"Tabletop D&D Has Lost Its Way" Says Pathfinder Video Game Exec

Feargus Urquhart, one of the execs from Obsidian Entertainment, which is behind an upcoming Pathfinder-themed video game, told Polygon why the company chose to go with Paizo rather than WotC for tabletop fantasy inspired games. "One of the reasons we actually went with Pathfinder was ... how do you say it? I'll just say it: We were having a hard time figuring out how to move forward with Dungeons and Dragons." The issue, he says, is that "D&D is a part of Wizards of the Coast and WotC is a part of Hasbro" and that he would "love to see D&D be bought by someone and become what it was before... Become TSR again."

Of course, TSR went bankrupt, so I'm not sure wishing that on somebody is a kindness.

Urquhart is a long-time D&D video game exec, having worked on games like Neverwinter Nights 2; he points out that "I'm probably one of the people who has one of the most electronic D&D games that they've worked on". Now, of course, his company has moved on to Paizo's Pathfinder.

The upcoming Obsidian video games will be based on the Pathfinder games - specifically a tablet game based on the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, due in the next few months. The studio is, of course, known to tabletop RPG fans for D&D games like Neverwinter Nights 2. Urquhart did hint at non-card-game based projects, saying that "We're thinking about how can we take traditional RPG stuff and put it on the tablet. No one has solved it really."

You can read the short interview here.

​

 

[Astrosicebear]

This reads : We couldnt afford D&D so we went with what was left.

 

[doctorhook]

However, I'm not sure how that relies ties into his decision to have Obsidian take the Pathfinder license rather than a D&D one - partly because the success of a video game only tangentially relies on the tabletop RPG anyway, but partly because one of the stated pillars of WotC's current strategy is precisely that they're looking to license. So, really, it seems an ideal fit... if not for Obsidian then for someone.

I say this is Obsidian's loss, someone else's gain.

...Provided WotC gets those licenses sorted out quickly and cleanly.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I say this is Obsidian's loss, someone else's gain.

...Provided WotC gets those licenses sorted out quickly and cleanly.

Well, they have a job posting for someone to do that exact role. How soon that is hashed out? With training time? Who knows.

 

[arjomanes]

I'm not convinced this isn't sour grapes. We don't have both sides to this story, and I woudn't be surprised with Hasbro's new emphasis on licensing if someone else outbid Obsidian. We'll see if there are any announcements on video games in the near future. A new studio picking up D&D games might be a good thing.

 

[Kramodlog]

So, basically is he critiquing the release schedule, or lack there of, the uncertainty of the life span of this edition* and the fact that D&D has a lot more people looking over its shoulder and meddling with it**.

He is right.


*At any time some new VP at Hasbro could say "What is that department that employees 13 people? It cost that much for that little revenues!? Off with its head!"

**Like the lack of ebooks and OGL is likely a decision made at the top. They probably have a compagny wide policies on licenses that are none negociable. Paizo has more room for negociations.

 

[Zander]

My guess is that the Paizo/Pathfinder licence cost less than the WotC/D&D one. This exec is simply trying to disguise a business decision as one relating to the merits of the two franchises. Sorry, Mr MBA, we're not fooled.

It's analogous to when Hollywood studios claim to have "creative differences" with a director or actor. It's very rarely about creativity. It's almost always a disagreement about money, that is, the director or actor wanting more and the studio not wanting to pay. (Occasionally, a "creative difference" is about an actor having behavioural problems relating to drink or drugs. But usually, it's about money.)

Edit: Astrocisebear beat me to it.

 

[fba827]

Agree with many of the posters here...
The way I read it isn't about table top gaming product but rather about a business decision, related to licensing terms, costs, and relationships.

Because, frankly ( in my opinion) a video game based off any RPG system really comes off similar, just a matter of what names you attach to things. So, I'd wager ( if licensing cost and terms, and businessrelationships wasn't a factor) the same types of things are required for coding and production of either a pathfinder or 5e based video game. Anyway, just my peanut gallery comments ;-)

 

[SteveC]

Well, they have a job posting for someone to do that exact role. How soon that is hashed out? With training time? Who knows.

I think the fact that this position is posted now, rather than a year ago is telling. Whoever drops into this position will be working on something that should have been sorted out long before the game launched. I wish them luck.

 

[Mallus]

Giving this a charitable read, I can kinda see the point, though he doesn't really make it in the interview. Paizo has been generating a lot of adventure & setting content that can mined for computer games. WotC hasn't, really -- their best stuff in that area is all old/legacy. What WotC has been up to lately is producing a good new set of D&D core rules that plays well at the table.

So I'll be playing/running live, tabletop D&D using 5e and, if they're good, playing Pathfinder cRPGs (I'm willing to play tabletop Pathfinder, but not run it).

 

[Wolfskin]

Forgive my skepticism, but to me this looks like a comment out of spite more than an objective assessment of the matter. The fact that WotC doesn't want to make yet another D&D game in the vein of NWN may as well be because such games don't sell as they did in their time, like it or not.

Also, if "becoming TSR again" means "turning on the supplement treadmill and crashing down"... then, no thanks!