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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steel_Wind" data-source="post: 8896174" data-attributes="member: 20741">I have been saying all along this is really about Foundry (or the "next Foundry", whatever that ends up being). They want the VTT for 6e locked down and to offer the only 6e VTT space at a subscription prince. When gamers can go elsewhere for a non-sub price, many will. They don't want that.They can lock out Roll20 via licensing. Same with FG. Foundry is the threat, because it is more technologically capable than either Roll 20 or FG -- and unlike any other VTT out there because of its module design, it is nimble AF in terms of feature offerings. It even does this while directly leveraging interactivity with DDB, and offering 3d functionality now that WotC is currently working on and has a free software community + Patreon approach surrounding it which is, in a word VIBRANT.And that's only about VTT market leaders today. It says nothing about the next decade and what other competitors might arise in that space that none of us yet see - because they don't exist yet.All of this is bad if you want your product to be the next WoW. So the plan was to lock down VTTs out of the OGL. The changes after that were a shopping list of druthers and OGL 1.0a remorse.My point: WotC can still get most of what it wants by simply making a markedly superior digital VTT product. They really should focus on this, because they can have the VTT space locked up with legal protections, policed by SWAT teams in VTOL aircraft, based on invisible SHIELD helicarriers hovering over the globe.  In the end, if  their own VTT product is no good -- not many will pay a subscription price for it.  OTOH, if it is good, not many will choose a cheaper alternative. This was simply greed, trying to get the whole pizza all to themselves. It's unnecessary and it always was.</blockquote>

Verification