MeepoTheMighty
First Post
Is it just me, or is Gary totally out of touch here?
From http://www.silven.com/articles.asp?case=show&id=115
From http://www.silven.com/articles.asp?case=show&id=115
Q1) We know from previous columns with you that you are not a great advocate of open licenses. Before we delve into the details of this lets define your views on this using the OGL as our standard discussion point. Are you against open licenses like the OGL in any form or is it one factor of the licensing model that you think is poor?
It is my opinion in general that an open license is worth every penny paid for it, and returns to the grantor full value for the material offered in the deal.
Q2) WoTC have on many occasions maintained that they went ahead with the OGL to relieve themselves of the all the burden of creating add-ons to the D&D universe so that they could focus on the core products. Is this not in essence a good idea?
If a company cannot walk and chew gum at the same time, then the reasoning is sound. Otherwise, I think it is no more than an excuse to cover an inability to create and produce quality adventure material. If course support material does not have the same profitability as do core books, but the publisher of a game system can certainly manage to generate some income from superior support products, and that is owed to the fans of the game system.
Q3) Now a downside to the OGL is, of course, the mass of mediocre products to hit the marketplace immediately following the release of the license. No doubt this contributes in the short term to a dilution of the brand and a weakening of the market quality. However do you not think that in the long term better products will emerge out of necessity and slowly out compete the poor products, thus reestablishing the strength of the brand AND a larger selection of products for the consumer? Are we not seeing this happen today on a small scale?
I totally disagree with the basic assumption in this question. Why should it have been necessary initially to flood the marketplace with poor products? What guarantee of quality is the D20 logo on future products? There is no quality control involved in regards either the D20 or OGL, so the marks generally only identify material that can be used with whatever new version of the D&D game is current. Finally, what value is there in having a large selection of support material of varying, mostly questionable quality? Quantity of this sort is not valuable in regards to support products, and there is no way for quality to be assured.
Q4) What are your views on WoTC redefining the license after its release to shut out certain types of content and is this is a manifestation of one of the weaknesses in open licenses like the OGL?
There's little for me to say about this. I concur that the license grants undue license, and the lack of control WotC is willing and able to exercise over content is evident. That they put in some minimal decency standards is refreshing in my view.
Had WotC retained control over their IP, and issued only specific licenses to qualifies publishers for development and production of support material, quality would be assured. The D&D logo would have gained further recognition by appearing on such products, and thus all concerned, consumers included, would have benefited.
The excuse that WotC could not afford to control licensees' product content is not valid. Income from royalties paid for use of the D&D game material and logo would surely pay the cost for employees hired to review manuscript material submitted for approval prior to publishing.
Q5) You have mentioned on numerous occasions that WoTC is not taking its responsibility to the industry when it comes to widening the appeal of the RPG game genre and bringing in new gamers. Does the presence of the OGL at all assist WoTC in making steps towards this goal?
No. All the OGL does is to allow virtually any sort of design to utilize D&D game material. The result might develop products that appeal to existing game enthusiasts, but it does virtually nothing in regards to bringing in new players.
Q6) If you would have been present at WoTC when the decision was made to create an open license, how would you have gone about it, assuming that not doing it was not an option.
I would have resigned my position with the company rather than seeing the OGL come into being.
Q7) Lastly, lets confront the reality of the existence of the OGL. Its here and it looks like its going to stay. We have seen some benefits and downsides to its existence. What can we [the industry] do now with the lessons learned so far to ensure that the OGL grows into something that is a benefit to the D&D and d20 genre over the years to come?
Frankly, the D20 and OGL licenses are what they are, and in my opinion they have no real benefit to WotC, and thus they do not benefit the D&D game system. The concept is flawed, and I do not believe that any amount of time will serve to make a silk purse out of a pig's ear.