Nice try. What I just said was that your assertion, that fans only began to complain *after* the books came out, was false. I should know, I was quite active on the FR boards at that time.WOTC
DOESN'T
CARE
ABOUT
THE
OLD
GUARD.
And they were right to ignore them. They are the ever-diminishing fan following. Enslaving yourself to their whims is a short road to TSR/Marvel/DC land, both financially and artistically. At some point, you have to say screw it, the old fans will either get on board or get overwhelmed by all the people who thing the new stuff is awesome, and risk that you end up with nothing afterwards. Sometimes that risk doesn't pan out; that's why it's a risk. There are good reasons to just ignore what the entrenched fans want, reasons which are not "Well, WOTC just wants to piss off all the loyal fans."
Arguing about whether the fans were grumbling before or after the die was cast is missing the point.
Actually, I hate to say this, but having Diamond as your main distributor is the short route to TSR/Marvel/DC land. A good chunk of the decline in gaming is a result of
1. Job growth in the US entering into its second lost decade.
2. A screwed up distribution system forcing prices over the point where sales would be stable.
A lot of people b$@*# about 4e, the truth is that they needed to cut back their gaming budget and WotC decided to give them a reason to skip 4e (the same happened to WW with the nWOD). Prior realm shattering events haven't substantially hurt FR sales. The problem is to get folk money today you need to have a good system and good setting. 3.x benefits from substantial R&D put in by WotC, 4e is a marginal setting designed by marketing. It doesn't really matter how good the setting material is when it's tied to a marginal system.
|
A lot of people b#~!~ about 4e, the truth is that they needed to cut back their gaming budget and WotC decided to give them a reason to skip 4e (the same happened to WW with the nWOD). Prior realm shattering events haven't substantially hurt FR sales. The problem is to get folk money today you need to have a good system and good setting. 3.x benefits from substantial R&D put in by WotC, 4e is a marginal setting designed by marketing. It doesn't really matter how good the setting material is when it's tied to a marginal system.
No, prior realms events didn't hurt sales because they were all fictional events that were never supported in the gaming product even though they tried to market supplements as such.
As for the setting material, it's not even supported. Two books, one adventure. That's it. Dragon and Dungeon offerings for the Realms have been pathetic and nothing that couldn't have been done if we weren't still in the 3.x timeline.
The Realms as a gaming universe were pulverized so that lazy authors and editors didn't have to look at PDFs from the TSR line (because WOTC never finished updating the important parts of the Realms to 3.x!!!!!) to make sure they weren't contradicting something. If Spellplague didn't kill something the timeline jump did.
|
Just a side note, but neither DC nor Marvel are struggling, since DC is owned by Warner Brothers and Marvel was just recently bought by Disney.They were bought out because they were struggling. The same thing that happened to WotC with Hasbro.
I don't think they were bought out as much as it was a take over, but to not panic shareholders the mutual consensus was to call it a buy out. Not to mention in the long run they would have been taken over by another company sooner or later so it might as well be Disney.
Neither of them stomp each other. They're both struggling publishers kept afloat with regular infusions of licensed property cash.
Yes, exactly.
Less Infinite Crisis and more Crisis on Infinite Earths, if you're up on comics.
Yeah, given that I specifically mentioned Crisis on Infinite Earths in the post you were theoretically replying to, you can guess I probably am. Maybe you should have, I don't know, actually read my post? My whole point is, if a "Crisis on Infinite Earths" actually worked better than continuity, DC should have utterly buried Marvel. They didn't.
Now, why doesn't such a setting explosion ever actually have the advantages you're attributing to it? Because you don't wind up with a clean slate, you wind up with a palimpsest. A field where you've mowed the kudzu down to the ground, but left its roots untouched. What actually happened to the DCU after Crisis on Infinite Earths should have made that utterly clear. It was as clean a reboot as ever happened, with nobody in the continuity knowing or caring about the previous multiverse . . . and the old continuity still overgrew and consumed the new. DC wound up no better off than Marvel, which never did obliterate Earth-616 and start anew.
And if Crisis on Infinite Earths was a setting nuke, the Spellplague was a mere firecracker. The entire old continuity remained valid (at least in theory), there was just a hundred-year time warp, with a few "Realms-Shaking Events" during that time not appreciably more severe than the same stuff that had been happening in the normal course of product.
The only coherent, rational, fully-knowledgeable motive for the Spellplague that could possibly exist would be to deliberately destroy the Forgotten Realms as a property, by alienating the old guard fans with big changes that, however, do little to nothing to make the setting accessible to new people. That such a theory is preposterous is simply to demonstrate how incoherent, irrational, and ignorant the people making the decisions were. That people promote conspiracy theories is entirely because they are too generous, giving the people making decisions at WotC entirely too much credit.
|
|
I am not sure what this FR "Spellplague" is all about since I lost interest in D&D when 4E came out*. However, I have noticed in my gaming group (whose ages range from 44 to 16) all tried 4E and gave it a "thumbs down". At a place in Delaware called "Our Gaming Table" the "youngsters" (I am old enough to call teenagers that) all HATE 4E and the books aren't moving off of the shelves. I realize that this is only a small cross section of the "D&D Populace" but it gives my eyes proof that maybe 4E was not such a good decision (notice that I said "maybe"?).
Now getting back to the OP. I really don't think that Paizo really NEEDS to delve into "other settings" right now. Everything is fine as is.
*Please don't explain "Spellplague" to me because (no offense) I really do not care!
We could use licensing in other media as an example. At the end of second edition and a good while through third edition Forgotten Realms video games were big (Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights) has there even been mention of a 4E video game yet?
Video games are a bad way of guaging things. First, the big name in that field is Bioware, which has moved on to their own products rather than dealing with external licenses. Second, Atari owns the D&D video game rights and can't do anything about them right now because Hasbro is suing them for mismanaging the property. Due to all the legal wrangling, there might not be a new D&D video game until 5th edition, through no fault of WotC's.
As to the Realms, I think the big mistake WotC made in the Spellplague is the 100-year time jump. If it had been a 10-year time jump like the leap from 1st to 2nd edition, most of the well-known NPCs would still be around. A lot of the Realms' popularity seems to have come from the colorful personalities of the setting, most of whom got killed off by the huge time jump. Ironically, the two characters who people hated on more than anything, Drizzt and Elminster, survived (albeit in a lessened form in Elminster's case).
Overall, WotC was making two gambles: 1) that the people who disliked the Realms overshadowed those who did like the setting from a consumer standpoint, and 2) that the former group would pick up the Realms if the perceived problems were erased. Without sales data, we as fans unfortunately have no way to know whether their gambles paid off.
...marginal system
As a publisher, I see the reasons why they did what they did and have to agree they were smart decisions.
As a fan, I am not exactly thrilled about the changes they made to the FR.
They did do some things really well.
1) They made it more accessible to casual gamers. 20+ years ago, the average gamer was a more hard core lot and played games either on tabletop or on a console. Today the average gamer is much more casual and players games on their iphone or similar device. Going after that market was a smart move for them.
2) You don't need to have prior knowledge to play in these settings. As mentioned above, I'm not thrilled with the current FR, but I am really excited about the upcoming DarkSun. There is one similar idea in their design goals though, you do not need years and years of study to be a competent writer/DM for the setting. Back when I ran games on a regular basis, I was ALWAYS contradicted by players that had been into the setting long before I ever heard of it. That frustrated me to no end. DS and FR both eliminate that. And frankly I'm glad. I may run a DS game someday, and I don't want to be told I am doing it wrong anymore.
3) The system is built with today's audiences in mind. Remember, it is more accessible to the casual gamer. As much of a fan of things like the Spell Compendium and having ton and ton of books to search through to and find the perfect spell for the perfect occasion, most players today ... aren't. They are casual. If it can be found in their one book, they will be fine. For that, 4E does the job well.
4) The system is solid. It isn't 3.5 or Pathfinder. Personally, I love PFRPG. It is currently my favorite system. But 4E is still solid. It targets a different demographic and is well playtested. But like I said, it isn't my favorite. Pathfinder is.
|
Overall, WotC was making two gambles: 1) that the people who disliked the Realms overshadowed those who did like the setting from a consumer standpoint, and 2) that the former group would pick up the Realms if the perceived problems were erased. Without sales data, we as fans unfortunately have no way to know whether their gambles paid off.
I think they were making a third gamble, that people would accept 4e as a valid successor to 3.0/3.5. And that is where I think their problems began, too many things changed at once and it was easier to abandon D&D/FR than to adapt. Which has been a fortunate turn of events for Paizo. If I had a dollar for everyone who has told me that 4e isn't D&D, I wouldn't be looking for a job.
I've been heavily invested in Forgotten Realms / D&D since the beginning and was an LC author and RPGA regional director in the early 80's and I'm seeing almost universal scorn for 4e among the people I know. The only people that I've met who really like 4e are the ones who are new to gaming and don't have a basis for comparison. One FLGS carries more Pathfinder than 4e material and another has said that 4e sales are disappointing, although the PHB 3 sold out quickly.
Ed
The only people that I've met who really like 4e are the ones who are new to gaming and don't have a basis for comparison.
I've heard that as well. In that sense, 4E is good. Because it is bringing in new people to the hobby.
|
|
The only people that I've met who really like 4e are the ones who are new to gaming and don't have a basis for comparison.I've heard that as well. In that sense, 4E is good. Because it is bringing in new people to the hobby.
Yes but to destroy a setting to make it more accessible, then stop supporting it after 3 products because that's how all their campaign settings are being handled just doesn't make any sense.
Yes but to destroy a setting to make it more accessible, then stop supporting it after 3 products because that's how all their campaign settings are being handled just doesn't make any sense.
See my comments above about not being a fan of the new FR. As a player, I'm right there with you. As a publisher and business man, I understand what they did and why they did it. But as a player, I don't have to like it (or buy it).
Edit: Did I mention I love Golarion? It has that familiar feeling while still being new.
I think they were making a third gamble, that people would accept 4e as a valid successor to 3.0/3.5. And that is where I think their problems began, too many things changed at once and it was easier to abandon D&D/FR than to adapt. Which has been a fortunate turn of events for Paizo. If I had a dollar for everyone who has told me that 4e isn't D&D, I wouldn't be looking for a job.
I think that gamble is separate from the Forgotten Realms stuff. Even though the Realms book came out just a couple of months after the core releases, I think most people who had been following the progress of the game already knew whether they were going to jump on board with 4th edition or not. I doubt many people who didn't like 4e were planning on picking up the new Forgotten Realms, so WotC was already pretty much targeting those who had stayed on through the edition change in the first place.
|
|
I think he's just channeling Johnny Cash...or an alien doppleganger that LOOKS like Johnny Cash! Hmmmm...To "A Man In Black":
I think that it's funny how you are saying someone is being a "conspiracy theorist", you have the name of "A Man In Black" :) Sorry I just find it ironic and funny. No insult was intended! Carry on!
Edit: Pathfinder Rocks!
Or Alex Trebek on the X-files.
I think they were making a third gamble, that people would accept 4e as a valid successor to 3.0/3.5. And that is where I think their problems began, too many things changed at once and it was easier to abandon D&D/FR than to adapt. Which has been a fortunate turn of events for Paizo. If I had a dollar for everyone who has told me that 4e isn't D&D, I wouldn't be looking for a job.I think that gamble is separate from the Forgotten Realms stuff. Even though the Realms book came out just a couple of months after the core releases, I think most people who had been following the progress of the game already knew whether they were going to jump on board with 4th edition or not. I doubt many people who didn't like 4e were planning on picking up the new Forgotten Realms, so WotC was already pretty much targeting those who had stayed on through the edition change in the first place.
I don't care for 4E mechanically, but I might have been willing to tolerate it if they had not reset FR. I don't understand the business decision of discarding an existing customer base, and I see very little point in speculating about their motives. They made their choice, and I voted with my dollars. They haven't made one thin dime from me since a GHotR.
In the end I'm disappointed that my favorite setting isn't supported any more, but I'm content playing in the realms using PFRPG and using the wealth of pre-4E realms lore.
|
|
With Golarion, we get to do what we think is best and take risks and enjoy all of the rewards. And we don't have to worry about the license not being renewed. It's a MUCH safer and more stable way to run an RPG business. We're very unlikely to go looking into acquiring rights to other settings as a result. Been there, done that.
I'm not necessarily interested in Paizo pursuing other fantasy-realm settings. Golarion's a pretty big sandbox, as is it's solar system.
What I'd like Paizo to do is Pathfinderize the d20 Modern system and create its own modern-day fantasy adventure setting.
|
|
If each 3PP created their own individual setting and stuck with it I'd see that as a great step forward in our hobby. However too many are doing one off products and then moving on. That’s one of the things I think has separated WotC and now Paizo from the rest. Though WotC with their new approach is seems to have taken a step back as mentioned that’s fine from a business perspective but to some extent they're still shot gunning the market like the rest of the industry in my opinion even with their three book approach. I think the correct approach is to do like Paizo or Green Ronin is doing.
By that I mean Paizo is pretty much just moving forward with their setting and keeping it rules light to reduce the need to reprint. They create product for a given area of Golarion and then move on despite the changes to the system used to run the world. Their structure seems to rely on the rules light aspect and that the fans want to see more of the world and not what’s already been covered.
WotC broke down in this aspect because they completely re-launch everything whenever they change systems. That leads to the issues of ambiguity fans complain about. Paizo might have that issue with the relaunch of the setting guide, but I don’t think it will be as bad as FR since they don’t plan on completely redoing the remaining setting books and future versions of the setting guide will remain the same outside of rules content and time line related material updates. By not rewriting every book already released Paizo will be avoiding the backlash from possible ambiguity.
The other approach as mentioned would be GR’s approach of completely divorcing the campaign setting from the rules. It’s a great concept but where they fail in it is they leave only the core setting book rules free. I think if they want to make it work then they should condense their products down to one setting book a year which covers the fluff and the rest be dedicated mechanic books for the various systems they want to support the product with via companion books. Which relating to Golarion would be to release the core setting book as they did, but then release a book the next year coving everything related to one of the areas or factions detailing it completely. Then release the companion books that let players put the product into play for their system.
As for the fall out surrounding FR I agree that they streamlined it too much which definitely alienated a lot of their older fans and at the same time hamstrings a lot of the new players coming into the game. I think in that regard WotC should have taken a GR approach at least in regards to the setting book and just loaded it with as much fluff as possible. Then did a companion book for both players and DMs that puts everything into perspective for 4e followed by the adventure they did. The end result as it is, is that they now have a product that doesn’t give enough story and doesn’t give enough rules implementation.
For all the talk of Paizo doing a modern game and setting I’d actually like to see them leave off and do something completely different. A good Sci-Fi setting would be a warm welcome. Still if they just stuck with Golarion and left it at that I’d be just as happy.
With Golarion, we get to do what we think is best and take risks and enjoy all of the rewards. And we don't have to worry about the license not being renewed. It's a MUCH safer and more stable way to run an RPG business. We're very unlikely to go looking into acquiring rights to other settings as a result. Been there, done that.I'm not necessarily interested in Paizo pursuing other fantasy-realm settings. Golarion's a pretty big sandbox, as is it's solar system.
What I'd like Paizo to do is Pathfinderize the d20 Modern system and create its own modern-day fantasy adventure setting.
If and/or until then, I strongly urge you to check this out. :)
If each 3PP created their own individual setting and stuck with it I'd see that as a great step forward in our hobby. However too many are doing one off products and then moving on. That’s one of the things I think has separated WotC and now Paizo from the rest. Though WotC with their new approach is seems to have taken a step back as mentioned that’s fine from a business perspective but to some extent they're still shot gunning the market like the rest of the industry in my opinion even with their three book approach. I think the correct approach is to do like Paizo or Green Ronin is doing.
For this, I think I can provide some historical insight. Before 4E's announcement, before the announcement that the Dungeon and Dragon licenses wouldn't be renewed, but still that same year, Scott Rouse came onto ENWorld and asked "If you were incharge of Wizard's fluff devision, what would you do?" Many ideas were thrown out. One idea presented by many many different people in some variation or another (myself included) was to release one campaign settings book a year with some limited support for the remainder of the year. To their credit, Wizards did listen to their fans and did exactly that.
The reason I said that (and many others, IIRC) was because we were tired of the Realms. Oh sure the Realms is big money and is not going to be left aside for some smaller campaign setting anytime soon (we thought), but those of us that like smaller, quirkier settings would like some love as well. Wizards has ALOT of intellectual property that went completely by the way side during the 3.x era. 4E, they are supporting it. Now, as I said before, I am no fan of what they did to the realms, but I will be buying Dark Sun. And thus the PHB3. If 2011's setting is good as well, I'll be seriously considering that as well.
|
|
I think a lot of the problem with the lack of settings during 3e era was due to TSR's old policy of doing only a two to three year run on everything but FR. I appreciate small campaigns, but I for bigger campaigns to work a company only needs to focus on one. If WotC were to announce they were going back to a larger campaign format I would hope they only chose one, be it FR, Dark Sun, Eberron, or some other setting.
|
|
It's funny, I've heard a lot of people talking about how great it is that Dark Sun's getting some 'love' from WotC for the first time in too long. But I can't help but shake the feeling that it's not going to do anywhere near as well as the Realms or Eberron setting books. Even in it's prime, it was a very niche game setting.
At GenCon this year, they should announce the setting for 2011. Since Ravenloft and Gamma World have been taken off the table, that leaves only a few left: Blackmoor, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, or one of the lesser known settings (that haven't been shoe-horned into the Realms over the years). I'm expecting them to do Dragonlance since Greyhawk is the generic setting and Blackmoor doesn't offer much variation from the norm.
After that, what will they have for 2012?
It's funny, I've heard a lot of people talking about how great it is that Dark Sun's getting some 'love' from WotC for the first time in too long. But I can't help but shake the feeling that it's not going to do anywhere near as well as the Realms or Eberron setting books. Even in it's prime, it was a very niche game setting.
Possibly. Look at White Wolf. Vampire is their big setting for the World of Darkness. Werewolf and Mage are definitely big 2nd's but the company launched those settings several YEARS ago. Since then they've done Promethean, Changeling, Hunter, Geist. Each are limited run (granted they extended Changeling because of its popularity) and they have done rather well with them. But they plan for those settings to not sell as well. They don't bank the farm that they become smash hits. Instead they also plan generic WoD books that can be used in any of the settings to make up their yearly income. Wizards is using a similar model with 4E.
Since Ravenloft and Gamma World have been taken off the table, that leaves only a few left: Blackmoor, Dragonlance, Greyhawk, or one of the lesser known settings (that haven't been shoe-horned into the Realms over the years).
List of Official D&D Campaign Settings (exclude KoK).
They have a substantial list of settings from which to draw from. Sure, none will sell as well as the Realms, but if they plan for smaller sales from those settings (and supplement them with things like a board game version of Ravenloft or Gama World) they'll be fine.
As far as 2011 goes, imagine it being Birthright, along with a DMG that focuses on epic level play. Wouldn't that sell rather well? I could also see Planescape (with some serious rework), Ghostwalk (where you play a ghost/other type of undead), Oriental Adventures, and others.
|
|
Catalyst Game Labs Money troubles
Would Paizo be interested in the license of a certain fantasy/cyberpunk setting that has millions of loyal (although jaded) fans? ;)
thats sad catalyst has done a hella job with shadowrun, the bt stuff has been ok all in all even if they where saddled with that craptastic timeline
Hm, unless I am reading that wrong, Catalyst may have made an accounting error, but nothing in that press release indicates that they are in a critical state.
|
|
Catalyst Game Labs Money troubles
Would Paizo be interested in the license of a certain fantasy/cyberpunk setting that has millions of loyal (although jaded) fans? ;)
actually I would prefer that Catalysts solves its issues... they have certainly do an awesome work...
besides Paizo has done somethign quite solid with Golarion and I doubgt Pathfinder RPG as a sistem woudl work at all with Shadowrun... while Dragonstar tried it already... and they did a good job, Shadowrun is another kind of animal... and I would love to see Catalyst continue with it.
a friend's though on it: Totally in Character
Gods I hope so, what they have done with shadowrun has been amazing. But 850k sounds like a lot of money for a small company or any company really.
Add me to the list of folks that would love to see Paizo make a Sci-Fi oriented RPG/Setting ;)
So I gather that Post Human Studios (Rob Boyle and company) is looking for a new publisher for Eclipse Phase...
I would dance in public if Paizo took over as publisher for them given the Catalyst situation.
|
|
hey people stop wishing bad things to Catalyst and lets hope they can travel this stormy seas... while you might want Paizo to take a new license (that they might not for reason already stipulated at the beginning of this thread) we are talking about lots of peoples works and and efforts... so lets hope they can keep the company afloat.
And they have been doing a fine job with what they produce. Very good work
Everyone might want to ratchet back on the Catalyst doom and gloom. Apparently all that happened is that a executive was overpaid due to an accounting error. The mistake was caught and the executive is paying back the money.
Some blogger heard about it and in the finest tabloid tradition posted a "Catalyst Games is bankrupt" story.
Everyone might want to ratchet back on the Catalyst doom and gloom. Apparently all that happened is that a executive was overpaid due to an accounting error. The mistake was caught and the executive is paying back the money.Some blogger heard about it and in the finest tabloid tradition posted a "Catalyst Games is bankrupt" story.
It's an unfortunate situation. Beyond some of the rumors on blogs, some people inside have said small bits, some people have resigned over what happened, and the company posted a press release. Otherwise, nobody is saying anything. As a fan of Shadowrun I hope that everyone who writes for the game is paid and the setting continues and does very well in the future regardless of what company is publishing it.
On somewhat related note, and has been stated by the folks in charge respectively, Eclipse Phase and Cthulhutech both jumped ship and are looking for new publishers. Regardless of how this unfolds, I wish the best of luck and success wherever they end up. I adore both games something serious.
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone might want to ratchet back on the Catalyst doom and gloom. Apparently all that happened is that a executive was overpaid due to an accounting error. The mistake was caught and the executive is paying back the money.Some blogger heard about it and in the finest tabloid tradition posted a "Catalyst Games is bankrupt" story.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's an unfortunate situation. Beyond some of the rumors on blogs, some people inside have said small bits, some people have resigned over what happened, and the company posted a press release. Otherwise, nobody is saying anything. As a fan of Shadowrun I hope that everyone who writes for the game is paid and the setting continues and does very well in the future regardless of what company is publishing it.
On somewhat related note, and has been stated by the folks in charge respectively, Eclipse Phase and Cthulhutech both jumped ship and are looking for new publishers. Regardless of how this unfolds, I wish the best of luck and success wherever they end up. I adore both games something serious.
Being a huge fan of SR, I have been watching this issue very closely. Here is what I know. The individual that brought this news to the Dumpshock forums was Frank Trollman. An individual who has a serious grudge against Catalyst. To the best of my knowledge, that is the primary source of the rumors, and therefore the origin of their blown out of proportion nature.
To the best of my knowledge the people who write Eclipse Phase are not severing all ties to Catalyst. According to what I saw on their site yesterday, they are going to continue publishing Eclipse Phase through Catalyst. They will however not be doing freelance work for them. Again that is what I saw yesterday, and it may have been out of date when I read it.
That is what I know. I could give lots of opinions, but for now I'll leave it at that.
The individual that brought this news to the Dumpshock forums was Frank Trollman.
<CLIP>
I could give lots of opinions, but for now I'll leave it at that.
Considering the source, there's really not much more needed to be said. ;)
Yep, everyone has their own opinions.
~shocked look~ No!!! Really? Since when?
|
Eclipse Phase's Jack Graham had some words concerning the selfless hero of the internets who broke the news.
As did a freelancer who so far intends to stick by Catalyst.
|
|
And their posts are both "Don't believe this, because the post is a jerk." They both are careful to not even deny the factual claims made, just the conclusion, while heaping abuse on the speaker.Eclipse Phase's Jack Graham had some words concerning the selfless hero of the internets who broke the news.
As did a freelancer who so far intends to stick by Catalyst.
Because pointing out that someone is cheerfully stirring the pot is heaping abuse.
We're all better off playing wait and see, but watch carefully, at the moment.