Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gweinel" data-source="post: 6290407" data-attributes="member: 2165">I find funny all this conversation if OGL hurt Wizards or not. If hurt Paizo or not. If 4e was too strict or not. I find all this talk funny because we talk about the companies and how these actually make big, little or no profit. We are even taking sides about their profits. I can understand this to a degree. The RPGs companies produce the game we love. I can understand it but i don't agree with all the focus we give to the companies.&nbsp;Almost noone is asking if open or close gaming policies helped the subjects: the gamers, all the ppl that post here and many thousands more. What would we do if 3e wasn't so free to use? What would the gamers do if wizards choose to produce 4e without any Pathfinder, or any dnd branch game? I am not a diviner ( <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :P"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" /> ) but I can predict that the OGL really boosted the number of choices that we have in our gamng nights. We are &quot;richer&quot; because 3e was free for all to use. Although I don't play Pathfinder i think that it kept many ppl to dnd at the same time were 4e players were reduced. I think that if there was no Pathfinder many disatisfied players from 4e would turn to other games. I consider OGL allowed to Wizards to make (imho) a financial mistake and still have the hegamony of the industry. Many of us still playing dnd because of this. I know quantity of gaming material doesn't mean quality, but I prefer to have the freedom of choice.In summary i think the players were in fact benefited from OGL and if 5e follow the same tracks we would will see another gamers bloom like we did 14 years before.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gweinel, post: 6290407, member: 2165"] I find funny all this conversation if OGL hurt Wizards or not. If hurt Paizo or not. If 4e was too strict or not. I find all this talk funny because we talk about the companies and how these actually make big, little or no profit. We are even taking sides about their profits. I can understand this to a degree. The RPGs companies produce the game we love. I can understand it but i don't agree with all the focus we give to the companies. Almost noone is asking if open or close gaming policies helped the subjects: the gamers, all the ppl that post here and many thousands more. What would we do if 3e wasn't so free to use? What would the gamers do if wizards choose to produce 4e without any Pathfinder, or any dnd branch game? I am not a diviner ( :P ) but I can predict that the OGL really boosted the number of choices that we have in our gamng nights. We are "richer" because 3e was free for all to use. Although I don't play Pathfinder i think that it kept many ppl to dnd at the same time were 4e players were reduced. I think that if there was no Pathfinder many disatisfied players from 4e would turn to other games. I consider OGL allowed to Wizards to make (imho) a financial mistake and still have the hegamony of the industry. Many of us still playing dnd because of this. I know quantity of gaming material doesn't mean quality, but I prefer to have the freedom of choice. In summary i think the players were in fact benefited from OGL and if 5e follow the same tracks we would will see another gamers bloom like we did 14 years before. [/QUOTE]

Verification