I think that Paizo's decision to stick with 3.5 was good for the short run, because their sales have improved. But in the long run, their sales will probably decline.
Not as much as it would if they changed to 4e, and then had no more Pathfinder when wizards discontinued the GSL (which can happen, and I guess it will when they switch to 5e, about 5 years from now, if not sooner).
3.5 still has a couple of years in it, and there's still a lot of people out there who want to play it, who want to get some more use out of their libraries. And, of course, there are many who won't play 4e because they can't stand it.
Several years from now, Paizo will probably do a Pathfinder RPG Second Edition, and will do their own take at an evolution to D&D (something they and their fans will agree that it is still D&D in spirit, which many don't in the case of 4e).
It will remain a P&P game, not a MMORPG. Eventually, P&P will be history, but then again, eventually, the sun will run out of hydrogen and start on the helium, growing in the process and swallowing earth.
Eventually isn't a good seller if you need money now. They'll cross that bridge when they get to it.
But note that they're no Software Engineers. They would need a whole new staff to do the programming, visual design, audio design, and all that. Not what Paizo as we know it is set up to do.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
It would have greatly effected their third adventure path would it have not? No Drow allowed, IIRC.While I agree that Paizo made a perfectly good decision to not switch I can't see any of this as being a part of why it was a good decision.
If they went with 4th Edition they'd still do far above average in writing, editing, art direction and print quality. All of these things are part of the Paizo model and there is no reason to think that any of them would be particularly negatively impacted should they ever choose to do 4E material.
The no drow issue was speculation regarding the GSL prior to its release. If Paizo were to have done the third adventure path under the GSL, it could have included the drow.
(Mind you, it would have been stupendously stupid of them to do the third adventure path under the GSL, but they could have used the drow).
|
The no drow issue was speculation regarding the GSL prior to its release. If Paizo were to have done the third adventure path under the GSL, it could have included the drow.
(Mind you, it would have been stupendously stupid of them to do the third adventure path under the GSL, but they could have used the drow).
So Drow are in the 4e SRD? I stand corrected.
Last year, both ENWorld and Wizards.com were offering us teasers of the coming new edition. So some drop off is to be expected after the 4e release. I don't know how much, but I'm not checking either site 10 times a day any more (or Paizo's, for that matter). But I'm still very pro 4e.
Is 50% decline to be expected?
I'm not claiming that there are not a lot of "very pro 4e" people out there. But the Eric Noah's pages had trouble after 3e came out because traffic kept growing faster than the hardware could keep up.
And you are not checking Paizo 10 times a day, but their traffic has held steady while ENWorld's has declined.
Again, that doesn't mean that your game sucks nah nah nah. That kind of argument is beside the point.
I'm just saying that the data might mean nothing and it might mean that Paizo made exactly the perfect choice. But it very clearly does not show that they made a mistake.
I think they made an awesome move.
The wizards.com dropoff is what's surprising to me. I would expect a bit of a drop-off after release, but they are in free-fall right now, at a time when the DDI is going live.
That can't be good for them.
|
Whether they're in the SRD or not is irrelevant.
They're open-content by virtue of being part of European myth for over 2000 years.
Yes and no.
The drow as evil fey with dark skins and all the rest of their background material are not open content.The term "drow", a word from a foreign language representing a particular kind of critter, is open, but subject to the terms of signing the GSL. As part of that, you agree not to use material that does not appear in the SRD.
That means for people signing the GSL, drow are not open content, and European myth is irrelevant.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
So Drow are in the 4e SRD? I stand corrected.The no drow issue was speculation regarding the GSL prior to its release. If Paizo were to have done the third adventure path under the GSL, it could have included the drow.
(Mind you, it would have been stupendously stupid of them to do the third adventure path under the GSL, but they could have used the drow).
Ack. You were right to begin with. For some reason I thought the SRD had included every monster in the MM (including the mind flayer), including those that were not in the 3.5 SRD. I see now that this belief was not founded in reality.
Well I think that if pathfinder had gone 4.0 I would be a little bit richer every month since I would immediately cancel my orders. But that's because I don't like or play 4.0 and so i'm biased.
|
|
Frankly, Paizo could publish their adventures using "rock-paper-scissors RPG" and I'd buy them, so 4E vs 3.x vs PFRPG is not the key point, at least for me. I go for the good stories wherever I happen to find them.
So, did Paizo make the right decision staying OGL? The answer, to me, would be yes, because the OGL allows Paizo to write the stories I want to read/play/run, whereas the GSL and its constraints over IP and "children-friendly" content doesn't.
I know some people who made the full switch to 4E and still run Paizo adventures. It's not the crunch what makes their material good; it's the fluff. And it's a pity the GSL doesn't allow that kind of fluff.
From what I been told alot of there modlers seem to dark for what wotc has planned for the GSL. But there lays the issue, holding up for weeks or more while they decide if it needs rewrote.
Sure - I even mention this as my primary reason for why it was a good idea for Paizo to hold off if you look at my first post on this thread.
However I did not get the impression that this was what James Keegan meant when he said that it was a good idea for Paizo to have remained 3.5 because their writing, editing and overall quality of the product was top notch.
I'm sure even with restrictions Paizo's writing would remain top notch (if a lot tamer) if they suddenly decided to go with 4E starting tomorrow at noon.
It would have greatly effected their third adventure path would it have not? No Drow allowed, IIRC.While I agree that Paizo made a perfectly good decision to not switch I can't see any of this as being a part of why it was a good decision.
If they went with 4th Edition they'd still do far above average in writing, editing, art direction and print quality. All of these things are part of the Paizo model and there is no reason to think that any of them would be particularly negatively impacted should they ever choose to do 4E material.
Probably they could have worked something out with WotC if this is the case and if not then I'm sure they could have reworked their story to make it work - they are a talented group of people after all.
The wizards.com dropoff is what's surprising to me. I would expect a bit of a drop-off after release, but they are in free-fall right now, at a time when the DDI is going live.
That can't be good for them.
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what's your source for your numbers? I don't doubt them, necessarily, I'm just curious.
Only on this Boards. Go the EN-World and you will find a very big 4th edition community. There was also a Poll on EN-World and it seems that there are a lot of people who are willing to pay for DDI.http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/enworld.org
Click on the "max" tab.
Enworld's traffic is down 50% since 4E was released compared to the year leading up to the release.Yeah, the people there are very pro-4E. But define "very big".
You can add compare Paizo.com to the chart. You will see that Paizo has held steady over the same time period and is now right at the same level as ENWorld. So whatever "very big" Enworld does have, so does Paizo. But who knows, maybe the 4E path woudl have seen them trend down the same 50% decline. That would have been bad.
Looks to me like Enworld just spikes a lot and not that they are doing particularly worse then their historical average.
In any case thats a neat website. I'd actually use the 'rank' tab to try and figure out how a web site was doing. If your going up in the ranks thats good and if your going down in the ranks thats bad. However all the main RPG sites are not doing as well as they were at some points in the last little while as the announcement of 4E caused huge spikes in traffic - people had something they wanted to say regarding 4E for good or for ill and they went out and found a message board to say it on.
All of that said I used this website to compare wizards to enworld and paizo and they are just not in the same league. En world and Pazio are both in the are of 50,000 most popular website while Wizards is around 2000 most popular (amazon is 33 and Blogspot is 9).
Wizards is orders of magnitude larger then either enworld or pazio. This implies to me that those that believe that Pazio can some how replace wizards as top dog in the RPG industry are fooling themselves. At this point they are just not comparable in any way shape or form in terms of size.
Chief Technical Officer
|
We have exactly 20 days of potential sales to go on, and I seriously doubt many retailers have any real information on these sales yet.
Actually, our industry has become fairly front-list driven these days. That is, a significant chunk of the lifetime sales of most products comes from the first month of sales, and a significant chunk of that month comes from the first week. While there are occasional sleepers—products that peak later than their first month—for the most part, manufacturers can gauge long-term success of a product based on initial sales.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Dang. If this site is to be believed, Wizards.com traffic looks bad compared to last year.http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/enworld.org
Click on the "max" tab.
Enworld's traffic is down 50% since 4E was released compared to the year leading up to the release.
I'd take Alexa information with a grain of salt. You can read their own disclaimers here, but in my experience, it's not terribly accurate for us. Because all of their data is measured relative to all internet traffic from Alexa users, and we don't know what the trend of either "all internet traffic" or "all Alexa users" is, it's impossible for us to be certain... but I have noticed that they show paizo.com as staying relatively flat over the last year when we know our traffic is up significantly.
We have exactly 20 days of potential sales to go on, and I seriously doubt many retailers have any real information on these sales yet.Actually, our industry has become fairly front-list driven these days. That is, a significant chunk of the lifetime sales of most products comes from the first month of sales, and a significant chunk of that month comes from the first week. While there are occasional sleepers—products that peak later than their first month—for the most part, manufacturers can gauge long-term success of a product based on initial sales.
Amazon Sales Rank for Sellswords Of Punjar (4e, Goodman) #317,013 in Books
Amazon Sales Rank for Second Darkness: Shadow In The Sky (3.5, Paizo) #381,061 in Books
|
Looks to me like Enworld just spikes a lot and not that they are doing particularly worse then their historical average.
I have to disagree with your interpretation of the chart. Whilst ENWORLD enjoyed a "turbulent" period, the median of that is clearly twice what the median trend of the last 3 months are; the 48% decline interpretation is correct. The dropoff is dramatic and pronounced.
HOWEVER, there is plenty of data missing! IE - what was traffic prior to the 4E announcement? Has ENWorld settled back down to its normal flow of regular users? How much traffic has it lost do to the technical issues they were having, etc. I would be especially interested to watch this when WotC ramps up its next big release block of Round II materials and Ebberon setting.
All of that said I used this website to compare wizards to enworld and paizo and they are just not in the same league. En world and Pazio are both in the are of 50,000 most popular website while Wizards is around 2000 most popular (amazon is 33 and Blogspot is 9).
I agree, and I believe that other posters have mentioned this. The point isn't the amount, but rather, the consistency. This may very well tie into Vic's comments about front-ending. Perhaps we've reached that point and now that 4E has released the drop-off is natural, and expected.
Let me throw another wrench into the gears. Put Playdnd.com into the mix, and tell me how you interpret that. Small hint - complete opposite of any of the above. I would say a large part of this is the "forced utilage" of the site with the advent of e-zines and tools, especially the e-zines. How to interpret the data inside of its context is well outside of my abilities.
How does that show a relevant sales figure? I know that my copy of Second Darkness isn't counted in that and I would assume that because of the option to have a subscription on this site that most numbers like those are inaccurate. Alot of people would just skip buying from Amazon and buy here.
Exactly!
We don't know how these other 3PP are doing yet. Sure Paizo staff can look how things are selling here and make some assumptions, but they can only make assumptions about this site only. As you so correctly point out, people could be getting their products from other sources, it would be foolish to look at only one source and try to draw comparisons from there.
|
How does that show a relevant sales figure? I know that my copy of Second Darkness isn't counted in that and I would assume that because of the option to have a subscription on this site that most numbers like those are inaccurate. Alot of people would just skip buying from Amazon and buy here.
Same here, that's not an effective way to try and gage sales among companies.
* Grabs some popcorn and watch in tension if this threads goes into 4e-3.5 "who's da best" competition *
*steals popcorn*
*Chases CJack all around the thread yelling Gimme my popcorn back or I'll tell on you to Mr. Frost!*
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but what's your source for your numbers? I don't doubt them, necessarily, I'm just curious.The wizards.com dropoff is what's surprising to me. I would expect a bit of a drop-off after release, but they are in free-fall right now, at a time when the DDI is going live.
That can't be good for them.
I was simply following the Alexa web address posted earlier in this thread. I make no warranties for their info. :)
|
|
I think that Paizo's decision to stick with 3.5 was good for the short run, because their sales have improved. But in the long run, their sales will probably decline. Change is a good thing, and the 3.5 rules can only be stretched so far. So, to answer my own question, it will become a mistake in the long run, unless Paizo comes up with an original RPG on it's own, instead of a version of another RPG. Maybe the folks at Paizo should try to create some kind of online game like WoW. Eventually, paper & pencil games will be ancient history. I will probably still be interested in them, but I am in the minority on most things.
I would just like to point out the many Monopoly Games in print. :D
How long a game system has been out has little merit to whether it will last or not. The ease and fun of play is all the matters.
3.5 Saw, and someone correct me if I am wrong, The greatest increase in new 'D&D'ers. There must be a reason for that. It was a very successful system. WotC decision to produce 4e was not because 3.5 wasn't selling. My belief is because they were having a hard time coming up with new ideas to produce 'splat' books from, and 3pp were beginning to steal their limelight with the production of better modules.
Note, I do not say WotC made a bad decision. Im over the edition wars, and not trying to start anything up. They made a corporate decision that will probably serve them well.
That doesnt change the fact that many of us like a diferent style of RPG's....Pathfinder fills that niche.
and quite nicely.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I think that Paizo's decision to stick with 3.5 was good for the short run, because their sales have improved. But in the long run, their sales will probably decline. Change is a good thing, and the 3.5 rules can only be stretched so far. So, to answer my own question, it will become a mistake in the long run, unless Paizo comes up with an original RPG on it's own, instead of a version of another RPG. Maybe the folks at Paizo should try to create some kind of online game like WoW. Eventually, paper & pencil games will be ancient history. I will probably still be interested in them, but I am in the minority on most things.
Not that a person can't change their mind, but Leafer, weren't you originally not at all interested in 4e? I'd be curious to hear what swayed you over, your prior posts seemed to be pretty strongly against the new edition.
|
|
3.5 Saw, and someone correct me if I am wrong, The greatest increase in new 'D&D'ers. There must be a reason for that. It was a very successful system. WotC decision to produce 4e was not because 3.5 wasn't selling. My belief is because they were having a hard time coming up with new ideas to produce 'splat' books from, and 3pp were beginning to steal their limelight with the production of better modules.
WotC's exact motivations would be difficult for any of us to pin down, and, whilst they have shown a lack of culpability, I tend to take what they say at face value because of this.
That being said, Games Workshop "rotates" its games rules about every 4 years. The set of rules that I have for 40K, for example, is 2004, and yet here we go, another edition just released this summer. Its how they keep their game line fresh and alive. It *IS* expensive, no doubt about it, and there are PLENTY of beardy grognards that hail all the way back to the initial 1987 edition of Rogue Trader as the only TRUE 40K they will ever play. GW is still alive, the hobby is still alive, and it's something we've come to expect, and in a way appreciate. For example, I enjoyed the unit types for the Dark Eldar, but felt a majority of the figures were crap glued to a plastic base. I'm looking forward ANXIOUSLY to see that line restarted. By the by, that analogy doesn't fit for EVERY player, or really, any player outside of myself, but it IS a viewpoint.
While I don't necessarily want to see another edition of D&D in 4 years, at the same time it wouldn't be the death of me, as I have a shelf of awesome to turn to, and a strong curiosity to see what comes next.
I will pretend to know the roleplaying industry.
We're very happy with our decision.
I haven't heard of any 4e third-party products selling in significant numbers, and Pathfinder's numbers have been significant since the beginning.
Again, we are confident we made the right decision for ourselves and for our customers.
Well, I like your material (both the pathfinder setting and the Planet Stories line), so as far as I'm concerned you've only done right. Keep on like this and you can rest assured of my business at least.
|
|
That being said, Games Workshop "rotates" its games rules about every 4 years. The set of rules that I have for 40K, for example, is 2004, and yet here we go, another edition just released this summer. Its how they keep their game line fresh and alive. It *IS* expensive, no doubt about it, and there are PLENTY of beardy grognards that hail all the way back to the initial 1987 edition of Rogue Trader as the only TRUE 40K they will ever play. GW is still alive, the hobby is still alive, and it's something we've come to expect, and in a way appreciate. For example, I enjoyed the unit types for the Dark Eldar, but felt a majority of the figures were crap glued to a plastic base. I'm looking forward ANXIOUSLY to see that line restarted. By the by, that analogy doesn't fit for EVERY player, or really, any player outside of myself, but it IS a viewpoint.
While I don't necessarily want to see another edition of D&D in 4 years, at the same time it wouldn't be the death of me, as I have a shelf of awesome to turn to, and a strong curiosity to see what comes next.
I don't disagree that it's not good for a game to 'refurbish' it from time to time....just saying the lifespan of a game cannot be 100% linked to whether it's done or not. More than anything else it keeps a game company alive and able to provide the other things we like...such as modules and campaign fluff books. You need the spikes of big bucks for new editions and 'new crunch' to be able to provide the rest.
so in essence you are preaching to the choir ;)
I just felt the need to point out to the OP that, longevity of play is more to whether the game was any good to begin with. :D
Exactly!
We don't know how these other 3PP are doing yet. Sure Paizo staff can look how things are selling here and make some assumptions, but they can only make assumptions about this site only. As you so correctly point out, people could be getting their products from other sources, it would be foolish to look at only one source and try to draw comparisons from there.
That is assuming the information the Paizo gets comes from this site and that they don't in any other way get information about their peers in their industry.
I would assume however, that they contacts about their industry extend both outside of Paizo's walls, and not limited to the Amazon rankings. I think it would be foolish to contend otherwise.
Exactly!
We don't know how these other 3PP are doing yet. Sure Paizo staff can look how things are selling here and make some assumptions, but they can only make assumptions about this site only. As you so correctly point out, people could be getting their products from other sources, it would be foolish to look at only one source and try to draw comparisons from there.
That is assuming the information the Paizo gets comes from this site and that they don't in any other way get information about their peers in their industry.
I would assume however, that they contacts about their industry extend both outside of Paizo's walls, and not limited to the Amazon rankings. I think it would be foolish to contend otherwise.
Or we just take the Paizo staff at face value.
Sometimes, informally. We also hear anecdotal reports from retailers (to be taken with a giant block of salt) and distributors (generally reliable, but only for their particular market segment).
Also, keep in mind that paizo.com is one of the largest gaming retailers in the world, so our own sales provide a pretty good indicator of the market. It can be argued that we have a customer base that's biased towards 3.5, so comparing 3.5 sales to 4E sales on paizo.com may not be fair. However, comparing our 3rd-party 4E sales to Wizards' 4E sales isn't affected by that bias. Given that we also know how well 3rd-party 3.5 sales compared to Wizards' 3.5 sales, I think we can put together a pretty good picture of which publishers have thus far done well by transitioning to 4E and which have not.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
We have exactly 20 days of potential sales to go on, and I seriously doubt many retailers have any real information on these sales yet.
Actually, our industry has become fairly front-list driven these days. That is, a significant chunk of the lifetime sales of most products comes from the first month of sales, and a significant chunk of that month comes from the first week. While there are occasional sleepers—products that peak later than their first month—for the most part, manufacturers can gauge long-term success of a product based on initial sales.
Amazon Sales Rank for Sellswords Of Punjar (4e, Goodman) #317,013 in Books
Amazon Sales Rank for Second Darkness: Shadow In The Sky (3.5, Paizo) #381,061 in Books
Not quite apples to apples there. As I mentioned, every week makes a difference; Sellswords of Punjar came out on August 31, while Shadow in the Sky was released August 14. So what was Amazon's ranking for Shadow in the Sky two weeks ago? Or—more answerable—what will Amazon's ranking for Sellswords of Punjar be in two weeks?
(But even if you were comparing apples to apples, it would be incorrect to assume that Amazon's sales are in any way reflective of relative sales in the hobby industry.)
Or we just take the Paizo staff at face value.
In which starts off by listing sources other than their online store.
I think that you might be better off taking the Paizo staff at face value.
were comparing apples to apples, it would be incorrect to assume that Amazon's sales are in any way reflective of relative sales in the hobby industry.)
Well I would be happy to learn if there was an independent source we could go to and look at the actual numbers. Any suggestions? Where does Paizo report all [subscription, retail, online] of their sales (so that things can get on best seller's lists and such)?
|
|
Recently I have been reading the D&D 4th edition books, and I have been trying to put together a 1st edition adventure, and I like the new stuff. As I look at the boards I see that the initial hatred against 4th edition is passing. Therefore, I must ask: Did Paizo make a mistake by not going with the 4th edition?
As I look at it, and my hatred is passing, I am forced to say that they may have made a mistake here. I still think that DDI was a mistake, but I would be lying if I said I was not reading the new core books. I will look at Paizo's Pathfinder RPG, and I have the free download, but if I am still converting to 4th edition, I probably won't buy the official Pathfinder game in 2009.
Leafar, I've been looking at your post and I'm not understanding why you think Paizo made a so-called "mistake". My best guess is that you like 4E and Paizo's not publishing 4E stuff. Is that right?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
were comparing apples to apples, it would be incorrect to assume that Amazon's sales are in any way reflective of relative sales in the hobby industry.)Well I would be happy to learn if there was an independent source we could go to and look at the actual numbers. Any suggestions? Where does Paizo report all [subscription, retail, online] of their sales (so that things can get on best seller's lists and such)?
There is no definitive independent source. A trade mag called Comics & Games Retailer used to compile top sellers lists based on a self-selected group of retailers, but they're no longer around. Frankly, their charts were terrible anyway; the way that retailers reported was horrifically inconsistent, with some comics retailers apparently reporting any roleplaying sales as "D&D," and other such issues. Their inaccuracy was particularly obvious to us because they reported estimated dollar figures, and they were often off by a factor of 10 or more on Paizo's estimated distribution sales (and they didn't even pretend to estimate book trade or direct sales).
As for our products in particular, we don't share our subscription numbers or online sales figures, and while each of our distributors obviously know how much they order, they don't know how much anyone else orders (short of back-door talk, which I'm sure happens a lot).
|
|
Paizo has gotten $854.06 of my earnings.Yeah, Paizo has nearly $1100 of my earnings (granted, not all of it was spent on Paizo-specific products, but still)...
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
I'm afraid to add up all of what I've spent on Paizo stuff, not to mention throwing in the time I spent volunteering for them at Gencon =p
Suffice to say I'm sure it's more than enough to make up for those issues of Dungeon and Dragon I downloaded (which is how they hooked me to begin with ^^)
Since the final version of the Pathfinder RPG won't be out until August of next year and since sales of the Beta were much higher than expectd (enough to warrant a second printing already, I believe), I'd say it's a bit too early to proclaim Paizo's decision a mistake.
I'd say it's a bit shortsighted to claim that you WON'T be entering a market whether it Paizo cutting off 4E, XBox not taking on Grand Theft Auto games or similar.
Pushing Pathfinder makes sense but keeping options open is an important business move, Paizo can however always reverse its decision and would get the business back in a short period.I think there are plenty of players who will take on Pathfinder once 3.5 disappears and 4E players will continue playing regardless.
Trouble is before the internet if a company produced a poor game(bad mechanics,storyline etc)nobody knew about it. Now when a player plays\reads a game and doesn't like it, the opinion is spread around the world in seconds even damaging other peoples opinions before they've even seen the game.
I'd say my attitude was badly coloured about 4E until I read it through.
|
|
I'd say it's a bit shortsighted to claim that you WON'T be entering a market whether it Paizo cutting off 4E, XBox not taking on Grand Theft Auto games or similar.
Steve, I'm not entirely certain you have a full grasp of the situation here. I am not trying to be insulting, or raise questions, but I think you misunderstand Paizo. I think it is easy to do.
Paizo had full intentions since announcing Pathfinder of doing Pathfinder AND 4E. The intended solution was to develop their own RPG to support Pathfinder materials, and also to develop 4E products through Necromancer. At this juncture, it was a match made in heaven. 3.5/Pathfinder AND 4E: whichever game you played you got lovin'.
Right now, you still don't have 4E support. This still has NOTHING to do with Paizo. It has EVERYTHING to do with the abomination called the GSL. Some companies felt it worth their while to go ahead and accept the GSL as written, but most of the bigger 3PP choked on the initial GSL.
The biggest thing to understand is that lack of support for 4E is clearly hinged on the quality and the timeliness of the GSL. I'd bet dollars to donuts that 1) had the GSL been released as promised, in a prompt and timely fashion, and 2) that it was written as a partnership between WotC and 3PP instead of what it is now, we'd more than likely be gearing up for a 4E Pathfinder.
I don't hate 4E. I don't hate WotC. I've been a fan for many years, and I don't suffer from a lot of tin hat issues. I own EVERY WotC 4E product released to date, including extra copies of players' guides. However, I absolutely cannot, under any circumstances, allow others to point the blame to anyone but mismanagement by WotC, through their own overwork, lack of foresight, or whatever. Regardless of the exact cause (and you and I will never truly know what it was) this situation, lock-stock-n-barrel, is fully purchased and owned by Wizards of the Coast.
|
|
Recently I have been reading the D&D 4th edition books, and I have been trying to put together a 1st edition adventure, and I like the new stuff. As I look at the boards I see that the initial hatred against 4th edition is passing. Therefore, I must ask: Did Paizo make a mistake by not going with the 4th edition?
As I look at it, and my hatred is passing, I am forced to say that they may have made a mistake here. I still think that DDI was a mistake, but I would be lying if I said I was not reading the new core books. I will look at Paizo's Pathfinder RPG, and I have the free download, but if I am still converting to 4th edition, I probably won't buy the official Pathfinder game in 2009.
What the? Do we have to start having hate 4th Edition threads again to support Pathfinder? Sure I hate 4th edition and yea I throw down cash for Paizo monthly. If people are getting the idea that Paizo made a mistake because I haven't voiced my hatred of 4th Edition in awhile.....LET ME TELL YOU. I still hate it, and I will always hate it. So there. Ahem. Ok, does that mean Pathfinder is hip again?
Its like you go to a fight. The air is hot to breath. You can smell testorone in the air. You know your face is going to sting soon. But then you say, "whoa." You calm down, and then decide to turn your back and walk away from it civil-like. Then someone throws a rock at you and says,"Loser!"
Man, it took me such a long time to act cool about 4th Edition and not say anything, then someone comes along and says, "Since you aren't hating us anymore, guess we were right....HAhahah."
Oh well, only Paizo can answer this one...and they did!
Cheers,
Zuxius
I'd say it's a bit shortsighted to claim that you WON'T be entering a market whether it Paizo cutting off 4E, XBox not taking on Grand Theft Auto games or similar.Steve, I'm not entirely certain you have a full grasp of the situation here. I am not trying to be insulting, or raise questions, but I think you misunderstand Paizo. I think it is easy to do.
Paizo had full intentions since announcing Pathfinder of doing Pathfinder AND 4E. The intended solution was to develop their own RPG to support Pathfinder materials, and also to develop 4E products through Necromancer. At this juncture, it was a match made in heaven. 3.5/Pathfinder AND 4E: whichever game you played you got lovin'.
Right now, you still don't have 4E support. This still has NOTHING to do with Paizo. It has EVERYTHING to do with the abomination called the GSL. Some companies felt it worth their while to go ahead and accept the GSL as written, but most of the bigger 3PP choked on the initial GSL.
The biggest thing to understand is that lack of support for 4E is clearly hinged on the quality and the timeliness of the GSL. I'd bet dollars to donuts that 1) had the GSL been released as promised, in a prompt and timely fashion, and 2) that it was written as a partnership between WotC and 3PP instead of what it is now, we'd more than likely be gearing up for a 4E Pathfinder.
I don't hate 4E. I don't hate WotC. I've been a fan for many years, and I don't suffer from a lot of tin hat issues. I own EVERY WotC 4E product released to date, including extra copies of players' guides. However, I absolutely cannot, under any circumstances, allow others to point the blame to anyone but mismanagement by WotC, through their own overwork, lack of foresight, or whatever. Regardless of the exact cause (and you and I will never truly know what it was) this situation, lock-stock-n-barrel, is fully purchased and owned by Wizards of the Coast.
So your saying the WOTC GSL is the cause and not Paizo? See that's what I had thought had happened ages ago but have not kept up with the latest changes.
I thought that with Goodman games creating 4E stuff the restriction on 3rd parties and 4E had 'softened', I take it that's not the case? I didn't get the impression that Paizo was disinterested with 4E but that they just gave up the 4E option due to the GSL.As for the 4E hatred mentioned there are a lot of people who feel the 4E went too far away from the origional, feel cheated that their views were ignored and that their messages will make a difference to WOTC so that they drop 4E and 'start anew'.
In short, I can't see it happening. They've sunk a considerable amount of money into 4E and like the XBox will push to make it work.
Another game suffers from the same issue, that's Warhammer 40k, GW changed the rules to a child level, changed the figures available, upped the costs to unbeleivable levels.
Younger children loved it so they survived and indeed they did the same thing about two or three times since then. At least the books have stayed at a reasonable price and can be purchased from the Web for a low price(£11 instead of £19).