Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Terramotus" data-source="post: 4211206" data-attributes="member: 7220">This was originally a response to the Ampersand thread where Bill Slavicsek talks about his comments at GAMA and the way that WotC is doing campaign settings, but I decided that it deserved its own thread.  There were a lot of complaints in that thread about WotC implementing that policy as a money grab to force people to buy books they don't want.I don't understand the assumptions inherent in that sentiment.  At all.  It seems to me that if you buy a product, you did in fact want it.  At least, you wanted it $30 worth, or whatever the product costs.  By my own calculus, taking into account the costs of my other interests, this hobby is downright cheap.  I'm involved in a certain type of collecting, and some people in that fandom think nothing of dropping a couple of hundred dollars on a single piece.  I happen to be excited about 4th Edition, but I was exceited about 3rd and 2nd before that as well.Maybe I'm just optimistic, but I think it goes beyond that.  There seems to be a deep anti-commerical sentiment in this fandom that goes beyond that, from the people who are angry that they're putting out a new edition at all (as a money grab), to those who don't like "splatbooks" on that principle, to complaints that D&D Insider is a ripoff scheme, to the people who are upset that *gasp* WotC actually wants people to switch over to 4E.  Even people who don't actively object to those practices often seem to make statements with that sentiment lurking in the background.I just don't get it.  Is it really that offensive that WotC wants to make more gaming books that are useful to you?  It seems like a win-win situation to me.  They get more revenue, and you get more material you like.  So they might not live up to their ideal fully.  Can you blame them for getting excited about what they're trying to do?  Why are so many people willing to claim those statements as marketing doublespeak?Why is operating with an eye towards profitability such a problem?  Certainly everyone can understand that the money to employ the WotC staffers has to come from somewhere, and that more books that we all enjoy will be produced if the game is more profitable.  Heck, given the number of gaming companies with procuts people love that have gone under, Guardians of Order most recently, and Palladium being in danger, I would think people would be hypersensitive in the other direction.  It reminds me of the people that complain about bands "selling out".  I don't understand that either.I suppose part of it has to do with roleplaying having so much to do with imagination, and people feeling a bit like they own part of the game from putting so much effort into it week in and week out.  But that explanation alone doesn't seem to be enough.So, I'm asking ENWorld: why do so many people seem to feel that WotC has to apologize for making money?  I personally find that idea a little offensive - most people wouldn't demand a car mechanic fix their car for free for life once he's fixed it once, but seem to think that a game designer should work differently.  But this is a serious inquiry.  Where does the anti-commercial thread come from in this fandom, and why does it seem so pervasive?  Why are so many people so ready to assume the most irresponsible money-grubbing motivation in absence of any other evidence?Note for Moderators: The 4E forums seemed the most appropriate for this thread, since the question was sparked by the discussions going on in this forum, and by a 4E strategy.  If you feel this needs to be moved to General RPG Discussion, please do so.</blockquote>

Verification