Pathfinder 2E Release Day Second Edition Amazon Sales Rank

[Mistwell]

Which is assuming that 5E and Pathfinder are closely analogous here. I think the rest of this thread makes it clear they are not. Adding in the fact that game stores are closed, coming to conclusions about the sales of Paizo through one distributor seems unreliable at best.

First, you are misunderstanding my claim. I did not make a conclusion about Paizo sales overall. I made a conclusion that Diamond appears to not be as meaningfully large distributor for them as many of us thought. That's not a conclusion about their sales.

Second, you are saying the two most popular RPGs, both based on the same d20 system at it's heart and both about dungeons and dragons, are not closely analogous despite being closely analogous for decades and for years and years as one went up the other also went up on Amazon and other charts like ICv2? That does not seem like a well supported claim.

The fact that gaming stores are closed is the same fact that Diamond stopped distributing. That's where Diamond distributes. They don't distribute to the big box stores like Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Walmart, Target, etc., they're distributing to the small comic and game shops.

I think from all of this we can safely assume Diamond was not as important a distribution channel for Paizo as we previously thought. It has to be Amazon and their own website/subscriber base that is the overwhelming bulk of their sales. That's not a conclusion about how good their sales are doing - it's a conclusion about how they distribute.

 

[Hussar]

I'll tell you what, since you have chosen to fixate on this isolated quote from me based on 10+ year old memories. I'll concede that I was wrong here and I'll just assume you've conceded all the points you are ignoring.

The point I was trying to make, before getting sidetracked into pop culture references, is that there is really very little evidence as to how well Pathfinder ever actually did. I mean, the best it could possibly be is about 13 million dollars per year. That was the total of the market once WotC stopped publishing any new RPG books. Now, that's the upper limit, it cannot realistically be any higher than that. And really, is probably a lot lower. Again, I ballparked it at about 5 million/year.

So, if the current market is 60 million/year, then so long as being in 2nd place means you have 10% of the market share, then you're doing better than Pathfinder 1 ever did. At 5%, you're probably about par really. Thing is, there's no real metrics out there to gauge market share. All we know is place, not actual percentages.

So, there's no real way of knowing. There's no real way of knowing how well Pathfinder 1 actually did - all we know is it did very well relative to 4e. Ok, fair enough. But, since we don't actually know how well 4e did, that doesn't really mean anything.

With all that said, all we can really say is that Pathfinder 2 seems to be trucking along. It's not taking the world by storm, but, it's still around and it seems to be getting played - things like the Roll 20 and Fantasy Grounds metrics show that.

Beyond that, it's all goats entrails and voodoo math.

 

[Mistwell]

Here is another possible reason why their sales on Amazon have dropped:

"Paizo, the company publishing pathfinder just announced that all employees would be either working from home or on a paid furlough until the crisis passes.

All book sales have stopped, and the warehouses are shut down. They have announced a sale on virtually every paizo PDF during the crisis as well. [Edit - It's 25% off]

If you've loved kingmaker and you're not quite sure what to do in these quarantine days, why not try the tabletop if you haven't ?

You can pick up an adventure path just like Kingmaker and play it online on something like fantasy grounds or roll20. Build your own barony, except your friends will be the advisors, and probably conspiring while your back is turned !

Thwart the plans of doom cultists, slay an eons-old patient evil or just high-five Cthulhu, everything is possible!"

 

[BryonD]

The point I was trying to make, before getting sidetracked into pop culture references, is that there is really very little evidence as to how well Pathfinder ever actually did. I mean, the best it could possibly be is about 13 million dollars per year. That was the total of the market once WotC stopped publishing any new RPG books. Now, that's the upper limit, it cannot realistically be any higher than that. And really, is probably a lot lower. Again, I ballparked it at about 5 million/year.

So, if the current market is 60 million/year, then so long as being in 2nd place means you have 10% of the market share, then you're doing better than Pathfinder 1 ever did. At 5%, you're probably about par really. Thing is, there's no real metrics out there to gauge market share. All we know is place, not actual percentages.

So, there's no real way of knowing. There's no real way of knowing how well Pathfinder 1 actually did - all we know is it did very well relative to 4e. Ok, fair enough. But, since we don't actually know how well 4e did, that doesn't really mean anything.

With all that said, all we can really say is that Pathfinder 2 seems to be trucking along. It's not taking the world by storm, but, it's still around and it seems to be getting played - things like the Roll 20 and Fantasy Grounds metrics show that.

Beyond that, it's all goats entrails and voodoo math.

OK so you go on about lack of knowledge and then just make up $5 million a year based on nothing whatsoever. Seems an odd logic path to star with.
We all agree that 4E cratered. There is no evidence that the TTRPG industry shrunk in that time, so your assumption that PF didn't pick up the lion's share of that is nothing more than sour grapes.

But then you are ignoring key pieces relevant to what we know right now.
I don't think that anyone is disputing that PF was way down from its peak.
And then there is a the point I've brought up a few times and you have yet to address: we don't even have any evidence that PF2E is replacing the now way past its prime PF in terms of who is really playing it. Yes, it sold gangbusters when it was released. And the only indications we have subsequent to that are that the sales are trending down. We can't quantify it, but the qualitative "down" seems quite self evident.

And we see nothing close to widespread enthusiasm. The limited VTT data suggests that MORE people are playing PF than PF2E. We have second hand quotes that even Paizo is saying "just wait for people to end their old campaigns" (I don't claim this is from Paizo, but it was referenced upthread. And this is on the list of recycled 4E theories that didn't pan out).

4E sold great and then people didn't stick with it. Sales in the 6 months after release are far less important to gamers than "are people really playing it" Not nearly enough people were playing 4E and the inevitable result of that played out. We appear to be repeating.

And unless you can show that PF2E is being embraced as a game of choice substantially better than the way past its prime PF, then the more you sour grapes poo-poo on PF, the more you are also slamming the limited success PF2E is seeing.

 

[Jester David]

We DO know that the 2009 PF1 Core Rulebook had the largest print run of anything Paizo released and immediately sold out. And that the second larger print run also sold out within a year. The third print run, which was larger than both combined sold out after a couple years.
Each year had a new print run that was larger than the one before.
This continued until the 6th printing in 2013, which is still the current printing.

This suggests Pathfinder did grow after it's initial release and experienced increased sales in 2011 and 2012.

 

[Porridge]

Here is another possible reason why their sales on Amazon have dropped:

"Paizo, the company publishing pathfinder just announced that all employees would be either working from home or on a paid furlough until the crisis passes.

All book sales have stopped, and the warehouses are shut down. They have announced a sale on virtually every paizo PDF during the crisis as well. [Edit - It's 25% off]

If you've loved kingmaker and you're not quite sure what to do in these quarantine days, why not try the tabletop if you haven't ?

You can pick up an adventure path just like Kingmaker and play it online on something like fantasy grounds or roll20. Build your own barony, except your friends will be the advisors, and probably conspiring while your back is turned !

Thwart the plans of doom cultists, slay an eons-old patient evil or just high-five Cthulhu, everything is possible!"

Was that the announcement they made in March? Or is this an announcement that was just made?

After their March announcement, they stated in April that they were opening warehouse services again, using social distancing measures, and were back to fulfilling orders:

paizo.com - Forums

 

[Mistwell]

Was that the announcement they made in March? Or is this an announcement that was just made?

After their March announcement, they stated in April that they were opening warehouse services again, using social distancing measures, and were back to fulfilling orders:

paizo.com - Forums

I don't know but I do know the sale is still on. Which was my point - they may have pushed most distribution to direct from their website during this, due to the sale. Their shipping is also discounted by up to $10.

 

[BryonD]

We DO know that the 2009 PF1 Core Rulebook had the largest print run of anything Paizo released and immediately sold out. And that the second larger print run also sold out within a year. The third print run, which was larger than both combined sold out after a couple years.
Each year had a new print run that was larger than the one before.
This continued until the 6th printing in 2013, which is still the current printing.

This suggests Pathfinder did grow after it's initial release and experienced increased sales in 2011 and 2012.

IMO there is overwhelming evidence of how well PF did. I just don't think it is worth trying to get bogged down here trying to checkmate someone into admitting a fact that they firmly wish to deny.
The huge sales of PF are history and I don't think anyone is holding PF2E to that standard.
But PF was WAY down from its height. And it costs a lot of up front investment to create a new game.
So any debate based on trying to cast shade on the early success of PF and/or trying to say that PF sales circa 2017 are the standard of success are really self inflicted wounds from a pro-PF2E point of view.

Not being critical of you here. Again, I totally agree with your point. But this is why I think this is kinda a snipe hunt as far as PF2E is concerned.

 

[Jester David]

IMO there is overwhelming evidence of how well PF did. I just don't think it is worth trying to get bogged down here trying to checkmate someone into admitting a fact that they firmly wish to deny.
The huge sales of PF are history and I don't think anyone is holding PF2E to that standard.
But PF was WAY down from its height. And it costs a lot of up front investment to create a new game.
So any debate based on trying to cast shade on the early success of PF and/or trying to say that PF sales circa 2017 are the standard of success are really self inflicted wounds from a pro-PF2E point of view.

Not being critical of you here. Again, I totally agree with your point. But this is why I think this is kinda a snipe hunt as far as PF2E is concerned.

Just wanted to bring up that PF didn't just have a single huge spike at launch, and grew in popularity over time, and its best sales years were likely 2011 or 2012.
And it potentially pulled some fans from 4e during said growth, which had been questioned earlier.

It will be interesting to see what happens after PaizoCon at the end of the month, which has become a free international convention.
I can imagine a lot of people playing test games and testing out the system. It might win over a whole bunch of new fans.

 

[BryonD]

And it potentially pulled some fans from 4e during said growth, which had been questioned earlier.

I was in the questioning side, at least somewhat. My reasoning was that the games are just so different.
But, first, it would be silly to claim the number is zero, and I won't do that.

And, second, you do make me realize I'm probably too into the weeds here.
At the most casual of levels, it is completely true to say that 4E, PF, PF2E (and 5E etc if you want) are very much the same game fundamentally.
Tell a story. Try to do something. Roll D20, add something, compare to something. Repeat.
If you roll a 17, odds are you did good and if you rolled a 3, odds are you did not. So if you are a very casual player, the GM will play a much larger role in the "fun" than the game being played. (I'll 100% being a mechanics wonk and "WHY" you are adding this not that matters to me, but I'm an outlier. I'm sure I'm an outlier in ENWorld, and I'm sure I'm in much closer company on ENWorld than in gamers worldwide)

But there are probably more than a few mechanics agnostics who migrated from 4E to PF. And probably a fair number who simply followed their GM.

But even for someone who is completely mechanics agnostic, the feel of a game will emerge over tens or scores of sessions. (or less). That is why some games are more popular than others. I predicted 4E would drop off over time as the feel, the patterns emerged. It did. (No issue with people who love that feel, just nonjudgmental predicting the broader trend). We are already seeing that as much as there are people who really like PF2E, there are also those who get turned off, and a lot who just become "meh".

I wouldn't be surprised to see a nice Paizocon spike. But it would change the flow of the river.