Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder outselling D&D

darjr said:

So I think the number of folks in that group are a good lower bound on the number of DDI subs.

Click to expand...

As I understand it, as of relatively recently, you now have an account automatically made and marked as a member of that group if you subscribe to DDI. Previously it wasn't automatic, but it now seems like a decent peg of the total membership (though somewhere recently I saw someone saying something about situations where lapsed subscribers were still listed among the total despite no longer being part of the group).

darjr said:

I've actually tested this. When you are no longer a DDI subscriber you are no longer a member of the group for DDI. It may no longer be true but it was at one point. Also when I reupped long ago I was again part of the group, automatically. The first time around I was not part of the group until I actually setup a forum account. And now, months after cancelling my DDI, I am still not a member of that group. Note that for a few weeks I wasn't a DDI subscriber, I asked for a refund and received a refund, but I was still technically in the DDI group and had access to DDI until my original sub time ran out.

So at one point it only counted current subscribers who were also forum account members with an account tied to their ddi account, barring those that asked for and received a refund while still having time on their sub.

er...

So I think the number of folks in that group are a good lower bound on the number of DDI subs.

Click to expand...

That makes it a good marking point then. So 56,00 is a good take on the minimum current number.

Certainly enough to keep the ball rolling, barring Hasbro getting all pointy haired.

The Auld Grump

Hussar said:

Better in store support? The Encounters program is in, what, it's third season now? How much more in store support can you get? Freebies, organized play, prizes and whatnot on a very regular basis.

We can complain about WOTC's customer service as far as actually talking to us goes. But complaining about WOTC's gamer outreach? That's a bit of a stretch. WOTC's done more gamer in-store outreach than I think has ever been done in D&D's history.

Never minding a pretty darn strong RPGA as well.

Click to expand...

Meh, on the strength of the RPGA, but better than most games, even so.

I honestly don't know about Encounters - the only local(ish) store that hosted it ended up dropping it as more trouble than it was worth. So....

I will also admit that the format of Encounters, back when it was new and shiny, confirmed pretty much everything that I thought that I would dislike about 4e. No real game, just an encounter, followed, maybe, with a completely unconnected second encounter. Yay. (It may well have changed since then, but it did not fill me with a desire to play the game.)

But that is neither here nor there - Encounters deals, perhaps more successfully now than once it did, with game stores. Pretty much any time I use the term 'store' I am referring to the book trade, which is much more than half the brick & mortar sales of both 4e and Pathfinder.

In honesty, I tend to leave out the game stores in general, and needed to be reminded that they still exist, and occasionally have something other than Games Workshop. (I'd insert rolling eyes here, but they would be aimed at me, and not at you.) So, good point about Encounters, even if I do not like what I saw of them. I had forgotten about them.

The only actually local game store that has RPGs running had one Star Wars (D6) game, one Pathfinder, and two 3.X games over the course of several months. No 4e at all, but I don't know if anyone has tried to set one up. The Star Wars game has outlived three stores so far.... Warhammer 40K on the other hand, that gets a lot of table time.

As an aside - the look on the owner's face when GW's new Finecast came in was like a kid opening his stocking on Christmas morning and finding dog poop. I am ashamed to say that it made me want to laugh. Not good, either the production quality or my reaction.

*EDIT* For clarity's sake - I am ceding the point about in store support, at least in regard to the game stores. I was thinking only of content on book store shelves, and how well or poorly that content sells.

The Auld Grump

On a slightly different note - a 4e player on a completely different forum said that for adventure support he does not look to WotC, he looks to EN World and the great adventure path WotBS!

So congratulations Morrus and Co. as well! Your reputation is spreading on the interweb . (It made me ludicrously happy to see that.)

The Auld Grump

Kamikaze Midget said:

About rules foibles and minor design flubs? Sure.

About an entire edition?

Cuz that's what we're talking about here. WotC reps, in light of Pathfinder's glorious success, saying "We screwed up by releasing 4e, we're looking at how, and we'll try to do better."

Somehow, I don't envision them saying that. Even if some of them secretly believe it to be true. At the very least, they won't want to burn bridges with the people who really do like 4e (even if those people are a tiny insignificant slice of the market) by calling it a "screw up."

If you can realistically imagine them doing that in response to a truly dominant Pathfinder/lackluster other sales, you've got a stronger/more delusional imagination than me.

I CAN imagine them saying, "DDI has been a great success!" or something, regardless the veracity of that statement, just because it's not exactly falsifiable, and therefore passes the marketingspeak test.

I could also imagine them saying, "4e hasn't gone exactly as planned," or something, if they were attempting to address the issues of people not buying enough 4e stuff, or the Edition Wars, or whatever.

But "We shouldn't have released 4e?"

Whatever, I was just trying to point out that no one actually knows how the hell any company is actually doing overall, period, because we're not actually privy to that actual information. All we know from this thread is that Paizo is selling more books than anyone else. That's probably good news for them. Any attempt to extrapolate that into "MY EDITION IS BELOVED BY MILLIONS AND CAN BEAT UP YOURS, WHICH IS FAILING AND SLIDING INTO OBLIVION" is a sort of weird jingoism at this point.

We will probably have both games for quite some time to come, and I think the edition warriors on both sides will need to make peace with that at some point, or just become grumpy old malcontents.

Click to expand...

Frankly, at this point I wouldn't say that 4e was a mistake - they did listen to a portion of their audience, and that portion is happy with 4e.

Perhaps not the game for either you or me, but it does have its fans.

It is not 'failing and sliding into oblivion', though I think that it may be stagnating at the moment.

I don't even think that 4e was a mistake, anymore. There was a vocal core that were not happy with 3.5. Perhaps a minority, but certainly not a small minority.

I think a bigger mistake might have been discontinuing 3.X - that having both games in tandem might have worked better for WotC than 4e on its own. That they were counting on a larger number converting to the new edition. My worry about 4e is based only on local observation that sales are stagnating, and that local stores are coming to recognize it. But I also think that is temporary, that 4e will recover.

On some level Essentials was Wizards saying "4e hasn't gone exactly as planned".

I had thought that Essentials, in particular the Red Box would do better, locally, than it did. I don't know why it didn't do better, aside from the apparently lackluster Red Box. It has an attractive price point, it is in a format that book stores would much rather deal with, and from the few folks that I know who looked at it Essentials is not a bad version of the game. Maybe closer to D&D 4.25 than 4.5.

If I were going to be tempted by 4e at all that would be my choice - the price point makes it an impulse buy, something all too rare in gaming these days.

I think WotC cutting back on their release schedule is a good thing, that fewer, but stronger, releases will help more than the Splat-A-Month schedule.

I think that there is room for both, and both groups of edition warriors need to acknowledge that both games are here to stay. The audience has split, so live with it!

And, despite my soothing words, I am a grumpy old malcontent, and don't you forget it! Grrrr.

My take on Pathfinder doing well is that it means that there is plenty of room for both games, I can set aside my sword and shield... no wait, sorry, playing a paladin, I need those.... Rather, I can pick up my dice and play, I can go to Borders and find material for my game, that I have lost nothing, even if 4e gets over its apparent slump. Seeing Shadowfell on the shelf does not mean that Ultimate Magic is not also on the shelf.

The Auld Grump, and again, grrrr.

Shemeska said:

As I understand it, as of relatively recently, you now have an account automatically made and marked as a member of that group if you subscribe to DDI. Previously it wasn't automatic, but it now seems like a decent peg of the total membership (though somewhere recently I saw someone saying something about situations where lapsed subscribers were still listed among the total despite no longer being part of the group).

Click to expand...

Yup. I've never joined the group, and just checking my account a few minutes ago verified that I'm somehow a member of it. I also let my account run out a few days ago, so it'll be interesting to see how long it takes before I'm booted from it.

I largely agree with what auld grump said about 4e not beiing a mistake on wizards part. It isn't an edition that appeals to me but i do remember a very contentious split over 3e regarding balance, rules mastery and builds. I think wizards saw the split and realized it had become pretty fundamental by a certain point. I even remember it in my own group and area. For a long time i think one thing 3e did for many of us was help to clarify our preferences. People who didn't like 3e knew exactly why they didn't. It wasn't a vague criticism but something very specific. When 4e came out same thing happened on the other side. People who didn't like it knew exactly why. 4e is tailor made to that audience that had specific issues with 3e. I think wizards did a good job of understanding those customers and made a game that works perfectly for them.

Some folks seem to be enjoying Pathfinder
Some folks seem to be enjoying 4th
Some folks seem to be enjoying (insert edition/version name here)

I totally understand that people can be excited enough about their choice to evangelize it, but citing the percieved merits of your own taste does not require anyone to downplay or degrade the tastes of another.

We are all gamers, we all enjoy our forays into fantasy... I'd prefer less civil war between us.

My personal belief is... if there is a "way of the future", it will likely be a game which will entertain as many of us as possible... right now RPG's are blessed with the gift enormous variety... enjoy it.

No body "wins" this arguement... but it certainly can make necomers to the hobby, and those who are returning, feel much less welcome.

As for the various editions, the best comparison I can make is Neapolitan ice cream.

1st Edition had three flavors (vanilla, chocolate & strawberry)... if you didn't like chocolate you just dug around it to get the vanilla & strawberry (we could also call the flavors simulation, gamist & narrativist).

Subsequent editions have focused on one or possibly two flavors... and the folks who dislike them usually do so because their flavor has been excluded or minimilized to some extent.

I've played all of the various editions... I still prefer digging out the flavor balance I like from the old Neapolitan. This grants me some illusion that my friends and I actually create the game ourselves... we customize it... we have been given a paint set to play with as we see fit.

I've played pool for years, and every time I visit a different state, province or country... the rules are different. The game itself has lasted quite well, and I just adjust to the local play style if I want to have a game... and sometimes really nice local folks ask me how I play, and they adjust to my way to try something new.

Welcoming other viewpoints and styles sure does feel welcoming to a wanderer... and accpeting new styles seems to endear me to locals.

Dannager said:

This seems like a lame dig at 4e, so I'm just going to leave it unaddressed.

Click to expand...

It isn't a dig at 4e so much as a dig at its popularity. I accept completely that 4E provides a ton of fun to a lot of people.

But in the context of this conversation to ignore the serious issues 4E has in terms of overall popularity would be a big mistake. Keeping the difference between individual groups and the overall market in mind is critical.