We've got a family friend that's in the low budget movie industry and we've had tons of conversations about "why won't they make this?" or "why doesn't that get made" and every single damn time Darrin's reply is that major movie labels don't take chances on the audiences because there's too much money involved. I think for SOME of those RPG releases it might have been the same issue.
Some of those really creative RPGs that came out in the last five years, like Eclipse Phase, were products that really sold themselves because they were just so interesting, had good systems, and were filled with all-around badassery.
However, I bet the costs to obtain the IP for Serenity, Battlestar Galactica, Dresden, etc weren't so expensive and these IPs already had a built in audience. So I agree with the writer that the licensed products probably do have a honey pot factor, but I don't agree that it's a sign of the declining gaming population. I also think that he should remove some of those titles from the list. The Star Wars RPG isn't some "license" like the others. That RPG has been around for 25+ years and despite the fact that it changes hands, it's a tentpole game in a lot of gaming groups(like mine). DC Heroes also is a bit different. Mutants and Masterminds had people on the boards making DC/Marvel character writups for use in game for years and then DC apparently got interested in the gaming books and put together a deal with M&M to put out DC books. That's pretty badass.
I think this guy is probably some game developer (I’ve worked in the gaming industry, in one way or another, for nearly twenty years now.) who's blaming licensed books for part of the reason that he isn't receiving as steady work in the gaming industry as he used to.
