You can check out the NY Times, the trade papers, the business journals, wherever you like - the print publishing industry is hurting and has been for a while now.If you'd read the source article I provided you'd know that unit sales were up slightly in 2008 (at 3.127 billion), and that unit sales are projected to rise (to 3.15 billion) by 2012.
*sigh* Projections out to 3 years from now? Seriously? It's apples-and-oranges to a discussion about past trends to-date and comparisons of current and past results. And are those unit sales figures adjusted for different sampling/collection methods - are they counting the same things in the same way? Otherwise it's not terribly meaningful for comparison.
If the book industry is hurting, it's because they're not growing swiftly. If the growth rate is flat it shouldn't make relative sales dip in the way you're describing in order to elevate D&D books.
Newspapers & magazines are not scrambling for investment/advertising capital or having layoffs or shutting their doors because of "flat growth". If revenues are flat and costs are rising, the business is in trouble. You have to at least acknowledge that a problem exists before trying to understand or correct it.
I'm all for open speculation and shared opinions, but the discussion only has meaning if we're at least working within the same frame of reference.
That's fine by me Scott because that's the metric I use for my start time. 2nd could do what 1st could do when it came out. 3rd ed could just about do everything second ed could do when it came out with its core 3. You could do monster race characters, you could do multiclass characters, and you could hit all the base classes. Granted somethings where new but all the 'core' material from the previous edition was there. I was highly annoyed when they switched over to 3.5 and made so many new changes, but 3.5 could still do what 3.5 could do, and was backwards compatible to boot.
I can't say the same about 4th edition yet. Major races are missing, meaning that some characters can't be 'reborn' in the new edition yet. Significant classes are still missing, and several of the "key features" of the previous editions are not completely supported yet. Until I can actually full on play 4th edition like I can previous editions, it's just a beta.
You do know that the only "core" race or class still missing from 4th Edition is the monk, right?
*sigh* Projections out to 3 years from now? Seriously? It's apples-and-oranges to a discussion about past trends to-date and comparisons of current and past results. And are those unit sales figures adjusted for different sampling/collection methods - are they counting the same things in the same way? Otherwise it's not terribly meaningful for comparison.
Oh for crying out loud. The Book Industry Study Group is a pretty well-respected organization, and they're referencing their own past results. It's not like they're comparing their results one year with some other group's results from previous years.
And the projections for the future are just there as icing for the cake. The only thing that really matters is that the BISG sees a nominal or flat growth rate, not a decline in either sales dollars or unit sales.
Newspapers & magazines are not scrambling for investment/advertising capital or having layoffs or shutting their doors because of "flat growth". If revenues are flat and costs are rising, the business is in trouble. You have to at least acknowledge that a problem exists before trying to understand or correct it.
We're not trying to fix the book industry. We're trying to see whether or not D&D is growing relative to the current marketplace. Whether or not newspapers and magazines are cutting costs has nothing to do with the question we're trying to answer because the data we have shows that the industry as a whole is not experiencing a decline in sales. Since there's no decline in sales, it is very unlikely that D&D products would rise in relative ranking (as we've seen) and not also experience significant sales increases.
I'm all for open speculation and shared opinions, but the discussion only has meaning if we're at least working within the same frame of reference.
If you have a "frame of reference" of your own that you'd like to introduce, be my guest. I went out and grabbed some actual industry trend data, though, and it does not support your assertion that the book industry is experiencing declining sales.
Speculating on the book industry is just a silly thing to do. I remember like 10 years ago when the internet was catching on, people were out on the street proclaiming the end to the bookstore and the book as a whole. I mean why would anybody buy a book when they can get text online?
Book stores are still going though. I am not debating if there is a growth but its not like they all closing up shop, boarded over their windows and leaving nothing but cliché tumbleweed behind them.
Remember the days before Harry Potter were child didn't want to read books? Or the days before Twilight (oh how I miss those days.) Books sales definitely are spiky from time to time. Sometimes something hits the shelves that sends the world into a flutter. At the same time there are periods were people grab their signs and head back to the streets for their prophecies of doom and gloom.
Any industry that makes such jumps in demand are going to have erratic growth rates. Speculate all you want but the fact remains that it is nothing more than speculation. Even looking at sales data is false in that it looks back at some past time. What past sales are, while it does relate some, is not the sole function of current sales.
|
Newspapers & magazines are not scrambling for investment/advertising capital or having layoffs or shutting their doors because of "flat growth". If revenues are flat and costs are rising, the business is in trouble. You have to at least acknowledge that a problem exists before trying to understand or correct it.
Newspapers have their own issues outside the tarede paperback/print industries. Its an apple and orange comparison.
Bias, gaining news from other sources and other reasons are why papers are in trouble.
|
|
Not to mention the likely year-over-year increase in illegal distribution of RPG materials. I don't think anyone was filesharing the 3.0 (or even 3.5!) books when they came out.While filesharing is clearly more widespread now than it was in 2000 or 2003, an increase in pirated e-books should translate to a drop in sales, not the higher relative sales figures that we're seeing now.
I'll be honest, a buddy of mine gave me scanned copies of all the 4th edition core books when they first came out. That was actually what prompted me to buy my own set. I was a 4e hater until I actually saw the finished product and decided that it wasn't as bad as I had thought it would be. Much to my wife's chagrin, I have ended up buying every 4e release as a result. I could have just stuck with the digital copies, there are even places where you can buy them legally for a fraction of the price, but I'm old skool and like the feel of ink and paper in my hands.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Regardless of the intricacies of comparing statistics, I think it's safe to say that the gamer market appears to be growing, if only relative to its past ranking among book retailers in general. And that's great to hear. But it should be noted that at this time, there isn't really an in-print option for people new to the game other than 4e. So of course someone going out to buy books is going to get those. While it's true to say that 2009 Toyota Camrys are selling better in 2009 than 2004 Camrys are selling in 2009, it also neglects the fact that one is the new shiny and the other can't be purchased new anymore.
In the end, though, I guess I'm just missing the point of this thread. What are we supposed to take away from this? That 4e's better? That we should be buying it too? That Scott Rouse isn't just blowing smoke up the gaming community's ass about the success of 4e? That the book industry is worse overall than it was 6 years ago? That game stores that sell RPGs but aren't reported in these statistics have closed many of their doors and the only place people can buy 4e is from Barnes & Noble? What's the point?
but I'm old skool and like the feel of ink and paper in my hands.
Me too. When it's a check with my name on it and a lot of zeroes.
Please, no jokes about how my name already accounts for at least one of those zeroes. ;)
I think the statistics are proving what everybody already knew: 3.0 sold really well because it was a new revival of an old favorite with better production values; 3.5 sold well but with less fanfare than 3.0 or 4e; 4e sold somewhere on the order of the 3.0 sales, but the exact figures are confused, particularly because the bargain pricing of the box sets for 4e which was not there for 3.0.
And then PHB II comes out for 4e and it sells much better than the PHB II for 3.5, though this is to be expected since it contains many of the races and classes that old players consider core and these were bumped over by WotC as a business move which can be viewed as cynical or savvy depending on the way you spin it.
|
<sob>
D&D of any form being played and staving off the looming "computer generation". All good I say.
Devil advocate time...
As to rankings on sales, perhaps a reflection of more acceptance to "shop online"? I brought my 3E and 3.5E from my local store, but brought 4E from Amazon.
Perhaps PHB2 sold so well because people felt the the PHB as presented was an incomplete game and that after they had forked out for the PHB/DMG/MM it was smarter to get PHB2 rather than resign the incomplete 4E D&D to the cupboard?
:)
Seriously who cares unless you have shares in WotC?
S.
PS: My dad is bigger than your dad.
Well, it hardly surprises me that 4E would sell better than anything previous. Assuming that given enough data, a statistical distribution will look like a bell curve, we see that an average is arrived at.
With that in mind, when you dumb something down more people will buy it because it's easier.
Using that train of thought, more people today probably read Dan Brown than Charles Dickens or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, but I know which of those books has more style for my taste. Apply this to the products in question and one may arrive at certain theories/ideas about people and accesibility.
I commend the people who I would like to term "4E apologists" (Believe me, there are 3.5 apologists too). You play an edition of DnD far superior to anything before it and now you can PROVE it with hard numbers. Scott Betts can no longer be argued with (if ever he could). I take my hat off to you and return to my little end of the bell curve, away from the average, to pick up my 3.5 book and experience some depth - along with my clique of die-hard grognards.
Could this be the end of the conflict? I hope so, then we can all feel okay about our own game, whatever that is and the 4E heads can talk about their game without getting sniped by the others. A dream perhaps, just a dream....
;)
|
|
Using that train of thought, more people today probably read Dan Brown than Charles Dickens or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, but I know which of those books has more style for my taste.
;)
Dude, I'm still laughing that you would compare ANY edition D&D to classic literature! Sorry by the way Gary. d20 Sherlock Holmes anyone?
I would suggest that implying that 4E'ers are somehow "dumber" then those that went before may invoke Scott. In this case however whatever Scott has to say on the matter (and I can imagine what it'll be) I can only but agree with. 4E as a DM you have to be some sort of organised, "current condition remembering" freak-a-zoid (er no offense intended by this comment btw). I can solve quantum mechanical equations in my head (not for fun you understand, as part of my job - doing it for fun would be weird) but I'm buggered if I can remember which player or critter had what current -/+ on them round to round when there are 5 players and 5-10 monsters about!
4E is like the force, let go of your hatred - it only leads to the dark side (meaning not having fun playing 4E). Choose the right group and 4E is fantastic, choose the wrong group and the game blows chunks. Anyway PHB2 has some cool concepts that expand on the old ideals we have of things like Rangers - well done WotC I say.
Beastmaster goodness!
Using Paranoia RPG's logic.
4E is perfect, 4.5E will be MORE perfect... :)
S.
Ah, Stefan Hill, one of my favorite posters. More moderate and reasonable. Yeah, my experience of 4E was similar. having said that, any edition of DnD I played with a crappy group tended to be crappy regardless of incarnation. What I find amusing is the need, on the 4E forum, for haters to think anyone really cares what they think, and secondly, the apologists need to defend their niche of the hobby. At a guess, I'd say that this thread was an attempt to stick it to the 3.5ers. I like to put on my tin hat and watch the fireworks.
Btw, I had to compare to literature or be forced to listen to the ramblings of armchair economists.
I'd love to do a poll of posters occupations. I'm sure there would be a great mix.
My group has two lawyers, a psychiatric nurse, a radiologist, a project manager (whatever that means) and an aircraft engineer. I think out of those, two bought 4E which would totally add nemerical weight to the argument that 4E has defeated 3.5 in a landslide. Dammit, I may just get out there and get a copy of 4E PHBII. My educated guess is that, based on high sales, there should be a price slump as the product gets dumped onto the market, thereby empowering me to bargain for a lower price! That's my market analysis! Should really get PHBI first tho...
p.s. I wasn't really stating that 4E meant dumb players, only that a simpler product makes easier access. Maybe the use of "dumbed down" was not the best language.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with comparing gaming to literature. Much of the literary canon was popular literature that was dismissed at the time.
The quality of 4e's prose, as with its artwork, varies from creator to creator. This is as it has been with all previous editions and as I expect it will be with all future ones as well.
Praising 3.X for the gold--and there is a lot of gold--is because an awful lot of dross is overlooked. Stuff like the musical dragon hookah in Song & Silence. The extreme giggle-worthiness of the name of the feat "Black Lore of Moil" in Complete Arcane. Etc. etc.
There have been some good editorial decisions in 4e and some extremely poor ones. This is the same as before as well.
A good DM can run a game with nothing more than his mind, some words, and maybe a random number generator as simple as rock-paper-scissors. A poor one can ruin the most elaborate and beautifully written game with leaden delivery.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with comparing gaming to literature. Much of the literary canon was popular literature that was dismissed at the time.Time may prove me wrong but I believe it unlikely that any edition of D&D no matter how well written will be placed along aside Shakespeare...
I'll agree with you there.
Rolls a d20. one 1-5, hands out maces, 5-10 gets swords,11-14 get clubs, 15-16, get chains, 17 gets a 9 mm 18 gets a flame thrower, 19 gets a Cadillac escalade, and 20 gets a Gundam. Sign your name here to get a roll
Ports in his throne and watches the fight
|
|
No. But it is only because you are wrong, and I have some statistics somewhere about that back me up, or at very least my cat will confirm what I have just said. Er, what are we talking about again?
I hate you
You suck!
Did I win?
My cat says that your cat is a noob and wouldn't know a good game if it came up and sniffed it's bum. ;-)
My cat says that your cat is a noob and wouldn't know a good game if it came up and sniffed it's bum. ;-)
My cat smells.
|
I don't get mad, cuz I just don't car4e.
I play 3.5, I couldn't afford 4e even if I wanted to, Earthdawn 3rd is being released in July, Pathfinder in August, I have to scrounge to afford those (since I make 3/4 of what I made last year).
In general gamers tend to cut other expenses before gaming expenses...so if other sales dip of course game sales will jump...relatively speaking.
Unless you can pull up hard numbers showing that 4e PHII sold 3x as many copies as 3.5e PH2 (which wasn't a core book, but a splat book anyway)...there's no footing to say that 4e is actually doing better...it's all relative to what is being sold in a recession economy...
just my observations...
Rolls a d20. one 1-5, hands out maces, 5-10 gets swords,11-14 get clubs, 15-16, get chains, 17 gets a 9 mm 18 gets a flame thrower, 19 gets a Cadillac escalade, and 20 gets a Gundam. Sign your name here to get a rollXaaon
Unless I'm missing it, Player's Handbook 2 seems to have gone from #28 to falling off the list completely in one week.
Yikes.
Unless I'm missing it, Player's Handbook 2 seems to have gone from #28 to falling off the list completely in one week.
Yikes.
Given that most D&D books fall off the list either after one or two weeks, that's not terribly surprising.
It's still #133 on Amazon.com.
|
|
Unless I'm missing it, Player's Handbook 2 seems to have gone from #28 to falling off the list completely in one week.
Yikes.
Given that most D&D books fall off the list either after one or two weeks, that's not terribly surprising.
It's still #133 on Amazon.com.
Does that mean the book is only 21.05% as good as it was a week or so go? Or do we use a velocity type calculation day (133-28)/7 days = 15 place drop per day. Meaning in month it'll only be at #450? Is this a logarithmic decay? Do we start checking eBay and doing a mass balance equation of numbers sold new verses those trying to sell their PHB2?* I am thinking that I could get another PhD out of the PHB2 sales analysis alone!
:)
*Currently at zero btw for auctions.
Unless I'm missing it, Player's Handbook 2 seems to have gone from #28 to falling off the list completely in one week.
Yikes.
Given that most D&D books fall off the list either after one or two weeks, that's not terribly surprising.
It's still #133 on Amazon.com.
Does that mean the book is only 21.05% as good as it was a week or so go? Or do we use a velocity type calculation day (133-28)/7 days = 15 place drop per day. Meaning in month it'll only be at #450? Is this a logarithmic decay? Do we start checking eBay and doing a mass balance equation of numbers sold new verses those trying to sell their PHB2?* I am thinking that I could get another PhD out of the PHB2 sales analysis alone!
:)
*Currently at zero btw for auctions.
HAHA! That's awesome.
Twilight and its sequels took the first five spots? Argh! Small Favors by Jim Butcher (#124) is way, way better!
I know you think I'm a hate-filled playa hater or something for not liking 4e with all my body, and I should not voice my opinions of 4e as they can be considered hatemongering, but boy, I just cannot refuse this opportunity!
You first list 4e PHB2 as higher in the list as 3.5e PHB, probably implying its better and getting a nice warm feeling for that, and then you say that the #124 book is better than the #1 book? T
he logical conclusion of this: That #28 spot is meaningless, since the #1 isn't better than #124.
Or maybe this: 4ePHB2 is #28, 4ePHB is #47, 3.5ePHB is #5s; since #124 is way better than #1, #57 must be better than #47 and a good deal better tahn #28.
So there. Feel free to call me a hateful person for using logic. :P
D&D selling well is good news for everybody who likes RPGs.
Not for me. I want it to fail. I want everyone responsible for 4e to lose their jobs and houses and loved ones and live under a bridge in misery only to die a lonely, painful death without anyone taking notice! Or something like that, only worse, like them being forced to sell themselves by watching Uwe Boll movies or Star Wars Episode 3 for money!
You first list 4e PHB2 as higher in the list as 3.5e PHB, probably implying its better and getting a nice warm feeling for that, and then you say that the #124 book is better than the #1 book? T
But joela didn't say that, another person did. You seem to have combined the statements of two different people to produce this logic, so it falls apart quite quickly.
|
|
OK, here's some logic...
If the PHB2 (or any 4E D&D) sells well in the first rush then the most likely explanation of a point sale "blip" is all us old farts buying 4E because it was the new D&D. If sales had remained constant then it would indicated that perhaps new people were picking up D&D. The third case would be it increasing in its ranking showing that the 4E D&D once on the market has caused a resurgence in D&D.
So in summary I would put forward the idea that initial high sales were to be expected, the audience was all the type of people who post on this board - old hand D&Ders. The dramatic slip in sales position strongly indicates that while there is a strong niche market (i.e. us) that 4E has not created a new D&D buzz.
S.
But joela didn't say that, another person did. You seem to have combined the statements of two different people to produce this logic, so it falls apart quite quickly.
You're right. It wasn't him. Instead, it was this guy joela who posted:
And #28 on USA Today's Top 150 Best Selling Books is...Player's Handbook II. And the crowd goes wild!Linky here.
Twilight and its sequels took the first five spots? Argh! Small Favors by Jim Butcher (#124) is way, way better!
He might not have provided the other numbers, but the implication was there: "Look how great 4ePHB2 is, it ranks quite high". Which was followed by: "Aargh! Highest ranks are inferior to some books from the bottom"
It was in good fun, but it's interesting that you had to attack my logic at once.
He might not have provided the other numbers, but the implication was there: "Look how great 4ePHB2 is, it ranks quite high". Which was followed by: "Aargh! Highest ranks are inferior to some books from the bottom"
It was in good fun, but it's interesting that you had to attack my logic at once.
You have seemed to assigned that implication to him where it didn't exist. In fact the later statement refutes the idea that he was even trying to state that there was a connection between quality and placement on the rankings.
I did not do it to attack your logic because you were assaulting 4e, I just felt you were attacking the person unfairly. I would be amused if one felt otherwise.
If you consider that an attack, you're built closer to the water than a fish pond.
Of course, it wouldn't be the first time something was twisted into an attack as an excuse for a "counter"attack.
I only know what I see in my area as far as living games. There was some interest in LFR 4.0 when it first came out and that has died out. Games days pull in less then 12 people usually where LG 3.5 game days had 2 to 3x as much. Most gaming stores seem to have very little shelf space dedicated to DnD 4.0. The few people who are big into LFR 4.0 I know of are having to drive farther and farther to find games.
That being said we are looking into pathfinder to fill the living campaign/convention void that 4.0 has left open.
I am glad to see so many people who made LC and LG great campaign moving to pathfinder.
If you consider that an attack, you're built closer to the water than a fish pond.
Of course, it wouldn't be the first time something was twisted into an attack as an excuse for a "counter"attack.
But you seemed to think that me pointing out that he didn't say some of the things you claimed was an attack.