Videogames for Pathfinder

[CapnZapp]

I really must question the wisdom in making videogames for Pathfinder 1 in the age of Pathfinder 2. Paizo's future hinges on enough people leaving PF1 behind after all.

That is all. (I didn't want to post this in the existing Righteous thread)

 

[MichaelSomething]

Well it's a good deal easier to make more 1E games since the foundation has already been made. Making a 2E game would mean programming in all new 2E stuff.

 

[Rhianni32]

I can understand them wanting to reuse the existing game engine for quick sales but I do agree.

I only played PF1 maybe 3 sessions. I'm currently running a PF2 campaign and then went to play kingmaker. It was a bit rough to get into. It heavily assumed you played PF1 and knew what you were doing with character creation. ultimately I set it aside.

 

[Morrus]

It's selling. It's made $1.2M and the KS isn't over yet. I guess that makes it wise by definition.

I would personally prefer it were PF2 though. I've moved on from PF1!

 

[CapnZapp]

I guess that makes it wise by definition.

I wasn't questioning the decisions of the video game developer.

 

[Bravesteel25]

I think it makes sense from a development perspective as you already have a lot done due to the first game, but I am surprised that Paizo is allowing a licensee to use the previous edition.

 

[gss000]

It's selling. It's made $1.2M and the KS isn't over yet. I guess that makes it wise by definition.

I would personally prefer it were PF2 though. I've moved on from PF1!

I wouldn't consider it as selling yet. It's great for Paizo, don't get me wrong, but the KS is paying for development, not sales. I assume all of this money, or most of it, will go to pay development costs. My fear with all of these very successful KS campaigns is they haven't accurately priced the cost of all the stretch goals.

I agree that it would probably be better to focus on PF2. I want game players to go buy current books, which is less likely if they highlight PF1 in the game. Silver lining is this shows great interest in the game when it comes out.

 

[Derren]

I wouldn't consider it as selling yet. It's great for Paizo, don't get me wrong, but the KS is paying for development, not sales. I assume all of this money, or most of it, will go to pay development costs. My fear with all of these very successful KS campaigns is they haven't accurately priced the cost of all the stretch goals.

I agree that it would probably be better to focus on PF2. I want game players to go buy current books, which is less likely if they highlight PF1 in the game. Silver lining is this shows great interest in the game when it comes out.

Don't forget that this is not their first Kickstarter, so I doubt that they will make massive mistakes again.
Also interestingly, Wrath now has a lot more people pledging than Kingmaker had. So they definately did something right, even with all the bugs Kingmaker had when released.

About PF2, don't forget that Owlcat is not owned by Paizo. They can't tell them to switch to PF2. Probably they licensed PF1 for a specific time or certain number of games and Owlcat takes advantage of it. And as switching now to PF2 would be quite costly the choice it either to do another PF1 game or no PF game at all.

And with the attention the Pathfinder brand gets Paizo would be stupid not to endorse another PF game, even a outdated one. Especially now as the BG3 reveal was rather lackluster and many people feel Wrath is the better BG sequel than BG3.

 

[Jharet]

There aren't Mythic rules for PF2 for one thing, so creating a game with that ruleset would mean having to create it from scratch. PF2 is still being developed. How are game designers supposed to program a game using a tabletop RPG that isn't complete?

You'll most likely get your PF2 video game wish with whatever comes next.

 

[MaskedGuy]

I think lot of people forget that Paizo is one of those middle size firms between being an actual corporation and between being bunch of amateurs(since sense of doing their job for love of it) and not in same category as Wizards of the Coast and other big firms yet.

By which I mean is that they didn't approve companies to do Pathfinder games just to expand the brand, they did it because genuinely lot of the devs think someone making CRPGs based on their game is cool and they want themselves to play them

(I'm sure someone is skeptical of that, but from what I've seen its pretty accurate and its part of why I can't imagine Wizards of the Coast ever allowing video company to do game on older editions or settings not currently being promoted or supported... Since to Wizards of the Coast games are partially expanding branch and partially commercials for their other products in transmedia franchise they are trying to build)