Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Retreater" data-source="post: 9210965" data-attributes="member: 42040">Mark certainly has the more balanced approach to topics. I started following RFC during the OGL news cycle, so it's been an almost constant anti-WotC position from Stephen Glicker. Which is what makes my head spin about this new take about WotC.It's not just that he concedes that the VTT is a well designed tool. It's all these points he's made in the past that he doesn't seem to acknowledge or temper in the latest video. As his audience, many of us still share these concerns.1.) He said the 2024 revision was simply an excuse for WotC to distance themselves from the the OGL and 5th edition SRD to force out third party companies. He now says it has beautiful art and he's looking forward to getting it. (In my mind, if his previous opinions were valid, &quot;beautiful art&quot; isn't a good enough reason to support such a dastardly plan.)2.) On many occasions, he said the new VTT is a means to undermine other companies such as Roll20, Fantasy Grounds, and Foundry VTT, by creating a &quot;walled garden ecosystem fueled by microtransactions&quot; that would destroy D&amp;D and turn it into a video game. He now says it has nice graphics and a smooth UI. (Again, in my mind, if those previous opinions were valid, &quot;nice graphics and a smooth UI&quot; isn't enough to make us want this service.)3.) He said the C-suite at Wizards and Hasbro don't care about the game and that they're in the position to &quot;milk customers dry&quot; with unnecessary cash grabs that probably make the game worse. He now says they completely know what they're doing for the betterment of the hobby, and everyone should get on board. (And to me, that's not enough of a statement to make me want to throw my support behind the company.)So he didn't do a good job to me, as a supporter of his channel and frequent customer of his products, to convince me to believe him - because he didn't address the core issues he has been ranting against for nearly a year. It's one of those moments of &quot;I really should've been taking this guy with a grain of salt the whole time&quot; moments. Honestly, I've spent nearly a calendar year since the OGL news cycle in anti-WotC echo chambers (not here on ENWorld, obviously), so maybe I need to rethink those sources (of whom Stephen Glicker is only one).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Retreater, post: 9210965, member: 42040"] Mark certainly has the more balanced approach to topics. I started following RFC during the OGL news cycle, so it's been an almost constant anti-WotC position from Stephen Glicker. Which is what makes my head spin about this new take about WotC. It's not [I]just [/I]that he concedes that the VTT is a well designed tool. It's all these points he's made in the past that he doesn't seem to acknowledge or temper in the latest video. As his audience, many of us still share these concerns. 1.) He said the 2024 revision was simply an excuse for WotC to distance themselves from the the OGL and 5th edition SRD to force out third party companies. He now says it has beautiful art and he's looking forward to getting it. (In my mind, if his previous opinions were valid, "beautiful art" isn't a good enough reason to support such a dastardly plan.) 2.) On many occasions, he said the new VTT is a means to undermine other companies such as Roll20, Fantasy Grounds, and Foundry VTT, by creating a "walled garden ecosystem fueled by microtransactions" that would destroy D&D and turn it into a video game. He now says it has nice graphics and a smooth UI. (Again, in my mind, if those previous opinions were valid, "nice graphics and a smooth UI" isn't enough to make us want this service.) 3.) He said the C-suite at Wizards and Hasbro don't care about the game and that they're in the position to "milk customers dry" with unnecessary cash grabs that probably make the game worse. He now says they completely know what they're doing for the betterment of the hobby, and everyone should get on board. (And to me, that's not enough of a statement to make me want to throw my support behind the company.) So he didn't do a good job to me, as a supporter of his channel and frequent customer of his products, to convince me to believe him - because he didn't address the core issues he has been ranting against for nearly a year. It's one of those moments of "I really should've been taking this guy with a grain of salt the whole time" moments. Honestly, I've spent nearly a calendar year since the OGL news cycle in anti-WotC echo chambers (not here on ENWorld, obviously), so maybe I need to rethink those sources (of whom Stephen Glicker is only one). [/QUOTE]

Verification