Roll20 publishes Game Percentages... Pathfinder at 25%

[Cherno]

Via Tabletop Gaming News.
Source

THE ORR GROUP INDUSTRY REPORT is an overview of tabletop gaming ruleset popularity
based on usage data from Roll20 Virtual Tabletop.
Based on a sample size of approximately 25,000 games and 15,000 players.
Notes on how information is gathered:

? “Games” = % of games where the Game Master said “this is what we’re playing.”
? “Players” = % of players who were active in the quarter and filled in the “this is what I
enjoy playing” field on their profile.
? Percentages will total more than 100% because each player/game can have more than
one game type designated. This is extremely common for players and rare for the
games.
? This only takes into account games/players which were active (e.g. game was played,
player played at least one game) during the 3rd Quarter of 2014.
? This is meant to be a representative sample, as it only takes into account games and
players who filled out relevant fields on their game page/profile. There was significantly
more than 25k games and 15k players who played in this quarter, but many do not fill out
these fields.
? The list of available games to select were curated by Roll20’s staff based on previous
freeform
survey results, and will be changing in the future.​

​

 

[Morrus]

I just came here to post this!

Q3 is July-September 2014.

I don't think the Player% column is of much use. It just looks at what active players have indicated in their profile they like playing, and presumably most of those are set when they create their account and rarely get changed. I could be wrong, but I know I don't even edit my Facebook profile much, let alone more niche ones. I probably last edited that a couple of years ago, save for the profile picture.

The Game% column is much more interesting. So this is 25K games, where the GM stated what game was being played. That's a large sample. I'm not surprised that Pathfinder games are strong, but the 3.5 entry surprises me a little. It'll be interesting to see if 5E rises up the chart over the next couple of quarters.

One stat that would really help is how long each game has been going on. Are we looking at long-term games which started two years ago and aren't likely to change any time soon? Are we looking at newly started games (which is the stat I would personally find more interesting)?

It'd also be interesting to compare that list to EN World's own list of games being talked about across the web. I wonder how much correlation there is. I would hazard a guess that - in general - talking about stuff has a lead on playing it, and so one list might correlate to the other historically by a quarter or so? No idea!
The

 

[Cherno]

I'm a little bit surpirised that PF has that muhc of an edge compared to the other games. It really drives home the point that WotC lost their first place in the fantasy RPG scene and Pazio managed to get on top by a large margin.

 

[Umbran]

It really drives home the point that WotC lost their first place in the fantasy RPG scene and Pazio managed to get on top by a large margin.

Eh. Or it means that players of WotC's games don't do it on that platform. I am not sure taking *one* software tool as a representative sample of the gaming community as a whole is a wise approach.

 

[Cherno]

Eh. Or it means that players of WotC's games don't do it on that platform. I am not sure taking *one* software tool as a representative sample of the gaming community as a whole is a wise approach.

You are right. I still think it's a reasonably indicator, considering that Roll20 is the biggest VTT out there by far (or is it?) and assuming that all RPG players from all different games have the same percentage of VTT usage

One could also theorize that since Pathfinder is considered a fairly popular RPG, it would be played _less_ via VTT since it's easier to find local people playing it.

 

[Umbran]

...and assuming that all RPG players from all different games have the same percentage of VTT usage

Yeah, that's the sticker, right there.

One could also theorize that since Pathfinder is considered a fairly popular RPG, it would be played _less_ via VTT since it's easier to find local people playing it.

Yes, so now we are theorizing on top of data we should at least question?

There is this *huge* drive to determine who is "on top". As consumers, that is not a primary issue. Why do we care who is on top? We care about products, and players, and support directly. If we have what we want in those areas, who is #1 is a non-issue.

WotC and Paizo are not sports teams. The stats don't matter.

 

[prosfilaes]

WotC and Paizo are not sports teams. The stats don't matter.

Why do sports teams' stats matter? Seriously. There is at least as much justification for following your favorite game as there is for following a sports team,

 

[BigVanVader]

I don't see why there's such competition in the tabletop world. It's like when comic fans rage between Marvel and DC, when the average non-nerd off the street isn't likely to care too much.

Except when it comes to Batman, because everybody loves Batman.

 

[Morrus]

Why do sports teams' stats matter? Seriously. There is at least as much justification for following your favorite game as there is for following a sports team,

It feels to me like a more modern phenomenon that sports team level brand loyalty has spread to consumer products, but it's probably not.

The odd brand loyalty that mobile phone manufacturers and game publishers and comic-book readers and social networks manage to instil in their customers (Apple vs. Android; D&D vs. Pathfinder; and DC vs. Marvel - hell, folks even defend poor, defenseless little Google against Facebook, ferchrissake!) and the fervent desire to "prove" that one's adopted club is the top dog - and even spend large quantities of time engaging in negative campaigning against your perceived "rival" for free on behalf of your chosen brand - is something companies seem to have managed to achieve.

I don't know how recent it is; I suspect it's an old thing which has just become really prevalent in the face of social media.

Just today I've seen Android users attacking Apple, and Marvel customers attacking DC. It's wonderful for the companies, I guess (well, I suppose it happens in both directions, so it's probably a wash).

Charts like these always end up with folks finding ways to explain why it's flawed because their particular brand loyalty isn't on the top of the list, no matter what it says. Often with accusations of various sorts - the word "agenda" is a favourite.

I don't think that's ever going to change. It's validation of one's choices, I suppose. The ICv2 chart results in the exact same thread every single quarter where folks lecture each other on the nature of the chart, how it's anecdotal, how it doesn't include this or that or the other, all without fail - you can literally write the entire thread in advance. EN World's hot games chart makes some people in some places really angry, and I've been attacked over it.

It's human nature, I suppose. You invest time into a social network, or money in a mobile phone, and you don't want to feel you made the "wrong" choice. Therefore everybody who didn't make the same choice you made has made the wrong choice.

 

[darjr]

It's also important because some of us follow the industry and are just plain curious about it. Also some of us publish for these games or would like to. And some are on the edge about what to buy and are looking for support to make a decision. I just whish there wasn't so much anger over the whole issue.

As for the numbers it is promising to see 5e in the top three by that timeframe. Pathfinder and 3.5 are good games with a big player base.