D&D 4E What was Paizo thinking? 3.75 the 4E clone?

[Raven Crowking]

And to RC: Sorry I didn't post it clearer. I wanted to say TSR seemed to see them as a chore, meaning they did it because they felt they had to, but didn't really see it as beneficial or an opportunity to gather information or use it for marketing - much unlike WotC.

OK, I see what you were saying. And, I won't argue that it might have seemed that way to some; this doesn't make it true. Nor does it necessarily seem as though WotC doesn't view customer input as a chore now. The mishandling of the 4e announcement, for example, wouldn't have happened (IMHO) had WotC viewed listening to its customer base as anything other than a chore. Some of the early 4e comments come across very much as "Whatever you may say, or whatever you may want, this is what is happening." I can't recall any TSR gaffe that was even remotely close.

EDIT: I also don't think that TSR failed to recognize a viable market; I just think that, compared to the competition, their collectable games were simply not as good. I personally enjoyed early Spellfire, but it spiralled out of control, and they had to print a book to tell you how to interpret the rules on the cards.....and the book was also contradictory! Dragon Dice was, I think, a last ditch effort to grab part of the collectable market when it became painfully obvious that the TSR card games couldn't compete with Magic: The Gathering.

As far as Mr. Dancey's "facts" (according to Mourn); I will note only that Mr. Dancey doesn't make the assertation that his opinions are facts, and leave it at that.


RC

 

[The Little Raven]

I can't recall any TSR gaffe that was even remotely close.

You don't recall them going out of the business because they were managed poorly and didn't listen to their customers? That's the biggest gaffe a company can commit (aside from fraud).

As far as Mr. Dancey's "facts" (according to Mourn); I will note only that Mr. Dancey doesn't make the assertation that his opinions are facts, and leave it at that.

The man went to TSR and went through their records. He found no customer feedback, surveys, profiles, or any information that showed TSR listened to their market. These are facts.

In all my research into TSR's business, across all the ledgers, notebooks, computer files, and other sources of data, there was one thing I never found - one gaping hole in the mass of data we had available.

He did research, which is based on (*gasp*) facts from records. Don't try and reframe facts as opinions because they don't agree with your opinion. You're entitled your own opinion, but not your own facts.

 

[Cryndo]

I could say almost the exact same thing about WotC for me. I have not purchased anything of theirs (except on ebay) for over a year already. I still claim fence sitter status for now, but after the release of Book of Experimental Might and Paizo's announcement I now have even more options that don't involve starting over from scratch, spending money for new stuff instead of replacement stuff, and still being able to pull from already purchased stuff with little or no modification.

I had already decided to wait and review 4E six months down the road and then maybe switch if it seemed right, now that decision has been pushed back to August 2009 and has a competitor to review as well.

Absolutely true! But I believe there are two huge differences that work in WotC's favor. First, Wizards is considerably more likely to re-invigorate the casual D&D player. People who played D&D before will likely come back. People who still play D&D but stopped purchasing new stuff cause they already had more than they could use will buy the new line. Wizards will most assuredly have in place agreements with video game makers (DDO2?, NWN3?, Baldur's Gate?) which will drive new gamers to D&D. D&D will dominate the shelf space in gaming stores too. How long before Pathfinder will be available for purchase? There are a lot of people like you (I'm one come to think of it) that haven't bought a WotC product for a year or two and many of us will be buying again. I don't see Paizo picking up many new customers due to cross-promotion, new players coming to the game, or old one's coming back, so they better keep almost evey customer they have.

Second, Wizards has a much larger margin for error. Paizo can't afford to have it's customer base shrink too much. Wizards, by the nature of their business, can have a flop and still make considerably more than last year just because they've produced the next incarnation of D&D. If Wizards doesn't meet sales projections, there will be some downsizing, but what does that really mean to us? Fewer splat books? Not a problem from my vantage point.

I'm not trying to slam Paizo. I love Paizo. I hope they don't fail to miserably so they are still around to support 4E when they see the error of their ways. Heck, I'd rather support Paizo than Wizards any day, but I'm not gonna drive a souped up Pinto when I can get the Mustang for a few bucks more.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Wizards will most assuredly have in place agreements with video game makers (DDO2?, NWN3?, Baldur's Gate?) which will drive new gamers to D&D.

Considering the DDO was a horrible, terrible flop, and that NWN2 wasn't exactly a screaming success story, and that Baldur's Gate is what, approaching a decade in age, I think they'll need to do rather better than that if they want to "drive new gamers to D&D".

Still, maybe, just maybe, the new MMORPG that is still so secret at BioWare is 4E D&D. The new rules-set would certainly work for that better than the old one (you'd still be best off ignoring/altering large chunks of it), and some of the ideas in 4E might actually advance MMORPG design.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Still, maybe, just maybe, the new MMORPG that is still so secret at BioWare is 4E D&D.

Hasbro has entered a strategic partnership with Electronic Arts that gives them right of first refusal on all Hasbro properties.

However, that deal "grandfathered" in all existing agreements-- including Atari/Turbine/DDO.

I can't believe that EA would not snatch up Dungeons and Dragons as soon as it becomes available.

And there's this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21257461/

 

[Cryndo]

Considering the DDO was a horrible, terrible flop, and that NWN2 wasn't exactly a screaming success story, and that Baldur's Gate is what, approaching a decade in age, I think they'll need to do rather better than that if they want to "drive new gamers to D&D".

Still, maybe, just maybe, the new MMORPG that is still so secret at BioWare is 4E D&D. The new rules-set would certainly work for that better than the old one (you'd still be best off ignoring/altering large chunks of it), and some of the ideas in 4E might actually advance MMORPG design.

Yes DDO sucked (sucks?). NWN2 was a step backwards from the original in my opinion. Baldur's Gate was released long ago. That said, I'm certain each game had more players than Pathfinder will have. And, while I played DDO, I talked to many players who hadn't played D&D and I explained to them the game offline was much, much better. A few of those people tried the game and now play D&D. I'm not claiming that Wizards has had good luck in granting license to companies that make killer games, but I am saying that even mediocre games will draw in more new players than the zero games to be inspired by Pathfinder.

 

[billd91]

It doesn't. But the poster said that he had not seen any effort to gather any feedback. Well, that's not true. WotC has also stated that they conducted surveys. Just because they did not share the results of their market research does not mean that they have not done any.

That's not really what I was saying. I didn't say they weren't getting feedback, rather that I hadn't seen any efforts that were particularly rigorous as far as market research goes. Feedback is often informal and, if not collected in a rigorous method not subject to systematic bias, frequently statistically insignificant.
My main point was that not seeing anything from Paizo doesn't mean they don't do the same kinds of research WotC does... particularly I've never seen WotC do really significant research either.

 

[billd91]

The man went to TSR and went through their records. He found no customer feedback, surveys, profiles, or any information that showed TSR listened to their market. These are facts.
<snip>

He did research, which is based on (*gasp*) facts from records. Don't try and reframe facts as opinions because they don't agree with your opinion. You're entitled your own opinion, but not your own facts.

No one is disputing that Dancey found that TSR wasn't doing much listening to the market, at least not in a way documented in any surveys or data left behind for WotC to inherit. But Dancey's assessment that it was the lack of knowledge of the market that killed TSR is just that, an assessment, not an indiputable fact. It's HIS opinion and not one shared by everyone.

It is a FACT that that was his opinion when he wrote the piece. Whether or not it's a fact for certain, who can tell? It's not exactly like we can run a series of experiments and control for other variables... like the absence of Magic and the shenanigans going on in game and comic distribution at the time TSR went down.

 

[crosswiredmind]

That's not really what I was saying. I didn't say they weren't getting feedback, rather that I hadn't seen any efforts that were particularly rigorous as far as market research goes. Feedback is often informal and, if not collected in a rigorous method not subject to systematic bias, frequently statistically insignificant.
My main point was that not seeing anything from Paizo doesn't mean they don't do the same kinds of research WotC does... particularly I've never seen WotC do really significant research either.

True, but unless you work at WotC it is likely you will never see any of their research efforts.

 

[Raven Crowking]

True, but unless you work at WotC it is likely you will never see any of their research efforts.

It is equally unlikely that, unless the WotC purchase of TSR included the purchase of TSR's market research, that TSR simply left it there out of the non-bitter goodness of their hearts for Mr. Dancey to find.


RC