Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alphastream" data-source="post: 7680924" data-attributes="member: 11365">WotC has never tried to differentiate D&amp;D from Pathfinder. It isn't remotely a goal. WotC's focus is on entertainment overall - competing with movies, video games, etc. instead of any one publisher. There isn't enough money in the industry, even if you put D&amp;D and Pathfinder together (if your goal is profit, employees with great salaries, etc.). The key is to look elsewhere. That's why we saw Paizo take a risk on their MMO, why WotC has the new storyline approach where one RPG release is the central hub designed to launch more profitable media properties. They still have very little market reach, even added together. The buzz they generate is tiny, even within a small industry. Your average RPG player barely knows -pick game X- exists. The actual active player base is tiny. The ability to launch other more profitable ventures is nonexistant. I'm not saying I don't love these games, I do! I love playing all sorts of mid and small RPGs. But, they lack the market to be influential for D&amp;D. Even the ones that feel so huge, like Numenera or Shadowrun or FATE have a very small active player base when you really get down to it. The numbers don't come anywhere close to, say, the number of gamers that played 4E every Wednesday in stores across the US alone. And, again, WotC's focus isn't &quot;oh crap, some RPG is popular, we need to adjust!&quot; Not at all.What is true is that a lot of today's new games are fun. And the kind of fun they have can be similar. Story rich, fast, easy to learn (some of them), encourage something about your character to impact the game, etc. Those concepts aren't unique to story games or OSR or any one game or game type, but they have influenced 5E, for sure. It just isn't fair to make the claims the article made.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alphastream, post: 7680924, member: 11365"] WotC has never tried to differentiate D&D from Pathfinder. It isn't remotely a goal. WotC's focus is on entertainment overall - competing with movies, video games, etc. instead of any one publisher. There isn't enough money in the industry, even if you put D&D and Pathfinder together (if your goal is profit, employees with great salaries, etc.). The key is to look elsewhere. That's why we saw Paizo take a risk on their MMO, why WotC has the new storyline approach where one RPG release is the central hub designed to launch more profitable media properties. They still have very little market reach, even added together. The buzz they generate is tiny, even within a small industry. Your average RPG player barely knows -pick game X- exists. The actual active player base is tiny. The ability to launch other more profitable ventures is nonexistant. I'm not saying I don't love these games, I do! I love playing all sorts of mid and small RPGs. But, they lack the market to be influential for D&D. Even the ones that feel so huge, like Numenera or Shadowrun or FATE have a very small active player base when you really get down to it. The numbers don't come anywhere close to, say, the number of gamers that played 4E every Wednesday in stores across the US alone. And, again, WotC's focus isn't "oh crap, some RPG is popular, we need to adjust!" Not at all. What is true is that a lot of today's new games are fun. And the kind of fun they have can be similar. Story rich, fast, easy to learn (some of them), encourage something about your character to impact the game, etc. Those concepts aren't unique to story games or OSR or any one game or game type, but they have influenced 5E, for sure. It just isn't fair to make the claims the article made. [/QUOTE]

Verification