Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SprainOgre

  • Rank
  • Birthday 10/04/1979

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    St Paul, Minnesota, United States
  1. I did miss that TCBC. But my concern still stands, in that the way to get into the play test, is by paying for the book. And since the book is a play test book, it will be replaced in just a few months. As such, the utility of the book is low. I appreciate the skepticism of my motivation. However, my concern is the game community, and how publishers will treat them going forward. I'm genuinely concerned with this new economic model. But, I suppose you can believe me or you won't. Nothing I can do to change that. If you don't mind the hobby moving in that direction, I guess you'll say it with your money. I know what I'll be saying with mine.
  2. Oh it can always be worse Dess. I don't play enough video games to see that one first hand. But yeah, I know of stuff like that happening. I was excited about the latest Sim City, but not the always online. Played some Diablo 3 with that and ugh. I totally get why a game company would want that, but I'm not interested enough in video games to deal with it again. Last time I cared enough about a video game to engage the online madness was the ME3 ending (I loved it, I'm in the minority, I know). But, all that said, I think that's been getting worse, hasn't it? Releases of buggy products or huge release day issues? This is why I buy like 2, maybe 3 video games a year. And they're almost always used. You can certainly rock it out, Mouth, I'm not going to tell you that you can't take part in the double purchase. I'm just trying to point out that there is an issue with it. And you're right, they're not being deceptive about it at all. They've told you strait up that the beta book has an 8 month shelf life, and expect that some of the fan base will buy it, eagerly too, and replace it when the final version comes out just as eagerly. That's kind of what I find concerning as well. But, again, for those that will do that, it's your choice and if it doesn't bug you to buy the book twice, it doesn't bug you. Thanks Angelic, I'm really glad that I'm not the only person who has some concerns over this. I hope your real life calamity works itself out as quickly as it can.
  3. I think you're missing the core of my concern, TCBC. Which is not actually those two things. Those are issues that have arisen, but they are tangental to it, but not it. My issue is: Fantasy Flight is asking people to pay money for the privilege of editing their books for them. They are (and this is harsh, I know, but this is what it has the appearance of) trying to take advantage of Star Wars fans. The would like to sell them, or give them the option to buy, the same book twice. The incentive to buying it that first time, in it's incomplete form, being that you get to PAY THEM (by buying the book) to do WORK FOR THEM (by helping them edit their product). I have a concern that we as a gaming community are eagerly allowing ourselves to be taken advantage of. If you don't mind buying the same book twice, fine. You rock on with your bad selves. Finally, as has been kindly pointed out to me by several lovely people, there will be no storm troopers coming to my door to drag me to the Source (or the Fantasy Flight store, whichever) and forcing me to buy the beta. Thanks guys, that was a real concern of mine. I was going to be tossing and turning all night over it, I just know it! But with your reassurances, I know now that I'm safe from that horrible fate. I can rest easy tonight, thanks to all of you. Oh, and I love the picture of Sam, Dess. And I did say "want" in there, with the implication that it was their intended marketing plan. So, there ya go. Besides, as said already, the rest of the board already reassured me that it wasn't the case! I leave, right now, to rest easy because of it. I just wanted to clarify my points, since they seems to have been lost in the thread. Like I said though, I'm know I'm just whistling. Oh, and hoping for that Ewok splat.
  4. Sham, don't forget, your printing costs and FF printing costs are nowhere near the same. Each book, in color and bound, probably costs a few dollars to make. And the art used depends on their own compensation and work for hire schemes. The license from Lucas is almost certainly expensive. FF is a business, and I get that, and they're in it to make money. They're making money, potentially twice, off of this book per consumer. And I knew there where no X-Wings, Star Destroyers, or Jedi in the EoE book before I bought it. I took the time to page through it and give it a good hard look. I decided to buy it anyway, even though I thought that those were mistakes in their overall design scheme. THAT is very much my opinion, and does not overly color my view of the SYSTEM in general. Three books to cover the main areas of the Rebellion erra and the Force. Fine. It's like the three cores for many an edition of D&D. I totally get that FF is a business Ineti. That does not mean I can't point out practices within that business that look to me as being improper. Not illegal or anything, just there to, well frankly, take advantage of the Star Wars fans. But, that's just me whistling some more.
  5. So this play test has in no way what-so-ever delayed the final product? Really? By not having a play test, there would be no time saved? ... Really? And no, TCBC, I'm not trying to make that analogy, nor would I. Those are fairly distinct games, with a different focus, and were all new books, even if there was some information cross over. It wasn't a beta to be replaced with a final. I'm not even complaining about the format of the book. (The three books to cover three separate parts of a single erra of play. I don't particularly favor it, but at the same time, it was the design decision made, and I could live with it. I wasn't happy that there was no X-Wing, Star Destroyer, or real chapter on Force powers, and that's all part of the design aspects I don't favor. This is not my concern, even if it did raise my hackles about the whole thing, my concern is really focused on the play test.) The concern/complaint I'm trying to bring to the fore is: you're paying FF to play their unfinished product (the Beta version), and will then pay again for the finished product (final version). There is an argument that this gets you a version of the rule book early. My response to this is that the final release of the book is delayed because the play test happens at all. Without it, the book would come to final print sooner, and there is little substantive changes (in EoE it sounds like about 3-4%). Some editing work, and while there are some substantive changes, they were few and far between when compared to the whole of the book. So, taken as a whole, not that much. This forms the foundation on my negative view of how the play test is being conducted (that is, again, you're paying for the privilege of giving feedback on a book that, let's all be honest, we'd have bought anyway, and at this stage I don't see how wide spread and deeply cutting the changes could be, based on the last play test results). Some people don't mind paying the money, and that is their choice. However, it seems to me that, when all is said and done, you've paid $90 (based on the idea that the Rebel book will MSRP at $60, and the beta at $30) for the whole book. The beta is not another splat book (I love splat books, my shelves are full of them, I would buy the hell out of that Ewoks book, especially if they included the movies, could be a great resource for my ewok character in a Saga Ed game). The beta is a book that is built to be made obsolete as it has the same information, but in an unfinished state, as the final book. Now, that presumes of course that you don't keep the beta around, after "paying" the additional time and energy putting in the corrections, to either use as a final version substitute, or use as a table copy for friends/fellow players. This is, indeed, taking the stance of a single end user (the business model ideal), who buys the beta and then the final, discarding (shelving, throwing away, whatever) the beta as being no longer the up-to-date rules. This argument certainly has an appeal to pathos in it, but is not devoid of an appeal to logos. I certainly have pathos arguments sprinkled all throughout. The logos argument however is rooted in a cost analysis, even though there are plenty of things to do with the beta, even recapturing some of the cost by selling it to another. My point is, when all is said and done, you've paid about $90 in total for the book (with hypothetically 3-4% difference between the two, if they correct the equivalent amount to the last one). That said, I suppose it's not bad economically to just buy the beta and cut and paste in the changes, or just have the errata on hand. But I don't think that's really going to be the norm in this case. So, once again, I find it upsetting that resources and production cycle time is being spent on a play test, that will probably change 3-4% of the final book (of which some is the job of decent editors), that one has to pay to engage in. It seems to be pandering to the idea of the open play tests seen else where in the industry, in an attempt to copy those other game companies, but not actually engaging the player base. I understand that there are probably license issues that restrict an open play test as has been done in other cases, and as such why is there one at all? TL:DR I'm really just whistling into the wind here, aren't I? So, hey, Fantasy Flight, how about the Ewok book Utsa mentioned above? I'd buy it.
  6. Unproved assertion? Well, perhaps. But I think you're looking at this from the wrong angle. It's not like the play test is something they decided to do at the last minute. It was something that was a planned part of the development cycle. The entire length of time to get this book from brainstorming to stores. As a part of that whole cycle, is the play test, and it takes time to do it. So, did it take time to type set the beta copy? Did it take time to get it to and from the printer? Will final edits be delayed while the play test is going? Will they need to edit the master copy and reformat it, thus having to typeset it all over again? If these are all zero time procedures, than you are correct, there is no delay in the entire production cycle that without the play test being a planned part of it would change a thing. That is correct. If, however, these components add time to the entire development cycle, than the final product is not arriving in stores until later than it could be. And considering the comments that there were very few changes between the EoE beta and final release, which I'd agree with having had the opportunity to compare a friends beta version to my final version in the past, this seems to be time frivolously spent, and is costing the consumer an additional $30 if they so choose to be charged. I guessing if other's are willing to shell out $90 for a 244(ish) page supplement, I'm not going to force you not to. I'm just trying to point out that this seems like a shady way to go. And the play test strikes me as pandering, or an empty gesture attempt to be like other game companies that are doing the same. It lacks substance. And since I won't be paying the $30 for a beta copy, as I could buy some movies, or a used video game, or another rpg book that I won't need to replace in less than a year, or save it, or countless other things that have varied long and short term rewards. There is some other opportunity cost for this book, just as with all things that we buy. As for me, I'll just have to wait and see what the final product looks like, and I'll be curious to see if it is substantively different from the beta. Utsanomiko, if you took a look at my game book shelves you'd see I'm happy to buy a supplement for the games I like. So are most of my friends. And while I certainly cannot speak for the entire community, in which I know that piracy is an issue, I think hour presentation of it is narrow. Yes, too many supplement can indeed drive people to the Pirate Bay. But are these inherently lost dollars? If there was not enough money in the budget to buy the book in question, it wouldn't have been bought. Not always the case, not at all, but it is a part of pirating, and should not be dismissed in any genuine analysis of the issue in general. In general, the gamers I know all work within the confines of our budgets, and try to get the books we really want. While we certainly lament what we cannot afford, it's not that the bad ol' game company is giving us too much, it that we don't have the income to keep up. However, flooding the market with books that are built entirely to be replaced might not be the best way to put more supplements out there. I'm sure that FF's warehouse team is very competent, and the creative staff are not needed to assist them. But regardless, a play test like this adds to the overall development time, and I find the value to the final products quality to be suspect. And again, I don't really care about getting into the play test. While it's cool to see and use rules early, whatever. I'm upset at how this play test is being run, and think it would be better to not have it, if this is the option available, as it would mean the final book would get to market sooner.
  7. I understand I'm in the minority on this. And it kinda confuses me, but I guess I'm coming at this from a different perspective. I don't know why people would spend $30 to get rules that they know for a fact will not be relevant in a few months, just to get a product early, where if FF was not doing a play test (that seems to have little effect on the final outcome) they'd get the final book, only paying for it once and not once and a half, sooner. If they want to just release a slimmed down version for less, and larger more bells and whistle's version for more, okay, fine. I could get that. I can even maybe understand having the second copy as a back up, so that other players in the group might not need to buy their own copy. But this isn't how it's presented. It's making you pay them to maybe give some feedback, which if the past book is any indication, didn't amount to a whole lot of changes. And the Kickstarter thing is an interesting analogy, but even then I'd be getting the final version of the book, for my (sufficient) donation, not having to pay enough to get a rough copy, and then pay again, even more, for the final. I know I haven't pledged to any Kickstarter like that. Regardless, you're paying twice, once for the not-finished rules, and then full price again for the edited copy of the book they may or may not have any significant changes. Like I said, it smells of a money grab (buying the books twice) and a pandering play test to get in on the trend (the rules didn't really change that much.) I like to get my new splat books too. But I'm able to wait a few months more to get a final version. *shrug* It's a trend I don't like to see. It smells of extorting the community.
  8. I don't like having to pay them, to do what they're already paying editors to do. If Norton is right and there is a license or contract element to this decision (not able to put out free play test books/materials), fine. I can totally understand that. But don't try to double charge me for each book with what smacks of a "trying to be trendy" play test. While some people might indeed be more likely to leave feedback on a play test they're paying for the privilege to, it would also stand to reason that a free play test would have a larger pool from which feedback could be gained. Also, as for the chance to pay for a rough draft of the rules, that's all well and good. Accept that without this play test, the rules would be out sooner, as they'd just do this last bit of editing in house and much more rapidly. And if the rules didn't change that much from the play test of EoE (I was aware of them doing it then, and was also a bit put out by it, but to see it start to become a pattern has upset me), really means that this is more pandering/trend following/empty gesture than a genuine attempt to get meaningful response on the system and rules. Norton, you're correct. I do not miss out on anything for not buying. But does that means this is just a money grab on FF's part to take advantage of those players who will buy both versions? I'd hope that sort of business model would not be sustainable. If the play tests don't mean anything, don't spend time and resources doing one. Don't waste the time to type set it. Don't waste the resources printing and shipping it. Don't waste the time waiting for feedback that won't be heavily integrated. Spend that time doing a last round of edits and play tests in house, and get the final product out sooner. And I can certainly draw on previous versions of Star Wars rpg's to play in multiple erra's of the Star Wars story already. I was just hoping that this new version would be something cool, since dead game systems can be a drag to maintain.
  9. lol. I choose to release this version free of charge, so that I wouldn't need to double post with corrections. However, I will be correcting that one now, thanks Yoshiyahu for the feedback!
  10. So, you want me to pay to get a book that you want feedback on, that has a built in obsolesce because of this, so that I can turn around and buy it again in a few months? You want me to pay you for the privilege of giving you feedback? Ugh. I bought Edge. I bought the dice. But I don't know if I'm going to be buying anymore. I really wanted to support this game, hell's bells I'm from the Twin Cities and was really excited to hear that Fantasy Flight got the license. But after getting it? I'm disappointed. I'm disappointed that X-Wing's and Star Destroyer's were missing from EoE. I'm disappointed that the Force was only a hand wave there at all. And now this? I feel like you're trying to take advantage of myself, and the community as well, with how this play test is set up. This feels like a money grab version of what Paizo does for their major Pathfinder releases, and what Wizard's has been doing for 5th edition D&D. Both of those companies give you the play test material for free. I know from experience that the folks on the Paizo board are very responsive to comments, and I remember seeing how Pathfinder changed due to comments. I can't speak for the DnDN play test, but I've heard from others that changes did seem to reflect what was being said online. This though, this look just so far along that the play test is being done to pander, or it's simply the new, trendy, thing to do. Not to mention the cost involved for the players. Either the books are a waste of money because so much will be changed in response to the user feedback (that user's had to pay in order to submit), or the developers basically have everything buttoned up, and are using the play test as an editing/fact checking final polish that they're being payed to have done. Either way, it'd be a waste of my money. Not speaking for others, maybe you don't mind double paying for your books, and paying for the privilege of being used as a play tester, but I don't like it myself. I'm getting to the point, in fact, that I don't know if this whole system is going to end up being a waste of my money. Yes, yes, fellow forum goers. Sour grapes (I'm obviously full, just full of them). What do the developers care about me bitching (I'm just one person, why should FF care about losing my business, and I suppose that is correct, I doubt they'd even notice). If I don't like it, I don't have to play it (obviously). I'm just a nay sayers who hates new things/systems (you're welcome to your opinion of my opinion, go nuts). Etc, etc, etc. But I'm part of the Star Wars community too. And I'm not going to be the only player that feels they're being taken advantage of, or wasting their money, or simply tired of being yanked around by what doesn't feel like a complete Star Wars game. And maybe I am alone in that. But maybe I'm not too. Anyway, that's what I have to say. Ogre out. Water and Shade all.
  11. The Shadowrun Core books did have a decent price (which is when I shelled out for them). However, the rest of their books did not follow their lead. And I'm not going to argue with how well the CthuhluTech books look. They're all-in-all gorgeous. I buy the print ones from my FLGS as soon as they hit the shelves. But even considering how nice those pdf's are, it's still just a pdf, not a physical object. Yes, they certainly have value, work and effort was put into them. The bulk (like 80%) of the cover price is mark-ups from the distributor and the retailer. Part of that 20% is the cost to manufacture. So why do so many RPG pdf's sell at 1/2 cover price, and not lower? There's no need to pay per unit costs to make them, or to ship them. Just the cost from which ever website is hosting and selling them. Basic economics says that the lower the price, the higher the sales. I don't see this working any differently, even in the age of file sharing. Sure, some people will NEVER buy that pdf, no matter the cost. But, will more people buy that pdf at $30, or at $15? This is my point. That the companies don't seem to be taking advantage of the fact that pdf's are going to have less overhead in the way the do business, so they can the price to something in the $5-$15 range, and still turn a profit from them. And I understand I haven't seen their numbers, so I don't know if they have a deep enough market share to see better profits in the case of Anima, but some of these same theories ought to hold true. Also, many of my coffee/soda stains and subtle warpings are self inflicted. In other cases, I don't punch friends. Glare and fume a bit, sure, but not punch. I contract that out. And binding on softcover books are there to be creased. It's just in their nature. Hardcovers are a different story of course. Those cause wailing and gnashing of teeth. And I've had more then one binding fall apart within hours of purchase on some of my pricey rpg hard covers. Anima not being one of them. That book has been a trooper so far.
  12. Is that the official bestiary, or a fan project?
  13. Sure, pdf's are great. I like having them. But they're not paper. They're not something physical that I can hold in my hand. More then that, $30 is what my FLGS pays for them from the distributor (and that's for a physical object that I can page through), who pays even less then that. While I'm all for game companies making a profit for their hard work, and thus being able to produce more of the same, I'm not willing to pay that high a price for pdf's. After all, I can't train a pdf to open to that page I always need to reference. They don't pick up the battle scars of coffee stains on pages, dings on covers, and little tears that gives a book character. I can't pass one around the table (and while I have a lap top, so I can bring pdf's to games, I don't have an ereader, tablet PC, etc, nor will I for some time). It's simply my personal opinion that the large number of 1's and 0's that make up pdf's are overpriced in many, many cases with game books, I'm hardly faulting their utility or that they have real value that would be worth paying for. I have the same issue with Shadowrun and CthuhluTech pdf's for example. Sure, they can't get damaged in a move, or warped by a basement flooding. You don't have to worry about their binding going bad, or pages being torn out. But I don't think that's worth as much as is being asked for it. Just my take on the matter.
  14. As much as I'd love to have the books in pdf, there's no way I'm paying $30 for them. Especially after I already bought both the core book and Gaia at cover price from my FLGS (The Source). I have a pretty decent idea of the mark up for the books at each step in the chain (or at least the last few), so taking half of the cover price for something I don't get to hold in my hands is not a good deal for me. Put those pdf's at the $5-$10 range, and I'll buy them. Not at $30.
  • Create New...