|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 7:51PM
#61
|
|
|
Since the "data" does not take into account direct sales and digital content from "both" companies it is important to gather other evidence from as many places as we can - like the Amazon sales figures for example.
WotC claimed that it could not make money from publishing adventures and Paizo has built a business around publishing adventures. If producing more quality products leads to higher sales then maybe WotC should be producing more stuff.
You wish that an interview with a store owner actually has just as much evidentual value than specific numbers. This is not the case. Do you actually think that store owners and distributors review their sales, write them down, make a list, etc. before the people from ICv2 come along to ask questions? On their site, the guys from ICv2 do not specify what questions are asked no offer any information about ther methodology.
Feel free to use this as evidence for whatever. But the report is highly unscientific and does not say much at all. And again, if you really take it seriously, keep in mind that Paizo publishes much more stuff while WotC publishes much less and still is #2.
Yes you are quite right, the ICv2 report is as un-scientific as it comes.
However it does provide us with evidence that we can use in forming an opinion.
Seriously, sitting there asking for "real data" when DnD does not even rank high enough to be reported seperately in Hasbro's annual accounts and Paizo is a private company that does not need to report its sales is naive at best. Ignoring available information that is available is also naive
So actual sales are now considered to be spin?
Of course not, actual numbers are actual numbers. Spinning the facts is pointing to the numbers on days when the actual sales are good for you, but not when you are dragging behind.
And the Amazon sales do not include digital content either.
Yes I understand that you want hard numbers.
I'll wait here while you get some.
You do realise that your definition of "responsibility" just means WotC trying to sell enough games to meet the unrealistic demands of Hasbro, right?
Cause if WotC can not handle the "responsibility" then I am sure there are plenty of companies willing to step up and do it for them. And, thanks to the OGL, they can.
The target number that I read was $50 million, not $100 million. And maybe at the time when the officials at WotC presented those numbers, they really thought it was doable.
But that is actually not what I am talking about. I am talking about what people want DnD to be. And what they claim DnD has to be. Even PF fans make that claim. And I find those claims not only unrealistic, but also rather hypocritical. Why, for instance, should WotC publish 3.x stuff? Why support a format that benefits the competition? WotC is critizised for this. Paizo, on the other hand, is not critized for not producing 4E content ans supporting that game. I fail to understand that.
If WotC makes a new game of DnD then it is up to WotC to support it. Paizo did not make the game so why should they support it? There is a market of players that want to continue to play 3e and Paizo chose to support that market (and WotC chose to not support it).
If WotC wants to try and restrict who can support 4e, then you can not criticize Paizo for not agreeing to their conditions.
But if a company like Paizo wants to "step up", the also need to cater to the players that like the 4E mechanics. Otherwise they will not reach those players. And I do not see at the moment that they are actually willing or even able to do this. Why spend the time and personnel to support a different version of the game and in diong so creating competing system within the company.
It would seem to be the same mistake that TSR made, this time, however, not on a setting level but on a mechanical level. I am not sure this is a wise business idea.
So, no, I do not think there is anybody out there who will "step up".
Illogical. Paizo does not need to cater to players that like 4e. The only one that can do that is WotC.
Paizo can provide support for players that like to play games based on the OGL though.
And, of course, anyone who wants to play their adventures. They are not too difficult to convert to 4e.
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 8:11PM
#62
|
|
|
People will by 5th Edition if it is better. That was one of the points of the OGL: future editions couldn't just be "good enough" they had to be inarguably, undeniably better.
If the game is good people will play. Pathfinder was an improvement and people like the products and what the company is doing, so it is selling well. The company listens to the fans and releases content they want to see. If 5e comes out and it's familiar yet fun, balanced yet customizable and allows people to do what they want.
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say? Spoiler:
Show
My Webcomic
Updated Tuesday and Thursday
Read my blog on the WotC Community Site (updated irregularly to avoid spamming the "Featured Blogger" list).
You can follow me on Twitter: "@DnDJester"
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 8:56PM
#63
|
|
|
People will by 5th Edition if it is better. That was one of the points of the OGL: future editions couldn't just be "good enough" they had to be inarguably, undeniably better.
If the game is good people will play. Pathfinder was an improvement and people like the products and what the company is doing, so it is selling well. The company listens to the fans and releases content they want to see. If 5e comes out and it's familiar yet fun, balanced yet customizable and allows people to do what they want.
The "Adventure Path" model is sheer genius and well written to boot. I would spend so much money on D&D Next if they had awesome chronological adventures/campaigns to play in. The subscription model is good too because then you have constant revenue stream (even from people who may not DM or may never get around to actually running the adventure)
"If it's not a conjuration, how did the wizard
con·jure/ˈkänjər/Verb
1. Make (something) appear unexpectedly or seemingly from nowhere as if by magic.
it?"
-anon
"Why don't you read fire·ball / fī(-ə)r-ˌbȯl/ and see if you can find the key word con.jure /'kən-ˈju̇r/ anywhere in it."
- Maxperson
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 9:07PM
#64
|
|
|
People will by 5th Edition if it is better. That was one of the points of the OGL: future editions couldn't just be "good enough" they had to be inarguably, undeniably better.
If the game is good people will play. Pathfinder was an improvement and people like the products and what the company is doing, so it is selling well. The company listens to the fans and releases content they want to see. If 5e comes out and it's familiar yet fun, balanced yet customizable and allows people to do what they want.
The "Adventure Path" model is sheer genius and well written to boot. I would spend so much money on D&D Next if they had awesome chronological adventures/campaigns to play in. The subscription model is good too because then you have constant revenue stream (even from people who may not DM or may never get around to actually running the adventure)
There's definitely something to be said about the Adventure Path model. It keeps people interested and buying month after month, which leads to a consistent revenue stream.
But I don't think WotC can pull it off nearly as effectively. Paizo has had nine years to really nail down the formula and what works, and WotC has only tried it twice. Plus WotC has a very short-term mindset for releases, very much focused on the new then the now with anything old fading from the attention. They have trouble maintaining the momentum needed for a sustained Adventure Path. And, at this point, Paizo has really marketed themselves as "the adventure path people"; if WotC tries it just seems like they're copying Paizo.
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?Spoiler:
Show
My Webcomic
Updated Tuesday and Thursday
Read my blog on the WotC Community Site (updated irregularly to avoid spamming the "Featured Blogger" list).
You can follow me on Twitter: "@DnDJester"
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 10:37PM
#65
|
Date Joined:
Aug 30, 2007
|
Illogical. Paizo does not need to cater to players that like 4e. The only one that can do that is WotC.
Paizo can provide support for players that like to play games based on the OGL though.
And, of course, anyone who wants to play their adventures. They are not too difficult to convert to 4e.
Paizo does not need to, but they certainly can, and it may turn out to be profitable for them to do so (only time will tell since that is only a guess on my part). WotC is not the only one that can support 4e, as evidenced by the presence of 3rd party products, both GSL and non-GSL.
Owner and Proprietor of the House of Trolls.
God of ownership and possession.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 01, 2012 - 11:29PM
#66
|
|
|
Paizo does not need to, but they certainly can, and it may turn out to be profitable for them to do so (only time will tell since that is only a guess on my part).
Wouldn't that be deliciously ironic.
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 1:03AM
#67
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2004
|
Seriously, sitting there asking for "real data" when DnD does not even rank high enough to be reported seperately in Hasbro's annual accounts and Paizo is a private company that does not need to report its sales is naive at best. Ignoring available information that is available is also naive
I was standing (naively I suppose) when I wrote that post. Also, since I really do not care if Paizo or WotC does better, I am not really interested in hard numbers.
But when you claim that Paizo is doing better than WotC and refer to the ICv2 reports, the burden of proof lies with you to prove that the reports actually mean something. So, it is not me who wants or needs specific numbers. It is you. But since you just agreed with me that the reports are unscientific, you prove my point and we can leave that subject.
Yes I understand that you want hard numbers.
I'll wait here while you get some.
Again, it is not I who has to present specific numbers. It is you. And I am not waiting for this to happen, because I am sure you cannot. However, the burden of proof is on you since you are making the claim. I was just arguing your "facts" and you just agreed with me that the stuff that you base your opinion on is unscientific and has nothing to do with actual numbers. So again, this case is closed for me.
If WotC makes a new game of DnD then it is up to WotC to support it. Paizo did not make the game so why should they support it? There is a market of players that want to continue to play 3e and Paizo chose to support that market (and WotC chose to not support it).
If WotC wants to try and restrict who can support 4e, then you can not criticize Paizo for not agreeing to their conditions.
Actually, I am not critizising Paizo for sticking to 3e. Read my post again and you will see this.
But what I am also saying is that if Paizo does not support 4E, there will be no "stepping up" (and this is your choice of words, not mine), because when WotC steps down Paizo will not be taking over the market of 4E players. So which other company that is "willing to step up" (your words, not mine) do you mean?
Illogical. Paizo does not need to cater to players that like 4e. The only one that can do that is WotC.
This is wrong. Paizo can support 4E if they wanted. WotC is not the only one that can support 4E. The guys at ENWorld do it, for instance. And they do it really well. Maybe Paizo can learn from ENWorld in this regard, wouldn't you say?
Joke aside, if you read my post you will find that I said that Paizo is doing well enough with PF and should stick with it.
And, of course, anyone who wants to play their adventures. They are not too difficult to convert to 4e.
Yes, the adventures can be translated into 4E. But since the higher level adventures are based on mostly static full-round-attack 3e/PF rules, the rooms need changing a lot and encounters have to be designed in a different way. Coming back to Rise of the Runelords, for example, I remember thinking: that dungeon near Sandpoint needs to be redesigned to have more space for the ever moving an shifting way of 4E combat. The rooms were just too small.
My point being: in lower levels, redisign can be easy. In higher levels, lots of work. Fortunately there are the adventure tools that makes monster conversions a piece oc cake in 4E. So that helps.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 1:14AM
#68
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2004
|
The "Adventure Path" model is sheer genius and well written to boot. I would spend so much money on D&D Next if they had awesome chronological adventures/campaigns to play in. The subscription model is good too because then you have constant revenue stream (even from people who may not DM or may never get around to actually running the adventure)
I agree that adventure paths are a great way to save time to come up with your own story. Paizo was not the first, just remember Dragonlance, which was extremely well recepted over here. Also, the Giants/Drow AP comes to mind. There are many others. And, to be perfectly clear, I am not of the opinion that every GM has to come up with a story in order to be great GM. My perspective being that I have a family, work and other hobbies and I understand that people cannot think about a RPG game 24/7.
Businesswise, for the longest time, I have thought that in order to make any edition a great success, WotC needs to upgrade the adventure quality. And I think they should, in order to be successful, either hire people who can write great adventures or train existing WotC personnel to do this.
As to the quality of Paizo APs: they are decent, but not as awesome as they could be or some PF fans claim they are. This is not the thread to talk about the quality of Paizo's AP, though. Maybe I should start a thread about it?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 1:16AM
#69
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
Amazon Best Sellers has a similar story with the Pathfinder Core rules beating the DnD PHB.
I can only talk only from my own experiance, i live in the netherlands i have seen the 4th books in plenty of gaming stores.
But hardly any have pathfinder books as a product they keep in stock.
as Amazon works internatonaly the sales figues for pathfinder books might be higer becouse people from countries where the pathfinder books are less availeble use it to order the books.
i think one of the reasons it is easyer to find 4th then pathfinder books in stores here is becouse wizards/hasbro already had a astabished distibuting network here in europe..
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 02, 2012 - 3:13AM
#70
|
|
|
But when you claim that Paizo is doing better than WotC and refer to the ICv2 reports, the burden of proof lies with you to prove that the reports actually mean something. So, it is not me who wants or needs specific numbers. It is you. But since you just agreed with me that the reports are unscientific, you prove my point and we can leave that subject.
You wanted proof - I gave you two sources of independant unbiased evidence.
What evidence do you have to the contrary?
Pro DnD Member of the Axis of Awesome Fighters: Using socks to kill monsters since 2012 DnD Next: Now with more then 4 minutes of Roleplay per gaming hour Spoiler:
Show
"If you can't make an interesting human fighter, then you aren't ready to play anything else yet" Edymnion
"The idea of resting up between encounters to fill-up on hit points and spells struck my meta-gaming nine-year-old as a distinct possibility. "Are you mad?" says my seven-year-old "This place is full of monsters!" "jamesgrahamuk
All characters have a story. Spoiler:
Show
Sometimes that story is short and sometimes it is long. They can be tragic, comic or absurd. Some teach. Some are just to fill the empty spaces in our lives. Rarely it is a transcendent fugue only half remembered but wondered at. And frequently: "it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." -William Shakespeare
|
|
|
