Just to recap the ICv2 articles going back to Second Quarter 2009 (when they first began reporting).
2009 Q2
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Warhammer (FFG); 3rd-Song of Fire and Ice (FFG); 4th-World of Darkness (WWGS); 5th-Shadowrun (FASA)
"The roleplaying game category remains deeply troubled, with most brands down, and the gap between Dungeons and Dragons and the rest growing."
2009 Q3
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Pathfinder (Paizo); 3rd-World of Darkness (WWGS); 4th-Song of Fire & Ice (FFG); 5th-Shadowrun (FASA)
"RPGs, behind the new excitement associated with Paizo’s Pathfinder RPG, are also doing well. "
2009 Q4
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Pathfinder (Paizo); 3rd-Warhammer (FFG); 4th-Rogue Trader (FFG); 5th-World of Darkness (WWGS)
"RPG sales were down around 10% in 2009."
2010 Q1
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Pathfinder (Paizo); 3rd-Warhammer (FFG); 4th-Rogue Trader (FFG); 5th-Dragon Age (Green Ronin)
"Paizo’s Pathfinder is competing for #1 in some venues, especially in comparative sales of core books."
2010 Q2
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Pathfinder (Paizo); 3rd-Warhammer (FFG); 4th-Shadowrun (FASA); 5th-Rogue Trader (FFG)
"In RPGs, the battle for leadership between perennial winner D&D and Paizo’s Pathfinder continues, with Wizards of the Coast mounting a strong defense and Paizo on the attack"
2010 Q3
1st-D&D (WotC) & Pathfinder (Paizo) (tie); 3rd-Warhammer (FFG); 4th-Rogue Trader (FFG); 5th-Dresden Files (Evil Hat)
Oddly, ICv2 had no mention of the general state of the RPG market this quarter, despite the unprecedented tie for 1st.
2010 Q4
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Pathfinder (Paizo); 3rd-Rogue Trader (FFG); 4th-Dragon Age (Green Ronin); 5th Mutants & Masterminds (Green Ronin)
Again, no comments to elucidate any trends.
2011 Q1
1st-D&D (WotC); 2nd-Pathfinder (Paizo); 3rd-Rogue Trader (FFG); 4th-Dragon Age (Green Ronin); 5th Mutants & Masterminds (Green Ronin)
"And in RPGs, WotC’s Dungeons & Dragons and Paizo’s Pathfinder continue to duke it out, with D&D's coterie of one-game stores, relative strength in the book channel, and organized play allowing it to still hold a lead over-all. That helps D&D overcome the stronger Pathfinder product schedule, which is swinging the balance in favor of the Paizo line in more stores that carry both."
2011 Q2
1st Pathfinder (Paizo); 2nd-D&D (WotC); 3rd-Rogue Trader (FFG); 4th-Dragon Age (Green Ronin); 5th-Shadowrun (Catalyst)
"In the RPG category, we estimate that Paizo's Pathfinder won the quarter, behind more and stronger releases than Dungeons & Dragons."
Still no one who is doubting anything? I am surprised
I just don't care is all.
I play D&D.
By the end of my time in 3.x, I disliked enough of the system that I have no interest in Pathfinder while many of my problems with 3.x were either fixed in 4E or those elements were not carried over at all.
I congratulate Paizo on their success, but I don't care how well it is selling, I'll never go back.
Anyway, the other really good question is "how much should we even care?" I'm not playing game X because it is THE most popular game on the sales charts. I'm playing it because it is what spins my wheels. As long as plenty of people will play it and there's support for it that's all I really care about.
Still no one who is doubting anything? I am surprised
I doubt it. I would be lying if I said I didn't care (I do), but these are not the times to pick a fight over it.
What I do want to nitpick about is the first time. Pretty sure that White Wolf was ahead of TSR for a few months.
Pretty sure that White Wolf was ahead of TSR for a few months.
Nope. Even at its height, White Wolf never claimed to outsell D&D. It was definitely number 2 in the mid-90's though, while D&D 2d edition revised was being released, and TSR was about to enter bankruptcy. The release of 3e threw it into the backseat, though, and it never recovered.
Anyway, the other really good question is "how much should we even care?" I'm not playing game X because it is THE most popular game on the sales charts. I'm playing it because it is what spins my wheels. As long as plenty of people will play it and there's support for it that's all I really care about.
I would like to remind everyone that chart toppers for sales have included Furbies, Chers "Do you Believe" Aqua's "Barbie Girl" and such cinematic suppositories such as Transformers 2 and the Twilight Series.
Mind you this is a double edged sword, but how much do numbers actually play into perceived quality? Just because something sells well dosent necessarily mean its good, nor do low selling products have to be bad.
The real question is whether or not Pathfinder will suffer from what WIzards has done in the past and overproduced and flooded the market with too many options, like in the case of 2e (TSR) and the different settings or in 3e with the 8 million Forgotten Realms titles. The product may be stronger, but if you put too many out and the gamer has limited purchasing power you may eventually have a massive backlog of books.
But you make sales.
Having a constant supply of possibly limited audience may be, and often is, a better business model than only ublishing a limited supply of would-be high sales products - especially in entertainment industries.
Knowing if an individual player can, or can not, buy everything is far less important than having a catalog of products that can sell, taken as a whole, to a maximum number of potential buyers.
Anyway, WotC invested more in "D&D boardgames" than in the RPG part of the brand.
I don't think the figures in OP include board games, or DDI membership fees. WotC can still be ahead if you consider the money generated by the whole brand.
But I see no reason to doubt they are behind Paizo on the "traditional" RPG market - it has been neglected enough this year.
Post scriptum :
Mind you this is a double edged sword, but how much do numbers actually play into perceived quality? Just because something sells well dosent necessarily mean its good, nor do low selling products have to be bad.
True - but you should say this to WotC themselves, as they have been pretty clear in the past that the publication scedule was changed because each individual product was not selling enough to their tastes.
I provide this solely for informational purposes. For the first time ever, D&D is not the top-selling RPG (slightly more).
Correction: D&D as published by WotC is not the top-selling RPG. Pathfinder IS still D&D, and is the most popular edition of D&D in the past 25 years. 3e was and is a phenomenon. This is not limited to Paizo as you can still see used copies of the 3e PHB pop-up on Amazon's top 20-40 RPG books.
Funny, how when the CEO of Paizo came out and said something very simmilar there was a wave of disbelief across this forum. People were dismissive, stopping just shy of calling her grossly misinformed or a liar. Now we have a second statement colloborating the claim.
Now, this is not a huge deal. Like when Paizo tied in Q3 of 2010.
In Q3 if last year, Paizo was pushing the Advanced Player's Guide and was hot on the heels of their sub-edition's release. It was their PHB2. Meanwhile WotC was putting out campaign settings, pricey card-based spin-offs, and hyping the reprinting the Core rules.
Now, in Q2, WotC has released very little, having soundly woun Q4 & Q1 with Essentials. We've seen a couple small products. Meanwhile, Paizo came out with Ultimate Magic, a very popular book that was Arcane Power on steroids plus the reprinting of their popular Campaign Setting.
Of course the company actually releasing multiple big releases is going to "win". They'll likely "win" GenCon and Q3 on the strength of Ultimate Combat and Goblins of Golarion and their other BIG releases. Meanwhile, with Heroes of Fey and Heroes of the Elements and The Book of Vile Darkness looming, WotC will crush Paizon in Q4 and Q1 of 2012.
Competition is good. This is good. Very good.
This will only drive WotC to give their A-game, release great books, and really focus on producing books that people really want and will sell. Meanwhile, Paizo has to prove their worthy of the top spot, and continue to release quality material, if not improve.
I'm excited!
We've heard Paizo say that all of their retail sales go through Diamond Distributors, which ICv2 track. WotC does a lot of its sales direct, bypassing distributors, which I'm almost sure ICv2 doesn't track, and DDI is a major revenue stream for D&D which again ICv2 doesn't track.. So at best, this is comparing most if not all of Paizo's sales vs a fraction of WotC's sales.
I don't see where there are meaningful conclusions to draw in any of this.
Sure their a small group that do one product, but they put it across well and those who stayed with them are clearly growing, that is great news for RPG's but not so great for 4e with a company like Hasbro looking always to the bottom line.
Now Paizo are producing figures and you can bet they will sell like hot cakes, for 4e and Pathfinder.
You can't fault a company loving what their doing, doing it well and caring about those who stick with them.
Ab
Funny, how when the CEO of Paizo came out and said something very simmilar there was a wave of disbelief across this forum. People were dismissive, stopping just shy of calling her grossly misinformed or a liar. Now we have a second statement colloborating the claim.
Just wait until these people discover this thread ;)
Correction: D&D as published by WotC is not the top-selling RPG.
I was referring to D&D the brand, not D&D the game, which has no universal definition and can only serve to further enflame the edition wars. I've edited the initial post to make it clear that I am referring to sales of the brand, just as the article is. As I said, I was presenting the article for informational purposes only.
I'd appreciate it if you left the edition warring for other threads. Thanks, Jester.
Numbers can be misleading.
We've heard Paizo say that all of their retail sales go through Diamond Distributors, which ICv2 track. WotC does a lot of its sales direct, bypassing distributors, which I'm almost sure ICv2 doesn't track, and DDI is a major revenue stream for D&D which again ICv2 doesn't track.. So at best, this is comparing most if not all of Paizo's sales vs a fraction of WotC's sales.
I don't see where there are meaningful conclusions to draw in any of this.
This.... well I dont have anything to add aside from this stuff is boring.
And wrecan - Mutants & Masterminds is by Green Ronin, not FFG.
Oops! Fixed.
) It doesn't mean that Paizo had greater total earnings than the D&D division of WotC.
It seems like it just means that Paizo sold more RPG books than D&D did. I do think that's big news. Whether you do or not is up to you.
I think the ICv2 rankings mean exactly what they say they mean: that Paizo sold more RPG books. Their rankings are "... based on interviews with retailers, distributors, and manufacturers." That statement definitely implies that subscription based sales are NOT included. Board games are clearly omitted from those numbers. However, it seems like they would have to include Amazon and similar companies, for that to be a credible statement; none of us know for sure. (Anyone want to contact ICv2 and ask if they include Amazon sales in their rankings? )
It doesn't mean that Paizo had greater total earnings than the D&D division of WotC.
It seems like it just means that Paizo sold more RPG books than D&D did. I do think that's big news. Whether you do or not is up to you.
WotC doesn't share its sales info. Amazon doesn't share sales info. Barnes and Noble doesn't share sales info. I doubt every hobby store talks to ICv2.
There are a lot of holes there. I think you're just seeing what you want to see.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I think the ICv2 rankings mean exactly what they say they mean: that Paizo sold more RPG books. Their rankings are "... based on interviews with retailers, distributors, and manufacturers." That statement definitely implies that subscription based sales are NOT included. Board games are clearly omitted from those numbers. However, it seems like they would have to include Amazon and similar companies, for that to be a credible statement; none of us know for sure. (Anyone want to contact ICv2 and ask if they include Amazon sales in their rankings? )
It doesn't mean that Paizo had greater total earnings than the D&D division of WotC.
It seems like it just means that Paizo sold more RPG books than D&D did. I do think that's big news. Whether you do or not is up to you.
WotC doesn't share its sales info. Amazon doesn't share sales info. Barnes and Noble doesn't share sales info. I doubt every hobby store talks to ICv2.
You don't know whether they talk to Amazon or B&N or not any more than anyone else does. We do know that this has never before beaten D&D in an ICv2 survey. So we can tell, that among the sources ICv2 speaks to, Pathfinder is taking market share that once belonged exclusively to D&D.
There are a lot of holes there.
I think you're just seeing what you want to see.
Did I ever mention what I wanted to see?
I don't think D&D is dying, or even losing the battle to Pathfinder. A guy at my FLGS tried to start a Pathfinder game a month-or-so ago, and still can't get a regular group together. Compare that to three full (6+) talbes at D&D Encounters every week. No, from my POV D&D is soundly beating Pathfinder! But not many of the Encounters players have bought anything since the Heroes of ... books. They almost all subscribe to DDi though. So I can see how D&D can be the stronger game, while Pathfinder leads in book sales.
It also seems like WotC is aware of the rise of Pathfinder. We got Essentials, and now have all those Mearls columns that harken back to older editions. Put it all together, and the ICv2 rankings are perfectly believable to me. You don't agree. Whatever.
Whatever the results of ICv2's report there's always people eager to bust in and shout "that just means Paizo is WINNING!" which I don't get.
Then someone points out that ICv2's figures are missing huge amounts of genuine numbers and their data is gathered in such a way that it is nigh meaningless.
Then someone gets offended by this, and despite the fact that it's been repeatedly shown that IvC2 cannot possibly have access to any of the information needed to support their claims/headlines (if you follow ICv2 at all, you know this is par for the course for a good half of their articles anyways, no matter what the headline is) then it's just "fanbois who don't want to admit Paizo is winning."
Then an edition war starts.
Cue moderation. (Actually, they jumped in pretty quick this time. Thumbs up!)
Edition war goes on for 10-20 pages (depending on how many posts you have set to display per page) with moderation sprinkled throughout, and lots of people assuming that ICv2's headlines are gospel despite the fact that (once again) they cannot possibly have any genuine clue about what they're saying.
Also, my autobiography is nearing the editing/layout step. I've got a whopping six(!) pre-orders already, so according to all the sources I check (my ledger) my unfinished autobigraphy has sold more copies in the last six months than Paizo's product have for their entire publishing history, because I have zero sales for them in the sources I choose to look at and have access to.
Whatever the results of IvC2's report there's always people eager to bust in and shout "that just means Paizo is WINNING!" which I don't get.
It's very simple, there are lots of people who can't stand the fact that some people may have different tastes than they do so they have to save the idiots from the errors of their ways.
It's exactly that simple.
It's odd... Every time I see one of these threads they're filled with the exact same content. (outside of the first post.)
Whatever the results of IvC2's report there's always people eager to bust in and shout "that just means Paizo is WINNING!" which I don't get.
I didn't see anyone say anything nearly that harsh... a COUPLE people did harp on WotC, but I didn't see anthing as extreme as what you imply. Maybe I missed it. Which post(s) were you talking about?
Then someone points out that IvC2's figures are missing huge amounts of genuine numbers and their data is gathered in such a way that it is nigh meaningless.
I agree that the data set probably isn't complete, but none of us KNOWS what data is/isn't included... even you. But the rankings are definitely not meaningless. It shows that in the markets ICv2 probes, D&D wasn't the #1 selling PNPRPG for the first time ever. Paizo IS gaining grounds in those markets.
Then someone gets offended by this, and despite the fact that it's been repeatedly shown that IvC2 cannot possibly have access to any of the information needed to support their claims/headlines (if you follow IvC2 at all, you know this is par for the course for a good half of their articles anyways, no matter what the headline is) then it's just "fanbois who don't want to admit Paizo is winning."
I have a totally different perspective. From my POV, the war starts when people come on and say "you can't believe anything about the ICv2 numbers," when there's clearly SOMETHING to believe. Their rankings may not tell the whole story, but they tell A story, and it's not fair debate to dismiss it outright without providing any conficting information.
I didn't see anyone say anything nearly that harsh... a COUPLE people did harp on WotC, but I didn't see anthing as extreme as what you imply. Maybe I missed it. Which post(s) were you talking about?
I think I've discussed moderation enough already.
I agree that the data set probably isn't complete, but none of us KNOWS what data is/isn't included... even you. But the rankings are definitely not meaningless. It shows that in the markets ICv2 probes, D&D wasn't the #1 selling PNPRPG for the first time ever. Paizo IS gaining grounds in those markets.
Actually, we do have an excellent idea of where they didn't get their figured from, because it's the same places they never get their figures from because no one gets them. Amazon, big market retailers, WotC's own sales records, non-book sales. Actually, you may want to take note of their methodology--they don't get any figures to begin with. They poll retailers and distributors and generally ask for "impressions" rather than numbers because ICv2 is irresponsible as hell when it comes to reporting. I'm actually shocked they haven't started running with "WIZARDS TO ANNOUNCE 5TH EDITION D&D AT GENCON" because someone on these boards thinks they might and that's more confirmation than they usually look for. "Who do you think sold the most?" is a question that just tells us that more people think Pathfinder sold more product than WotC.
I have a totally different perspective. From my POV, the war starts when people come on and say "you can't believe anything about the ICv2 numbers," when there's clearly SOMETHING to believe. Their rankings may not tell the whole story, but they tell A story, and it's not fair debate to dismiss it outright without providing any conficting information.
From a source that has repeatedly shown itself to not bother to confirm information, fails to do proper research, reports speculation as fact on a regular basis, and wouldn't know "responsible journalism" if it walked up and showed off it's photo ID press pass, then yeah, I think I can safely ignore their conclusions.
All their "results" show is that in a quarter where WotC had the most sparse release schedule since the release of 4e and Paizo published several big name books that some retailers they chose to poll THOUGHT Paizo products sold more than WotC, but outside of polling certain distributors which do not handle the bulk of one company's business (and likely not even then) they have no genuine data to compile to come to an actual conclusion of what genuine sales figures are even in the markets that they chose to poll. There are enough qualifiers in that sentence to make their "story" pretty dismissable.
Wanna buy my autobiography? It's the best selling book in the world according to the markets I chose to poll, and I actually have data to back it up.
ICv2: I Can't verify 2 save my life. They're straight up the Weekly World News of nerdery, and I keep wondering how long it's going to be until they start reporting things like "Hasbro sacrifices entire Wizards of the Coast staff to Oprah in grisly rites, hires Bat Boy as new operations manager to lead staff of androids."
You'd think if PF was actually outselling D&D, Paizo would be celebrating and telling the world. Maybe there'll be a huge anouncement at Gen Con, maybe WOTC will walk in and point out they're wrong. Who knows?
Why did it take 5 pages for it to get to just how bad the article is? Even if PF products were outselling D&D on a global scale it wouldn't show what people were buying or even using things to play PF.
You'd think if PF was actually outselling D&D, Paizo would be celebrating and telling the world. Maybe there'll be a huge anouncement at Gen Con, maybe WOTC will walk in and point out they're wrong. Who knows?
That's not how businesses work. It's not about two kids arguing over who has the most toys and then one going "nah nah nah nah, I have more toys (sticks out tongue)"
Whatever data is collected is put out there, nothing more and nothing less. Being to quick to see it as full on proof, or to dismiss it as nothing but people taking sides is just bad form.
"Nobody" knows the system that was used to come up with the figures they did except for the people that work there.
There is nobody taking sides on this, they gathered the data and presented what they had.
Seems to me that there aren´t any real surveys in the market, that are up to date.
If you're now the no. 1 selling RPG in the world and there's actual proof, you're going to tell people because it will draw crowds and interest, that's a pretty basic marketing strategy.
Paizo doesn't have to do this. It let's the quality of it's products and the quality of it's service speak for itself.
The RPG hobby is in decline, the fact that D&D is hit hardest by that is not really all that suprising, Wizards has made the largest investment of any company out their in their RPG title and when the consumers just aren't their to buy it they have to trim the fat which is exactly what they have been doing. The fact that they have momentarily been surpassed by Paizo really doesn't mean a whole lot, while I love Paizo and their products, companies like that have come and gone more times than I can count. A hicup in the economy can put them out of business overnight.
I don't think Paizo's success and Wizards reduced success has anything to do with product quality at all. People that play 4th edition continue to play 4th edition, people who play Pathfinder continue to play Pathfinder. Their is a definitive split their and between the two is a very large gap in which many people like me exist that play both. Regardless of which fence you sit on, or if your in the bowl in the middle the fact is that the economy is jacked up, people don't have money and buying game books doesn't make the cut for many out their. That impact has its effects on Wizards and Paizo, but the difference is that Paizo is a small company and can function better on less, while Wizards is a big one and when a product fails to sell they are hit considerably harder. Smaller companies simply do better in bad economies in the short term, but in the long term they tend to do considerably worse because they don't have the financial backing to dig themselves out of a hole.
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
You'd think if PF was actually outselling D&D, Paizo would be celebrating and telling the world. Maybe there'll be a huge anouncement at Gen Con, maybe WOTC will walk in and point out they're wrong. Who knows?
You would even imagine that the CEO of Paizo would come out with a statement saying how pleased they are with their sales.
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
Pathfinder's golden age was a couple of years ago when 3.5E was still out, because Pathfinder essentially is 3.5E, and that golden age is long past and they're just holding on to those who won't let it go.
Pathfinder's golden age was a couple of years ago when 3.5E was still out, because Pathfinder essentially is 3.5E, and that golden age is long past and they're just holding on to those who won't let it go.
Hence one of the lines in my sig.
If you're now the no. 1 selling RPG in the world and there's actual proof, you're going to tell people because it will draw crowds and interest, that's a pretty basic marketing strategy.
Paizo doesn't have to do this. It let's the quality of it's products and the quality of it's service speak for itself.
Out of curiosity, Xun, where do Pathfinder evangilists/jihadists fall into this?
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
Pathfinder's golden age was a couple of years ago when 3.5E was still out, because Pathfinder essentially is 3.5E, and that golden age is long past and they're just holding on to those who won't let it go.
Ah ok thanks for clarifying it, so even after their golden age has long passed they are outselling the latest edition of 4th edition D&D? Pathfinder is very much in their golden age, they are selling more today than ever before and they are continuing to attract more and more players, despite a slumping economy. Thats hardly the definition of holding on to those that won't let it go.
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
Pathfinder's golden age was a couple of years ago when 3.5E was still out, because Pathfinder essentially is 3.5E, and that golden age is long past and they're just holding on to those who won't let it go.
Ah ok thanks for clarifying it, so even after their golden age has long passed they are outselling the latest edition of 4th edition D&D? Pathfinder is very much in their golden age, they are selling more today than ever before and they are continuing to attract more and more players, despite a slumping economy. Thats hardly the definition of holding on to those that won't let it go.
I thought at the end of the day it's about what the customers want? If you have more people who want to play a certain game why would you want to take that away from them? Wizards tried this already
"Hey let's take away this edition and give you guys something that we think you will like better".
" Ummmmm no thanks, I am fine with the edition that I enjoy better and since you stopped making it I will go to this company over here that gives me what I want."
Whatever the results of IvC2's report there's always people eager to bust in and shout "that just means Paizo is WINNING!" which I don't get.
I didn't see anyone say anything nearly that harsh... a COUPLE people did harp on WotC, but I didn't see anthing as extreme as what you imply. Maybe I missed it. Which post(s) were you talking about?
Oh hey, look, now there's another extra page of them. ^_^
If you'd like more examples, just check back in this afternoon. There should be more than a few extra.
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
Pathfinder's golden age was a couple of years ago when 3.5E was still out, because Pathfinder essentially is 3.5E, and that golden age is long past and they're just holding on to those who won't let it go.
Ah ok thanks for clarifying it, so even after their golden age has long passed they are outselling the latest edition of 4th edition D&D? Pathfinder is very much in their golden age, they are selling more today than ever before and they are continuing to attract more and more players, despite a slumping economy. Thats hardly the definition of holding on to those that won't let it go.
Except that Pathfinder outselling 4E is a load of crap. ICv2's numbers are a load of crap, as has been established in this and previous threads. Your own prejudice tells you that 4E is failing, and you are taking faulty information at face value to see what you want to see. People call that confirmation bias or wishful thinking.
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
Pathfinder's golden age was a couple of years ago when 3.5E was still out, because Pathfinder essentially is 3.5E, and that golden age is long past and they're just holding on to those who won't let it go.
Ah ok thanks for clarifying it, so even after their golden age has long passed they are outselling the latest edition of 4th edition D&D? Pathfinder is very much in their golden age, they are selling more today than ever before and they are continuing to attract more and more players, despite a slumping economy. Thats hardly the definition of holding on to those that won't let it go.
Except that Pathfinder outselling 4E is a load of crap. ICv2's numbers are a load of crap, as has been established in this and previous threads. Your own prejudice tells you that 4E is failing, and you are taking faulty information at face value to see what you want to see. People call that confirmation bias or wishful thinking.
I don't see why people even bother to respond to you. You are like Scully from the X-Files, an alien could slap her up side the head and she will still find a way to claim that it wasn't an alien.
I understand that this isn't hard proof but the fact of the matter is you can't prove it's wrong just like we can't prove it's right.
Now if you think it's wrong then that is your opinion, but unless you have some hard evidence to back you up then try stating your comments as they are, an opinion.
That said I think 4th edition has lived out its golden age and it is now thoroughly over, while Pathfinder has really just started theirs. I do believe that a very wide portion of the D&D audiance has shifted to Pathfinder, in particular those gamers who are looking for a more complex gaming experiance which Pathfinder offers as oppossed to the continued simplification (dumbing down) of 4th edition D&D. I don't see that situation changing under Wizards umbrella and its why I firmly believe that its unlikely we will see another D&D edition under Wizards assuming contractual obligation don't force Hasbro to do so.
pathfinder isn't a "more complex gaming experience" maybe a "more needlessly complex gaming experience" but it's definitely not more complex in a good way, nor can i see the higher reliance on tactics in 4th ed over the "i stand there and full attack" of 3.5 as "dumbed down" in any sense of the words.
When you have more than ICv2's flawed data and your own personal prejudices, feel free to come back and make a real argument.
You don't need evidence to prove that the sky isn't falling. Opinions aren't created equal. D&D is the industry leader and the 800lb Gorilla in the room. The burden of proof is on other games to prove that D&D is no longer #1, and that would require much more than ICv2's flawed data.
When you have more than ICv2's flawed data and your own personal prejudices, feel free to come back and make a real argument.
Sooooooooooooooo you are an expert on this type of data and how it is all retrieved and compiled?
You don't need evidence to prove that the sky isn't falling. Opinions aren't created equal. D&D is the industry leader and the 800lb Gorilla in the room. The burden of proof is on other games to prove that D&D is no longer #1, and that would require much more than ICv2's flawed data.
When you have more than ICv2's flawed data and your own personal prejudices, feel free to come back and make a real argument.
Sooooooooooooooo you are an expert on this type of data and how it is all retrieved and compiled?
It doesn't take an expert to deem data collected without WotC's direct sales to retailers, Amazon's WotC sales, or DDI as worth about as much as a strip of newspaper smeared with poop.
I actually really like the Pathfinder game, love the setting, and even I find these threads are getting offensive. It doesn't do any great service to come to the 4e general thread and gloat - not to mention yeah, these numbers aren't saying as much as people want them to.
Does it really matter which one outsells the other? I mean, I know I won't see any of that cash any time soon.
I actually really like the Pathfinder game, love the setting, and even I find these threads are getting offensive. It doesn't do any great service to come to the 4e general thread and gloat - not to mention yeah, these numbers aren't saying as much as people want them to.
Its as if enjoying Pathfinder isn't enough, that 4E needs to be a proven failure and that its fans need to have their faces rubbed in that failure before some people will be satisfied.
You don't need evidence to prove that the sky isn't falling. Opinions aren't created equal. D&D is the industry leader and the 800lb Gorilla in the room. The burden of proof is on other games to prove that D&D is no longer #1, and that would require much more than ICv2's flawed data.
When you have more than ICv2's flawed data and your own personal prejudices, feel free to come back and make a real argument.
Sooooooooooooooo you are an expert on this type of data and how it is all retrieved and compiled?
It doesn't take an expert to deem data collected without WotC's direct sales to retailers, Amazon's WotC sales, or DDI as worth about as much as a strip of newspaper smeared with poop.
The paper could be used as fertilizer....
- not playing games that require reading books.
My daughter will probably learn to read faster than she might have in order to better play D&D and WoW... just as my son learned to read to better play Magic The Gathering.