Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 7863810" data-attributes="member: 85870">I've criticized Cubicle7 in the past for its handling of The One Ring product line. From my perspective, it was obvious from the beginning that they'd been both overly ambitious and overly optimistic in their ability to meet the full demands of the product line.I don't think they released a single supplement for TOR that wasn't at least 6 months behind schedule, and in many cases 12 or even 18 months behind schedule (see: The One Ring Adventurer's Guide). Not only that, they purposefully excluded major components of the setting from the original core game ---Rohan, Gondor, and the Noldor---which is functionally equivalent to releasing a Forgotten Realms campaign setting that excludes the Sword Coast, the Underdark, and Waterdeep.Admittedly the material they did release was top-notch, but I quickly lost patience with the whole endeavor---especially when I had the excellent Lord of the Rings Living Card Game from Fantasy Flight competing for my consumer dollars. And that's really what it comes down to --- consumer dollars. It's pretty obvious that the product line simply wasn't profitable enough for C7. If it was profitable enough, then C7 would do everything within its purview to renew/continue the license.If it wasn't about sheer profitability, the only other reason I can imagine them dropping the license was if the terms of control over the IP going forward were too onerous---much like Paizo determined in 2008 that the licensing terms of the 4e GPL were far too confining.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 7863810, member: 85870"] I've criticized Cubicle7 in the past for its handling of The One Ring product line. From my perspective, it was obvious from the beginning that they'd been both overly ambitious and overly optimistic in their ability to meet the full demands of the product line. I don't think they released a single supplement for TOR that wasn't at least 6 months behind schedule, and in many cases 12 or even 18 months behind schedule (see: The One Ring Adventurer's Guide). Not only that, they purposefully excluded major components of the setting from the original core game ---Rohan, Gondor, and the Noldor---which is functionally equivalent to releasing a Forgotten Realms campaign setting that excludes the Sword Coast, the Underdark, and Waterdeep. Admittedly the material they did release was top-notch, but I quickly lost patience with the whole endeavor---especially when I had the excellent Lord of the Rings Living Card Game from Fantasy Flight competing for my consumer dollars. And that's really what it comes down to --- consumer dollars. It's pretty obvious that the product line simply wasn't profitable enough for C7. If it was profitable enough, then C7 would do everything within its purview to renew/continue the license. If it wasn't about sheer profitability, the only other reason I can imagine them dropping the license was if the terms of control over the IP going forward were too onerous---much like Paizo determined in 2008 that the licensing terms of the 4e GPL were far too confining. [/QUOTE]

Verification