another rpg industry doomsday article (merged: all 3 "Mishler Rant" threads)

[thecasualoblivion]

The angry ranting in the second part kind of casts a shadow over any points he may have accidentally made in the first post.

 

[Cadfan]

1. His response to Hobo is dishonest. He's comparing the price on a trade paperback to the price on a mass market paperback. He works in publishing, he has to know that these are not the same thing. The same book experiences about a 50% cost swing as it shifts between those two types of publication. Two minutes in a Barnes and Nobles should be enough to notice this.

2. His comment about boardgame profits and the possibility that more expensive boardgames are being purchased is probably very wrong. First, lets note that its at best a conspiracy style apologetic- he isn't saying that his theory IS true, or even that there's reason to SUSPECT that his theory is true. He's just saying that the stats given fail to disprove his theory, and that therefore the more intuitive explanation of the available data should not be accepted. While I love my eurogames, I would be very, very VERY surprised if eurogames were responsible for an increase in dollars of product sold at the same time as copies sold was declining. The success of Catan notwithstanding, the typical eurogame is something that Mishler should be quite familiar with- a small print run luxury good with a print run in the low thousands that is sold in specialty stores and on the internet. In contrast, Monopoly or Apples to Apples sells in my grocery store.

3. His argument about the devaluation of Pathfinder's core rules due to them being available in the OGL is not likely correct. 3e counts as an experiment regarding the validity of this argument.

4. His repeated assertions that Paizo is screwing themselves by expecting the majority of their profits to come from the sale of supplementary material that customers do not actually need, and his actual career, are somewhat at odds.

5. As I browse his page, I'm not sure why I should even respect someone who thinks that rolling up a character instead of using point buy makes you a more hardcore gamer. Why am I writing this response? I'm out.

 

[Dire Bare]

If it's anything like the University I'm at the school doesn't get a kickback on the books. I get to select the course textbook for my classes and the department secretary lets the bookstore know what they should order for the students to buy. The students don't *need* to buy the textbooks there though, and they can get them from another store, 2nd hand, Amazon, Ebay, etc.

Quite often the publishers/distributors will send me a copy of their textbooks to evaluate hoping that I'll pick their book for the textbook for my class.

Maybe it's different for other schools/profs... but my experience is that there's no kickback to the school / teacher on new books.

This is how it works at every university I've had experience with. I suspect it is how it works at all universities. The university doesn't get a kickback, and neither do the professors, unless you count the free teacher's edition you often get to evaluate a given text.

At university, we use new editions because quite often the information changes. Especially in the scientific fields, which is what I'm most familiar with.

IMO, textbook prices are so high because it is a limited market (you won't find most of them at your local B&N or Borders), and that market is also somewhat of a captive audience (hard to pass the class without purchasing the text).

 

[Dire Bare]

I realize you're quoting the author's logic, which is largely sound, and applying it to the core books, but my take from a marketing perspective would be that WotC (and even TSR back in the day) is applying the "Give away the razor, sell the blades" model that Gillette has applied to their razors for about a century. Make the core products hyper-affordable (or even a loss leader like the XBox is) and make the money off of the ancillary products (the blades for a razor, the modules/accessories for d&d, and the games for XBox).

Not saying it's right or wrong of them to assume that - just saying I think that's what's at work here.

I'm not going to go do any internet homework on this one, but I'm pretty sure that while razors tend to sell at a thin profit margin or even perhaps a loss . . . that razors sold today are significantly more expensive than razors sold in the 1970s.

 

[Intense_Interest]

Oh what a silly little guy.

As to the point of game sales picking up during a recession, we are not in a recession, we are in a depression; very different sets of economic circumstances obtain, and in this case, it is even different from the Great Depression. The Great Depression was described as a time of want in a time of plenty; this depression, the Greater Depression, is a time of want in a time of penury.

The word "Depression" has no meaning in an economic sense. Other than as a reference to a period of history, it has no definition in terms of a poor economic climate.

"The Depression" was actually a spin on the term Recession, because a recession actually means a reduction in job and economic output. Hoover and his crack team decided that to encourage spending we should avoid implying that the economic situation was receding at all, but instead use a word that implied that it was merely the output and spending habits that were being hampered.

Other than being cute, "The Greater Depression" is a nonsense word. Playing at coining phrases during a response to criticism is not considered a strong defense of your point.

 

[ggroy]

Mishler's economic depression stuff sounds like the words of a permabear. "The sky is falling" type of rhetoric.

On the other hand, it is kinda funny seeing permabears on financial news shows. The ultimate super-curmudgeons, trying to rain on everybody's parade.

 

[Jack99]

I got quoted!

Whoever knows this guy, tell him to do his research on WotC sales better, there is much more info to be had, and it's even been posted on this board. Of course, that info doesn't fit well with his ideas, so maybe that's why he chose to ignore them.

Anyway, from the blog

"You may find in the end that you have a lot of people playing Pathfinder RPG, but unwilling to buy any further support material at anything resembling a full mark-up. You may call that if you want; I merely call it prophecy."

Yep, I call it .

The difference between me and you is that I'm staking a successful company on it, and you are pulling guesses out of your ass on the internet.

Made my morning, XP for mr. Erik Mona

 

[No Name]

I see his type in FLGSs often. The loud, obnoxious guy who can't see reason and claims to be an expert on everything. It's best to just ignore him and hope he grows out of it. After all, you know what they say about kids these days...

 

[pogre]

I see the board game revival as a positive thing. I remember when RPGs were "dead" because of MTG and then bam - 3E. We'll see another non-computer gaming boom. It may be a new genre or a revival.

Honestly, I'm not sure economy has a lot to do with gaming. I know that sounds non-intuitive, but I don't think the economy was doing particularly well when 3E hit the shelves. People tend to spend money on entertainment when times are tough. One of the biggest growth industries in the Depression for example was motion pictures.

I look at model railroading as a good example of what might happen to conventional fantasy roleplaying. Fantasy roleplaying as we know it may fade, but there will be another boom in gaming.

EDIT: In both of these threads I see a bit of name calling against Mr. Mishler. He has not done that. You and I may not agree with everything he says, but it really is against the spirit of the ENW board to label him or call him names.

 

[Hussar]

Y'know, I read the first screed and I was willing to at least listen. Sure, it was back of the envelope style calculations, but, at least it sounded like he knew what he was talking about. But, for some very bizarre reason, he cannot seem to stick on task and instead devolves into random lashing out, like his little 4e rant:

It is unfortunate that one cannot speak of the role-playing game market without mentioning 4E; otherwise I would gladly ignore it altogether, as I tire of dealing with fans that willfully ignore the realities of the game they play. Call it trolling if you will, it is simply base, bald fact: 4E was designed to capture the WoW experience on the tabletop. It can be adapted for use for other game styles, to be sure, but that is not what it was designed to do.

If you are going to talk about the state of the gaming industry, why would your personal feelings about a product possibly enter into things? Why would you even consider wanting to ignore the largest segment of the industry simply because you happen to prefer a different game? It's mind blowing. It's like a Pepsi fan talking about the state of the soft drinks industry while bemoaning the taste of Coca-cola.

/singing "One of these things is not like the others... One of these things just isn't the same.