I think the single biggest difference is that in the case of the YouTube, Facebook, Amazon, Ticketmaster etc they aren’t actually providing anything themselves. They don’t contribute - the only path is through other creators.
Whereas in the case of WotC they are looking at more than just hosting a platform for other people’s work. They are actively contributing themselves. I can’t ever see a point at which WotC just becomes a VTT hosting service and not a publishing company. It’s the same reason that DM Guild isn’t a choke point because those that take part get access to IP they wouldn’t otherwise get. In the same way NetfliX aren’t a chokepoint when they give a production company 5mil to produce a series.
WotC sure contributed by buying off D&DBeyond someone else created, same way Elon Musk founded Tesla by buying it off, firing real founders and then blowing tons of money on telling everyone it's his creation.
And yes, by definition, both DRiveThruRpg (which DMs Guild is part of) and Netflix are chokepoints - they control the means through which the creators (rpg publishers, movie makers) deliver their product to the customers, which gives them control over the product and customer experience.
The second reason that I think it’s premature to worry is that there isn’t one single VTT company. Beyond, Roll20, Foundry, Fantasy Grounds, Owlbear and they are just the best known ones. All in a very small
niche industry. Most of these were produced as start ups by independents and compete effectively. Now maybe Sigil will be so amazing that it will blow us all away and it will be the only sensible way of playing the game. I’m sceptical that any VTT can turn into the YouTube of VTT, because Gamers want wildly different things from their VTT.
Netflix also supposedly has competition, but most is either struggling or became money sink for biggest companies, while Netflix jacks up prices because they know people have nowhere to go. Sadly WotC doesn't need to make good product to put other VTTs out of business, it just needs to make POPULAR product.
Thirdly. WotC seem to pull back really hard on anything that whiffs of negativity the moment they’re challenged on it. It was 2 weeks from the OGL leak to them doing a complete 180. I don’t believe that was just down to beyond subscriptions dropping. I genuinely do think they care about their reputation within the community at large. Otherwise we wouldn’t see the continued voluntary release of free rule systems.
Chokepoints are more "boil the frog" projects, they lure people into false sense of security, ensure everyone they need it and then, once people are too dependent to leave, begins shady business practices
I ask this because you seem to be arguing in this post, and in prior posts, that WotC making a good product is bad. Does that mean that WotC making a bad product is best for consumers? Or is WotC making any product bad? Is WotC just not able to compete, in your view, without causing issues?
but WotC is not making a good product, they bought a mediocre product and add to it a bloated hardware-based barrier of entry and is now trying to use them to control how the fans interact with the hobby and with third party publishers.
The problem here is that this requires two parties to agree to the terms to begin with. And every third party on DNDBeyond has other methods of selling their product. But because it is, hypothetically, possible that this happens, WotC shouldn't pursue making better products?
You do realize that companies need from time to time renegotiate their contracts, right? What if this new model blows out so much, that it becomes substantial source of Kbold Press' income? And THEN WotC wil renegotiate the deal in a way that forces KP to close their own store? When KP is no longer in position where they can defy WotC demands without taking substantial, possibly leathal, hit?
