Pathfinder 2E Release Day Second Edition Amazon Sales Rank

[BryonD]

nevermind

 

[BryonD]

By the way, thank you for posting this. It's great to get some quantitative data (not merely ranking data) to sink one's teeth into.

(Where did you get this, by the way? Do you have access to more than a year of data? If you did, one could start making educated guesses about all sorts of things, like what the typical spike/drop-off rates for new TTRPGs are, and what edition change conversion rates tend to look like.)

Actually, this came from ENWorld. Just go to the news page and search for fantasy grounds.

As to the analysis, I agree it is pretty noisy. It is hard to say a lot about what is going on.
To me the interesting point are:

1. PF2E bumped in August and then immediately fell off. (This tracks with the otherwise unrelated conversation in this thread)
2. PF2E was back below PF by the 3rd month and stayed there for 6 months running now.
3. The pandemic bump showed a larger increase for PF than PF2E

And a couple points on that. It would be easy for me to go tribal and proclaim "PF is kicking PF2Es butt!! Ha Ha". That is not what I'm thinking or saying. I do not think that PF is doing particularly well. As is well established, it had fallen from it's peak and there is no doubt that PF2E didn't help. (Though simply making PF an unsupported game may have more to do with it than shuffling of players). So PF isn't kicking anything's butt. It is just that PF2E appears to be even weaker.

Second, there is enough variability in the data here that this chart can be over-interpreted. But six data points in a row is not considered random chance from a quality control point of view. And, the real kicker is, PF2E should (imo) be CRUSHING PF.

There is no question that PF2E is SELLING better. It is new. It has brand recognition. And everybody pretty much already owns PF stuff. (Obligatory massive kudos to 5E sustained sales here) But buying a game is one thing. Deciding it is the game of choice is another. I'm sure you could fill a nice convention with PF2E fans and they could echo chamber each other into being convinced that everybody thinks it hung the moon. But that doesn't change the indication that the overall market view is telling. This chart aligns with that bigger picture.

 

[BryonD]

Plus, the fact that 4e was selling better than Pathfinder for most of the run means that they weren't pulling that many players.

Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present

This is a compilation of the [URL='http://www.icv2.com']icv2.com[/URL] retailer surveys of Top Five Roleplaying Games. They are generally compiled quarterly (with some exceptions). ICv2 notes that "the chart [are] based on interviews with retailers, distributors, and manufacturers." Also see...

www.enworld.org

Q3 2008 - 4E Released
Q3 2009 - PF Released
Q3 2010 - PF and D&D tie for first (1 year)
Q2 2011 - PF#1 (ignore the tie and give 4E a 1.75 year run beating PF head to head)
Q4 2014 - 5E released (3.5 years later, all PF #1)
Q1 2015 - 5E #1 and never looks back

I don't think there were a lot of 4E fans switching to PF, if that is all you are saying.
But that pretty much because a lot of the fanbase simply didn't stick around in 4E to be pulled away from...
Remember, there was the whole "we don't need them" fiasco. 4E embraced that they were purging fans from the get go. And the people who were most strongly inclined to love 4E were by and large the least likely to want to play PF.

But if you look at the path of the gamer marketshare tracking from before 4E was announced, through all of 4E and PF and up until 5E was announced you will get a very different image than you will get if you just look for 4E players converting to PF.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, I agree, there were not a lot of 4e fans switching to PF. And, as you pointed out in your quotes, it was very late in 4e's cycle. By the time Pathfinder beats 4e, 4e had released pretty much all of its major releases. From 2012 to 2015, there's very, very little released for 4e. My point being that Pathfinder didn't grow the market at all. It basically yoinked a share of the market and then stayed there.

But, now, the market is so much larger than it was in 2013/2014 that anyone else other than WotC is now more or less a rounding error. (ok, it's not that bad, but, you get my point.) @BryonD, you mentioned Pathfinder getting media attention. Really? I've never once seen a mention of Pathfinder beyond directly RPG related sites. I just happened to watch an episode of Legends of Tomorrow and they are playing 5e D&D.

THAT'S what media attention looks like. Outside of gamers, no one has ever heard of Pathfinder.

 

[teitan]

The only mention I ever saw of Pathfinder was a Kurt Busiek marvel comic. Can’t remember the title but the kids were talking about playing Pathfinder instead of D&D. That’s about it.

 

[Parmandur]

I read an article once about how prisoners were playing Pathfinder, because they could get around restrictions on playing Dungeons & Dragons by shifting brands. That's about it, outside of forums and personal gamer friend circles.

Even among people I know who played PF, it was always as basically brand-generic Dungeons & Dragons, with fresh support for their 3.x game.

 

[teitan]

I read an article once about how prisoners were playing Pathfinder, because they could get around restrictions on playing Dungeons & Dragons by shifting brands. That's about it, outside of forums and personal gamer friend circles.

Even among people I know who played PF, it was always as basically brand-generic Dungeons & Dragons, with fresh support for their 3.x game.

I always kind of felt like all the crowing about PF was more 3.5 holdovers going hahaha 3.x beat that monstrosity called 4e than a true fracturing of the market. I think the OSR community did more to make WOTC reverse gears than Pathfinder did. That’s not to belittle PF by any means. Vampire was in the same spot through the 90s and early 00s. I think what Vampire did though was much bigger than what PF accomplished. Vampire was new and brought in new people, outside of the game. PF wallowed in its legacy as a continuation of 3.5 but was no less creative in its setting materials. A truly remarkable accomplishment.

 

[BryonD]

Yeah, I agree, there were not a lot of 4e fans switching to PF

Yeah, the point being that there were so many fans of D&D that didn't carry the tag of "4E fans" that there was more than plenty of room for PF to take over.
Keep in mind that there were plenty of 3X fans were dissatisfied with 4E but had been away from 3X for a couple years by the time PF came around and simply didn't want to resume that system either. So 4E lost so many fans that you could take a subset of that departure and still come out ahead of what was left.

By the time Pathfinder beats 4e, 4e had released pretty much all of its major releases.

That's not at all accurate. But whatever. It is ancient history.
They tied within a year, and though 4E took back #1, they were right there neck and neck. The 800 lb gorilla suddenly had a twin almost right away and THEN then twin got bigger. (or at least was the bigger of the two)
I certainly agree that 4E cratered all by itself and didn't need any help from Pathfinder.
But that "neck and neck" point came within a year. 4E fans were still in denial at that point. (A situation repeating itself right now) But nobody playing PF (or anything other than 4E really) was the least bit surprised in 2010. And we were saying it was coming as early as 2009.

My point being that Pathfinder didn't grow the market at all. It basically yoinked a share of the market and then stayed there.

Well, yeah. That isn't what you said before though. Your exact words were "the fact that 4e was selling better than Pathfinder for most of the run ". That is what I replied to.

I completely agree with PF didn't grow the market.. This is EXACTLY what I kept repeating back then. 4E was supposed to grow the market and I kept saying that the market pretty much would not grow.
I've noted several times that 5E has changed that paradigm. And I'm really impressed by that.
But in the Pre-5E days I repeatedly talked about the only market growth would be roughly the same percentage of a growing overall population. It is nice to see you've come around to seeing that was true at the time.

@BryonD, you mentioned Pathfinder getting media attention. Really? I've never once seen a mention of Pathfinder beyond directly RPG related sites.
THAT'S what media attention looks like. Outside of gamers, no one has ever heard of Pathfinder.

Your lack of memory of it is noted. Paizo had fun noted all the times that Pathfinder was getting called out on TV and comics etc.

 

[BryonD]

I always kind of felt like all the crowing about PF was more 3.5 holdovers going hahaha 3.x beat that monstrosity called 4e

ah yes, and we get back to the Pathfinder fans were just bad people more interested in being mean to 4E than playing a game they like cliche.

than a true fracturing of the market. I think the OSR community did more to make WOTC reverse gears than Pathfinder did.

Source? Data to back this up? Anything?
Again, I will completely agree that 4E lost fans all by itself and PF was there to pick up the pieces.

But you are the guy who just claimed that crushing Call of Chthulu is evidence of how well PF2E is doing. And now you are saying that OSR games were a bigger deal than PF at its peak was? It is absurdity.

That’s not to belittle PF by any means. Vampire was in the same spot through the 90s and early 00s. I think what Vampire did though was much bigger than what PF accomplished. Vampire was new and brought in new people, outside of the game.

Depending on how you look at the data, VtM may or may not have grabbed ONE quarter. I'll agree that it was neck and neck, as I've referenced for early 4E just above. So good for them. But that was in the "D&D" is dying days of 2E. At least PF kept people playing a D&D style game.

There is some similarity. But you seem to be squinting to get the view you are comfortable with.

PF wallowed in its legacy as a continuation of 3.5

Well, yes. I love 3.5. I think Paizo did quite an admirable job of maintaining it. But certainly they built success on 3.5. They didn't build the game itself. And people have slammed them on that point since Day 1.
And it is a shame that it appears their chance to build a legacy of their own has been squandered.

 

[Jaeger]

...They didn't build the game itself. And people have slammed them on that point since Day 1.
And it is a shame that it appears their chance to build a legacy of their own has been squandered.

I'm curious, as to what direction system-wise you feel that they should have gone for PF2?

Personally I think that unless they took a big risk and offered something markedly different with what they did d20 system-wise, that they would pretty much be in the same boat that they are in now.

IMHO I think that we'll only see the real fallout for Pazio of PF2 not really catching on 3-5 years down the line. They are already branching out with some 5e material, and in time that may become more of their business than their PF house brand.

At least PF kept people playing a D&D style game.

This is more my own imperfect thoughts than directed at anyone in particular:

The d20 OGL was the most brilliant move WOTC ever made.

Yeah 4e made people question it a bit with the success of PF. But with out that misstep 5e would probably be a different game.

PF stepped into a good place during 4e because not only had WOTC screwed up with 4e, but largely the non d20 alternatives ability to attract D&D players looking for something different had been long gone from the landscape. With no viable contender in sight to this day.

I take the inability of PF2 to grab any kind of increase in market share from 5e to be a notable data point for my theory that 5e's raging success at attracting new players does not translate into success for the rest of the RPG hobby or "market".

Because IMHO there is no single RPG market. There is the market for D&D. Then there is a epically smaller RPG market for everyone else. Because now even in the "everyone else" category, d20/D&D based systems still compete with other systems for gamers attention.

The 5e explosion is made up of people who want to play 5e. Period.

At Best, the rest of the hobby gets a trickle of new blood from the WOTC stone.