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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5265556" data-attributes="member: 957">I wouldn't call it a Paizo effect.  After all, the changes to WotC's fan base happened before Paizo went in a new direction.But, I think they miscalculated when they looked at other forms of gaming (WoW in particular) and figured that they were missing out on a market.I am NOT saying that 4E is WOW or that WotC tried to make D&D more into WOW.I AM saying they saw a market based on people pretending to be elves that is vastly larger then their market based on people pretending to be elves and assumed that they could tap into that with the right game play and marketing.They were wrong.The appeal of MMOs and the appeal of tabletop RPGs are very different animals.  It may be true that a lot of tabletop RPGers also enjoy MMOs and get a lot of the same fun from both.  But the reverse is not true.  So trying to tap into the non-tabletop market is a hard sell.  There seems to be some assumption that being a gamer is just a matter of marketing.  I don't believe that for a second.  There are gamers and there are non-gamers.  There may be a wide range within "gamers", but there are still a lot more people who are flat out *not gamers*.  But a lot of these *not gamers* will maintain a subscription to WOW, play semi-regularly and enjoy the game, but would never consider sitting around a table at a scheduled time and place to play face to face make believe without graphics, automated controls, and guild chat.There will always be new gamers between new young blood coming up and the occasional older person who has never really been exposed.  And marketing to these people is a good thing.  Getting as many gamers actively gaming is a good thing.  But trying to market to non-gamers is just a poor allocation of resources.They tried, and they got a huge slug of interest.  But they lost some portion of "gamers" and the "non-gamers" who dove in turn out not to have nearly the same longevity or spending habits.  (addictions <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  )This isn't to say that 4E doesn't appeal to gamers.  Again, there are a wide range within gamers, and clearly 4E very strongly appeals to some.That doesn't mean there are no longer dominant.  90% is better than 85%, even if both are dominant.  I don't think they were 90% before, and I don't think they are near 85% now.  But the point is, simply being the biggest one doesn't give enough information.  D&D has lost a chunk of its market base and would be better off it it had more.They can't change at this point.  They pretty much have to dance with the one they brung.  Trying to go back now would just lose more than they recovered.But they miscalculated.  Or maybe they just took a shot and didn't get lucky.  Certainly going after the WOW market was an appealing brass ring.  Maybe they considered the risk worthwhile.  And a hit there would have been immense.I don't think this really works out.  The two pieces have some truth to them.  But you can't really put them together like that.  You can't ignore the change in scale between the two.Other RPG companies are much bigger blips on the D&D part of WotC's radar then WotC is on any part of Blizzard's radar.  Wotc is in competition on both sides of the equation.  And they take their eye off other RPG companies, and the fan base those other companies are nipping away at, at their own peril.</blockquote>

Verification