So, this is a bit of a conspiracy theory regarding the recent leak of the new Open Gaming License. My thoughts are that Wizards of the Coast intentionally leaked it in order to stir up controversy and hatred for an edition of the OGL that they were never going to release. Then, after everyone got super upset, they would use that feedback to change the real OGL while also making the new one seem better by comparison. By making a lot of changes from the cartoonishly horrible one to something that is still bad but seems much better, they would give the appearance of listening to their fanbase and making changes, all while getting more money than they would have gotten had they not changed it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quokkas are objectively the best animal, anyone who disagrees needs a psychiatric evaluation
While I'm not sure it's what happened... it wouldn't be out of the question. It's a negotiation tactic: referred to as "the anchor" or "the big ask", or things to that effect. Put out terms that are so outrageously bad that when you release the "real" version that has been walked back only slightly, people go "oh, it's not THAT bad I guess..." because the awful one is fresh in their minds. One writer at The Escapist once called when games publishers do this "making the outrage outdated": making it so that "oh, you're still mad about THAT version? That was so five minutes ago!" be an argument that people critical of a situation have to put up with. This tactic though is of course contingent on having the good will necessary to ride out the initial trash fire... which WOTC might have over-stepped: the OGL 1.1 is so awful that entire businesses are already pivoting in response.
So, this is a bit of a conspiracy theory regarding the recent leak of the new Open Gaming License. My thoughts are that Wizards of the Coast intentionally leaked it in order to stir up controversy and hatred for an edition of the OGL that they were never going to release. Then, after everyone got super upset, they would use that feedback to change the real OGL while also making the new one seem better by comparison. By making a lot of changes from the cartoonishly horrible one to something that is still bad but seems much better, they would give the appearance of listening to their fanbase and making changes, all while getting more money than they would have gotten had they not changed it.
Quokkas are objectively the best animal, anyone who disagrees needs a psychiatric evaluation
While I'm not sure it's what happened... it wouldn't be out of the question. It's a negotiation tactic: referred to as "the anchor" or "the big ask", or things to that effect. Put out terms that are so outrageously bad that when you release the "real" version that has been walked back only slightly, people go "oh, it's not THAT bad I guess..." because the awful one is fresh in their minds. One writer at The Escapist once called when games publishers do this "making the outrage outdated": making it so that "oh, you're still mad about THAT version? That was so five minutes ago!" be an argument that people critical of a situation have to put up with. This tactic though is of course contingent on having the good will necessary to ride out the initial trash fire... which WOTC might have over-stepped: the OGL 1.1 is so awful that entire businesses are already pivoting in response.