a big fan of the Visualizer idea. But then, I have a hard time conceptualizing what my characters look like. Since I don't have a picture/image in my head, I don't care that much - so that tools is low on my chart as well.
Of course, when it releases I'll probably get addicted to it - because it will PUT a picture in my head. :P
Wolf Star76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide  Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 22, 2009 - 10:06AM
#118
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2005
|
Why would anyone pay for a campaign manager when they could use Obsidian Portal for free?
The best features of Obsidian Portal aren't free.
It has some amazing free features and some even better ones for a paid subscription.
Just a minor point of contention there.
I guess WOTC has their work cut out for them if they intend to build a better campaign management tool than Obsidian Portal, which is already good, and for the most part, free.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 22, 2009 - 10:34AM
#119
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
- Dragon Slayer
- D&DI News Guide
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2005
|
Imagine an MMO that wouldn't let you create an avatar. Oy!
Not really a fair comparison since D&D is a textual/imagination game - and most MMOs are graphical in their very nature.
Unless you count MUDs/MUSHs - which I've had quite a bit of fun with in the past, and didn't have any image of my avatar for. 
Wolf Star76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 5:39AM
#120
|
Date Joined:
Feb 14, 2005
|
Not really a fair comparison since D&D is a textual/imagination game - and most MMOs are graphical in their very nature.
Unless you count MUDs/MUSHs - which I've had quite a bit of fun with in the past, and didn't have any image of my avatar for.
I am baffled by this "unfair comparison" argument.
I got into MMOs because they were like playing live D&D. I'm not sure why this is hard for people to understand. All anyone had to do to sell me on my first MMO subscriptions was say, "This is like being inside D&D! It's like you're a D&D... insider! If you can imagine how cool that would be! You can SEE the character you create, play with friends across the country, and the computer even keeps track of the rules so you don't have to flip through all these books and stuff!"
To me, Everquest was D&D sprung to life in graphical detail. UO predated it, and a plethora of MMOs have followed, all based on the same principles as D&D, but while trying to improve upon those ideas as well.
The nice thing about computers was, "Wow, now we have the technology to SEE my character!"
The nice thing advertised about DnDi was, "Wow, now the OFFICIAL D&D company is going to make use of that same technology! Finally!"
The frustrating thing is still waiting.
Feel like being mediocre? Not following through? Providing crappy service? Do people find you frustrating? Arrogant? Unhelpful?
Simply add the word "beta" to any product or service you provide; all will be forgiven.
|
|
|
