Does anybody have information on the commercial success of 4E you can share (besides Amazon.com rankings)?
Thanks.
Those numbers are not publicly available - only WotC really knows.
Everything would be either anecdotal or otherwise incomplete.
Is there any specific context in which you're looking to use this information? That might help narrow down what you might need.
Barns & Noble or Borders would have those numbers, if they would share?
well, i have bought 4e, so, thats one.
|
well, i have bought 4e, so, thats one.
Me too. Guess sales are at least two then. But seriouly, as Scott said context of the question? This has been discussed in another thread already under the guise of determining which edition is better. Simple answer is no one knows really as exact combined sales figures are only known to WotC. If you were a Hasbro share holder you may be able to request the information? My local gaming store often sells out of 4e products so I would say sales are at least good for him. He has said that 4e currently sells better than his 3e stock (which is discounted to clear).
S.
Does anybody have information on the commercial success of 4E you can share (besides Amazon.com rankings)?Thanks.
4E is a complete failure. WotC betrayed the essence of D&D, then kicked my dog, all while shoving nails through kittens. Pathfinder is the 2nd coming!
or
4E is selling wonderfully, Paizo is a bunch of grognard throwbacks who can't keep up with the times. They'll be out of business in six months. And Mona smells like cheese!
I don't mean to jump down your throat, but this question gets posed by some (probably) well-meaning person every few weeks, and it always devolves into the above shouting match. I'm just trying to save you 30 pages.
The boring truth is that nobody releases the data. Even if they did, people would still try to spin the data to support their side...a little something called confirmation bias.
The part about Mona is probably true, though.
|
Well not sure if this is proof either way but here is the Trafic details For Wizards . com
That was a cool little site. Thanks for that. Any idea if they track access to other areas of the site or is it only the home page that registers?
(curious becasue I have favourites links that bypass the homepage on both sites, so wondering if that type of access is accounted for).
I liked the break down of where the major hits are coming from as well. Very useful little program for people studying data. (Sorry , I'm a science/maths teacher and that type of thing gets my geek meter running)
Cheers
|
Well not sure if this is proof either way but here is the Trafic details For Wizards . com
That was a cool little site. Thanks for that. Any idea if they track access to other areas of the site or is it only the home page that registers?
(curious becasue I have favourites links that bypass the homepage on both sites, so wondering if that type of access is accounted for).
I liked the break down of where the major hits are coming from as well. Very useful little program for people studying data. (Sorry , I'm a science/maths teacher and that type of thing gets my geek meter running)
Cheers
Afraid I couldent really say it's just a website I happened to stumble upon one day.
what sort of cheese?
I got sortova' Pepperjack vibe off of him when I last smelled him at the first Paizocon--with maybe a whiff of toner.
Well not sure if this is proof either way but here is the Trafic details For Wizards . com
Oddly, the trafic on the Wizards Web site seems to decrease since mid-2008 (release of 4th ?)
Oddly, the trafic on the Wizards Web site seems to decrease since mid-2008 (release of 4th ?)Well not sure if this is proof either way but here is the Trafic details For Wizards . com
It's hard to say (not seeing back before that time) - it might have gotten really busy during the lead-in to 4th, when everyone in the world was watching what was coming, and then died down once the dust settled.
One thing to keep in mind about Alexa - it doesn't track all internet use. It only tracks the use of those who have the Alexa Toolbar. As an entirely volunteer program, how accurate it statistically represents the full internet is often up for debate.
I also seem to recall that they changed their formula for determining traffic sometime in 2008, which might also reflect a change.
Now, all the above? Doesn't change the fact it is a very interesting, very useful site. But given the argument at hand - and the data that already is dismissed on the topic - this source is just as debatable as any other.
Yeah, I believe that Vic had previously noted that despite Alexa showing little or no growth for the traffic on Paizo.com, their own information from running the site had shown that they traffic had been growing significantly.
There are the US Today top150 lists, the top 25 yearly amazon.com list and a host of other information spread around the internet.
But no, there are no hard numbers anywhere. So everything just comes back to what you like. Not that hard evidence would help you there either. Because if WotC released the sales numbers of 4e, the nay-sayers would just claim that the numbers were false.
So the best thing is just to not care.
|
|
There are the US Today top150 lists, the top 25 yearly amazon.com list and a host of other information spread around the internet.
But no, there are no hard numbers anywhere. So everything just comes back to what you like. Not that hard evidence would help you there either. Because if WotC released the sales numbers of 4e, the nay-sayers would just claim that the numbers were false.
So the best thing is just to not care.
True - bottom line is. Either Hasbro are making money and WotC will continue to make D&D products, or Hasbro is loosing money and WotC will stop making D&D. Right now WotC seems to be making D&D so we can infer that Hasbro is happy with them.
S.
|
|
True - bottom line is. Either Hasbro are making money and WotC will continue to make D&D products, or Hasbro is loosing money and WotC will stop making D&D. Right now WotC seems to be making D&D so we can infer that Hasbro is happy with them.S.
*cheers* Now, back to the regularly scheduling game program ;-)
Isn't the Divine Power book and the Eberron campaign setting book released this week?
|
|
You'll never see the numbers. It would just invite bad heat if it wasn't OMGBREATHTAKINGNOWAYYYYY numbers. Then every hater would pop out and say "Ha, 3rd was doing better at this time" or "2nd was better" or "Cool, a Hello Kitty MMO is out!"
... can I take back that last one?
Anyway, I hope they keep doing well for themselves. A lot of people like the system and though I might not be in love with it, I'm ALSO not the only gamer that matters. I hate seeing any game company go under. We need MORE table top gamers, not less :D
I hate seeing any game company go under. We need MORE table top gamers, not less :D
Huzzah to this. More gamers equals more money, which makes better products for all. Back to the OP, it does seem strange that no data has been released at all....you might be able to deduce 'some' of the numbers from Hasbro's earnings report.
From Hasbro's Form 8-K, dated July 20, 2009:
"U.S. and Canada segment net revenues were $490.9 million, compared to $467.7 million in 2008 . The results reflect growth in TRANSFORMERS, G.I. JOE, LITTLEST PET SHOP, NERF, PLAY-DOH, FURREAL FRIENDS and TONKA. The U.S. and Canada segment reported an operating profit of $56.3 million, compared to $43.7 million in 2008.
International segment net revenues were $276.2 million, compared to $293.7 million in 2008. The revenues include a negative foreign exchange impact of approximately $42.8 million. The results reflect growth in TRANSFORMERS, G.I. JOE, LITTLEST PET SHOP, NERF, PLAY-DOH and STAR WARS. The International segment reported an operating profit of $16.5 million compared to operating profit of $14.0 million in 2008.
Entertainment and Licensing segment net revenues were $24.2 million, compared to $21.3 million in 2008. The results reflect increases in TRANSFORMERS, G.I. JOE and NERF. The Entertainment and Licensing segment reported an operating profit of $2.9 million compared to operating profit of $8.0 million in 2008. The 2009 results were impacted by one-time expenses associated with the investment in the joint venture with Discovery Communications. The Entertainment and Licensing segment includes television, movies, lifestyle and digital licensing and on-line entertainment operations."
This is publically available information... unfortunately it also doesn't really nail anything down with regard to this discussion.
Later on in the 8-K, it does clearly state As a brand-driven, consumer-focused global company, Hasbro brings to market a range of toys, games and licensed products, from traditional to high-tech and digital, under such powerful brand names as TRANSFORMERS, PLAYSKOOL, TONKA, MILTON BRADLEY, PARKER BROTHERS, CRANIUM and WIZARDS OF THE COAST, so these figures should also cover WoTC and by extension 4e.
So, the 8-K states clearly it's leading product lines... and 4e isn't among them. I wouldn't take away anthing significant from this though. Those product lines have volume behind them, so any profit margin from those products is magnified by scale. 4e is probably a drastically smaller product line with regard to scale, so it's natural it wouldn't be among it's leading products.
So, in short... we're still back to guessing. ;)
From last year: Deconstructing 4e Sales.
I have no doubt that WotC has sold a lot of 4e books. But I don't think that this is a zero-sum game.
OTOH, nearly everyone I know who has played D&D for a long time would rather play something besides 4e. I never bought the 4e books, but I jumped on Pathfinder, having known about Paizo quality due to Dungeon. We're introducing new players to the game, and we're introducing them to Pathfinder.
EDIT
So, the 8-K states clearly it's leading product lines... and 4e isn't among them. I wouldn't take away anthing significant from this though.
Exactly. Transformers and GI Joe now have blockbuster movie marketing and promotion. Hasbro is a goliath.
On the other hand, if they did definitively list D&D4e in their 8-K, it would probably indicate an amazing commercial success. :)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
On the other hand, if they did definitively list D&D4e in their 8-K, it would probably indicate an amazing commercial success. :)
I think the only time I've seen reference to WotC or its products in Hasbro's public filings is in the context of Magic expansions. I believe there was a comment in one of their 10-Q's about how the subsidiary was less profitable due to a lower number of expansions in one year. The only other reference I can recall is a comment about the investment in their digital initiative. I don't think it was WotC-specific, but it was likely a reference to the project taken on by WotC for all its products.
Edit: The acquisition of WotC wasn't even material enough to warrant Hasbro filing an 8-K about that transaction, so that also shows how small WotC is in comparison to Hasbro as a whole.
From last year: Deconstructing 4e Sales.
I have no doubt that WotC has sold a lot of 4e books. But I don't think that this is a zero-sum game.
OTOH, nearly everyone I know who has played D&D for a long time would rather play something besides 4e. I never bought the 4e books, but I jumped on Pathfinder, having known about Paizo quality due to Dungeon. We're introducing new players to the game, and we're introducing them to Pathfinder.
EDIT
So, the 8-K states clearly it's leading product lines... and 4e isn't among them. I wouldn't take away anthing significant from this though.Exactly. Transformers and GI Joe now have blockbuster movie marketing and promotion. Hasbro is a goliath.
James is an old school 4e hater, which is cool; to each his own. But he is basing his sales figures on nada. The article you quoted is as close to a joke as you can get.
Also, I love your anectodal evidence. Seriously. This is precisely why this subject is a waste of time.
Have fun playing 3.75 though.
|
|
I haven't seen any 4e commercials (maybe they're on G-4 or something?) so I couldn't tell anyone if they were a success or not.
As far as sales go, I think they're somewhere between 3.0 and 3.5 (3.0 brought a lot of old school gamers back into the fold, and was a minor phenomenon - not nearly to 1e volume, but still). Even if 4e is just a bit behind 3.0 numbers, I'd have to say it is doing pretty well, especially considering the economy now.
It's almost like one could've predict where this thread was going...
Everyone I know who's started a thread like this has had it go very well. ;-)It's almost like one could've predict where this thread was going...
Well played....well played.
:)
|
|
Seriously, D&D full stop (who cares which edition) is nothing compared to the toy market. Honest truth is we play a niche game, we aren't main stream and we aren't the cool kids. Sorry, sometimes the truth hurts.
Trying to compare say Transformers to D&D is like comparing sales for Coca Cola to sale volumes of Diet, caffine free, organically grown mung bean flavoured enemas...
S.
Seriously, D&D full stop (who cares which edition) is nothing compared to the toy market. Honest truth is we play a niche game, we aren't main stream and we aren't the cool kids. Sorry, sometimes the truth hurts.
Trying to compare say Transformers to D&D is like comparing sales for Coca Cola to sale volumes of Diet, caffine free, organically grown mung bean flavoured enemas...
S.
Dude...where the heck do you shop?
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Dude...where the heck do you shop?Seriously, D&D full stop (who cares which edition) is nothing compared to the toy market. Honest truth is we play a niche game, we aren't main stream and we aren't the cool kids. Sorry, sometimes the truth hurts.
Trying to compare say Transformers to D&D is like comparing sales for Coca Cola to sale volumes of Diet, caffine free, organically grown mung bean flavoured enemas...
S.
More disturbing question: why does he care what his enemas taste like?
Wait...I don't want that question answered.
Diet, caffine free, organically grown mung bean flavoured enemas...
Is that for real, or are you just a cruel tease?
|
|
Dude...where the heck do you shop?Seriously, D&D full stop (who cares which edition) is nothing compared to the toy market. Honest truth is we play a niche game, we aren't main stream and we aren't the cool kids. Sorry, sometimes the truth hurts.
Trying to compare say Transformers to D&D is like comparing sales for Coca Cola to sale volumes of Diet, caffine free, organically grown mung bean flavoured enemas...
S.
For the recored I know about as much about how well the sales of aforementioned mung bean product is going as I do about 4e sales. I hope that this is a general situation.
However to change this thread from the usual decline into useless speculation puncuiated by the odd 3e* die hard crying "see 4e sucks because my Wall Street linked tea leaves I read this morning say NOBODY is buying it and WotC is on the verge of collapse, and WotC are SO evil that when they collapse they will form a black hole and destroy the World".
I say we concentrate now on determining the exact (not rumor but fact) sales of the Mung Bean Enema. 4e sales has been done to death, unlike said enema.
In reference to Transformers we should call the Mung Bean Enema, MBE-1.
S.
*Not inferring that 3e players on the whole are odd you understand.
Everything would be either anecdotal or otherwise incomplete.
Is there any specific context in which you're looking to use this information? That might help narrow down what you might need.
I've been playing D&D since first edition. Some of my friends have had plans to publish some of their work, and we've all been pretty impressed by the OGL and the overall development of the 3E community.
Most discussions in our little community address the question of what our future canon / consensus will be. Similar to folks on the message boards, there are strong advocates of a "running system", as well as those who want to "keep up" with ongoing development.
With the advent of Pathfinder, I see a new situation altogether, and I would like to add that to the dicussion as an alternative to edition-hopping every 4 years or so.
To allow for an evaluation, whether 4E is actually performing in terms of gaining foothold in the community is an important aspect. I thought WOTC might actually have published information about sales, and that someone might have more on this than just their opinion or a comment whether this topic is useless or not (for me, it is of interest, and clearly that's the reason I started this thread).
Everything would be either anecdotal or otherwise incomplete.
Is there any specific context in which you're looking to use this information? That might help narrow down what you might need.
I've been playing D&D since first edition. Some of my friends have had plans to publish some of their work, and we've all been pretty impressed by the OGL and the overall development of the 3E community.
Most discussions in our little community address the question of what our future canon / consensus will be. Similar to folks on the message boards, there are strong advocates of a "running system", as well as those who want to "keep up" with ongoing development.
With the advent of Pathfinder, I see a new situation altogether, and I would like to add that to the dicussion as an alternative to edition-hopping every 4 years or so.
To allow for an evaluation, whether 4E is actually performing in terms of gaining foothold in the community is an important aspect. I thought WOTC might actually have published information about sales, and that someone might have more on this than just their opinion or a comment whether this topic is useless or not (for me, it is of interest, and clearly that's the reason I started this thread).
The goodman games link a few posts up is well worth reading imo.
The Goodman Games blog entry is no more or less relevant than the Clark Peterson post indicating the contrary view.
Neither knows wtf is going on as neither is on the Hasbro board.
I dont mean "You should read that link it has all the answers and is absolutely true." I mean it's well worth a read if you are looking around and trying to inform yourself on the topic. It is possible that there is another article somewhere on the internet which is also worth reading - even if it provides a conflicting opinion.
|
|
"I know more than everybody and I went to a bunch of gaming stores" is hardly informative. Goodman has a vested interest in talking up 4e, as he hitched his wagon to WotC. Peterson is still ticked off that the GSL isn't the OGL, so has a personal reason for talking down 4e.
Neither is objective, therefore, neither is reliable, imo.
"I know more than everybody and I went to a bunch of gaming stores" is hardly informative. Goodman has a vested interest in talking up 4e, as he hitched his wagon to WotC. Peterson is still ticked off that the GSL isn't the OGL, so has a personal reason for talking down 4e.
Neither is objective, therefore, neither is reliable, imo.
Do you have a link to the other post? (I have no idea who either of them are)
I did find the Goodman take on history interesting (particularly the claim that D and D had 2 'spike' years). Personally, I think you can glean something of interest from a biased perspective - it just pays to remember that most people are not good witnesses, nor do they give objective accounts. Anyhow - I didnt mean to suggest that the link is gospel truth, but I do think it's interesting in a 'food for thought' kind of way.
"I know more than everybody and I went to a bunch of gaming stores" is hardly informative. Goodman has a vested interest in talking up 4e, as he hitched his wagon to WotC. Peterson is still ticked off that the GSL isn't the OGL, so has a personal reason for talking down 4e.
Neither is objective, therefore, neither is reliable, imo.
Now that is the truth. But if you want to waste your time look at his post for what it really says.
From 1974 to 2009 is 35 years. Or, roughly two generations. D&D has roughly one peak every generation. 35 years total, 2 of which were great, and the other 33 of which were "okay."
But what do people compare 4E to?
One of the two best sales years in the past 35 years of D&D. Not the other 33 years.
Is 4E doing as well as 3E sales in 2001? Definitely not. That was the high point in a generation.
Is 4E doing as well as D&D sales in the times of 1974-1981? 1983 through 2000? And approximately 2002 through 2008?
Yes.
He makes this claim but with no proof, even if he has proof all this claim says is that sales are in the same general realm as they were in 2007, 1990, or any other year not including the two big years. That could mean sales have not gone up from the last year of 3.5 but it certainly would imply they haven't gone up much if at all.
So, is 4E doing well?
Yes. In the 35 year history of D&D, we stand at a high point. D&D is selling more copies, reaching more customers, supporting more game stores, than it has during most of its history.
How does this make sense for him to claim right after stating it was not one of the two great selling years but instead similar to the other 33? He says in one statement sales are basically ok, as good as most years, then makes the bold claim but they are better then they are most of the time...
Anyway his little post to me shows nothing of value nor should be concidered any help in informing you on how 4e is doing. Time will tell, that alone will be the our best indicator unless Hasbro starts releasing the sales numbers.
|
|
To allow for an evaluation, whether 4E is actually performing in terms of gaining foothold in the community is an important aspect. I thought WOTC might actually have published information about sales, and that someone might have more on this than just their opinion or a comment whether this topic is useless or not (for me, it is of interest, and clearly that's the reason I started this thread).
While I agree 100% that uptake by the community is of importance in that you can hardly have a community if you only have 1 person actually playing a game but...
However I fail to see why WotC should (or would) publish details of their sales? What does it matter to an individual who has purchased 4e, loves it and plays it? I would venture that "most" D&D is played by small groups of friends and isn't really an organised sport.
The common reason (and I apologise to you in advance if this isn't you) that most people pose this type of question is they secretly hope that WotC will post sales figures that show that 4e is failing.
I hope you can see that nobody knows and everyone has an opinion. Read articles by Clarke, Peterson, Santa Claus or President Obama and you will still be not one step closer to knowing the exact sales figures. I would suggest you contact WotC directly and "if" you get an answer please come back and post here. You will head off the next "Is 4e doing well?" thread that will pop up in another 3-5 weeks.
S.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
"I know more than everybody and I went to a bunch of gaming stores" is hardly informative. Goodman has a vested interest in talking up 4e, as he hitched his wagon to WotC. Peterson is still ticked off that the GSL isn't the OGL, so has a personal reason for talking down 4e.
Neither is objective, therefore, neither is reliable, imo.
Now that is the truth. But if you want to waste your time look at his post for what it really says.
From 1974 to 2009 is 35 years. Or, roughly two generations. D&D has roughly one peak every generation. 35 years total, 2 of which were great, and the other 33 of which were "okay."
But what do people compare 4E to?
One of the two best sales years in the past 35 years of D&D. Not the other 33 years.
Is 4E doing as well as 3E sales in 2001? Definitely not. That was the high point in a generation.
Is 4E doing as well as D&D sales in the times of 1974-1981? 1983 through 2000? And approximately 2002 through 2008?
Yes.
He makes this claim but with no proof, even if he has proof all this claim says is that sales are in the same general realm as they were in 2007, 1990, or any other year not including the two big years. That could mean sales have not gone up from the last year of 3.5 but it certainly would imply they haven't gone up much if at all.
So, is 4E doing well?
Yes. In the 35 year history of D&D, we stand at a high point. D&D is selling more copies, reaching more customers, supporting more game stores, than it has during most of its history.
How does this make sense for him to claim right after stating it was not one of the two great selling years but instead similar to the other 33? He says in one statement sales are basically ok, as good as most years, then makes the bold claim but they are better then they are most of the time...
Anyway his little post to me shows nothing of value nor should be concidered any help in informing you on how 4e is doing. Time will tell, that alone will...
You show that horse! Beat him some more!!! I think he's twitching still! Not quite dead.
With the advent of Pathfinder, I see a new situation altogether, and I would like to add that to the dicussion as an alternative to edition-hopping every 4 years or so.
Pathfinder 2E? ;-)
Again, I didn't mean to jump down your throat. It is simply that this exact question has just been posed many times before, and the truth is there is no hard data available. So opinions are all you can hope to get. Of course, not all opinions are created equal, but still...
In the interest of trying to be useful, my opinion is that 4E is doing OK. Probably better than 3.5 did near the end, but not as well as 3E did in the beginning.
In the interest of trying to be useful, my opinion is that 4E is doing OK. Probably better than 3.5 did near the end, but not as well as 3E did in the beginning.
In the interest of not being useful, my opinion is that pizza is delicious.
To allow for an evaluation, whether 4E is actually performing in terms of gaining foothold in the community is an important aspect. I thought WOTC might actually have published information about sales, and that someone might have more on this than just their opinion or a comment whether this topic is useless or not (for me, it is of interest, and clearly that's the reason I started this thread).While I agree 100% that uptake by the community is of importance in that you can hardly have a community if you only have 1 person actually playing a game but...
However I fail to see why WotC should (or would) publish details of their sales? What does it matter to an individual who has purchased 4e, loves it and plays it? I would venture that "most" D&D is played by small groups of friends and isn't really an organised sport.
The common reason (and I apologise to you in advance if this isn't you) that most people pose this type of question is they secretly hope that WotC will post sales figures that show that 4e is failing.
I hope you can see that nobody knows and everyone has an opinion. Read articles by Clarke, Peterson, Santa Claus or President Obama and you will still be not one step closer to knowing the exact sales figures. I would suggest you contact WotC directly and "if" you get an answer please come back and post here. You will head off the next "Is 4e doing well?" thread that will pop up in another 3-5 weeks.
S.
I was of a mind that people want to know what is doing better between Pathfinder and 4e so they know where they should focus their buying power. If 4e is a super hit and crushing all who oppose it, then people would rather buy those books, but if Pathfinder has more support, they want to go in that direction.
I don't think it's a question of leaders vs. followers so much as having a limited amount of disposable income and not wanting to buy 2 sets of rules. I was in the same boat before 4e arrived, should I focus on 4e or PFRPG because I can no longer afford to buy everything for both games (growing up and being a responsible adult and all that).
Perhaps they want to buy a game that will continue to have products to support it. If they go the PFRPG route and it fails to generate support material, then they’ve wasted money.
What I ended up doing was to purchase the 4e gift set, just to see if I liked it or not. I loved the game and have decided to follow it and give up on PFRPG. Sorry all, it's not anything against Paizo, who I believe puts out better support products that WoTC, but I can no longer afford to purchase everything I WANT, and have to make decisions about what I can afford.
I’m sure there are other people who overtly and covertly want WoTC to fail to justify their anger at them for ruining THEIR game, but I don’t think all people feel that way.
I would love to buy everything I want (Cthulhu Tech looks really cool, but I just don’t have the funds or time to play so many different games).
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
In the interest of trying to be useful, my opinion is that 4E is doing OK. Probably better than 3.5 did near the end, but not as well as 3E did in the beginning.In the interest of not being useful, my opinion is that pizza is delicious.
You're wrong. Pizza sucks. Tacos are delicious.