Honestly, if WoTC didn't create it would 4e be D&D?

[Fobok]

D&D is not strongly linked with good rules (though being the most successful game helps in trying to get good game designers.)
The rules are the work of the designers and developers creating each edition, and quality is not implied by D&D. Unless someone says AD&D stopped being D&D once D&D 3E came around and improved the quality of the rules framework.

D&D is not only the mechanics. If it was, OD&D and D&D 3E cannot be D&D.
D&D is not only the game world. If it was, then Forgotten Realms, Fading Suns and Al Quadim could not be all D&D.

Yep, totally agreed. That's why I've stayed away from the original post and was answering a specific question of would I be calling 4e a better game if it didn't have the D&D name? Yes, I very much would.

Is it fitting of the D&D name? That's up for each person to decide. Personally, (though admittedly I've only come to this conclusion recently), I don't care. I play a game system because it's fun to play, not the name on the cover. The game I started playing with was Star Wars D6, so I have no nostalgic connection to D&D. A good game's a good game.

 

[Turanil]

If the game was not called D&D, it would be an obscure side-interest at best.

Brand loyalty for this name is freakin' insane.

I suspect that there are a lot of people who love the 4th Edition rules simply because they are the current rules of the game branded D&D. As soon as 5th Edition comes out, those same people will trash 4th Edition for its glaring and obvious problems.

I believe in these hypothesis too.

 

[Jack99]

I think brand loyalty and name recognition drives the majority of D&D sales. There have been many other RPGs both stylistically and mechanically superior to D&D over the years, yet D&D is still here and still top of the heap.

Name a few please. Also, while you are at it, maybe you could provide either reviews or sales figures that support said statement. I am curious and would love to know more of my options.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

If D&D doesn't give me a good, well-supported game system, I wouldn't want to play it.

So, I don't care for the brand name D&D, and it is immaterial to me if 3E, 4E, or Shadowrun is D&D or not.
Is it well-supported? Do I get my fix on new supplements and adventures?
Is it fun to play? Can I create interesting characters? Can I create new adventures easily? Can I run the game without getting headaches? Can player characters shine, do they get useful mechanical abilities? Are the mechanics easy to grasp?
(Das Schwarze Auge might fulfill my first criteria, but mostly fails in this one?)

 

[CleverNickName]

In my opinion? No. The playstyle is similar enough, but the differences outweigh the similarities if you ask me.

Is this a good thing?
Is this a bad thing?

That's the question.

 

[xechnao]

If D&D doesn't give me a good, well-supported game system, I wouldn't want to play it.

So, I don't care for the brand name D&D, and it is immaterial to me if 3E, 4E, or Shadowrun is D&D or not.
Is it well-supported? Do I get my fix on new supplements and adventures?
Is it fun to play? Can I create interesting characters? Can I create new adventures easily? Can I run the game without getting headaches? Can player characters shine, do they get useful mechanical abilities? Are the mechanics easy to grasp?
(Das Schwarze Auge might fulfill my first criteria, but mostly fails in this one?)

What do you mean by "interesting characters" and "player characters that shine"? What exactly fits the bill here?

 

[Rechan]

I thought we weren't having edition wars for a month?

 

[xechnao]

Name a few please.

Games that have D&D's mechanic style but perhaps are superior in certain parts: Decipher's Lord of the rings, BESM.
Games with different or similar mechanics, but inspiring a superior number of different styles: Burning wheel, Cadwallon, Reign, ConspiracyX 1st edition, Issaries' Runequest, Decipher's Lord of the rings.

 

[Imaro]

Name a few please. Also, while you are at it, maybe you could provide either reviews or sales figures that support said statement. I am curious and would love to know more of my options.

Reign by Greg Stolze... here's some reviews.

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13062.phtml

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13162.phtml

http://gamesteratlarge.blogspot.com/2007/08/reign-by-greg-stolze.html

http://www.lulu.com/content/825234

 

[MortalPlague]

Is this a good thing?
Is this a bad thing?

That's the question.

No, that isn't the question. That question has been debated on and off for the last few months prompting a ban on edition wars.

Very interesting question from the OP... I have to confess I probably wouldn't be playing 4th Edition were it not branded with the D&D name, mostly for lack of awareness. I really enjoy 4th, and I think WotC did a really good job in updating the rules, but my awareness of 3rd party RPGs is far from complete.

I also agree with some of the other posters in this thread; part of the D&D brand isn't simply blind brand loyalty. The D&D name guarantees support in the way of products, events, and players. It's easier to find a D&D game or a D&D product than, say, a Shadowrun product or a Mutants and Masterminds product.