Did WotC underestimate the Paizo effect on 4E?

[ShinHakkaider]

I think that WOTC and 4E are doing their thing over here and Paizo and Pathfinder are doing their thing over there.

I think that crossover (and I mean players) between the two are few and far between and that's fine too.

Even if WOTC lost 30% (really unlikely) of the 4E players that it had at the beginning of the launch they'd STILL be the number one RPG because of brand name recognition. There are plenty of people who play the game who dont post on message boards. they just go about their business and play the game

Paizo has the fans that it has because of they care about crafting backgrounds and stories as well as superior production values. They make a GREAT looking product very much on par with WOTC (and sometimes surpassing them). They are also a haven for a lot of people who didnt like 4E for whatever reason. So as long as I have a player base (which was one of my fears when 4E came out and I realized the it wasn't a game that I was interested in running or playing) I don't care about 4E. I dont mean that in a negative way, it's just that it doesn't impact me in the slightest. Paizo makes a product that I want, WOTC does not. I was a customer of WOTC for 8 years straight. I have enough WOTC 3.0 & 3.5 books to choke a donkey. Now I am not their customer. Paizo gets most if not all of my money these days.

 

[pawsplay]

I think that crossover (and I mean players) between the two are few and far between and that's fine too.

Not sure about that. I remember polls here have suggested a fair amount of crossover, and I have seen little Pf or 4e in used book stores.

 

[bouncyhead]

Speaking from my own experience, I think the whole 'Paizo stole customers from WotC' idea is far more nuanced and malraux is about right.

Our group were eager 4E switchers - we actually competed to see who would get hold of the core books first. So WotC got (and kept) their 4E cash from us - call it 7 sets of 3 core boxed sets at c. £50 each.

We all dived in to the rules and came up a little underwhelmed but kicked off with KotS, played through, had a think and decided we would pass. It's a taste thing. A perfectly good game and all of that. I absolutely understand the thinking behind the re-worked spine of the game, but the end result was not for us.


Because of RL issues we don't play as much as we should - 4E had actually been the shiny to get us playing again - and we kind of lapsed back into semi-retirement.

To get things ticking over again I thought I'd follow up something I'd heard about Paizo adventure paths - I knew virtually nothing about them at this point - and liked the look of Rise of the Runelords - from there I found out about the PF Beta. Downloaded, sought out a print copy and haven't looked back. We all bought the Core Rules, a couple of us have the Bestiary and I have just bought a Game Mastery Guide.


So PF didn't switch us from 4E, or 'steal' us from WotC. We had jumped off that train already. There is an argument that if 4E had been a better to fit for us we would have also dropped £xxx on the next two rounds of core rules, perhaps a couple of adventures and three or four of us would maintain a DDI sub, but that's another bucket of frogs entirely.


To the OP - I very much doubt that WotC underestimated the 'Paizo effect'. As has been said elsewhere, they must have anticipated that those that did not adopt 4E would be a great target market for a 3PP under the OGL.

 

[olshanski]

Speaking as a DM:
Since the release of 4E:
I've spent $240 on Paizo products (2 adventure paths).
I've spent $0 on WoTC products.
I've spent $30 on NecromancerGames products for 3.5E.
I've spent $80 on Goodman Games products for 3.5E.


If WoTC would have had a decent GSL that allowed Necromancer Games and Paizo to publish modules for 4E, I probably would have spent:
$120 on WoTC products
$75 on Goodman Games products for 4E
$100 on Necromancer Games products for 4E
$240-$480 on Paizo products for 4E

I've saved a lot of money overall, so Thanks, WoTC, for driving me away from RPGs.

 

[Wicht]

I agree with your first sentence. I'm a bit dubious about your estimate in the second sentence, though.

If you are right, then rpgs have really declined tremendously, overall. If Paizo was really controlling 40% of the rpg market, it would have to be because the market has shrunken.

Are you pulling your estimate out of thin air or is there some factual basis?

People keep mentioning they disagree with my statement so I thought I would take a moment to defend it.

I'm most certainly not giving solid numbers. I don't know what the numbers are. What I am saying is that I would not be suprised to find though the numbers were somewhere in that range, at the moment at least. Also, please note I didn't say 40%, I said between 25 and 40%. Also, by market, I don't mean what people are playing, I mean what people are buying. That is an important distinction. I would guess the number of RPG players or groups to be doing Pathfinder to be between 10 and 25% of the whole; though I again would not be surprised to see that number increase.

The numbers are just speculation, though mildly informed speculation. Last year, somewhere between 10 and 15% of the members of this messageboard iirc answered to playing Pathfinder predominantly. Since then, Paizo has only improved their position in the market. They are the #2 selling RPG according to most avalaible rankings. They outsell 4e in some regions and even on Amazon they maintain a pretty decent showing in the RPG ranks.

I do find the idea that some people have, that Paizo can only be successful in a shrinking market, to be strange. Markets change. Nothing, in business remains static forever. When I was a kid IBM was The Computer Company. But I suspect my children have little or no idea what IBM is. There is always the possibility of the market growing and new players seizing sizeable chunks of business real-estate. Paizo's products appeal to people. To many of us, they are far more appealing than 4e. I am not so naive to think that others like whatever I like. At the same time, I do think I have a decent amount of taste and can recognize quality when I see it. I also have faith that most other people can as well, if they care to do so.

Edit: One other point to consider when asking "what are people buying?" How many 4e DMs buy Paizo adventures and setting books to mine them for idea. A few? More than a few? Now ask yourself, "When is the last time you heard a Pathfinder DM say they were buying a 4e adventure or setting book to mine it for ideas. Less than a few would be my guess. Close to none in fact. Think about that: even non-pathfinder players buy Paizo products. Anecdotally, that does not seem to be working in reverse. I know that I haven't bought a single WotC product since the release of 4e that I can think of (though I have bought several Hasbro products). My kids have bought a few magic decks and I have considered buying the New 3Dragon Ante but thats it.

 

[Wicht]

Speaking as a DM:
Since the release of 4E:
I've spent $240 on Paizo products (2 adventure paths).
I've spent $0 on WoTC products.
I've spent $30 on NecromancerGames products for 3.5E.
I've spent $80 on Goodman Games products for 3.5E.

Before Paizo's APs started, I spent about 40% of my rpg gaming budget on WotC 3.x books. About 50% on Kenzer's Kalamar books and about 10% on other 3pp.

When the APs started, that went to probably about 30% WotC, 30% Kenzer, 30% Paizo and 10% other 3pp.

Since 4e has been released WotC gets 0% of my gaming budget, Paizo gets about 70% of my gaming budget and the other 30% goes to 3pp that support Pathfinder or the OGL.

 

[MortonStromgal]

I believe there is just a general disconnect between hands at WOTC right now.

Here is what I mean, they want to attract new players but rather than another Forgotten Realms game we got Dragon Age. Which in turn sparks its own Pen and Paper RPG. You also have a fairly complex rule set with digital subscriptions and bringing everything in house alienating the old timers and OGL players giving rise to Pathfinder. You also have these game store events coming out like encounters to bring back former gamers (whom many have moved on to Savage Worlds or something else) and try to bring in new kids with a box set (direct competition to Dragon Age). It would appear that rather than target a particular group old guard, young kids, etc you have 1/2 dozen or more strategies on the table, some of which go against some of the others.

 

[AllisterH]

Wicht, there's the fact that many a 4e player doesn't see "PAIZO" as "THE EVIL" so have no problem picking it up.

Contrastingly, there's a large sgment of players who wont touch 4e products JUST because it is WOTC.

There's also that WOTC hasn't actually put out THAT much "fluffy stuff". There's the adventures of course and the campaign guides (which were settings that most 3.x fans ALREADY had access to) but really, most of WOTC's outlay has been crunch heavy or retreads of previous 3.x material (underdark, secrets of the astral sea etc all have 3.x equivalents)

The newest "new" product that WOTC would actually be this month's Dark Sun as there is no 3.x equivalent to mind (other than the DS articles from DRAGON and those were widely panned)

 

[Wicht]

Wicht, there's the fact that many a 4e player doesn't see "PAIZO" as "THE EVIL" so have no problem picking it up.

Contrastingly, there's a large sgment of players who wont touch 4e products JUST because it is WOTC.

There's also that WOTC hasn't actually put out THAT much "fluffy stuff". There's the adventures of course and the campaign guides (which were settings that most 3.x fans ALREADY had access to) but really, most of WOTC's outlay has been crunch heavy or retreads of previous 3.x material (underdark, secrets of the astral sea etc all have 3.x equivalents)

The newest "new" product that WOTC would actually be this month's Dark Sun as there is no 3.x equivalent to mind (other than the DS articles from DRAGON and those were widely panned)

I think you are over generalizing. I don't think most of us Pathfinder players think of WotC as "evil," even if we don't agree with their apparent gaming philosophy. There are some who do , of course, just as there are WotC supporters who are convinced Paizo doesn't deserve any recognition as they are just building with toys WotC gave to them. But for me personally, and I think it is a general consensus, I don't by WotC products, not because I dislike them (I wish them and the brand all the best), but because they don't make anything I want. Paizo does and so I buy from them.

Still, in the end, the "whys" are irrelevant (or only relevant to those laying down future business plans in either company). The fact of the matter is: Paizo sells to a large segment of the gaming population and WotC has shrunk their appeal down to basically just those people that play their game. Paizo has cross game appeal; WotC does not. That sort of trend has to have some short and maybe long term effects.

 

[Mistwell]

The fact of the matter is: Paizo sells to a large segment of the gaming population and WotC has shrunk their appeal down to basically just those people that play their game. Paizo has cross game appeal; WotC does not. That sort of trend has to have some short and maybe long term effects.

That looks more like an opinion to me, not a fact. I've seen a large number of non-4e players state they are looking forward to buying the new Red Box set, and others say they are looking forward to buying the Dark Sun setting. The interest level in Gamma World seems high as well. Earlier, it seems like many non-4e players bought WOTC miniatures.

And of course, lots of people play Star Wars, Heroscape, MTG, Axis & Allies, Duelmasters, etc..

So it sure looks to me like WOTC had, and continues to have, plenty of cross game appeal. In fact, if I had to bet, I'd bet WAY WAY WAY more people in the world buy WOTC products than Paizo products, even if you entirely eliminated Dungeons and Dragons 4e from the equation. So as far as selling to the larger percentage of the gaming population, I'd guess WOTC wins that hands down.