Miniatures Kickstarter Ninja Division


Third-Party Starfinder Products

651 to 700 of 1,221 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If everyone had got their minis this wouldn't be a problem. But that's not what happened. Paizo gambled their reputation and fan base's money on a shady company. Now most of us have nothing and those that actually do have something waaaaaaay overpaid for it, especially so considering the reports of crappy quality.


Precisely, it was a gamble that unfortunately didn't pay off.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Briit wrote:

Having no "minis in existence" is better than having no minis and no $400

And a bunch of forum threads complaining that Paizo didn't have minis made.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To me it seems pretty crap to make a really bad gamble on a company with a really bad history of failing to complete kickstarters with your fan's money and good will. I guess that's just the kind of company Paizo is now. A better move would have been to wait, help a better company get to the point where they would have been better positioned to complete this and then make a deal. That just seems like good buisness sense.

And as to:

TOZ wrote:


And a bunch of forum threads complaining that Paizo didn't have minis made.

Which would have been infinitely better than a thread full of fans who are complaining about lost money and no minis. Ask Paizo staff, I'm sure they'd tell you which they'd prefer.


J-Bone wrote:
A better move would have been to wait, help a better company get to the point where they would have been better positioned to complete this and then make a deal.
Wut
Quote:
Which would have been infinitely better than a thread full of fans who are complaining about lost money and no minis. Ask Paizo staff, I'm sure they'd tell you which they'd prefer.

Maybe, maybe not. These forums can get most unpleasant.

Liberty's Edge

Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
Maybe, maybe not. These forums can get most unpleasant.

Yeah as we are seeing. Playing with people's trust, money and expectations can do that.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

What a bunch of random speculation - how does the saying go? If wishes were horses, we'd all be eating steak?

It seems to me it boils down to some simple questions:

* Is Paizo happy with the decision they made?

* Is the goodwill of some of their fans a price they are willing to pay for having miniatures on the market for the rest of their playerbase? In other words, how much damage has their brand sustained over this?

* Did it make financial sense for them to proceed with this kickstarter?

Since none of us work for Paizo and aren't privy to their internal discussions and legal shenanigans, we don't know the answer for certain to any of these. Trying to speak about this with a position of authority makes no sense.

"No minis was not an option" is not something I have seen or heard from Paizo directly, so I take that with a grain of salt. I like to imagine somewhere in some hard drive at Paizo, someone did a market analysis and a risk analysis on this. You're not wrong to assume this to be true - tt seems pretty logical that yes, of course, they would want miniatures to coincide with the launch of a new product to support it. But a risk vs reward analysis must have certainly been done somewhere, I hope?

My personal feelings are obviously biased in this, since I have lost money in this endeavor. As a result, I have divested myself entirely of all starfinder products I had and have made it a point to stop purchasing Paizo products. It probably doesn't mean much that my group of players and myself no longer use Paizo products, but I can only vote with my wallet in this case.

I backed the project entirely on the strength of the word of Paizo representatives who (seemingly) had the gravitas to know more than the average outsider. How could the COO not know more than I did, since they were speaking with authority on the matter and were directly involved in every facet of the decision making process?

Of course, the bulk of the responsibility of this lies on ND, with a not-inconsequential responsibility on myself. Other individuals were very vocal about the questionable ethics and ethos of ND and tried to warn the players about this. I should have listened, and hindsight is 20/20. But I'm not going to blame the poor saps who took Paizo's word as pretty authoritative and ended up being taken for a ride.

All this to say - until and unless Paizo come out with full disclosure on what the process looked like from beginning to end (from decision-making around partner selection, through to where we are today) we have no real way of knowing what happened and the rest is (perhaps well-educated, perhaps not) speculation.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Raakam wrote:
All this to say - until and unless Paizo come out with full disclosure on what the process looked like from beginning to end (from decision-making around partner selection, through to where we are today) we have no real way of knowing what happened and the rest is (perhaps well-educated, perhaps not) speculation.

Sure we have to speculate on the details that went into the decision to go with ND. However what we did have at the time of the Kickstarter was a very clear trail of failure from Ninja Division. Yet Paizo still got into bed with them. So like you, I need to know why this decision was made and why they felt comfortable and secure enough in this company to encourage their fans to give a significant amount of their money into it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made

you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
J-Bone wrote:
TOZ wrote:
And a bunch of forum threads complaining that Paizo didn't have minis made.
Which would have been infinitely better than a thread full of fans who are complaining about lost money and no minis.

I'm not so sure, but then I don't have skin in the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made
you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.

is it really a gamble to place a bet on the dark horse that sometimes comes in last, or just hops the fence and robs the betting station, running off with all the money?


yukongil wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made
you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.
is it really a gamble to place a bet on the dark horse that sometimes comes in last, or just hops the fence and robs the betting station, running off with all the money?

If the bets in this race mean you also assuredly lose out on a lot of money by not betting at all, yes. Which would be the case with no minis for their new game.


I mostly play online, but... well, Starfinder is a miniatures-using game. I understand why Paizo would want miniatures at launch (or as soon as possible after launch), and also why it might be really hard to delay the launch for months if nobody else could produce the mini's in time.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

It does seem strange to me that a company would allow the license to go to a company that had such a poor record, even at the time of the start of the kickstarter. I think that part of the question is where so much anger and frustration directed a Paizo comes from. I would really like to know why this decision was made. The answer that seems to be coming from non-Paizo apologists is that they needed minis is really poor. It seems to imply that Paizo was so desperate that they disregarded concerns over their fans to rapidly have a product sent to the market. While I have read Sara Marie say recently that, "Paizo absolutely cares", the actions that led to the ND licensing do not seem to reflect that. Maybe they care now, but that's after I have lost $400 to a predatory company they licensed and actively supported despite so many warning signs. In that case, thanks for your recent concern Paizo, but you helped to land me, and many others in this situation so your concern is now considered suspect.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
yukongil wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made
you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.
is it really a gamble to place a bet on the dark horse that sometimes comes in last, or just hops the fence and robs the betting station, running off with all the money?
If the bets in this race mean you also assuredly lose out on a lot of money by not betting at all, yes. Which would be the case with no minis for their new game.

well as long as they got theirs I suppose...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made
you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.

Are CMON minis being drawn from the ether? ND was not the only possible option, it was the one that was chosen. "It was this or nothing" is giving a free pass to someone(s) who made a poor decision at the expense of actually learning from the mistake.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

That's a lot of baseless accusations you're throwing around about Paizo staff. I'd give it a rest and wait to see if they prove otherwise.


Raakam wrote:

It seems to me it boils down to some simple questions:

* Is Paizo happy with the decision they made?

* Is the goodwill of some of their fans a price they are willing to pay for having miniatures on the market for the rest of their playerbase? In other words, how much damage has their brand sustained over this?

* Did it make financial sense for them to proceed with this kickstarter?

1. Obviously not. Now they know we know they got paid for this, so I think they'd be even less happy.

2. Considering the people willing to plonk hundreds down on preordering minis sight unseen would be almost entirely outspoken fans? I would hope not. It's certainly crushed my desire to buy Paizo products, and that was a desire literally thousands of dollars strong

3. Of course. They get paid 28k and all it costs them is goodwill later down the line if the KS fails.

Liberty's Edge

Furdinand wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made
you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.

Are CMON minis being drawn from the ether? ND was not the only possible option, it was the one that was chosen. "It was this or nothing" is giving a free pass to someone(s) who made a poor decision at the expense of actually learning from the mistake.

I know, right! And this notion that ND was somehow more capable than all these other non Wizkids/Reaper mini producers when ND have never demonstrated it could competently complete a Kickstarter is a joke. But suuuuuuuuuure, they were the only option... uh huh.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

After the first two turned it down, yeah.

I'm curious, what other miniatures companies could Paizo have approached?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
That's a lot of baseless accusations you're throwing around about Paizo staff. I'd give it a rest and wait to see if they prove otherwise.

I fail to see what they have left to prove. The facts speak for themselves:

1. They didn't heed the warnings about ND from the people who pay their bills.

2. They didn't do any evident due diligence about prior failed KS's by this company, see point #1.

3. None of the people who vouched for ND (instilling some trust that the Paizo name would make ND suddenly get their crap together) have come forward with even a recognition/statement/apology/status update.

Sara is basically their meat shield/damage control to appease a bunch of pissed off customers (some, if not most spend a lot of money/month with Paizo) who spent a lot of money with the implicit trust into something that bore the Paizo name.

The fact that the CEO/COO/whoever who vouched for ND has not come into this thread and either addressed the issue, or gave a statement of "I wish I could say more but reasons" makes me question why I am giving this company money every month if their leadership cant cop to making a mistake.

Sara is doing her job in keeping us informed, the CEO/COO/etc need to step up and do their job in taking some once of responsibility. If they are unable to do this, then maybe its time to move on to a company that show that they care.

/rant

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
SCSi wrote:
I fail to see what they have left to prove. The facts speak for themselves...

None of those facts speak to the motivations of the Paizo staff. They are allowed to be human and make mistakes.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
TOZ wrote:
None of those facts speak to the motivations of the Paizo staff. They are allowed to be human and make mistakes.

To be human is also to do the right thing(tm), that includes copping to your mistakes and doing what is in your power to make what was wronged, right.

From the typed evidence in this thread, thats not being done. Not one word from the higher ups have been posted here. Even under an NDA they can give a generic statement addressing the issue without going into specifics.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TriOmegaZero wrote:
After the first two turned it down, yeah.

This is the type of answer that makes me think the Paizo-apologists on this thread are just trying to troll the angry fans. It seems to stick to a narrative that Ninja Division was the only other option despite no proof that they could accomplish this, and plenty to show they couldn't. We all know of many other companies that produce miniatures. Were they approached? But this nonsense narrative that it was only Ninja Division just is aggravating because it assumes a poor level of understanding of those hurt by this kickstarter of the miniature market in general. Was Fantasy Flight approached? How about Game Time? What of the myriad of board game makers that use highly detailed miniatures. To say it was Ninja Division or nothing seems to come from a fantasy.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
SCSi wrote:
TOZ wrote:
None of those facts speak to the motivations of the Paizo staff. They are allowed to be human and make mistakes.
To be human is also to do the right thing(tm), that includes copping to your mistakes and doing what is in your power to make what was wronged, right.

Yes, and I hope that they will do so when they are able.

Briit wrote:
Was Fantasy Flight approached? How about Game Time?

Are they able to do sci-fantasy miniatures? What is their turnaround time? What was their product schedule like and did they have openings?

I honestly don't know anything about them. I only buy Pathfinder Battles and avoid unpainted/metal minis. But the existence of other companies does not mean other options were available.


So when you say:

TriOmegaZero wrote:
After the first two turned it down, yeah.

You seem to affirm that Ninja Division was the only option. Only to follow up with:

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Are they able to do sci-fantasy miniatures? What is their turnaround time? What was their product schedule like and did they have openings?

I honestly don't know anything about them. I only buy Pathfinder Battles and avoid unpainted/metal minis. But the existence of other companies does not mean other options were available.

Which shows you really know nothing of the process. Yet still feel confident to push forward the Ninja Division or nothing narrative despite

TriOmegaZero wrote:
not having skin in the game.

That's quite special.

Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:


Are they able to do sci-fantasy miniatures? What is their turnaround time? What was their product schedule like and did they have openings?

We know the answers to those questions from Ninja Division.

N O P E !!!!!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Briit wrote:

So when you say:

TriOmegaZero wrote:
After the first two turned it down, yeah.
You seem to affirm that Ninja Division was the only option.

The only viable option, as evaluated by Paizo at the time. Hindsight is 20/20 and all. I personally would have been among the individuals who did NOT go in on this if I had been in the market for SF minis at the time, for many of the reasons posted by the OP and others. Paizo made a poor decision, undeniably true. I'm hopeful they will make good on it but find it unlikely.

J-Bone wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:


Are they able to do sci-fantasy miniatures? What is their turnaround time? What was their product schedule like and did they have openings?

We know the answers to those questions from Ninja Division.

Hey, whether you knew those answers when you backed or not, I feel sorry for your pain. I really do. But ain't nothing I can do for it but wait and hope.

Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:


The only viable option, as evaluated by Paizo at the time. Hindsight is 20/20 and all.

How do you know that? Paizo hasn't been at all forthcoming in the decision making process so either your making an assumption or know secret knowledge. Maybe if they did let us all in on how they came to ND at the exclusion of so many other options we could avoid a lot of this discussion.


TOZ wrote:
None of those facts speak to the motivations of the Paizo staff. They are allowed to be human and make mistakes.

I think you are absolutely right - unfortunately, we cannot judge intent or motivation, only final results.

If we had a time-machine, and Paizo knew back then what they know now, what would they choose to do?

We can speculate all we want:

1- Would they still choose ND?

2- Would they choose someone else?

3- Would they delay the production of miniatures/Starfinder as a whole?

4- Some alternate option?

If we try and guess based on some of the information we have now, and some of the comments from the thread in here (which again, is very speculative) it seems like option 1 becomes a non-starter.

Obviously, hindsight is 20/20. How much delving did they do in options 2, 3, 4 or whatever else might exist?

The fact that the executive who publicly stated that they had complete faith in ND's ability to deliver has yet to make a public comment discussing their mistake indicates, to me, that maybe option 1 would still the selection of choice; and the frustration so clearly evident in these discussions seem to indicate that I'm not the only one who feels that way.

Input from other users guessing about Paizo's intent or their goals doesn't do anything to change the narrative or rhetoric - "this was their only choice", "it was this or nothing". Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. I'd like to hear specifics from the leadership team if they still stand by that choice.

Presumably, if all else remains equal and that this was their only choice, then the result that ultimately occurred was considered an acceptable risk.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
J-Bone wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:


The only viable option, as evaluated by Paizo at the time. Hindsight is 20/20 and all.

How do you know that? Paizo hasn't been at all forthcoming in the decision making process? Maybe if they did, we could avoid a lot of this discussion.

Maybe they are betting on the short attention span of gamers and hope it'll just be forgotten in a few months.

I mean im sure thats what Palladium is doing with their Robotech Fiasco

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
J-Bone wrote:
How do you know that? Paizo hasn't been at all forthcoming in the decision making process so either your making an assumption or know secret knowledge. Maybe if they did let us all in on how they came to ND at the exclusion of so many other options we could avoid a lot of this discussion.

Do you really think so little of Paizo to claim that they would intentionally choose the worst of their options instead of the best? (Again, speaking of them using the best of their knowledge.)

I absolutely agree that they should speak when they can, but I don't think they are able at the moment.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Paizo has also made clear that they are in some sort of discussion or negotiations about the situation. If this is true (and I have no reason to doubt them on this), they cannot provide the answers you want now. Some of the answers you want they may never be able to provide due to laws.

Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:


Do you really think so little of Paizo to claim that they would intentionally choose the worst of their options instead of the best? (Again, speaking of them using the best of their knowledge.)

I'm speaking from the point of view of not knowing anything. I'm not the one making assumption that ND was the most "viable" option. Perhaps they were selected because they promised more of a kickback on the kickstarter? As for "thinking so little of Paizo" until they explain this debacle they expose themselves to such speculation.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

The assumption is that Paizo determined them to be the most viable. Which they could certainly have been wrong about.

Are you saying they wouldn't go with who they saw as the most viable?


Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
yukongil wrote:
Rysky the Dark Solarion wrote:
J-Bone wrote:
I need to know why this decision was made
you've been informed multiple times. It was take a gamble on ND, or a 100% chance of no minis at all.
is it really a gamble to place a bet on the dark horse that sometimes comes in last, or just hops the fence and robs the betting station, running off with all the money?
If the bets in this race mean you also assuredly lose out on a lot of money by not betting at all, yes. Which would be the case with no minis for their new game.

Companies shouldn't "gamble." They may take risks--and those risks should be calculated--but it isn't gambling (and I take it you're not really a gambler either).

I find it hard to believe that the existence of miniatures was a "necessity" to sell Starfinder. In fact, if you look at Paizo's history, there's always a fairly long lag between release a campaign/AP/supplement and the associated miniatures. Which tells us that it's simply an additional revenue stream but not necessary to release the game.

But let's say that the Paizo thought miniatures had to be released for Starfinder to ultimately be profitable. Is the less than $40,000 in licensing fees really what made the difference? If so, I feel for Paizo's financials. But the more important question is was the less than $40,000 in licensing fees really worth the "very bad gamble" to go with a company with a terrible track record? To engender bad feelings from customers? (Sure, this won't affect the spending of some, but I can tell you my table has frozen its Paizo spending until this is addressed, and we collectively spend much more per year than we invested in this Kickstarter. I don't know how prevalent this thinking is, but I know we're not alone.)

To pile on, I still don't find fulfilling the explanation to go with ND over some other alternative. Reaper supposedly didn't want to compete with their sci-fi line--but that means you actually have existing IP to bring down your initial investment and can be re-purposed, using Starfinder as a revenue booster--score!

WizKids said they didn't have enough time for sculpting. So maybe delay release a bit? Or, hire additional sculpters on a freelance basis, which we know is how this industry often works. Oh, that may drive up the price a bit for Paizo? Do it, because it's better than the risk of total project failure from ND--which HAD to be identified as a possibility--and we know it won't be by much given the prices that freelance artists are paid. More importantly, if scheduling sculpting really was the case, how was ND going to have time to do it?

I obviously don't know the details, and I'm not pretending to, but the answers provided don't make good sense. Maybe those involved in negotiations simply don't have as much business acumen as expected, or maybe Paizo rushed Starfinder's release too much (TBH, the game definitely feels like it was rushed in places).


Sara Marie wrote:
Roflercoaster wrote:
I doubt Paizo cares....

I've seen this sentiment several times in this thread from a variety of levels of involvement with Starfinder and the miniatures and I wanted to let folks in this thread know, the people who make up Paizo absolutely care. We care that our community is frustrated, and feeling hurt, that people have been put off Starfinder or Paizo in general because of this. We empathize deeply with the community involved in this.

I'm not here to try to get people to stop feeling frustrated or upset or fed up over the kickstarter, or to ask people to stop posting how they feel. I'm also not here to give people assurances or provide resolutions for backers.

I'm continuing to update in the thread, so that however y'all feel about things, you know we are listening to feedback and internally this is not being ignored. That's all we can offer right now as far as commenting on the issue. We know people are looking for more answers, information, or details from people who are not me. We know that "No new information is available" isn't satisfactory for backers. But however much we want to say one thing or another or be able to provide folks with information and details, we are not able to (usually for legal reasons). If there's questions we aren't answering, usually it's because we can't, not because we don't care.

There's been an uptick in posts over the last week, particularly with the update from Monday. I am trying to keep up with reading them, but if there are things that I can answer (or not answer) I am not going to be able to get to them until probably the end of this week, early next.

Sara, I appreciate you communicating with us. I understand that there are certain things you can and cannot say as the PR person.

Can you tell us whether someone at Paizo--at the Erik Mona level or higher--will, at some point, address this situation publicly? Will this include any information as to why there was thought that ND could fulfill their obligation given their track record?


I think people are overstating just how bad the track record of Ninja Division was at the time this Kickstarter was produced. It was bad, but it wasn't 'only a total fool would ever work with this company' bad. I mean, if somebody thought ND were that bad at the time then they really shouldn't have backed even with Paizo working on it.

Yes Super Dungeon Explore Legends was a few months late at that point, but that seemed to be related to working on the rules and dealing with just how much the project had swollen at the time of the Kickstarter. They had other projects which were just coming up late too, but that's not terribly uncommon on Kickstarter either.

Don't get me wrong, there were certainly red flags that I could understand people being wary of which kept them from backing. But I can also see how they convinced Paizo and a bunch of backers to support them one more time too. It's not like they didn't have a history of producing quality miniatures, whatever the apparent game design and management failings they also seemed to have.

Sure, hindsight has shown that it hasn't gone well. But plenty of companies have had some troubles coming out of extremely successful Kickstarter projects and come through fine. There was a time when CMON was getting quite a lot of bad press early in their Kickstarter days, and even Reaper got a lot of flak from some quarters over shipping issues in their Bones projects.

I'm certainly hopeful that Paizo may try to do something for backers of the project once they're satisfied that there is no chance of ND delivering. But as long as they're still working towards it at all I can see why Paizo want to see if there's any chance of actually getting the miniatures out.

I've got plenty of skin in this game too, but I don't think any of us gain anything by wanting to constantly re-litigate how Paizo decided to work with ND. I'm sure they've asked that question internally to try and mitigate it in future, but the decision was made long ago now. I'm much more interested in any future steps Paizo take on this rather than there initial decision to work with ND.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Berik wrote:

I think people are overstating just how bad the track record of Ninja Division was at the time this Kickstarter was produced. It was bad, but it wasn't 'only a total fool would ever work with this company' bad. I mean, if somebody thought ND were that bad at the time then they really shouldn't have backed even with Paizo working on it.

Having assurances from the Paizo high-ups that they have full faith in ND delivering has more weight than you probably assume. Thats also where most of the complaints here stem from.

Its one thing to post warnings about ND and having them buried in a forum post to be missed, its something else to have the higher-ups of Paizo double down on said warnings.

Then, when things explode in their face, have their CS manager Sara do damage control while we get radio silence from the same higher-ups who assured us it would be alright.

To throw Sara under the bus to deal with all of us isn't right, Erik doubled down, so he should be here telling all of us whats going on.

Liberty's Edge

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Are you saying they wouldn't go with who they saw as the most viable?

Yes. But "viable" to me isn't the company that had failed on Robotech and was way behind on other projects.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

...okay?

Liberty's Edge

Was that not clear enough for you?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Conflicting, yes. But not worth exploring further.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I find the dialogue interesting where both sides accept the fact of failure but where one side wants accountability the other will offer explainations as to why no accountability is needed.

Point blank, if you go to the first page of this forum thread you will see that customers had already raised many red flags about Ninja Division and Paizo told us that they had full confidence in Ninja Divisions ability to deliver.

Fail 1: Ignoring your customers

Fail 2: Giving your customers confidence to hand money to a company that is KNOWN AT THAT TIME to take money from one project to attempt to fulfill a previously, for all intents and purposes, failed project and then fail to deliver on both.

Paizo is a part of the con Job in the sense that they vouched for a company that a sampling of their customers KNEW to be unscrupulous and the Paizo faithful that pledged, especially all in, based on Paizo's recommendations are out hundreds of dollars.

The current Paizo apologists are not doing Paizo any favors. Paizo needs to heal the wound they caused by backing a 3 legged dog in a horse race and telling their flock to bet on it.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Paizo deserves no favors in this.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

The point is not whether an apology is needed, it is that those demanding an apology and explanation are being premature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Redelia wrote:
The point is not whether an apology is needed, it is that those demanding an apology and explanation are being premature.

You think that with Ninja Divisions recent public announcement of laying off their entire company except 3 people and their very blatant mismanagement of funds that people asking for an explanation and apology are being premature?

Interesting.

I mean, someone can apologize for being wrong while also explaining what their plans are to make things right.

Pretty sure that there is no 'it's too soon'situation when it comes to that.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Redelia wrote:
The point is not whether an apology is needed, it is that those demanding an apology and explanation are being premature.

So when is going to be the right time? The writing was on the wall on page-1 on this thread. They chose to ignore it.

So the question is, are the Paizo head-ups going to chime in on this before or after we all vote with our dollars.

The angry mob is forming, and soon the window of opportunity for Paizo's 'mea culpa' will be over.

651 to 700 of 1,221 << first < prev | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Starfinder / Third-Party Starfinder Products / Miniatures Kickstarter Ninja Division All Messageboards