>> Consider: The OGL makes >game rules< a commodity. (In >> fact, it drops the cost of using a certain set of game rules >> (the contents of the SRD) to $0 across a large portion of >> the market). >> >> So, if game rules become a commodity, what becomes more valuable? >> >> The brand. Brands in gaming are complements to rules. >>
So in theory (taking this to an extreme), if the Rules necessary to play we available for $5, and were brandless. Then branded, quality settings, that are primarily not rules, should in theory raise the price of branded modules from say ~$14.95 to ~$19.95 (over time of course) And if additional rules, the commodity, are introduced to the community at the absolute lowest price point possible, then those branded quality modules should continue to rise in price? Also, by lowering the price point of people entering the market, those that must purchase the core rules, and by providing a large number of quality brands based on those rules, it will increase the number of new consumers entering the market? -- Mike (who has just found a new interest in economics) _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
