Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MrGrenadine" data-source="post: 5534070" data-attributes="member: 62619">I don't mean to pick, Hussar, but I'd like to make a couple comments on your post:I would say Paizo has done more outreach in the past decade, myself, but who knows?&nbsp; Here's an honest question, though:&nbsp; Whats the feedback loop for Encounters and GW, because reaching out to customers doesn't necessarily mean listening and responding to customers.&nbsp; You need the loop!&nbsp; And if WotC is really listening to its customers, and wisely choosing which feedback to incorporate, then that can only be good for the game.Are you thinking of specific publishers here, because I thought the GSL was the death knell for D&amp;D 3PP.I think D&amp;D was a mess at the tail end of 2e, because TSR was a mess.&nbsp; The game rebounded spectacularly during the 3e years, which was great to see.Interesting point, but I would think it would be more worrisome for D&amp;D's current owner that a d20 D&amp;D-based game is the one nipping at their heels.&nbsp; (If that's really happening, off course, because I have no proof of that.)&nbsp; And I'm not sure what you mean by &quot;leveraged the D&amp;D name&quot;, because Pathfinder doesn't seem to do that.&nbsp; What it does do is leverage past D&amp;D editions, as did 3rd edition, 3.5, 4e, Essentials, etc etc.Also, excellent marketing can get folks to the table, but only a solid and fun game will keep players at the table.&nbsp; My unsupportable anecdotal experience leads me to believe that Pathfinder will be fine down the road.&nbsp; But anything can happen.In the meantime, I'll keep playing both PF and 4e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MrGrenadine, post: 5534070, member: 62619"] I don't mean to pick, Hussar, but I'd like to make a couple comments on your post: I would say Paizo has done more outreach in the past decade, myself, but who knows? Here's an honest question, though: Whats the feedback loop for Encounters and GW, because reaching out to customers doesn't necessarily mean listening and responding to customers. You need the loop! And if WotC is really listening to its customers, [I]and wisely choosing which feedback to incorporate[/I], then that can only be good for the game. Are you thinking of specific publishers here, because I thought the GSL was the death knell for D&D 3PP. I think D&D was a mess at the tail end of 2e, because TSR was a mess. The game rebounded spectacularly during the 3e years, which was great to see. Interesting point, but I would think it would be [I]more[/I] worrisome for D&D's current owner that a d20 D&D-based game is the one nipping at their heels. (If that's really happening, off course, because I have no proof of that.) And I'm not sure what you mean by "leveraged the D&D name", because Pathfinder doesn't seem to do that. What it does do is leverage past D&D editions, as did 3rd edition, 3.5, 4e, Essentials, etc etc. Also, excellent marketing can get folks to the table, but only a solid and fun game will keep players at the table. My unsupportable anecdotal experience leads me to believe that Pathfinder will be fine down the road. But anything can happen. In the meantime, I'll keep playing both PF and 4e. [/QUOTE]

Verification