So..um..how's that GSL coming along?

[Raven Crowking]

You know what's funny? You've just said the same thing twice.

Not quite.

Some people buy brand name because, while they know it is not the best quality, they also know what quality to expect. A brand name is often a sort of sure thing, whereas an unknown is a gamble.

A great many people buy McDonalds, for example, not because they believe McDonalds is the best burger, but because they always know what they're going to get.

I suppose if you rolled "value of knowing what the product will be" into the quality of the product itself, then you could say it is the same thing, but I'm fairly certain that that changes the meanings of the terms from those justanobody is using.

There are huge budgets allocated to name-brand recognition, and the whole point of trademark law is to prevent others from profitting by your expenditure on name-brand recognition. Saying that this advertising works is not, IMHO, dismissive of anyone. If anything can be proven with statistics, I would accept that "name-brand recognition affects buying patterns" is high on the list of things that have been so proven.

After all, buying on the basis of brand isn't irrational. There are good, logical, reasons to do so. However, doing so doesn't guarantee that you've purchased the best possible product, either.

(All of which has little to do with when the GSL is coming out, except to speak to the question of why WotC decided to go GSL over OGL in the first place. It still seems to be an attempt to close the barn door after the cows have already escaped to me.)


RC

 

[TerraDave]

You'd sooner go to an applebees then a british pub, in britain?



EDIT: you being Charles Ryan, in this case.

 

[darjr]

One other thing. Just to toss in.

Sometimes the brand brings along with it a higher quality to a product because that product is an addition to a suite of products.

In other words, if the product works with others in the brand, the quality of the previous suite of products in the brand can enhance the quality of the new product. Or shred it.

There is a term for this... it just escapes me.

 

[Jack99]

I think that recent announcement of the new mini distribution model is kind of the nail in the coffin for a good GSL. If WOTC is moving to a mini/card format for products any GSL that comes out has its days numbered from the start.

I don't see Hasbro letting another company produce power cards or minis for its game.

That's a nice jump you just made there...

 

[SteveC]

You'd sooner go to an applebees then a british pub, in britain?



EDIT: you being Charles Ryan, in this case.

Well me not being Charles Ryan, I can answer that anyway with: it depends. If you are traveling with children, then going to a chain restaurant is a great idea anywhere in the world. For me, when I am out of the country I love trying local food, but McDonalds is always one of the places I go.

You know what you're getting there, and also you know that they have a clean bathroom of a western nature. And yes, that last one can be an issue, even in England!

But I do loves me my pub food, so as I usually travel solo and single overseas, bring on the beer and meat pies!

Sorry for the distract: but it does go to show that the decision on what "brand" to make use of is more complicated than you might think.

--Steve

 

[Fifth Element]

Sorry for the distract: but it does go to show that the decision on what "brand" to make use of is more complicated than you might think.

This was basically my point. Differing brands have differing advantages in differing situations. To say one is "higher quality" in all situations is generally misleading.

 

[ExploderWizard]

That's a nice jump you just made there...

Well of course it was. Making those difficult jump checks is part of what being a crotchety old grognard is all about.

 

[CharlesRyan]

Not quite.

Some people buy brand name because, while they know it is not the best quality, they also know what quality to expect. A brand name is often a sort of sure thing, whereas an unknown is a gamble.

A great many people buy McDonalds, for example, not because they believe McDonalds is the best burger, but because they always know what they're going to get.

I suppose if you rolled "value of knowing what the product will be" into the quality of the product itself, then you could say it is the same thing, but I'm fairly certain that that changes the meanings of the terms from those justanobody is using.

Fair enough and well said.

 

[CharlesRyan]

You'd sooner go to an applebees then a british pub, in britain?

SteveC already gave a pretty good answer to this.

I'll just add that if all British pubs really were what you imagine them to be (as implicit in your post--if nothing else, superior to Applebees), the answer would be Heck No.

This sort of illustrates my point (albiet perhaps weakly). Based on how you put your question, I'm guessing you have an image in your mind of The British Pub. It seems like it might be a favourable image--a comfortable, welcoming place, characterized by old world charm and a neighborly camaraderie. In this sense, The British Pub is in effect a brand, to which you have a relationship. Given the chance, this image--this brand--might affect your restaurant-patronization choices should The British Pub be an option for you.

In reality, some British pubs are like the above. Others are beer-soaked sports bars. Some don't serve food at all. The "British pub" spans a range of experiences equivalent to almost every form of bar and mom-and-pop restaurant in the US. Actually, some British pubs are in fact chain restaurants.

I prefer the food and experience at The Selbourn Arms and The White Horse many times over that at Applebee's. But eating at The Selbourn Arms tells me absolutely nothing about the pub in the village in Dorset that I happen to be driving through with two hungry children. Whereas the Applebee's logo tells me everything I need to know!

 

[Voadam]

My guess is that it's not a competition issue. It's an issue of barriers to entry. In the "copy & paste publishing" scenario, anyone with a little time, a few thousand bucks, and a desire to be a game publisher can flood the hobby game channel with poorly-selling product that chokes the profit out of the RPG category. That was very much the state of the industry circa 2005.

Eliminate that, and create a scenario in which every single word of a 65,000-word sourcebook must be original, and you create a barrier to entry that will restrict the volume of new product entering the RPG marketplace--hopefully a restriction that favours product more likely to sell.

[Is this the end-all-and-be-all solution for avoiding a glut? Hardly. But I bet a lot of decisions about the GSL are being made with glut-avoidance in mind.]

Copy and paste publishing created a glut IYO?

Most d20 products IME did not paste material from the srd directly into their products. Just ones that tried to be complete in themselves games that wanted full d20 rules (Arcana Evolved, Conan RPG, Thrilling Tales, and such) or more convenient srds (or pocket PH/DMG/MM guides).

These copy and paste products did not seem a large portion of the d20 product market and banning their creation would not have significantly affected the number of d20 products IMO.

d20 never had a useful short stat block in the srd for monsters or NPCs that could be copied into a module or sourcebook. These had to be created by the new product authors.

Even looking at huge 700 page d20 books like Ptolus or Rappan Athuk or Castle White Rock or World's Largest Dungeon, I'm not sure what you could find that was pasted into them directly from the srd.

Most products simply used srd mechanics names but had to type in the whole stat blocks of everything themselves. This would still be allowed under the GSL. All that is really blocked by eliminating copy and paste publishing are the full stand alone games and reformatted srds.