T5 Has Arrived!

[EDG]

I appreciate wanting to know the details before buying the product but I cannot help but wonder if your "gaming industry" definition of play-testing (which I bolded above) is as solid as you seem to imply. Is there truly an industry standard . . . especially now that more gamers are demanding to have their input in the process?

True, it's not a hard-and-fast standard, but when most RPG companies playtest an RPG product, they still do some or all of what I described. Even if it's a public playtest, the same processes are going on - people are trying the systems, pushing the limits, finding the problems, suggesting other ways of doing things that need them, and giving feedback on how the proposed systems are working in practice. That's how it works.

I'll definitely agree with you on one thing . . . the "final" product should be play-tested by a whole new group of people before going public.

I'm still curious to know what purpose the people who have paid $35 and are contributing on the private forum serve though. RPGs usually aren't written by public committee, and it's fairly well know that Marc is sufficiently attached to his vision of T5 that I can't really see him allowing other people to divert him much from it during the writing process.

Also, a company doesn't have to listen to the feedback from playtesters... yes for the most part that would be a bad decision on the part of the publisher, but it's there prerogative.

Given that the "playtesters" in this case have each paid $35 for the privilege of being there, Marc had damn well better listen to them. Oh sure, one can make excuses about how they've paid $35 for the final product and are just in on the playtest as a bonus, but that's a really flimsy self-justification - in practical terms, they've paid the money (sometimes years ago) and all they have to show for it right now is a preliminary CD and all they can do to get any worth out of it is to contribute to a playtest.

I've heard people claiming that the $35 they paid is an "investment" - if it is, then as investors they should be allowed a LOT of influence over the final product. People seem to be under the misapprehension that they're somehow privileged to be able to pay money and contribute to the project, but the reality is that Marc is the one who is privileged enough to be sponsored by people who are paying him money to support his vision - DonM has said that at least 650 people have paid for it, which means that Marc has at least $22,000 in contributions here. So IMO the "investors", "patrons', "sponsors" or whatever one wants to call them have every right to steer Marc wherever THEY want to see the project go, and he had damn well better listen to them if he doesn't want to lose their sponsorship.

 

[EDG]

So relax. It's an inhouse playtest, with a semi-closed playtest group. Exactly like mongoose is doing, and has done, with every product they've put out for traveller since the core rules.

Mongoose don't ask people to pay $35 for a product that they haven't written yet, continually delay it, and then "release" a preliminary version on CDs that they tell people not to talk about that isn't remotely ready for final publication yet.*

Mongoose's authors write the books, they're playtested behind the scenes (or in public, as appropriate), and then they publish them and then they ask people for their money (or ask for pre-orders when they know they've got something written at least).

So no, it's nothing like what Mongoose is doing or has done with every Traveller product they've released.


And if Marc has his way, then nobody is going to see a detailed review of it until it's ready for final release anyway, which for all we know won't be till later in 2009... or 2010, or 2011, or maybe even later. It's a rather baffling way to market a product.

*: And there's another thing - why is T5 even being released as a CD at all when it's not even remotely finalised yet? Wouldn't it have been easier (and cheaper) to just offer it as a download for the people on the private development board?

It's your chance to step up to the plate and have something authoritative to say to those who accuse you of judging without objective evidence. You can say: I have it, I read it, and it sucks....and here is why." At no financial risk to yourself.

I don't have to own it to be able to read it - people already on the playtest are allowed to privately show others their copy of it, and I know several people on the playtest. I've seen enough of the current version to be able to have an informed opinion on its contents - though I'm obviously not going to publicly comment on the specifics of what I've seen (because I still respect the confidentiality, even though I haven't signed an NDA).

 

[AKAramis]

Mongoose don't ask people to pay $35 for a product that they haven't written yet, continually delay it, and then "release" a preliminary version on CDs that they tell people not to talk about that isn't remotely ready for final publication yet.*

*: And there's another thing - why is T5 even being released as a CD at all when it's not even remotely finalised yet? Wouldn't it have been easier (and cheaper) to just offer it as a download for the people on the private development board?

Quite possibly to avoid running afoul of false advertisement claims. Advertise a CD, you'd damned well better deliver a CD.

 

[captainjack23]

I don't have to own it to be able to read it - people already on the playtest are allowed to privately show others their copy of it, and I know several people on the playtest. I've seen enough of the current version to be able to have an informed opinion on its contents - though I'm obviously not going to publicly comment on the specifics of what I've seen (because I still respect the confidentiality, even though I haven't signed an NDA).

So, I'll take that to be a "no thank you " on buying you a copy then ? If you change your mind let me know.

Merry Christmas anyway.

 

[EDG]

So, I'll take that to be a "no thank you " on buying you a copy then ? If you change your mind let me know.

It would be a "no thank you". Even if I did take you up on your offer, I wouldn't be able to get onto CotI, and I am pretty certain that Marc wouldn't want me involved in it anyway and given previous experience I know he wouldn't listen to me even if I was.

Nice gesture, but ultimately futile.

 

[Libris]

I think you are missing the point about the $35 up front. I and, I suspect, many others like me didn't pony up he cash and expect a physical product anytime soon - possibly never in actual fact. Some may well have but those individuals, if unhappy with progress, appear to be able to get their money back. In the scheme of things it's a small amount of cash. It's not an investment, more of a speculative punt. You pay your money and take a chance.

Indeed, it was more of a, "for $35 you can be in on the early drafts, have access to the discussions on the CoTI forum and generally get a look at a product as it develops. oh, and eventually get a CD/DVD with all the stuff on it." Whether that product is to your taste is neither here nor there. I'm not quite sure if it mentioned being a part of the playtest as an actual participant or merely an observer along for the ride. I just thought, "Oh that sounds cool".

 

[EDG]

I think you are missing the point about the $35 up front. I and, I suspect, many others like me didn't pony up he cash and expect a physical product anytime soon - possibly never in actual fact. Some may well have but those individuals, if unhappy with progress, appear to be able to get their money back. In the scheme of things it's a small amount of cash. It's not an investment, more of a speculative punt. You pay your money and take a chance.

So you're saying that it's a gamble on Marc's ability to produce a final product now? It really isn't. You're paying the guy money - in return, you should be getting a final product. Maybe this CD is it - but I think it's a pretty flimsy rationalisation to claim that people are just paying to watch him develop it. Even if that were true, he's still sitting on over $22k of people's cash - I do have to marvel at how he can persuade people to part with that sort of money without the promise of anything concrete in return.

In practical terms, this is pretty similar to the old system of "patronage" - people are giving someone money to create something. The difference is that those people seem to expect or want little say or influence in what's being created, and seem to even lack any expectation that anything will be actually created. I find that somewhat baffling.

What I'm curious about now is whether people who have received the preliminary CD will still be able to get a refund on their money if they want it - or are they now "locked in" and their money isn't retrievable anymore?

Indeed, it was more of a, "for $35 you can be in on the early drafts, have access to the discussions on the CoTI forum and generally get a look at a product as it develops. oh, and eventually get a CD/DVD with all the stuff on it."

IIRC initially it was advertised as "ok, T5 is pretty much done, preorder now and get the CD". Then it became apparent to everyone else (apart from Marc it seemed) that it actually needed a hell of a lot of work to be even usable - Marc even says as much in one of the recent announcements. And then it dragged on and on, slipping through promised release date after promised release date.

What you said is pretty much what you can say in hindsight - after a long, drawn out development phase. But when it was initially annouced it seemed very much as if Marc thought it was nearly ready for release - I don't think he expected it to take this long to get to the stage that it's at now.

Whether that product is to your taste is neither here nor there. I'm not quite sure if it mentioned being a part of the playtest as an actual participant or merely an observer along for the ride. I just thought, "Oh that sounds cool".

If you're there as an observer along for the ride, then it's not a playtest, period. I don't believe any other RPG company has ever done a project where they take money from people so they can watch it being developed and get nothing else out of it.

 

[Sturn]

No one lied to anyone about what they were getting. No one forced anyone to pay for what they were getting.

If Marc Miller had said he was selling you a blank notepad with a T5 logo on it for $250, and told you...that it was a blank notepad with a T5 logo, who can complain if they buy it?

I pre-ordered long ago, never been lied to, and have been told over and over I could get a refund if I wanted to. If this isn't what some are used to, if this is different then past RPG releases, oh well. No one has been duped, there was no con, no one is being ripped off. Let it go.

 

[EDG]

I'm not the one saying it was a con or a dupe - I just don't know what the hell this is. Neither it seems do people involved in the project - some say it's a playtest, others say it isn't, some say it's fully playable, others say it's not even a first draft.

Either way it doesn't really change anything - people have CDs now, but nobody can talk about the contents, so in practical terms T5 still isn't officially released - it's just that now some people at least have something to show for the wait (that presumably they had before, just only in downloadable format). So no change, really.

I can't help but wonder though, what would happen if another RPG company tried this though. I'm fairly sure there'd be people battering down their doors if it took this long to get this far having paid money up front - but Marc mysteriously seems to engender a sense of "oh, whatever" from people. I guess that's what you get from having a cult of personality (cue guitar riff ).

 

[Libris]

So you're saying that it's a gamble on Marc's ability to produce a final product now? It really isn't.

How so? It's always a gamble when you give someone money with a return at an undefined future date.

You're paying the guy money - in return, you should be getting a final product. Maybe this CD is it - but I think it's a pretty flimsy rationalisation to claim that people are just paying to watch him develop it.

Well, as you say, technically I do have a final product. And, perhaps Marc's done it for that very reason - I don't know. Flimsy rationalisation or not that is actually what is happening.

Even if you do, he's still sitting on over $22k of people's cash. I do have to marvel at how he can persuade people to part with that sort of money without the promise of anything concrete in return.

People do it all the time. Welcome to the world...

What I'm curious about now is whether people who have received the preliminary CD will still be able to get a refund on their money if they want it - or are they now "locked in" and their money isn't retrievable anymore?

Now that a tangible product has shipped any number of arguments could be made to state that the contract is complete - or not...

IIRC initially it was advertised as "ok, T5 is pretty much done, preorder now and get the CD". Then it became apparent to everyone else (apart from Marc it seemed) that it actually needed a hell of a lot of work to be even usable - Marc even says as much in one of the recent announcements. And then it dragged on and on, slipping through promised release date after promised release date.

It was an advert. By definition they stretch the truth without actually breaking it - much.

What you said is pretty much what you can say in hindsight - after a long, drawn out development phase. But when it was initially annouced it seemed very much as if Marc thought it was nearly ready for release.

True, but essentially everything I say about events that have transpired is said in hindsight.

If you're there as an observer along for the ride, then it's not a playtest, period.

IIRC nobody ever said it was.

I don't believe any other RPG company has ever done a project where they take money from people so they can watch it being developed and get nothing else out of it.

Yeah, it's quite clever. Wish I'd thought of it...

 

[EDG]

How so? It's always a gamble when you give someone money with a return at an undefined future date.

T5 was never advertised as a such though. It was "pre-order it now, get the product later" - not "pay money now, and maybe you might get something in a few years".

Well, as you say, technically I do have a final product. And, perhaps Marc's done it for that very reason - I don't know. Flimsy rationalisation or not that is actually what is happening.

It's still a flimsy rationalisation though. I guess I just can't get my head around the fact that people can be satisfied and think the deal is complete when they get a product that is at best barely out of its preliminary development phase and that was presumably already available as a download from the private forum anyway.

It was an advert. By definition they stretch the truth without actually breaking it - much.

I don't think it was intended to take so long, but I would have thought it'd be a lot more honourable to have said "OK folks, sorry, this is taking longer than I thought - here's your money back and I'll announce a new preorder when it's actually more realistically closer to publication" (i.e. now that it' reached the CD stage).

IIRC nobody ever said it was.

I don't recall anyone ever saying that it wasn't a playtest. Hell, Marc claimed that the very first attempt on CotI was a playtest, and he didn't even have anything written at the time. I tried playtesting it back then and simply couldn't playtest the scraps he had given us because they were incomplete and referencing things that hadn't been written yet. THAT was false advertising, definitely. After that failed miserably he then started to refer to things as "alphas" which merely muddied the water.

Yeah, it's quite clever. Wish I'd thought of it...

I bet Matt does too...

 

[captainjack23]

deleted by author.

reason: obviously a mistake on my part.

 

[EDG]

Do we really need to be throwing around accusations of dishonesty and explicit false advertising, as well as imputations of peoples honor ?

The original "playtest" on CotI in 2005 was nothing of the sort, and it was definitely false advertising to claim that it was. There was nothing to test, and for quite a while nothing to even read. It's somewhat moot now, but doesn't change the facts of the matter - if you're too squeamish to accept that then that's really not my problem.

Whether the current "playtest" on CotI has actually been a playtest up to this stage is also unclear. Hopefully people have had some kind of involvement, but some folks seem to be implying that an "inner circle" have been doing all the testing and that the people who actually paid money haven't. But then it wasn't advertised as "pay $35 to playtest a product", so it's not really false advertising here - it was advertised as "pay $35 for a final version of T5" and we still haven't seen that yet, but nobody's said it'll never happen. Now, if Marc were to suddenly turn around and say "that's it, there will be no more development of T5, this CD is all you get" and then keep the money, then one could argue it's false advertising, but he hasn't (and I doubt that he'd do that, somehow). I'm not making any claims about what the current situation is - if anything I'm trying to figure out exactly what people have actually been doing on the private forum.

And don't put words into my mouth either - I haven't besmirched anybody's honour here. It's good that Marc has offered to refund peoples' money if they got tired of waiting - but I still can't help but think it would have been more honourable to have said "no, this isn't getting anywhere yet, let's just refund everyone's money and ask for it again later". Of course that assumes that he had any inkling of how long it'd take to get to this stage, and to be honest (based on things that he's said in the announcements) I don't think he did - I'm not quite sure why a man of his experience couldn't figure that out earlier though.

Maybe it's normal business practice to hold onto money that people have paid for as long as possible, but in some cases it can backfire (see QLI's handling of the 1248 refunds). At least Marc's a lot better than that, but having someone else holding onto money for that long with nothing concrete to show for it is still not what I would view as an ideal situation - but at least people do have a CD to show for it now.

I mean, those are awfully big hammers for a rather small nail - and starting to be potentially actionable, given that this is a business with a real product that's being publicly slagged off to its target audience.

Oh come off it, there's nothing "actionable" going on anywhere here :roll:. The facts of the matter are that Marc has released a CD to people who have paid money (for something, at least) that nobody can talk about. Good for him. Nobody's disputing that.

All I'm doing is questioning the logic of the development process, and what actual worth people have got out of it. Given that there's so much secrecy going on here, I don't think it's unreasonable to try to figure out what's going on. Especially given how such a big deal is paradoxically being made of it by FFE itself (e.g. why announce the CD release with such fanfare - and even announce and put on a special sale supposedly just for the pre-orderers (but actually anyone could take advantage of it) - if nobody can even talk about it?).

Any chance both sides can back off, or at least ratchet the descriptions down to more subjective levels ?

So far things have been very civil here, and I really don't think it's escalating at all. Though perhaps if you could refrain from inferring things from statements that aren't actually being said or implied, the discussion can remain on an even keel.

But again, if you're too squeamish for the conversation, nobody's forcing you to take part in it.

And I'll bet he'd rather not have his name and business brought into this, too.

Neither Matt nor Mongoose have anything to do with it and I'm not even remotely saying or implying that they do, so I'm not sure why you're trying to put it in people's heads that I am. All I was suggesting (with tongue firmly in cheek) was that I bet a lot of RPG publishers (like Matt) would love to make that much money that easily and still have people cheerfully waiting for a final product years later. I mean, either this is a one-off blip that will never happen again in RPG publishing history or it's the dawn of a new kind of business model that will have everyone raking in the cash .

 

[captainjack23]

deleted by author.

reason: obviously a mistake on my part.

 

[EDG]

Actually, I'm pretty sure you're wrong; you're making direct accusations of fraud, and arguably misrepresenting his product;

Shrieking about litigation is just a tactic to distract from the discussion - I've made no inaccurate factual statements here, and where I'm not sure about the facts I've said so clearly, so your accusations about what I'm saying are baseless. Just because you claim it's "rhetoric" or "litiginous" doesn't make it so. And as far as I am aware I haven't misrepresented anything at all - in fact I have gone to great lengths not to.

I think there's a lot to comment on regarding how T5 has been handled, how it's being marketed and presented, and where it's going. I certainly don't think any deliberate malicious intent was involved at all (and have never implied that there was), but I do think that some of the decisions that were made (and are being made) by FFE were astoundingly naive, and I am frankly surprised that it's got this far as a result - hell, I'd even congratulate Marc on getting this far with it.

Well, you were (and are) suggesting that he would delightedly participate in a process that are also describing as ethically questionable, and essentially dishonest and fraudulent.

Foetid donkey balls - I have made it clear that I am saying nothing of the sort, and you're still insisting that I am (and you have the nerve to claim that I'm piling on the rhetoric when you're the only one here who's bandied around words like "ethically questionable", "dishonesty", "fraudulent", and "reprehensible" - and then you've got the gall to try to pin that on me?!). You are deliberately and willfully stirring here with a view to escalate this and make out that I'm saying things that I'm not saying at all, jack (and you talk about spite and malice? I wonder what your motivation for continually making insinuations about everything I say is...) - I would hope that people who are reading this thread are smart enough to see through that. You seem to be incapable of reading what I actually say without tainting it with your own twisted interpretation of it, and I am really not interested in playing your games.

But hey look, again you've twisted the thread around to talk about me. What a surprise. Now that you've had your fun, maybe we get back to a more rational discussion of the subject and not have to put up with your hysterical baiting.

 

[captainjack23]

My post was generally aimed at several people, not just you, believe it or not, and intended to be helpful. I'm honestly sorry about referencing Matt, as clearly I read your posting incorrectly, and my comment was uneeded. As to the rest, the quotes are there in the thread, and from a variety of people, not just you. But obviously it wasn't helpful.
Matt, my apologies, and, believe it or not, the same to you Constantine. As they've only served to ruin the threads equilibrium, I'll remove my comments.

 

[Sturn]

Do we need a private sticky thread just for EDG-Capt. Jack discussions?

 

[GamerDude]

Do we need a private sticky thread just for EDG-Capt. Jack discussions?

YES!

 

[EDG]

Do we need a private sticky thread just for EDG-Capt. Jack discussions?

No, we just need other people to stop making sarky comments about them. He's apologised, so this is done now - don't fire it back up again please. Let's just all get back to the thread topic.

 

[Sturn]

Let's just all get back to the thread topic.

Please remember you said this, not just for this thread, but for all future threads you participate in.