Guest Post: Why I stayed with DDI

Great writeup. I agree whole heartedly! The forums at WoTC are the worst. I can’t imagine trying to give good customer service to a group who is generally so angry, so negative and so inflammatory. The fact they don’t just shut that rage shed down is amazing to me every time I dare to visit.

It’s a good reminder:

Compare WotC not against what we want but against what others can/have provided.

In a strange way I agree with both articles (newbiedm/alphastream). I’ve never been unhappy enough to can my subscription or demand a refund, but if things don’t improve in the next 6 months I will not renew my subscription. (Mind “improve” includes “more VT games in my time zone”.)

Excellent post, and great counter-argument against critics of D&DI (myself included).

@infocynic It’s a blogpost, not a scientific paper. Get over it.

(with apologies for stepping on @newbiedm’s toes, but things like that annoy me no end).

@infocynic

It’s a blog post. It’s usually a safe bet to assume that unless presented otherwise, a blog post *is* an opinion post.

Hi infocynic, thanks for the comments. I can understand where you are coming from and a critical mind is a good thing to have.

On the thread to which I linked some very fine minds have struggled to debunk the numbers. They haven’t succeeded in doing so. As far as anyone can tell, DDI is a very big success. Could there be something going on with the numbers? Maybe, but given the automatic nature of the numbers and that some people have carefully tracked the numbers across several months (before and during recent controversial DDI changes), it seems pretty solid. It is likely off in some way but still accurately telling that DDI is doing far better than people would guess. My wild guess is that it is due to the success of programs like Encounters. But, overall, my reason for feeling good about this is that very smart and critical guys cannot disprove it and end up agreeing with the thread.

On the issue of people coming around to liking the online CB, I base it on what I read on the forums and on what I see at the table. On the forums, I see vastly decreasing rage over the online CB (and it is becoming focused on a few specific requests rather than on broad displeasure). I read more and more statements from people liking the online CB. At the table, I increasingly see the new format being printed over the old classic CB style. I attend a lot of large conventions, and I have been at large conventions in Oregon and VA within the last month (both coasts, same result). In my gaming area I see gamers that were using CB Loader now using the online CB. This isn’t always true. I saw a prominent WotC staff member using a classic sheet! And, I myself still prefer the classic in terms of user interface design.

As Greywulf said, I’m not trying to drop hard science. This is an opinion piece. I do my best to be factual, but this isn’t an op ed on stock prices or census numbers.

One thing I do try to do, being a critic, is to be aware of my own bias. I tried to speak to that in that I really like KQ and Pathfinder. As I found myself making the decision to stay with DDI I did first go out and look at the competition. I liked what I saw and I firmly believe that KQ and Pathfinder are fantastic options. I still like DDI more. I didn’t mention it in my article due to forgetting, but there is even more value through the art galleries (amazing stuff), the Compendium (I used it all day two days ago), and surely I am still forgetting something else. DDI is a really good offering. That said, I am a big fan of RPGs and a hater of none.

Yeah, I don’t buy using the forum numbers, b/c they can only measure subscribers who register/create/use forum accounts, and I think WotC would be all over “subscriptions are up across the board” in one of their self-praising editorials if it were really true. That said, I admit that neither side can really prove whether subs are up or down, so it’s not really worth arguing over, and I don’t think it does anyone any good to wish that subs are down, because I don’t think that subs going down will cause WotC to wake up and suddenly go back to the Old Ways (TM).

The online CB lacks key features that the old one had (house rules support), and the rage has probably subsided because the ragers realized it wasn’t helping. At some point, apathy sets in or you realize the futility of arguing, so you accept what you’ve been given and move on. The fact that WotC claimed it would be “difficult” to implement things like Dark Sun in the offline CB and kept their customers in the dark for 6 months does not give me warm fuzzies about what they might do to them again in the future. The new monster builder viewer is a great example of this.

I’m not trying to say WotC is horrible, evil, and D&Di isn’t a good product, but to me, it’s no longer a good product, because it’s this thin, ghostly shell of what it once was, which was truly great.

If I were going to compare a Paizo subscription to DDi, I would use the Adventure Path subscription. Of course I’m looking at it strictly from a GM’s perspective.
The monthly AP has a full adventure, which is part of a campaign that is spread over 6 issues(months), with everything you need to run it. It also has fiction, a bestiary, magic items, articles about the setting, etc. All of this can be used as stand alone campaigns/adventures or to further build upon the world of Golarion, if you use the campaign setting.
If you subscribe you get a 30% discount on the 96 page APs ($13.99 after discount) plus a “free” pdf of the AP to read on your computer/tablet/e-reader. You also get a 15% discount on any other subscriptions(again with free pdf) or products you buy on Paizo’s site.
Just looking at the AP you get the $19.99 book for $13.99, plus the $13.99 pdf for free with your subscription. Granted you have to pay S&H, which puts it at about $17. But 2 copies of the book (1 full color printed copy and 1 full color pdf =192 pages) put the cost at about .09 per page.
With a DDi subscription you may get both magazines, but you also have to print them yourself, which for some can raises the cost a great deal. As for the Character Gen, there are several good ones you can use for free online. There is the Pathfinder Database and several other sites that give you access to some great material. Then there is the PFSRD which gives you access to the full rules, for free. Also if you do buy Pathfinder pdfs (or subscribe and get free ones) you get the full book available to redownload for free when there is an update, not just errata.
So at this point the only benefit I see of DDi over Pathfinder is the adventure builder.

Now if you play 4e instead of Pathfinder, then the whole thing is moot. DDi is going to be the better deal for you. However, if you are like me and play more Pathfinder than 4e D&D (Essentials) then DDi may be a huge waste of money.

I’m not arguing that “x” is better than “y” here, so don’t take it that way. I am without a doubt a bigger fan of Pathfinder, but I also kind of like a lot of the 4e Essentials material. However, I was just pointing out that Pathfinder can be just as or more cost effective depending on which subscriptions you look at and your game preferences.

Actually, let’s look at the facts:
1) Neither side can prove anything. Of course this is a negative statement, which is hard to prove, but I contend that without official numbers from WotC, which we clearly do not have, no one can prove anything about numbers of subscriptions.

2) “The Online CB lacks key features.” This is a fact that is well-documented by WotC. As evidence, I present the list of known issues: http://wizards.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1543/

3) Wizards claimed that it would be difficult to implement Dark Sun in the offline CB. I can’t find a link for this off-hand, but if pressed, I’m sure I could find a WotC employee posting something like that on the forums. I might have to use the wayback machine if the PR scrubbers have been at work altering history.

4) Wizards kept their customers in the dark for 6 months. I don’t think I need to cite this, because it falls under the category of well-known facts, at least to the target audience. Anyone who was around for the 6 months leading up to the launch of the online character builder knows that we couldn’t get any information. I will concede that 6 months may be exaggeration.

5) The new monster viewer is a great example of [wizards doing things which don’t give me warm fuzzies]. This is a statement of fact as pertains to me as an individual, therefore it does not need citation. However, I could also cite plenty of other users who were dissatisfied, to say the least, with the new MB, and I don’t think you’d try to defend WotC on that front. Sure, improvements may be coming, but as it stands right now, I don’t think anyone’s going to try to use that as a basis for “why you should have a D&Di subscription.”

So while it was an opinion piece, it actually did contain a number of statements of fact, which were all in the realm of “well-known” or have now been documented, except one that I don’t think anyone is really going to challenge me on.

I will give props to infocynic on the WotC bragging thing; IF DDI and D&D 4e were doing as well as the fanboys propose, we would definitely see a ton of editorials proclaiming their majesty. Now, for last quarter 2010, D&D was #1 on the RPG index charts (http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/19721.html), you can see that Dragon Age, Pathfinder, M&M, and Dark Heresy are eating its heels and climbing rapidly in sales. WotC is worried, their antics have driven off gamers, and as usual, they refuse to admit errors.

It is the refusal to admit truths which put WotC in the hotseat for many a gamer; I think the current bitch fests about 4e would have subsided long ago if they had come clean on some issues, say, the influences for the rules set changes. The haters would use that to f-ck with the supporters, but that would die down quickly and everyone could go on their merry way. As it stands, each side must ‘prove’ the other is moronic via the inter-lols.

As for hard data in a blog, yes you should use it because if you do not and make sweeping statements, you look like you belong on Jersey Shore and no one will want to take your words seriously anymore. It is all about credibility, even on a blog.

Oh, and Dragon Age RPG RULES!

@Alphastream Well said!

And my point is that a subscription USED to be worth the money and now, to me, no longer is, because I’m paying more for less. (I was a $5/mo subscriber for 2 years, and let my sub lapse last October when it became clear that the magazines were offering less and less content and the character builder fiasco was, as you have admitted, a monumental blunder.)

So I think they have the potential, the capability even, and possibly (although I do question this) the desire to win me back as a subscriber, but until they
A) give me tools that do everything the tools I was using could do, and with the same or less effort and speed
B) give me the same amount or more content than before
C) establish that they can do A & B on a continuing basis

Then I don’t see sufficient value in it for me. I see value sure, but not enough. Not $6/month (and a 1-year commitment to a company with a track record of remarkably bad blunders is a steep price to pay).

@Alphastream
Like I said it all depends on your preferences and or perspective.

For me personally I use both the print AP and the pdf (gotta love my kindle for this one), so it is a double value. Plus I get the added bonus of discounts with my other subscriptions and items I order. To cut down on the shipping costs they also give you the option of shipping multiple items at once for a lower S&H.

All of that added with all the free official material that is available make Pathfinder a great deal cheaper than a DDi subscription, for me. In my case I feel I get less with DDi and I’m not fond of the current Dragon and Dungeon content, but of course that is just my personal opinion.

When it comes to KQ, I really like the book, but with it containing non-Pathfinder content it the book simply isn’t as useful to me as it could be. That’s why I don’t subscribe, I just buy the issues that contain things I want.

While I am a semi-fan of D&D Essentials products, I prefer Pathfinder. If I ever start playing more D&D than PfRPG my opinion would most likely change to be more inline with yours. It is all in what you prefer and how you assess an items value/usefulness to on an individual basis.

Overall I have to say I did enjoy both of the DDi oriented posts and the discussions that followed. These have been two of my favorite posts of the past week on the RPGBN. Thanks.

@ ArrogantFool
“Maybe adding some sort of code within books that, once redeemed, gives access to that content in the character builder before its released on the builder.”

Back when they first announced 4e/DDi at Gen Con, they did discuss using some type of code in the printed books for content and/or for access to digital copies of purchased books. For one reason or another that never panned out.

After the core books, you guys really don’t need to worry about having the latest books. As long as everyone has, some dice, a PHB and the DM has a MM and DMG, then you don’t really “need” anything else to play. All the other books are just stuff you may or may not want, but aren’t necessary to play. At the most I’d suggest having the PHB 1 & 2, just to have the primary classes. Same thing holds true if you are using Essentials. Even having a DDi subscription is not necessary.
When I do play 4e I usually make my characters the old fashioned way (PHB, dice, pencil, character sheet) and never touch a computer. So you could even save yourself the money and skip the DDi all together.

As for the entire RPG industry going digital, I agree and disagree. I do think that we will see more and more content being published as pdf (or some other format) only, with a possible Print on Demand option, but I don’t see all companies developing their own DDi service. At least not anytime soon.

Good stuff, everyone. I do dig people disagreeing with me. I play a lot of different games and I am not cemented to one style. I mean, I didn’t play purple box, AD&D, 2E, or 3.* without developing a huge love for those editions. And I love me some other gaming systems. The last thing I want to do is come off as being pro DDI/4E at the exclusion of other systems/offerings. In my ideal world, we all have the desire (and means) to buy all three.

KQ has some really strong offerings. I think any player on one side of the fence can really benefit from it because you get that diversity. The mechanics for one article might come from edition x, but the concepts and fluff can be really useful even when you play edition y. Just as playing Shadowrun can help you communicate grit when you run Dark Sun, KQ can help you see new possibilities.

Pathfinder has some really gorgeous quality. While I sometimes feel that it is a bit much in terms of bloat (that catalog is huge!!! Good grief, is there a sourcebook for “basements of Golarion”?), I love the quality and the concepts. They reclaim vintage creative space in terms of exploring history and culture for settings. You can easily take that and add it to any fantasy RPG game. I’ve greatly enjoyed the adventure paths. Fans on all sides have things of which to be proud.

Arrogant Fool wrote “As far as content delay goes, I know they are just wanting more book sales, but those books are expensive and for all 6 to 7 people involved with my game, most of us young college students”. Every RPG struggles with this. The industry model is horrid. You publish an RPG core book and on average the DM and one player might buy it. The rest of the players share. Then you release a sourcebook, because every DM and player is demanding support and the system needs to be robust. But, with each supplement/adventure/etc. you cut into the demographic and see sales decline sharply. Much (often all) of the profit (if any) you made on the core book is eaten up by the loss you incur on the supplements. Now you are bleeding and take a loan to write a new edition… this is a sad cycle for many of the games with names we all recognize. Even RPG companies known for fiscal responsibility usually fall after some point, often purchased by another company. It is rough.

What these three companies are trying to do is to migrate to the subscription model as a way to avoid that plight. It is a new model and in flux. No one has proven that anything works, but the big companies nonetheless try. Ultimately, you want to get money from every participant. Having two out of six people pay every other month is just not good enough. You need everyone contributing. The challenge is for these companies to find out how to do it. The good news is that as they try they experiment and we get new offerings.

When it comes to paper vs. digital… this is tough. RPG companies do make a lot of money from stores. That part they want to keep. But, the printing costs are brutal and the margins are terrible. Plus, book sales are conducive to that whole sharing and only 2/table owning them problem. If you love RPGs in the traditional format then support your local gaming store. There is no edition war when it comes to the survival of our hobby, because every RPG company is connected in many ways. Think of it this way: Would Paizo like to absolutely trounce WotC, or would they simply like to meet their goals while also seeing a healthy WotC? I can promise you it is the later, and not just because WotC and Paizo employees all game together. (Hey, if they can get along, shouldn’t we?)

I don’t use 4e, so DDI is a non-starter for me, and I have no vested interest either way in this article. I just wanted to express kudos to Newbie DM for being willing to provide a venue for a counterpoint article. Well done, sir.

The group I DM/GM for are more or less telling me they rather not spend a bunch of money to play a game like this. We play 2 ed and 2.5 ed mix. We spend our money on the minis, tiles, and other props to help with the game. But spending money to be able to build a character online, my group just thinks it is crazy. I have to admit though our group likes building them and gets into the story. We use Central casting : Heroes of Legend to add more flavor to them and give them character. Nothing like playing a son of a dock prostitute and either her or you was taken agianst your will by a sea monster. If I am DM automatic fear of water or aquatic creatures or both!

I guess I am saying our group rather spend money on something we can actually hold, like minis and such. When asked about trying 4 ed they all squawked and moaned about having to buy dozens of books to just play our favorite game.

So a cheap try out for us was to go to Archon here in St Louis last October. Well thanks to those who put up with me and my friends and helped us best they can. I forgot the one female GM who was the most friendly and helpful, also I would invite her to my table any time.
But because everyone uses this online thing to make characters, no one could help us build one on paper. Thanks to someone having a couple pregen’s we was able to give it a go. But could not level them lol, without a computer to do it. So we stayed level 1, and it hurt the parties we joined.

But after the experience was over all of us agreed 4ed and this online thing is not for us. We like it simple and easy. We rather spend time building the PC and getting to know it and attached to it. Less time trying to remember if we used a Daily or Monthly or a Yearly power in combat and just get to the role-playing.

Some will say 2ed or 2.5 is so crazy with extras that make it hard. Maybe it does, but we don’t need an online subscription to build characters. All you need in my game is your stats and sub-scores, resists, ThacO, weapon damage, AC, and your idea of who your PC is and how he will react and do things.
Saying that I have successfully integrated 3 new players last year into my game, for a total of 9 players. I told them to read the PHB’s we loaned them. I know none of them did. But still they play are actual good role-play contributors to the game and story.

My trouble is when they reach town!

Nice article, Teos. Just came across it. For those of you who don’t know him before this post, Alphastream/Teos is one of the most accessible, friendly, helpful guys in the community. That being said, I have two criticisms about the post.

One, just a nitpick – I hate the use of “biweekly” without immediate context. Check it out on Dictionary.com. It literally means both “every two weeks” and “twice a week”. I point this out less to criticize and more because I find it hilarious. ;p

Two, and more importantly, you do a disservice to DDI when you bring up tools and not mention Compendium. Compendium is a godsend, a fantastic resource to me both as a player and a DM. It is the reason I shell out my DDI money, period. They could take everything else away and they’d still get my money. (But let me save out some Dungeon articles first, please. ;p)

I’m not a big fan of the new online model for character builder. I strongly dislike the image-based printing, because it still causes problems and creates bloated print jobs, I strongly dislike the 20-character limit, and I want more customization space. I want enough space for all 5 PC’s in the home game I run, several NPC’s, and my ever growing library of LFR characters, plus I play in the occasional home game, and I frequently want to create “aspirational” characters – what will my 4th level ardent look like at 11th, at 16th, etc. Another thing I liked to do was track story awards right on my character sheet with the offline version. I can’t do that on the online version due to character limits. Until problems like these are fixed, I will continue to use the offline version as much as possible.

I dont disagree with you

Oh, and I should also note that after writing this guest blog entry I was fortunate enough to become part of either the problem or solution (depending on your point of view!). I have written an article for Dragon and will have one in Dungeon in October. Now that I have actually worked on content for the magazines I’ve seen how challenging it is to write good articles and I’ve seen the editorial process. It increases my respect for what all the companies have to do to keep quality high.