Fault?
I'd like to weigh in here because a lot of this is pretty infuriating.
WotC is making a terrible decision here; worse, this will only unduly affect those who are already honest, paying customers and consumers of WotC products.
That said, the level of fire in this thread seems out of line, or at least misdirected.
I can understand calling this decision ill-begotten, unnecessarily punitive, myopic, archaic, irrelevant, and impotent.
It makes little sense to be angry at WotC for anything other than the short notice.
One might say that WotC fails to affect any real change with this decision, but are they wrong to make it? Should we really be angry at a publisher for acting in its interests, even if it does so in a blunderingly stupid way?
Some have commented that this will only increase theft of products, which might be true, but even if that is the practical effect of WotC's decision, surely they are not to blame for that? If you try to make it so that it is harder for a thief to steal from you, and your attempts are ineffective and inspire thieves to target you even more, you are not to blame in such a case.
We have assigned far too little blame to thieves who create conditions such that companies want to take action, even ill-advised action, in an attempt to thwart their activity. It does matter that people have watched it happen, all over; the fact that we think that it is not the same as watching someone take a new t.v. from a neighbour's house, saying nothing, does not mean that it isn't the same in all but magnitude. The implication in some of the responses here shows that some think it a good thing that a company suffer loss for attempting to deal with the thieves.
Nearly as frustrating is the championing of other game companies as virtuous paragons, rather than small, somewhat parasitic corporate entities. Failing to act uselessly is not an act of courage, even if it is much more clever, and opportunistic.
I get it. Some of you had downloads that you wanted to get that you can't now. That's bad. Boo WotC.
But for the rest, why the villifying?
WotC still offers, by far, the cheapest digital access to its products of any game company. I mean, it's hard to beat DDI; the character builder alone gives access to all current rules; a one month membership gives you access to a year's worth of material. For the cost of a single game book, you could buy a DDI membership four times a year and be very up to date with 4E, if you like it.
Even Paizo's generous policy of providing free pdfs of its products requires that you subscribe longer than that (or it did when I bought it).
I guess at the end of this rambling post, I'm depressed that our apathy and carelessness has allowed a situation to get bad enough that a company whose products I like feels forced to make a ridiculous, foolish, and alienating decision. I'm upset that I can't buy products I like electronically from a company I buy most of my gaming junk from. And I can't help but be upset that there isn't more rage directed at thieves who ruin things for the rest of us. What
s.
I'd like to weigh in here because a lot of this is pretty infuriating.
WotC is making a terrible decision here; worse, this will only unduly affect those who are already honest, paying customers and consumers of WotC products.
That said, the level of fire in this thread seems out of line, or at least misdirected.
I can understand calling this decision ill-begotten, unnecessarily punitive, myopic, archaic, irrelevant, and impotent.
It makes little sense to be angry at WotC for anything other than the short notice.
One might say that WotC fails to affect any real change with this decision, but are they wrong to make it? Should we really be angry at a publisher for acting in its interests, even if it does so in a blunderingly stupid way?
Some have commented that this will only increase theft of products, which might be true, but even if that is the practical effect of WotC's decision, surely they are not to blame for that? If you try to make it so that it is harder for a thief to steal from you, and your attempts are ineffective and inspire thieves to target you even more, you are not to blame in such a case.
We have assigned far too little blame to thieves who create conditions such that companies want to take action, even ill-advised action, in an attempt to thwart their activity. It does matter that people have watched it happen, all over; the fact that we think that it is not the same as watching someone take a new t.v. from a neighbour's house, saying nothing, does not mean that it isn't the same in all but magnitude. The implication in some of the responses here shows that some think it a good thing that a company suffer loss for attempting to deal with the thieves.
Nearly as frustrating is the championing of other game companies as virtuous paragons, rather than small, somewhat parasitic corporate entities. Failing to act uselessly is not an act of courage, even if it is much more clever, and opportunistic.
I get it. Some of you had downloads that you wanted to get that you can't now. That's bad. Boo WotC.
But for the rest, why the villifying?
WotC still offers, by far, the cheapest digital access to its products of any game company. I mean, it's hard to beat DDI; the character builder alone gives access to all current rules; a one month membership gives you access to a year's worth of material. For the cost of a single game book, you could buy a DDI membership four times a year and be very up to date with 4E, if you like it.
Even Paizo's generous policy of providing free pdfs of its products requires that you subscribe longer than that (or it did when I bought it).
I guess at the end of this rambling post, I'm depressed that our apathy and carelessness has allowed a situation to get bad enough that a company whose products I like feels forced to make a ridiculous, foolish, and alienating decision. I'm upset that I can't buy products I like electronically from a company I buy most of my gaming junk from. And I can't help but be upset that there isn't more rage directed at thieves who ruin things for the rest of us. What
s.
