Goodman rebuttal

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

I know one thing, this thread is a good example of the reason why he chose to remain silent until now.

When Orcus posts to a D&D 3pp community and creates a feeling of doubt about the viability of 3pp and thus their relevance in the hearts of the fans Joe Goodman has to rise the consumer morale, hasn't he? Seriously why did he make his only comment only right now? Wouldn't this support my argument here?

[Zil]

Originally Posted by Bumbles

Of course, he could have gone out of business for reasons completely unrelated to 4E, like the landlord raising the rent, a medical emergency, bad gambling debts, winning the lottery...any number of things.

Indeed. I suspect he mostly wanted to retire, but it is strange that he didn't (or perhaps couldn't) sell the business as a going concern. The name alone should have been worth something.

[jdrakeh]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

I know one thing, this thread is a good example of the reason why he chose to remain silent until now.

This thread is a good example of why some publishers take long hiatuses from publishing and/or give it up altogether.

[thecasualoblivion]

Asking for evidence of whether or not 4E is doing well is like asking for empirical evidence about whether god exists. No matter how much you blather about it, the evidence is not
going to arrive. Using the "there is no evidence" argument when there never will be evidence is discussing things in bad faith. "There is no evidence" does not disprove anybody's opinions or statements given the circumstances of these discussions. Using this argument shows a lack of a real counter argument.

The following are opinions I hold:

1. 4E is doing well
2. 4E is selling D&D books well enough to firmly put 3.5E D&D "in the past"
3. 3PP are not terribly important to the D&D brand
4. 3PP are not in serious competition with WotC, not even combined

One could argue I have no evidence of any of this. Evidence of this is something we will never have, and I see no point in arguing over a lack of evidence. If you disagree, state why and give your reasons.

[BryonD]

Originally Posted by Bumbles

Of course, he could have gone out of business for reasons completely unrelated to 4E, like the landlord raising the rent, a medical emergency, bad gambling debts, winning the lottery...any number of things.

FLGS became a dying breed well before 4E.
I doubt Paizo stubbing his store's toe killed it nearly so much as Amazon's blow to its head.

[carmachu]

Originally Posted by BryonD

FLGS became a dying breed well before 4E.
I doubt Paizo stubbing his store's toe killed it nearly so much as Amazon's blow to its head.

yeah this. Amazon, ebay and discount places hurt the FLGS more than Paizo subscription model....

[thecasualoblivion]

Yes, and a downturn for FLGS has nothing to do with M:tG cooling off or being a slow time for Games Workshop.

Amazon and discount places never hurt FLGS in terms of M:tG, though eBay might have. None of those three affected Games Workshop sales that much.

[Bumbles]

Originally Posted by BryonD

FLGS became a dying breed well before 4E.

Well, for what it's worth, FLGS have been living and dying since the industry began...

I doubt Paizo stubbing his store's toe killed it nearly so much as Amazon's blow to its head.

True, but Amazon is very nearly a complete competitor with nothing much to do with the FLGS, whereas Paizo should conceivably want the FLGS to at least look on them somewhat favorably. It's like how SJGames doesn't offer regular discounts on their own products sold through Warehouse 23. Why? Oh yeah, because they don't want to upset other retailers.

Yes, Amazon is bad for FLGS. So are rising Fuel Prices and a poor economy, and so is not opening on the weekends because you get to hung over on Friday, but that doesn't mean that there are legit grievances to be found.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by jdrakeh

This thread is a good example of why some publishers take long hiatuses from publishing and/or give it up altogether.

Honestly the show is put up by the publisher's side in this case.

If there is a demand there will be some offer at least. Of course too much offer will create a crash : enter OGL bloat. After the crash things need some time to settle, of course. Orcus said that 4e failed to create the initial explosive take off that 3e did. And he blames this to the seemingly "crash protection" regulation (enter GSL).

Then Joe Goodman enters aggressive: no actual data, just a round of highly explosive special effects to create some impression. But I believe he has been working so far to build some muscle to flex. And rightly so he is flexing it when he can. Now what did you expect the fans on a thread like this to do? I am asking seriously here because I fail (totally) to see your point.

[Shemeska]

Originally Posted by carmachu

yeah this. Amazon, ebay and discount places hurt the FLGS more than Paizo subscription model....

I can see this. Except for used books, I haven't purchased any RPG book from an FLGS in the last four years. Everything has been through Amazon.com (amazon prime shipping is awesome) and to a lesser degree from Paizo's online store and whatever the name is for Catalyst's store for Shadowrun.

Any browsing of physical books tends to happen at GenCon, which is the only time of the year I'll buy books without the sort of discounts I can get online.

Of course, the shift to online sales away from FLGSs also impacts best sellers lists too (since AFAIK sales in FLGSs don't tend to count as much or at all compared to big box stores, amazon, etc). But that's for another discussion entirely.

[Rechan]

Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion

Asking for evidence of whether or not 4E is doing well is like asking for empirical evidence about whether god exists. No matter how much you blather about it, the evidence is not
going to arrive.

Even if the evidence arrived, it would still be argued with.

WotC could publish their sales figures, and the response would be either:

1) Oh yeah? What was 3e's sales figures, HUH?
2) They're probably giving fake figures to cover how meager 4e is selling.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Even if the evidence arrived, it would still be argued with.

WotC could publish their sales figures, and the response would be either:

1) Oh yeah? What was 3e's sales figures, HUH?
2) They're probably giving fake figures to cover how meager 4e is selling.

You have gone way too far in the other side of the fence right now

[Invisible Stalker]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Even if the evidence arrived, it would still be argued with.

WotC could publish their sales figures, and the response would be either:

1) Oh yeah? What was 3e's sales figures, HUH?
2) They're probably giving fake figures to cover how meager 4e is selling.

I get that hilarity every month when they publish the sales figures for comic books.

[thecasualoblivion]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Even if the evidence arrived, it would still be argued with.

WotC could publish their sales figures, and the response would be either:

1) Oh yeah? What was 3e's sales figures, HUH?
2) They're probably giving fake figures to cover how meager 4e is selling.

Thats what happens when you hold an opinion so strongly that reality can't change it.

[scourger]

Well, that was an interesting read. Makes me want to visit more game stores. Seriously. 47? In half a year? That's impressive. Like I said, makes me want to visit more stores.

[Bumbles]

Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion

Thats what happens when you hold an opinion so strongly that reality can't change it.

Are you sure it doesn't warp the fabric of the universe?

[Haffrung Helleyes]

I'm glad that Goodman Games is doing well. The truth is, they have far fewer 3rd party products to compete with this time around, so even if the 4E pie is smaller than the 3E pie was, they're getting a bigger piece of it. I am glad that the 4E folks are getting support from at least one of the good 3rd party developers.

I think I disagree with his analysis of the importance of FLGS stores, though. Sure, we all got exposed to RPGS via them, but that was a generation before google, facebook, twitter, and the omnipresent connectivity we all have with each other today. I think it's a mistake to extrapolate from the past in this case and think that it is predictive.

To contest one of his example -- if I moved to a new city (and I do this quite a bit, actually) I wouldn't go to the FLGS to get players -- I'd go to EnWorld gamers seeking gamers. Or to the paizo boards. Or to the WoTC boards I guess. Let's say I moved somewhere wierd -- like Buenos Aires, Argentina. Actually, that isn't hypothetical at all -- I did just this in 2008. I found gamers there at de Rol :: Comunidad de Roleros . This site was suggested to me by a poster on the Necromancer Games board, who lived in Argentina! I imagine that finding gamers here in LA on the web (I moved here 3 weeks ago) won't be too difficult.

Honestly, with regards to 4E I believe both Joe Goodman and Clark Peterson . I don't find what they write to be contradictory at all. They're in different situations.

Ken

[Cadfan]

Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion

Asking for evidence of whether or not 4E is doing well is like asking for empirical evidence about whether god exists. No matter how much you blather about it, the evidence is not
going to arrive. Using the "there is no evidence" argument when there never will be evidence is discussing things in bad faith. "There is no evidence" does not disprove anybody's opinions or statements given the circumstances of these discussions. Using this argument shows a lack of a real counter argument.

I have certainly noticed a "god of the gaps" parallel- defining the success or failure of 4e in terms of whether it meets Hasbro's secret, unpublished sales projections basically defines the matter into an unanswerable state. One might wonder at the motivations of someone who considers that unobtainable information to be the only acceptable evidence, who (presumably) knows he'll never receive that information, and yet continues to revive this debate on a weekly basis.

[Cadfan]

Originally Posted by Haffrung Helleyes

I think I disagree with his analysis of the importance of FLGS stores, though. Sure, we all got exposed to RPGS via them, but that was a generation before google, facebook, twitter, and the omnipresent connectivity we all have with each other today. I think it's a mistake to extrapolate from the past in this case and think that it is predictive.

The thing that I think gaming stores do that the internet does not is connect fans of one realm of gaming with fans from others. You can hang out at ENWorld for years and never even know what a eurogame is, or never hear about Infinity, or never consider whether you might enjoy playing ASL. The internet can be awfully balkanized.

Gaming stores can be as well, but they don't have to be. They at least offer the potential for cross polination between gaming communities.

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by Cadfan

I have certainly noticed a "god of the gaps" parallel- defining the success or failure of 4e in terms of whether it meets Hasbro's secret, unpublished sales projections basically defines the matter into an unanswerable state. One might wonder at the motivations of someone who considers that unobtainable information to be the only acceptable evidence, who (presumably) knows he'll never receive that information, and yet continues to revive this debate on a weekly basis.

Because it is also impossible to really know if 4e is going strong and yet people say so. Marketing is a reality that comes to fill the gaps of knowledge. But if one does marketing expect some people to question and rightly so. In the end this is how democracy works too.