Can we maybe gather together all the corrections that have so far been confirmed for Unwired?

It would be nice to have them all in one place for ease of use.

e.g.

another piece of errata...from here

cya
Tycho

What puzzles me is, we've already had a couple of show stopper bugs (mostly agent smith related), but its too late to fix them because the book has gone to the printers.

Why not typeset it all, then release the PDF, take the first two weeks of synner saying 'okay we'll have to errata that' insert all the errata, update the PDF and send that to the printers? So people's books don't still have the rules that enable agent smith?

Meh. The proposed errata doesn't really stop Agent Smith, so I basically don't even care.

In general it would probably be a good idea to release it in pdf format and then send it to the Printers after Errata 1.01, but I honestly don't think it matters in this case. By its very nature, if you can make Agent Smith win the Matrix for you, then you're supposed to. If the presented errata make it more expensive or annoying to win the Matrix in that fashion, but you still can do it, then the essential game world equilibrium has changed in no way.

-Frank

Because -- especially in the case of Unwired, which hit unexpected delays in production -- this further delays the print release, which further impacts cash flow, which means that even though we end up releasing a better book, we'll probably make less money on it. Every month, we as a company have fixed costs: if we release 3 SR books in a year compared to 6, each of those 3 books has to absorb twice the amount of fixed costs into their budget. Not pretty.

I can be as contentious a git as anyone here, but can we try and limit this to actual examples of errata in Unwired?

There's at least two other threads running for those of us interested in having a 'square go' about Matrix rules.

It seems to me that the folks at Catalyst on this board take a fair bit of abuse for their labor. Frankly, I'm glad Unwired did come out. And I'd rather see six books, with a ton of discussion and subsequent errata, then three books, in a year.

Why?

Because those three books, even if somewhat more polished, will STILL get a bunch of people playing the material, and STILL have a zillion eyes looking at them, (or at least several thousand pairs of eyes) and folks fighting about this and that that could be tweaked, should be modified, is fatally broken, or "OHMIGOSH, the world will end unless you officially change this RIGHT NOW and reprint your whole line of books to fit my preferences!"

So if we're going to always have the fur flying, might as well spread the joy over six books then three. Everybody is going to use what they like, and change what strikes them as off, either with formal house rules, or ad hoc in-game GM fiat. Except maybe the demo team, or folks running other Catalyst events, like SRM.

I prefer having more material to work with, and even just enjoy poring over, rather then less.

I'll close by saying that I've enjoyed reading every SR4 product I've picked up. (I've got all of them, I believe, up to this point.)

Sorry for the threadjack, crizh.

No probs.

I am, however, suddenly struck by an image of a bunch of drama-queens throwing hissy fits.

We do all tend to take these things a bit seriously..

[consumes chill pill]

That is not a bad reason, but doesn't the PDF sales then book transition merely postpone rather than reduce cashflows for the paper product not the PDF component? (I have no idea how big your releative sales are)

So its only a one time cost, because once you suck up deferring the cash flow once, you should then be getting extra cashflow later?

Not having the financial reserves to wear the one time cost is probably a solid reason, but as far as I can see, unless there is some factor that my back of the envelope isn't examining, your net revenues per year should be exactly the same.

At the most simple level, net revenue would be the same *if* there were no schedule slippages. However, as I outlined, as soon as there are schedule slippages/fewer books per year, the fixed costs make every single book less profitable, and profit margins are not exactly large to begin with in the hobby gaming industry.

I guess I don't get why a schedule slippage is any different in terms of revenue impact if you release the PDF before you hit the printers or afterwards.\

Edit: Actually I suppose in this case you are hard up against FY07 ending. Fair cop gov. Still might make a nice general practise, potentially. It will demonstrate value to online customers too by ensuring that you get the first PDF update out fast.

PDF revenue compared to print revenue is very small. Releasing the PDF then waiting for feedback to come in and then revising the book and sending it to press would slow down the entire production schedule, for every single title, and almost certainly result in fewer books per year and thus an increased cost per book and lower profits.

I'm not saying it couldn't be a good thing for book quality. At this time, however, it doesn't make financial sense, and the Shadowrun and BattleTech lines need steady releases and overall stability and growth over the next few years; we can't limp along like FanPro did. _Any_ form of schedule slippage sucks for Catalyst.

Um I know this sounds crazy, but couldn't you still release 6 books in a year anyway and just budget some time factoring in the PDF to print time? If you had released the draft knowing that it would delay the print an extra 2 weeks to a month it would then allow for some padding and if it is freely edited by fans wouldn't this actually save you guys some time? You know when we buy the PDF and start to chime in our advice and suggestions or typos what we say is you know.... free. It lets mistakes get caught. I mean call me crazy, but sometimes people really like to know that when they get a book there is something more solid about it if it lacks typos and mistakes that need correcting in the next version of the printed book that you will then have to buy.

I get that you want to run out guns blazing while kicking ass and taking names, but maybe giving a bit of time will at least appease the fan base. I mean after our group bought Arsenal I was a little sad that it didn't have an awesome appendix that the BBB had. There was also some rules and weapons that were said to exist, but then provide no solid information about them (i.e. chainguns/miniguns.) When Unwired was announced I talked our group out of buying the PDF/book combo. I mean I love the game, but I am somewhat finicky and would like to know that what I hold in my hand won't require sticky notes pasted in various pages explaining that certain rules or items are actually a mistake and wasn't caught during editing. It further raises the more unsettling part of play testing. How long are these rules play tested with 3-6 books being planed a year?

Maybe I'm a minority, and don't actually affect sales. However I don't think it is a good idea to say that editing and creating a solid book has been curtailed in light of sales, and quantity. It makes me not want to buy a single book until the second or third reprinting.

*edit* Let me be more specific. I would be happier putting in a pre-order of a book and then able to get a unfinished work in progress PDF and know that it will be edited, screened, and updated to the point that when I get the book and updated PDF I know it's not going to leave me with having to sort out the mess later. MMO's do it, and although I know this is not an MMO game at least some form of play testing and editing might be helpful for everyone. *edit*

Crizh, it would be a good idea to include what those quotes are responding to, as well as a link to them in the original thread. I know LabRats comment is in regard to submersion tasks, but anyone who did not read that thread would have no idea whatsoever what he is talking about from your above quote.

Good idea, I'll see if I can dig it out of the thread after I get some kip...

We could not adjust the schedule at this time for products that are currently in production to do this.



No matter what you say, this isn't entirely free:

1. The developer still has to spend his time going through all the suggested corrections and figuring out which ones are valid and which are not, and those need to be passed onto the graphic designer to actually be inputted into the documents.

2. When someone does work for you for free, the phrase "you get what you pay for" always has to come up. I often get people emailing me "corrections" to books that are in print that, simply, aren't. They may be correct according to a particular style guide, but not ours; they may be intentional errors [such as those that may be present in in-character material]; or the person making the correction may simply be misunderstanding or misreading the material.



Let me be clear: we are not doing less editing than usual, but we are not electing to do some sort of free-for-all PDF release weeks before the book goes to press. Beyond the issues I've already raised, releasing the PDFs that far beyond the print release -- especially since we wouldn't even have a Street Date that point -- would alienate the retailers who we have worked hard to win over during the license transition to Catalyst Game Labs.

That said, we are adding additional proofreaders for future titles, but they will be people willing to sign an NDA and look at pre-release files and comment on every release, not some sort of public or pseudo-public distribution.

I can haz?

In the 5th printing of the core book, the sprites had edge. Edge = Rating. So there was no Errata for this, it just appeared. One of those pleasant surprises for a Technomancer flipping through to see what all has changed.

Well, if there is a way to sign-up for consideration to be a proof-reader, I'd like to know how. I get called on all the time at work to proof people's documents and deliverables (to government reps).

Everyone at works seems to think I was an editor in a previous life or something...

Thanks.