OGC Wiki?

[philreed]

I would evaluate what I was doing and try to limit the damage. Unfortunately, for game designers and publishers, if they begin to limit new OGC, they may become criticized by their consumers and lose revenue due to lost sales. This can become a vicious spiral where less and less OGC is produced and the industry losing sales as a result.

And here is the sequence of events.

Fans threated in create an OGC Wiki. Publishers state that due to financial reasons this will lead to a radically decreased amount of new OGC. Fans threaten to not buy from publishers that decrease their OGC output.

Publishers, no matter what, are not respected and are treated as evil, hostile corporations out for millions of dollars when they are really small operations that depend on monthly sales for survival.

 

[jezter6]

And here is the sequence of events.

Fans threated in create an OGC Wiki. Publishers state that due to financial reasons this will lead to a radically decreased amount of new OGC. Fans threaten to not buy from publishers that decrease their OGC output.

Publishers, no matter what, are not respected and are treated as evil, hostile corporations out for millions of dollars when they are really small operations that depend on monthly sales for survival.

I respect many a publisher. I respect them based on their actions and their words, and the quality of their work. I respect you because you are a good businessman who's 'made it' in the biz. I respect ralts because I love his work. I respect Chuck Rice because he has given me some of the best products ever made.

I don't respect publishers who want to limit how others use their open content, regardless of if that content is free, paid for, reused, collected in mass, whatever. I respect your right to disagree with some of it, but not when it comes to threatening OGC cuts, calling the correct use of OGL 'immoral', or any of the other derogatory things that has come out of this.

Considering all the bad vibes coming of this, I would not be suprised to see an OGC wiki created TO spite publishers because of the attitudes presented here. It's rude, but I can see it happening.

 

[philreed]

Considering all the bad vibes coming of this, I would not be suprised to see an OGC wiki created TO spite publishers because of the attitudes presented here. It's rude, but I can see it happening.

Do you not see this as a threat to publishers?

Look at it this way. An OGC Wiki will punish every publisher that has a clear, generous OGC declaration while leaving those with confusing and restrictive OGC declarations relatively safe from harm. Is this your goal?

EDIT: Let me add that the publishers that have taken time to interact in this thread have been those with clear, generous OGC declarations. What does this mean to you?

 

[Man-thing]

It will also might lead those with generous and clear OGC declaration, to make a more confusing and crippled OGC declaration leading to even less collaboration in the system and not more.

 

[philreed]

An example from life.

Green Ronin's Hammer & Helm states: "All text in this product is designated as Open Gaming Content." The product was released in 2002. Does this mean that you (again, not targeted at any individual) feel this material should be on an OGC Wiki? My understanding is that many supporters of the OGC Wiki -- people, I must add, that would in no way be negatively affected by such a Wiki -- feel that the material must be on an OGC Wiki.

 

[jgbrowning]

Considering all the bad vibes coming of this, I would not be suprised to see an OGC wiki created TO spite publishers because of the attitudes presented here. It's rude, but I can see it happening.

Everything put up for FREE from an OGC source that wasn't FREE (of cost) to begin with is telling the creator how much their opinion is valued: none.

Given that, it's hard to see why any free OGC compilation source isn't spiteful to begin with. Even if 100% legal.

joe b.

 

[Zelgar]

I think that the OGL has always been a threat to designers and publishers. The problem is that a lot of them never realized the threat until too late. And if the response to the creation of a OGC Wiki is the elimination or greatly reduced production of new OGC, then I would not be surprised if there is a negative reaction from the gaming community.

Please note, this is not intended as a threat agaist the game designers or publishers, but I think that they need to consider all aspects of their decisions.

Zelgar

 

[jgbrowning]

I think that the OGL has always been a threat to designers and publishers. The problem is that a lot of them never realized the threat until too late. And if the response to the creation of a OGC Wiki is the elimination or greatly reduced production of new OGC, then I would not be surprised if there is a negative reaction from the gaming community.

Please note, this is not intended as a threat agaist the game designers or publishers, but I think that they need to consider all aspects of their decisions.

Zelgar

It's not a threat, I think it's truth. If an OGC FREE source becomes available publishers will produce less OGC and then some gamers will have negative feelings towards the publishers because of it.

Great. All that acrimony and worry because someone wants FREE OGC?

This is why, as Wulf stated, it's probably unwise.

Hell, everything I've ever released has been 100% open, but now I'm deciding if I should form new opinions on the matter. I don't like it and am not pleased with it.

joe b.

 

[Zelgar]

Everything put up for FREE from an OGC source that wasn't FREE (of cost) to begin with is telling the creator how much their opinion is valued: none.

Given that, it's hard to see why any free OGC compilation source isn't spiteful to begin with. Even if 100% legal.

joe b.

Let's look at this in another way. Book X costs $40 when first printed. A year later, a PDF version is released online for $20. Has the value of the material in the book changed? Ok, now the OGC material is taken from the book and is put in another book or put on a Wiki. Has the value of the material in the book changed? What if the entire book was clearly stated as OGC? Just a few things to think about.

Zelgar

 

[philreed]

Let's look at this in another way. Book X costs $40 when first printed. A year later, a PDF version is released online for $20. Has the value of the material in the book changed? Ok, now the OGC material is taken from the book and is put in another book or put on a Wiki. Has the value of the material in the book changed? What if the entire book was clearly stated as OGC? Just a few things to think about.

As long as a reasonable, fair market price is charged for the OGC then it retains its value. The instant it is free, or available at a substantially decreased price, its value has been reduced to nothing.