> I am perplexed at the people who have been
> saying that the mid-level gaming companies
> will be hurt AND the customers will be helped.
> This notion goes against every economic and
> business theory on the books. You reduce
> competition, and the customer will never
> benefit. Never. No small game company
> will be even remotely able to compete with
> WotC for customer attention, distributor
> attention, advertizing, or shelf space.
How is this reducing competition? The only area where competition will be reduced is
in actual rulesystems. With the major one free, the incentive to produce/purchase
another is increasingly lessened and barriers to entry for other systems increases
dramatically.
On the content side, competition can flourish. The market won't have to settle for a
half-baked D&D adventure from WotC because there is now the opportunity for someone
else to produce one that's very nearly D&D without fear of repurcussion from IP
lawsuits. You've just removed a huge barrier to entry in that market. So there's more
competition at that level and consumers have more choice.
The main advantage WotC has are the rulebooks and its distribution network. ORC games
won't mind that WotC is the #1 gaming rules company. Heck, they'll probably appreciate
it because it means more potential gamers for their own settings/products based on
those same rules.
I see mid-sized companies that are tied down to their own rulesystems feeling the
crunch. They've invested resources and time into these systems and it won't be easy
for most to simply give them up because the largest one is now essentially free. The
mid-sized companies will have to completely change their business model to compete on
that level. That's not an easy thing to do. A smaller company is better suited for
that kind of manuevering.
Of course, that still leaves the distribution network. This has always been and will
always be the hardest thing to manage for the independent/small publisher. I doubt
anything will change on that front for a while, but there is a better chance to
compete with new distribution models.
So that leaves us a rulesystem that, while stifling desire to produce new systems,
allows for change and innovation within that system. It also leaves a larger, more
open market for game content making things better for small publishers who can
concentrate on writing a game rather than designing and testing rules and consumers
thanks to an expanded selection. At least, that's how I've been looking at. :)
-Andrew
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
