Do you find printed matter easier to read?

[Onix]

I've thought about doing that a number of times. I have e-book versions of Steampunkfitters. The thing that trips me up with The Artifact is the maps section. I'm pretty sure I could work it out if I really pushed, but I've always got a bunch of things on my plate to get to first.. .

[Rob Lang]

I like the idea of producing a eBook format of my games but I am not sure how well it would work out due to all the imagery. I rely heavily on "Look at image X, 'A' represents this, 'B' is that" etc. I suppose all of that would have to have wordy descriptions instead. Many games have tables too, that might cause a problem.

I wonder what the market size is for RPGs that are solely for kindle-like ereaders. I'll find out more about all that when I finish my novel some point at the start of next year. I don't have a kindle yet but I appreciate that I might be one of the few Brits who don't.

[Evil Scientist]

I guess a specially tinkered with PDF with , each containing a paragraph or two of text or a single table (with 2-3 columns and 7-8 rows) theoretically would be readable on a Kindle. It's like a pocketbook challenge!

But it's a whole different universe that needs a different approach - in a certain sense, it's closer to the old text-only computers with ASCII art and stuff

[Onix]

You actually can put tables in an epub. They're the same as HTML tables. (shudder!) I've done it before but the tools I had required a lot of hand coding.

I think epub is more handy for short 1-40 page games anyway. Big tomes like Icar and The Artifact are difficult to navigate on e-ink.

I have a few Kindles and an old Kobo. The Kindles are not bad for PDF reading if you can read really small type, which I can and prefer, but even this bumps up against my limits. The Kobo is useless for PDFs. The other thing is that they are intended for linear reading. RPGs generally aren't.

[Wannabe writer]

I find having an electronic copy only rather tiresome, I just print it and get it bound at a printers. Electronic is good for reference but terrible for gleaning anything to play.

[Evil Scientist]

I tried a graphic heavy (with backgrounds etc.) PDF (~20 megs) with OCR of Unknown Armies on my Kindle - loading/page turning times were quite significant.

[kylesgames]

I think it really depends on the quality of the electronic version. Perhaps some of it is because I spent a lot of time reviewing stuff for DriveThruRPG in PDF's, but I've found digital to actually be easier than print; I have a hard time holding a large book comfortably anymore, and the ability to CTRL-F is nice.

[J.K.Mosher]

Printed matter is easier . . . to me for a few reasons . . .

1) It's physical and tactile; meaning it has weight in your hands, you can flip the pages, and flip back, not scroll. The actual motion of moving pages is something 99% of us grew up doing (school, home, work) so digital media is always the lesser of options when you are used to physical mediums.

2) It's easier to see you edits, and work with. Yes deleting a line of text on a computer screen is simpler but crossing things out that don't read right on paper is and act we all know. If you keep old copies of edits you'll notice and can track how things/ideas/formats have evolved over time.

3) Throwing papers or books out of frustration causes less damage, and costs less than throwing a desk top or laptop. Plus there are health considerations . . . grabbing a desk top to toss can hurt your back while tossing a load of pages off your lap may result in a paper cut.

4) The main reason I like printed matter is the sense of (and I think Chainsaw nailed this one) is the sense of progress it gives you when you actually can hold a physical representation of your evolved ideas in your hand. It's like creating life. No electronic media can compete with that feeling.

As for ebooks, I like them, but they still don't replace traditional printed materials. They are cheaper, and with a kindle you can carry around a huge number of books in a single device instead of boxes upon boxes of heavy books (my kindle currently has a bunch of the old Tarzan and John Carpenter of Mars novels in it.) If someone handed me a copy of "the Son of Tarzan" in paperback and on a kindle I'd hand them back the kindle. Turning pages and smelling the paper is all part of the process that makes a book so exciting.

[Abstract Machine]

Yeah. The 'P' in PDF frequently proves significant but I don't ever finish them, or even peruse them thoroughly. It's easy to underestimate the adaptability of a book - flicking back & forth, the sense of the whole, quick-dip sensations and then, not least, reading a whole chapter (!) at a time.

I cheat with fat novels these days by buying an audiobook to 'get me going' on the Caxton-version. I started Moby Dick 5 times before slowing down, listening to the audio & then enjoying it so much I read it twice.

PDFs are still working out their relationship with their printed sources, which means we, as readers, are in an in-between stage too. What does this mean for guys like Rob Lang? More work. The trick is to make it both joyful & consistent. I haven't solved this.

Funny thing about human nature: those things that are made easy for us somehow seem less worthwhile.

[madunkieg]

The problem with ebooks isn't that good layouts haven't been done, it's that good layouts haven't been done often enough. An ebook is a significantly different beast from a printed book. Comparing them is a lot like apples and oranges.

Ebooks should do more than printed books. They are capable of using embedded video, picture links, hypertext, automatic updating, variable size text, and other software widgets that usually aren't used with paper books. Unfortunately, it's difficult to read an ebook, and that will only be rectified by the screens working more like paper.

Until then, I'll stick with the printed books.