OGC Wiki?

[Yair]

Why is 4-year waiting period dangerious?

Most dangerous as in the most possibly harmful to the industry; it is less dangerous than the 6-months period you suggested in the sense that it will likely lead to less loss of income.

 

[GMSkarka]

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

Exactly.

And another thing-- One of the things that bothers me the most about subjects like this is that it brings to the fore something that I've noticed over the past decade in the business: Gaming is one of the few entertainment media where a disturbingly large percentage of the audience seems to actively resent those who produce the material they enjoy.

I've seen it pop up here and there in other "geek media" (comics, for example), but never with the frequency and vehemence that I've seen among gamers. It's this twisted sort of love/hate thing....love the material, hate those who make it. Often manifested as the view that we somehow "play games for a living" and don't deserve to be paid for what we do....or that they "could keep gaming without the industry," which seems to be a view that those who professionally produce the entertainment products they use are somehow superfluous to the process.

It's frustrating.

 

[Yair]

And another thing-- One of the things that bothers me the most about subjects like this is that it brings to the fore something that I've noticed over the past decade in the business: Gaming is one of the few entertainment media where a disturbingly large percentage of the audience seems to actively resent those who produce the material they enjoy.

That is strange.
But then, it's much less strange than "information wants to be free". Speaking as a physicist, information wants to get degraded, if it wants anything at all...

Often manifested as the view that we somehow "play games for a living" and don't deserve to be paid for what we do....or that they "could keep gaming without the industry,"

Of course we could game without the industry. It will just be poorer gaming.

 

[BryonD]

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

If only everyone agreed on what they "should" do.

If only "should" were ultimately relevant.

Do you define your behavior purely based on what others think you should and should not do?

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

If only everyone agreed on what they "should" do.

If only "should" were ultimately relevant.

Do you define your behavior purely based on what others think you should and should not do?

Yup. Otherwise, there's plenty of people who wouldn't be pulling air past thier teeth.

I could do it, doesn't mean that I should do it.

 

[Nellisir]

The more I think about it, the more I like Nellisir's "Open Source Community" model. It is just so unproblematic, that there isn't any objecting to it.

One notices the "voices of the publishers" have been ignoring it.

Most of the ones posting here won't like it, though.

Reframed slightly, this is about competition to a monopoly. It's in the monopoly's best interests to suppress any competition, no matter how slight.

The irony is, it's not really about creating Open Game Content. The monopoly is on distribution. I suspect the overall OGC created by the gamer community outweighs published material by several orders of magnitude, but that output has no viable means of broad distribution. A successful OGC repository, particularly a open-source, independent-design one, would create a broad distribution channel for design competition to the monopoly.

 

[Nellisir]

I'd just like to add that what's being talked about has serious potential to damage people's livelihoods. It's easy to be cavalier about such things when it's not your salary or your mortgage payments on the line. Sure, we got into this industry because we love gaming, but it's also the way we make a living. We don't work our asses off for substandard wages so we can see the fruits of our labor given away for free on the internet. Information may want to be free, but my family also wants to eat. So there you go.

I'm glad you could drop by. If you're willing, could you address the idea of the "open-source" repository I detailed? Your statement above, as written, doesn't apply to it.

I can repost the outline, if you like.

Thanks,
Nell.
Eagerly awaiting the Advanced Race Codex.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

One notices the "voices of the publishers" have been ignoring it.

Most of the ones posting here won't like it, though.

Reframed slightly, this is about competition to a monopoly. It's in the monopoly's best interests to suppress any competition, no matter how slight.

The irony is, it's not really about creating Open Game Content. The monopoly is on distribution. I suspect the overall OGC created by the gamer community outweighs published material by several orders of magnitude, but that output has no viable means of broad distribution. A successful OGC repository, particularly a open-source, independent-design one, would create a broad distribution channel for design competition to the monopoly.

How is the current method a monopoly?

Anyone can register with RPGNow and the EN Game Store.

Anyone can create a d20 gaming supplement, or even an OGL game, for that matter.

The OGC created by the gamer community has the same viable method of distribution that all of used.

RPGNow.
DrivethruRPG.
and now, EN Game Store.

There's books to help beginning publishers, many companys, authors, layout designers, etc, all offer advice and assistance.

There's no monopoly. Current publishers aren't some monolithic organization with a lock on the entire market.

That's a broad, unfair portriat that we are all out to crush the "poor little guy" when we all started like that, and I know for a fact that some of the bigger names have helped out people, many of whom put out only 1 or 2 books before moving on to other things.



What many people dislike about the OGC Wiki is the idea that it doesn't matter what we want, our work will end up there within days or hours of us publishing it, without even the ability to ask for it to be removed.

It's part of the "gentleman's agreement" currently in place. If I was to ask, say, Wulf, to remove the mechanics I came up with for mitigating the damage of thrown AAA batteries against jelly-folk from his Big Book of Semi-Solid Creatures, I believe he would, just as if he asked me to remove the mechanics for determining the effects on a player who stuck his face into frozen plasma for my Big Book of Idiotic Actions, I would. Neither of us would make an issue of the fact that the other choose to ask us to remove thier mechanics.


I could get behind the OGC Wiki, IF I retained the right to say: "Pull that." and the people running the Wiki would comply. It's only fair.

 

[Nellisir]

I'm going to make a quick personal note.

No, actually, I'm not. While it would feel good, it's ultimately irrelevant to the discussion.

Nell.

 

[GMSkarka]

There's no monopoly. Current publishers aren't some monolithic organization with a lock on the entire market.

But...but....we're eeeeeeeevilllllll!

We're "The Man" trying to "keep a brutha down".....or something.

Come on, man, get with the program!

As Lucy Van Pelt tells us: "It's run by a Big Eastern Syndicate, you know..."