Shadowrun
Catalyst Game Labs => Catalyst's Shadowrun Products => Topic started by: Method on <12-22-10/2139:24>
-
Hello.
I'm curious if there are any plans to release corrected pdf's of recent books. There are a few products I would like to buy (War! and This Old Drone being at the top of my list), but I've heard so much about poor proofreading that I've been holding off.
Thanks!
-
I'd also like to know about this. After buying Sixth World Almanac I was quite upset about the sidebar issue. I've been very hesitant to buy any other product since then as I keep hearing about typographical, layout, etc, errors in the new content.
I understand that typos happen and a few will always get by, but lately it seems to be a bit more drastic of an issue with those errors that do get through being part of important parts of the books.
Thanks for your time.
-
I still want to see some errata for the Sixth World Almanac, because I legitimately want to know what those sidebars on the duplicated dates say. I bought a paper copy so I'll never get an update if there was one for the .pdf. I heard rumors of their being an updated paper copy, but I don't want to spend $40 on another copy just to see some errors fixed. I too am withholding my purchase of future products until I hear there aren't major errors in them. I bought War! and that turned me off to buying future products until these things are worked out.
If anyone could tell me what the correct text of the years 2020 and 2044 are in the sidebar in Sixth World Almanac, I would be very grateful.
-
I suspect that they are more focused on getting a positive money flow by producing new products then correcting existing ones (at least as long as existing stocks last). This is basically how it is in all iterative businesses. Consider mobile phones for instance, any work hours spent correcting firmware bugs in a already sold product is a loss (as accounting sucks are enumerating goodwill). Also, SR seems to be on the general back burner at CGL. Consider the number of BT products released in recent months vs SR products.
-
I suspect that they are more focused on getting a positive money flow by producing new products then correcting existing ones (at least as long as existing stocks last). This is basically how it is in all iterative businesses. Consider mobile phones for instance, any work hours spent correcting firmware bugs in a already sold product is a loss (as accounting sucks are enumerating goodwill). Also, SR seems to be on the general back burner at CGL. Consider the number of BT products released in recent months vs SR products.
Maybe I'm looking at a different cost/benefit analysis than they are, but I would think that gaining a reputation for shoddy product is far more detrimental in the long term than the short term gain from releasing before fully proofing. Assuming, of course, that maintaining a customer base is a priority, which it may not be.
-
I suspect that they are more focused on getting a positive money flow by producing new products then correcting existing ones (at least as long as existing stocks last). This is basically how it is in all iterative businesses. Consider mobile phones for instance, any work hours spent correcting firmware bugs in a already sold product is a loss (as accounting sucks are enumerating goodwill). Also, SR seems to be on the general back burner at CGL. Consider the number of BT products released in recent months vs SR products.
Maybe I'm looking at a different cost/benefit analysis than they are, but I would think that gaining a reputation for shoddy product is far more detrimental in the long term than the short term gain from releasing before fully proofing. Assuming, of course, that maintaining a customer base is a priority, which it may not be.
Accounting have always been poor at enumerating the value of reputation and other intangible aspects of doing business.
-
I'd like to add my voice to the chorus demanding better proofreading and editing. I bought a print copy of 6th World Almanac at GenCon and I was sorely disappointed in the number of errors I found. I feel all the more silly for having made this purchase at the same time I was personally congratulating CGL staff at the booth for holding things together and continuing to publish product.
As was documented in the topic regarding "Darkest Hour" a number of mistakes in continuity and plot have been discovered, mistakes that I am frankly stunned made it through playtesting and proofreading. In the credits for Darkest Hour there are thirty-two playtesters and eight proofreaders credited. As many as five or six different gaming groups playtested Darkest Hour and not one of them noticed the straight-up contradictions about who was responsible for the murder of the Faustian leader?
Now I read that War! is poorly organized, has no maps or timeline, and is riddled with errors. What am I, a loyal Shadowrun fan for over twenty years, supposed to make of this trend?
-
I will add myself to this list of fellow runners
The current releases have not given me a happy happy feeling due to a lack of detail in the books.
It worrys me that the game is heading down the same route as computer games where goods can be rushed out half finished and 'patched' at some later date if ever
-
I'm definitely interested if there's any word on updated PDFs for the Artifact series and WAR (eventually, obviously, consider it was just released very recently). I might not always like the material presented in recent product, but that's just personal tastes differing. I'm okay with that, as I just use what I like and discard what I don't. I'd just hope that there's some behind the scenes work being done on the seemingly more frequent (than previous product) proofing/editing issues that have cropped up in those two particular recent products (Artifacts series and WAR, that is).
-
Much as I'd love to see a statement along the lines of "We fucked up, here's a fix" or even "We fucked up and we're working on a fix" from the main people behind the WAR! and 6WA books, somehow I doubt it. For the most part the seem to have either closed ranks or just completely stopped posting in the face of actual reasoned criticism on obviously flawed product. I'll admit there's been a lot of vitriol on the forums, and a *LOT* more on dumpshock, but when you're in the situation CGL is in after losing a lot of people's favorite freelancers you have to expect some anger just for the fact that people are (still) angry.
Do I expect them to respond to the personal attacks and rude flames? Absolutely not! Do I expect them to respond to reasoned criticism about products they're expecting people to part with cold hard cash in order to get? Absolutely, especially when the flaws are as obvious as they apparently are with both 6WA and WAR!
Now to be fair, it's the holidays right now and maybe we'll come back from the new year to see some response to this situation. I think the odds are almost as bad as those of pigs flying without mechanical aid, but I could be wrong (and would be very pleased to be proved so).
*** DISCLAIMER: To date I have only read a few sections of 6WA and have yet to see WAR! I am basing my comments with regards to flaws largely on the expressed opinions on the Official forum and dumpshock, however they have been consistent and specific enough that treating them as facts seems reasonable. I am personally trying to ignore the attack posts just as I point out that CGL must and focus on the reasonable and specific criticisms of problems that *should* have been addressed at some stage of the process before publication. ***
-
Actually, there's been comments by several freelancers about this, to a degree. We can't do a lot about War! or 6WA. But we've mentioned that there is a strong effort by the freelancer pool to try and work harder to self edit stuff better. We want to make sure fact checking gets done, want to catch errors. Unfortunately, we're also hampered somewhat by the fact that someone in the freelancer ranks keeps posting publicly everything we send around to the group, something that seriously upsets several of the writers. So things aren't getting sent out to the group as a whole. So on one hand, we have more people wanting to look stuff over, on the other we can't just send files out to the entire group anymore, like they could back in the day.
It's an annoying and frustrating situation.
That said, I, for one, have been doing what I can to look over Attitude, and hopefully catch things. Been pretty solid thus far, but it's also a lot more IC fluff and a lot less hard facts and deep and obscure SR history, mostly. At least the few chapters I've gone over so far.
Bull
-
Unfortunately, we're also hampered somewhat by the fact that someone in the freelancer ranks keeps posting publicly everything we send around to the group, something that seriously upsets several of the writers. So things aren't getting sent out to the group as a whole. So on one hand, we have more people wanting to look stuff over, on the other we can't just send files out to the entire group anymore, like they could back in the day.
Edit: Glad to hear the issues are being looked at and being dealt with.
And that's an understandable point. But outside of the freelancer group, (and I ask this out of lack of knowledge, not as an accusation), wouldn't that be something that an editor would be looking over as things are proofed? Meaning, the product goes back for a final check by somebody inside of CGL, before the layout is finalized and such? If that's the case, would leaks amongst the freelancer ranks matter? I also understand if this can't be answered.
More importantly, shouldn't those leaks be addressed? That doesn't sound like a situation which can continue without large impact on CGL's business operations. Also, as a fan who continues to pay for the products he wants, that's really disappointing and dishonest behavior to see from the folks who should be there to help with SR and are doing contract work for CGL.
-
You're right Bull, and I appreciate that the freelancers have seen the feedback and are responding. I've also heard about the problem with the freelancer group with regards to somebody posting things that should be private (just heard about it today mind you, like I said, holidays and all that). The freelancer problem sucks and sounds like it needs to be tracked down and dealt with using a fairly large legal hammer, but that's neither here nor there.
The gist of my post was that while there is little the freelancers can do, there are things that the editing team and more important, the Shadowrun Line Developer can do, namely post errata. It's been done in the past and should be something that continues to be done to fix problems. Unfortunately it's been sorely lacking for some time now, even before the more recent troubles. With the large number of problems there seem to be with the two most recent books it's even more important to actually address the problems rather than sweeping them under the rug and expecting people to ignore them and continue to buy books. While it may not always be true, it's human nature to base decisions to purchase upcoming and new products on the basis of the quality of past products, and more specifically products from the recent past. Right now CGL's recent past on the Shadowrun front has a rather large black eye.
Does this mean I'm personally going to stop buying Shadowrun products? Near term, yes actually, but that's as much because money is tight as anything else. I was really looking forward to the crunch sections of WAR! and had planned on largely ignoring the story part of the book even before it came out. Now that it is out in PDF we've all heard about the number of problems it has and I'm on the fence about buying it before we get some word on some sort of fix on the errors. I'm not a Shadowrun oldtimer, so I have less of a problem with regards to the continuity errors that apparently exist, largely because the only reason I know about them is other people's complaints. I'd just like to see good quality work without massive quantities of obvious mistakes.
I think that's really all most of us would like to see from this thread.
-
The issue of the leak is more than just that there's a leak (though that's bad enough). There's a scribd.com user that's been posting some private conversations, some Shadowrun writer chat transcripts, some of Ancient History's unpublished work (though that, at least, with permission I'd assume), some project specs for upcoming books (the general outline that the line developer posts to the writer pool), some private freelancer brainstorming posts...and, now, apparently, also published work in pdf form.
We've got people already trashing an upcoming product that no one's even started on yet, just because they didn't like the look of the project spec. None of us have even sent in proposals to say what sections we'd like to write, and it's already getting trashed and insulted.
More troubling than just the fact we've got a leak, and that some documents are being seen before they're necessarily finished (or without someone paying them, which hurts the game in the long term)...the problem is the atmosphere this brings.
This filehost account had a document on it that was part of a freelancer brainstorming conversation, for instance, where someone pitched out an idea to see what people thought. The idea got posted to scribd, and it got torn apart pretty harshly by the usual bunch of critics out there. What didn't get posted was feedback from other freelancers about the idea, changes to the idea, whether or not anyone even liked the idea, what book it might go into, or anything else like that. Someone essentially said "Hey, wouldn't _____ be cool?" and it got posted to the 'net to be shredded as though it were a finished product. No one looks at the chunks of chicken bone and skin that ooze out of a blender and expects that unfinished product to look or taste as awesome as their Chicken McNuggets, but for some reason an unfinished brainstorming session (one with only a single post, in fact) can be treated as though it were the next CGL Shadowrun book to hit shelves.
Now, imagine you're a freelancer. After something like that happens, you finish writing a rough draft for a chapter for an upcoming product.
Do you want to post that chapter to the fileshare or the freelancer group that's got a leak, or do you want to email it privately to the Shadowrun line developer?
If you post it to the group in order to let other freelancers read over it, share their thoughts, make sure you're all using the same voice for various Jackpointers, to put extra eyes on it for proofing and basic typos, to let your would-be peers read it to see that you're all on the same metaphorical page, and to share with them the basic look and feel and voice and vibe of your chapter...you're opening yourself up to have this rough draft show up on a free fileshare site, where people can and will read this first draft, post links to it on popular SR forums, and tear apart your rough draft without ever giving it a chance to get published in a book.
If you email it privately to the line developer, it's much more secure...but now there's that much extra work falling onto just the layout/editing folks, because the other ten or twelve freelancers aren't reading each other's work, sharing ideas as openly, and generally coordinating the way they'd like to.
I'm not saying that's what happened to War!, because I don't know. I wasn't involved in that project in any way (I got into the freelancer pool well after its chapters were already assigned, writing was already done, all that good stuff), myself. I wasn't in the group, seeing the conversations, as it was being worked on, so I'm not trying to say that that's what happened to it, or whatever.
But I'm saying that, as we writers are moving forward with future products, that's the atmosphere we're in. In the face of complaints about layout and proofing, communication and coordination between writers, we're being put in a position where trying to help each other proof and edit, communicate and coordinate, is something of a Catch 22. I don't think I'm violating any sort of NDA or anything by saying so, but when the first complaints about War! came in, some of the first posts made to that freelancer group were to go ahead and share drafts for our next project. They're posted now, and I, for one, have made several revisions based on feedback I got from other writers. We're trying to put product quality ahead of product security, and we're just hoping that doesn't turn around and bite us in the ass (and then, naturally, about a day later there was another leak, this time of that project spec I mentioned).
And in the meantime, the leak is one more headache for the line dev to have to deal with, along with trying to, y'know, develop the line.
And the truly maddening part is that that scribd user, who's posting this stuff...they probably think of themselves as a fan of the game, and they might even be a current freelancer, who's violating an NDA to post the stuff they're posting. So while they're throwing these sort of obstacles into the path, they're thinking it's somehow helping the game they no doubt claim to love.
-
As far as proofing issues go, the big issue is getting the production schedule in shape so that all mechanisms in place can be used. Last year threw schedules off for a lot of reasons, and recovery has not been easy. But progress is being made, and I expect more normal development processes for upcoming products.
Jason H.
-
As far as proofing issues go, the big issue is getting the production schedule in shape so that all mechanisms in place can be used. Last year threw schedules off for a lot of reasons, and recovery has not been easy. But progress is being made, and I expect more normal development processes for upcoming products.
Jason H.
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
-
We've got people already trashing an upcoming product that no one's even started on yet, just because they didn't like the look of the project spec. None of us have even sent in proposals to say what sections we'd like to write, and it's already getting trashed and insulted.
I'm not defending leaks, but you do realise that now before anythink is written is exactly the correct time the voice displeasure over the project specs.
It prettty much zero use to voice displeasure with a books basic premier after the book has been written.
-
The problem is, Max, who's displeasure do we listen to?
For everyone who hates an idea, someone likes it. When it comes to the internet, that ratio grows even larger. For every person bitching and arguing about any topic online, there are a four people who are perfectly content with the product and who don't bother to post, and a dozen more who are completely oblivious to the internet discussions at all.
The Internet is still not the majority of the fanbase. And yes, it's easy enough to say "Well, *I* think this, and everyone I play with thinks this, so if we all agree, then..." But keep in mind, most people hang out with and play with people with similar attitudes about the game. I have personally gamed on a regular basis with about 40 different Shadowrun players (Serious players who played for extended periods of time, many of whom still play. I'm not counting all the people who played just a few games with me and our groups here and there). Of those, today, there is only one that regularly follows Shadowrun online fandom. There are only 6 or so that were ever regulars on the old SRN Mailing list, or Deep Resonance, or Dumpshock, and all but one of them were lurkers and not active posters.
I'm not saying that peoples posts aren't valid. I'm just saying that people are talking in what is effectively an echo chamber. You end up sounding much louder than you are.
Now, that said... As I've pointed out before, the spec sheet that got posted that everyone's bitching about? It's incomplete. And beyond being an incomplete spec sheet, there's additional information that's been discussed and tossed around outside of just what's on the spec sheet. So people are jumping to conclusions and making assumptions, some of which are completely wrong. The spec sheet never tells the whole story, for any project. So basing decisions on internet discussion about them is pointless.
Finally... you can't develop by committee. It doesn't work. You know TV shows and movies where there's a basic good idea, and then all kinds of stupid gets thrown in? That's usually because of meddling by committee. Because there's not one single person guiding the ship.
We have a pretty diverse group of freelancers. There's a few new guys who want to push forward some of the newer Transhumanist stuff. We have some old timers like me who want to keep the game grounded in it's cyberpunk roots. And we have plenty of folks in the middle. And we all voice our opinions. Jason listens to those opinions, and he's changed directions based on those opinions before, when they make sense, and more importantly, if they'll make for a better story and be more fun. But at the end of the day, he';s the Line Developer, and it's his decision, and it has to be that way, or nothing will happen, nothing will get done. You just end up with arguments. And we've seen how well arguments on the internet go. Most of us that are willing to actively post and debate and discuss (and argue) are all pretty strong willed people with very strong opinions. It often doesn't end well when two of us on opposite ends of the spectrum, headbutt.
Bull
-
As far as proofing issues go, the big issue is getting the production schedule in shape so that all mechanisms in place can be used. Last year threw schedules off for a lot of reasons, and recovery has not been easy. But progress is being made, and I expect more normal development processes for upcoming products.
Jason H.
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
Yes, I'll be working on that. It is, as always, a matter of finding the time …
Jason H.
-
As far as proofing issues go, the big issue is getting the production schedule in shape so that all mechanisms in place can be used. Last year threw schedules off for a lot of reasons, and recovery has not been easy. But progress is being made, and I expect more normal development processes for upcoming products.
Jason H.
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
Yes, I'll be working on that. It is, as always, a matter of finding the time …
Jason H.
I'm going to be a bastard here but isnt it a matter of making the time, or more importantly delegating the work to others who will make the time to do it.
This is of course based on the idea that it is something important.
When anyone one says I'll do something when I find the time, I find it very hard to take it seriously.
I know the common joke about shadowrun is the errata will come out sometime after the next edition but thats pretty poor
-
As far as proofing issues go, the big issue is getting the production schedule in shape so that all mechanisms in place can be used. Last year threw schedules off for a lot of reasons, and recovery has not been easy. But progress is being made, and I expect more normal development processes for upcoming products.
Jason H.
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
Yes, I'll be working on that. It is, as always, a matter of finding the time …
Jason H.
I'm going to be a bastard here but isnt it a matter of making the time, or more importantly delegating the work to others who will make the time to do it.
This is of course based on the idea that it is something important.
When anyone one says I'll do something when I find the time, I find it very hard to take it seriously.
I know the common joke about shadowrun is the errata will come out sometime after the next edition but thats pretty poor
Any time spent working on collecting and updating the errata is time not spent working on new books to sell. But it is still time that ends up payed for by CGL. As such, it is costing CGL money but producing practically zero ROI.
-
As far as proofing issues go, the big issue is getting the production schedule in shape so that all mechanisms in place can be used. Last year threw schedules off for a lot of reasons, and recovery has not been easy. But progress is being made, and I expect more normal development processes for upcoming products.
Jason H.
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
Yes, I'll be working on that. It is, as always, a matter of finding the time …
Jason H.
I'm going to be a bastard here but isnt it a matter of making the time, or more importantly delegating the work to others who will make the time to do it.
This is of course based on the idea that it is something important.
When anyone one says I'll do something when I find the time, I find it very hard to take it seriously.
I know the common joke about shadowrun is the errata will come out sometime after the next edition but thats pretty poor
Any time spent working on collecting and updating the errata is time not spent working on new books to sell. But it is still time that ends up payed for by CGL. As such, it is costing CGL money but producing practically zero ROI.
Goodwill made by fixing previous mistakes has value although I will give you defining it can be troublesome but it is doable.
Its even shown on the Statement of Financial Position - (Current international standards for accounting for what previously was called a balance sheet).
Whilst I would like new stuff the most recent new stuff have not been polished enough to justify release in that state. When I submit financial for a deadline it has to be right I dont get the luxury of being able to say "that will do" I expect the same level of detail from anyone I spend money with.
Now I'm not a total bastard I accept nothing is perfect but part of showing professionalism is accepting that when you dont do something right first time you go back and fix it and you fix it in a timely fashion.
Now thats not a dig at any particular writer or even developer we are all still people and make mistakes. But the company doesnt get that forgiveness it is paid money for goods which are not up to code - You can argue its always like that or thats how things are but that doesnt change the fact that is not how thing should be.
-
Thanks for the comments, Jason, Bull, Critias. It is appreciated.
Just out of curiosity: what are the barriers to fixing typos (which should only take a few hours at most) and sending a corrected version to pdf distributors? I'm not talking about changing layout or fixing (arguably) broken rules, and I'm certainly not talking about corrected printings (which are clearly cost prohibitive and more involved). Just correcting typos. If such corrected pdf's were made available there are at least 2 products that I would buy right now (despite complaints about mechanics and fluff). It seems to me that this should be an easy thing to fix and would go a long way toward reassuring the SR fan base that this issue is being addressed, but maybe there is some other factor I'm not aware of?
-
I got nothin'. I don't know enough about the printing, formatting, layout, etc, side of things to offer up any sort of answer. Jason could tell ya, or maybe even Bull (just 'cause he's been involved in more projects than me), but I'm in the dark where the distribution side of things is concerned.
-
In theory, the only real barrier that I know of is time. Granted, I'm not certain how much is involved on the back end, so... This is just my own lacking knowledge.
For one, someone needs to type up a set of corrections. Not only pointing them out, but also typing up the correction itself. To give an example, I tend to be a tad faux-dyslexic with my page references when I write. The correct format should be p.XX, Book Name. I sometimes flip that around. When we were proofing the semi-final version of the FAQ above, we were catching a bunch of those. So when we were fixing those, my proofing notes read like this:
Page 2, Column 1, Third Paragraph, Second Sentence:
"If the players use Marshmallows, drop a Thor Shot on their heads (War!, p. 272)"
Change To:
"If the players use Marshmallows, drop a Thor Shot on their heads (p. 272, War!)"
We do this, so that when it gets to the next step, Layout, our Layout guy can find and correct these quickly and easily. Ideally these would be caught in proofing and fixed in the text before it hit layout originally, but... Proofing and editing is often like distilling out impurities. You don't catch everything the first time through, and you have to run it through several times. And sometimes after things go through proofing, you end up making some changes (rewriting portions, moving things around, etc). Which means those portions slip through the earlier proofing process. It's annoying when this happens, but... It happens.
So then the Layout guy has to go through and make all those tweaks. Usually this isn't a problem, but sometimes the changes are semi-significant, involving several lines of text, which can end up shifting multiple pages around. So this can be quite time intensive as well.
And, well, at the end of the day, we're a small operation of very underpaid employees, most of us with day jobs (Or in my case, VERY underpaid and looking desperately for a day job :)). Matt Heerdt, who does the layout on Missions, has a regular job plus handles layout for, AFAIK, almost everything CGL does. Between all the Missions stuff I keep dropping on him (one Missions per month so far, plus things like redesigning the cover, tweaking the interiors to prep for Missions going Color, and being a real champ and completely rebuilding and tweaking the Missions Debreifing Logs, the Calender, and the Karma Transfer Log. All stuff he's done this last week for me). Plus he also handles the SR eBooks, the SR core books, and I think all the Battletech stuff (And judging by all the tweets that show up on Facebook, I think BT has been releasing about 14 PDFs a week).
So finding the time to go back and fix things is a giant pain in the arse. Esepcially since no matter how much we get done, there's more piled up in front of us. (Again, using Missions since that's my area, I just finished writing a Mission (SRM 04-00), I'm writing a second one (SRM 04-01), I have 3 final drafts that are being proofed (CMP 2011-01, -02, and -04), one Mission I'm waiting for a the final draft to come in so I can get it proofed (CMP 2011-03), and waiting on a couple more first drafts (SRM 04-02, SRM 04-03, and PM-01). And I'm moving across the state tomorrow and may not have internet access for a couple weeks, so I'm trying to get as much wrapped up as I can tonight so that I can send 4 of those off to layout, send one off to proofing, and send the first drafts back with dev notes, rewrites, and tweaks.
Plus I'm trying to start organizing the conventions since I'm helping with that this year.
And... At some point... I have to go back to some stuff that's technically "done" but not released publicly yet (SMH 2011, and the 8 2010 CMPs) and get them cleaned up so we can figure out how to release those.
And this has been the same sort of schedule I've been under since March when I took over Missions. And I don't expect it to slow down. Ever. Oi vey!
I'm not making excuses. I've been trying to work very hard to catch these errors. I have 3 dedicated proofers, plus the Missions team in general. I post Missions up for comments from the group first, so they can catch any major errors. This is after I've gone back and forth a couple of times on it with the author, reading it over, tweaking it, and making sure things conforms to the rules and is balanced and playable. Then it gets run through one of the proofing staff, and ideally one of the others to double check things (At this stage, it's grammar, punctuation, style, and the little things, as well as one more eye on the text to catch errors).
Then it hits layout, then me and Jason go over it one last time, doing Layout correction notes like I posted above. Then Matt tweaks it, THEN it's released.
And then we find a couple last minute errors, inevitably, and the question becomes "Are these minor enough to ignore, or do we need to fix it". If it's a minor typo or two, it's not worth fixing (I'd love to, but again,time and effort and manpower). If it's major, then IMO yes and I try to get it fixed.
Again, this is just on MY end for Missions. But, as I said above, a lot of the same people are involved with all the SR stuff, so everyone's looking at how we do things to refine them.
Keep posting Errata stuff you guys find in the Errata board. If you can, keep the style I mentioned above in mine when listing errors, to make them quick and easy to catch and fix. I'd love to see corrected PDFs posted myself, and I'd love to see an Errata document posted for people who bought the physical copies of the book. I can't say that this will happen, just that, hey, I'd love to see it, and I can at least pester the right people to see if we can figure out a way to make it happen.
(And hey, if anyone is interested in helping out with this on a purely voluntary basis, let me know. :))
Bull
-
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
I wouldn't get my hopes up on getting errata for WAR in several years, considering the erratas for Augmentation(been apparently ready about half a dozen time by now and is included in some format into german realise) and Runners Companion(Is included into latest English printing) are still nowhere to be found.
-
Jason, with all due respect, that's a load of bulldrek.
I can respect that in your position, you have a lot to do. You have more responsibilities than simply editing and proofing a book. It's very time-consuming, and I'm sure you don't have enough time as is.
But there's a saying that applies: "The buck stops here." You are ultimately responsible for the quality of every Shadowrun product that goes out, no matter how busy you are. If a draft is riddled with errors, it is your job to fix it yourself or delegate to a competent editor. (Which, according to the writing credits on War!, you did both. John Dunn is a skilled editor.)
I think your previous statement is telling. Your focus is on putting out product to make money for CGL, rather than putting out quality product. This is a formula for failure. I and others have been boycotting CGL products for various reasons, but crappy product isn't going to bring back the fans.
-
Will errata be released in the future for current products?
I wouldn't get my hopes up on getting errata for WAR in several years, considering the erratas for Augmentation(been apparently ready about half a dozen time by now and is included in some format into german realise) and Runners Companion(Is included into latest English printing) are still nowhere to be found.
Runners Companion I knew about and it irks me, particularly now that the most recent printing actually includes the damn changes. Augmentation I didn't even know about but it also irks me now that I do. Considering these are books with known issues in books that are 2 and even 3 years old it doesn't inspire confidence in me to pick up new first printings with some confidence that errors found in those printings will be fixed. Sure they've been fixed in Runners, but only in a new printing, which is almost worse than not being fixed at all as it can clearly be seen by those with the right inclination as an attempt by Catalyst to get people to pay for the type of fixes that are generally considered to be free in this field. (And honestly, if anyone is likely to make those conclusions, it's Shadowrun fans, after all, look at the game we're playing here :P)
I know fixing these problems takes developer time and money, but keeping up consumer confidence, particularly in the internet community where it's at an all time low for at least the CGL publication of Shadowrun, has a significant, if difficult to measure value. That said, I know that I'm stating the obvious, guess I just want to publicly throw in my two cents on the issue.
I think your previous statement is telling. Your focus is on putting out product to make money for CGL, rather than putting out quality product. This is a formula for failure. I and others have been boycotting CGL products for various reasons, but crappy product isn't going to bring back the fans.
Case in point.
-
Since I was ignored, I'll state things a bit more bluntly. Jason Hardy, do you intend to adopt a "get to it later" approach to errata, or a "The Buck Stops Here" approach?
-
Since I was ignored, I'll state things a bit more bluntly. Jason Hardy, do you intend to adopt a "get to it later" approach to errata, or a "The Buck Stops Here" approach?
I thought it was pretty clear that he's working on the issue but needs to fit it into the production schedule:
Yes, I'll be working on that. It is, as always, a matter of finding the time …
Jason H.
-
I've seen doom and gloom about the Shadowrun line since the very beginning. I'm sure if I still had my archive of old Shadowrun mailing lists I'd find references to the end of the game and the poor direction of the line going back to 1990. I remember having exactly those discussions in IRC. There have been many times the future of this game line has been very cloudy and the end seemed very near. None of those times , including the end of FASA, has seemed as likely as the past year. The fact that we have any new product to talk about is frankly amazing. If there are a few typos and some errata that got missed, I say pull up your big girl panties, stop whining about someone else not doing enough, and do it yourself.
I'll be the first one to sign up as a volunteer to proofread.
I'll also take it upon myself to start finding errata in the books I currently own.
-
I thought it was pretty clear that he's working on the issue but needs to fit it into the production schedule:
Yes, I'll be working on that. It is, as always, a matter of finding the time …
Jason H.
Generally the response to "not enough time" is "make the time".
At least that's what my boss always barks at me.
Delegation does wonders.*
-k
* - as someon who just helped put together a local stage production doing what normally takes months in the space of weeks, I can say that the old adage "many hands make light work" really does apply.
-
If there are a few typos and some errata that got missed, I say pull up your big girl panties, stop whining about someone else not doing enough, and do it yourself.
I would gladly release the erratas for Augmentation and RC if i had them, but unlike the Catalyst Games i don't have those erratas ;)
-
I thought it was pretty clear that he's working on the issue but needs to fit it into the production schedule:
That's the "Get to it later" approach. Personally, I'd rather see a: "The Buck Stops Here" approach, but you probably guessed that.
I don't doubt that Jason has a busy schedule, but that's no excuse.
-
I thought it was pretty clear that he's working on the issue but needs to fit it into the production schedule:
That's the "Get to it later" approach. Personally, I'd rather see a: "The Buck Stops Here" approach, but you probably guessed that.
I don't doubt that Jason has a busy schedule, but that's no excuse.
You could always volunteer your time to Proofread and correct Errata. Of course, to work on the project, you'd probably have to put in at least 20-30 hours a week. They might be able to budget some money for you, but hey, you love the game so much, I'm sure you'll give up your nights and weekends for free.
-
You could always volunteer your time to Proofread and correct Errata. Of course, to work on the project, you'd probably have to put in at least 20-30 hours a week. They might be able to budget some money for you, but hey, you love the game so much, I'm sure you'll give up your nights and weekends for free.
I'm disabled. If Jason Hardy sends me a letter asking me to fix War!, along with an editable copy, I'd do it. (Editable copy, natch, being so I can fix any typos I discover.) I submitted fan stuff for SR3 for free, so don't worry about payment. About the only thing I'd need to ask money for is whatever program they use to write the book in; I only have Acrobat Reader and Open Office; probably not what a professional shop uses.
And for the record, I have a minor in English. I'm a little out of date on the punctuation and grammar style guides, but I'm sure I can manage. Oh, and I'm not super computer-savvy, so I'll need a few days to get used to the programs. Otherwise, not a problem.
Your move.
-
Just FYI, copy editors don't work directly on the final documents, that's what layout people do. Editors hand off explicit instructions to the layout people like, "On page X, section 'Stuff Matters,' replace the second paragraph, third sentence to the end, 'Ipsum lorem ...' with 'The quick brown fox jumped.'" The layout people then make the changes, fitting it in with minimal impact on the surrounding text, correcting page references and such as necessary. There's a lot more process to publishing than most fans realize, and everyone involved has multiple projects with schedules to meet. When JH says it's hard to fit things into the schedule, that doesn't mean he could fix things by staying late on a Thursday. He's not the only person who needs to work on it. And because of the difficulty of organizing things, and the cost of re-printing, they usually collect errata into batches, synced up with times that they'd be re-printing anyway.
-
All the more reason to have done it right in the first place.
I haven't done any publishing since college-- way too many years ago-- so I'll admit ignorance. However, I do know the importance of putting out a quality finished product. ANd even if it takes a lot of time and effort, you need to spend that effort if you want people to think you've got a quality product. Jason Hardy said, in so many words, that he was more interested in producing books to sell than fixing shoddy product. I think that's the wrong way to go.
-
Terrific! Cain, I'm being a little snarky (comes from just moving into a new place and still unpacking) and I apologize, but if you do have that kind of experience, step up to the plate and send JH a PM offering your services. When the board first launched, I did just that, offering my experience as a Web Developer to help out whenever needed. After a few months here, they offered me a Global Moderator position.
So, if you're serious about helping and not just complaining about what's wrong, then volunteer to help. JH might not be able to put you to work immediately, but he'll at least know there's an option out there if he needs it.
-
Just FYI, copy editors don't work directly on the final documents, that's what layout people do. Editors hand off explicit instructions to the layout people like, "On page X, section 'Stuff Matters,' replace the second paragraph, third sentence to the end, 'Ipsum lorem ...' with 'The quick brown fox jumped.'" The layout people then make the changes, fitting it in with minimal impact on the surrounding text, correcting page references and such as necessary. There's a lot more process to publishing than most fans realize, and everyone involved has multiple projects with schedules to meet. When JH says it's hard to fit things into the schedule, that doesn't mean he could fix things by staying late on a Thursday. He's not the only person who needs to work on it. And because of the difficulty of organizing things, and the cost of re-printing, they usually collect errata into batches, synced up with times that they'd be re-printing anyway.
That would be a little more convincing post, if it wasn't a know fact that couple of erratas are ready and it's pretty much just that no have bothered to realise them to us.
-
Terrific! Cain, I'm being a little snarky (comes from just moving into a new place and still unpacking) and I apologize, but if you do have that kind of experience, step up to the plate and send JH a PM offering your services. When the board first launched, I did just that, offering my experience as a Web Developer to help out whenever needed. After a few months here, they offered me a Global Moderator position.
So, if you're serious about helping and not just complaining about what's wrong, then volunteer to help. JH might not be able to put you to work immediately, but he'll at least know there's an option out there if he needs it.
You appear to be missing the point of the question,
Simply the question is
Which is more important
A) Fixing mistakes at some point in the future
Or
B) Changing things to make sure there are less mistakes going forward (with a show of good will of putting out some fixes for previously admited fuckups)
Offering to help by any person outside the company is irrelevent to that question. In fact unless answer B is taken any offers of help are pointless as they are unlikely to be utilised if the 'At some point' option is taken forward.
-
Terrific! Cain, I'm being a little snarky (comes from just moving into a new place and still unpacking) and I apologize, but if you do have that kind of experience, step up to the plate and send JH a PM offering your services. When the board first launched, I did just that, offering my experience as a Web Developer to help out whenever needed. After a few months here, they offered me a Global Moderator position.
So, if you're serious about helping and not just complaining about what's wrong, then volunteer to help. JH might not be able to put you to work immediately, but he'll at least know there's an option out there if he needs it.
You appear to be missing the point of the question,
Simply the question is
Which is more important
A) Fixing mistakes at some point in the future
Or
B) Changing things to make sure there are less mistakes going forward (with a show of good will of putting out some fixes for previously admited fuckups)
Offering to help by any person outside the company is irrelevent to that question. In fact unless answer B is taken any offers of help are pointless as they are unlikely to be utilised if the 'At some point' option is taken forward.
A) This is where my response comes in that it's better to try and help than to complain.
B) This has been discussed in other threads regarding the problems they've been having with a "leak" in the pool, which has resulted in them needing to tighten up security on projects. The tightened security means that freelancers are less likely to talk to each other as they're working on the project and, thus, JH has to go over everything himself. Unfortunately, this also increases the likelihood that errors will slip through (or he can delay the project's release 2-3 more months to give it a few more passes).
-
Terrific! Cain, I'm being a little snarky (comes from just moving into a new place and still unpacking) and I apologize, but if you do have that kind of experience, step up to the plate and send JH a PM offering your services. When the board first launched, I did just that, offering my experience as a Web Developer to help out whenever needed. After a few months here, they offered me a Global Moderator position.
So, if you're serious about helping and not just complaining about what's wrong, then volunteer to help. JH might not be able to put you to work immediately, but he'll at least know there's an option out there if he needs it.
You appear to be missing the point of the question,
Simply the question is
Which is more important
A) Fixing mistakes at some point in the future
Or
B) Changing things to make sure there are less mistakes going forward (with a show of good will of putting out some fixes for previously admited fuckups)
Offering to help by any person outside the company is irrelevent to that question. In fact unless answer B is taken any offers of help are pointless as they are unlikely to be utilised if the 'At some point' option is taken forward.
A) This is where my response comes in that it's better to try and help than to complain.
B) This has been discussed in other threads regarding the problems they've been having with a "leak" in the pool, which has resulted in them needing to tighten up security on projects. The tightened security means that freelancers are less likely to talk to each other as they're working on the project and, thus, JH has to go over everything himself. Unfortunately, this also increases the likelihood that errors will slip through (or he can delay the project's release 2-3 more months to give it a few more passes).
You seem quite hung up on people doing their work for them.
We cant all give up our time and devote ourselves to a unpaid position like your good self, this distinction doesnt make us any less worthy to make a point as a fan and a paying customer
The point I think is this.
Money is paid for goods - These goods have errors which would be unacceptable in most other areas of sales (this does not say it doesn't happen just it is not accepted). It is up to the company who creates them to do things better but in this instance they can earn goodwill by actively fixing the errors that have already happened and as such maybe keep some customers.
All suggestions of 'why don't you help rather then complain' are irrelevant to the actual issue. If they wanted help with the problem they could ask for it and I'm pretty sure they would have more offers then they know what to do with. But as so repeatedly pointed out by its absence they don't want the help.
Current updates have not been published as errata, promised errata have not been completed and the recent product has been more sloppy then expected. All these things are bad signs which do not appear to have been given the seriousness they deserve.
I would like to believe that things will get better and I would prefer not to aim any vitriol at any one person (I believe that the work is a team effort and every single person is responsible for his own input), but that being said I am somewhat worried by the 'We will do it when we want to and you should be damm well happy we are even doing this much' attitude.
-
I would like to believe that things will get better and I would prefer not to aim any vitriol at any one person (I believe that the work is a team effort and every single person is responsible for his own input), but that being said I am somewhat worried by the 'We will do it when we want to and you should be damm well happy we are even doing this much' attitude.
This is the part that I'm getting hung up on. I have yet to see any such attitude from JH or any of the other freelancers that are working on the projects. It's not a "we'll do it when we want to" approach, it's a "we have X outstanding projects right now and, unfortunately, the errata isn't high on the priorities" approach.
-
Just FYI:
The turnaround time between my email to Mr. Hardy offering to help proofread and his response with attached NDA forms was about three hours. I turned in the NDA forms that night and received my first chapter for proofing a few days later. I cannot say anything about how and whether proofreader changes are incorporated into the final product because I just started. Once a product I helped proofread is published and I am no longer bound by NDA I will comment on the differences between the final product and the draft I was given to proofread.
-
I would like to believe that things will get better and I would prefer not to aim any vitriol at any one person (I believe that the work is a team effort and every single person is responsible for his own input), but that being said I am somewhat worried by the 'We will do it when we want to and you should be damm well happy we are even doing this much' attitude.
This is the part that I'm getting hung up on. I have yet to see any such attitude from JH or any of the other freelancers that are working on the projects. It's not a "we'll do it when we want to" approach, it's a "we have X outstanding projects right now and, unfortunately, the errata isn't high on the priorities" approach.
What part of 'isnt high on the priorities' isnt 'when we want to'
When you set the timelines you get to decide what the plan is.
We might differ in our interpratation but you have admitted yourself its not a high priority.
-
I would like to believe that things will get better and I would prefer not to aim any vitriol at any one person (I believe that the work is a team effort and every single person is responsible for his own input), but that being said I am somewhat worried by the 'We will do it when we want to and you should be damm well happy we are even doing this much' attitude.
This is the part that I'm getting hung up on. I have yet to see any such attitude from JH or any of the other freelancers that are working on the projects. It's not a "we'll do it when we want to" approach, it's a "we have X outstanding projects right now and, unfortunately, the errata isn't high on the priorities" approach.
What part of 'isnt high on the priorities' isnt 'when we want to'
When you set the timelines you get to decide what the plan is.
We might differ in our interpratation but you have admitted yourself its not a high priority.
Because "WANT" is a big difference from "CAN".
I may "WANT" to buy the big flatscreen TV this week. I "CAN" buy it after saving my money for the next couple of weeks.
They may "WANT" to collect and publish the errata for the products, but "CAN'T" because they are currently working on getting Runner's Toolkit and Attitude out the door. And with the backlash from the release of War!, these are probably getting an extra go-around now, thus pushing the schedule back a bit further than they'd like.
As for timelines, I have yet to see any timeline accurately predict when a project will be done.
-
This is the part that I'm getting hung up on. I have yet to see any such attitude from JH or any of the other freelancers that are working on the projects. It's not a "we'll do it when we want to" approach, it's a "we have X outstanding projects right now and, unfortunately, the errata isn't high on the priorities" approach.
And that IMO is really really bad approach, especially when few of those erratas are allready made and just awaiting someone to release thenm to the general public(as opposed to only those who buy new printings of books)
-
Okay, I should clarify that my "quote" isn't a direct quote from anyone, but merely an example of what may be going on. I have no idea what the priorities for JH nor anyone else is right now. I also am not part of the publishing process for CGL, so I don't know what may be on the table nor what may be ready to release.
-
...especially when few of those erratas are allready made and just awaiting someone to release thenm to the general public(as opposed to only those who buy new printings of books)...
This statement is based on...?
-
...especially when few of those erratas are allready made and just awaiting someone to release thenm to the general public(as opposed to only those who buy new printings of books)...
This statement is based on...?
There does appear to have been changes made to second printings that have not been errata'ed yet. I cant give actual details I'm afraid as I dont buy multiple copies of the same hardback.
-
...especially when few of those erratas are allready made and just awaiting someone to release thenm to the general public(as opposed to only those who buy new printings of books)...
This statement is based on...?
The fact that the German printing as well as the latest English printing of RC include the errata as does the german version of Augmentation(from what i have cathered from emplyee posts, that one has been ready about half a dozen times over the years and has never been realeased :()
-
I would like to believe that things will get better and I would prefer not to aim any vitriol at any one person (I believe that the work is a team effort and every single person is responsible for his own input), but that being said I am somewhat worried by the 'We will do it when we want to and you should be damm well happy we are even doing this much' attitude.
This is the part that I'm getting hung up on. I have yet to see any such attitude from JH or any of the other freelancers that are working on the projects. It's not a "we'll do it when we want to" approach, it's a "we have X outstanding projects right now and, unfortunately, the errata isn't high on the priorities" approach.
It shouldn't be a question of "want to". It's a question of "Do we put out a quality product, or not?" Basically, once again, this comes down to The Buck Stops Here.
Putting out a car with full safety features isn't a matter of "priority", it's a matter of quality. It doesn't matter how many outstanding projects you have, quality is important.
-
I would like to believe that things will get better and I would prefer not to aim any vitriol at any one person (I believe that the work is a team effort and every single person is responsible for his own input), but that being said I am somewhat worried by the 'We will do it when we want to and you should be damm well happy we are even doing this much' attitude.
This is the part that I'm getting hung up on. I have yet to see any such attitude from JH or any of the other freelancers that are working on the projects. It's not a "we'll do it when we want to" approach, it's a "we have X outstanding projects right now and, unfortunately, the errata isn't high on the priorities" approach.
It shouldn't be a question of "want to". It's a question of "Do we put out a quality product, or not?" Basically, once again, this comes down to The Buck Stops Here.
Putting out a car with full safety features isn't a matter of "priority", it's a matter of quality. It doesn't matter how many outstanding projects you have, quality is important.
So now it no longer matters if they want to or not. Now, you're saying proof-reading and correcting errata is the same as Toyota making sure the brakes are up to snuff.
<sigh>
All I'm trying to say here is that the publishing industry has it's own problems. Then you toss in RPGs as a niche publishing and you get more problems because you don't have as many people going over the books as Little, Brown and Company that can have 50 people read over Twilight before it hits the shelves. THEN you add to the fact that Catalyst doesn't have the resources of WotC/White Wolf, so that means there's even less to work with. Are errors going to slip through? More than likely. Is it important they get fixed? Yes. Do I want JH and crew to postpone deadlines of other projects in the pipeline in order to get a official pdf that says "Page 52, paragraph 5, line 2: replace 'his' with 'hers'"? No.
But that's my own personal feelings on the matter. You obviously feel differently about the subject and nothing I say will change that, so let's agree to disagree on this and let the matter drop.
-
Ok, this is my position if I get to choose from
A) A book taking 8 months to be written published and dispatched but it has mistakes / errors which may or may not be fixed at some point in the future.
Or
B) A book taking 10 - 12 months to be written published and dispatched but is of very high quality and needs only minor tweeks at worst
I'm choosing B please Bob.
Id rather wait abit longer for something great then less time for something ok with no guarentee of it being fixed.
*my prospective timelines are not supposed to be realistic as I have no real background data on this subject. All expressions of time should be used for indicitive purposes only, if you do know actual timelines please feel free to substitute these in your own head.
-
Do I want JH and crew to postpone deadlines of other projects in the pipeline in order to get a official pdf that says "Page 52, paragraph 5, line 2: replace 'his' with 'hers'"? No.
Yeah, because obliviously releasing erratas that are already made is gonna postpone new releases by a whole lot ::) ::)
-
@Lansdren:
I agree, if it takes longer to get a better quality product out, I can be patient. But for a product that's been worked on for a while and will soon see the light of day (like the Runner's Toolkit), I'd rather not have it be delayed a couple more months so they can get errata out for a book that's been published.
@Mäx:
I don't know what JH has on his desk ready to go, so I can't say that errata is already made for the products that they can release to the public. Yes, they have a collection of errata and have fixed it in 2nd printings and such, but they may not have it in a file and/or format that they can just publish to PDF and put it on the site. Like I said, I don't know what's on everyone's plates right now nor what is readily available to them. Also remember, as was brought up before, they are working for a company and have people they report to. If the higher-ups tell them to focus on new (income-generating) products versus publishing (free) errata, they have to focus their energy on the wishes of their bosses.
-
They could try making a half price released Proofread PDF with a form for fan suggested fixes that way they have more eyes on it and no one is disappointed on low quality because they know it is a proofread copy and if they relay love shadowrun they can help raise the quality themselves. it is sad that the idea is unlikely end up on the table though.
-
Maybe they should hire someone to just deal with errata. Or get a volunteer. Someone who is dedicated to just taking care of the compilation, release, and incorporation (into new print copies) of errata.
-
I am fairly sure that if they just post it on the forums they would get plenty of errata feedback
-
Then you toss in RPGs as a niche publishing and you get more problems because you don't have as many people going over the books as Little, Brown and Company that can have 50 people read over Twilight before it hits the shelves. THEN you add to the fact that Catalyst doesn't have the resources of WotC/White Wolf, so that means there's even less to work with.
If it's so impossible, I wonder how they managed to put out errata before...
And it's not like they need to come up with print-ready errata here, which has to be worded so than paragraphs and everything else stays in place. A simple list like "Karmagen: Attributes should have cost Rx5, not Rx3" would already suffice
-
If it's so impossible, I wonder how they managed to put out errata before...
And it's not like they need to come up with print-ready errata here, which has to be worded so than paragraphs and everything else stays in place. A simple list like "Karmagen: Attributes should have cost Rx5, not Rx3" would already suffice
I don't think it's a coincidence that we stopped seeing errata right around the same time that the company ran into some very rocky times financially. For a while, they were struggling just to pay the printers so that they could sell books so they could make any money at all. The same crisis led to a mass personnel exodus, and in some cases they had to rework whole products to replace material that ex-employees took with them (e.g., Runners Toolkit). Clearly, the process they had before did allow for regular errata, but they're playing catch-up now. I think it's inappropriate to cast the situation as greed versus quality, when I suspect that the situation is more like survival versus perfection.
Also, getting errata ready for publication in two different forms like that isn't trivial. I don't know how expensive it is in the game publishing world, but it's certainly not free. Again, when the company is recovering from financial disaster, core work is likely more important than polish.
-
And it's not like they need to come up with print-ready errata here, which has to be worded so than paragraphs and everything else stays in place. A simple list like "Karmagen: Attributes should have cost Rx5, not Rx3" would already suffice
The print ready errata for RC is allready done, it's in the latest printing of RC >:(
-
And it's not like they need to come up with print-ready errata here, which has to be worded so than paragraphs and everything else stays in place. A simple list like "Karmagen: Attributes should have cost Rx5, not Rx3" would already suffice
The print ready errata for RC is allready done, it's in the latest printing of RC >:(
But is it in Errata form (i.e. "Page X, Paragraph Y, line Z") or have they gone through and updated RC? There's a big difference there. It's easier to go through a book and correct things on the fly, harder to list those mistakes and compile it all in a separate file. Note, I'm not saying it's extremely difficult, just that it's not as easy as correcting for a second printing.
-
I don't think it's a coincidence that we stopped seeing errata right around the same time that the company ran into some very rocky times financially.
The troubles came to a head around one year ago. By that time "errata" had long become a running gag. Regular errata? Good one :D
-
Okay, I think this discussion has pretty much beaten the dead horse into a pulpy paste. We, as fans, don't know the situation on projects and errata in house. We can speculate all day and night long as to why this hasn't been released or that hasn't been updated, but in the end, it's only speculation. JH & crew probably could answer a lot of these questions, but I have a feeling they are all busy working right now to stop by and tell us what's what. Since it's policy that street dates aren't bandied about until they've reached a "point of no return" in the publishing of the book, it probably extends to errata and FAQs as well--in other words, when it's ready, they'll let us know.
A lot of things have gone on with the guys in the past few years, and this has caused a lot of issues with publishing and such. I'm not saying you should all put on your rose-colored glasses and dance in the park, but if answers are available, they'll let us know as soon as they can.
With all that being said, unless you have something more to offer in this thread (like volunteering to help proof or compile Errata--like in the Errata sub-forum (http://forums.shadowrun4.com/index.php?board=12.0)), this thread has run its course. It's not going to get locked unless it goes way further down from where it is now. I'm pretty sure five pages of posts have gotten the point across.
-
Maybe they should hire someone to just deal with errata. Or get a volunteer. Someone who is dedicated to just taking care of the compilation, release, and incorporation (into new print copies) of errata.
This may seem like a silly point, but isn't there already someone who does that? I know that exists (and forums to organize the errata) over on the BT side, so I just kind of assumed (perhaps mistakenly) that it did for the SR side as well. Do we have any idea on that?
Edit: Sorry, just saw Fastjack's post now. Feel free to ignore.
-
And it's not like they need to come up with print-ready errata here, which has to be worded so than paragraphs and everything else stays in place. A simple list like "Karmagen: Attributes should have cost Rx5, not Rx3" would already suffice
The print ready errata for RC is allready done, it's in the latest printing of RC >:(
But is it in Errata form (i.e. "Page X, Paragraph Y, line Z") or have they gone through and updated RC? There's a big difference there. It's easier to go through a book and correct things on the fly, harder to list those mistakes and compile it all in a separate file.
You do know that the errata form is as far as i understand from Jasons and CO posts exactly the same format in witch it is send to the lay-out guy who then makes the actual changes to the book.
-
And it's not like they need to come up with print-ready errata here, which has to be worded so than paragraphs and everything else stays in place. A simple list like "Karmagen: Attributes should have cost Rx5, not Rx3" would already suffice
The print ready errata for RC is allready done, it's in the latest printing of RC >:(
But is it in Errata form (i.e. "Page X, Paragraph Y, line Z") or have they gone through and updated RC? There's a big difference there. It's easier to go through a book and correct things on the fly, harder to list those mistakes and compile it all in a separate file.
You do know that the errata form is as far as i understand from Jasons and CO posts exactly the same format in witch it is send to the lay-out guy who then makes the actual changes to the book.
No I did not.
-
So now it no longer matters if they want to or not. Now, you're saying proof-reading and correcting errata is the same as Toyota making sure the brakes are up to snuff.
<sigh>
All I'm trying to say here is that the publishing industry has it's own problems. Then you toss in RPGs as a niche publishing and you get more problems because you don't have as many people going over the books as Little, Brown and Company that can have 50 people read over Twilight before it hits the shelves. THEN you add to the fact that Catalyst doesn't have the resources of WotC/White Wolf, so that means there's even less to work with. Are errors going to slip through? More than likely. Is it important they get fixed? Yes. Do I want JH and crew to postpone deadlines of other projects in the pipeline in order to get a official pdf that says "Page 52, paragraph 5, line 2: replace 'his' with 'hers'"? No.
Quality still matters. Twilight wouldn't have sold so well if it had so many typos per capita. And you're mixing up proofreading with errata. Proofreading should be done in such a way that there should be very little need for errata. And 50 editors isn't necessary for a project the size of War!, two should suffice. And by a coincidence, we have two very good editors on the project, John Dunn and Jason Hardy himself. I *know* they're capable of better work than this. I've seen it.
I'm going to echo what another poster said. If it comes to a choice between getting a slipshod book quickly, or waiting for a quality one, I vote for quality. Delays are common in the RPG industry, and CGL doesn't announce street dates until the product is ready to hit the streets. I say take it one step further: don't announce the release until the book is good enough for release.
-
I say take it one step further: don't announce the release until the book is good enough for release.
They are already doing this. They do announce upcoming projects, but do not give any dates until just before it goes out.
-
I say take it one step further: don't announce the release until the book is good enough for release.
They are already doing this. They do announce upcoming projects, but do not give any dates until just before it goes out.
I think he was more meaning the "Good enough for release" bit. but then again we can have different ideas of what is good enough to spend money on
-
Guys, come on. the freelancers have heard your complaints, best thing you can do now is either volunteer your time as unpaid fact checkers or stop wasting people's time with endless complaining. Let them work and let's see if the backlash from War! makes anything better.
-
...or stop wasting people's time with endless complaining.
This is the Internet, it's a home for people to whine for the sake of whining.
-
This is the Internet, it's a home for people to whine for the sake of whining.
Hey! Some of us whine for the sake of being dicks too you know. ;)
-
Hey! Some of us whine for the sake of being dicks too you know.
I wasn't going to say anything, that whole "Let's be adults here." rule and everything. ^_^
-
Hey! Some of us whine for the sake of being dicks too you know.
I wasn't going to say anything, that whole "Let's be adults here." rule and everything. ^_^
Monky has his own corollary to that law. ;)
-
There's a point where getting out errata to fix products becomes not a point of wanting to do it, but rather a point of needing to do it to get books to the point where people realize that they are actually going to do quality products. I think Catalyst is about one bad book away from a having a substantial portion of the fanbase (and I'm not even just referring to the vocal online fanbase) stop buying books because they realize they're going to be crap.
Truth be told from some of the griping I've seen around here and Dumpshock I'd say they hit that point with War! amongst a statistically significant portion of the vocal internet fanbase. Even a start on putting out some old errata might help their case here, given that there are at least 2 books worth that sound like they only need layout at a max before being put out. I'm not even going to cut them slack at this point for the fact that they've had to change layout people because their old one left during the Bills crisis, since from the sounds of it this has been ready more than long enough that it could have been solved before then.
Given that they fought to keep the license for Shadowrun, it's about time they started making us think they actually want it rather than treating it like an ork born in a humanis neighbourhood.
-
There's a point where getting out errata to fix products becomes not a point of wanting to do it, but rather a point of needing to do it to get books to the point where people realize that they are actually going to do quality products. I think Catalyst is about one bad book away from a having a substantial portion of the fanbase (and I'm not even just referring to the vocal online fanbase) stop buying books because they realize they're going to be crap.
Truth be told from some of the griping I've seen around here and Dumpshock I'd say they hit that point with War! amongst a statistically significant portion of the vocal internet fanbase. Even a start on putting out some old errata might help their case here, given that there are at least 2 books worth that sound like they only need layout at a max before being put out. I'm not even going to cut them slack at this point for the fact that they've had to change layout people because their old one left during the Bills crisis, since from the sounds of it this has been ready more than long enough that it could have been solved before then.
Given that they fought to keep the license for Shadowrun, it's about time they started making us think they actually want it rather than treating it like an ork born in a humanis neighbourhood.
And it's my opinion that they haven't reached that yet based on the outcry on these forums. Except for some (about a dozen) very vocal people, I don't see the majority of fans here ready to stop buying books.
If the product doesn't meet with your expectations, that's fine. Vote with your pocketbook (god knows I've been doing just that with WotC products for the last 3½ years). But here's the thing. You've made your point that you don't like it and want better quality. So have others. That doesn't mean you need to come in and reiterate that sentiment every few weeks/days/hours.
Now to go off on a tangent:
As the old adage goes, "You get more flies with honey than vinegar". Posting on the boards with polite comments regarding the errors in the books, detailing what you've found in the Errata subforum (http://forums.shadowrun4.com/index.php?board=12.0) and telling the writers what you liked and didn't like (again, politely) will get more of a reaction than complaining that they haven't made any good decisions since X.
I'll tell you what I'm basing this off of. I'm a long-standing resident over at Candlekeep forums (http://forum.candlekeep.com/) as well, and they have a LOT of authors and FR Game Designers come by to answer questions and such. They got to where they are by being very conscientious towards their industry guests and making sure all the scribes do the same. I'd love to see that type of atmosphere here, where we could show that we're mature enough that we might convince other "bigwigs" to stop by and answer questions from their fans without fear that they'll get a bunch of comments that are more appropriate over on Youtube.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying that you can't complain. Bitch, whine and moan! But you can do so and STILL be polite to those that are writing what we're reading. The general rule of thumb I use for posting ANYTHING on the internet is "Would my mom/dad/whomever be okay with what I wrote if taken out of context?"
-
I have long said that Shadowrun is my favorite bad RPG. It's gotten better with each edition, but the system has always been arcane, and the setting is more like an action movie than a plausible alternate history. Regardless, the game has always been a ton of fun to play! The recent releases have been along the same vein. There are lots of little fiddly things that I would fix, and a few things are downright annoying, but honestly that's how Shadowrun has always been for me. I've still found the books very helpful and a lot of fun, especially WAR! with its new game information, so they'll certainly not turn me away from the game.
More generally, this has been my experience with the whole RPG industry – and with technical books, and novels, and frankly all publications. Even college textbooks have extensive errata, despite all the reviews that those go through before publication. Fiction, including game books, have much lower standards (and rightfully so, in my opinion). I personally would rather have more creative material, even if it means that I need to fix it myself sometimes.
Of course, if I didn't need to fix it myself, that would be nice too. ;)
-
I've always looked at forums like these as a company coming to me, hat in hand, and asking in very earnest terms what I think of their product. Doubly so with these forums as the actual creators seem to pay attention to them. If someone thinks enough of my opinion to set up and maintain a complicated feedback site, then I want to give it to them in the most constructive way possible.
I've been playing Shadowrun since second edition and I consider fourth edition to be, by far, my favorite. Of this round of books I've loved the Almanac the most because I ADORE the fluff and backstory of the universe. I was irritated by the misprinted columns but i didn't get that upset at them because I live in an imperfect world filled with imperfect people and that was honestly the first misprint that I'd seen that was glaring enough for me to notice it. I understand that War! has a few more and that is sad but I'm a smart and logical human being and if I see something that doesn't make sense I can extrapolate what was probably intended and work from there. I don't see this as indicative of a trend though, I see this as the end result of some innercompany turmoil and it seems like everyone involved is on board with making sure it doesn't happen again. I'm content.
-
There's a point where getting out errata to fix products becomes not a point of wanting to do it, but rather a point of needing to do it to get books to the point where people realize that they are actually going to do quality products.
Needing to get errata out is important, that should go without saying (but I will anyway). The question is in what format are we talking about. A simple PDF of the errata? That shouldn't be too tough. Rolling the errata into the book PDFs? That requires the book to go through layout again, it's not always easy.
I think Catalyst is about one bad book away from a having a substantial portion of the fanbase (and I'm not even just referring to the vocal online fanbase) stop buying books because they realize they're going to be crap.
I don't.
Truth be told from some of the griping I've seen around here and Dumpshock I'd say they hit that point with War! amongst a statistically significant portion of the vocal internet fanbase.
They may delude themselves into thinking otherwise, but the online fanbase is not representative of fans everywhere. I'm willing to bet if you did a straw poll of Shadowrun players the majority won't even know there were issues with CGL. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that a good number can't even tell who's publishing it without looking at the covers.
Even a start on putting out some old errata might help their case here, given that there are at least 2 books worth that sound like they only need layout at a max before being put out.
Who's your source that there are "...at least 2 books worth..."? Unless it's Jason I wouldn't believe the source. If it's one of the people who've been grinding axes for the last year-ish then I would not only not believe them but I would accuse them of stirring up more trouble.
I'm not even going to cut them slack at this point for the fact that they've had to change layout people because their old one left during the Bills crisis, since from the sounds of it this has been ready more than long enough that it could have been solved before then.
Your call. I offered help to Jason, sounds like he's going to accept it. I'll let him continue to be the public face (so don't bother asking me for statuses), while I volunteer my time to help make things better.
Given that they fought to keep the license for Shadowrun, it's about time they started making us think they actually want it rather than treating it like an ork born in a humanis neighbourhood.
Shadowrun's working out the kinks. A little patience will go a long way here.
-
But you can do so and STILL be polite to those that are writing what we're reading. The general rule of thumb I use for posting ANYTHING on the internet is "Would my mom/dad/whomever be okay with what I wrote if taken out of context?"
This is the internet. I am not responsible for people taking my words out of context, nor can I do *anything* to prevent it.
I agree that open flames and insults don't belong, but come on! Even I'm not PC enough to try and avoid bruising the ego of everyone in the world.
As for buying War! versus not buying it, it's your decision. However, you should know that the more shoddy product you buy, the shoddier it'll get. If you want to help Shadowrun, vote with your wallet in favor of high-quality product. The only thing companies listen to is the bottom line. If they discover that you'll buy steaming turds with the Shadowrun logo stamped on them, they'll sell you steaming turds. That's the whole point of making a profit.
Shadowrun's working out the kinks. A little patience will go a long way here.
I've been playing this game for 22 years. I think I've had a lot of patience.
-
Sixth World Almanac and WAR! are high-quality products, by the standards I look for in an RPG supplement. They're full of excellent material to help me prep and play the game. I'm annoyed by some of the glitches in the book, but I don't demand perfection when they're fulfilling their primary function quite well. I've already used both books actively in my group, and the game is better for it.
-
However, you should know that the more shoddy product you buy, the shoddier it'll get. If you want to help Shadowrun, vote with your wallet in favor of high-quality product.
I happen to like the recent books and I don't think they are shoddy. I am voting in favor of getting more high-quality product by giving them my money since I like what I am seeing.
-
I've enjoyed the heck out of the Sixth World Almanac and like the content within. I really didn't notice the errors until I decided to join the forums and to be honest I find them rather minor annoyances than company ending problems. As long as I get a thread or pdf or something that clues me into the missing timeline segments its all good with me. I like the presentation the books are giving. I like full color hardcovers with the bookmark already bound into the book. It looks great. I love the fluff within. And in a way I am voting with my wallet because my wife and I are on a budget and I can only purchase so many books in a year. I wouldn't be buying Shadowrun if I didn't enjoy what I'm reading.
Just my opinion.
-
I've been playing this game for 22 years. I think I've had a lot of patience.
I'm sorry, but what does that have to do with anything? You may have gotten in from the first edition of the game, but how does that make your demands any more important than somebody who got in after you? Why should your opinion be singled out in the sea of other opinions that have been spoken? What does your history of participation have to do with the fact that the game has had, what, five or six Line Developers in the last three years?
-
What does your history of participation have to do with the fact that the game has had, what, five or six Line Developers in the last three years?
You asked for a little patience. I'm pointing out that Shadowrun fans have had a lot of patience recently, especially under CGL. There comes a point where you can't reasonably ask for more time, and CGL hit it quite a while back.
As for the quality of War!-- it's got nothing on past books, or even what CGL is capable of. SR4.5 core is a very nicely done book, well-put together. But quality is going downhill. On Thee Run was good if misguided, Ghost Cartels was plain headache-inducing, and now this?
-
Who's your source that there are "...at least 2 books worth..."? Unless it's Jason I wouldn't believe the source. If it's one of the people who've been grinding axes for the last year-ish then I would not only not believe them but I would accuse them of stirring up more trouble.
Nice for you to not read the topic and make baseless accusations to boot.
That erratas for 2 books are ready is a fact, the german Augmentation includes the errata(that is translated from the English errata) and the RC errata is available in English for those who are willing to shell out money for a new printing of the book, the rest of us are for some bizarre reason shit out of luck as far as any erratas go.
-
Nice for you to not read the topic and make baseless accusations to boot.
I read the thread. It's an interesting read.
That erratas for 2 books are ready is a fact...
See, that's the funny thing. I get people telling me this in one ear, the first time I remember seeing anything about this was over at TGD. A place that I have no faith in. In my other ear, I have Jason telling me something else. Guess who I'm going to believe?
-
See, that's the funny thing. I get people telling me this in one ear, the first time I remember seeing anything about this was over at TGD. A place that I have no faith in. In my other ear, I have Jason telling me something else. Guess who I'm going to believe?
Did you even read the rest of that sentence, if you believe that errata isn't ready even thought its already in a printed book your the most gullible person in the world.
-
If these were normal times then I would agree. That was a stupid statement.
However, as we all know these aren't normal times. People left in unprofessional manners, I would not be surprised if whatever data that was handed back was the bare minimum needed to avoid getting themselves into trouble.
-
More importantly... The question is how much of that Errata is currently "separated out" right now? And in English on top of that (For the stuff that's been Errata'd in the German books).
(This is a question I'm trying to find out, actually, especially from the German freelancers)
Just because a books been updated doesn't mean that there's a list floating around somewhere documenting all the changes. THere must have been at one time, but the question is... Where is that list now? And if it doesn't exist, going through and trying to do a line by line comparison of different editions of a book would be more work than creating a new Errata from scratch. And an all German Errata doesn't us any good either, since most of us can;t read German. If anyone wants to volunteer to collect the German changes and Errata and translate them for me, I'll see about getting them PDF'd and posted though.
I don't really know what the status of all of this is right now. I'm poking at folks and trying to find out, but... For now, all I'm saying is that just because a book has been reprinted with some Eratta doesn't mean that this data exists in a format that's readily available for the masses. It may never have been created (Handwritten notes or emails that were edited directly into a book document), it may have been a casualty of change-overs in personnel buried on someones personal computer and never sent over or uploaded somewhere to anyone else (Jason is, after all, the 6th person to have the Developer Title in the last 6 years), or it's possible that it was in a big bulk of data that was sent over after Adam & Co left, and is currently lost in the piles of disks and hard drives that the Layout guy has. I have no clue.
For the record though, I do agree that there should be Errata published and the PDFs updated periodically. Not that I have anything resembling the free time to work on something like that though.
Bull
-
But come on, Bull. If Toyota lost a few pages of errata to their users manual, they wouldn't stop looking for them or even divert resources away. Losing the errata is bad business practice. Not fixing it is worse.
And there's no shortage of volunteer proofreaders. Just because I have a background in English doesn't make me the only one qualified. Plus, Posthuman Studios manages to put out high-quality products without so many typos, and they're a two-man operation. Manpower isn't an issue, it's priority. The priority is currently on cranking out product instead of making sure that product is of high quality.
-
Plus, Posthuman Studios manages to put out high-quality products without so many typos, and they're a two-man operation.
I don't believe that's quite accurate. There's at least four core folks involved with Posthuman (Adam, Rob, Jack, and Brian). Those would be the folks who accepted the Ennie awards EP won. Though granted, it is a small operation. I have no idea on what they have or use in regards to additional freelancers, or if there's more core folks than that. Or on how their size in numbers compares to current SR staff/freelancers size in numbers. I won't speculate on it either, since I have no freaking clue. :)
-
Just because a books been updated doesn't mean that there's a list floating around somewhere documenting all the changes. THere must have been at one time, but the question is... Where is that list now?
A more imprtant question is, why on earth wasn't errata released when that list came in or at the very least when the new errated books hit the printers.
I can possibly understand why the errata isn't possible to release now, but not why it wasn't realeased back when it should have been(ie: when the new errated book was printed)
-
Only the editors and layout people can answer that. It may have been just as impractical then: We don't know whether a central list or compilation of errata ever existed, or whether it was sent to layout as each issue arose. Likewise, we don't know whether English translations of the German errata ever existed. Of course it would be a good idea to track and translate all of this stuff, and hopefully they'll get back on top of that now that the internal issues have improved.
-
Only the editors and layout people can answer that. It may have been just as impractical then: We don't know whether a central list or compilation of errata ever existed, or whether it was sent to layout as each issue arose. Likewise, we don't know whether English translations of the German errata ever existed. Of course it would be a good idea to track and translate all of this stuff, and hopefully they'll get back on top of that now that the internal issues have improved.
Hell if I know. I wonder the same thing.
-
This is somewhat the problem.
There have been errors but no real answer on how its going to be fixed apart from the odd comment of its getting better and at some point we will fix the previous mistakes.
Now I think I'm reasonably fair if they said we have it and heres the timeline most of us could live it. Now I'm not talking about future releases because thats far more nebulous and I get that but putting a fix together that can go on the website is something that can be timelined or at least given a deadline to work too. Now I know sod all about publishing but I know a damm lot about working to deadlines and measuring timescales and I know its doable. To even pretend otherwise is simply accepting that things cant be made better.
Now I've heard arguments about the RPG industy being always crap at fixing things or even doing it right the first time and I dont accept it. That might be how things are in some instances but that isnt a good enough reason to accept it as thats how it will always be.
-
Now I've heard arguments about the RPG industy being always crap at fixing things or even doing it right the first time and I dont accept it. That might be how things are in some instances but that isnt a good enough reason to accept it as thats how it will always be.
Hell, CGL has done better than this. The SR4.5 core book is beautiful, and has fewer typos despite being much larger.
-
Hell, CGL has done better than this. The SR4.5 core book is beautiful, and has fewer typos despite being much larger.
Thats not really a fair comparison, most of it isn't new stuff after all.
But Seattle 2072 is also very beautiful and a much fairer comparison IMO.
-
So, what's your comparison? I see fewer typos and more interesting material in approximately the same page count. Do you see the same?
CGL isn't even living up to its *own* standards.
-
A more imprtant question is, why on earth wasn't errata released when that list came in or at the very least when the new errated books hit the printers.
I disagree, I think that's one of the least important questions facing us. It's in the past, it's not something we're able to answer, and there's nothing we can do about it. Well, we can harp over it but that doesn't accomplish anything productive.
Focus on the here and now. Expend energy on things we can improve, in the long run that's what's better for the game.
-
As the old adage goes, "You get more flies with honey than vinegar". Posting on the boards with polite comments regarding the errors in the books, detailing what you've found in the Errata subforum (http://forums.shadowrun4.com/index.php?board=12.0)
Better plan: Write your error list on a piece of paper and place it in the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Chances are that god will descend from heavens to hand out errata on stone tables before CGL gets around to putting a pdf onlne...Did I mention I'm a convinced atheist? ;)
About the first thing you learn in any "producing" job, whether it's brick-laying or literal rocket science, is that fixing errors gets more and more complex the longer the error has been around. So if a company's development process can't catch the most glaring errors before release, don't expect them to fix stuff until they're also able to release quality products again...and that's before you get into the allegations (by bitter ex-Freelancers) of JH simply ignoring error lists.
Regarding the German errata, as far as I've been told Pegasus has to get CGL's approval for every change and addition they do for the German releases. If they want to get approval they need to submit proposals. And if they submit proposals that means a list, even if it's just a series of informal emails, has to be around somewhere. That agreement probably does not cover obvious typos, but at least the more serious changes should be documented.
-
Let me jump in here and say that I know of some corrections that need to be made to certain books. What I don't want to do, though, is release errata in drips and drabs--if we're going to release errata, it should be complete. I'm working on a process to make that happen, but designing new processes takes time, especially when I have many other things I'm doing. I wish errata had come out quicker than it has, but I have a limited amount of time in a day to make everything I want to happen, happen.
Jason H.
-
Let me jump in here and say that I know of some corrections that need to be made to certain books. What I don't want to do, though, is release errata in drips and drabs--if we're going to release errata, it should be complete
Could you tell us what happened to allready complete erratas that are printed in to books, but not released as errata.
-
Let me jump in here and say that I know of some corrections that need to be made to certain books. What I don't want to do, though, is release errata in drips and drabs--if we're going to release errata, it should be complete
Could you tell us what happened to allready complete erratas that are printed in to books, but not released as errata.
Any errata like that was put together before I came on as developer and has not yet been passed on to me. I'll work to track it down.
Jason H.
-
Any errata like that was put together before I came on as developer and has not yet been passed on to me.
Well, that sucks :'(
-
Well I'm not going to hold against you things you didnt get given, hand overs at work during good times can be a ass at bad times I dont even want to imagine.
Can we have some reasurance that the quality issues are being handled in both directions? It does wind me up that I put up with a older copy of a book and the only way to get the updates is to buy a new one.
-
I agree. It sucks that you weren't given the errata, but the fact that revenue is apparently being put over the product is disturbing. What's your plan to improve quality?
-
Well I'm not going to hold against you things you didnt get given, hand overs at work during good times can be a ass at bad times I dont even want to imagine.
Can we have some reasurance that the quality issues are being handled in both directions? It does wind me up that I put up with a older copy of a book and the only way to get the updates is to buy a new one.
Yup. I've gotten the schedule for the year more formalized, and that builds in more quality-assurance time. I'll also be working on a new errata-generating procedure, most of which should be in place by the end of the month.
Jason H.
-
Well I'm not going to hold against you things you didnt get given, hand overs at work during good times can be a ass at bad times I dont even want to imagine.
Can we have some reasurance that the quality issues are being handled in both directions? It does wind me up that I put up with a older copy of a book and the only way to get the updates is to buy a new one.
Yup. I've gotten the schedule for the year more formalized, and that builds in more quality-assurance time. I'll also be working on a new errata-generating procedure, most of which should be in place by the end of the month.
Jason H.
Thanks for coming back with a answer it is appriciated.
I wont try to speak for anyone else but I would be happier to wait longer for better products any day. I'm done with the arguring points have been made which seem to be taken on board I'm willing to extend some time to see the next batch of work under the new procedures. Attitude sounds like it could be fun so I'll look forward to see how that turns out.
-
Well, I am a fan of the Shadowrun Line since the 2cnd Edition and I bought every single PDF Product from the 4th Edition right until the Corporate Guide. And I bought every single book from the 4th edition that was translated in german to have it in paper. The reason I stopped buying the english PDFs right upon their date of release is the poor quality that startet with the Corp Guide discussed in many other threads here and on Dumpshock or the german Pegasus boards.
I can understand the difficulties as explained here in this thread, but seriously that can't be an excuse forever. I mean you just need to go back to the standards you had, not do anything fancy or impossible. I can understand that CGL had a rough time, but please show us your sincere intent to do things better again. In my opinion the timely release of erratas would be the first step in that direction and a strong reason for me to buy the corrected PDFs and the upcoming products right on their release date again. You have lost some trust from your fanbase and I think that would be the right way to begin getting it back.
As said in this thread, this may just be a single opinion, but you can multiply each comment left here and get a very good clue what your customers are thinking. Multiply good comments by a factor 10 times higher than the bad (it is 10x more likely to complain, than to compliment), but even if you do this you must see there is a certain ammount of mistrust in the quality of your releases. Just putting out new products will not fix this, even if they are better than the last, it will take a good ammount of time until this is recognized. That's why starting with erratas should have a high priority, this shows the dissatisfied custumors of the last products, that you take their opinions serious and that you are back on track regarding product quality.
At the moment I don't trust your approach towards quality, whatever the reasons behind that may be. Please restore this trust.
And about that leak - I can't understand why anybody does this and whoever does is certainly not a fan of the game line and treats other peoples work and enthusiasm without respect. But I'd rather see some trash talk about early ideas or unfinished chapters on the internet, than seeing poorly edited books that I have just bought for real money. I understand it must be frustrating for the authors, but seriously: isn't it more frustrating to release a badly researched and edited book and getting this response from your honest customers? I can't really imagine that the trash talkers and trolls who comment on these leaks are part of your loyal customer base.
So please reestablish your old standards for quality releases and fix the errors that were made. I can't think of anything more important for the long term development of the Shadowrun game line and it's fan base.
There a few things more important than the trust of your customers in your products for any business that wants to make money and stay in the market.
-
I can't really imagine that the trash talkers and trolls who comment on these leaks are part of your loyal customer base.
On the contrary, pretty much all of them are/have been loyal members of the customer base for years/decades(some from the very first books ever released) thats the exactly the reason why they take time to express their worries about the way the game line is going to.
-
Any errata like that was put together before I came on as developer and has not yet been passed on to me.
So that I'm getting this right: Not just have procedures for new errata been mostly absent so far, but whatever previously existed got eaten by the dog? Oh dear...
-
I can't really imagine that the trash talkers and trolls who comment on these leaks are part of your loyal customer base.
On the contrary, pretty much all of them are/have been loyal members of the customer base for years/decades(some from the very first books ever released) thats the exactly the reason why they take time to express their worries about the way the game line is going to.
The most vocal fans are often the most passionate fans. The word "Fan" comes from "Fanatic" after all.
-
Any errata like that was put together before I came on as developer and has not yet been passed on to me.
So that I'm getting this right: Not just have procedures for new errata been mostly absent so far, but whatever previously existed got eaten by the dog? Oh dear...
The most vocal fans are often the most passionate fans. The word "Fan" comes from "Fanatic" after all.
The positioning of the quote button gets an other victim, or did you really intend to quote him and not me 8)
-
Yeah, quoted the wrong person. Sorry about that :)
Fixed now :)
-
I get the impression Jason is taking the proofreading very seriously, and I'm actually currently assisting in it myself. I think everyone is going to be pleased with future releases, and if you look at my earlier comments in this topic you'll see I wasn't thrilled about the current state of the product myself.
-
Yup. I've gotten the schedule for the year more formalized, and that builds in more quality-assurance time. I'll also be working on a new errata-generating procedure, most of which should be in place by the end of the month.
Jason H.
Your Battletech Brothers and Sisters have a very good setup at present, established by one of the fandom turned fact checkers essentially volunteering to
run it. Their Erratta forum is also better set up then the one here, with each book given an Errata thread, which gets locked every so many months, errata from
it compiled, put into a the header of a new thread on the book.
The Errata forum here? It is a bit of a Grand Melee. First time I posted something to it, in fact, I was surprised you did not have a thread already set up for
the product in question. It might be a good idea to follow something similar to Battletech's procedure for Errata. It works, after all. (You just have to remember
to remind people that they cannot argue on the errata in that thread..)
Though, I have to wonder why people think it is better to just BWMC then to just, you know, put stuff into the Errata Forum, since, you know, that is what it is there
for?
-
I've been pointing people over there whenever they bring errata up. I'll also bring it up with the other Mods to see about keeping it more organized.
-
There's been a bit of discussion on the freelancer groups about that as well.
But yeah, I agree... Keeping the threads contained, on topic (i.e., no rules discussions or arguments), and concise would help a lot, as would some standardized format of listing potential Errata.
I would actually suggest two threads.. One for pure Errata (Obvious typos and errors), and one for "Questionable COntent" (THis would be where you go "Did you REALLY mean for that to only cost 1,000¥? Seems cheap) or "These rules seem broken!", though again the latter would need to be discussion free... Post up the "Questionable content" there so freelancers and devs can review it, but discuss it over in one of the other sub-forums.
Bull
-
I would actually suggest two threads.. One for pure Errata (Obvious typos and errors), and one for "Questionable COntent" (THis would be where you go "Did you REALLY mean for that to only cost 1,000¥? Seems cheap) or "These rules seem broken!", though again the latter would need to be discussion free... Post up the "Questionable content" there so freelancers and devs can review it, but discuss it over in one of the other sub-forums
BattleTech's forums split that into two sections. Keeps the chatter down in the Errata threads.
-
There are a few forum tweaks I need to do--I'll see what I can get to over the weekend. Maybe while I'm enjoying the Bears game …
Jason H.
-
A thread for each book, with a first post updated with the current errata ever so often, would get a hearty recommendation from me. It's a nicely organized way to do it, and it makes it very easy to find the most up to date information. A few different game forums I frequent use that (Battletech among them), with the usual format of product, page number, issue noted (without long arguments ideally), and suggested corrections (if necessary). I'd think that would be a solid format to follow, provided (and this is really key), clear examples for the desired format of errata submissions are provided at the beginning. Without those examples, confusion can easily result.
-
...and suggested corrections (if necessary).
I prefer the so-new-that-people-didn't-follow-it format of the now down BattleTech forums:
Discussion is only in the "Ask The..." section (whatever its counterpart will be called over here). Aside from obvious tense/word substitution errors, there are no suggested changes in the errata threads. Rather there are links to the outcome of the discussion from the other board.
-
Yeah, I don't mind either way, really. I think it worked in that particular instance, mostly because it was constrained to something like "You missed a half ton on construction here. Need to drop this thing that is only thing that weighs a half ton on the design." In general, the suggestions might be best when they are limited to something that clear cut, and not something liable to inspire heavy debate, or something that is more a matter of personal tastes. Once you start delving into more of the fluff material, it's tough to make clear suggestions.
-
In general, the suggestions might be best when they are limited to something that clear cut, and not something liable to inspire heavy debate, or something that is more a matter of personal tastes. Once you start delving into more of the fluff material, it's tough to make clear suggestions.
Problem stems from what is defined as "clear-cut" changes from person to person.
-
I can't really imagine that the trash talkers and trolls who comment on these leaks are part of your loyal customer base.
On the contrary, pretty much all of them are/have been loyal members of the customer base for years/decades(some from the very first books ever released) thats the exactly the reason why they take time to express their worries about the way the game line is going to.
I'm one of the ones he's talking about. I've played Shadowrun for twenty-two years, I love the game and I'm not giving up on it. So, I complain loud enough to have my voice heard, because I care about the game line. If I didn't care, I'd be content to let the line die. Only people who care will fill out complaint cards, after all. The 60's are long gone, but there was a time when we knew that if we shouted loudly and passionately enough, we could cause a change.
-
Only people who care will fill out complaint cards, after all. The 60's are long gone, but there was a time when we knew that if we shouted loudly and passionately enough, we could cause a change.
I'd disagree that complaint cards are only filled out due to care. Sometimes folks just want to complain (legitimate or otherwise, all depends on the situation). Also, sometimes shouting loudly just ends up being a whole lot of noise and not a whole lot of clear message.
-
Problem stems from what is defined as "clear-cut" changes from person to person.
Yeah, like I mentioned earlier, I think you can have it work as suggestions (and only suggestions, not rants or kvetching). We'll probably differ on that, but it really only works when you're looking at hard and fast numerical mistakes. That was my experience with the BT errata, but then again, I don't actually think the new policy there made sense. :) That's just personal taste speaking, though.
I'm not sure if you'll find that same sort of hard and fast corrections in the type of SR errata needed as a general rule (there could certainly be some things in the future that might fit that mold, I have no clue), as there's less of a construction system in play. (Excepting things like the vehicle/weapon mods). When you get into fluff issues/conflicts, the situation gets a lot messier. I can definitely understand not going the suggestion route there, and simply wanting submissions to point out the conflict, rather than offer a fix.
-
Only people who care will fill out complaint cards, after all. The 60's are long gone, but there was a time when we knew that if we shouted loudly and passionately enough, we could cause a change.
I'd disagree that complaint cards are only filled out due to care. Sometimes folks just want to complain (legitimate or otherwise, all depends on the situation). Also, sometimes shouting loudly just ends up being a whole lot of noise and not a whole lot of clear message.
Or people with a lot of time on their hands. ;)
-
Well I'm not going to hold against you things you didnt get given, hand overs at work during good times can be a ass at bad times I dont even want to imagine.
Can we have some reasurance that the quality issues are being handled in both directions? It does wind me up that I put up with a older copy of a book and the only way to get the updates is to buy a new one.
Yup. I've gotten the schedule for the year more formalized, and that builds in more quality-assurance time. I'll also be working on a new errata-generating procedure, most of which should be in place by the end of the month.
Jason H.
Ummm I may have missed that, well...what year were you exactly talking about?
-
If you have a question for the developers, please ask in a respectful tone.
I realize updates and errata are an outstanding issue, but being disrespectful to the developers is not a way to get them motivated.
-
Please be nice to the Freelancers as well. We have sensitive feelings. :-[
-
Please be nice to the Freelancers as well. We have sensitive feelings. :-[
Get back in your cage, scum!
;)
-
If you have a question for the developers, please ask in a respectful tone.
I realize updates and errata are an outstanding issue, but being disrespectful to the developers is not a way to get them motivated.
Respect is mutual relationship, IMO. Works the same way as trust.
That said, I admit I was sarcastic.
Dev team has such a dedicated defender. I have only sarcasm left.
-
Respect is mutual relationship, IMO. Works the same way as trust.
That said, I admit I was sarcastic.
Dev team has such a dedicated defender. I have only sarcasm left.
Eh...the proof reading has gotten better. There are far fewer instances where it takes 3-4 reads through to
figure out what words are missing, which ones are added, or other funky issues. Yes, there are still things
that make it through. Then again, in novels I have been reading recently, I have noticed typoes, horrible
gramatical errors, etc that slipped past their editors. I have seen issues like that in Palladium, White Wolf,
and Pathfinder books as well. It is NOT something that just happens with CGL. Heck, the new Chaos Marines
Codex from Games Workshop has some weird wording make it through. I consider, though, that CGL has gotten
better over the last year, over all, not just with Shadowrun.
-
If you have a question for the developers, please ask in a respectful tone.
I realize updates and errata are an outstanding issue, but being disrespectful to the developers is not a way to get them motivated.
Respect is mutual relationship, IMO. Works the same way as trust.
That said, I admit I was sarcastic.
Dev team has such a dedicated defender. I have only sarcasm left.
Honestly, with the bitching, I have to ask this. If you* hate the company and game that much, why do you* bother? Do you* just want to troll the people who are happy with the system?
*- Generic 'you' directed at all the BS vitriolic bitching over something as piss-ant as errata and typoes.
-
If you have a question for the developers, please ask in a respectful tone.
I realize updates and errata are an outstanding issue, but being disrespectful to the developers is not a way to get them motivated.
Respect is mutual relationship, IMO. Works the same way as trust.
That said, I admit I was sarcastic.
Dev team has such a dedicated defender. I have only sarcasm left.
Honestly, with the bitching, I have to ask this. If you* hate the company and game that much, why do you* bother? Do you* just want to troll the people who are happy with the system?
*- Generic 'you' directed at all the BS vitriolic bitching over something as piss-ant as errata and typoes.
Frankly? I have often wondered the same thing, myself. There are typoes, there are errors. It is part of publishing, in general,
and especially game publishing. Heck, things get past playtesting all the time and end up in a case where the company has
the choice of just ignoring it or releasing an errata/faq on it. Sure, CGL does not get errata out as fast as I would like. However,
they do get them out. *looks at the 100+ pages of errata for Tactical operations for BattleTech* When they do get them out,
they are, indeed, worth it.
Frankly, the only errata I really wish they would put out is the corrected timeline info for the years they duplicated in 6th World Almanac.
-
like Ive said somewhere else:
"There is a reason that I cannot stop whinning about polishing SRA rules...since if Vehicle combat is redone to make sense, and some major contradictions and glithces that are in Core Rule books are solved published, there will never be the need to get new set of rules, we can just expand the 6th world to the Horizon and beyond. That is why I am so sad from time to time...and sarcastic then..."
(for this contradictions see List of things that need to be cleared somewhere on this forums...) Genraly, I dont mind typos, if they are not gamebreaking, but flaws that had been discovered by geeks playing the game. Like Subscription list difference for example between CoreBook and Unwired, that finaly allow two explanations how haking work etc...
The reason Im bitching is that I love the game. It has potentioal to perfect. Why stop half way.
-
like Ive said somewhere else:
"There is a reason that I cannot stop whinning about polishing SRA rules...since if Vehicle combat is redone to make sense, and some major contradictions and glithces that are in Core Rule books are solved published, there will never be the need to get new set of rules, we can just expand the 6th world to the Horizon and beyond. That is why I am so sad from time to time...and sarcastic then..."
(for this contradictions see List of things that need to be cleared somewhere on this forums...) Genraly, I dont mind typos, if they are not gamebreaking, but flaws that had been discovered by geeks playing the game. Like Subscription list difference for example between CoreBook and Unwired, that finaly allow two explanations how haking work etc...
The reason Im bitching is that I love the game. It has potentioal to perfect. Why stop half way.
Well, then either do as FastJack suggested and sign up to become a Freelancer hoping to get assigned to such things. If you can't be bothered, then keep your traps shut.
-
I wish they would hire Nath. He is very good at picking stuff up, and tends to be fairly professional with his errata's.
Me, I am soooooo not detailed orientated. So the books look fine. If I have an issue with a rule, I just make a call and move on. So I never have anything to bitch about...
-
<snip>It has potentioal to perfect. Why stop half way.
NOTHING will ever be perfect. Adding errata to the vehicle rules may make the game more perfect to you, but for every one like you, there's one like me that doesn't have any problems with the vehicle rules. The same goes for a lot of rules in a lot of games. The only rules that will absolutely be perfect in your own eyes will be rules that you create (and even then, your players will probably disagree). My point is, the best you can do is create a game system with enough stuff to cover the main points and some tangential points, and leave enough room for the GMs and players to create house rules to accommodate their needs.
-
The only rules that will absolutely be perfect in your own eyes will be rules that you create (and even then, your players will probably disagree).
That's not even an absolute, Jack. As someone who's written his fair share of rules, I can speak to that with some authority.
-
I wish they would hire Nath. He is very good at picking stuff up, and tends to be fairly professional with his errata's.
Me, I am soooooo not detailed orientated. So the books look fine. If I have an issue with a rule, I just make a call and move on. So I never have anything to bitch about...
If I have issue with a rule, for the most part I either ignore it if it's a major beef for me (Social Modifiers Limitation I'm looking at you), or I suck it up and deal with it like a grown up rather than whine like a little baby.
-
Calling others "bitch" is really adult way to speak to someone else. Ill leave this to you, since it is your image. You only show that you are not able to argement and comunicate with reasonable people.
About whinnig, Ill listen to the expert. As for those vehicle rules example...Not sure if you ever tried to play by them...everything in all three layers: Magic/Matrix/Flesh happens in 3 second turns...well not vehicle combat. What about adept powers efffects on this scale, for example: If you have static sniper, matrix support and astral overwatch two team members on bikes, cops in the car and target in the van you are trying to kidnap, sittauation is unplayable by RAW. creating my own set of rules is quite silly idea in such complex and interconnected thing as SRA is.
Nath would be excelent addition to team...he has pretty complex view on timeline and that guy is quite reasonable...I, for myself, had a work and woman to take care off. But I can try to help. Když vám to bude stačit česky ;)
-
Okay, time for everyone to calm down a bit. I think I'll lock this until cooler head prevail.