Pathfinder 1E Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo, commenting about ENWorld

[Wulf Ratbane]

One of the first rules of sales is that you do not want to base your sales pitch on bashing your competitor, because that way you come across as mean-spirited and petty.

Instead, you base your sales pitch on the benefits of your product, and let the customer make the comparison in his mind.

What about basing your sales pitch on bashing the prior edition of your own work?

How'd that work out?

 

[BryonD]

I think early on there was a presumption that 4E would replace 3E.
It took a while for that assumption to pass.
I think things are quite fair now.

 

[Fifth Element]

What about basing your sales pitch on bashing the prior edition of your own work?

Introducing Widget 2.0! It's not better than Widget 1.0, but it's different!

Very effective.

 

[Mercule]

That's an unfortunate quote. It's no more fair than it is to say that any financial issues Paizo may have are because they so firmly planted themselves in the 3e camp and made 4e fans unwelcome. Less so, actually, because ENWorld isn't primarily concerned with creating and selling products, being more focused on news, collaboration, and discussion; and because Paizo is far more biased than ENWorld ever could be.

 

[Treebore]

This is a discussion forum not a blog. If you speak, you will have your words discussed. Otherwise, why are you expressing yourself here? Trying to deny that dynamic is succeeding at wasting everyone's time and painting yourself a troll.

I think the idea that ENWorld is blatantly pro-4E and anti-3E is wrong. Certainly the forum has a number of committed and obnoxious advocates for either edition, and certainly people feel persecuted or appalled by them but that happens on either side.

I also don't think Lisa is necessarilly commenting on this.

What Lisa seems to be saying, though, is that maintaining a solidly anti-4E and pro-3E stance, which the decidely unsolid on anything ENWorld did not do, would have helped ENWorlds .pdf sales.

That argument may be accurate. It certainly ignores a lot of other harms that policy would have done for ENWorld.

I find it curious how others feel they have every right to try and attack someones opinion, even when well reasoned and backed up with experience playing the game. Its a statement of his opinion, yet defenders of 4E obviously decided to take offense at his deciding his mind was made up and try and force him to change his mind in rude and offensive ways. He was not rude or offensive, the "Defenders of 4E" were.

I guess its more important to justify the rudeness rather then admit people went over board in their reactions.

Gamers cause rifts, not games.

 

[Grimstaff]

No offense to Lisa, but we care what she says why? In any case, I'm sure the comment was taken out of context, the idea that Morrus somehow influenced the purchasing habits of 50k ENWorlders is silly, and she seems like she has better business sense than that.

As to other issues on the boards lately, I don't think the boards are heavily biased one way or the other, there seems to be a level playing field. I run a 4E game and play in a PF game, and I somehow manage not to get into too many fights with myself...

I do think its odd that when someone posts a negative comment on 4E, some folks think the OP should not have to hear any contrary opinions. Why is the OP in these "Why I don't like 4E" threads suddenly the only person entitled to an opinion? Sorry, but including something along the lines of "This is my opinion, so don't argue with me" in a manifesto of anger/disappointment/etc against a RPG does not immunize the OP from responses. This is what blogs are for.

I think if ENWorld's Mod Squad is no longer going to ENForce bans on this type of edition-war-fodder thread, they should make it clear that both sides are entitled to post their opinions, even if that opinion disagrees with the OP.

 

[Treebore]

No offense to Lisa, but we care what she says why? In any case, I'm sure the comment was taken out of context, the idea that Morrus somehow influenced the purchasing habits of 50k ENWorlders is silly, and she seems like she has better business sense than that.

As to other issues on the boards lately, I don't think the boards are heavily biased one way or the other, there seems to be a level playing field. I run a 4E game and play in a PF game, and I somehow manage not to get into too many fights with myself...

I do think its odd that when someone posts a negative comment on 4E, some folks think the OP should not have to hear any contrary opinions. Why is the OP in these "Why I don't like 4E" threads suddenly the only person entitled to an opinion? Sorry, but including something along the lines of "This is my opinion, so don't argue with me" in a manifesto of anger/disappointment/etc against a RPG does not immunize the OP from responses. This is what blogs are for.

I think if ENWorld's Mod Squad is no longer going to ENForce bans on this type of edition-war-fodder thread, they should make it clear that both sides are entitled to post their opinions, even if that opinion disagrees with the OP.

I take it you did not read the thread in question? The OP was very nice and well reasoned. HE very obviously gave 4E a solid shake down run. He said, "this is my opinion based on my experiences giving 4E a fair shake, and my mind is made up." (My paraphrasing, not an actual quote)

Then a number of people came along and rudely attacked him. Rudely. Justifying it because he dared to say he had already made up his mind based on actual game play and well reasoned and well mannered explanations.

So posters still insisted not only on wasting their time trying to "prove" how he was wrong to form such an opinion based on actual playing of the game, but they took it upon themselves to do so rudely.

Such rude responses ar4e not justified because he said, "I have formed my opinion and I am not going to change it, so don't waste your time trying." Thats actually very courteous. He let everyone know up front he wasn't open to changing his mind. They insisted on trying anyways, and were insultingly rude doing it too.

Just continues to prove gamers cause rifts, not games.

 

[Fenes]

Responses are one thing, insults another.

 

[Halivar]

I think if ENWorld's Mod Squad is no longer going to ENForce bans on this type of edition-war-fodder thread, they should make it clear that both sides are entitled to post their opinions, even if that opinion disagrees with the OP.

They have. There are at least two occurrences of such mod posts in the Celtavian thread.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I find it curious how others feel they have every right to try and attack someones opinion, even when well reasoned and backed up with experience playing the game. Its a statement of his opinion, yet defenders of 4E obviously decided to take offense at his deciding his mind was made up and try and force him to change his mind in rude and offensive ways. He was not rude or offensive, the "Defenders of 4E" were.

I am not claiming this didn't happen there, but don't use it as an example of "bias" pro-4E or anything. (I am not sure that's what you are doing, so don't worry if you did not ). Because I see the same happening in threads about 3E and discussing its flaws or merits. "Ah, so you see X as a flaw of 3E? I never experienced it, so you are wrong and it's not a problem with the game". That happens all the time.

The real problem in the discussion culture is that people feel they need to defend "their" edition, which results in fans not being able to talk with a critical mind about their own edition. As a "fan", you feel compelled never to talk about the problems of your game system, or at least find excuses for any flaws others have experienced. And as fan, you feel compelled to only talk about the flaws of the other game system.
Not every poster falls into this trap. But I think I probably did a few times, though I am trying to be better than that. But I don't feel like I am there yet.

I feel like we're drifting off-topic...