From the Paizo message boards posted by Lisa Steven, CEO of Paizo(I would provide a direct link, but my iPad won't let me):

QuoteAfraid not.

Scott is totally right here. Pathfinder has surpassed D&D in most of the markets that I check.
Thanks for ninja'ing me Scott!

-Lisa

So, it would appear Pathfinder has SURPASSED D&D 4e in marketshare. Earlier in the thread where this was pulled, they said they've had a consistently growing number of core book sales since Pathfinder's released. That is mind boggling.

Quote from: KrakaJak;466524That is mind boggling.

Not from where I am sitting.

Quote from: jeff37923;466526Not from where I am sitting.

Not from where I'm sitting either. The 3.x audience is significantly larger than the 4.x audience, even today. When we explore the implications of that fact, it boggles the mind, and forces us to acknowledge that WoTC royally fucked up when marketing their new game...

Grim summed it up best on Twitter.

"They went after a new target ignoring their fanatical niche."

Quote from: KrakaJak;466524So, it would appear Pathfinder has SURPASSED D&D 4e in marketshare. Earlier in the thread where this was pulled, they said they've had a consistently growing number of core book sales since Pathfinder's released. That is mind boggling.

Did anyone supply any actual evidence of this?

4e is a huge departure from all prior editions, so it's not a huge surprise to me. I think it killed one too many sacred cows.

Quote from: The Traveller;466532Did anyone supply any actual evidence of this?

Always nice, never present in discussion of rpg success or failure. Premature speculation is the usual method, the young are prone to it.

QuotePathfinder has surpassed D&D in most of the markets that I check.

This is credible if the markets they are looking at are hobby shops and bookstores. I do wonder, though, if they figure in the role of DDI or not. That might change the picture.

On the other hand, nice to see them prosper.

Quote from: The Traveller;466532Did anyone supply any actual evidence of this?

The ceo of paizo made the statement based on conversations with distributors who told her pathfinder was outselling 4e. I find that pretty convincing...though its possible she misunderstood what she was told. Distributors (and there are only a few biggies for rpgs) should have reliable data on their product sales. I think this combined with the firing of bill slavicsek suggests 4e isnt performing as well as 3e did.

Quote from: Melan;466538This is credible if the markets they are looking at are hobby shops and bookstores. I do wonder, though, if they figure in the role of DDI or not. That might change the picture.

On the other hand, nice to see them prosper.

This came up on en world a few days ago and ddi is the big question mark. It seems her statement is limited to print sales. Still D&D falling behind on print sales is huge.

The idea that anything has overtaken D&D - even another iteration of D&D - is quite a shocker. Even if only in hard copy.

What is it exactly that most gamers seem not to like about 4e? Is it the way fighters have kewl powerz which add perhaps by some standards excessive layers of complexity to the game? Is it the way believability, suspension of disbelief and in some senses flexibility of play have been left behind to pursue a more focused experience with greater game-balance and tactical challenge?

Extra layers of complexity and a willingness to sacrifice some element of believability and suspension of disbelief were already present to some degree in 3rd ed, hence in Pathfinder. But 3rd ed / Pathfinder maintained flexibility of play, and didn't go to the extremes of complexity and trampling on suspension of disbelief which we seem to see in 4e. Did 3rd ed strike the right balance for most gamers? Or is even 3rd ed out of step with what gamers really enjoy?

Cranewings for instance commenting on my thread on musings on immersive roleplay in the Pundit's forum seems to indicate Pathfinder isn't his group's preferred system and seems to attribute this to it lacking believability and having excessive complexity, though both only specifically in relation to the way magic works.

Maybe most gamers are yearning for a simpler, more flexible, more believable experience, but still with hard and fast rules. Yet network externalities dictate that only a narrow selection of systems have any kind of market reach:- D&D and its offshoots; WHFRP and its offshoots; WOD; a few other major systems maybe. So gamers are stuck in some kind of morass?

Quote from: danbuter;4665334e is a huge departure from all prior editions, so it's not a huge surprise to me. I think it killed one too many sacred cows.

And it didn't appeal to the people who didn't like the sacraed cows as it didn't kill the most annoying ones and added some worse new ones

supporting evidence-

http://bit.ly/jP2LXu

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/16211

How is this in any way shocking?

Other than it's behaving exactly like everyone has believed it would for the past two years?

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;466540Still D&D falling behind on print sales is huge.

If WotC was still selling their product that way.

Seanchai