Pathfinder 1E Is PAIZO becoming the next Wizards?

[Haffrung Helleyes]

You know, the fact that the Paizo CEO is a gamer like us who jumps into EnWorld threads and has substantial discussions without a Marketing Filter is just one more reason that I'm glad I play Pathfinder!

Ken

 

[ggroy]

You know, the fact that the Paizo CEO is a gamer like us who jumps into EnWorld threads and has substantial discussions without a Marketing Filter is just one more reason that I'm glad I play Pathfinder!

Since Paizo appears to be a privately held company which is not traded on the stock market, they're not directly covered by "regulation FD". Regulation FD would greatly restrict what the CEO and other insiders can say.

Regulation Fair Disclosure - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DEFCON 1]

Oh for pete's sake... what DIFFERENCE does it make which company is a supposed "market leader" or "industry leader" or any of that nonsense?

Do any of these companies use this terminology to describe themselves? No. Because they realize just how meaningless and undefined the terms actually are. So for all of us on a messageboard trying to argue for and against specific companies by pulling their successful and not-successful, popular and not-popular products out of our collective rears and try to use that to make one company seem more important than another... is nothing more than insecure players feeling the need to hype the products THEY like, n order to justify their liking it in the first place. It's their way of making themselves feel better about the choices they make.

Some of you like the games Paizo puts out. Some of you like the games WotC puts out. Some of you like the games White Wolf puts out. Some of you like the games Green Ronin, Steve Jackson Games, and every other game company out there puts out. And many of you like more than one. But so long as you like and spend money on SOMETHING of theirs... that's all that really matters to these companies at the end of the day. They are all trying to just give as many people as they can, something that they want to spend their cash on. And worrying about terms like "innovation" or "industry leadership" is not something that companies need to do... because those terms don't put food on the table of people who work at these places.

 

[malkav666]

I don't think this is entirely fair. There is a lot of free preview stuff WotC posts, both at the start of the month when showing upcoming products, and numerous individual previews for each book over the course of the month leading up to release. Plus, lately, a lot of free excerpts shared with various RPG blogs as well as on Facebook, Twitter, etc. Plus the demo of the character builder and the compendium, both of which have a lot of free info for early levels of play. Plus the early issues of the online magazines which remain free, plus H1 which is available online for free.

I honestly can't make any actual comparisons to other companies (since I haven't seen firsthand what Paizo or others make available), but I think the claim that the only way to look at 4E material is to go behind the paywall of DDI... is simply wrong, and has no basis in actual reality.

Did you read the rest of my post where I said:

"WOTC used to be like that as well, and I spent a lot of time on their site as a result and bought more of their products as a result. Stuff I might not had otherwise bought if I had not gotten to check out bits from the release. Now I realize that WOTC does have free previews up as well but as I navigate through their site I often hit the paywall (or used to, as I quit going there a while back, maybe it has changed, and if so please consider this point moot)."

(bolded for emphasis)

My post was my opinion. And my opinion remains unchanged despite your claim that it is not grounded in reality. And to be fair when I did navigate their site I DID IN FACT hit the paywall regularly just linking back and forth between articles. I don't have an issue with WOTC having a subscription service. I think it was a smart move on their part. The point I was trying to make is that stashing paywall items and links throughout their site and clicking links in non-wotc forums and hitting the paywall bothers me personally.

I think there should be a clear division (maybe even a separate webspace) for the pay content and the promotional content. I also feel that some the pay content that DDI sells should be free promotional content. But alas I will bow out of the DDI as it stands currently discussion as I have not been a subscriber in a while and I am sure it is evolving. My entire discussion is based off of what i experienced on the D&D website about a year ago. And if they have made efforts to improve those things then I apologize. As to Facebook, blogging, and Twitter: I don't follow D&D on those services, I was speaking strictly about the official website which is where I would imagine a lot of new players would begin their serious exposure at.

Even if they have improved the paywall issue still exists and the comparison is still valid. For example I often see threads about new builds and classes hitting the D&D character generator. To get those updates you have to subscribe and install software. Compare this to Paizo's APG playtest where the new classes and builds they are releasing were made available to the public for free in high quality PDF.

That is the comparison I was drawing:

Subscription paid to get sneak peaks vs. Free to all to get the full classes ahead of time.

I feel that makes Paizo's game a little more approachable for some folks as the entry cost to get in SEE and PLAY with it is 0 dollars and 0 cents vs the entry cost of D&D4 which has no SRD, and all of the playtest data is pay to play.

But once again this should be read as my opinion I am in no way stating which way of doing business is BETTER, I am just stating which one I prefer and my own views on both models.

love,

malkav

 

[DaveMage]

Regulation FD would greatly restrict what the CEO and other insiders can say.

Maybe/maybe not. A public company that chooses to be more transparent could release the information and then discuss. They are only restricted by what they choose not to release to the public in the proper ways. Greater transparency = greater opportunity for discourse, no?


(Edit - Thanks for posting that link!)

 

[ggroy]

Maybe/maybe not. A public company that chooses to be more transparent could release the information and then discuss. They are only restricted by what they choose not to release to the public in the proper ways. Greater transparency = greater opportunity for discourse, no?

It would probably sound more like a press briefing or a shareholders meeting, than the sort of informal "off the cuff" type of chatter common to online message boards.

 

[MrMyth]

Did you read the rest of my post where I said:

"WOTC used to be like that as well, and I spent a lot of time on their site as a result and bought more of their products as a result. Stuff I might not had otherwise bought if I had not gotten to check out bits from the release. Now I realize that WOTC does have free previews up as well but as I navigate through their site I often hit the paywall (or used to, as I quit going there a while back, maybe it has changed, and if so please consider this point moot)."

In all honesty - yes, I did misread that, so my apologies there. I still feel the main point you made, that "when new D&D stuff is made it is put behind the paywall and the only way to look at it is to give money to WOTC to look at what is essentially design notes and advertising" is untrue. But it seems like your point was more regarding the usability of their site in finding the free preview information more than anything else.

The site is currently a pretty different place from a year ago. It has some issues of its own, now, of course - but articles are pretty clearly delineated whether they are free or subscriber only content. And the archive easily sorts into different categories, like 'excerpts' and 'previews'. So I believe they have addressed any concerns along those lines.

I definitely acknowledge this is just your opinion - my issue was more with some of the claims you were making (which I didn't believe to be accurate) rather than the value judgement itself of which system you prefer.

Namely, I will continue to argue against the claim that you can't see and play 4E with no entry cost. The character builder demo and the free downloadable starter demo give all the tools with which to do so, and the regular free previews give a lot of info about the current products being released. Claiming that you nonetheless prefer Paizo's style is fine, and a reasonable opinion - claiming that these offerings of WotC do not exist, on the other hand, is simply incorrect. That is what I am objecting to, and trying to clarify - nothing more.

 

[innerdude]

I apologize if my earlier comments caused problems, the idea was to compare what I felt was Paizo's approach to the gaming community versus their largest competitor.

My real point was that if Paizo is growing, it's because they have so far (knock on wood) seemed to have avoided the eventual "corporate oversight" numbness that inevitably hits ANY company/corporation that has some measure of success. The list of companies that died while resting on their laurels (i.e., stopped listening to their customer base and stopped being innovative) is too long to list, and I hope that Paizo can maintain their sense of community and customer engagement while they prosper. The last thing I want to see is a successful, critically acclaimed company that is putting out the kinds of products I enjoy lose the edge that got them there in the first place.

And if I ever see Paizo start taking "corporate marketing imperatives" more seriously than customer need (as I feel WotC has done), then I will mourn the loss of a great company (as I did for WotC), and look for my RPG products elsewhere (as I have already done with WotC).

 

[Mistwell]

While the theme of this thread seems to have been initially "Is Paizo becoming the next big gaming company", it seems too often the thread is progressing as "Here is why I don't like WOTC or 4e". Seems like more than 50% of the comments in the later half of this thread find ways to get a pot-shot in at WOTC or 4e.

So, is the intent of this thread to bash WOTC or 4e? If so, that's fine by me, but let's just be up front about it. If that is not the intent, then why are so many posts expressing that sentiment in this kind of thread? Can't folks comment on where they think Paizo is going as a gaming company without taking a short at WOTC or 4e?

As for myself, I do not see Paizo becoming a much bigger gaming company than the size they are right now (which is I think around 30 employees, with some offices and warehouse space about the same size as my companies office and warehouse space, which is to say around the size of a stable but small company, with probably around $2.5M revenue a year or so). Paizo has a core of fans, and others who casually buy a product of theirs here and there. Maybe they will have a product that breaks out into the "mainstream" of buyers, but so far it seems like they fill a niche nicely and remain at about the same stable but small size.

 

[Twowolves]

Except that they have already stated in various public forums that the PRPG is succeeding beyond their wildest imaginings and they have already hired more staff to expand this year....

I'm not saying they will have a corporate compound or anything, but they are growing.