|
8 months ago ::
Oct 07, 2012 - 8:33PM
#171
|
|
|
Yes, you are right that was my mistake.
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 1:33PM
#172
|
|
|
If it is a different issue, then why did you bring it up?
I was simply answering your question about whether the CB will be supported after the DDN switch-over.
Because the idea is that WotC has done many things to disillusion, lie to, betray, make people dislike them or whatever you want to call it, to their customers. The idea is to get those customers (which doesn't include you) back WotC will have to eat some crow. Posting on the forums and just ignoring some flak would be a great start. Issuing apologies would be even better. Heck if they apologized I'm sure most people would come back and give 5E a try...
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 1:47PM
#173
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
the idea is that WotC has done many things to disillusion, lie to, betray, make people dislike them or whatever you want to call it, to their customers.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 2:40PM
#174
|
|
|
If it is a different issue, then why did you bring it up?
I was simply answering your question about whether the CB will be supported after the DDN switch-over.
Because the idea is that WotC has done many things to disillusion, lie to, betray, make people dislike them or whatever you want to call it, to their customers. The idea is to get those customers (which doesn't include you) back WotC will have to eat some crow. Posting on the forums and just ignoring some flak would be a great start. Issuing apologies would be even better. Heck if they apologized I'm sure most people would come back and give 5E a try...
You're going overboard. You are right about the Paolo bit and the CB and MB change. But why this happened is not clear. Was it that they didn't allocate enough resources to the old CB patch or was it that they botched thinking it would matter or maybe to force people on board the online CB? We'll likely never know. But it was badly marketed. That must of been a PR nightmare for them and eventually they did give people their money back to those who asked for it.
You should stay in the realm of facts and that is WotC did loose the trust of a lot of users (I remember those days on another account) and didn't show respect to the subscribers of DDI. But to make the leap you are making in the quote above is ridiculus.
As for people leaving, there aren't any real proof of that, but yeah at that time there were a lot of people mad because of the CB switch, but also because of the lack of content and ponctuality of the online mags and the design shift that was Essentials (aka 4.5).
But what is your point anyway? That people shouldn't buy DnD products anymore?
République du Plateau, Montréal, Québec
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 4:19PM
#175
|
|
|
If it is a different issue, then why did you bring it up?
I was simply answering your question about whether the CB will be supported after the DDN switch-over.
Because the idea is that WotC has done many things to disillusion, lie to, betray, make people dislike them or whatever you want to call it, to their customers. The idea is to get those customers (which doesn't include you) back WotC will have to eat some crow. Posting on the forums and just ignoring some flak would be a great start. Issuing apologies would be even better. Heck if they apologized I'm sure most people would come back and give 5E a try...
You're going overboard. You are right about the Paolo bit and the CB and MB change. But why this happened is not clear. Was it that they didn't allocate enough resources to the old CB patch or was it that they botched thinking it would matter or maybe to force people on board the online CB? We'll likely never know. But it was badly marketed. That must of been a PR nightmare for them and eventually they did give people their money back to those who asked for it.
You should stay in the realm of facts and that is WotC did loose the trust of a lot of users (I remember those days on another account) and didn't show respect to the subscribers of DDI. But to make the leap you are making in the quote above is ridiculus.
As for people leaving, there aren't any real proof of that, but yeah at that time there were a lot of people mad because of the CB switch, but also because of the lack of content and ponctuality of the online mags and the design shift that was Essentials (aka 4.5).
But what is your point anyway? That people shouldn't buy DnD products anymore?
You're missing the point. Its doesn't matter why it happened it matters that it happened at all. It alienated a segment of the fan base. That's all that matters.
My point is that WotC has garnered some ire from previous and current customers and they are going to have to even it out in some way. For some this might just mean not repeating what they did wrong in the first place, for others it might mean a public apology or at least an acknowledgement of having messed up. For others they will have to earn back their trust by going a long time without doing anything even remotely untrustworthy. That was my point before it turned into a huge argument over what was done or why which is irrelevant. Its that it happened and what WotC is going to do to make it right...
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 5:47PM
#176
|
|
|
If it is a different issue, then why did you bring it up?
I was simply answering your question about whether the CB will be supported after the DDN switch-over.
Because the idea is that WotC has done many things to disillusion, lie to, betray, make people dislike them or whatever you want to call it, to their customers. The idea is to get those customers (which doesn't include you) back WotC will have to eat some crow. Posting on the forums and just ignoring some flak would be a great start. Issuing apologies would be even better. Heck if they apologized I'm sure most people would come back and give 5E a try...
You're going overboard. You are right about the Paolo bit and the CB and MB change. But why this happened is not clear. Was it that they didn't allocate enough resources to the old CB patch or was it that they botched thinking it would matter or maybe to force people on board the online CB? We'll likely never know. But it was badly marketed. That must of been a PR nightmare for them and eventually they did give people their money back to those who asked for it.
You should stay in the realm of facts and that is WotC did loose the trust of a lot of users (I remember those days on another account) and didn't show respect to the subscribers of DDI. But to make the leap you are making in the quote above is ridiculus.
As for people leaving, there aren't any real proof of that, but yeah at that time there were a lot of people mad because of the CB switch, but also because of the lack of content and ponctuality of the online mags and the design shift that was Essentials (aka 4.5).
But what is your point anyway? That people shouldn't buy DnD products anymore?
You're missing the point. Its doesn't matter why it happened it matters that it happened at all. It alienated a segment of the fan base. That's all that matters.
My point is that WotC has garnered some ire from previous and current customers and they are going to have to even it out in some way. For some this might just mean not repeating what they did wrong in the first place, for others it might mean a public apology or at least an acknowledgement of having messed up. For others they will have to earn back their trust by going a long time without doing anything even remotely untrustworthy. That was my point before it turned into a huge argument over what was done or why which is irrelevant. Its that it happened and what WotC is going to do to make it right...
They won't make it right, man. You can hope they learn from their mistake or that customer learn from WotC's behavior, but that is it.
You must let go.
République du Plateau, Montréal, Québec
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 9:23PM
#177
|
Date Joined:
Jan 23, 2012
|
They won't make it right, man. You can hope they learn from their mistake or that customer learn from WotC's behavior, but that is it.
You must let go.
Exactly. And I still stand by my point that demanding folks from WotC chat on the boards and just take flak is so far beyond wrong it isn't funny.
For those confused on how DDN's modular rules might work, this may provide some insight: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/11/the-world-of-darkness-shines-when-it-abandons-canon
@mikemearls: Uhhh... do you really not see all the 3e/4e that's basically the entire core system?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 9:35PM
#178
|
|
|
They won't make it right, man. You can hope they learn from their mistake or that customer learn from WotC's behavior, but that is it.
You must let go.
Exactly. And I still stand by my point that demanding folks from WotC chat on the boards and just take flak is so far beyond wrong it isn't funny.
DnD desingers should be more present. If they were less people would talk against them. I am amazed at Paizo staff who talk regularly on the Paizo forums.
République du Plateau, Montréal, Québec
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 9:46PM
#179
|
Date Joined:
Jan 23, 2012
|
DnD desingers should be more present. If they were less people would talk against them. I am amazed at Paizo staff who talk regularly on the Paizo forums.
It's a chicken-and-egg scenario, really. When you have folks suggesting that WotC employees should just put up with an undetermined amount of abuse for an unspecified length of time, though, I can't find a way to fault those WotC employees for not showing up here.
The other side of the scenario is that the players need to just plain be nicer/better when they post - especially when they disagree with something the designers have done. Posting rants about how some particular thing sucks, is horrible, and the designers don't know what they're doing is hardly the way to do that.
For those confused on how DDN's modular rules might work, this may provide some insight: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/11/the-world-of-darkness-shines-when-it-abandons-canon
@mikemearls: Uhhh... do you really not see all the 3e/4e that's basically the entire core system?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 09, 2012 - 12:17AM
#180
|
|
|
DnD desingers should be more present. If they were less people would talk against them. I am amazed at Paizo staff who talk regularly on the Paizo forums.
It's a chicken-and-egg scenario, really. When you have folks suggesting that WotC employees should just put up with an undetermined amount of abuse for an unspecified length of time, though, I can't find a way to fault those WotC employees for not showing up here.
The other side of the scenario is that the players need to just plain be nicer/better when they post - especially when they disagree with something the designers have done. Posting rants about how some particular thing sucks, is horrible, and the designers don't know what they're doing is hardly the way to do that.
Its not a chicken or an egg thing. Its investing in future goodwill, taking a little flak now will pay off dividends later when the forums become nicer and players actually get a dialog going with the developers. We can point out problems and get immediate responses, something we have to wait 2-3 days for an article and 2 months for a play test update now for...
|
|
|
