Goodman rebuttal

[BryonD]

Originally Posted by Twowolves

In short, it was very interesting, but comparing it to Orcus' post, it's really apples and oranges.

I agree.

I read Orcus post and was surprised that he was having trouble even with ToH. I really thought a banner product title from a big name would be a no-brainer. But I wasn't really surprised by the overall statements.

I read Joseph's comments and I was not surprised by anything.
Somewhat different perspectives that both fit with my personal expectations.

[Alzrius]

Originally Posted by joethelawyer

I don't doubt his industry expertise, nor his business acumen. But he seemed to state his credentials and then his conclusions, with nothing objective to back it up in between.

That's the conclusion I came to also. He goes straight from telling us what materials he's gathered, without saying what data they actually provide, and then gives us his interpretation of them.

His post was interesting, but if you break it down it reads like so:

Admin here. Portion of post removed. We don't allow "fixed it for you" posts here. Why did you think that a highly sarcastic, exceptionally insulting version of that would be okay? I don't care either way if you disagree or agree with him, but if it's on ENW it'll need to be politely and without personal attacks.

[Filcher]

Edited.

[joethelawyer]

Originally Posted by jdrakeh

You seem to be taking his post entirely out of context on purpose, going so far as to ignore very specific parts of it. Mr. Goodman very specifically says that 4e is doing as well as D&D was from 1974 to 1981, 1983 to 2000, and from 2002 to 2008. Or, in other words, D&D 4e is doing as well as D&D ever has, with the exception of two. . . er. . . exceptional years.

By what objective standard? Dollars in sales? Number of books sold? Amount of shelf space in stores? Stores that carry the book? Anecdotal evidence from contacts in gaming stores? Im still curious how he got hard objective concrete measurable benchmarks from the 70's and 80's for purposes of comparison.

Either way though, it's irrelevant how well they are doing as compared to back i n the day. What matters is how well they are doing as compared to how well Hasbro wants them to do. How well are they meeting their revenue goals for the year?

[Remathilis]

Originally Posted by Alzrius

That's the conclusion I came to also. He goes straight from telling us what materials he's gathered, without saying what data they actually provide, and then gives us his interpretation of them.

His post was interesting, but if you break it down it reads like so:

Hugh. I guess if you have an agenda to prove that 4e is crashing, 3pp is doomed, and X (Paizo, retroclones, Green Ronin) is the only salvation for D&D style RPGs, I could read it like that too.

[jdrakeh]

Originally Posted by joethelawyer

By what objective standard? Dollars in sales? Number of books sold? Amount of shelf space in stores? Stores that carry the book? Anecdotal evidence from contacts in gaming stores? Im still curious how he got hard objective concrete measurable benchmarks from the 70's and 80's for purposes of comparison.

I'm curious about hard data, too. I'm just reiterrating what Mr. Goodman said, a great portion of which S'mon ignored in his attempts to get on with the doomsaying.

[joethelawyer]

Originally Posted by Alzrius

That's the conclusion I came to also. He goes straight from telling us what materials he's gathered, without saying what data they actually provide, and then gives us his interpretation of them.

His post was interesting, but if you break it down it reads like so:

I haven't laughed so hard in months Enable your XP so I can give some to you, man.

"...created the month of May." LOL

[Ourph]

Originally Posted by joethelawyer

Im still curious how he got hard objective concrete measurable benchmarks from the 70's and 80's for purposes of comparison.

He states very clearly in the post that he accessed sales figures included in court documents from various lawsuits TSR was involved in throughout the years. Whether those numbers are "hard, objective and concrete" is, I suppose, debatable. But presumably they're coming from the only entity that would know (TSR) and so are at least as reliable as anyone else's data.

[Psion]

Originally Posted by DaveMage

Hopefully not.

I've heard nothing but positive things said about Joe in the past.

To be clear, I was no way impugning Joseph's integrity. Indeed, of all the people I have dealt with in the RPG industry, he's one of the more professional.

[Bumbles]

Originally Posted by DaveMage

Also, if 4E is doing as well as 3E was - why aren't more 3PPs jumping on board? Or is the price for them to jump on board providing things like spinner racks to game and hobby stores? In the early 3E era, product was enough. Now it seems that you need more than a product to get in stores, you have to actively nurture the relationship.

Indeed, there was a period where pretty much anything could be published and put on a store shelf. This turns out to not be so desirable to retailers, as they end up with junk on the shelves they have to throw away to make room for stuff that will sell. Distributors don't like it because they end up with junk in the warehouses that the retailers don't want, so they have to throw it away to make room for stuff that is viable.

Either that, or pay money for years to store a bunch of Wilderness Survival Guides that aren't worth the paper they're printed on.

And speaking as a consumer, I'm glad I don't have to worry about typo-ridden poorly-indexed books with dithered graphics and doubled-spaced text being on the shelves when I'm looking for stuff to buy.

Yeah, it's nice to have the idea that anybody can dream up some awesome-killer RPG book and serve the world by putting it out there, but the reality is quite different in my experience.

[Rechan]

Originally Posted by DaveMage

Also, if 4E is doing as well as 3E was - why aren't more 3PPs jumping on board?

Perhaps:

They don't like 4e.
They don't like the GSL.
They waited too long on the GSL and gave up.
The common wisdom is 4e is doing badly, so they aren't interested.

[jdrakeh]

Originally Posted by Ourph

But presumably they're coming from the only entity that would know (TSR) and so are at least as reliable as anyone else's data.

That is a good point — and one that I completely overlooked. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

[Odhanan]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

So are we now doubting Joe Goodman's word because he has vested interest in seeing his company earn a profit, which right now is tied to the health of the 4e market?

Short answer? Yes, we absolutely can, based on this set of parameters.

[Shroomy]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Perhaps:

They don't like 4e.
They don't like the GSL.
They waited too long on the GSL and gave up.
The common wisdom is 4e is doing badly, so they aren't interested.

Or the conception of 3PP ends with Green Ronin, Paizo, Goodman Games, Necromancer, Mongoose, and Malhavoc.

[Remathilis]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Perhaps:

They don't like 4e.
They don't like the GSL.
They waited too long on the GSL and gave up.
The common wisdom is 4e is doing badly, so they aren't interested.

I'll give you the first three, but the last isn't so common (as JG is trying to point out) and shouldn't be repeated as gospel.

Remathilis "But it said so on the internet!" Ooi.

[Rechan]

Originally Posted by Shroomy

Or the conception of 3PP ends with Green Ronin, Paizo, Necromancer, Mongoose, and Malhavoc.

One Bad Egg seems to be going strong.

The guy in charge of it posts the company's monthly earnings on his blog, even.

[Psion]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Perhaps:

They don't like 4e.
They don't like the GSL.
They waited too long on the GSL and gave up.
The common wisdom is 4e is doing badly, so they aren't interested.

Is it?

I thought #2 and #3 were the common wisdom.

#1, I've seen some small publishers that think that. And some (including some I respect a bunch) who lurve 4e.

#4 seems silly. Even if 4e is half the sales of 3e, it's still an order of magnitude more sales that most 3pps ever see, so I wouldn't see why that would be a driving factor.

[Rechan]

Originally Posted by Psion

I#1, I've seen some small publishers that think that.

Some SMALL publishers?

Paizo. Green Ronin. Malhovic.

[joethelawyer]

Originally Posted by Ourph

He states very clearly in the post that he accessed sales figures included in court documents from various lawsuits TSR was involved in throughout the years. Whether those numbers are "hard, objective and concrete" is, I suppose, debatable. But presumably they're coming from the only entity that would know (TSR) and so are at least as reliable as anyone else's data.

The thing is, having worked in courts, and seen a bit of the legal arena, those types of records typically do not make it into the official court record. I don't now how it is in other states, but in Connecticut sensitive financial information is often sealed. The sort of detailed information he refers to is usually passed back and forth as part of the discovery process between the lawyers and not given to the court. They may make it into the court record as exhibits once a case goes to trial, but from what I remember most of the old TSR cases settled before going to court. Also, the courts in CT throw out old exhibits after a certain period of time, 4 months after a case goes to judgment. Space is limited in courthouses, and they cant afford the space to store old exhibits. There are always transcripts of the court proceedings once a case went to trial, but you have to pay a lot for those, and like I said, I thought most of them settled before trial anyhow. Lastly, he could have gotten them from the litigants themselves, but I would assume that any decent attorney would have, as part of the settlement agrement, also gotten everyone to sign confidentiality agreements as to any sensitive financial information shared as part of the case.

He mentions the Dave Arneson cases, where he sued for royalties. I assume the sales figures he says he read were in the Complaint filed by Arneson. A Complaint is a court document that starts a case. It contains alegatons of truth, not the truth itself. The other side of the case files what is known here as an Answer, wherein they usually deny the allegations in the Complaint. Somewhere in the middle lies the truth. If they settle out of court, we generally never find out the truth. We just know the case is dropped and withdrawn.

I did a quick search for cases Arneson was named in which there was an actual decision available electronically. Keep in mind that a lot of older cases are not available electronically, and you have to physically get them from the courthouse in some manner. I attached them below. I can't seem to find anything really meaningful he can use ass reliable benchmark in them. But, it was a quick search. He apparently spent more than just the 5 minutes I did doing this research. Like I said, I'd like to see what he uses for his figures, as well as where he got them, not just a list of sources used.

Again, my experience is in CT. It may be different in other states.

Like I said, I'd love to see his book.

[Lord Mhoram]

Originally Posted by Piratecat

Excellent. Thank you.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Fiery Dragon putting out the Tome of Horrors 4e?

They did the Creature Collection, and have license for the Scarred Lands, but I never heard of them getting the Necro stuff.

The Creature Collection is amazing by the way. Got my print copy day before yesterday. Great stuff.

OK, back to regular topic.