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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mouseferatu" data-source="post: 4669723" data-attributes="member: 1288">I'm sorry to be so blunt, but your personal presumptions are neither binding nor, in this case, reasonable.When you buy a book from a company, that is the end of any legal or moral obligation between you and the company. You paid for a product, and you received that product. As long as said product is complete and not rendered somehow unusable through internal error, the company owes you nothing more, and you have the right to expect nothing more. If the company advertises forthcoming books, then "good faith" means they produce what they said they would produce. It does not mean they produce anything they didn't say they would produce.Anything else--including continued support beyond what's advertised--is gravy. You might have expected it, but that doesn't mean the company is acting in bad faith, in any reasonable definition of the term, not to provide it.And the "spare parts" for cars metaphor is faulty. If you can't get parts for the car, it stops working. The game doesn't stop working without extended support; it works exactly as well as it did the day you bought it. Further support beyond what's promised/advertised is the equivalent of demanding upgrades from the dealer--and not essential upgrades, but cosmetic ones, because you're bored of the car only doing what it did when you purchased it. And that's an entirely different thing--and something that few dealers or mechanics ever guarantee.It might have been the peak of popularity--I've heard otherwise, regarding total numbers of gamers, but we won't get into "dueling anecdotes" <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />--but was it the peak of profitability? I would argue that it was not. TSR was woefully mismanaged, and people from WotC and TSR both have said in so many words that part of what drove TSR into the ground--not all of it, by any means, but a large part of it--was them trying to market too many variant lines to the gaming audience. Campaign settings are usually trotted forth as the primary culprit, but the existence of multiple simultaneous "branches" of D&D was certainly involved.Again, I'd love it if this wasn't the case. I'd like a full-fledged, complete BECMI-equivalent game for 4E. But it's not likely to happen, and as much as I might wish otherwise, there are good reasons for that.</blockquote>

Verification