Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 5506804" data-attributes="member: 65637">The GSL is a direct response to the OGL and it's flaws.&nbsp; The problem is, the flaws with the OGL weren't really seen by us, because we didn't foot the bill.The big flaw in the OGL is that it was too much. &nbsp; The OGL has it's roots in three main things.&nbsp; &nbsp; First off, the era.&nbsp; Remember, the OGL was written at the same time&nbsp; the internet was in a compelete frenzy over &quot;open source.&quot;&nbsp; It was everywhere.&nbsp;&nbsp; You couldn't even think about Wired without something about open&nbsp; source popping up, in your brain if need be.&nbsp; Just as oWoD was the most&nbsp; 90's game imaginable, the OGL was directly influenced by &quot;the inevitable&nbsp; triumph of open source.&quot;&nbsp; Secondly, TSR was insanely, insanely restrictive of their license.&nbsp;&nbsp; Whenever people get misty eyed and nostalgic for TSR, some part of me&nbsp; screams in horror.&nbsp; They were suing fansites left and right and&nbsp; generally had no concept at all of how their own business functioned,&nbsp; much less how the internet worked.&nbsp; If you've ever read Dancey's entries&nbsp; / posts on what he found while overseeing the TSR buyout, it's insane&nbsp; stuff.&nbsp; The OGL was a direct response to the absurd inclusiveness that&nbsp; TSR had practiced.&nbsp; The OGL was also meant to solve the biggest problem&nbsp; TSR had - too many miniproducts.&nbsp; Rather then make the weirdly specific&nbsp; low-volume, no-margin products that TSR went bankrupt with, third party&nbsp; would handle those, while WotC would focus on the big sellers.&nbsp; So your&nbsp; Ecology of the Thri-kreen or Big Book of Mindflayers could be made by Paizo, while WotC would be&nbsp; making Complete Warrior.&nbsp; Thirdly, the OGL had some good core ideas.&nbsp; But, a few of them,&nbsp; several people might actually find repugnant.&nbsp; See, the OGL wasn't just&nbsp; meant to help D&amp;D become bigger, it was also meant to destroy the opposition.&nbsp;&nbsp; The goal was to make d20 so synonymous with gaming as a whole that&nbsp; non-d20 games would dry up completely.&nbsp; If you enjoy a non-d20 game,&nbsp; that was running hardline against the assumptions.&nbsp; Never forget that&nbsp; the OGL as designed first and foremost to sell 3e.&nbsp; So, what went wrong?&nbsp; The OGL was too big.&nbsp; It contained too much.&nbsp; Rather then just&nbsp; make the low-volume products that WotC didn't want to deal with - and&nbsp; while Paizo gets some flake, I gurantee adventures were a part of that,&nbsp; so they operated completely within WotC's expectations - you had entire&nbsp; game systems being made.&nbsp; Now, I enjoy Pathfinder, but in some ways you&nbsp; could say that Pathfinder is exactly what the OGL's failing is - from a&nbsp; business perspective, Pathfinder is proof that the OGL experiment failed.&nbsp; The idea goes like this: D&amp;D is the #1 RPG.&nbsp; Other RPGs are short&nbsp; lived blips in comparison, and most RPG groups are short lived.&nbsp; Thus,&nbsp; players who are pulled into the hobby are in turn inevitably pulled into&nbsp; D&amp;D, since that's where all the campaigns and source material is!&nbsp;&nbsp; Even when you hit things like Spycraft or M&amp;M that don't pay one&nbsp; cent to WotC, they will inevitably leave that for D&amp;D, since they're&nbsp; already familiar with the basic rules.&nbsp; But that didn't work.&nbsp; The network effects didn't create the network.&nbsp;&nbsp; Part of it was failings outside the OGL - Dancey also wanted a very&nbsp; robust internet presence and RPGA presence, both of which flopped hard,&nbsp; especially the online presence.&nbsp; Part of the failings was simply that&nbsp; the OGL was too optimistic in regards of open source - releasing your&nbsp; source code increases market share but doesn't neccisarily translate to money.The other big problem is that third party producers weren't really interested in making the Big Book of Mindflayers.&nbsp; The intention for the OGL was to build of the base of D&amp;D, but only third party folks that did actively expand on WotC's&nbsp; established 3e base were those that typically just churned out a lot of&nbsp; crap.The big 3p players - well, big for third party - generally just did&nbsp; their own thing with the license.&nbsp; The only publishers I know of that&nbsp; actually expanded on WotC's stuff successfully were Paizo through&nbsp; Dragon/Dungeon, a few weird &quot;second party&quot; materials made by Monte Cook&nbsp; at Malhavoc Press, and the psionics stuff done by Dreamscarred.&nbsp; And&nbsp; even most of that was also used to build up themselves - Paizo built up their own Pathfinder line&nbsp; of adventure paths and modules for their own setting, and Malhavoc made&nbsp; their own I Can't Believe It's Not 3e line through Arcana Unearthed.&nbsp;&nbsp; Most stuff was third parties pumping and beating their own chests.&nbsp;&nbsp; Rather then make the Big Book of Aboleths and Mind Flayers, they'd make&nbsp; the big book of monsters in their own homebrew setting that earned WotC zero other sales.&nbsp; Of course, the 3p glut and the fact that you&nbsp; had a billion books that were all utter garbage, leading most DMs to just&nbsp; banning third party altogether, also removed any incentive for WotC to&nbsp; utilize them as an unofficial branch in the first place&nbsp; In the end, the OGL experiment was just that - an experiment.&nbsp; A brilliant experiment, mind you!&nbsp; But, nonetheless, it was an experiment.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's one that benefited a whole lot of companies...but WotC was the&nbsp; one that had to foot the bill.&nbsp; It's not surprising in the least that in&nbsp; 4e they would go much more conservative with their license.&nbsp; There's been some good third party stuff for Paizo - I'm a rather&nbsp; proud owner of Psionics Unleashed and probably the most irritating&nbsp; fanboy that Dreamscarred has had to deal with ;p - but there's also a&nbsp; lot of stuff that I glance at and think: &quot;Oh boy, the second glut&nbsp; begins!&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 5506804, member: 65637"] The GSL is a direct response to the OGL and it's flaws. The problem is, the flaws with the OGL weren't really seen by us, because we didn't foot the bill. The big flaw in the OGL is that it was [I]too much[/I]. The OGL has it's roots in three main things. First off, the era. Remember, the OGL was written at the same time the internet was in a compelete frenzy over "open source." It was [I]everywhere[/I]. You couldn't even think about Wired without something about open source popping up, in your brain if need be. Just as oWoD was the most 90's game imaginable, the OGL was directly influenced by "the inevitable triumph of open source." Secondly, TSR was insanely, insanely restrictive of their license. Whenever people get misty eyed and nostalgic for TSR, some part of me screams in horror. They were suing fansites left and right and generally had no concept at all of how their own business functioned, much less how the internet worked. If you've ever read Dancey's entries / posts on what he found while overseeing the TSR buyout, it's insane stuff. The OGL was a direct response to the absurd inclusiveness that TSR had practiced. The OGL was also meant to solve the biggest problem TSR had - too many miniproducts. Rather then make the weirdly specific low-volume, no-margin products that TSR went bankrupt with, third party would handle those, while WotC would focus on the big sellers. So your Ecology of the Thri-kreen or Big Book of Mindflayers could be made by Paizo, while WotC would be making Complete Warrior. Thirdly, the OGL had some good core ideas. But, a few of them, several people might actually find repugnant. See, the OGL wasn't just meant to help D&D become bigger, it was also meant to [I]destroy the opposition[/I]. The goal was to make d20 so synonymous with gaming as a whole that non-d20 games would dry up completely. If you enjoy a non-d20 game, that was running hardline against the assumptions. Never forget that the OGL as designed first and foremost to [I]sell 3e.[/I] So, what went wrong? The OGL was too big. It contained [I]too much[/I]. Rather then just make the low-volume products that WotC didn't want to deal with - and while Paizo gets some flake, I gurantee adventures were a part of that, so they operated completely within WotC's expectations - you had entire game systems being made. Now, I enjoy Pathfinder, but in some ways you could say that Pathfinder is exactly what the OGL's failing is - from a business perspective, Pathfinder is proof that the OGL experiment [I]failed[/I]. The idea goes like this: D&D is the #1 RPG. Other RPGs are short lived blips in comparison, and most RPG groups are short lived. Thus, players who are pulled into the hobby are in turn inevitably pulled into D&D, since that's where all the campaigns and source material is! Even when you hit things like Spycraft or M&M that don't pay one cent to WotC, they will inevitably leave that for D&D, since they're already familiar with the basic rules. But that didn't work. The network effects didn't create the network. Part of it was failings outside the OGL - Dancey also wanted a very robust internet presence and RPGA presence, both of which flopped hard, especially the online presence. Part of the failings was simply that the OGL was too optimistic in regards of open source - releasing your source code increases market share but doesn't neccisarily translate to [I]money[/I]. The other big problem is that third party producers weren't really interested in making the Big Book of Mindflayers. The intention for the OGL was to build of the base of D&D, but only third party folks that did actively expand on WotC's established 3e base were those that typically just churned out a lot of crap. The big 3p players - well, big for third party - generally just did their own thing with the license. The only publishers I know of that actually expanded on WotC's stuff successfully were Paizo through Dragon/Dungeon, a few weird "second party" materials made by Monte Cook at Malhavoc Press, and the psionics stuff done by Dreamscarred. And even most of that was also used to build up themselves - Paizo built up their own Pathfinder line of adventure paths and modules for their own setting, and Malhavoc made their own I Can't Believe It's Not 3e line through Arcana Unearthed. Most stuff was third parties pumping and beating their own chests. Rather then make the Big Book of Aboleths and Mind Flayers, they'd make the big book of monsters in their own homebrew setting that earned WotC zero other sales. Of course, the 3p glut and the fact that you had a billion books that were all utter garbage, leading most DMs to just banning third party altogether, also removed any incentive for WotC to utilize them as an unofficial branch in the first place In the end, the OGL experiment was just that - an experiment. A brilliant experiment, mind you! But, nonetheless, it was an [I]experiment[/I]. It's one that benefited a whole lot of companies...but WotC was the one that had to foot the bill. It's not surprising in the least that in 4e they would go much more conservative with their license. There's been some good third party stuff for Paizo - I'm a rather proud owner of Psionics Unleashed and probably the most irritating fanboy that Dreamscarred has had to deal with ;p - but there's also a lot of stuff that I glance at and think: "Oh boy, the second glut begins!" [/QUOTE]

Verification