Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9410349" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>While also admitting that the game is "under-monetized" and that they want to create a recurring spending environment, utilizing assets that are specific to <em>their</em> VTT (e.g. a virtual gold dragon mini) all in an effort to move people over to the digitized play area they're making, rather than the tabletop. That we know they want people to not only play digitally, but to do so using their platform, isn't in question; I really don't understand why people think they're going to try and encourage people to do that. Are you under the impression that WotC will finish designing the VTT and then sit back and not do anything to entice people into using it?</p><p></p><p>No one said it was "shocking." I'm not at all sure why you think there's some element of surprise to this (if there was, that was pretty much blown when they told us what they were planning to do).</p><p></p><p>I shouldn't have to point out that this is a strawman, since I'm not talking about "forcing" anything, and haven't throughout the course of this thread. Please try and answer the issues that I've raised, and not the caricature raised by some other posters.</p><p></p><p>No one has suggested otherwise.</p><p></p><p>Leaving aside the "relatively" cheap aspect, you're just reiterating things which aren't in contention, for reasons I'm not clear on.</p><p></p><p>See above. "Forcing" isn't an issue under discussion.</p><p></p><p>You're already closing in on using "force" a half-dozen times. How many times have I used that in previous posts? Because it's less than this.</p><p></p><p>Or a debate perspective, since "forcing" people isn't what's being discussed.</p><p></p><p>As long as we're unilaterally deciding what is and isn't an issue, I'll go ahead and say that something something naming what industry a company is part of is a non-issue.</p><p></p><p>Well, if you don't see it, then it clearly must be fine.</p><p></p><p>Especially if they try to make supplementary aspects of the game funnel people toward those tools, despite those tools not having the same scope of interface as imaginative play. Of course, not every other company deals in imaginative play, so that makes comparing it to every other company kind of pointless, but I suppose we can declare that a non-issue also.</p><p></p><p>No one suggested they wouldn't, the same way no one suggested anyone would be "forced" online. Given how you're replying to so many points I never raised, I'm curious if you meant to reply to someone else?</p><p></p><p>And I'm given to understand the acid in the paper is less than before, or so I heard, so clearly that drives a stake through the heart of their attempts to further monetize the game digitally. Because if we list a bunch of stuff WotC is doing that we like, it means that the stuff we don't is negated.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 9410349, member: 8461"] While also admitting that the game is "under-monetized" and that they want to create a recurring spending environment, utilizing assets that are specific to [I]their[/I] VTT (e.g. a virtual gold dragon mini) all in an effort to move people over to the digitized play area they're making, rather than the tabletop. That we know they want people to not only play digitally, but to do so using their platform, isn't in question; I really don't understand why people think they're going to try and encourage people to do that. Are you under the impression that WotC will finish designing the VTT and then sit back and not do anything to entice people into using it? No one said it was "shocking." I'm not at all sure why you think there's some element of surprise to this (if there was, that was pretty much blown when they told us what they were planning to do). I shouldn't have to point out that this is a strawman, since I'm not talking about "forcing" anything, and haven't throughout the course of this thread. Please try and answer the issues that I've raised, and not the caricature raised by some other posters. No one has suggested otherwise. Leaving aside the "relatively" cheap aspect, you're just reiterating things which aren't in contention, for reasons I'm not clear on. See above. "Forcing" isn't an issue under discussion. You're already closing in on using "force" a half-dozen times. How many times have I used that in previous posts? Because it's less than this. Or a debate perspective, since "forcing" people isn't what's being discussed. As long as we're unilaterally deciding what is and isn't an issue, I'll go ahead and say that something something naming what industry a company is part of is a non-issue. Well, if you don't see it, then it clearly must be fine. Especially if they try to make supplementary aspects of the game funnel people toward those tools, despite those tools not having the same scope of interface as imaginative play. Of course, not every other company deals in imaginative play, so that makes comparing it to every other company kind of pointless, but I suppose we can declare that a non-issue also. No one suggested they wouldn't, the same way no one suggested anyone would be "forced" online. Given how you're replying to so many points I never raised, I'm curious if you meant to reply to someone else? And I'm given to understand the acid in the paper is less than before, or so I heard, so clearly that drives a stake through the heart of their attempts to further monetize the game digitally. Because if we list a bunch of stuff WotC is doing that we like, it means that the stuff we don't is negated. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.
Top