|
Unless you own stock in one of those companys who realy cares. This will not change my game this Satday night one bit.
AIUI, it won't change *anyone's* gaming habits in the next week...or the next few months, for that matter. If PF weren't doing well, though...in the long run, that might mean no more APs, which has a bit more potential to directly affect someone's gaming experience. OTOH, the fact that PF *is* doing well means a better chance of finding other people who play it...which also has some potential to directly affect someone's gaming experience.
I also happen to think that the success of a company I think well of on a personal level is kind of cool.
The 4e "Fortune" cards remind me a lot of the "Bunk" cards WW released for the 1st ed of Changeling. They were pretty, but annoying, and too expensive, and the only real use I ever saw for them was someone sticking them in the band of his hat a la the Mad Hatter to play a Malk for a Vampire LARP.'Tis true Kevin. But man how I miss my Changeling game.
Have you checked out Changeling: the Lost? Its pretty fantastic IMHO.
The Fortune Cards are a fun little dealey you can optionally add to your game if you so desire. They aren't the DEATH OF THE GAME, here, no more then the Official AD&D Wood Burning Set(tm) was to AD&D.Remember "Spellfire" cards? Those weren't the death of the game, but they were the death of TSR. Or at least a contributing factor.
I really, really doubt WotC and pre-bankruptcy TSR have that much in common. There were a lot of things that lead to the TSR meltdown, and so far WotC hasn't shown any of the same signs.
AIUI, it won't change *anyone's* gaming habits in the next week...or the next few months, for that matter. If PF weren't doing well, though...in the long run, that might mean no more APs, which has a bit more potential to directly affect someone's gaming experience. OTOH, the fact that PF *is* doing well means a better chance of finding other people who play it...which also has some potential to directly affect someone's gaming experience.
This.
Part of the value of an RPG, at least for many, comes from more than what is in the book. A good part of the value is in the network. More players, ongoing support, organized play, etc., etc., etc. In fact, the value of the network is one of the reasons that Pathfinder is my game of choice despite my love/hate relationship with many 3.5 mechanics.
People who exclaim that "no one is going to show up at your house and take your books" are missing the point, imo.
AIUI, it won't change *anyone's* gaming habits in the next week...or the next few months, for that matter. If PF weren't doing well, though...in the long run, that might mean no more APs, which has a bit more potential to directly affect someone's gaming experience. OTOH, the fact that PF *is* doing well means a better chance of finding other people who play it...which also has some potential to directly affect someone's gaming experience.This.
Part of the value of an RPG, at least for many, comes from more than what is in the book. A good part of the value is in the network. More players, ongoing support, organized play, etc., etc., etc. In fact, the value of the network is one of the reasons that Pathfinder is my game of choice despite my love/hate relationship with many 3.5 mechanics.
People who exclaim that "no one is going to show up at your house and take your books" are missing the point, imo.
That makes me think that what paizo does with its forums (the attention they give it, for example, and how they use it to test new stuff) goes a long way to increase its player network, which then might be why they are doing so well.
Question though, Is ICv2 sales only tracking print products? How do PDF sales factor into the reporting on Paizo's market share?
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I really, really doubt WotC and pre-bankruptcy TSR have that much in common. There were a lot of things that lead to the TSR meltdown, and so far WotC hasn't shown any of the same signs.
Management tone deafness
Flood of productAbrupt product cancellations
Spin about nothing being wrong
Emphasis on boxed sets :)
Need more?
Mind you, I think the only meaningful thing in common are that both have signs of an impending edition collapse.
I really, really doubt WotC and pre-bankruptcy TSR have that much in common. There were a lot of things that lead to the TSR meltdown, and so far WotC hasn't shown any of the same signs.Management tone deafness
Flood of product
Abrupt product cancellations
Spin about nothing being wrong
Emphasis on boxed sets :)Need more?
Mind you, I think the only meaningful thing in common are that both have signs of an impending edition collapse.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.
|
|
I really, really doubt WotC and pre-bankruptcy TSR have that much in common. There were a lot of things that lead to the TSR meltdown, and so far WotC hasn't shown any of the same signs.The Fortune Cards are a fun little dealey you can optionally add to your game if you so desire. They aren't the DEATH OF THE GAME, here, no more then the Official AD&D Wood Burning Set(tm) was to AD&D.Remember "Spellfire" cards? Those weren't the death of the game, but they were the death of TSR. Or at least a contributing factor.
Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase, opaque communications with fans, hard to figure production decisions, etc.
Yeah, they haven't gone "sue happy" (haven't had a reason to, I suppose), and haven't released a zillion campaign settings, but there are some small parallels.
Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...
Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.
Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.
At least WotC hasn't started mass producing a game no one ever played, I am looking at you Buck Rogers.
Also to be very TSR they should see that the minis start selling now that they are canceled and then start mass producing more sets (Spellfire).
|
|
Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.
Remember that TSR didn't have the kind of competition that WotC has. I don't agree with the decision, but there's a semblance of rational thought behind looking at how 3.5 is doing against MMORPGs and concluding that the way to pick up market share in an MMORPG-rich environment is to differentiate your current (new, hip, cool) approach to gaming from (old, stodgy) 3.5.
|
WotC tried to attract new players by making 4E, but what they forgot about is how traditional gamers are notoriously cheap.
This is about the only generalization that I disagree with on principle. At least in my experience "most" traditional gamers are the IT professionals, legal minds, doctors, teachers and white collar professionals that are in the low to upper level of middle-class income.
What I think most game companies forget is that the gaming market is larger than ever on the whole with CCGs and LCGs, various console games, PC games, high-end board games (Fantasy Flight, et al) and the ready availability of Euro-games on every shore now, and a re-invigorated miniature wargaming market with the like of Privateer Press and Games Workshop competing against new stalwarts like Malifaux and Flames of War.
"Most" gamers I know aren't 1-game loyalists, they dig into everything. Myself included, I indulge in one form or another of all of the above.
My experience tells me that it's not that gamers are cheap, it's that they have so many more places to split their money to - and it's the companies that are earning the respect of their customers who are coming out on top.
|
|
Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.
I don't know. When they "sanitized" 2e, they lost a lot of customers. Me, for one. I took my gaming dollar to FASA, pretty much. I was 19 when 2e came out, not 12.
TSR had to sell the license because the company imploded due to a wide variety of reasons which I won't bring up here. and was essentially going down for the third time. WOTC on the other hand is in far better shape, and actually not doing that badly when you consider that we're still in the Great Recession.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.
Just a point of clarification TSR didn't sell the license, WotC bought the whole company.
|
|
Just a point of clarification TSR didn't sell the license, WotC bought the whole company.TSR had to sell the license because the company imploded due to a wide variety of reasons which I won't bring up here. and was essentially going down for the third time. WOTC on the other hand is in far better shape, and actually not doing that badly when you consider that we're still in the Great Recession.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.
Another point of clarification. WotC isn't an independent company. It's a subsidiary of a large corporation that bought THEM and isn't going to go all "TSR" any time soon. WotC isn't in charge of its own destiny or finances, really. They're a small cog, not the whole enchilada.
Completely different from the TSR situation in that respect.
|
Just a point of clarification TSR didn't sell the license, WotC bought the whole company.TSR had to sell the license because the company imploded due to a wide variety of reasons which I won't bring up here. and was essentially going down for the third time. WOTC on the other hand is in far better shape, and actually not doing that badly when you consider that we're still in the Great Recession.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.Another point of clarification. WotC isn't an independent company. It's a subsidiary of a large corporation that bought THEM and isn't going to go all "TSR" any time soon. WotC isn't in charge of its own destiny or finances, really. They're a small cog, not the whole enchilada.
Completely different from the TSR situation in that respect.
TSR was independent, but it had Lorraine Williams. Kinda cancels each other out ;-)
TSR was independent, but it had Lorraine Williams. Kinda cancels each other out ;-)Just a point of clarification TSR didn't sell the license, WotC bought the whole company.TSR had to sell the license because the company imploded due to a wide variety of reasons which I won't bring up here. and was essentially going down for the third time. WOTC on the other hand is in far better shape, and actually not doing that badly when you consider that we're still in the Great Recession.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.Another point of clarification. WotC isn't an independent company. It's a subsidiary of a large corporation that bought THEM and isn't going to go all "TSR" any time soon. WotC isn't in charge of its own destiny or finances, really. They're a small cog, not the whole enchilada.
Completely different from the TSR situation in that respect.
And we are back to Buck Rogers (her family owns Buck Rogers).
|
|
TSR was independent, but it had Lorraine Williams. Kinda cancels each other out ;-)Just a point of clarification TSR didn't sell the license, WotC bought the whole company.TSR had to sell the license because the company imploded due to a wide variety of reasons which I won't bring up here. and was essentially going down for the third time. WOTC on the other hand is in far better shape, and actually not doing that badly when you consider that we're still in the Great Recession.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.Another point of clarification. WotC isn't an independent company. It's a subsidiary of a large corporation that bought THEM and isn't going to go all "TSR" any time soon. WotC isn't in charge of its own destiny or finances, really. They're a small cog, not the whole enchilada.
Completely different from the TSR situation in that respect.
You spoke her name. No good can come of this.
|
|
You spoke her name. No good can come of this.TSR was independent, but it had Lorraine Williams. Kinda cancels each other out ;-)Just a point of clarification TSR didn't sell the license, WotC bought the whole company.TSR had to sell the license because the company imploded due to a wide variety of reasons which I won't bring up here. and was essentially going down for the third time. WOTC on the other hand is in far better shape, and actually not doing that badly when you consider that we're still in the Great Recession.
The one thing WOTC has going for them is that they could just shelf dungeons and dragons and still have magic to keep them going. This means that unlike TSR who basically had to sell the license, WOTC could just stop producing anything under it and make it disappear. This is not a good thing for the game.Another point of clarification. WotC isn't an independent company. It's a subsidiary of a large corporation that bought THEM and isn't going to go all "TSR" any time soon. WotC isn't in charge of its own destiny or finances, really. They're a small cog, not the whole enchilada.
Completely different from the TSR situation in that respect.
That should be one of the rules.
You spoke her name. No good can come of this.It doesn't count, Gorbacz didn't say it three times--oh, wait. You and Justin both quoted it, didn't you? Oops.
I like to think of her as one of the main reasons we got Pathfinder.:)
I don't know. When they "sanitized" 2e, they lost a lot of customers. Me, for one. I took my gaming dollar to FASA, pretty much. I was 19 when 2e came out, not 12.Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.
I was 11 and was just moving up from an old blue book that my parents had gotten as a gift and stashed away :P, that and HeroesQuest the boardgame. Kind of like the kids picking up 4e, only they have no mainstream mass market fantasy boardgame to start them.
IMO WotC made some bad choices early with 4e and it will continue to bite them in the rear for some time. They did not make any moves to strengthen two key areas. 1) Software, 2) Adventures. I cut down a major rant about WotC strategic shortcomings. So far I see no signs they are making moves in the right way.
I don't agree with the decision, but there's a semblance of rational thought behind looking at how 3.5 is doing against MMORPGs and concluding that the way to pick up market share in an MMORPG-rich environment is to differentiate your current (new, hip, cool) approach to gaming from (old, stodgy) 3.5.
MMORPG's do MMORPGing well but P&P RPG's don't.
Kinda off-topic:
One of the great things about PnP RPGs is that it gives you freedom to create all kind of imaginative stuff.
Yet published adventures and campaing settings are extremely important, contradictory?
Not universally true the last campaign setting that was not home brew I played in was Planescape, around the time Dead Gods came out. There is a sizeable number of players/GM's who are looking for a mechanical framework for thier setting/ imaginations.
|
|
I don't know. When they "sanitized" 2e, they lost a lot of customers. Me, for one. I took my gaming dollar to FASA, pretty much. I was 19 when 2e came out, not 12.Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.I was 11 and was just moving up from an old blue book that my parents had gotten as a gift and stashed away :P, that and HeroesQuest the boardgame. Kind of like the kids picking up 4e, only they have no mainstream mass market fantasy boardgame to start them.
IMO WotC made some bad choices early with 4e and it will continue to bite them in the rear for some time. They did not make any moves to strengthen two key areas. 1) Software, 2) Adventures. I cut down a major rant about WotC strategic shortcomings. So far I see no signs they are making moves in the right way.
Kinda off-topic:
One of the great things about PnP RPGs is that it gives you freedom to create all kind of imaginative stuff.
Yet published adventures and campaing settings are extremely important, contradictory?
I run a homebrew CS, and use canned adventures sparingly, so, in this case, not really. And, any good GM makes prefab stuff his anyway.
Kevin,
Awesome. Now I'm going to go and dig up the "mysteries of the Arabian Nights".Oh indecently, I think your avatar image comes from the Pathfinder Module LB 1 “ The Tower of the Last Baron” by Stephen S. Greer. The module is one of my favorites. You will see your avatar image, on page 7 of the module. ** spoiler omitted **
Thanks for answering my post,
Myles
No problem. Thanks for asking.
I picked the "Bumbo" avatar because that's the one who looks the most like me, or at least me in my mid-twenties. I was wondering where he came from.
Creative Director
|
Kinda off-topic:
One of the great things about PnP RPGs is that it gives you freedom to create all kind of imaginative stuff.
Yet published adventures and campaing settings are extremely important, contradictory?
Not at all.
If you're a novelist, one of the BEST ways to find inspiration and learn how to write novels better is to read novels written by other novelists. Why should that method of learning and being inspired work any different for designing campaign settings or adventures?
At least WotC hasn't started mass producing a game no one ever played, I am looking at you Buck Rogers.
Also to be very TSR they should see that the minis start selling now that they are canceled and then start mass producing more sets (Spellfire).
Two words:
At least WotC hasn't started mass producing a game no one ever played, I am looking at you Buck Rogers.
Also to be very TSR they should see that the minis start selling now that they are canceled and then start mass producing more sets (Spellfire).
Two words:
Oh!! I completely forgot about that, what ever you would actually call it.
|
|
Kinda off-topic:
One of the great things about PnP RPGs is that it gives you freedom to create all kind of imaginative stuff.
Yet published adventures and campaing settings are extremely important, contradictory?
I ran a homebrew CS once. A wife, 4 kids, and full-time engineering job later, I find I don't have time to sit down and flesh out everything. So I find published adventures and campaign settings a necessity.
If you have the time and skills to do a homebrew, more power to you. But some of us who don't have the time, and some that don't have the skills find that published material is a godsend. It especially allows me to focus on the things I find more important in life.
What has become really special for me is that my oldest daughter has taken up the dice and started playing. With published material I get a chance to spend more time in my favorite hobby with her.
Like I said earlier, if you have the time and skill to do your own campaign setting, go for it. Thankfully both options are available for us all. And thankfully, Paizo is here to publish the best material (IMHO) available today. Thank you!
Another interesting situation: Many star wars fans that weren't gamers bought Star Wars RPG accesories (I.e. THe Guide to the Empire, etc..) only for the well written fiction and the art, and never played the actual game, I always found it kinda strange.
Why? I rarely have an opportunity to play Shadowrun anymore, but I still buy most of the books published because I like the setting and art, and there are many people who play in the Rifts setting but use other mechanics than the Palladium System.
Heck, when it comes down to it I've never played Pathfinder outside of a convention because of work, but I still keep up with the hardcover books and Pathfinder Magazine.
|
I can't completely disagree with you, but it still seems weird that WOTC isn't pushing harder for their online intuitive. If it's really so successful why haven't they hired more people in that area? Why are they still being slow in releasing new tools? Why are some tools that have where promised three years ago either canceled or still in production?I'm not sure to what degree it's common knowledge to gamers who don't follow the software industry, but WotC is somewhat infamous for its gaffes in all matters technology-related.
I was going to add this same thing.
Software just isn't their core competency. That, I believe, would be Pokemon cards, but I digress...
Another interesting situation: Many star wars fans that weren't gamers bought Star Wars RPG accesories (I.e. THe Guide to the Empire, etc..) only for the well written fiction and the art, and never played the actual game, I always found it kinda strange.
Why? I rarely have an opportunity to play Shadowrun anymore, but I still buy most of the books published because I like the setting and art, and there are many people who play in the Rifts setting but use other mechanics than the Palladium System.
Heck, when it comes down to it I've never played Pathfinder outside of a convention because of work, but I still keep up with the hardcover books and Pathfinder Magazine.
In a way I will echo that. I've watched "Pathfinder Players" on a different, more generic forum, go from using the PRD, to buying the 5 dollar core PDFs (for the art and layout), to finally buying hard copy. In some cases these are people who would not have joined the hobby if they had felt compelled to buy the book or an online subscription upfront. They need that equivalent of a "14-day free to play" period to see if they liked it or not... and I'll say "ya no duh they were going to like it, could told them that from the start"
I'll also echo the time vs money equation. If you have time (are a kid, or other situation) then you likely don't have money, and therefore are not really buying much. If you have money, you likely don't have time and need the support product.
Also it doesn't (edit Jobs was making up a words for me XD ) hurt adventure products if they are also a good story to boot.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Question though, Is ICv2 sales only tracking print products? How do PDF sales factor into the reporting on Paizo's market share?
ICv2's figures are estimates of print sales in the hobby industry only. It does not include book trade (such as Barnes & Noble or Amazon), mass market (like Walmart or Target), direct sales (paizo.com), PDFs, or DDI subscribers.
For some of those outlets, it's pretty easy to compare sales between 4E and Pathfinder. Going backwards:
Paizo has nothing like the DDI.
Wizards currently doesn't sell PDFs.
We sell a lot of Pathfinder products through our website; D&D isn't generally sold through either wizards.com or hasbro.com (though I think hasbro.com has carried some D&D minis and perhaps some intro games in the past).
Paizo has no mass market sales; Wizards has sold D&D Minis and the "Red Box" through mass outlets; other stuff pops up occasionally.
Book trade is not easy to compare, as there are few public sources for sales data there. As folks have pointed out, Amazon's top seller lists show Pathfinder outselling D&D. Borders, though, seems to stock a *lot* more D&D than Pathfinder... but then "stocks" is not the same as "sells," and, unlike the hobby trade, the book trade buys their merchandise with the ability to return it if it doesn't sell.
Thanks for the insight Vic. It does make ICv2's numbers a bit more suspect, but I love learning more about the nuts and bolts.
Book trade is not easy to compare, as there are few public sources for sales data there. As folks have pointed out, Amazon's top seller lists show Pathfinder outselling D&D. Borders, though, seems to stock a *lot* more D&D than Pathfinder... but then "stocks" is not the same as "sells," and, unlike the hobby trade, the book trade buys their merchandise with the ability to return it if it doesn't sell.
And, of course, Borders is in heap big trouble.
And, of course, Borders is in heap big trouble.
Which is interestingly due to outsourcing their online store through Amazon and not really getting a creditably e-reader in stores. Plus, at least in my area, having a fairly crappy selection of titles on the shelf.
No internal digital distribution, no mobile/e-book strategy, and oddly a physical media/music section which showed up as iTunes was really ratcheting into gear.... Of course changing CEOs every few years didnt help much either.
Are we seeing some parallels?
And, of course, Borders is in heap big trouble.
Offtopic: I hope Borders hovers "in-trouble" for a long time, as they seem to be sending me a 33% off coupon every week.
My girlfriend works at Borders and a good friend works at B&N. The main problems with Borders are:
-Unrealistic sales projections and requirements. And a store gets penalized when they don't meet quotas.
-Terrible e-reader. It really, really sucks.
-Terrible music/dvd, sometimes none whatsoever.
-Using smaller outlet stores instead of "B&N" like superstores. Much more limited selection attracts much more limited clientele.
-Way too much heat on managers, which leads to a lot of $#*! flowing down river to the employees. This is most detrimental, since having your sales people feel bad/unappreciated makes them more prone to apathy on the job.
-Poor floor design and usage. The products in front, which should be your 'dump stock' or bestsellers usually are random weird things, like atlases, greeting cards, and 'employee's choice'.This is coupled with poor cashier placement.
I've been to a lot of Borders, these problems have been present at nearly all these stores.
As for the RPG market, I work at a hobby store that specializes in scale models, trains, and such, and hobbies are always hit the hardest during a recession. But hobbies are also among the first industries to recover. With this in mind, I'd expect for 4th ed. to actually make a resurgence in the next few years with Paizo not far behind if not bigger. The key for Paizo vs. WotC is that Wizards has the financial backing to weather the storm. Paizo will have to introduce a expanded line in order to take and keep #1, but will have to be savvy enough not to overload a market. A difficult prospect, but one which looks to be in motion.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
...hobbies are always hit the hardest during a recession. But hobbies are also among the first industries to recover.
If you judge by the number of retail stores, you're pretty much on target. According to our distributor, the hobby market lost stores in 2008, stayed even in 2009, and had an increase in 2010.
I believe it reflected an attitude; we can slop whatever cr-p to the suc---, I mean customers, and they, (this is Hasbro now) because they are nerdy gamers we looked down on in high school, will buy it. I think a lot of customers sensed it for a long time before 4e came out, but no one said it because they thought they were the only one.
This. Ever since I saw the videos of the marketing team from the cons, way back when Scott Rouse et al. were still pushing the demos of the virtual tabletop. And even for someone who sees a certain beauty in the mechanics underlying the system, I still feel this way.
Example: I threw away the adventure that came with the 4E DM's Kit and Monster Vault - all I wanted were the rule books. But I will never get rid of my prints of Rise of the Runelords - a gift from a very dear friend and fellow gamer.
That may not be a very fair comparison, but what I buy from Paizo is usually Runelords-quality, and what I've bought from WotC just reads like the stuff in the Encounters boxes, especially the DDI stuff.
Hmmm, makes me wonder how Castles and Crusades, The Dresden Files RPG, The Doctor Who RPG, Mouseguard, Savage Worlds, Shadowrun and The Battletech RPG are doing these days.
Plenty of other games out there now competing in the market place. Tons of honestly quality RPGs on the market that I'd be quite happy to see Paizo sitting on top of the pile with.
Last I heard, Dresden Files was #4 in sales, with some other games (maybe Savage Worlds?) tied for third, I think. I do know that my FLGS in Raleigh ordered between 6 and 12 copies each of Your Story and Our World in late November. Two weeks ago I went in to buy Our World and got the last copy, and there was one copy of Your Story left on the shelf. Sounds to me like they're doing alright - me and my gaming group love the novels and are planning to take the RPG out for a spin later in the year.
EDIT: Whoops, Liz's link had the correct info for Q3. Still, my anecdotal evidence stands for all its statistical worth. :)
My girlfriend works at Borders and a good friend works at B&N. The main problems with Borders are:
-Unrealistic sales projections and requirements. And a store gets penalized when they don't meet quotas.
-Terrible e-reader. It really, really sucks.
-Terrible music/dvd, sometimes none whatsoever.
-Using smaller outlet stores instead of "B&N" like superstores. Much more limited selection attracts much more limited clientele.
-Way too much heat on managers, which leads to a lot of $#*! flowing down river to the employees. This is most detrimental, since having your sales people feel bad/unappreciated makes them more prone to apathy on the job.
-Poor floor design and usage. The products in front, which should be your 'dump stock' or bestsellers usually are random weird things, like atlases, greeting cards, and 'employee's choice'.This is coupled with poor cashier placement.
I've been to a lot of Borders, these problems have been present at nearly all these stores.
+1
And it's a bloody shame because I like going to my local Borders. They have a good selection of books, and their manga section is the best in my area. It also helps that they have a fair selection of RPGs.
But above all that is the fact that their coffee shop, Seattle's Best, is twice as good as most and five times as good as Starbucks.
Are you sure? Alienating the older fan base to appease/lure a younger fanbase...Yeah, that's pretty much a whole new flavor of idiocy I can't recall TSR exhibiting to the same degree.At least WotC hasn't started mass producing a game no one ever played, I am looking at you Buck Rogers.
Also to be very TSR they should see that the minis start selling now that they are canceled and then start mass producing more sets (Spellfire).
Don't look too hard. I played XXVc. I found quite a few people on th net that played that game. The only real thing wrong was trying to shoehorn Buck into it.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
At least WotC hasn't started mass producing a game no one ever played, I am looking at you Buck Rogers.
I remember sitting in on a TSR sales presentation at a trade show in the early '90s when they announced yet another Buck Rogers game (probably "High Adventure Cliffhangers"). Some retailers audibly groaned, and Jim Ward, who was making the presentation, said "That's right—we'll keep making it until you start buying it."