Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Azgulor" data-source="post: 4962426" data-attributes="member: 14291">Clark,While I think it was a classy move on your part, I don't think you really needed to apologize.&nbsp; You were up front from the very beginning as to the personal and business-related reasons why you were lining up to support 4e.&nbsp; Although I thought you were viewing the 4e announcement &amp; launch through extra-thick rose colored glasses and giving WotC waaaay too much credit, I can hardly claim I was right and you were wrong.If anything, the reality NecroG came to realize is Exhibit A for the case of &quot;WotC did screw up&quot; (in part).&nbsp; Whether a WotC customer &amp; D&amp;D fan felt betrayed, slighted, or dismissed is purely subjective.&nbsp; When the biggest non-WotC cheerleader &amp; popular 3rd-party publisher says supporting 4e isn't viable (under the original GSL)... well, that's as close to tangible data as I've seen in the RPG industry.Note: While not a fan of 4e, I'm not saying anything about the game itself.&nbsp; If you like it, booya for you!Obviously a thread this long will start to wander off-topic.&nbsp; However I do find it ironic that after so many posts about &quot;WotC provides everything I need&quot;, &quot;3rd-party support isn't important to my game&quot;, etc. we've got 9 pages (currently) of 4e fans expressing disappointment, or clamoring for NecroG 4e modules.&nbsp; If 3rd-party support is really than unimportant to the 4e crowd, why did Clark's post get anything more than a passing glance?Perhaps it's nothing more than expressing a desire for a &quot;nice to have&quot;.&nbsp; My own ancedotal speculation is that 3rd-party support is a big deal for many gamers.&nbsp; I also suspect that while 4e has been successful for WotC, it would have seen greater success if it had encouraged the 3rd-party publishers the way it did under 3.x.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Azgulor, post: 4962426, member: 14291"] Clark, While I think it was a classy move on your part, I don't think you really needed to apologize. You were up front from the very beginning as to the personal and business-related reasons why you were lining up to support 4e. Although I thought you were viewing the 4e announcement & launch through extra-thick rose colored glasses and giving WotC [I]waaaay[/I] too much credit, I can hardly claim I was right and you were wrong. If anything, the reality NecroG came to realize is Exhibit A for the case of "WotC [I]did[/I] screw up" (in part). Whether a WotC customer & D&D fan felt betrayed, slighted, or dismissed is purely subjective. When the biggest non-WotC cheerleader & popular 3rd-party publisher says supporting 4e isn't viable (under the original GSL)... well, that's as close to tangible data as I've seen in the RPG industry. [I]Note: While not a fan of 4e, I'm not saying anything about the game itself. If you like it, booya for you![/I] Obviously a thread this long will start to wander off-topic. However I do find it ironic that after so many posts about "WotC provides everything I need", "3rd-party support isn't important to my game", etc. we've got 9 pages (currently) of 4e fans expressing disappointment, or clamoring for NecroG 4e modules. If 3rd-party support is really than unimportant to the 4e crowd, why did Clark's post get anything more than a passing glance? Perhaps it's nothing more than expressing a desire for a "nice to have". My own ancedotal speculation is that 3rd-party support [I]is[/I] a big deal for many gamers. I also suspect that while 4e has been successful for WotC, it would have seen greater success if it had encouraged the 3rd-party publishers the way it did under 3.x. [/QUOTE]

Verification