D&D: big as it ever was? (Forked Thread: So...How are Sales of 4E Product?)

[Delta]

I would point out that in the Evolution of the Fighter article, the vast majority of gamers started with Basic D&D. Almost 50% starting with either the '81 or '83 starter sets. That actually runs counter to your point since you are discussing 1e PHB's, which aren't included on the list.

I never mentioned 1E or PHB's in this entire thread.

 

[Hussar]

I never mentioned 1E or PHB's in this entire thread.

You didn't post this:

Are you seriously arguing that everything before, after, and around 2E was messed up as a business, but not 2E? Are you at least aware that TSR went bankrupt in the 2E era?

This is the best data we have to work with:
- Gygax said in 1987 there were some 5 million D&D players.
- WOTC estimated in 1999 there were 1.65 million players.
- WOTC estimated in 2004 there were 3 million players.

Which translates to: Up in 1E, down in 2E, back up in 3E. If anyone has better data I'd love to see it, but that's what we have to date.

You assume that everyone playing in 1987 is playing 1e. Or, at least that's what it looks like. If I'm misreading you, my bad.

The main problem with the Fighter article is that it asks what BOXED set you started with. That the Basic Boxed set in the 1980's (take your pick of which one) was more popular than any later set is something I'd certainly never argue with you about.

But, it ignores the number of gamers who came to the game without playing from a boxed set.

 

[Delta]

You didn't post this:

Good catch -- I searched the whole thread twice and couldn't find that.

Nontheless, you notice I do in fact never mention PHB's (1E or otherwise) in this entire thread; that you made up. If you look back at my first post I'm only using the "2E era" as shorthand for the time period of the 90's, etc. So you're really barking up the wrong tree for a reason I don't understand.

 

[Diremede]

I don't think that there is really enough solid data to get an accurate picture to say if the game is bigger now or even as big as it ever has been, at least as far as a whole goes, but my opinion is that is bigger only because it has more exposure. I saw the reference to the 80's cartoon and national attention, and well that just brings to mind all of the current D&D themed pieces of media. In the 90's with PC's coming to every home you had several PC games based on the games rules, or at least as close as could be. The players of those games may not have been PnP players at all, they just liked the video game. You also had the Baldurs Gate Series and Neverwinter Night games, and I know friends that loved those games but never played the PnP games. With 3rd edition you had two new PC games almost right out of the gate and a couple of games for consoles, you had two live action movies, as well as an MMORPG with the 3.5 rules. While I am sure many a D&D PnP gamer takes part of these other bits of media, I am sure the other is true as well, and those people who don't play PnP games, but like video games probably play the D&D titles.

So to say is D&D as big as it ever was, I really think it depends on how you are measuring it. If you are talking strictly on a PnP basis, you could probably measure it in product sales data and get a close idea. D&D in general, that is the franchise as a whole, I would have to say is bigger now than it was back then as far as exposure and those people who enjoy the game, either on paper or on their game station of preference, or for those like me, both.

 

[Hussar]

Good catch -- I searched the whole thread twice and couldn't find that.

Nontheless, you notice I do in fact never mention PHB's (1E or otherwise) in this entire thread; that you made up. If you look back at my first post I'm only using the "2E era" as shorthand for the time period of the 90's, etc. So you're really barking up the wrong tree for a reason I don't understand.

Sorry, was probably getting confused with the original thread that spawned this one.

My point is, Gary Gygax's numbers are easily as suspect as any that come from WOTC. If WOTC's numbers are so suspect, so much "spin doctoring" how can we avoid the same conclusion of Gygax's? Consider the fact that WOTC now belongs to Hasbro, a large corporation where this sort of bean counting is pretty much mandated from on high while TSR was a fairly amateur start-up that did amazingly well.

We know that TSR did next to no market research. Very, very little. The only real way Gygax could guess the number of players would be through sales. Since he wasn't actually involved in the accounting side of things (correct me if I'm wrong), he's basically going second or third hand off of information that was barely compiled at the time.

So, how can we possibly put any weight behind these numbers?

 

[Hussar]

To give you an idea of D&D's current presence, let me share an anecdote.

I live in a small town in Japan. I'm the only English speaking foreigner in town. We're talking pretty country here. I went to the local library the other day and was just wandering around. Guess what I found. R. A. Salvatore Drizz't (or howeverdahellyou spell that) novels, translated into Japanese.

In a small town in Japan.

Now THAT'S market penetration.

 

[justanobody]

Everybody loves Drizzt Do'Urden.

 

[garyh]

Has nothing to do with 4th edition.

Of course, this thread isn't about 4e. This is about how big D&D is now, of which 4e is a certainly part, as well as things like Drizz't being available in Japanese. I think Hussar's anecdote tells us a lot about D&D's presence in world wide popular culture.

 

[justanobody]

Of course, this thread isn't about 4e. This is about how big D&D is now, of which 4e is a certainly part, as well as things like Drizz't being available in Japanese. I think Hussar's anecdote tells us a lot about D&D's presence in world wide popular culture.

This is the forked one!

 

[garyh]

This is the forked one!

I can understand the confusion. Fair enough!