Did WotC underestimate the Paizo effect on 4E?

[TheAuldGrump]

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)

*Shrug* I don't get 4e products because they are WotC - I don't get 4e products because they are 4e.

I actually purchased the only D&D minis that I have ever bought well after 4e came out. (I blame the Remhoraz. He just looked so cute! ) If WotC came out with material for Pathfinder I would, well, actually I would drop dead from shock, but after being revived I would at least look at the material.

The Auld Grump

 

[Wayside]

Paizo is still a relatively new player, it is true. They have had their game out for 1 year. Of course they don't have a huge media franchise yet. But that doesn't really mean anything concerning their success, their future, nor how many books they are selling.

It means a great deal concerning their success relative to the other companies I mentioned if we're going to start drawing up rankings lists. Specifically: Paizo isn't in the same league yet.

Dungeons and Dragons did not start out with a huge media franchise and the full power of Hasbro behind it. It started out as a small game, spread by word of mouth.

What's the number one predictor for a product's success?

Warhammer didn't release video games their first year either. Nor did WoD. Nor did they begin their games with a full court press of comics, novels and the like. Those things came later. Companies tend to start out small, and generally focused on a few core products. As these products gain support then they expand.

In other words, Paizo is orders of magnitude smaller than these other companies. The rest is unfounded speculation--and really poor reasoning. "All big companies started small" is not the same as "All small companies become big."

Paizo is growing with Pathfinder. There does not seem any doubt about that. Where they end up is anyone's guess. But to dismiss them because they don't yet have a video game released for their product is rather naive.

And to frame my point entirely in terms of video games is dishonest. Looking just at fantasy, D&D, Warhammer, Warcraft and other notable properties can all trace their success back to being first to market in one way or another. Obviously this is true of games like Shadowrun and the World of Darkness as well, and it's an advantage Pathfinder doesn't enjoy. If Warcraft, being a Warhammer clone like Pathfinder is a D&D clone, had been a miniatures game rather than an RTS, it would've sunk like a stone. Therein lies Pathfinder's problem: it's a clone trying to compete with the original on its own turf.

And, in case you missed it, the Novels are being released as we speak.

And when they reach the NYT Best Seller list we'll have something to talk about, especially if non-gamers are the ones buying. For now, though, comparing Paizo to the big boys is silly. They have a lot of brand building to do first.

 

[ggroy]

What's the number one predictor for a product's success?

What is this predictor?

 

[ShinHakkaider]

What is this predictor?

Being First to market?

 

[Reynard]

And to frame my point entirely in terms of video games is dishonest. Looking just at fantasy, D&D, Warhammer, Warcraft and other notable properties can all trace their success back to being first to market in one way or another. Obviously this is true of games like Shadowrun and the World of Darkness as well, and it's an advantage Pathfinder doesn't enjoy. If Warcraft, being a Warhammer clone like Pathfinder is a D&D clone, had been a miniatures game rather than an RTS, it would've sunk like a stone. Therein lies Pathfinder's problem: it's a clone trying to compete with the original on its own turf.

First off, the only "first" in your list is D&D -- and that's arguable (Glorantha, Tekumel and Blackmoor all predate D&D). Warhammer was not the first tabletop fantasy miniatures game: there were Middle Earth and Hyborian wargames first. Dune and Dune 2 were the first RTS games. The World of Darkness was pre-empted by Palladium by years with Nightbane, and Shadowrun was neither the first cyberpunk game nor the first science fantasy game.

Second, I don't think you can qualify Pathfinder as a "D&D clone" because it exists very specifically as an alternative to the current edition of D&D. It is neither retroclone nor fantasy heartbreaker, but rather "spiritual successor". The biggest obstacle it has is that it does not possess the Brand Name (tm) of D&D, even if it possess the sould of that game.

 

[Reynard]

Being First to market?

For every first you can think of, there's a pretty good chance that a little research will reveal some ideas/products/whatever that beat it to market. It isn't being first, or even being best. it's being the right *whatever* at the right time.

 

[Wicht]

It means a great deal concerning their success relative to the other companies I mentioned if we're going to start drawing up rankings lists. Specifically: Paizo isn't in the same league yet.

In other words, Paizo is orders of magnitude smaller than these other companies.

I wonder what basis for comparison you are using for placing Paizo in some "minor" league not ready for the big time game yet?

They have more employees than most RPG companies, excepting WotC and WotC, as has been pointed out, is much more than RPGs. I wonder how Paizo's numbers stack up against WotC RPG department.

They have the sales. They are, as I'm sure you read earlier, the #2 RPG in the market at the moment. Subject to change, sure, but nothing to be sneezed at.

They most certainly have experience. I doubt there are many RPG companies with more experience in the industry.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

While 4e made some marketing blunders, advertising axing out saving throws isn't one of them. There's a reason Pathfinder also made it their goal to try and put save or dies to sleep, if granted in a different fashion.

I don't think there is a "Paizo effect." When 3e came out, plenty of people kept playing 2e. The whole "Old school revolution" or whatever them crazy kooks call themselves these days is a pretty big sign that people never even transfered to 2e. Now that 4e is out, people who still want to play 3e have an alternative in Pathfinder.

Nobody who disliked 3.x is going to like Pathfinder, I think that speaks for itself. And plenty of people who play Pathfinder are those that would've never enjoyed 4e in the first place. If you switched from 4e to Pathfinder, I'd wager that you would've switched from 4e back to 3.x if Pathfinder weren't there in the first place. It's not a new sale being lost, it's an old lost sale in new packaging as far as WotC is concerned.

Anyways, some people play and enjoy both games and give money to both companies. 420 play D&D everyday.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

I... i... agree with... *checks heart rate* i agree with Professor Cirno. Next: flying squirrels fight the death ninja rabbits of Castle Awesomesauce.

Though i still think Mona should copyright "Paizo Effect" and use it to market a 3.5 compatible perfume. "It rises like Runelords - the Paizo Effect! (TM)"

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

Whatever.

CLEARLY Paizo ripped off WotC's D&D IP to publish their little pretend RPG game.

The only reason WotC hasn't sued yet is because they laid off all of their on-retainer lawyers in early 2009 because of the worldwide economic meltdown.

(Wake up, sheep! Read a newspaper!)

The only retaliation and leverage WotC could manage was the _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_ license, which has turned out to be a hidden blessing because hiding those publications behind a digital paywall is the best thing to ever happen to our hobby.

Jeez!!!

Mod Note: This may have been intended as sarcasm, but some have noted a bit of confusion. Please allow me to interject that the above statement is incorrect. The Open Gaming License used for 3e made Pathfinder quite legal.