|
Excerpt:
Will 4E do as well as 3E?
Maybe. But frankly, who cares? That's like asking if 4E will do as well as AD&D did in 1982. Or as well as 2nd edition did. Or as well as the little white box. Anybody who's ever had a job where they're accountable for sales numbers -- and I've had a lot of these -- knows that there are some marketing events that simply hit the ball out of the park. 3E was one of those, and it will be hard to top for a generation to come. It was a once-in-a-generation feat, just as D&D sales in 1982 were a once-in-a-generation feat. For twenty years following 1982, D&D sales never recovered their peak. Twenty years. From the vantage point of 1983, was D&D dying? In 1983, you could have said that. The twenty-year decline was starting. But D&D went on to have another peak in 2001.
From where we stand now, at the very beginning of 4E, I see a long, strong run ahead of us. Just as in 1982, it may be another twenty years before the generational peak of 3E is reached again. Or it could be next year, when the economy improves. Just as in 1983, who can say?
In the meantime, there are thousands of game stores clamoring for 4E product. And I'll be here publishing it for a long time.
Full post here.
Personally, I can't wait to see what WotC, Goodman, Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. continue to release to feed my habit...er...keep me happy ;-)
A lot of hand waving, "trust me", in that artical. Not sure it means much other then that 4e did not produce a spike in the sales of D&D products, or at least not a spike that was noteworthy.
So from what I read of his post, asssuming he knows what he's talking about he's saying sales are as they were when they were publishing the end of 3e....I would not know either way, but again how can it be good that sales have not gone up some noticeable amount when they switched editions?
With a new edition you have players and DMs buying new core rule books, moduals and settings. Things you don't see the sales of during the end of days for an edition I would think.
If all they did is hold serve on sales...
So from what I read of his post, asssuming he knows what he's talking about he's saying sales are as they were when they were publishing the end of 3e....I would not know either way, but again how can it be good that sales have not gone up some noticeable amount when they switched editions?
With a new edition you have players and DMs buying new core rule books, moduals and settings. Things you don't see the sales of during the end of days for an edition I would think.
If all they did is hold serve on sales...
Actually, I believe what he said is that 3.5 sales were dropping off to the point that WotC needed to release a new edition; their bottom line was clamoring for one even if the players were not. It's nice to see that it's working out for them.
Matthew Keoble wrote: Well, it sounds like it is selling better than through most of 3rd Edition's run...
He actually seems unclear about the sales of 3.X from 2002-2008. He says:
Is 4E doing as well as D&D sales in the times of 1974-1981? 1983 through 2000? And approximately 2002 through 2008?
Yes.
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.
Which to me means he is saying it is doing as well as those yes, not really better even though he ends saying such. He claims we are at a high point, but clearly not one that really raises the sales level significatly. Is it a high point like the release of 2nd ed? Will it do as well as 2nd ed even?
Who knows. But it's start has not been the homerun many 4e supporters have claimed it has been. Nor though has it been the abject failure some of it's detractors have said. It's held serve.
Actually, I believe what he said is that 3.5 sales were dropping off to the point that WotC needed to release a new edition; their bottom line was clamoring for one even if the players were not. It's nice to see that it's working out for them.So from what I read of his post, asssuming he knows what he's talking about he's saying sales are as they were when they were publishing the end of 3e....I would not know either way, but again how can it be good that sales have not gone up some noticeable amount when they switched editions?
With a new edition you have players and DMs buying new core rule books, moduals and settings. Things you don't see the sales of during the end of days for an edition I would think.
If all they did is hold serve on sales...
I've reread his post, and do not see that anywhere. I admit I only read the post the OP quoted and have not gone further. Too much hand waving, "I am an expert", junk from Mr. Goodman to give him any more time then reading his one post. But nowhere in that post did I say him claim anything about 3.5 sales, he even indicated he was only approximating the sales for the time period of 2002-2008.
I suppose the fact we are in the largest financial crisis in recent history would have had an effect on sales.
Too much hand waving, "I am an expert", junk from Mr. Goodman to give him any more time then reading his one post.
Are you irritated that he listed his credentials, or do you simply believe his credentials don't qualify him to make observations about the topic?
Too much hand waving, "I am an expert", junk from Mr. Goodman to give him any more time then reading his one post.Are you irritated that he listed his credentials, or do you simply believe his credentials don't qualify him to make observations about the topic?
So you are asking a quesiton instead of explaining you pervous post which turns out to be a lie. I look through the entire thread after my counter and he never mentions 3.5 sales doing anything that forced the to produce 4e. Lying does not help support you veiw that 4e is doing well.
That said this is hand waving:
Back to myth #3: "retailers do not support 4E." Simply not true. Why not? Because Joe Goodman says so, and I know more about game stores than you do. Show me someone with the same list of credentials regarding direct retailer feedback, and I'll back down. Until then, the statement stands.
That is just hand waving. And claiming he is more an expert then you so listen to him.
Really? And he also has a financle stake in 4e sales, and I don't. So since it will effect his bottom line and not mine, my veiw is more fair then his. Since he has cause to lie and I don't See handwaving. Meaningless.
If he had facts to support his premise it would not need us relying on his expert opinion to accept his conclusion. It would be a matter of presenting the facts and putting it all together. He lacks or doesn't have time to present facts and thus the truth of his claim can not be varified. Since I can not check it for myself I will take it for what it's worth, and that isn't much.
QUOTE="Sebastrd"]
Too much hand waving, "I am an expert", junk from Mr. Goodman to give him any more time then reading his one post.
Are you irritated that he listed his credentials, or do you simply believe his credentials don't qualify him to make observations about the topic?
So you are asking a quesiton instead of explaining you pervous post which turns out to be a false. I looked through the entire thread after my counter and he never mentions 3.5 sales doing anything that forced the to produce 4e. Deception does not help support you veiw that 4e is doing well.
That said this is hand waving:
Back to myth #3: "retailers do not support 4E." Simply not true. Why not? Because Joe Goodman says so, and I know more about game stores than you do. Show me someone with the same list of credentials regarding direct retailer feedback, and I'll back down. Until then, the statement stands.
That is just hand waving. And claiming he is more an expert then you so listen to him.
Really? And he also has a financle stake in 4e sales, and I don't. So since it will effect his bottom line and not mine, my veiw is more fair then his. Since he has cause to lie and I don't. See handwaving. Meaningless.
If he had facts to support his premise it would not need us relying on his "expert" opinion to accept his conclusion. It would be a matter of presenting the facts and putting it all together. He lacks or doesn't have time to present facts and thus the truth of his claim can not be varified. Since I can not check it for myself I will take it for what it's worth, and that isn't much.
I suppose the fact we are in the largest financial crisis in recent history would have had an effect on sales.
We were in a large financial crisis in 2001 when 3e set a peak sales number. Also while you may not recall it I do, in 1982 when we hit the other peak, we were also in a rather large financial mess.
Just saying that D&D sales have managed to do when in bad times before.
So you are asking a quesiton instead of explaining you pervous post which turns out to be a false. I looked through the entire thread after my counter and he never mentions 3.5 sales doing anything that forced the to produce 4e. Deception does not help support you veiw that 4e is doing well.You know, you are free to believe that 4E is doing badly. The best evidence anyone really has, at this point, is anecdotal. Even Goodman's claims are just coming from a larger pool of personal knowledge, and it is clear that the various other sources of data (book rankings, WotC's claims about print sales, etc) tend to not be regarded as viable evidence by those looking for absolute proof.
And in the end, that's fine - you don't have to believe anything you don't want to, and nothing is really going to change based on that belief or not. I certainly feel that 4E is doing well, and clearly so do various others. As you've established - and as has been thoroughly established by others in previous threads - many folks feel otherwise, often based on their own local experiences. So it goes.
I never said what I believe either way. It seems clear from his post that the sales of 4e are doing about what the sales for 3e the year before it were doing. No great change. That's based on Goodman's own post.
But I think it's out of line to start accusing people of being engaged in deception.
As I said, you're free to have your own opinion, and welcome to it. But if you want to start talking about what does or does not help support someone's specific views, I recommend you take a second look at how you've approached this thread, which has been almost uniformly aggressive and argumentative. I mean, you are free to take such a tone (aside from the borderline personal attack above), but I really don't think it is conducive to generating a civil discussion about the topic.
If, of course, you are interested in such.
See I think lying is out of line, I think deception is out of line and when I see it I call people on it.
Let me sum up what I called deception. He posted this about what Goodman said:
Actually, I believe what he said is that 3.5 sales were dropping off to the point that WotC needed to release a new edition; their bottom line was clamoring for one even if the players were not. It's nice to see that it's working out for them.
Now if you would be so kind, read what Goodman actually said. And if you do you will find he made no such claim. He never once indicated that 3.X sales were down in 2008 from 2007 or 2004, just said that when 3.X first came out it caused a huge spike in sales that lasted it's first year.
That poster claimed Goodman said something he did not, that is deceptive. And so I called it such, but only after the poster declined to defend his post after I called him on it.
We were in a large financial crisis in 2001 when 3e set a peak sales number.
Since you are all about keeping it real and calling people on being deceptive....the economy was actually quite healthy at the release of 3rd edition and through Sept of 2001....so to describe 2001 as a year of large financial crisis is to be less than honest when comparing it to our current situation.
As for the topic of how 4th is doing...there's little point in speculating and it is ultimately nothing but trivia of the most insignificant sort. It's doing well enough that Wizards is putting out books on their planned schedule but has not been embraced sufficiently to endanger the 3e market. Sounds like everyone should be happy. And yet...everyone's still bickering.
Stuff about hand waving...
Did you miss what he said BEFORE that? The entire paragraph with links to other things? That was the beginning of Myth #3 and the part you posted was the "Back to Myth #3". I will do ahead and repost the omitted part of Myth #3.
Myth #3: "Retailers do not support 4E." Simply not true. This sort of claim is where the debate breaks down, because one gamer can say, "4E isn't selling at my local store," and it's hard to refute that. Store-by-store experiences do indeed vary widely, and the truth is that there are many individual stores where 4E isn't selling well. It is these stores, and gamers who trumpet these stores, that have led to many claims regarding 4E not selling. What can I say to refute that? I will rely on my credibility regarding direct retailer feedback.
I've personally visited 47 different game stores so far this year. Yes, 47 -- see viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5197 for some details. Next time someone tells you "4E isn't selling at my local store," remind him that he's discussing 1 store. Aside from those personal visits, I've spoken on the phone with probably 100+ other game stores, gotten direct feedback via a Dungeon Crawl Classics sale (see list of stores in the download at http://www.goodman-games.com/dcc-sale-09.html ), sponsored another year of Free RPG Day (see list of stores at http://www.freerpgday.com/stores.htm ), and run two Worldwide D&D Game Day promotions involving every store participating in Worldwide D&D Game Day (see http://www.goodman-games.com/WWDDD5-23.html and http://www.goodman-games.com/WWDDD3-21.html ). There are hundreds of stores that participate in each of these events individually, probably thousands overall if you compile the various lists. Naysayers who post claims of "4E doesn't sell well at my local store" seem to omit these massive lists of supporting retailers.
Back to myth #3: "retailers do not support 4E." Simply not true. Why not? Because Joe Goodman says so, and I know more about game stores than you do. Show me someone with the same list of credentials regarding direct retailer feedback, and I'll back down. Until then, the statement stands.
That is just hand waving. And claiming he is more an expert then you so listen to him.
Really? And he also has a financle stake in 4e sales, and I don't. So since it will effect his bottom line and not mine, my veiw is more fair then his. Since he has cause to lie and I don't. See handwaving. Meaningless.
If he had facts to support his premise it would not need us relying on his "expert" opinion to accept his conclusion. It would be a matter of presenting the facts and putting it all together. He lacks or doesn't have time to present facts and thus the truth of his claim can not be varified. Since I can not check it for myself I will take it for what it's worth, and that isn't much.
It does not really make sense to claim that he has much of a personal reason to inflate how well 4E is doing. He has a business that produces 4E material but there is no particular reason to believe that his assertion that 4E was doing well when it really wasn't would some how help his bottom line.
My opinion of this post is that its not really about economics at all. Its essentially about ego. Clark says 'take it from me' you can't sell 4E products and Goodman responds with essentially the opposite ' I'm an expert too and I say you can sell 4E 3pp material'.
Both Clark and Goodman are experts and they both have opinions on the topic. They are just airing their opinions and the motivation is probably more about the fact that experts like to talk about things they feel they know (especially if its insider knowledge and its related to ones hobby) then it is about Machiavellian schemes to increase sales.
|
I rather believe who actually has a products in stores over someone who does not. It's hard to beleive somone who says "retailers are not interested in 4E" whe he has not released anything. How can Clark say for sure without even having tested the market. So I'm more inclined to believe Joe Goodman. He also sounds more postive then Clark. After awhile you can only take so much pessimism from someone before you gwet tired of hearing about it.
I rather believe who actually has a products in stores over someone who does not. It's hard to beleive somone who says "retailers are not interested in 4E" whe he has not released anything. How can Clark say for sure without even having tested the market. So I'm more inclined to believe Joe Goodman. He also sounds more postive then Clark. After awhile you can only take so much pessimism from someone before you gwet tired of hearing about it.
The same can be said about optimism.
I rather believe who actually has a products in stores over someone who does not. It's hard to beleive somone who says "retailers are not interested in 4E" whe he has not released anything. How can Clark say for sure without even having tested the market. So I'm more inclined to believe Joe Goodman. He also sounds more postive then Clark. After awhile you can only take so much pessimism from someone before you gwet tired of hearing about it.
I have no doubt that Clark is probably right on some level. But that is probably because of what you said, he hasn't done anything recently. Several of the retailers, especially book store and not gaming store ones, probably have no idea who he is and what his company has made because he's been sitting on the side lines. Goodman is probably also right, but that might be due to the fact that he went balls to the wall, with even producing things using the OGL before the GSL was up and running, even in its absolutely worse state. In any kind of business, if you want to be successful, you got to work your rear off. Clark has said that Necro is a sideline, more of a hobby for him, so it is no surprise when he has trouble breaking in (again).
|
|
The same can be said about optimism.
True yet between the two Clark posts about 4E always seem to be more negative then positive. While I'm not always expecting to hear only good things about 4E clark version of things imo seem to be at odds with every other publisher. I don't see any of the other 4E third party publishers have as much trouble as Necromancer Games seem to be having.
I have no doubt that Clark is probably right on some level. But that is probably because of what you said, he hasn't done anything recently. Several of the retailers, especially book store and not gaming store ones, probably have no idea who he is and what his company has made because he's been sitting on the side lines. Goodman is probably also right, but that might be due to the fact that he went balls to the wall, with even producing things using the OGL before the GSL was up and running, even in its absolutely worse state. In any kind of business, if you want to be successful, you got to work your rear off. Clark has said that Necro is a sideline, more of a hobby for him, so it is no surprise when he has trouble breaking in (again).
I think it's more that he seems to be jumping all over the place in terms of projects and what he can actullly do with the resources he has imo. He wants to support PF. He wants to support 4E. He wants to make his own version of 4E. He needs to focus. Out of the three either support PF then 4E. Not both at the same time. As for his own version of 4E from what I have read on what he wants to do it imo would be a wadte of time. Removing everything that makes me want o play 4E is not going to make me buy it. Espcially not if the motto of "4E with a first edition feel". If I want to play old style D&D I csn always borrow a freinds 1E or 2E books. Certainly not spend money on it twice.
He needs to get some sort of product out. Otherwise I can't see retailers doing many preorders from Necromancer games imo.
While I'm not always expecting to hear only good things about 4E clark version of things imo seem to be at odds with every other publisher. I don't see any of the other 4E third party publishers have as much trouble as Necromancer Games seem to be having.
That is because, like damn near everything in life, it depends on the perspective.
Clark Peterson has never hidden the fact that Necromancer Games is more of a hobby than anything else. Therefor, he has less need or drive to make "the hard sell."
Joseph Goodman, as well as the other 3PP, are looking to make their living off of their product line. So they will "go the extra mile" to put their product out there.
Some might say they have to do more than they should have to.
I think what can be taken away from this is that the market for print product has changed. What that means for the hobby as a whole remains to be seen.
Joseph Goodman, as well as the other 3PP, are looking to make their living off of their product line. So they will "go the extra mile" to put their product out there.
Goodman's staff might, but Goodman himself made it pretty clear in his post that he doesn't fall into the "making a living off his product line" crowd:
I personally have a full-time "business job" at a Fortune 50 company, where I manage a large staff running a billion-dollar division. Goodman Games is an extremely enjoyable outlet for my love of the hobby, but it's not how I pay my bills. I do it for fun because it is something I absolutely love to do.
But he still gives the impression that he's the one doing a lot of the outreach to these outlets, and he probably is. Perspective, certainly, but Goodman seems to truly love what he does.
Joseph Goodman, as well as the other 3PP, are looking to make their living off of their product line. So they will "go the extra mile" to put their product out there.Goodman's staff might, but Goodman himself made it pretty clear in his post that he doesn't fall into the "making a living off his product line" crowd:
I personally have a full-time "business job" at a Fortune 50 company, where I manage a large staff running a billion-dollar division. Goodman Games is an extremely enjoyable outlet for my love of the hobby, but it's not how I pay my bills. I do it for fun because it is something I absolutely love to do.But he still gives the impression that he's the one doing a lot of the outreach to these outlets, and he probably is. Perspective, certainly, but Goodman seems to truly love what he does.
Well. I missed that entirely. I admit, I mostly skimmed the Goodman post.
As far as Goodman loving what he does, I'm sceptical. Not because I don't trust him, but there is a well known "rule of thumb" in business to always act like you love what you do. I'm not sure where that came from, but it is a bit more outside this thread than I want to take it.
How much competition is there with 3rd party 4e stuff right now? I do not play so I was kinda curious if 3pp had alot of books fighting it out for the gaming dollar or just a few. If its just a few then it is hard to imagine the few doing very well because there really is no alternate choices.
Not much competition really. Just not that many players in the game. I get the impression that the 3PP market is also way down however. Still I think there are some serous niches that could be exploited. Basically stay out of WotCs way and focus on what they are not doing and you might be paid off. There is probably room for high quality adventures that are less combat focused. Pick some other genre (mystery's, horror, intrigue) and put out good material in this area and you've got a product for which there might well be demand that's not really being pushed by WotC.
Or do a book full of DM extra's focusing on material that WotC has not really been putting out a lot of material for. A book that includes a plethora of skill challenges, a whole bunch of extra traps, a slew of interesting hazards and a handful of extra goodies (more templates for monsters maybe?) would target material that's covered only lightly so far in 4E. There is a little of this in the DMG and we'll get a bit more in DMG II but after that we'll probably have to wait for DMG III.
A book of Puzzles and Riddles might sell. You possibly could move a compendium of interesting NPCs.
On the other hand books on classes or races probably results in one being run over by WotC as they just put out so much of this kind of material. Its hard to imagine many buying such a book as WotC puts out so much of this type of material that its already hard to digest it all. Plus no one really trusts 3PPs to make balanced classes and races so their is broad resistance among DMs to allow such material in their game - you know that's not going to happen if whats on offer is called Grimoire of Traps and Challenges.
|
|
In this discussion let's not forget what products Goodman, WoC and Necromancer sell.
WoC sells "Core Books" that are supported by their DDI
Goodman sells mostly 64pages adventures and some Race and Class Splat Books
Necromancer sells big Monster Books and bigger adventures (meaning higher price than DCC adventures).
So, IMHO stores will of course stock WoC stuff as this is "Core".
Goodman stuff was there from the beginning of 4th AND is comparatively cheap.
Necromancer has not produced 4th edition Stuff yet and their Flagship, the Tome of Horrors is a relative expensive Hardcover Book.
I think both Joseph and Clark can be correct in their assessment of 4th edition sales for 3PPs.
And one last thought: It does not really matter if 4th is selling well now. It is much more important if thse sales are sustainable over a period of 5-7 years until the new edition is due.
It may be that WoC have it right and 4th will even grow in the next years. this is the best of all possible scenarios.
But it may also be, that the current euphoria of old players and the enthusiasm of new players is like a wildfire. High Sales in the beginning but then a fast drop and stagnation because Players stop playing 4th for whatever reason and only a Core of Players remains.
And one very last thought: 4th edition took a lot of time and most probably Funds to develop. I think that Hasbro and WoC will consider sales figures that are smaller than 3rd edition a clear failure of 4th edition.
But only time will tell.
A long New Edition Cycle will how that sales are good and sustainable and thet Hasbro is happy with it.
A short cycle will show that 4th was a failure.
Joseph Goodman, as well as the other 3PP, are looking to make their living off of their product line. So they will "go the extra mile" to put their product out there.Goodman's staff might, but Goodman himself made it pretty clear in his post that he doesn't fall into the "making a living off his product line" crowd:
I personally have a full-time "business job" at a Fortune 50 company, where I manage a large staff running a billion-dollar division. Goodman Games is an extremely enjoyable outlet for my love of the hobby, but it's not how I pay my bills. I do it for fun because it is something I absolutely love to do.But he still gives the impression that he's the one doing a lot of the outreach to these outlets, and he probably is. Perspective, certainly, but Goodman seems to truly love what he does.
That's a cool quote. But as someone who works in business, I want to know how the hell does he have time to run G. Games as a hobby? WTF?
That's a cool quote. But as someone who works in business, I want to know how the hell does he have time to run G. Games as a hobby? WTF?
As per the Goodman post:
First, a little background. I own Goodman Games but don't run it full time. Goodman Games has an outstanding staff who do most of the product development, run the tournaments, handle the shipping, etc. I personally have a full-time "business job" at a Fortune 50 company, where I manage a large staff running a billion-dollar division. Goodman Games is an extremely enjoyable outlet for my love of the hobby, but it's not how I pay my bills. I do it for fun because it is something I absolutely love to do. I wrote my first RPG at the age of 10, self-published my first work at 17, had my first professional contract at 18, had my first staff writer job at 21, and have been involved professionally in the gaming industry ever since.
He doesn't run it fully. It is a hobby, a well loved one that has paid off for him, but still a hobby.
We were in a large financial crisis in 2001 when 3e set a peak sales number.Since you are all about keeping it real and calling people on being deceptive....the economy was actually quite healthy at the release of 3rd edition and through Sept of 2001....so to describe 2001 as a year of large financial crisis is to be less than honest when comparing it to our current situation.
Really, guess WorldCom and Enron didn't happen before 9/11. Guess Greenspan didn't cut the fed rate by half in Jan 01 to try and head off what he saw as a coming econimic slow down and very likely a recession. You're right 2001 was doing great until 9/11...or not. Every economic pointer was down the economy was not dead or in as bad shape as it is today, but a recession coming was seen and the growth rate from the previous year was cut in half, worse the tech bubble was burst and the manufacturing industry was in deep recession already before 9/11. Again the economy today and in 81/82 was in far worse shape then it was in 01, but to say it was quite healthy is a lie. Recession had already hit large parts of the US economy and the fed clearly saw it spreading and was trying to fight it off best they could all before 9/11.
I've reread his post, and do not see that anywhere. I admit I only read the post the OP quoted and have not gone further. Too much hand waving, "I am an expert", junk from Mr. Goodman to give him any more time then reading his one post. But nowhere in that post did I say him claim anything about 3.5 sales, he even indicated he was only approximating the sales for the time period of 2002-2008.
My apologies. The comment I was quoting is from Ken Hart, one of the DCC writers. He says this a little further down the page (emphasis mine), "Nicely stated, Joseph, and probably the best case I've seen for the continued support of the retail stores. Based on a few of the negative posts I've read elsewhere, it's as though some of those writers came a conclusion first (e.g., "4e is selling badly") and then worked backwards to line up stats that would support that conclusion. I entered 4e with no expectations, merely observations along the lines of version 3/3.5 had been around a while, the economy was slowing down, the RPG 'boom' of 1999-2001 was beginning to implode just like the comics industry did in the '80s, and something needed to happen at the top to jumpstart the industry. Hasbro/WotC saw the threat to their profits and acted. So I viewed 4e as being inevitable and perhaps even necessary considering the industry's state, and -- to my surprise and delight -- it's actually pretty darn good on top of that." Thank you for the accusation, though.
I see that our point of contention is whether or not Joseph Goodman's vastly more informed opinion (visited 47 stores, phone contact with 100+ others, etc.) should count for more than yours. You claim that because he's biased, and please keep in mind that he's mentioned how Goodman Games is a bobby and not his primary source of income, that his credentials are meaningless and he's probably lying for his own profit or edification; therefore your obviously unbiased opinion carries more weight. I wonder if you wouldn't mind enlightening me as to your opinions on 4E and which system or edition you prefer. It's possible you aren't quite as unbiased as you suspect.
Regardless, as Goodman says, and I know I'm quoting accurately this time ;), "Show me someone with the same list of credentials regarding direct retailer feedback, and I'll back down. Until then, the statement stands."
In this discussion let's not forget what products Goodman, WoC and Necromancer sell.
WoC sells "Core Books" that are supported by their DDI
Goodman sells mostly 64pages adventures and some Race and Class Splat Books
Necromancer sells big Monster Books and bigger adventures (meaning higher price than DCC adventures).
So, IMHO stores will of course stock WoC stuff as this is "Core".
Goodman stuff was there from the beginning of 4th AND is comparatively cheap.
Necromancer has not produced 4th edition Stuff yet and their Flagship, the Tome of Horrors is a relative expensive Hardcover Book.
I think both Joseph and Clark can be correct in their assessment of 4th edition sales for 3PPs.
And one last thought: It does not really matter if 4th is selling well now. It is much more important if thse sales are sustainable over a period of 5-7 years until the new edition is due.
It may be that WoC have it right and 4th will even grow in the next years. this is the best of all possible scenarios.
But it may also be, that the current euphoria of old players and the enthusiasm of new players is like a wildfire. High Sales in the beginning but then a fast drop and stagnation because Players stop playing 4th for whatever reason and only a Core of Players remains.
And one very last thought: 4th edition took a lot of time and most probably Funds to develop. I think that Hasbro and WoC will consider sales figures that are smaller than 3rd edition a clear failure of 4th edition.
But only time will tell.
A long New Edition Cycle will how that sales are good and sustainable and thet Hasbro is happy with it.
A short cycle will show that 4th was a failure.
I think in general you have it right. Goodman's thought on the subject do not matter, well any more then most others. It will be determind down the road by how well 4e actually does, not just in it's first year but in the next 4-8 years. If it's sales are sustainable then it will be at least a marginal success, if they grow it will be a big success, if they fall off it will be a failure. And again even all that is open for change if their cost of doing bussiness increase or decrease. A bussiness can maintain it's sales at the same rate but if it's costs go down it's still improving, it however it's costs go up, well that is a bad thing.
If the production of 4e increased costs, and frankly I'm not sure how producing and publishing a new edition doesn't raise your costs, yet it's sales numbers remain the about the same as the last year of 3.X, that isn't a good thing at all. Unless the sales from this time on keep growing. Something we can't know for 4 or 5 years.
If you are curious about what Joe does with most of his time, here is part of his LinkedIn profile. He looks busy to me:
Joseph Goodman
Director of Inventory Management at Sears Holdings Corporation
Owner of Goodman Enterprises (www.goodman.com)
Owner of Goodman Games
With all the other things he does, Goodman Games has to be a 'for fun' project.
If the production of 4e increased costs, and frankly I'm not sure how producing and publishing a new edition doesn't raise your costs, yet it's sales numbers remain the about the same as the last year of 3.X, that isn't a good thing at all. Unless the sales from this time on keep growing. Something we can't know for 4 or 5 years.
Any time you produce a new book for the game, you are going to have to pay for research and development. Whether it is a new edition or the newest mage stuff extraordinaire book.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Out of all the stupid things to argue about regarding 4e, this has to be, hands down, the stupidest. If you're so vested in 4e's success/failure that you need to completely discount one expert's opinion while embracing another's, based on such esoteric information as your vague sense of what that person's morales are and (much more importantly, whether they support the same edition you like), you need a new hobby. I suggest playing D&D. It's a lot of fun, you should try it.
Edit: Also, true story, if 4e sells better than 3e (or vice versa), it proves that it's the better edition. Seriously. I mean, Paizo products probably don't sell in the same numbers as late era 2e products, so obviously, 2e > Paizo. This is the logic at the heart of these debates and it is, in a word, stupid.
|
Out of all the stupid things to argue about regarding 4e, this has to be, hands down, the stupidest. If you're so vested in 4e's success/failure that you need to completely discount one expert's opinion while embracing another's, based on such esoteric information as your vague sense of what that person's morales are and (much more importantly, whether they support the same edition you like), you need a new hobby. I suggest playing D&D. It's a lot of fun, you should try it.
I'm sorry, Sebastian, but your argument lacks all merit. You wrote morales when it's clear you meant morals.
Unless, as a lawyer, can you even write the word morals?
|
|
I think in general you have it right. Goodman's thought on the subject do not matter, well any more then most others. It will be determind down the road by how well 4e actually does, not just in it's first year but in the next 4-8 years. If it's sales are sustainable then it will be at least a marginal...
Yeah, "Sales" was loosely used here. In the end, WoC cares for a growing after tax revenue (adjusted for inflation).
I ceratinly hope that 4th will be sustainable for a long cycle and that at the end of the cycle 5th edition as a pen and paper product will be a viable option for WoC.
If 5th edition will not come or go 100% online, we Pen & Paper Gamers have truly become Grognards.
Unless, as a lawyer, can you even write the word morals?
+1
;-)
And seriously, the truth is pretty plain: Despite what many people are desperate to believe, 4E isn't doing amazingly well, but it isn't tanking either. By most unbiased accounts I've seen, it's a moderate success. And in any event, financial success isn't well correlated with quality.
Is there a story here I missed?
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I'm sorry, Sebastian, but your argument lacks all merit. You wrote morales when it's clear you meant morals.Unless, as a lawyer, can you even write the word morals?
I was talking about the chance the experts would flee combat...what did you think I was talking about? ;-)
Can't we just ask WotC about sales? Can it really be a state secret?
S.
As a subsidiary of a publicly-owned company (Hasbro) I believe they're prevented by company policy from giving out financial information like that.
|
|
As a subsidiary of a publicly-owned company (Hasbro) I believe they're prevented by company policy from giving out financial information like that.Can't we just ask WotC about sales? Can it really be a state secret?
S.
Seems a bit silly, it would put to bed finally this long and repeated discussion of who sells the most of what.
End of the day v3.5 is owned by WotC and theirs to do with as they see fit, they (and rightly so) didn't want to split people over multiple systems and therefore are solely supporting their new flagship product. I am failing to see the problem here, especially in light of Pathfinder RPG basically continuing the 3.5 ruleset so we aren't losing "v3.5".
I am sure I talk for some others when I say, I care little about the total sales of 4e, I have the books I want and enjoy playing the game. If I find myself buying shares in WotC or Hasbro perhaps then I will take the same almost morbid (fail, fail, fail WotC, fail darn you) fetish with book sales.
S.
PS: Scott our DM has started RotRL using your conversion blog - having a great time so far. My Shifter Druid is crazy fun :)
|
|
I was talking about the chance the experts would flee combat...what did you think I was talking about? ;-)
I'm sorry, Sebastian, but your argument lacks all merit. You wrote morales when it's clear you meant morals.Unless, as a lawyer, can you even write the word morals?
Your riposte is duly noted. and appreciated. smurf? too soon?
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Your riposte is duly noted. and appreciated. smurf? too soon?I was talking about the chance the experts would flee combat...what did you think I was talking about? ;-)
I'm sorry, Sebastian, but your argument lacks all merit. You wrote morales when it's clear you meant morals.Unless, as a lawyer, can you even write the word morals?
Never too soon for old dueling partners like us. Smurf right back at you.
Edit: Yes! I even got crotchety smurf as my avatar. How appropriate.
PS: Scott our DM has started RotRL using your conversion blog - having a great time so far. My Shifter Druid is crazy fun :)
Sweet! Let me know how it turns out. :D
Really, guess WorldCom and Enron didn't happen before 9/11. Guess Greenspan didn't cut the fed rate by half in Jan 01 to try and head off what he saw as a coming econimic slow down and very likely a recession. You're right 2001 was doing great until 9/11...or not. Every economic pointer was down the economy was not dead or in as bad shape as it is today, but a recession coming was seen and the growth rate from the previous year was cut in half, worse the tech bubble was burst and the manufacturing industry was in deep recession already before 9/11. Again the economy today and in 81/82 was in far worse shape then it was in 01, but to say it was quite healthy is a lie. Recession had already hit large parts of the US economy and the fed clearly saw it spreading and was trying to fight it off best they could all before 9/11.We were in a large financial crisis in 2001 when 3e set a peak sales number.Since you are all about keeping it real and calling people on being deceptive....the economy was actually quite healthy at the release of 3rd edition and through Sept of 2001....so to describe 2001 as a year of large financial crisis is to be less than honest when comparing it to our current situation.
Its improbable that these factors would have played much into how well something like new core books for D&D sold any more then it will effect how well a Harry Potter novel sold or the newest album from Britney Spears. Trouble on the horizon makes financial market watchers change their behavior but for most people its not going to really effect their spending on small desired widgets until the evidence significantly starker and hitting much closer to home. Could effect a home or a car purchase but no one would have been cutting back on the Lattes just yet.
I am failing to see the problem here, especially in light of Pathfinder RPG basically continuing the 3.5 ruleset so we aren't losing "v3.5".
Perhaps it's a minor point, but... was there any company that "took up the torch", as it were, for 1st or 2nd edition when those systems were replaced? I don't seem to recall any, but I won't claim my memory is perfect. Granted, there was no license back then to allow a 3PP to pickup where an old system left off, but I don't really remember any candidates. The creation of Paizo and the Pathfinder RPG is fairly unique. It's also probably due, in very large part, to Wizards themselves. Who would have thought back when the OGL was created, that they were setting the seeds of schism within their own system?