Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gundark" data-source="post: 6059548" data-attributes="member: 6148">I can concede that PF 2.0 might be more of a 1.5 , or that they will soft sell it or attempt to sneak it under the radar (an "advanced" rules module that everything after the fact uses)I will also concede that their subscription model buffers them from the need to put out a new edition. But I only think this prolongs it and doesn't protect them 100% from it.Paizo is a business, they are in it for the money(no negativity implied). They've said that the majority of their income comes from subscriptions. The analogy that I think of is say they make (I have no idea what Paizo earns in a month so I am making up numbers) 80 bucks a month from their subscriptions and 20 bucks a month from selling PF books. So they are making 100 bucks a month. Eventually they are going to run out of PF book ideas, or they pump out silliness that people don't buy (New Core Classes book 8!!!). Are they going to go back to making only 80 bucks a month? I don't think so.I also question how long a subscription model can sustain. This is speculation so take it for what it's worth. I'm guessing they are putting out APs faster than people are playing them. Yeah there are the groups that can keep up, but I am thinking that is the exception and not the rule. If I am still chewing away at Curse of the Crimson throne and they are 3 APs ahead of me I begin to question how many more of these am I going to buy? If my gaming is covered for the next 5 years do I keep buying APs? How long before APs seem to be more of the same? I stopped buying them because there was an underlying structure that repeated itself over and over from on AP to the next. I'm not sure if subscriptions can carry long term. They will need to look at other streams of revenue, hence a new edition (however that looks). I know that some buy them to read. I wonder how many of the subscribers fit into that group I won't attach a time frame, but I think it will come</blockquote>

Verification