What's stopping WOTC from going back to 3.5?

[prosfilaes]

B/c it's all anecdotal and it's all data collected from opt in options.

Those are contradictory. In any case, so what? Social scientists don't throw up their hands at answering a question even if they know they'll have to use opt-in interviews and their subjects may have reason to lie. At that point you accumulate information, and try and figure out what you know and what you don't know, and try and suss out inconsistencies and biases.

And part of the dynamic here is that Pathfinder fans tend to find the data and 4e fans tend to dismiss it, because in the absence of evidence, people assume (implicitly or sometimes explicitly) that D&D is the best selling game.

 

[ANewPosterAppears]

Those are contradictory. In any case, so what? Social scientists don't throw up their hands at answering a question even if they know they'll have to use opt-in interviews and their subjects may have reason to lie. At that point you accumulate information, and try and figure out what you know and what you don't know, and try and suss out inconsistencies and biases.

And part of the dynamic here is that Pathfinder fans tend to find the data and 4e fans tend to dismiss it, because in the absence of evidence, people assume (implicitly or sometimes explicitly) that D&D is the best selling game.

As someone who is a social scientist, please do not conflate my work with this. Thank you!

Incidentally, I believe the dynamic is that Pathfinder fans either make up or extrapolate "data" - note sarcasm quotes - from unofficial sources, bend it to fit their narrative, and when 4e fans dismiss the "data" - note again sarcasm quotes - Pathfinder fans get upset that people aren't buying into their neverending claims that 4e's death is just months away guys, any day now WotC will throw in the towel and our game will prove the superior one!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

As someone who is a social scientist, please do not conflate my work with this. Thank you!

Incidentally, I believe the dynamic is that Pathfinder fans either make up or extrapolate "data" - note sarcasm quotes - from unofficial sources, bend it to fit their narrative, and when 4e fans dismiss the "data" - note again sarcasm quotes - Pathfinder fans get upset that people aren't buying into their neverending claims that 4e's death is just months away guys, any day now WotC will throw in the towel and our game will prove the superior one!

I find it amusing that people who don't financially profit from either game decide to divide themselves up into teams and get emotionally invested about the outcome. What next, people arguing about whether "heads" or "tails" is inherently superior?

Play the game you want to play and let the rest of the world do their thing; you're not diminished by their choice.

 

[Pentius]

I find it amusing that people who don't financially profit from either game decide to divide themselves up into teams and get emotionally invested about the outcome. What next, people arguing about whether "heads" or "tails" is inherently superior?

Play the game you want to play and let the rest of the world do their thing; you're not diminished by their choice.

Tails is better, Whizzy. It just is, there's no arguing it. My american quarters have an eagle on the tails side, it's way better than some dead guy's head. It's not even an accurate portrait, we all know he's a skeleton by now.

 

[Grydan]

Tails is better, Whizzy. It just is, there's no arguing it. My american quarters have an eagle on the tails side, it's way better than some dead guy's head. It's not even an accurate portrait, we all know he's a skeleton by now.

Canadian quarters (well, the standard ones) have no tails. It's heads (the Queen) or heads (a caribou).

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I am stopping them.

 

[prosfilaes]

ANewPosterAppears, whose sockpuppet are you?

Play the game you want to play and let the rest of the world do their thing; you're not diminished by their choice.

The problem is, we are. If Pathfinder were the far and away winner, I'd probably be playing Pathfinder on a weekly basis. If D&D 4 were the far and away winner, I'd probably be playing D&D 4. As it is, I'm playing D&D 3.5. If D&D 4 manages to take most of the D&D market share, my Pathfinder books will lose most of their value, and I'll probably end up playing D&D 4. If Pathfinder manages to take most of the D&D market share, I might be able to find a Pathfinder game with less travel time. So, yeah, there are consequences to me as to what the world plays.

 

[gamerprinter]

Pathfinder fans get upset that people aren't buying into their neverending claims that 4e's death is just months away guys, any day now WotC will throw in the towel and our game will prove the superior one!

Certainly some PF fans might have this point of view, but some of us realize that a better selling quarterly cycle while having meaning for the game in question isn't necessarily a death movement for the other editions. A momentary fluxuation in the market.

There is no superior game, there are only games that some prefer and others do not. No matter what share of the market any given edition holds, somebody is enjoying it and that's all that matters.

I'm a PF fan and am glad when ICv2 shows PF doing better than competitors in a given quarter - no matter how incomplete that data is compared to unknown data that is not being released through other sources. I'm glad for the successes, but in no way should that equate to PF wins, 4e loses.

Not all PF fans are whiners and death-tellers. I'd go so far as saying most PF gamers aren't this way - but then there's a whole other set of numbers nobody can prove or disprove, so that would just anecdotal at best.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Canadian quarters (well, the standard ones) have no tails. It's heads (the Queen) or heads (a caribou).

I like the early nickname for the Canadian 2 dollar coin: the "Moonie." It was called that because it had the Queen on the front and "a Bear behind." (IOW, there was a bear on the reverse.)

Somebody felt disrespectful!

 

[Desdichado]

So I said they were anecdotal observations in my original post, but do they ring true for others reading this? I don't have much data but it's really rare to hear people claim 4E has more momentum than 3.5 in their community. Do you feel more gamers you know are teaching their siblings, nephews, and friends 4E than 3.5? Are they recommending new players get 4E and go out and buy the books?

My group still plays 3.5, but I strongly believe--but cannot prove, of course--that we are a marginal niche exception. Most other D&D players are either playing 4e or Pathfinder, with a small group into retro-clones.