Hardly any information is out, but that doesn't mean it isn't too early to make bullshit predictions that are about as accurate as a council of economists predicting what the GDP is going to be next quarter. How do you think PF2 will do, saleswise? Will Paizo maintain steady sales, will this rocket them up to a new plateau or will this be the end for them?

Pathfinder is still doing pretty well, this will boost sales of the brand, and the only way this will hurt Paizo is if the new edition really sucks.  Like some I could mention.

JG

I think it will turn out well enough to turn a decent profit and keep Paizo in the game, so to speak.

With that being said, I doubt that PF2 will completely dethrone D&D 5e like PF1 did to D&D 4e.

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1028486I think it will turn out well enough to turn a decent profit and keep Paizo in the game, so to speak.

With that being said, I doubt that PF2 will completely dethrone D&D 5e like PF1 did to D&D 4e.

I agree.  The demand for "something else" isn't there.

jg

I predict;

1) Sales of the PF brand will slow down overall. Because people just don't have the time to invest in system-mastery anymore. It's not popular.
2) This will result in downsizing. More freelancers, less FTEs.
3) Paizo will survive nicely because they're a smart bunch.
4) APs will continue to sell like chocolate-covered crack because you can use them for any version of D&D you want to play. And they are widely regarded as well done.

Now, if PF2 is sexy AND it's simplified AND it's easier to GM AND it requires less system-mastery (wankery) to play AND they can make organized play actually fun to participate in for both masters and newbs (like have you ever walked in at a con to play some PFS and 1-hour in just wanted to kill yourself. Yeah, that should be fixed.)... I could see it going differently.

EDITED to add: Also, the bestiaries are so damn gorgeous and creative you can use those monsters anywhere. Also, Pathfinder Pawns are ingenious and Paizo should win an Academy Award for them. So, again, they could broaden the sales pitch to be more "every-game", and do well IMHO.

PF2 seems to be chasing people who don't like 3.5/PF and like 5e. Even if they aren't using 5e as a base, clearly all the 5e jargon they are using is not a coincidence.

I think they will get a short term burst of sales. But the people who like 5e and don't like PF will still prefer 5e. Meanwhile people who like 3.5/PF will probably not like PF2. Given how badly (and seemingly unpopular) Starfinder turned out, I have doubts that Paizo will be able to produce a great game. Or even a good one.

Adventure paths will probably sell. But I predict Paizo will start dual statting or publishing separate versions for 5e. Bestiaries are an interesting problem. Since PF2 won't be compatible with PF1, they're going to have to re-stat all the PF1 monsters.  Which means the bulk of the monsters in the bestiaries will likely be re-treads.  I mean, they have 6 books of monsters to convert. They'll likely drop some of the worse monsters and have new ones, but I have to think the new ones will be only 20%

I voted "doomed" in my own poll. Pathfinder is, despite Paizo's protests to the contrary, nothing more than off-brand D&D. It's built its product identity as a copycat of a legacy product that, for a time, was more popular than the flagship product of the market's dominant participant. In the world of consumer products, this rarely ends well. Sometimes it does, usually when the market leader screws up so badly for so long that people forget the time when it was #1. That's basically what happened with the Toyota Camry becoming America's #1 midsize sedan.

The route Paizo is taking, which is to vaguely copy many of the market leader's ideas while trying to retain key elements of its aging, decrepit copycat product, is a strategy that frequently fails. It fails even if what they're selling is "objectively" better. Brand identity is a huge driver of getting new customers in the door, and if the name brand product is "good enough," it doesn't matter if the off brand is somewhat better.

There are I think 3 main kinds of Pathfinder players:
1. People who play because it's 3.x. These will be turned off by the new edition.
2. People who play because they love Golarion and Paizo APs. These will stick around.
3. People who just play what their friends are playing. They'll drift wherever their friends go.

What they're not going to do is attract a bunch of people away from 5e, which is clearly what they're fantasizing about doing. Because if what your game offers is a chance for players to gather up a gang consisting of a dwarven cleric, a half-orc fighter, a halfling rogue, and an elven wizard, and you go out to hurl d20s at hill giants, troglodtyes, and acid-spitting black dragons, then your game is Dungeons & Dragons, and the name brand version is doing a fine job of being itself right now. There's just not much space for "D&D, but better in some ways" in the market.

I could be completely wrong, of course.

I know a lot of people who would play PF all day if they could, but play 5e because that's where all the games are. They always yearn for a 5e that's more like PF. 5e but more classes, more options, prestige classes, feats, character optimization and customization, etc.

I don't know how many people are like this out there but they'll probably all go to 5efinder when it comes out. Unless everyone just sticks with 5e anyway.

Pathfinder players will buy 2.0. Especially the ones that also bought Starfinder years later.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1028531I voted "doomed" in my own poll. Pathfinder is, despite Paizo's protests to the contrary, nothing more than off-brand D&D. It's built its product identity as a copycat of a legacy product that, for a time, was more popular than the flagship product of the market's dominant participant. In the world of consumer products, this rarely ends well. Sometimes it does, usually when the market leader screws up so badly for so long that people forget the time when it was #1. That's basically what happened with the Toyota Camry becoming America's #1 midsize sedan.

The route Paizo is taking, which is to vaguely copy many of the market leader's ideas while trying to retain key elements of its aging, decrepit copycat product, is a strategy that frequently fails. It fails even if what they're selling is "objectively" better. Brand identity is a huge driver of getting new customers in the door, and if the name brand product is "good enough," it doesn't matter if the off brand is somewhat better.

There are I think 3 main kinds of Pathfinder players:
1. People who play because it's 3.x. These will be turned off by the new edition.
2. People who play because they love Golarion and Paizo APs. These will stick around.
3. People who just play what their friends are playing. They'll drift wherever their friends go.

What they're not going to do is attract a bunch of people away from 5e, which is clearly what they're fantasizing about doing. Because if what your game offers is a chance for players to gather up a gang consisting of a dwarven cleric, a half-orc fighter, a halfling rogue, and an elven wizard, and you go out to hurl d20s at hill giants, troglodtyes, and acid-spitting black dragons, then your game is Dungeons & Dragons, and the name brand version is doing a fine job of being itself right now. There's just not much space for "D&D, but better in some ways" in the market.

I could be completely wrong, of course.

This fits my view, so I voted doomed.
In the short term they will get sales, as many people who played PF1 will convert over to PF2. But I can't see them taking the 5e D&D market. Their chance there was 5 years ago, maybe build a new better game off the PF Beginner Box. 5e has now had plenty of time to re-establish D&D as dominant.
In the long term they will mostly just have fragmented their legacy consumer base while not, I expect, making much of a dent in WoTC's market.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1028531Sometimes it does, usually when the market leader screws up so badly for so long that people forget the time when it was #1. That's basically what happened with the Toyota Camry becoming America's #1 midsize sedan.

The first thing that came to my mind were Oreo cookies. People forget that those nasty Hydrox things came first. Still, I voted that Paizo will be fine. Regardless of the buzz words they're using, I doubt it'll be much different from 1e.

I predict hordes of butt-hurt nerd-raging geeks screaming They changed Pathfinder and now it sucks!

I also predict that PF2 will be far more playable, but WTF do I know?

Now excuse me, I gotta go make some popcorn. I smell another pointless yet entertaining edition war brewing....

I see a massive drop in 1.0 sales for Pathfinder.

Seeing this topic, I started not to reply since it is outside my knowledge, but then the sheer enormity of the ignorance itself caught my eye.  I'm struck by the way in which you might as well be asking me to predict tea futures in China.  As someone who dropped out of the 3E model when 3.5 came around, who hates adventure paths (though I admit Paizo seemed to have the form down), and doesn't want a frustrated novelist writing my games--I was already off that train before Pathfinder arrived.  Paizo letting their inner SJW run wild certainly didn't encourage me to peek in, but I doubt I would have anyway.  

I think I have a better handle on the future of several different branches of story games, than I do PF.  Oh well, I guess we are about to find out.

I reckon they'll reduce the hit die of the fighter to d8, to make it more balanced.