Did WotC underestimate the Paizo effect on 4E?

[Imaro]

I make no claims on what others can and cannot consider "success". You make your own determination. However, I wouldn't fault someone for feeling that until Paizo cuts it chops on something entirely new, their own, then they aren't quite there yet.

I'd make an analogy to an author who writes only "shared world" stories, or only works with public domain worlds. They may be good writers, but until they do something uniquely their own, they're still not quite top-notch.

Just not seeing how this is a requirement for success? They have to make a system, just to make a system, regardless of whether it is necessary or needed in order to be considered successful by some? IMO, making the decision on whether this is necessary or not is the real key to success... perhaps WotC couldn't make the OGL work for them... but if Paizo can, I think that speaks volumes about their success.

As far as making something that is their own... they do that with every adventure path they put out.

I also disagree with the shared world analogy, if anything Paizo is using the foundation of the OGL and definitely building their own world, rules, adventures, etc. around it.

I think, eventually, they'll need to acknowledge and jump it, or stumble and never be a major player in the race again. Their starting situation was unique, but from this point on they are subject to the same market forces as every other game publisher out there.

Eventually, the market will be saturated with Pathfinder materials. That's the reality of the niche. They will not be able to sit on 3e's laurels forever if they want to maintain their market position and size as a company.

Are they really sitting on 3e's laurels. Again, I would say it takes more business savy to come up with the products and process to revitalize a system that the largest rpg company in the biz has procalimed "dead" and is actively competing against... than you are giving them credit for.

 

[Reynard]

Eventually, the market will be saturated with Pathfinder materials.

Only insofar as the market gets saturated for any game's materials. Hence, new editions. It's reasonable to assume that somewhere down the line there will be a second edition of Pathfinder, and the core-adventure-supplement cycle will begin anew. Hopefully, it will be a long time from now 9as long as it needs to be, anyway) and it will preserve the same level of quality Paizo has shown so far.

 

[ggroy]

Only insofar as the market gets saturated for any game's materials. Hence, new editions. It's reasonable to assume that somewhere down the line there will be a second edition of Pathfinder, and the core-adventure-supplement cycle will begin anew. Hopefully, it will be a long time from now 9as long as it needs to be, anyway) and it will preserve the same level of quality Paizo has shown so far.

Probably very few tabletop rpg companies can get away with saturating the market like how WotC did it during the 3.5E D&D era (ie. tons of Eberron, Forgotten Realms, Races of *, Complete *, environments, different monster types, etc ... hardcover books).

We'll see how long Pathfinder can maintain the treadmill, until even the hardcore Pathinder completionists get exhausted too and start to jump off.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

For all the blunders 4e made with marketing, the Saving Throw comment there is not one of them. Nobody likes save or dies. WotC doesn't need to comment that humans need oxygen anymore then they need to claim "Well our customers claimed people don't like saving throw kills." It's a fact of life.

If you see an issue in that bit of marketing, you're going out of your way to find problems. Fact is, Paizo also axed off saving throws. So hey, clearly it's not a WotC only problem. And yet only one of those groups is under fire for it...

 

[JoeGKushner]

Paizo seems to have sales, yes. And a goodly sized staff, and some kinds of experience.

There's one thing Paizo hasn't done yet that many folks might consider required to cement their position: create their own game from the ground up, and have it sell well.

WotC, White Wolf, Steve Jackson Games, and some others - all these folks have demonstrated the ability to build their own and refresh, keeping themselves in a market that saturates fairly quickly. That's Paizo's next real hurdle.

But when you talk Steve Jackson Games and white Wolf, it ain't RPGs. Take a look at White Wolf's Gen Con Booth this year. Look at SJG rpg product release for the last few years. It's Munckin. Neither is a bad thing mind you but those companies are hardly models of role playing game companies that I'd want to hold up and say, "I want Paizo to be more like this." I like the actual printing and reading of RPG material.

 

[Reynard]

Nobody likes save or dies.

I do. I also like energy drain that sucks levels. Both of those things add something to the game that cannot be replaced by simple "save or suck" or "you'll get better" mechanics.

So, what's that mean, other than you're painting with a broad brush?

More to the point of the thread, you can't equate 4E and Pathfinder as you seem to be trying to do. There are some common design theories present, since both came from common stock, but the whole point of Pathfinder, the whole reason that it exists and is successful, is that it doesn't do what 4E is, which can be mostly simply stated as "throw the baby out with the bath water".

 

[Fifth Element]

I do. I also like energy drain that sucks levels. Both of those things add something to the game that cannot be replaced by simple "save or suck" or "you'll get better" mechanics.

So, what's that mean, other than you're painting with a broad brush?

Giving the Professor a charitable reading, which is generally a good idea on message boards, one assumes he did not mean literally nobody likes save-or-dies, just that a very small proportion of gamers does. WotC and Paizo both apparently agree with that assessment.

 

[czak]

Paizo seems to have sales, yes. And a goodly sized staff, and some kinds of experience.

There's one thing Paizo hasn't done yet that many folks might consider required to cement their position: create their own game from the ground up, and have it sell well.

WotC, White Wolf, Steve Jackson Games, and some others - all these folks have demonstrated the ability to build their own and refresh, keeping themselves in a market that saturates fairly quickly. That's Paizo's next real hurdle.

paizo.com - Paizo People: Lisa Stevens

Given that the founder and CEO was with white wolf for vampire, and with wotc for magic and 3.0 you could almost say that would be nothing new for the company. Just a matter of time eh.

 

[Votan]

I make no claims on what others can and cannot consider "success". You make your own determination. However, I wouldn't fault someone for feeling that until Paizo cuts it chops on something entirely new, their own, then they aren't quite there yet.

I'd make an analogy to an author who writes only "shared world" stories, or only works with public domain worlds. They may be good writers, but until they do something uniquely their own, they're still not quite top-notch.

I freely admit to having both a 4E game (online) and a Pathfinder game. As I continue to see new Pathfinder products I become increasingly impressed with the production values and the quality of writing. While I agree that "success" is an arbitrary criterion, many successful projects have begun with IP that was developed by another party.

For example, Chris Claremont clearly added a lot to the X-Men in his 17 year run even if he never really did launch a successful book that he developed.

Apple did a lot to take ideas first looked at by Xerox park and made some pretty amazing software.

In my opinion (admittedly a pure opinion), I think that you can start with another IP and end up putting your own stamp on it. I admit that it is a higher threshold but I could see Paizo reaching it by adding enough value to the d20 basis. That being said, D&D 3.5 was a pretty successful system so they are not setting themselves a low bar.

 

[jaerdaph]

Well, Paizo can add "Sweeping the 2010 ENnies" now to their list of successes.