|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 4:08AM
#291
|
|
|
i wish someone at the convention had pressed them about the mags. i understand them not wanting to set an exact day for something, but now they cant keep up with the week's announced articles, as well as the months articles (some were after the month), nor do we have a table of contents. i love the mags but im not loving the way they are getting handled. none of this has SQUAT to do with what articles people downloaded and other reasoning they gave for not compiling, although its clear most readers want compiled issues (although im sure someone will try to argue with that  )
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 5:27AM
#292
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
i wish someone at the convention had pressed them about the mags. i understand them not wanting to set an exact day for something, but now they cant keep up with the week's announced articles, as well as the months articles (some were after the month), nor do we have a table of contents. i love the mags but im not loving the way they are getting handled. none of this has SQUAT to do with what articles people downloaded and other reasoning they gave for not compiling, although its clear most readers want compiled issues (although im sure someone will try to argue with that )
I agree that it doesn't look good when they don't meet deadlines; it reflects poorly on a company. However, I don't see the online articles as something pressing. A book getting delayed or cancelled is more important to me. The articles are a fun extra; I don't really care when they are coming out or if they are changed or delayed. That said, I also agree that I don't like the way they are being handled.
The thing I certainly disagree with: your statement that "its clear most readers want compiled issues." How is it "clear"? How do you know what "most readers" want? All we have to go by is the information from WotC that the majority of DDI subscribers weren't downloading the compiled issues. Now, you could certainly think they are lying when they say that and I won't argue. But saying you don't believe them is one thing; claiming you have evidence that disproves their statement is another. If you make big, undefendable statements like that, you had better believe someone will try to argue with it, weird frowny face or not.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 6:05AM
#293
|
Date Joined:
Sep 15, 2006
|
I am really glad that the Conquest of Nerath game hasn't been cancelled (and hope it stays that way). I am really looking forward to this product and hope to integrate it into a campaign someday, like the classic modules DL11 and X10.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 6:25AM
#294
|
|
|
i wish someone at the convention had pressed them about the mags. i understand them not wanting to set an exact day for something, but now they cant keep up with the week's announced articles, as well as the months articles (some were after the month), nor do we have a table of contents. i love the mags but im not loving the way they are getting handled. none of this has SQUAT to do with what articles people downloaded and other reasoning they gave for not compiling, although its clear most readers want compiled issues (although im sure someone will try to argue with that )
I agree that it doesn't look good when they don't meet deadlines; it reflects poorly on a company. However, I don't see the online articles as something pressing. A book getting delayed or cancelled is more important to me. The articles are a fun extra; I don't really care when they are coming out or if they are changed or delayed. That said, I also agree that I don't like the way they are being handled.
The thing I certainly disagree with: your statement that "its clear most readers want compiled issues." How is it "clear"? How do you know what "most readers" want? All we have to go by is the information from WotC that the majority of DDI subscribers weren't downloading the compiled issues. Now, you could certainly think they are lying when they say that and I won't argue. But saying you don't believe them is one thing; claiming you have evidence that disproves their statement is another. If you make big, undefendable statements like that, you had better believe someone will try to argue with it, weird frowny face or not.
i think the 30 page thread of people begging for it to be complied again speaks for itself. is it scientific? no, but its pretty clear from where im sitting. thats my 'defense' at least. that being said i can continue to cut and paste editorials and make hideous little folders (as much as i despise doing so), but the whole thing just has fallen apart. articles for the week dont come out, articles for the month dont come out, table of contents doesnt come out...none of that has anything to do with their unfortunate experiments/baby steps in data mining
i disagree that the articles are a 'fun extra', the magazines, are (were?) a major reason to subscribe.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 7:06AM
#295
|
Date Joined:
Jul 22, 2001
|
I agree that it doesn't look good when they don't meet deadlines; it reflects poorly on a company. However, I don't see the online articles as something pressing. A book getting delayed or cancelled is more important to me. The articles are a fun extra; I don't really care when they are coming out or if they are changed or delayed. That said, I also agree that I don't like the way they are being handled.
The thing I certainly disagree with: your statement that "its clear most readers want compiled issues." How is it "clear"? How do you know what "most readers" want? All we have to go by is the information from WotC that the majority of DDI subscribers weren't downloading the compiled issues. Now, you could certainly think they are lying when they say that and I won't argue. But saying you don't believe them is one thing; claiming you have evidence that disproves their statement is another. If you make big, undefendable statements like that, you had better believe someone will try to argue with it, weird frowny face or not.
I think the actual quote was along the lined of people look at the loose articles frequently but they only open the compiled issue once. (Just long enough to copy it.)
So in their retardedness they got rid of the compiled issues because they had less hits???
Missing any deadline is unprofessional; I don’t care if it’s construction, a book or a magazine.
Sergent at arms of the house of trolls.
Est Solarus oth Mithas
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 7:10AM
#296
|
Date Joined:
Jul 22, 2001
|
With the Rules Compendium, DM's Kit and Monster Manual, you have everything you need to DM.
The Rules Compendium is the most current version of the rules, updated to include the errata from the last two years. For the most part, no matter what the player's opinion of the Essentials line, most will agree that the Rules Compendium is a worthwhile, almost necessary, purchase.
While I dislike the book for formatting reasons, I do not think it will hold up well to use because paperbacks rarely do. Having the errata in one place is nice.
Yes I broke down and bought one after saying I would not; the errata was too much to pass on.
Sergent at arms of the house of trolls.
Est Solarus oth Mithas
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 8:09AM
#297
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2004
|
I agree that it doesn't look good when they don't meet deadlines; it reflects poorly on a company. However, I don't see the online articles as something pressing. A book getting delayed or cancelled is more important to me. The articles are a fun extra; I don't really care when they are coming out or if they are changed or delayed. That said, I also agree that I don't like the way they are being handled.
The thing I certainly disagree with: your statement that "its clear most readers want compiled issues." How is it "clear"? How do you know what "most readers" want? All we have to go by is the information from WotC that the majority of DDI subscribers weren't downloading the compiled issues. Now, you could certainly think they are lying when they say that and I won't argue. But saying you don't believe them is one thing; claiming you have evidence that disproves their statement is another. If you make big, undefendable statements like that, you had better believe someone will try to argue with it, weird frowny face or not.
I think the actual quote was along the lined of people look at the loose articles frequently but they only open the compiled issue once. (Just long enough to copy it.)
So in their retardedness they got rid of the compiled issues because they had less hits???
Missing any deadline is unprofessional; I don’t care if it’s construction, a book or a magazine.
Somebody who uses the word "retardedness" in just about any context is in no position to tell anyone what is or is not professional.
-SYB
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 8:31AM
#298
|
Date Joined:
Feb 10, 2009
|
hmmm I knew that essentials had some bad press but I didn't realize it was considered "borked". I actually just bought the Rules Compendium and DM Kit because I wanted to have my own copy of the rules and though getting the latest iteration would be ideal, as well as I liked the size of the Rules Compendium as I often have to travel a bit to reach certain game groups.
Im sure their are a lot of topics about this already but just out of curiousity.. which part of the essentials line is being considered as Borked? Is it the class books, the rules compendium? or is it non specific as in the whole system?
The DM products in Essentials are ok except for the unsupported rarity system and random treasure distribution. It is the player-side (mostly the dumbed-down classes) that most people have issues with.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 8:32AM
#299
|
Date Joined:
Feb 10, 2009
|
Strange. I've played a Mul Gladiator Slayer in Dark Sun. I never noticed themes were incompatible with Essentials...
Really? How many powers have you swapped from the theme to your slayer? My guess is none, since slayer doesn't have powers to swap (except maybe some random (f)utility powers).
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Feb 04, 2011 - 8:44AM
#300
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
I agree that it doesn't look good when they don't meet deadlines; it reflects poorly on a company. However, I don't see the online articles as something pressing. A book getting delayed or cancelled is more important to me. The articles are a fun extra; I don't really care when they are coming out or if they are changed or delayed. That said, I also agree that I don't like the way they are being handled.
The thing I certainly disagree with: your statement that "its clear most readers want compiled issues." How is it "clear"? How do you know what "most readers" want? All we have to go by is the information from WotC that the majority of DDI subscribers weren't downloading the compiled issues. Now, you could certainly think they are lying when they say that and I won't argue. But saying you don't believe them is one thing; claiming you have evidence that disproves their statement is another. If you make big, undefendable statements like that, you had better believe someone will try to argue with it, weird frowny face or not.
I think the actual quote was along the lined of people look at the loose articles frequently but they only open the compiled issue once. (Just long enough to copy it.)
So in their retardedness they got rid of the compiled issues because they had less hits???
Missing any deadline is unprofessional; I don’t care if it’s construction, a book or a magazine.
Somebody who uses the word "retardedness" in just about any context is in no position to tell anyone what is or is not professional.
-SYB
Add to your list: people who claim to cite actual quotes to further their own argument, without actually citing them correctly. Luckily, he began his sentence with "I think".
Here is the actual quote (from the article Icy Winds of Fortune, 1/12/2011, Dragon 395): "Subscriber data informs us that the vast majority of you consume our articles individually, when they are posted, as opposed to downloading the monthly compilations."
It is pretty clear that some of you think everyone at WotC is a complete moron (and yet you continue to play the game they design...). I don't believe that for a second. If their data revealed that the average subscriber downloaded individual articles 20 times a month, but only downloaded the compiled issue once a month...they aren't going to say, "Wow, people are 20 times more interested in the articles!"
Again, as I said to Froth...it is just a question of whether or not you believe them (and as before, if you think they are liars why do you buy from them?). Unless you have hard data to back up your claims; and no, referencing a thread that had people talking about how they miss the compiled issue doesn't count. That simply shows there are people who liked it. Even WotC didn't say no one compiled the issues, just that the vast majority did not.
The internet is a wonderful thing. You can find a thread somewhere that has people talking about how they are convinced the World is flat and only 4000 years old...but it doesn't make it true and it doesn't mean they are a majority.
|
|
|
