gleichman wrote:
> tussock wrote:
>
>> It will also prevent the next Iron Heroes or Mutants and
>> Masterminds True20 type, which is a great shame for the hobby, IMO.
<snip>
> From the WotC PoV it was horrid as their marketing and R&D enriched
> others without a solid payback to their brand due to the fact that they
> were effectively different games. They may as well been operating as a
> charity, and WotC isn't a charity.
Rubbish. Iron Heroes was a pretty light seller that most active users
incorperated into their DnD games, played with WotC books. It alerted
WotC to a designer that's already helped their sales and is a popular
(internally and externally) member of the 4e design team.
Other stuff showed them were core d20 was weak, influencing the
design of later WotC suppliments.
> The best return for an open agreement from the WotC PoV is to offer
> development of lower print run products to smaller companies with less
> overhead. This allows WotC to gain the greatest return for investment,
> enables smaller companies to turn a profit, *and* builds a larger on
> shelf selection/space for their product line.
>
> Believe it or not, this is also what's best for you as the buyer.
Argument from false premise. The best return for WotC is to grow the
hobby, end of story. The best way for an open agreement to do that is to
improve the basic structures of play.
Trying to prevent 3rd party computer aids (as SJGames and most others
also do) is another way they're keeping the hobby down. People want to
provide their users with free improvements to the hobby, allowing more
people to participate, *growing the hobby*, and still the suits can't see
the woods for the trees.
--
tussock
Zzzzzzzzzz... uh, wha? What the hell? I was sleeping, bugger off.
|
