 Release Dates, I know, I know, why do I bother |
  |
 Feb 23 2007, 04:17 PM
Post
#26
|
|||
|
Moving Target  Group: Members Posts: 831 Joined: 5-September 05 From: LAX, UCAS Member No.: 7,687  |
It's this legal licensing crap that I don't get ;) But that's cool, we'll just say FanPro/Wizkids/SR4 = good. ;) |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Feb 23 2007, 04:30 PM
Post
#27
|
|||||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
...should have substituted "curve" instead of "pace" for "ballistic' usually has a "downside" to it on the other end.
I do not have difficulty with this, where I do see things a bit more daunting is making sure I am current on the background well so I have everything right. I tend to run what I call a "loose canon" type of campaign e.g. a lot of personal colour (including setting details, "current events", new gear, new corp players, and even a stab at a new archetype). I am up on the major points of the metaplot but for the most part, I tend to focus more on the corporate and social-political angle while for the most part avoiding direct involvement of GDs & IEs (with the exception of the two Harlequin arcs which I still think are two of the best pre-written scenarios published). While I have just about every rule expansion & fluff book from the last two editions I am rather remiss in keeping up with the backstory through the various novels (I have only read the first three). It is not so much a reflection on the writing rather that I generally tend to stay away from game and media associated novels overall (the "too many books to read already & not enough time" syndrome). [ Spoiler ] Anyway, I do not know how much or whether my lack of keeping up with the background story line affects the chances of cocontributing As I have mentioned in other posts I have a lot of original material written, a fiar poportionf it being campaign based, but a lot which is also pure setting fluff. I also have an expanded gear compendium and been planning over the last couple years have been toying with pushing into the "unknown" of near and far space. [Note - Please excuse any spelling errors, PHP spell is freaking out again by highliging fragments instead of full words - Mods, can this be looked into?] |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Feb 23 2007, 04:59 PM
Post
#28
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
What would happen if WizKids gave the licence to another company? And what if this company actually had the resources to pay a staff and adhere to a regular release schedule? I realise that one full-time bloke cannot be expected to run an operation on par with Mongoose or White Wolf. Why doesn't WK give the license to a company with more than one employee? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 23 2007, 05:26 PM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 3,314 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Lisbon, Cidade do Pecado Member No.: 185 |
Wizkids could potentially pull the license and hand it to another company. However, that is pretty unlikely. Why?
a) Because in fact, the impact of manpower on the development cycle is only one factor, there are others. FanPro is a small publisher (like pretty much every RPG company outside WotC and WW) and that means there are limits on what it can put into print at any given time simply because of the state of the industry (and by that I mean publishers, distributors and retail) and cashflow considerations. There's also the limitations imposed by the freelance model (and there is no viable alternative to that in the current RPG market) and the availability and commitment of authors, artists and editors. b) Because the current realities of the RPG market offer no guarantees that another company (regardless of manpower) would be able to do any better (particularly since FanPro has been doing pretty well by any standards). c) Because Wizkids is quite happy with the way FanPro has been handling the SR property (and BTC for that matter). To a large extent because Shadowrun and BTC are selling strong while the market seems to be stagnated or tanking for everyone else, and because SR4 was one of the best selling products on the market for the last 2 years. d) Because for all its apparent slowness, FanPro is still putting out more releases to its core product lines each year than most RPG publishers in its market range (which means pretty much everyone except WotC and WW). e) Because part of the "problem" has to do with the nature of this game. Without in house writers (which is a breed on the verge of extinction in todays market anyway) it is simply not possible to maintain editorial control of the game line, the metaplot and the direction of the game. The alternative is using multiple freelancers and regardless of their dependability, there are limits to the time and commitment a limited pool of freelancers can devote to writing and developing books (doubly so when those books are core rule books and need to carry you through the whole of 4th edition). Yes, we probably could churn out rule books faster, but that comes at a cost in quality and consistency that we're not willing to compromise. f) And finally, because FanPro has addressed the issue of manpower by bringing on 2 part time developers to aid the SR line developer and enhance workflow. Admittedly, it's been a steep learning curve for everyone involved due in no small part to the unique demands of the projects at hand (ie. the core rule books). Hitting our stride has taken longer than we would have liked, but we're getting there. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 23 2007, 06:04 PM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
Thanks for the reply, Synner. I must address (d) because I have never thought the FanPro slowness to be merely "apparent." By "publishers in its market range" I assume you do not mean all of these companies that release quality books on a regular schedule: Mongoose, Goodman Games, Green Ronin, Steve Jackson Games, Troll Lord Games, Kenzer & Company, Atlas Games, ICE, and (until the scandal) Palladium. My issue, I suppose, is that the release of SR4 was poorly planned. The main rule book was published without any sourcebooks completed to support it. The lag time between SR4's release and its first true supplmental rule book (Street Magic) was far, far too long. At the very least, the GM's screen should have been finished at the same time as the rule book and ready for shipping a month or two after the game's release. However, if what you say is true, then we can expect another three or four books to hit the shelves this year. I won't hold my breath, but if it indeed happens, then I swear never to complain about release dates again. But all that aside, my main question is this: Why, in print, is Shadowrun italicised? I understand that one puts book titles in italics, but no other game title appears this way. We do not italicise Dungeons & Dragons or Werewolf. Just wondering. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 23 2007, 06:50 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
I think that quirky style dates back to the FASA days -- the first edition was simply called Shadowrun, so it got italicized [actually, bolded], and it just stayed that way.
It's annoying from a writing/layout perspective, because you can't just automatically ital every instance of the word -- but since the word is used as part of the setting, I think it makes sense. That, however, doesn't explain why it's done in Classic BattleTech... :-) |
|
|
|
|
Feb 23 2007, 07:01 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,266 Joined: 3-June 06 From: UK Member No.: 8,638 |
I'd prefer to wait for really good books than wind up buying a bunch that I never use because they were badly written, badly conceived, or plain unnecessary; which I recall doing several times back when I used to play WoD. The most annoying thing was when they released some stuff for a line, but then quit writing for it because it wasn't doing as well as their other lines. This happened to both Wraith and Changeling which were my favourite WoD lines.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 23 2007, 07:17 PM
Post
#33
|
|||||
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,078 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 67 |
That's been my personal feeling too, but I'm willing to admit I'm pretty clueless on the details of SR4's early development. They chose to keep SR4's development secret from some of the freelancers until shortly before the public announcement and also kept a number of freelancers working on late SR3 releases like System Failure. They could have done it differently, and in my opinion should have, but they probably had their reasons why they did it the way they did.
Like Adam said, it's just one of those quirky things. There's no real official standard when it comes to game line names. You italicize a television series name, but what about a game series name? It's pretty much up to the editors. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Feb 23 2007, 08:43 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
Synner's point #e) is also good. You need continuity, FanPro took over the Shadowrun franchise while SR3 was still in print. It makes most sense that those who were involved remained intact for the SR4 project. With the two part time developers and a couple more freelancers being brought on line (one who I know BTW), things will pick up, particularly as Synner implies in the case of setting books which do not require extensive playtesting and reivision as doe rules expansions.
Startups are not easy, and in a sense SR4 was a "startup" project since it was a major redeux of the ruleset and not just a slight revision as in the past. We have gone through what is it now, 3 sets of Errata to the BBB and one for Street Magic. I think they are doing an excellent job compared to some other companies, including WoTC which basically released its errata for their most popular system as a complete "x.5" revision (making you buy the core books again about six to eight months after after x.0 was originally released). Meanwhile, FanPro has been posting the Errata and FAQs for us to read and download for free which to me says they do care. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 23 2007, 10:41 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
Let's not villify WotC on false terms -- D&D 3.0 came out in 2000, and 3.5 in 2003, and a ton of the material is available for free online as part of the System Reference Documents.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 23 2007, 11:08 PM
Post
#36
|
|||
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,206 Joined: 9-July 06 From: Fresno, CA Member No.: 8,856 |
There is an Eratta for Street Magic? Didn't we just get our 4th SR4 Eratta? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 23 2007, 11:13 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
There was an *update* to the Fourth Edition errata in December, but it wasn't the first release of errata for the book.
Street Magic errata hasn't been released yet, but it -- along with some material that was cut from the book for space reasons -- is on the cards very soon. |
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2007, 04:37 AM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-March 06 Member No.: 8,397 |
It's done in CBT for the same reason it should be done in every game line: because it's part of the book title. It's only "up to the editors" (as Demonseed Elite said) in the sense that it's up to them to break the rules of the English language. ;) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 24 2007, 05:45 AM
Post
#39
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
:oops:...yeah I will admit, I didn't catch on to it at the outset. Wasn't aware there was a third ed until I ran into an old friend who turned me onto it in 2002 (I had pretty much been out of the D&D loop since 1994). When I encountered Shadowrun I found "my" game system & anything D&D related became but a distant memory. Didn't realise 3.0 had been out that long. [Sidebar] Many years ago at a SF convention in Seattle I was asked to demo play a new card game that was in set a fantasy world. Afterwards, I remarked it was "quaint" but too limited compared to RPGs. I think I even gave my complementary set away to a kid that weekend. The game was of course called Magic. Several years later I was in the dealer room at another convention (believe it or not looking for "rare" SR TCG singles) when I noticed an unopened (and relatively new release) 6 card booster pack for Magic The Gathering going for 65$ American. Some of the singles were fetching as much as 125$. Yeah, we all miss the bus sometimes. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 24 2007, 11:16 AM
Post
#40
|
|||
|
Great, I'm a Dragon... Group: Retired Admins Posts: 6,699 Joined: 8-October 03 From: North Germany Member No.: 5,698 |
Flipping through the list of future releases, it seems to me that GDs and IEs won't be in the focus of the metaplot for quite some time. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 24 2007, 02:38 PM
Post
#41
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 52 Joined: 4-January 04 From: Redbridge, London, UK Member No.: 5,957 |
Actually, the italicising of book titles is not a rule of the English language. It is a standard of formatting, much like putting "/" when quoting poetry as a way of indicating line breaks. Only recently have we all stopped using typewriters, mind. "Because it's part of the book title" isn't reason to italicise it when we are referring to the game specifically, rather than the book. Dungeons & Dragons first appeared as a box set. Would we italicise that? Of course not. But when it appears in book form? No, we wouldn't, though we do italicise Player's Handbook. Technically, we would italicise Shadowrun when referring to the rulebook, but not when referring to the game: "Look on page 13 of the Shadowrun rulebook for specifics about this aspect of the Shadowrun universe." Of course, to do so would be as cumbersome as it would be absurd. (Hmmm, sounds like one of my recent romantic relationships . . . ) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 24 2007, 11:32 PM
Post
#42
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
"Cumbersome and absurb" describes a lot of formatting oddities in game books.
BattleTech Line Developer: "Unitalicize all the vehicle names in that chapter, Adam." Adam: "Um, why?" BattleTech Line Developer: "We don't italicize them." Adam: "Okay, the names of 'Mechs are italicized, but the names of vehicles are not." BattleTech Line Developer: "Correct." Adam: "Why?!!?!" BattleTech Line Developer: "Because." Adam: *cries* |
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2007, 11:40 PM
Post
#43
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,748 Joined: 5-July 02 Member No.: 2,935 |
Ah, Adam. Have we told you we love you today?
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 24 2007, 11:58 PM
Post
#44
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
Well, Union Jane did call me 'love' yesterday, but I think she was just living up to her name. ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2007, 04:51 AM
Post
#45
|
|||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-March 06 Member No.: 8,397 |
I would. :P Though that comes from thinking of Dungeons and Dragons as a book-based RPG, having first heard of it in the mid-90s, rather than as a board game. But then, ignoring me might be the best course of action. After all, everyone else does... :wobble: |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Feb 25 2007, 04:53 AM
Post
#46
|
|||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-March 06 Member No.: 8,397 |
Don't blame him, blame the people working at FASA in the 80s. :S
Isn't that your reaction to everything involving more work for Adam? ;) |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Feb 25 2007, 05:38 AM
Post
#47
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
There's work, and there's Work ... :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2007, 05:44 AM
Post
#48
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 28-October 02 Member No.: 3,512 |
Amazon has concrete dates now...
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2007, 05:50 AM
Post
#49
|
|
|
Prime Runner Group: Retired Admins Posts: 3,929 Joined: 26-February 02 From: .ca Member No.: 51 |
Funnily enough, I told Amazon new dates for some books in, oh, November or December, and they finally showed up a few weeks ago. I suggest that trusting Synner or myself is just a *wee* bit more reliable than Amazon. ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 25 2007, 06:29 AM
Post
#50
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,174 Joined: 13-May 04 From: UCAS Member No.: 6,327 |
But it's Amazon, they're the experts at this stuff, they have the heads up on this sort of stuff so we should believe what's there on their website. ;-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 1st December 2024 - 09:58 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.