|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought about specifying but then decided it didn’t matter which one we talked about.Especially after the last D&D movie.You mean the last theatrical release or the two direct-to-DVD films?
:/
No, it really, really doesn’t.
I mean, they got better as they went on. (As in, actually watchable and enjoyable in a “bad movie” sense.) But man we’re they all terrible.
But, hey, for a couple decades Marvel heroes were the domain of straight to TV movies (Doctor Strange), direct to video (Captain America), or just not even released (Fantastic Four). So there’s always hope.
While I doubt they’ll ever hit Marvel numbers, I’d love to see D&D become a noteworthy franchise (like the Fast & Furious or Harry Potter), or even a secondary franchise (an Insidious, Transformers, or Mission: Impossible). But, again, I doubt it will do anything for the game.
But it will still be nice, just like as a lapsed comic fan it’s great to see Iron Man be a name hero and freakin’ Thanos being a known antagonist,
|
|
Tasha's Cauldron is back in stock at Amazon and at position #44 as of this posting. What's most impressive is the 4,000+ ratings/reviews it's gotten averaging 4.8. ####!
Dipped slightly to #49. And the PHB is currently #98 in books. Like all books and not just gaming.
Impressive for a book that has been out for a month-and-a-half.
(It's likely the bump of kids spending Christmas money on said book.)
What I also found interesting was that, for a couple times this month, the Call of Cthulhu core rulebook popped above the Pathfinder 2e Core Rulebook in the Amazon ranking.
They're currently #18,000 and #13,000 respectively, but it's interesting that Pathfinder is currently got some competition for the #2 RPG spot.
Which isn't a surprise, really as D&D has a lock on fantasy RPG so anyone who burns out from D&D will probably want a different genre and to tell different stories, and PF2 is fairly similar in tone. CoC is very different.
And apparently CoC (and InSANe) are huge in Korea & Japan. And it's been the #2 RPG on Roll20 for a year or so.
Plus, Mythos is likely getting a nice awareness boost from Lovecraft County.
Not saying that PF2 is failing or anything. Just that CoC is getting some decent attention and spikes in sales, and might be growing into the next big RPG.
|
|
Investigative games are tricky. But they do also tend to attract GMs who like running investigations, or quickly get good at that type of game. Those would be the mental muscles being exercised.
I imagine many dedicated CoC GMs would look at the idea of a site based dungeon crawl and think that's tricky to make work, as they're so used to investigation.
;)
It probably helps that there's likely a lot more player buy-in. CoC isn't going to attract the same degree of gamers seeking the power fantasy. It's inherently easier to tell those kind of stories for players who want to RP investigators and detectives and occultists than to tell an investigative horror for a mage that can conjure elements, a fearless berserker, and the holy warrior.
....It probably helps that there's likely a lot more player buy-in. CoC isn't going to attract the same degree of gamers seeking the power fantasy....Your character cannot ultimately be certain any of the uncovered truths are in fact true and your character will devolve into ineffective insanity before piecing it all together in the off chance that death is not the end.
Not many takers for that I'd say, but then I totally don't get Warhammer 40k yet it sells quite well and has for decades apparently. So WTH do I know?
There are many takers for that. Just like there were for Vampire the Masquerade when you questioned whether or not people played it, or FFG Star Wars when you questioned whether people played it. In each of those three cases sales data demonstrated a player base and you questioned whether that data was accurate because you hadn't personally interacted with people who played those games or weren't interested in playing those games yourself.
Often that sales data that called those games out as doing well was the same data that you consider to be ironclad when it supports your unchallenged opinions about D&D.
|
|
....It probably helps that there's likely a lot more player buy-in. CoC isn't going to attract the same degree of gamers seeking the power fantasy....Your character cannot ultimately be certain any of the uncovered truths are in fact true and your character will devolve into ineffective insanity before piecing it all together in the off chance that death is not the end.
Doesn't sound any weirder than the OSR "expect to die quickly and randomly then rereoll a character in 5 minutes."
Plus, having a character meet a grisly end appeals to a lot of people who like that degree of finality. The type of player who has their characters stay dead rather than be resurrected.
Not many takers for that I'd say, but then I totally don't get Warhammer 40k yet it sells quite well and has for decades apparently. So WTH do I know?
:D
Yeah, also likely an acquired taste. It likely helps that there's the miniature game feeding people into the RPG.
Of course, sales numbers for anything below the #3 slot on RPG sales charts does become super niche. It very quickly drops from players numbered in the millions to players numbered in the tens of thousands.
Of course, sales numbers for anything below the #3 slot on RPG sales charts does become super niche. It very quickly drops from players numbered in the millions to players numbered in the tens of thousands.
Really? That's fascinating, where do you get those numbers?
|
|
Active CoC players definitely don't number in the millions.
Yeah. The infographic WotC put out in 2019 places D&D's fanbase at 40 million. (With 2 million alone watching their D&D Live special that year.)
An impressive figure given there was only 20 million players back in 2007. And how the industry has grown from $15 million back in 2013 to well over $50 million.Sites like https://www.tckpublishing.com/amazon-book-sales-calculator/ can really highlight the sales difference, calculating the 5e PHB is selling 600+ copies a day, and somewhere around 100,000 to 200,000 copies per year.
Compared to Pathfinder 2's 4,000 copies per year or Call of Cthulhu's current 3,000. That's a massive difference in sales. Each month, 5e is selling twice as many copies as PF2 is selling in an entire year!
Even if you look at Roll20 and assume that's representative that pegs the number of CoC gamers at <5 million and Pathfinder at 1.79 million. And when you get to games less popular than those two... well, Star Wars ("any edition") would only be 300k. And that's Star Wars!!
And Roll20 probably isn't remotely representative, as people disproportionately play smaller games on Roll20, as they can't find groups in meat space. I'm going to be able to find a Pathfinder or 5e group if I look hard enough, but Eclipse Phase or Star Trek Adventures will be much harder.
Star Trek Adventures wasn't hard to find. I typed in Star Trek Adventures, well I typed in Star Trek and it auto-filled Adventures, in Find Games To Play on Roll20. Games with open slots popped right up. Not much harder at all. 30 seconds of my time. Tomorrow I can't speak to, they may fill up. But it wasn't hard. Or much harder. Found games on Warhorn too. Not hard. Again they may fill up.
Sites like https://www.tckpublishing.com/amazon-book-sales-calculator/ can really highlight the sales difference, calculating the 5e PHB is selling 600+ copies a day, and somewhere around 100,000 to 200,000 copies per year.
Compared to Pathfinder 2's 4,000 copies per year or Call of Cthulhu's current 3,000. That's a massive difference in sales. Each month, 5e is selling twice as many copies as PF2 is selling in an entire year!
That isn’t how the tckpublishing tool works. You enter the current rank of a product and it calculates how many books you had to sell in a day or in a month to hit that rank.
Notice the Amazon Book Sales Calculator tells you how many sales you need to hit in EITHER one day OR one month to hit a certain bestseller ranking. We use “The Rule of 15” which means if you take the monthly sales needed to hit a certain bestseller ranking, all you have to do is divide that monthly sales number by 15 to calculate how many sales you need in one day (24 hours) to achieve that same sales ranking.
It does not give you a lifetime sales representation, or a yearly sales rank. It lets you know how you could achieve that products current ranking and Amazon sales rankings are a moving target as evidenced by QB’s updates about the current rank of Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything.
You took a tool meant to give you a snapshot of sales at the moment and then you multiplied (and rounded) to produce a statement about the massive difference in sales month over month which is something the tool does not predict, nor can you prognosticate the change in sales from any of the three games mentioned. Specifically since the entire conversation about CoC began when you claimed surprise at having seen it selling so well.
Also you claim that the estimate on CoC players is <5 million and QB says those players “definitely don’t number in the millions.
You both present nothing but facts here and when anyone challenges either of you, you both make sure to prove that everyone else is wrong because only your facts are correct.
You can’t both be right can you? Which is it, him or you?
It’s neither. We don’t have access to that kind of player base information. You’re both just spitballing to support your *opinion* about the state of other games.
|
|
Star Trek Adventures wasn't hard to find. I typed in Star Trek Adventures, well I typed in Star Trek and it auto-filled Adventures, in Find Games To Play on Roll20. Games with open slots popped right up. Not much harder at all. 30 seconds of my time. Tomorrow I can't speak to, they may fill up. But it wasn't hard. Or much harder. Found games on Warhorn too. Not hard. Again they may fill up.
To emphasize I said:
And Roll20 probably isn't remotely representative, as people disproportionately play smaller games on Roll20, as they can't find groups in meat space.So, yes, you will find STA quickly on Roll20. And people playing it. Because it's gathering the disparate players from across the continent.
But my point is it will be harder offline. I won't find players of STA at my FLGS as easily. Or a gaming club at university. And even getting your regular group of D&D players to all be interested would be tricky.
And so people who like games like STA go on Roll20 so they can play. Which makes the non-D&D games more popular on that platform than they would be elsewhere.
Which makes Roll20 not entirely representative. It will skew to non-D&D games compared to gamers overall.
|
|
I think the point there was that it would be harder to find in meat space, so people are more likely to seek out online games. A higher percentage of less popular games would be played online, thus distorting percentages if you just based it on Roll20 or other online tools.
That was my point, yeah. But I guess I could have made it clearer since it was misunderstood.
You said it better.Thanks!
So it's not hard, in the sense of in this modern age where you are using tracking on website for sales tracking you can easily find games. If internet can track sales on amazon ease of finding games counts
So, yes, you will find STA quickly on Roll20. And people playing it. Because it's gathering the disparate players from across the continent.
But my point is it will be harder offline. I won't find players of STA at my FLGS as easily. Or a gaming club at university. And even getting your regular group of D&D players to all be interested would be tricky.And so people who like games like STA go on Roll20 so they can play. Which makes the non-D&D games more popular on that platform than they would be elsewhere.
Which makes Roll20 not entirely representative. It will skew to non-D&D games compared to gamers overall.
Ah so popularity on online platforms is a metric of D&D’s overall success. Other games popularity on online platforms is illusory and not representative of actual popularity?
Does that ‘more popular games play in person and less popular games play online’ argument hold true during COVID-19 when many FLGS’ aren’t allowing in person play, or is it purely another academic conversation where you are theorizing and presenting it as fact?
|
|
So it's not hard, in the sense of in this modern age where you are using tracking on website for sales tracking you can easily find games. If internet can track sales on amazon ease of finding games counts
Again, to find games online, it's fairly easy. Not effortless, as finding someone in your time zone on a day you're free that has a style you like is still a bit of a hurdle.
I've joined four or five Roll20 D&D games over the years and 4/5ths were terrible and not for me.But it's harder in person, which is what I was describing. Just finding an in-person D&D game is tricky at the best of times (i.e. not a global pandemic) and finding a smaller game is harder still. There's just proportionately fewer people, and the odds of finding someone you click with that is playing at the right time is that much harder.
Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
And if one of those players is someone you just don't gel with, then you're S.O.L.
I've joined four or five Roll20 D&D games over the years and 4/5ths were terrible and not for me.
So it’s something you’ve done only a handful of times and your experiences with it should be taken as such?
But it's harder in person, which is what I was describing. Just finding an in-person D&D game is tricky at the best of times (i.e. not a global pandemic) and finding a smaller game is harder still. There's just proportionately fewer people, and the odds of finding someone you click with that is playing at the right time is that much harder.
And yet there are other people who find it absolutely easy to find an in-person D&D game and your argument should be taken not as objective reality but your anecdotal experiences.
Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
This would suggest that perhaps the Roll20 numbers aren’t actually representative of the player base out in the physical world, because we know that there are small cities and small towns that have large enough player bases for World of Darkness to support a chapter in the WoD LARP organization both when it was the Camarilla and now in its new form. Those willing to LARP WoD is a subset of those willing to play WoD.
This would suggest that there is no solid metric for determining a games total player base given the data sources that the industry actually does make available and you’re just whistling in the dark.
Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
And if one of those players is someone you just don't gel with, then you're S.O.L.
So it's okay to use Roll20 numbers to extrapolate data for in person games but it's not okay to use the ease of finding games online through Roll20, for which it was designed, as an example for ease of finding a game. Sounds like cheating.
Some of that is probably down to how well the game in question plays online as opposed to in person. I'm not experienced with FFG Star Wars but I don't think it'd work well as an online game, so people might not be creating online groups for it. It's dice mechanic really isn't ideal for non F2F play.
Roll 20’s FFG SW sheet has the narrative dice roller built in, so it runs super easily
|
|
So it's okay to use Roll20 numbers to extrapolate data for in person games but it's not okay to use the ease of finding games online through Roll20, for which it was designed, as an example for ease of finding a game. Sounds like cheating.
Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
And if one of those players is someone you just don't gel with, then you're S.O.L.
They're two very different things. I'm not sure how this is hard to understand...
You can look at who is playing what on Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds and get a really quick idea of the most popular games people are actually playing (opposed to ones they're just reading ).
It's likely not wholly accurate—there's going to be some variance and a margin of error—but it will be in the right ballpark. There's not going to be a huge discrepancy where lots and lots of people are playing a game in-person but no one is doing it online, and vice versa. If a game is a huge hit online, it's going to be popular offline as well.
But finding a game on Roll20 versus finding a game in person are two very different things. Because in the former you're drawing from a potential worldwide pool and in the former you're limited to a radius of a hundred kilometers.
I played in a Star Trek Adventures game for two years with a couple fellow Canadians (one not far from me, the other on the far side of the continent), a couple Americans, and someone from New Zealand. But I turned to Roll20 as my current gaming group wasn't interested and I couldn't find enough people locally.
What is your experience finding people for in-person games like versus Roll20? Both new groups and new players. Was the experience the same?
So it's okay to use Roll20 numbers to extrapolate data for in person games but it's not okay to use the ease of finding games online through Roll20, for which it was designed, as an example for ease of finding a game. Sounds like cheating.
Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
And if one of those players is someone you just don't gel with, then you're S.O.L.They're two very different things. I'm not sure how this is hard to understand...
You can look at who is playing what on Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds and get a really quick idea of the most popular games people are actually playing (opposed to ones they're just reading ).
It's likely not wholly accurate—there's going to be some variance and a margin of error—but it will be in the right ballpark. There's not going to be a huge discrepancy where lots and lots of people are playing a game in-person but no one is doing it online, and vice versa. If a game is a huge hit online, it's going to be popular offline as well.But finding a game on Roll20 versus finding a game in person are two very different things. Because in the former you're drawing from a potential worldwide pool and in the former you're limited to a radius of a hundred kilometers.
I played in a Star Trek Adventures game for two years with a couple fellow Canadians (one not far from me, the other on the far side of the continent), a couple Americans, and someone from New Zealand. But I turned to Roll20 as my current gaming group wasn't interested and I couldn't find enough people locally.What is your experience finding people for in-person games like versus Roll20? Both new...
TL;DR if a source proves his point then he considered it valid. If it doesn’t prove his point then it is no longer worth discussing.
|
|
Some of that is probably down to how well the game in question plays online as opposed to in person. I'm not experienced with FFG Star Wars but I don't think it'd work well as an online game, so people might not be creating online groups for it. It's dice mechanic really isn't ideal for non F2F play.Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
And if one of those players is someone you just don't gel with, then you're S.O.L.
That is true.
Any game with a lot of heavy crunch options (read: Pathfinder 2 or 4e D&D) might see less play, as inputting that all manually is hard. There's a lot of text to type. Especially for the DM. And the platform slows down play just that little bit each turn, which quickly adds up with lengthy battles.
And games with non-standard play methods like Dread just won't work. And as much as I love the Alien RPG, it's Panic dice mechanic just isn't as effective digitally.
But you can make custom dice pretty easily. So it's probably simple (and cheaper) to play FFG's Star Wars on Roll20. And since it doesn't use positioning, you don't need to worry about finding exact battlemaps.
|
|
So it's okay to use Roll20 numbers to extrapolate data for in person games but it's not okay to use the ease of finding games online through Roll20, for which it was designed, as an example for ease of finding a game. Sounds like cheating.
Based on the Roll20 numbers, for every 50 people playing D&D in a city, there's 10 who play CoC, 6 that play Pathfinder, 1 that plays World of Darkness, and 1/2 that plays Star Wars. To get a group together to play FFG's Star Wars in person with a full group of 5 you need to be in a community large enough to support 250 D&D players. Which probably means medium sized city.
And if one of those players is someone you just don't gel with, then you're S.O.L.
Actually, let's try this...
WotC reported there are 40 million D&D players worldwide.
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/07/40-million-people-play-dd-according -to-wotc.html
Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds place D&D somewhere between 53% and 63% of the market:
https://blog.roll20.net/post/632076046197489664/the-orr-group-industry-repo rt-q3-2020-breakout
https://www.enworld.org/threads/fantasy-grounds-stats-show-massive-pandemic -bump.671486/
This puts the total number of RPG players at between 63 and 80 million.
The combined population of Europe and North America is 1.3 billion. Making RPGers between 4 and 6 percent of the population. Small.
But let's go BIG for the sake of argument and just do NA and Great Britian. Assume that D&D is mostly English. That's 645 million, with gamers being between 9.7 and 12.4 percent of the population.
Cities in the UK and North America range in population between 10 million and 100,000k. 5 million median average or a mid-range average of 180k. The mid-range will be closer as even the greater Manchester area is 2.5 million and LA is only 4 million: London and New York really skew the numbers.
12% of 180k is 21,600. That's your average number of gamers in your average city. When looking for a game, you might have as many as 21k players to draw from. Or as few as 720, if we use the smaller number of 4%.
Each time you look for a new game or gamer, that's your pool of potentials. And each time you impose a limiter on the game (system, day of the week, time, frequency of play) the number of potential players drops.
In comparison, Roll20 has a pool of 5 million gamers.
https://blog.roll20.net/post/611692093861199872/5-million-users-roll20-find s-critical-success
It's the equivalent of living in a city with a population between 41 and 125 million. Tokyo only has a population of 37 million.
In which situation will it be easier to find players for your game:
1) When you have a pool of 720 and 21,000 gamers?
2) When you have a pool of 5 million gamers?
WotC reported there are 40 million D&D players worldwide.
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/07/40-million-people-play-dd-according -to-wotc.html
The very first line of your linked article states:
Edit: A recent correction has come to light, there was an error in the original article–it should be an estimated 40 million people have played D&D since 1974. This number is still impressive, however, and the article has been updated.
Source: https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/07/40-million-people-play-dd-according -to-wotc.html
So your entire premise is based on flawed math from the jump.
Actually, let's try this...WotC reported there are 40 million D&D players worldwide.
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/07/40-million-people-play-dd-according -to-wotc.htmlRoll20 and Fantasy Grounds place D&D somewhere between 53% and 63% of the market:
https://blog.roll20.net/post/632076046197489664/the-orr-group-industry-repo rt-q3-2020-breakout
https://www.enworld.org/threads/fantasy-grounds-stats-show-massive-pandemic -bump.671486/This puts the total number of RPG players at between 63 and 80 million.
The combined population of Europe and North America is 1.3 billion. Making RPGers between 4 and 6 percent of the population. Small.
But let's go BIG for the sake of argument and just do NA and Great Britian. Assume that D&D is mostly English. That's 645 million, with gamers being between 9.7 and 12.4 percent of the population.Cities in the UK and North America range in population between 10 million and 100,000k. 5 million median average or a mid-range average of 180k. The mid-range will be closer as even the greater Manchester area is 2.5 million and LA is only 4 million: London and New York really skew the numbers.
12% of 180k is 21,600. That's your average number of gamers in your average city. When looking for a game, you might have as many as 21k players to draw from. Or as few as 720, if we use the smaller number of 4%.
Each time you look for a new game or gamer, that's your pool of potentials. And each time you impose a limiter on the game (system, day of the week, time, frequency of play) the number of potential players drops.In comparison, Roll20 has a pool of 5 million gamers.
https://blog.roll20.net/post/611692093861199872/5-million-users-roll20-find s-critical-success
It's the equivalent of living in a city with a population between 41 and 125 million. Tokyo only has a population of 37 million.In which situation will it be easier to find players for your game:
1) When you have a pool of 720 and 21,000 gamers?
2) When you have a pool of 5 million gamers?
To be fair shouldn't you also break down the 5 million? Cause it isn't actually a pool of 5 million for every game is it? You start off byy saying that D&D is 53% to 63% of the Roll20 market which you then say is 5 million. But 53% to 63% of 5 million is smaller than 5 million. But before you break that 5 million down to the 53% to 63% shouldn't you first break it down to English speaking Roll20 users since you so kindly did to the real world. For fairness sake.
Let's make that 5 million as small as possible just like you did the real world extrapolation based on the Roll20 percentages
Like say, less than 1 million? I could go for than kind of number!
:D
You would like to estimate that the total number of English speaking users of Roll20 is less than 1 Million. Wouldn't that cute you off at the knees for using Roll20 as a metric of success for D&D if it only represented thousands of players rather than millions?
|
|
WotC reported there are 40 million D&D players worldwide.
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/07/40-million-people-play-dd-according -to-wotc.htmlThe very first line of your linked article states:
So your entire premise is based on flawed math from the jump.Edit: A recent correction has come to light, there was an error in the original article–it should be an estimated 40 million people have played D&D since 1974. This number is still impressive, however, and the article has been updated.
Source: https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2019/07/40-million-people-play-dd-according -to-wotc.html
Okay, I'll reply to you this once.
That is a fair point. Which means all the numbers of gamers I posit will be SMALLER. The pools of potential gamers in each city will be reduced, potentially by half.
And makes Roll20's numbers even bigger by comparison.
So that's for emphasizing my point.
Okay, I'll reply to you this once.That is a fair point. Which means all the numbers of gamers I posit will be SMALLER. The pools of potential gamers in each city will be reduced, potentially by half.
And makes Roll20's numbers even bigger by comparison.So that's for emphasizing my point.
It emphasizes the point you'd like to be able to prove, but coupled with your flawed usage of the Amazon sales estimator data it also shows that you are just grasping at straws to try to arrive at conclusions that there just isn't enough data to support.
Your argument only works accurately if the entire english speaking world of gamers is a monolith and all cities contain the exact same basic population make up with the same demographics and preferences. The world is far more complex than that.
You having trouble finding people willing to play Star Trek Adventures in your city does not mean that I will have trouble finding people willing to play Star Trek Adventures in my city. Pre-Covid one of the FLGS' in my city ran STA games in store just like they do with PFS and Adventures League. Certainly they ran more AL and PFS sessions, but the STA sessions existed.
|
|
To be fair shouldn't you also break down the 5 million? Cause it isn't actually a pool of 5 million for every game is it? You start off byy saying that D&D is 53% to 63% of the Roll20 market which you then say is 5 million. But 53% to 63% of 5 million is smaller than 5 million.
No. Because if you go back and read my post I increase the total number of gamers by 47-37% (to 63 and 80 million).
That's accounted for.
But before you break that 5 million down to the 53% to 63% shouldn't you first break it down to English speaking Roll20 users since you so kindly did to the real world. For fairness sake.
Let's make that 5 million as small as possible just like you did the real world extrapolation based on the Roll20 percentages
Read my post again.
By only using the English speaking world, I made the numbers LARGER. If I had included Russia, the Middle East, and Korea the ratio of gamers would be significantly smaller.
But even if you do reduce the number of people using Roll20 by half or even two-thirds, at 333,000 the number is still over fifteen times that of an average sized city.
Even if you arbitrarily halve the number of users for bots and alt accounts—reducing it to <150,000—then that's still larger than the purposely large number of 21,000.
Even in that unlikely situation where only a sixth of Roll20 is an English speaking individual, you're still looking for a potential players out of an audience seven times larger than that of the average city. Which means finding players who play the system you want, at the time you want, and that you click with will have a higher chance of success.
|
|
You having trouble finding people willing to play Star Trek Adventures in your city does not mean that I will have trouble finding people willing to play Star Trek Adventures in my city. Pre-Covid one of the FLGS' in my city ran STA games in store just like they do with PFS and Adventures League. Certainly they ran more AL and PFS sessions, but the STA sessions existed.
So, to be clear, you are disagreeing with me and arguing it is easier to find a Star Trek Adventures game in person than on Roll20.
That if you want to play a small roleplaying game you WILL have more success finding one in meat space than online.
So, to be clear, you are disagreeing with me and arguing it is easier to find a Star Trek Adventures game in person than on Roll20.That if you want to play a small roleplaying game you WILL have more success finding one in meat space than online.
No, to be clear I'm saying that your quest for absolutism is reductive of the diversity of gamers because by claiming there is a single set of us that can be applied universally to all areas of the world you are discounting the possibility that your experience is not everyones experience.
I am using, to showcase the diversity of communities in the hobby, the example you used of Star Trek Adventures which you claimed was hard to find on Roll20 and harder to find in person by informing you that it was possible to find their sponsored play in my moderately sized city. Just as Tristan used the search feature on Roll 20 to showcase the ease he had finding them online, I am demonstrating the ease I would have had finding them in the real world before Covid. Your lack of ease finding players is not in doubt, and my ease does not mean your lack of ease is some form of an aberration.
It just means we live in different regions with different demographic make ups and that STA is more popular where I live than it is where you live. This hobby is not a monolith.
And I'm absolutely disagreeing with the phrase "meat space" to describe the physical world. Gross.
To be fair shouldn't you also break down the 5 million? Cause it isn't actually a pool of 5 million for every game is it? You start off byy saying that D&D is 53% to 63% of the Roll20 market which you then say is 5 million. But 53% to 63% of 5 million is smaller than 5 million.No. Because if you go back and read my post I increase the total number of gamers by 47-37% (to 63 and 80 million).
That's accounted for.
But before you break that 5 million down to the 53% to 63% shouldn't you first break it down to English speaking Roll20 users since you so kindly did to the real world. For fairness sake.
Let's make that 5 million as small as possible just like you did the real world extrapolation based on the Roll20 percentages
Read my post again.
By only using the English speaking world, I made the numbers LARGER. If I had included Russia, the Middle East, and Korea the ratio of gamers would be significantly smaller.
But even if you do reduce the number of people using Roll20 by half or even two-thirds, at 333,000 the number is still over fifteen times that of an average sized city.
Even if you arbitrarily halve the number of users for bots and alt accounts—reducing it to <150,000—then that's still larger than the purposely large number of 21,000.Even in that unlikely situation where only a sixth of Roll20 is an English speaking individual, you're still looking for a potential players out of an audience seven times larger than that of the average city. Which means finding players who play the system you want, at the time you want, and that you click with will have a higher chance of success.
Wait 333,000 is 15 times larger than the average city? the average city is 22,000? Crazy talk. That's super small. Wikipedia has a list of US cities by population. It takes 317 cities to get down to 100,145.
The small city I went to college has a 48,000 population. The school has grown since I went there to 21,820 enrollments. That number is not part of the city's population.
By your average city my university is an average city surrounded by 2 other average cities
So by bringing the 5 million Roll20 down to even 150,000 for English speaking games and me living in a metro area of 1.5 million which is 71 times the purposely large number of 21,000 but based on actual cities in the US doesn't seem average or large at all I'd have an easy time in finding a game in both.
In fact by breaking down the real world to 21,000 and accounting for English using games of the sort I want in Roll20 based on your numbers I should have a harder time in Roll20 finding a game I want than in the real world. Since I live in the real world in a metro area 71 times larger than the "average" city