Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 7975311" data-attributes="member: 957">You may or may not be right.&nbsp; I certainly think that you have some valid points and the overall issue is very complex.&nbsp;&nbsp; But I'm not even suggesting &quot;reach the same level as PF1&quot;. &nbsp; Obviously I agree.&nbsp; But a couple points. If every single PF1 group made the switch and nothing else then that would clearly be a failure.&nbsp; PF1 was done and, from a marketplace / sustainable business point of view, it HAD to be replaced.&nbsp; But a replacement requires a lot of investment.&nbsp;&nbsp; It needs keep everything and grow nicely.&nbsp; Or lose 100% but make a huge multiplier on new fans back.&nbsp; Or do something in-between.&nbsp;&nbsp; But PF1 was already too small and keeping that fanbase (me included) can be overrated.Plus, as much as I agree with your opinion.&nbsp; It isn't about your opinion or my opinion (no offense). I was a big MtG fan for a while.&nbsp; I never got into Pokeman when that became all the rage.&nbsp; The marketplace didn't seem to care.&nbsp; And, of course, you won't find me being critical of Pokeman. Is it?&nbsp; What was the #2 RPG right before PF2E was announced?&nbsp; It was Starfinder.&nbsp; And Pathfinder was right on its heels.&nbsp; But Starfinder dropped out of the top 5 pretty quickly.&nbsp; Clearly it is still popular, but being #2 right after release clearly isn't proof of anything long term.&nbsp; And if online play means anything, more people (then and now) use their old PF books that they don't need to buy to actually play PF than people play SF.&nbsp; Which isn't a knock on SF.&nbsp; I'm just pointing out that there is a difference between new shiny sales and &quot;being #2&quot; as a major achievement. (much less as an indicator of marketshare resilience) After all, Hoard of the Dragon Queen is a 5E module that came out almost 6 years ago.&nbsp; If we rank RPGs via Amazon sales rank and use ONLY that one title as a surrogate for all of 5E, PF2E still comes in second place.&nbsp; So what does second place really mean?Yep.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 7975311, member: 957"] You may or may not be right. I certainly think that you have some valid points and the overall issue is very complex. But I'm not even suggesting "reach the same level as PF1". Obviously I agree. But a couple points. If every single PF1 group made the switch [I]and nothing else[/I] then that would clearly be a failure. PF1 was done and, from a marketplace / sustainable business point of view, it HAD to be replaced. But a replacement requires a lot of investment. It needs keep everything and grow nicely. Or lose 100% but make a huge multiplier on new fans back. Or do something in-between. But PF1 was already too small and keeping that fanbase (me included) can be overrated. Plus, as much as I agree with your opinion. It isn't about your opinion or my opinion (no offense). I was a big MtG fan for a while. I never got into Pokeman when that became all the rage. The marketplace didn't seem to care. And, of course, you won't find me being critical of Pokeman. Is it? What was the #2 RPG right before PF2E was announced? It was Starfinder. And Pathfinder was right on its heels. But Starfinder dropped out of the top 5 pretty quickly. Clearly it is still popular, but being #2 right after release clearly isn't proof of anything long term. And if online play means anything, more people (then and now) use their old PF books that they don't need to buy to actually play PF than people play SF. Which isn't a knock on SF. I'm just pointing out that there is a difference between new shiny sales and "being #2" as a major achievement. (much less as an indicator of marketshare resilience) After all, Hoard of the Dragon Queen is a 5E [I]module[/I] that came out almost 6 years ago. If we rank RPGs via Amazon sales rank and use ONLY that one title as a surrogate for all of 5E, PF2E [I]still[/I] comes in second place. So what does second place really mean? Yep. [/QUOTE]

Verification