Gamers vs Companies

[thecasualoblivion]

I think the Gamers vs Companies tag is a misnomer. WotC isn't really against anyone. They have just decided that the new version of their game isn't going to cater to the OGL-worshipping crowd anymore. They decided that D&D being part of the OGL-community wasn't good for D&D or RPGs as a whole, and I would have to agree with that.

Wizards isn't against you so much as they have left you behind.

P.S. --As for the PDF thing, I think that issue goes deeper than a company/consumer relations issue.

 

[Morrus]

Why should gamers be required to support FLGS?

I agree. Unless the FLGS is doing something to support me, I don't see why I should feel obligated to support them. I'm not a charity, and if I did want to do something for charitable reasons, it wouldn't be for a gamestore owner, it'd be for lost puppies or something.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

Well, nearest game store is 30+ miles away, and while I really like it (them actually, Dragon & George in GLasgow and Static nearby), my health's bad, so it's much easier to get from Amazon.
*shrug* :/

 

[Badwe]

People think it’s ok to go to amazon for cheaper books, but if wotc:
+has a short page count on PHB2
+publishes dungeon delve such that it uses dungeon tiles
+changes the nature of DDM
+even simply CREATES the subscription based DDi online service
Then they are an evil, greedy, money-grabbing corporation. Never mind that with the exception of the PHB2 pagecount most of them were value-adds or refocusing of business (give people more ways to use the tiles or minis they’re already buying), no it was just completely blind and only in the interest of money, and therefore horrible and worthy of many pages of complaints.

The only luxury gamers have over LGSes is that they are not monolithic and there aren’t boards for gamestore owners to kvetch about gamers on. Imagine what they would say:
“I host an RPGA event every week, get my store filled, and none of them buy anything.”
“I host a magic tournament for 5 dollars, all of which ends up as prize money, but they all buy their boxes online to save money. Their singles too. They don’t even trade with each other.”
“I have an entire shelf dedicated to boardgames, I have test play copies available to try out, they play it, then they whip out their iphone and order it off ebay.”

Honestly I don’t envy gamestore owners in the least, I think they’re only above internet service providers in terms of carelessly abusive customers. Yeah, I used to take calls from a local ISP working out of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois where people called in and bitched about how much they were paying for. Then that company, with its razor thin margins, got bought out by Comcast who ended same-day service calls, raised rates, and added charges for most things that were free such as home networking support. Do you think one person in those states knows that they invited that onto themselves with their purchasing habits and demands? Unlikely.

If you are out to save money no matter what, you will get what you pay for: whatever can be shoved out for that price. If certain qualities mean something to you and you show it with your dollars, a business might spring up to serve your demand. Gamers are a lucky few to have gamers working for them. Today I work for a distribution company’s tech department, and I don’t know the first thing about industrial supplies.

 

[Zaukrie]

Perhaps my use of the word "greed" was wrong. Of course, I'm not sure WotC trying to make more money is greed either. Both gamers and the comapny are acting to maximize their resources (either by increasing revenue or reducing cost).

So how about instead of greed, we ask:

why is it ok for gamers to maxmize their resources (through frugality, which is a behavior I endorse and am trying to teach my sons), but wrong for WotC to try do so?*

*putting aside I think WotC made the wrong choice to do so, they are being ripped for being "against" gamers and being greedy as much as they are for the actual decision.

 

[Byronic]

I quit my F not so local game store when I decided they weren't really friendly at all, were overpriced and decided they didn't even want to allow people to post "wanted" ads for RPG's.

They didn't make a fuss about people spending too much time with the books and that kept me for a while but... they're just not local or friendly or well supplied enough.

 

[DaveMage]

The topic of whether or not WotC is evil or whatever, made me think of the following:

WotC is being villified for being greedy, stupid, acting in their own interest (even if wrong in their decision) and against customers.

Yet, every day, gamers buy products from Amazon or others, and don't support FLGS.

Why is it ok for gamers to be greedy, and try to get the best price at the expense of some businesses, but not ok for WotC to be greedy, and try to make the most profit?

I'm hopeful this can be an actual discussion, and not flamewar.....

I think this is an apples and oranges relationship. My view of WotC invlolves my perception and actions by WotC. Me paying for a WotC product involves me, WotC, and a 3rd party.

If I'm buying a WotC product, 3rd parties are competing for my business - my relationship with WotC is not directly relevant at that point.

Edit - as for "greed", we're not comparing cost-cutting measures - which is what the consumer is doing. WotC is making business decisions to (what they hope will) maximize profits, not just minimize spend.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I'm not saying anything, I'm responding to the posts in other threads saying that WotC trying to make more money is greedy, while many of those same people try to "make" more money by spending less. I'm trying to reconcile why one is considered greedy (WotC) and the other is considered just plain smart consumerism.

I'm not personally judging either, just asking people why they think (for those that do) it is ok for customers to act "greedy", but not companies.

**now I will "judge"
Personally, I think WotC and the customers are both right to maximize their income/profit (or not, for some customers. for some customers, they get value out of supporting an LGS that outweighs the extra dollar cost of buying from them. I'm generally one of those, but I'm not offended by others that are not).

I don't get the vitriol aimed at a company (whose sole purpose is to make money - that's why companies exist in our society, like it or not. If executives of publicly held companies don't act in the interest *to the best of their ability* of shareholders, they are breaking the law), nor do I get the judging as wrong those that shope one way or the other.

I agree that WOTC should do what they can to make money. I've never called them greedy, they are a company it's their JOB to make money. And they've made a fair share of money off of me in the past, pretty consistently .
But now they produce a product that I have no need for. This coupled some of their most recent actions have really soured me toward that company. Even though there are products of theirs that I like (Star Wars Saga, Dungeon Tiles) I've made a decision not to give them any more of my money. Me choosing not to support them any more isnt about them being greedy, it's about how I feel that they've treated me as a customer. Pretty much the same thing I say about LGS's, If youre not really offering me anything of added value I'll take my money elsewhere.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

What ShinHakkaider said.

None of my issues with WoTC have anything to do with price. It's about the fact that I think they've become poor stewards of my hobby.

Ken

 

[Zaukrie]

It fascinates me (I'm fascinated by much of human behavior, and spend too much time thinking about things like this) how much the comments and emotion and logic on these boards mirrors the conversation on sports boards I frequent. It's almost like WotC is the Cubs or Patriots sometimes, more than they are producers of Doritos.

Clearly there is a signficant emotional involvement in gaming, much like sports team fandom (though different, because we actually participate, as opposed to just watch).