# When's "Tears of the Burning Sky" Coming?



## EugeneZ (May 14, 2010)

I get this sinking feeling that EnWorld isn't making enough money off the 4e conversion or something. If you chart EnWorld release dates for 4e on a graph, there is a linear progression towards longer and longer intervals between releases. _Monastery_ took three months. Next weekend will be the three-month point for _Tears_. Considering EnWorld says releases will come a month-and-a-half apart, it's kind of ridiculous. You guys haven't released an adventure a month-and-half apart since the _Fire Forest_, when it was supposed to be a month apart.

Furthermore, Steve was around early on to provide untagged maps and there were art previews and all kinds of errata and other fun stuff. All of this has crawled to near non-existance. It's extremely frustrating for those of us who were excited by EnWorld's initial enthusiasm for the project. I don't want to make anyone angry with me, as I love Burning Sky, and appreciate all the work you folks have put in.

I just want some realistic estimates. Morrus, you're always saying "next week" and you have never, ever been correct on those estimates. It inevitably ends up being three to four weeks when you say that. I understand you're busy, and I understand that Steve broke his leg... I can live without the untagged maps. But I really *do* need the next adventure. When can paying customers get it?


----------



## Volaran (May 14, 2010)

I'm not sure if this is anything new.  I think the 3.5 version was almost a year past the initial estimates when it was finally finished, and a lot of that extra wait was the last 3 adventures.

There are various causes for this, but I seem to recall that it basically boiled down to Morrus not having aa large, dedicated staff like Paizo has with their adventure paths.  I do seem to recall there being offers to get people partially-completed drafts if they were catching up with release schedule and an adventure was delayed.  I think that might have been Ryan Nock, rather than Morrus though.  

I'm not playing or running the 4E version, of course, so this is not an urgent issue for me.  I do remember the frustration in waiting though.


----------



## Morrus (May 14, 2010)

> Furthermore, Steve was around early on to provide untagged maps and there were art previews and all kinds of errata and other fun stuff. All of this has crawled to near non-existance.




I posted two items of errata in just the last week!  The jousting supplement and the revised Inquisitor Torrax.  I also have a revised Madness which I playtested just last night. 

The next adventure is well underway - I'll need to get a full update from Steve.  It's not an excuse (merely an explanation) but we've been beset by so many problems; Steve's accident was just one of the problems.  I'm not comfortable sharing the personal details of the problems of others, though - let's just say that worse than that accident happened to someone else, and something else befell another person.  At one point I was being told of a different major issue in someone's life every 3-4 days.  We've been playing catch-up ever since.

So I do understand the frustration - I'm playing through these adventures, too, and need the next one very soon!  I've reached the end of #4, and will be starting #5 next week.    

Of course, the other thing is that - as we've said before - when we started this we didn't realise how much of a rewrite 4E versions would entail.  It was only when we got underway that we realised just how much work was involved.  

But #6 on its way, I promise!


----------



## RangerWickett (May 14, 2010)

Morrus . . . I think I'm pregnant.


----------



## Jdvn1 (May 14, 2010)

RangerWickett said:


> Morrus . . . I think I'm pregnant.



I didn't do it.


----------



## EugeneZ (May 14, 2010)

I'm really failing at this whole "communication" thing. Maybe I don't spend enough time on message boards.

I'm not saying you should be releasing them faster, nor am I asking you to divulge the details of anyone's personal problems. I completely understand and wish those folks all the best; I honestly hope they take as much time as needed to deal with whatever events have come up in their lives. Burning Sky can wait. I can wait!

But I would *love* to be kept in the loop about the status. Maybe it's my background, working with a team in which process and communication are the bedrocks of success. EnWorld has no process and scattered, unorganized communication, which creates frustration for me (and I suspect I am not alone).

I guess I'm suggesting that until everyone is fully on-board to commit to a deadline, announce that Burning Sky is on hiatus. Then, once everyone is prepared to continue the conversion, announce a deadline and stick with it. If it comes down to releasing a subpar product to meet the deadline, then, sure, push the deadline, but communicate it cleanly and announce a new, realistic deadline.

Obviously, factors like the difficulty of a rewrite and delays in getting certain maps or whatever can make setting a realistic deadline hard. That's why when EnWorld slipped its first SIX deadlines (including Paragon Paths) I didn't complain. But by now, you guys should have enough experience to set a reasonable deadline. Again, when an accident occurs that prevents work from continuing, go on hiatus. Communicate this in a way that's clear to all your customers.

At least, that's what I was trying to get at. You *could* just keep doing what you're doing. I'll just have to deal with not being able to plan my group's activities from week to week, which, well, sucks, and immensely lowers our enjoyment of the campaign... which, due to its high quality, is really a kick in the trousers.


----------



## Morrus (May 14, 2010)

EugeneZ said:


> But I would *love* to be kept in the loop about the status. Maybe it's my background, working with a team in which process and communication are the bedrocks of success. EnWorld has no process and scattered, unorganized communication, which creates frustration for me (and I suspect I am not alone).




Sure. You're right - there is a lack of corporate discipline; we - for better or worse - are a few random guys writing an AP for a pittance. I think that has it's pros and cons - certainly the result is more focussed and visionary (i.e. less "committee blandness" and more "one guy with a good idea") but it's also more haphazard and depended on individual's lives. WotC, for example, doesn't suffer from a staff member being off for a while - it has a dozen others to fill in. We're utterly screwed when any one person has a delay, because we have no replacements of redundancy. 



> I guess I'm suggesting that until everyone is fully on-board to commit to a deadline, announce that Burning Sky is on hiatus.




But it's not. #6 is coming! Everyone is working on it; saying otherwise would not be true.



> If it comes down to releasing a subpar product to meet the deadline, then, sure, push the deadline, but communicate it cleanly and announce a new, realistic deadline.
> 
> Obviously, factors like the difficulty of a rewrite and delays in getting certain maps or whatever can make setting a realistic deadline hard.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bercilak (May 15, 2010)

Morrus said:


> What we DO promise is that you WILL get them all.




While I too would like something akin to release dates, even the above quote is somewhat of a relief. I got a little nervous as well when the forum posts about a new AP came up. I wondered if that was a death knell for WOtBS--given that this is a 4 to 5 person operation, I wondered if people were going to start working on a new AP which would mean even longer wait-times for future WotBS stuff. 

I'm not too worried yet though; my group is only midway through adventure 3. But if we get to adventure 5, and 6 is still not out, I will definitely be worried.

(Part of the problem, I'm sure is that ENWorld's web presence is large enough to make it seem like a big operation, which is misleading.)

Berc


----------



## Morrus (May 15, 2010)

Bercilak said:


> While I too would like something akin to release dates, even the above quote is somewhat of a relief. I got a little nervous as well when the forum posts about a new AP came up. I wondered if that was a death knell for WOtBS--given that this is a 4 to 5 person operation, I wondered if people were going to start working on a new AP which would mean even longer wait-times for future WotBS stuff.




Goodness no!  There's no overlap of people.  Ryan Nock (who directed the 3.5 version of WotBS) is heading up the new AP, but that's (a) a year away (b) only in the discussion stages and (c) has no staff involved yet except for him (and he's not involved with WotBS 4E).



> (Part of the problem, I'm sure is that ENWorld's web presence is large enough to make it seem like a big operation, which is misleading.)




I guess we have that problem.  EN World is - basically - me, plus a few volunteers who moderate or do some tech stuff from time to time.  ENP is literally just me plus people I pay to do stuff - which, at current count, is Steve to convert the adventures from 3.5 to 4E, Eric to lay them out, and any artists I manage to persuade to produce new art quickly for cheap!


----------



## EugeneZ (May 15, 2010)

I know exactly how large EnWorld is, and as Morrus points out, that has its advantages.

You're right, Morrus -- Paragon Paths was well done. You didn't know when you'd finish it, and didn't set a deadline. So I take it back, EnWorld missed five deadlines, with Tears being the sixth rather than the seventh. That means you've missed every deadline you've set; in some cases, badly.

I'm not annoyed that you are unable to recover from staff issues like WotC. I knew that going in. I'm annoyed because my group is in the middle of adventure #5 and we have no idea when #6 will be released, and you've taken _over half a year_ to release two adventures... without ever announcing that they will be late. If you had announced it, our group would have found a way to slow down the pacing. I just kept thinking that since you guys didn't change your estimates of a month/month-and-a-half that you were confident you'd at least approach them.

If you'd said "Hey guys, lots of stuff is happening with our staff right now, we know the adventure is due out tomorrow, but it's gonna take a few months to sort this stuff out. I don't know how long so I can't give you a deadline, but it sure as heck is not coming out this month." Then we'd stagger our sessions and figure things out. But it always felt like the adventure was coming next week because the release dates never changed and you kept saying "next week" after being heckled for updates a month after the release date slipped, and that same "next week" turned into another month -- three months total. Now it's the same thing for _Tears_... complete radio silence regarding the now two-month-slipped date.

I'm just asking you to keep us informed, nothing else.


----------



## Morrus (May 15, 2010)

EugeneZ said:


> I'm just asking you to keep us informed, nothing else.




OK, I do understand. So I'll say - three months! If we get it in next week that'll be a bonus! But I now feel scared to mention any time period at all! I suddebnly understand why computer games companies refuse to give release dates! 

I'm in exactly the same situation as you. Honestly, I sit here waiting to hear just like you do.  I do know it takes us about 6 weeks do complete an adventure - barring unforeseen events - but that we've not yet experienced an adventure without unforeseen events.  

What we need is redundancy - a situation where the absence of a staff member doesn't hold up the entire queue - but I don't have any employees, and thus zero redundancy.  If one person is delayed, everyone is delayed.

I know it sucks.  But that is how it is.  There's never been any intention to mislead, merely to cope with situations as they crop up.  

One day, I hope we'll have enough people that these things won't affect the overall workflow.


----------



## EugeneZ (May 15, 2010)

Sorry to keep this going but my intentions are once again unclear. I wasn't asking to be kept informed of release dates. For a variety of reasons, they are clearly not working. So three months, one week, a month a half -- they all essentially translate to "we don't know" in EnWorld speak. That sucks but its okay, you have good reasons.

What I'm asking to be informed about is the STATE of each adventure. I mean, this thread has made it sufficiently clear that you're doing all you can to get #6 asap, so that's that. I just wish this thread wasn't neccessary. When #7's month-and-a-half date comes up, would you mind dropping by the forums and laying it on us what the deal is with the adventure? Is it going to be on time? Are you just waiting for a couple things and gonna release it in the short term? Are you a long way away from releasing? If so, give us another update in a month.


----------



## Primitive Screwhead (May 16, 2010)

I too am patiently awaiting the next adventures.. but in my case I am running a self-converted version of Adventure 7.... and really wish I had something from y'all to help me out!

 I feel the pain of converting these adventures, as I am basically only converting some of the combat encounters and making up half of it as I go. This month I am trying to set up the battle with Rhuarc and design the 'enemy' group for the Temple....

 I can lend a hand with the NPCs I created and saved, as well as possibly post my thoughts on the set peice encounters (as I did with the Black Widow), but don't want to put too much out there..

Anyway, off to find the Jousting supplement!


----------



## Blackbrrd (May 18, 2010)

Having release schedules that reflects reality is quite hard business. I am in the software business and everybody knows it's know for ridiculous slips. Think: Duke Nukem 3D. 

Anyway, something that could be done is for you to have a thread about a new release which you update about every 2 weeks. The first thing you have to do is _guessing_ at how much work (in time) it is going to take. Two weeks later you update the original post saying how much work was done and how much work it takes to complete the job. Giving reasons for nothing happening (sickness, personal issues, etc), can be given if no work was done. Or, if you find the project larger you can add to the total amount of weeks it takes to finish a project.

You would have a series of updated posts looking a bit like this:
1. March: 0/8 weeks of work to finish module done
15. March: 1/10 weeks of work to finish module done
1. April: 2/10 weeks of work to finish module done
15. April: 2/10 weeks of work to finish module done (no work done due to sickness)
1. Mai: 6/11 weeks of work to finish module done

Now it's up to the people relying on you finishing the module to assess when it's getting finished. Most people are quite reasonable if they get updated information and don't need a specific date.

A small not - I am talking about work-weeks, not actual dates, something that needs to be explained at the start of such a post. Coordinating between 3-4 people can give you a lot of waiting-time so a 8 week job can take 5 months. On the other hand, if it's done in parallel with 4 people it can take as little as 2 weeks.


----------



## EugeneZ (May 19, 2010)

I work in the software business as well. And I'm coming from precisely the opposite side of the table from you, Blackbrrd. I think accurate release dates are a critical but difficult part of releases. Duke Nukem is but one example of horribly slipped release dates, there are hundreds of others. That doesn't excuse a company that doesn't communicate with their customers. Especially after commiting to a timeline.

There's a company called AGD Interactive (they also go by Himalaya Studios) that released remakes of old Sierra adventure games that never got converted to VGA. There were quite a few companies that did this sort of thing (still are) but these guys were featured on Slashdot and other news aggregators because of the professional quality of their releases. They were a three-person team.

They released their King Quest 1 remake with no release date because that was the first anyone heard that they exist: when they completed their project. They then also released KQ2 without any release dates. Then they promised to remake Quest for Glory 2, and announced a rough date. They missed it. They announced another rough date, and missed it again. Of course, every time they missed a date, their messageboard was flooded with posts like mine. Unhelpful posts from people who were expecting something they were promised. After that, they said "it's done when it's done" and gave no more dates. After that, no one complained; there was no longer an expectation. When they finally released QFG2 years later (it was a complex project), it was greeted with much fanfare.

I'll let that story stand for itself except to add that their remakes were free, so complaining about the slipped dates was far more selfish than when complaining about a paid product. In fact, AGD said that was one of the reasons they didn't charge (aside from the legal implications): they didn't want the additional pressure. And they STILL felt honesty and communication with their "customers" was important. Second difference: Wanting the remake to a game you already own is very different from wanting the next adventure in a series. There is no time dependancy with the game. You can play it any time. But with adventures, if you see EnWorld say they'll release them a month apart, you think "I don't mind paying for this now and starting the adventure right away."


----------



## Jdvn1 (May 26, 2010)

Spam reported.


----------

