OBT Forum

The sloppy proof-reading doesn't have anything to do with con season, and everything to do with the amount they are jamming product out. And because unless something has changed, they have one layout person that all Battletech and Shadowrun products must go through. Too much going through one pipeline at far too rapid of a rate.

If you're a Shadowrun fan, you'd be even more upset. The horror that was WAR! on the SR side makes any of these errors look like chump change.

I'll start another topic about this, but after discussions with Maelwys last night, I think I've solidified my own theory on the sudden rush of print and PDF-only products.

By the way, for those interested in Wars of Reaving, it doesn't sound like the wait will be too long.

From the CGL facebook page, posted by Randall:

Quote

For those waiting on it, we've got Promotional Tile 1 text all ready, but Wars of Reaving needs to make Gen Con, so it's top priority

Yeah, I saw the same thing posted on Twitter.

I'd be interested in hearing your fully developed theory Dread. Might make a good article for the site. That said, they do have a proof reader, but perhaps would do better with two?...

Sadly, this is a common occurrence or "new" trend in the print industry (it's not that new - started with the papers.) Large print giants like SIM (who I work for *cough*) laid off lots of their necessary print people during the down turn. This meant Senior Editors were working double, sometimes triple duty writing, managing writers and editing. Without dedicated copy writers and/or editing staff full run issues reach the printers riddled with errors. While annoying, the industry flux means new personnel (who are necessary) are not forthcoming. As a result I have to assign AWPs to copy edit articles earmarked for the websites - diminishing their productivity and impact elsewhere. In the end, it's a vicious cycle that only "ceases" when sufficient manpower is available, but inevitably won't show because of industry cost/return fears.

Niche markets like BT work in a similar fashion, albeit for different reasons. One of the first rules I learned working for GW Corporate years ago was - Niche Hobby Markets are not affected by macroeconomics. A kid will starve himself all week long, saving up his lunch money if it means buying that new squad or regiment. Involved hobbyists will continue to purchase new product regardless of the situation as long as the means are even remotely available. New customer growth might be more challenging, (which is offset by price reductions and other incentives) but even temporarily quiet hobbyists will return after even small positive income changes.

So, while as embarrassing or annoying as print errors, or any errors for that matter are, they typically have very little impact on sales and can be ignored by the publisher.

You might be saying to yourself, "He's talking crazy! How can a publisher ignore product errors?" Well, it's easy. How many of you bought the book despite errors in previous products, and how many of you will continue to purchase new books regardless of how H:RW turned out? While you're thinking about, let me just tell you that the numbers are surprisingly high. (Even without seeing BT's numbers, I can tell you from GW experience that they're high.)

The rule of thumb is as follows: Regardless of intelligence or knowledgeable consumption, unless the hobby fundamentally challenges your perception (i.e., a radical storyline or game rules change) of your "hobby" you'll stick with it and continue to buy. (Hobby as defined in quotations can be any involvement in the genre - painting, writing, game play, reading, etc., the list goes on.) So unless product developers "betray" your hobby, hobbyists rarely leave permanently. That's good news for publishers, but means they have to pay attention to "things" that might betray a hobbyist.

For example, perhaps the greatest success of CGL in recent years was and has been navigating the Jihad/Dark Age storyline and the "Clicky-Tech" game system. Both examples have radically challenged CBT hobbyists, and in contrast to other gaming systems, CGL has not only reinvigorated BattleTech, but actually grown as a result. It's not without it's pitfalls of course, but the mark of a successful navigation isn't in the naysayers, it's in the sales.

As a company, regardless to what say to the contrary, is the most important thing. 

The endgame is this: Expect product errors. As long as they don't detract from sales insofar as the numbers are concerned, hobbyists are clearly rolling with the punches and there's no reason to outlay extra capital. If sales take a dip (along with associated community uproar) the company might make changes if the cost/benefit ratio is in favor for said change - like hiring or outsourcing additional help.

 
   

The first level is one of particiaption by the fan base in improving the product, thereby feeling that what they contirbute is taken seriously.

Secondly, why pay 2 proof readers, when you can pay 1and have 1,000 other people submit additional work for free?  This second, more cynical reason, is probably not even conciously thought of by TPTB, but exists nonetheless.

Well over on CBT Herb just posted the first Errata for TRO Prototypes and it acknowledges the proofreading that was done by members of the forum.  Hopefully they will do the same for H:RW.  I think for most fans this is probably payment enough (although a free copy of the dead tree version would  be nice....)

Doubtful they'll send you a free copy Irose (those things cost money after all and you've already bought the "free" version), but they could put your name in the thank you section of a forthcoming PDF product and achieve the same results. Heck, a pat on the head on the CBT forum would work for most people - simple recognition is often more than enough.

I agree that simply thanking the on-line reviewers would be enough- or maybe even a special thank you of allowing them to contribute some small bit the BT Universe (i.e. find 5 corrections in a product  and you can submit a mech for a future TRO or some such).  I didn't seriously expect a free H:RW (not that I wouldn't appreciate it) but if they did send on the most expensive part for CGL would be the cost of shipping the book to me, not the printing cost. 

I didn't seriously expect a free H:RW (not that I wouldn't appreciate it) but if they did send on the most expensive part for CGL would be the cost of shipping the book to me, not the printing cost.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if the cost was about the same. 

Quote from: Blacknova on July 05, 2011, 10:25:42 PM

Without getting into unnecessary detail, needless to say PDFs cost nothing except labor - which makes the format exceedingly wonderful under the cost/benefit heading.

Yeah, but labor is not an insignificant percentage of the total cost of a gaming book, particularly a Battletech book. Adam Jury, former layout guru for CGL (and now one of the owner-operators for Posthuman Studios), has done a number of different blog posts about that, even showing numbers. Artwork and writing are a big portion of that non-printing cost, especially since CGL had to update/change their freelancer payment setup after last year's internal issues. I'm not disagreeing on any of the rest of your post, just trying to throw a note in there with it. I've been involved with several other forums, trying to combat the silly mentality of "PDFs cost nothing! Gimme them for free!", so I guess it's just a hot button issue for me.

You're right, but in comparison to the cost associated solely with print production PDF falls short by a fairly decent margin. (When working production cost/return numbers PDFs can help reduce the "magic number" to a lower level if the PDF is priced competitively and appropriately.) It's not to say labor costs aren't significant - after all we're talking about salaries and hourly wages, but the end product isn't an additional cost. Income saved is profit earned. (Don't even get me started with CGL's new freelancer payment setup or those "internal issues.")

In the gaming industry, solely focusing on digital production can extend the life time of a company by years if they budget properly. This is where the GW/CGL comparison start to fall apart. CGL is predominately and almost solely a digital entity - insofar as saying they lack a major physical presence and/or outsource much of their physical product out of house.

But that's another conversation altogether...

I should also mention that many of these ratios/numbers change with the inclusion of certain factors. For example, cost forecasting is different when dealing solely with a print publication, average sales (as determined by the controller - so quarterly, weekly, etc.)

Here's a real life example of forecasting (I'm making this simple - it's really way more complex)

1. Cost of Production (Print) costs X amount of dollars: This includes Salaries, Materials, Promotion, etc. From A to B.
2. Average Sales of Prior Product: How much is sold
3. Lost Product: How much doesn't sell

You take the total amount of #1 and subtract from it #2 (hopefully you're ahead.) Then you subtract the total cost of #3 from the result of your first equation. Hopefully you're still in the positive. Now if your company produces a single product at a time and the product is fairly stable, (a magazine for example has similar word/page - not counting custom art - counts every time) this is easy to accomplish. Now start including multiple releases of different counts, schedules, costs, etc. Using prior sales of similar types is then diversified between PDF, Print and combo - repeat customers, etc., and now you have some picture as to how this system can complicate itself. Cost of Production also includes facilities and bills - one of the areas where GW/SIM differ from CGL.

I mentioned how SIM cut a number of personnel from the ranks to save money. Well, when your company produces 30+ magazines and owns things like automobile.com, it might seem kinda of silly, but it's not. The production costs plus lost product can create an exceedingly high total percentage of your average sales - one of the reasons why CGL has such small print runs. They can't afford to have lost product sitting around - and even if they could, it's not in their best interest to do so. Besides, who's house would they store it in?   Better to build buzz and save money by printing to purchase and just sacrifice time rather than money. (Plus customers are more likely to then buy a PDF - People hate to wait, which is instant income for CGL to help offset #1 - and the Print version when it is available.)

Cutting production costs is one of the key areas small and even large print companies help maintain a positive profit ratio - and while the cost of 3-4 new salaries might only add up to $250,000 USD, that's just X more magazines the company has to sell to maintain a certain profit percentage to justify the initial expenditure.

Remember, initial expenditure is pulled first to produce product - so the money (or credit) has to be available for that and fixed costs (salaries, CC payments, etc.) The more products in production the greater the initial expenditure. The cyclic cycle is kind of like circles within circles around a common pile of cash, while fixed costs are straight lines running from it.

Irose, layout is not a fixed cost unless the layout person is salary. Otherwise, layout like writing is usually based on word count or page numbers.