Ben Riggs talks about Why WotC tried to cancel the OGL

[jerryrice4949]

It makes all the sense in the world that it was really about potential money being left on the table. Especially when you consider that there's no way to accurately calculate just how much the availability of the OGL has increased the popularity of the base game (and the money made by WotC from it) versus the money they don't get because it's going to those 3rd Party producers. Because it's not like WotC could make a 1-for-1 comparison and say "That 1 Million Dollar Kickstarter would have been money that would have come to us if that Kickstarter otherwise wasn't a thing." We know that's not true in the least-- that million dollars would not in any way have made its way to WotC if the Kickstarter (and it through the OGL) didn't exist, because WotC would still have needed to produce something to warrant bringing in those million dollars.

But I'm sure there were folks at Hasbro that just didn't get that. They probably just thought indeed that every dollar spent on a 3PP was a dollar that wasn't coming to WotC that otherwise would have. And no matter how many times folks in the D&D department would tell them "D&D is only AS BIG AS IT IS currently BECAUSE the OGL has allowed everyone to grow-- a rising tide lifts all boats-- so putting an end to that will not actually benefit us!"... the money people probably just wouldn't accept it.

Now granted... it's way too simple to just point to the numbers and say "See what the sales of 2E and 4E were without an OGL versus the sales of 3E and 5E WITH an OGL? This is why the OGL has been great for us!" because correlation does not imply causation. But at the same time it was the most evidence the D&D team had to at least have SOMETHING to point to. Until of course then the implosion of January 2023 occurred and gave even more evidence to the problem of what removing the OGL would result in.

And look... quite frankly I understand the money people's argument. I don't think it's a very good argument, and was not nearly worth arguing for... but I understand why they made it. But thankfully those people were put in their place about it.

The lesson to learn from all of this is "If you want to make a lot of money... just make something people really want. Don't try to just skim off of other people's work. You're not going to make nearly enough to warrant all the hassle."

I like most people on this site believe the OGL has been a boon for WoTC but is is important to note that we have a very specific bias and such a belief benefits us and supports our preconceived notions. There really is no empirical evidence to support or refute that belief so it is not unreasonable that some business execs might not agree. Can you imagine suggesting to McDondalds that Burger King has enhanced their sales. I get that is not a great comparison but it is easy to see how some execs feel the OGL has cost WoTC revenue and there is always a chance that it it even true.

 

[JAMUMU]

This one time after training we went to play pool but I dropped 60 quid at some point between the training hall and the pool hall and I couldn't afford to take my lady out for dinner the next night and that burning, impotent, insidious rage was like what WotC felt when they realised that for the #1 D&D company they're actually like the #3 D&D company.

 

[DEFCON 1]

...when they realised that for the #1 D&D company they're actually like the #3 D&D company.

Heh... that might be overstating things a little bit. Just because a couple companies can pull in a million bucks on a Kickstarter doesn't mean WotC isn't pulling in just as much (if not even quite a bit more) from just their normal book sales. And it ain't like that million bucks is profit for those 3PPs either, a lot of that money is just covering costs and salary.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Hasbro has got its own crowdfunding plataform.

They should worry because I choose a title instead other because with the same price I enjoy more page, more crunch and lore.

 

[MNblockhead]

Can you imagine suggesting to McDondalds that Burger King has enhanced their sales. I get that is not a great comparison but it is easy to see how some execs feel the OGL has cost WoTC revenue and there is always a chance that it it even true.

Actually, the comparison kinda works. Every wonder why throughout the US you'll see several fast food places clustered together? It isn't solely because those are good spots in high traffic areas. It is also because people know to go to that area for quick food pickup. It ends up increasing sales for all the fast food restaurants to have this cluster of options.

The OGL (and now Creative Commons) allows WotC to not just sell the burger but to be the landowner. Sharing profits with nearby restaurants (with other publishers) is more effective than taking most of the profits of a low populated area (niche hobby).

Eh, not a perfect analogy. But, you know, "network effects", "game theory", and other jargon I pretend to understand because I can search Google.

Cite: How Game Theory Explains Why Fast Food Restaurants are Always So Close to Each Other : Networks Course blog for INFO 2040/CS 2850/Econ 2040/SOC 2090

 

[jerryrice4949]

Actually, the comparison kinda works. Every wonder why throughout the US you'll see several fast food places clustered together? It isn't solely because those are good spots in high traffic areas. It is also because people know to go to that area for quick food pickup. It ends up increasing sales for all the fast food restaurants to have this cluster of options.

The OGL (and now Creative Commons) allows WotC to not just sell the burger but to be the landowner. Sharing profits with nearby restaurants (with other publishers) is more effective than taking most of the profits of a low populated area (niche hobby).

Eh, not a perfect analogy. But, you know, "network effects", "game theory", and other jargon I pretend to understand because I can search Google.

Cite: How Game Theory Explains Why Fast Food Restaurants are Always So Close to Each Other : Networks Course blog for INFO 2040/CS 2850/Econ 2040/SOC 2090

The way I read this article it is saying McDonalds is better off sharing profits with another fast food place in a busy location than going to a less busy area and not having to share the the sales. However if it is just McDonalds with no competition in a high trafficked area then McDonalds would have better sales. Competition doesn’t improve McDondalds’ sales it is just the lesser of two evils if the choice is sharing a high trafic location or being alone at a less busy area.

 

[Iosue]

Well, that was a whole lotta nothing.

 

[Dausuul]

He seems to be leaning pretty heavily on a single source, which we've already seen go sideways over the course of the OGL debacle.

Indeed. I find it very hard to believe the whole thing was just a straight-up money grab aimed at 3PPs. When the backlash started, royalties were the first thing Wizards jettisoned. But they hung onto the clauses that gave them control... and that let them shut out digital competitors.

Looking at WotC's behavior throughout the debacle, I think the most likely explanation is that they had/have grand plans for a Wizards VTT, and the goal was to keep that space to themselves. I'm also quite open to an argument @Snarf Zagyg made at one point, that it was driven by a desire to keep The Brand under tight control -- not so much a strategy as a kind of blind corporate reflex. "All about the 3PP Benjamins" is possible, but much less plausible than those two IMO.

 

[darjr]

Indeed. I find it very hard to believe the whole thing was just a straight-up money grab aimed at 3PPs. When the backlash started, royalties were the first thing Wizards jettisoned. But they hung onto the clauses that gave them control... and that let them shut out digital competitors.

Looking at WotC's behavior throughout the debacle, I think the most likely explanation is that they had/have grand plans for a Wizards VTT, and the goal was to keep that space to themselves. I'm also quite open to an argument @Snarf Zagyg made at one point, that it was driven by a desire to keep The Brand under tight control -- not so much a strategy as a kind of blind corporate reflex. "All about the 3PP Benjamins" is possible, but much less plausible than those two IMO.

If you read Bens article the money was a vector to attain that power.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Maybe I am too conspiranoic but some times I suspect somebody wants the control of the entertaiment industry, including the TTRPGs because its strategic value as "soft power", the ability to influence culturally in other societies.