Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jmucchiello" data-source="post: 4402766" data-attributes="member: 813">The OGL was never meant to make money. It was designed to increase D&amp;D's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect" target="_blank">network of players</a>. With games like M&amp;M, C&amp;C, True20, it did that very well. It is much easier to find players for 3.x D&amp;D games than say GURPS or HERO since even people who've abandoned D&amp;D for M&amp;M, C&amp;C, True20, etc are able to grok 3.x D&amp;D quickly. Moving players to completely unrelated systems takes more effort and the network of players of those games is smaller making getting a game started harder.The OGL did not cause any hemorrhaging of money. It was financially sound business practice. If you can point to a some proof that there was money loss specifically due to the OGL, quoting from a WotC source, I'd like to see it.The reason they abandoned the OGL is because the current suits, like you, don't understand network externalities.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jmucchiello, post: 4402766, member: 813"] The OGL was never meant to make money. It was designed to increase D&D's [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect]network of players[/url]. With games like M&M, C&C, True20, it did that very well. It is much easier to find players for 3.x D&D games than say GURPS or HERO since even people who've abandoned D&D for M&M, C&C, True20, etc are able to grok 3.x D&D quickly. Moving players to completely unrelated systems takes more effort and the network of players of those games is smaller making getting a game started harder. The OGL did not cause any hemorrhaging of money. It was financially sound business practice. If you can point to a some proof that there was money loss specifically due to the OGL, quoting from a WotC source, I'd like to see it. The reason they abandoned the OGL is because the current suits, like you, don't understand network externalities. [/QUOTE]

Verification