mamba
Legend
as I said, PR / damage control. Do you think Budweiser firing the two marketing guys over the one transgender influencer was because they actually made a mistake this severe or because it functions as damage control...
WotC Anyone Else Tired of the Wizards Bashing?
- Status
Warpiglet-7
Cry havoc! And let slip the pigs of war!
I started reading thinking this was about the wizard class. Alas, it’s about the company…
I am tired of it for sure. It has lost all novelty.
When the complaining maybe pushed wizards to a better direction, sure. Gripe away.
When it degenerates to shock about corporate greed etc etc
Ugh…does nothing for me. I do however like some of their game products…
I am tired of it for sure. It has lost all novelty.
When the complaining maybe pushed wizards to a better direction, sure. Gripe away.
When it degenerates to shock about corporate greed etc etc
Ugh…does nothing for me. I do however like some of their game products…
mamba
Legend
depends on the case, there are also ones where they did not ask for it back
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
Impossible to argue with that.
mamba
Legend
finally something that meets that criteria
LeviKornelsen
Explorer
I actually agree entirely here. A corporate entity apologizing for an action and that corporation's management sincerely believing in the apology are only occasionally connected, and in this case I doubt it strongly.
Wizards top brass is a lot of former Amazon/ Microsoft folks; they're there to do business, not steward the community or any of that.
trappedslider
Legend
I still play, but it's only commander and I'll buy a pack or two. My biggest purchase will be when i pre-order the commander legends per-cons.I'll have to assume you are not a recovering mtg addict then.
Same, I own books but I don't play D&D.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
The irony is that, by and large, once Microsoft got serious about gaming, they became good stewards of those brands. I remember when everyone was sure MS was going to ruin Minecraft and instead, it's been great. Shockingly great, in fact.
On the other hand, Amazon Gaming ...
Amrûnril
Adventurer
I love D&D and really wish I could be happy with the company that produces its official products. WotC's recent conduct, though, makes that impossible. This conduct reflect a profound disrespect for their customers, for their business partners, and for the underlying principle that laws, contracts and ethical principles exist to protect other parties' rights, not just their own.
In the OGL dispute, WotC announced their intention to revoke an agreement that was written to be irrevocable, that they repeatedly affirmed was irrevocable, and that others had built livelihoods around. They ultimately backed down, but notably did not retract the claim that they could retract the OGL if they wanted to.
In the Pinkerton case, WotC deployed private enforcers (likely armed) to circumvent the legal process for resolving property disputes. They ultimately gave the other party replacement cards for the ones they intimidated him into surrendering, but they didn't give him the opportunity to consult a lawyer about the relevant legal claims before "agreeing" to their offer.
What both of these incidents reflect is a desire by WotC to unilaterally dictate the rules of their business dealings. WotC is happy to argue that their proposed license terms and dispute resolutions are fair. Sometimes, they're willing to be generous with those terms. What they're not willing to do is negotiate those terms. From their perspective, customers and business partners have have privileges that WotC has generously elected to give them, but they don't have rights that WotC has to respect when it proves inconvenient.
In the OGL dispute, WotC announced their intention to revoke an agreement that was written to be irrevocable, that they repeatedly affirmed was irrevocable, and that others had built livelihoods around. They ultimately backed down, but notably did not retract the claim that they could retract the OGL if they wanted to.
In the Pinkerton case, WotC deployed private enforcers (likely armed) to circumvent the legal process for resolving property disputes. They ultimately gave the other party replacement cards for the ones they intimidated him into surrendering, but they didn't give him the opportunity to consult a lawyer about the relevant legal claims before "agreeing" to their offer.
What both of these incidents reflect is a desire by WotC to unilaterally dictate the rules of their business dealings. WotC is happy to argue that their proposed license terms and dispute resolutions are fair. Sometimes, they're willing to be generous with those terms. What they're not willing to do is negotiate those terms. From their perspective, customers and business partners have have privileges that WotC has generously elected to give them, but they don't have rights that WotC has to respect when it proves inconvenient.
jerryrice4949
Hero
Ironically this thread has turned into exactly what the poster is tired of.
- Status
Similar Threads
