Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wicht" data-source="post: 6170543" data-attributes="member: 221">And that's probably true. Snark from my original comment aside, it is very possible, if not probable, that Hasbro and WotC have unrealistic (or did have) expectations for the profitability of an RPG. Their model (and budget) for R&D, etc. never makes much sense to me; especially (not to harp) with the existence of the OGL, which should have made the possibility of cutting that particular office down in size a notch or two completely feasible. I'm also pretty sure they misread the market when they decided adventures were a losing proposition and shuffled that particular chore off to 3pp. I think Paizo's folks (ie. Lisa, Eric, et.al) better understand the actual industry and market and plan accordingly. Which is also why Paizo is eating WotC's lunch in this particular segment of the gaming market. Paizo is also doing a better job, from all that I can tell, of figuring out what works and licensing their brand. D&D still has more name brand recognition in the world at large, but the Pathfinder Card game sold out at Gen-con in one day and there were still some people wanting it afterwards.Going back to the original question of the OP, I think it perfectly fair to critique the model that WotC has been pursuing since about 3.25 and analyze where they went wrong. Hopefully they can right their ship because I am a firm believer that competition is good for all involved and Paizo can use the competition. Though I still think WotC should go back to the OGL and figure out how to use it, rather than just writing it off as a bad decision (which it did not have to be).</blockquote>

Verification