Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6664135" data-attributes="member: 996">Unlikely.&nbsp; 4e was an ambitious gamble that tried to deliver MMO-like revenue that no TTRPG had ever gotten close to - indeed, the entire 'industry' as a whole had never even flirted with the kind of revenue stream WotC promised Hasbro.&nbsp; The failure of WotC to develop the on-line tools was probably the biggest perceived factor in the business sense.&nbsp; Pathfinder really didn't matter.&nbsp; Even if you had combined the sales of 4e books &amp; Pathfinder books - and every other d20 book published at the time - and every other RPG published at the time - you still wouldn't have had a WoW-like revenue stream.&nbsp; By the standards of the TTRPG industry, Pathfinder was a rousing success, and by the standards of a tiny, closely-held company like Paizo, quite profitable - but by the standards 4e was being judged, it would have been a dismal failure.&nbsp; &nbsp;Nope, completely irrelevant.&nbsp; If anything, Pathfinder helps the D&amp;D brand, because it's popularity is perceived as adding to D&amp;D's popularity.&nbsp; TTRPGs aren't a meaningful market, D&amp;D is being kept on life support so it can be used as an IP in other markets - maybe.&nbsp; &nbsp;Nope.&nbsp; WotC pulls down 9 figures with CCGs, Paizo's market share represents less than 1% of their revenue - income is probably even more trivial, since RPGs aren't exactly high-margin.&nbsp;Actually it's not clear at all.&nbsp; Paizo took the lead, briefly, when WotC put out Essentials, and again when WotC put out /nothing/.&nbsp; As soon as D&amp;D was being published again, Pathfinder was back to second fiddle.&nbsp; There is not some epic Paizo-WotC battle.&nbsp; They're even a lot of the same folks:&nbsp; someone works on D&amp;D at WotC, gets laid off one Christmas, goes to work at Paizo, does their own Kickstarter project, does some freelance for WotC again, etc.&nbsp; It's a small industry.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6664135, member: 996"] Unlikely. 4e was an ambitious gamble that tried to deliver MMO-like revenue that no TTRPG had ever gotten close to - indeed, the entire 'industry' as a whole had never even flirted with the kind of revenue stream WotC promised Hasbro. The failure of WotC to develop the on-line tools was probably the biggest perceived factor in the business sense. Pathfinder really didn't matter. Even if you had combined the sales of 4e books & Pathfinder books - and every other d20 book published at the time - and every other RPG published at the time - you still wouldn't have had a WoW-like revenue stream. By the standards of the TTRPG industry, Pathfinder was a rousing success, and by the standards of a tiny, closely-held company like Paizo, quite profitable - but by the standards 4e was being judged, it would have been a dismal failure. Nope, completely irrelevant. If anything, Pathfinder helps the D&D brand, because it's popularity is perceived as adding to D&D's popularity. TTRPGs aren't a meaningful market, D&D is being kept on life support so it can be used as an IP in other markets - maybe. Nope. WotC pulls down 9 figures with CCGs, Paizo's market share represents less than 1% of their revenue - income is probably even more trivial, since RPGs aren't exactly high-margin. Actually it's not clear at all. Paizo took the lead, briefly, when WotC put out Essentials, and again when WotC put out /nothing/. As soon as D&D was being published again, Pathfinder was back to second fiddle. There is not some epic Paizo-WotC battle. They're even a lot of the same folks: someone works on D&D at WotC, gets laid off one Christmas, goes to work at Paizo, does their own Kickstarter project, does some freelance for WotC again, etc. It's a small industry. [/QUOTE]

Verification