Pathfinder 1E Rate Paizo as a Company!

[dmccoy1693]

Forget all polls, this is the real measure. Same is true for me. I bought 1 book out of my whole collection of WotC books at full price. The rest I got from Ebay, more then half of which were after the 4E announcement once the price dropped.

Paizo, I subscribe to the Adventure Path and Settings books. And I don't even think twice about the money I spend. Its worht it.

If that's the real measure then let's look at WoTC sales vs. Paizo sales. WoTC wins!

Umm, no. Its the VALUE of the books. I do not consider most of WotC books worth more then $10 and waited until I could buy them on Ebay for that price. Paizo on the other hand, I buy direct from Paizo before reading a single review and even before they hit store shelves. Why? Because that's how much Paizo books are worth.

And if you want to compare sales, compare future sales. Look at where the collectors, the hardcore games, the "alphas" if you will, are going. Those 20% of customers comprise 80% of the a company's sales. They're going to Paizo. A stock analyst that I respect once said, "If you want to know a company's current health, look at their sales, their earning and other similar indicators; if you want to know a company's future heath, look at their customer service. Because you can only piss off your customers for so long before they go elsewhere." Wizards lost me and others.

EDIT: Besides remember what a juggernaut Microsoft use to be. They've now been beaten by what was once a little upstart called Google.

 

[ThirdWizard]

And if you want to compare sales, compare future sales. Look at where the collectors, the hardcore games, the "alphas" if you will, are going. Those 20% of customers comprise 80% of the a company's sales. They're going to Paizo.

Where do you get these statistics?

 

[Jack99]

I really, really can't sympathise. It's a case of unrealistic expectations on his part, IMO.

The most recent thing I ordered took two weeks for the importer to get back to me, said they were waiting on the manufacturer to make more of them...three weeks later they contact me saying it'll be another 6 to 8 weeks to ship. I expected all of this (delays of months), and am not disappointed as a result.

That's the real world. Most companies that aren't Amazon or Dell don't seem to run on internet time.

First of all, I am not looking for sympathy. If I was, I would be talking to my friends, not random people over the Internet. And comparing your example with mine is just a strawman of epic proportions, but whatever floats your boat.

I have had at least 6-7 separate "dealings" (as in, where CS was needed) with Paizo within the last year, and in each case, their response time was under 24 hours, when I sent them a mail (unless it was on weekends, of course). Considering that the 6-7 separate dealings represent 30-40 emails back and forth, each being delivered within the before mentioned time, I do not think it was unreasonably of me to expect not to have to wait for 13 days.

Either way, this is really a silly discussions. I like Paizo, I buy their products, although I only play 4e. I just pointed out that with regards to this grading situation, I would have given them a point more, had I not just had this less than stellar experience. I am quite sure that the next time I buy something, the service will once again be top notch.

Cheers

 

[dmccoy1693]

Where do you get these statistics?

Psst. That's us. We're the hardcore gamers. Look at how we're rating the two companies. And if you're talking about the 20/80 rule, that's a corporate America rule regardless of the industry.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Psst. That's us. We're the hardcore gamers. Look at how we're rating the two companies. And if you're talking about the 20/80 rule, that's a corporate America rule regardless of the industry.

20% of gamers post on the Internet? Doubtful. All Internet posters are Paizo customers? Doubtful as well. No Internet posters are going to 4e? Again, doubtful. The fact of the matter is that ENWorld isn't nearly as important as some people make it out to be. It's a fun place to talk about games, sure. I love ENWorld. That doesn't mean that our community is some kind of power in the life and death of Wizards of the Coast, or even Paizo for that matter.

This is probably more accurate:

"0.5% or so of WotC customer base are very vocally against 4e by posting repeatedly on the Internet about how much they hate it, vs. about 0.5% of their customer base raving on the Internet about how wonderful it is. We can draw no conclusions about these statistics, since I just made them up. Hooray for the Internet!"

 

[Wicht]

20% of gamers post on the Internet? Doubtful. All Internet posters are Paizo customers? Doubtful as well. No Internet posters are going to 4e? Again, doubtful. The fact of the matter is that ENWorld isn't nearly as important as some people make it out to be. It's a fun place to talk about games, sure. I love ENWorld. That doesn't mean that our community is some kind of power in the life and death of Wizards of the Coast, or even Paizo for that matter.

This is probably more accurate:

"0.5% or so of WotC customer base are very vocally against 4e by posting repeatedly on the Internet about how much they hate it, vs. about 0.5% of their customer base raving on the Internet about how wonderful it is. We can draw no conclusions about these statistics, since I just made them up. Hooray for the Internet!"

I keep seeing people commenting on these sorts of polls by stating that they don't matter because the number of people that posts in them is too small or because there are more people not on the internet then on it. Which shows a basic ignorance/misunderstanding of polls.

The size of the sample is less important then the way in which the sample mirrors the larger population. The percentage of gamers who post on ENWorld is irrelevant compared to the question of whether the gamers who post on ENWorld have the same overall buying habits as nonposters. I would guess the answer is no, but I would also guess that ENWorld Posters are representative of the more active buyers in the gaming community.

When I look at the two polls regarding the two companies, the first thing I notice is that both have a nice curve, which is a good thing in polls of this sort. The second thing I notice is that the #2 in the Paizo poll is slightly off the curve and makes me think if we increased the sample size, it would probably level off to being smaller than the 3.

Overall, if I was Piazo, I would be pleased with the Poll results, internet or no. And if I was WotC, I would be a little worried.

 

[FallenTabris]

I've never really found Paizo to be a company to pay any attention to despite their improvements of Dragon for a while. Of the two adventures I've bought of theirs, they seemed rail roady and overpowered the encounters. But somehow they have won the hearts and minds of many 3.x gamers so I must be of a different style.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I keep seeing people commenting on these sorts of polls by stating that they don't matter because the number of people that posts in them is too small or because there are more people not on the internet then on it. Which shows a basic ignorance/misunderstanding of polls.

The size of the sample is less important then the way in which the sample mirrors the larger population. The percentage of gamers who post on ENWorld is irrelevant compared to the question of whether the gamers who post on ENWorld have the same overall buying habits as nonposters. I would guess the answer is no, but I would also guess that ENWorld Posters are representative of the more active buyers in the gaming community.

Bingo. Most gaming groups have a minimum of one passionate gamer (and that person is generally the DM). That gamer buys every book that enhances their game and many more that just give ideas. They read magazines and reviews of material. They hang out in game stores and discuss this their opinions at length. They go online and talk with others equally passionate.

If that passionate gamer leaves their current game (i.e. D&D) and turns towards a new game (i.e. Pathfinder), it really is only a matter of time before the group follows.

 

[freyar]

Yes. Wizards have many many more customers than Paizo. I would also be willing to bet that the costs of a really good PR/customer service operation aren't linear with the number of customers, but are at least quadratic, and probably exponential.

In other words, to get PR/CS at the level that Paizo (mostly) display would cost WotC a huge amount. Even a marginal improvement might cost so significantly as to be not worth doing.

I don't think it would have cost WotC so much just not to bungle the Dragon/Dungeon, GSL, and DDI announcements so badly. Or to then meet the deadlines that they have given themselves to get their various services running.

 

[Caliber]

* One big negative is not necessarily from Paizo themselves, but from their fanboys. Wow, I thought some of the 4E fanboys could be elitist, confrontataional, and emotionally twitchy- they are nothing compared to some of the venom and vitriol I've looked at on the Paizo boards over the last 2 years, but especially since 4E came out. Those are the kind of people Paizo SHOULD NOT listen to if they want to keep any credibility. Again, not Paizo's fault, but hopefully the whackjobs have little influence with them, for the long-term sake of their company.

I absolutely agree on this one, and unfortunately they do seem to be the ones wielding influence over there.

As far as their current venture goes, it's the worst possible from my point of view. Too similiar to 3.5 to actually be a new game (which my group would be interested in, like Arcana Unearthed) but too different from 3.5 for my group to consider replacing 3.5 with it (not really a new edition, like a half of a new edition, like the change from 3.0 to 3.5 on steroids)

I gave them a 2, for current performance. If I weighed their past into the matter (and totally ignored their messageboards) they'd probably register a 4 or 5.

I do find it interesting how many people think a company's image is important though. I'd suspect most gamers aren't even aware of a company's practices or "image" and buy product they like based on their actual, honest enjoyment of the product, not whether they think the company making it is good or bad. Is this a minority opinion here?