Pramas: Does 4E have staying power?

[thecasualoblivion]

People sure are making a lot of assumptions out of very little data.

The USA Today best seller list is based on reports from certain stores and, as quoted from their site:



Yes, some big hitters there. But we know very little about what proportion these mix with when it comes to reporting D&D books. It's quite possible that good USA Today best seller rankings do not conflict at all with Pramas's informants, even if they are represented in the very same list. It could be that the market has shifted toward getting new D&D books from Amazon and away from the outlets they know about. It could be that the market hasn't really shifted but that there are segments of it where 4e doesn't have legs.

About all we can really infer, if they are correct in what they told Pramas, is that there are segments of the market where 3e supplements, several years into the product, are selling as well as the new shiny. That could be because 3e still has life left in it. It could be because 4e isn't doing it for some people who tend to shop at those outlets. It could be because the outlets also serve omelettes on alternate Thursdays and, as everyone knows, that favors the sale of 3e supplements...

In other words, its all speculation. This is not news.

 

[Scribble]

About all we can really infer, if they are correct in what they told Pramas, is that there are segments of the market where 3e supplements, several years into the product, are selling as well as the new shiny. That could be because 3e still has life left in it. It could be because 4e isn't doing it for some people who tend to shop at those outlets. It could be because the outlets also serve omelettes on alternate Thursdays and, as everyone knows, that favors the sale of 3e supplements...

Actually based on what was quoted, we can tell that there are segments of the market where suppliments for the new shiney are selling at the same rate as supliments for the old shiney were selling at the begining of the year.

It says nothing about how well suppliments for the old shiney are doing currently, nor whether or not the new shiney is selling well, or poorly. (Unless we know for a fact the old shiney was selling well or poorly at the begining of the year.)

 

[I'm A Banana]

Y'know, the online thing that Jack99 pointed out IS a good point (though Jack99's particular wording of the case is a little boinked).

If Pramas's sources are ol' fashioned bricks-n-mortar folks, it is limited information.

In addition, the whole "multiple streams of revenue" (DDI) is a good point.

I think it's probably still not enough information to give a full picture. It's still interesting information, and it certainly indicates that 4e supplements might not be doing so hot, but the market might still be figuring out Amazon and the DDI and such.

I'ma go read more WFRP2 and mull this over....

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Actually I think the most interesting piece of data is the least surprising.

Namely, that 4e Supplement sales might be a little disapointing.

You can argue with the veracity of that data, but if you take it at face value it makes a lot of sense.

I mean could anyone argue that the supplement release patter for 4E - and this is disregarding 3rd party sales which I don't think anyone can argue are a shadow of 3E's - is much slower and more deliberate than the initial supplement release pattern for the last edition.

We've had two setting books, two lines of adventures, one creature feature, one item book, and one class supplement. Along with some associated paraphenalia that's all she wrote.

Now some of that is just new edition anemia. You look at the 3e supplements for last year and you had a much more developed line from the backlog of titles alone.

But I also wonder if this isn't a result of deliberate strategy on WotCs part. I mean, Martial Power is a much better supplement than it's 3e equivalent and even where the line is weak it ain't bad. The FR player's guide could be called thin and incomplete, but the races and one class are both very interesting and it had two pretty sweet new mechanics with the spell scared multi-class only class structure and the regional benefits. So on the whole I think we're seeing a much more consistent line than we have in the past and one that certainly seems to be aiming for a long term strategy in terms of growing the market and saving the base.

 

[Alzrius]

It's too early for this to really be applicable, but I wonder how much WotC's attempt to merge "Core" with "supplements" will have in this regard.

They've said before that they don't want people to just think of the 4E PHB, DMG, and MM as being the "Core" rulebooks, but while I can understand why they'd want to do this - to make later releases seem more necessary - that sort of viewpoint seems like it'd make a lot of newcomers, particularly casual players, less inclined to play because it makes them feel like their game is incomplete without every single 4E book WotC puts out.

I wonder how much effect that's having on people (not) purchasing 4E books.

 

[Korgoth]

I am not a fan of 4e. But nonetheless I hope sales are fairly brisk. I think it's important that WotC do well financially, for the sake of the industry,

I snipped the rest not because it was unreasonable but simply because I want to consider that last bit, "the sake of the industry". For my money the best products for D&D (OD&D itself, many of the gems of Judge's Guild, some of TSR's enduring classic modules) came out before there was an "industry".

As someone who sees the products of "the industry" as mediocre (a judgment with a substantial subjective component; YMMV) I find myself wondering if the industry's health is even in my best interest.

D&D was made great by the hobbyists who tinkered with light, flexible rules concepts to each create their own vision of the game. The genius of the garage, if you will. For me, if Pramas' comments identify a lack of "legs" for 4E (and that's a big "if", obviously), this whole thing might possibly presage the end of the industry, which I think might be a very good thing for the creative content of the role playing hobby (though also a very regretable thing for those whose livelihoods are derived from said industry).

Of course it's all speculation at this point anyhow: IF 4E is going to bomb, and IF that means D&D goes away, and IF that means that the industry folds along with it, etc. I'm not exactly going to lay down a wager on those odds. But if it went that way, I think it could be a great thing for the hobby. The great stuff coming out in the Old School Renaissance (private print runs, print on demand services like Lulu, electronic publishing, online community, etc.) bears out the reasonability of the latter claim.

 

[garyh]

It's too early for this to really be applicable, but I wonder how much WotC's attempt to merge "Core" with "supplements" will have in this regard.

They've said before that they don't want people to just think of the 4E PHB, DMG, and MM as being the "Core" rulebooks, but while I can understand why they'd want to do this - to make later releases seem more necessary - that sort of viewpoint seems like it'd make a lot of newcomers, particularly casual players, less inclined to play because it makes them feel like their game is incomplete without every single 4E book WotC puts out.

I wonder how much effect that's having on people (not) purchasing 4E books.

I don't get this argument. I would imagine the new-to-the-game player is going to pick up the PHB1, maybe the MM1 and DMG1 if they're going to run a game, and not even really be aware of the expansions or that they're "missing" anything. After all, the game plays just fine with the first trio. It's us, the hardcore message board types, that are likely to feel as if our game is "incomplete" because we don't own Draconomicon VII - Pseudo-Natural Wyrms of Faerun.

 

[Imaro]

Actually I think the most interesting piece of data is the least surprising.

Namely, that 4e Supplement sales might be a little disapointing.

You can argue with the veracity of that data, but if you take it at face value it makes a lot of sense.

I mean could anyone argue that the supplement release patter for 4E - and this is disregarding 3rd party sales which I don't think anyone can argue are a shadow of 3E's - is much slower and more deliberate than the initial supplement release pattern for the last edition.

We've had two setting books, two lines of adventures, one creature feature, one item book, and one class supplement. Along with some associated paraphenalia that's all she wrote.

Now some of that is just new edition anemia. You look at the 3e supplements for last year and you had a much more developed line from the backlog of titles alone.

I agree with nearly everything you said above…

But I also wonder if this isn't a result of deliberate strategy on WotCs part. I mean, Martial Power is a much better supplement than it's 3e equivalent and even where the line is weak it ain't bad. The FR player's guide could be called thin and incomplete, but the races and one class are both very interesting and it had two pretty sweet new mechanics with the spell scared multi-class only class structure and the regional benefits. So on the whole I think we're seeing a much more consistent line than we have in the past and one that certainly seems to be aiming for a long term strategy in terms of growing the market and saving the base.

Now, I disagree with some of this. I won’t debate whether 3e/3.5/4e supplements are/were “better” as everyone has a right to their oppinion… but I see a totally different reasoning in the sourcebook anemia (as well as the shortening of page count, generous whitespace and super large font of the released books)… DDI. WotC would rather the majority of it’s customer base be signed into a subscription model, for material thay cannot preview before they buy and with an auto-renew than to depend on them purchasing sourcebooks, and I think the problems with the GSL as well as the snail pace of sourcebooks were purposefully implemented to push customers towards subscribing to get content.

 

[Filcher]

It's us, the hardcore message board types, that are likely to feel as if our game is "incomplete" because we don't own Draconomicon VII - Pseudo-Natural Wyrms of Faerun.

Hehehe. So true.

Not to add the the argument or not, but if 4E did succeed in capturing a younger audience (one without ready income) winter should be a big time, as mom and dad tick off those Christmas lists.

 

[scruffygrognard]

It's too early for this to really be applicable, but I wonder how much WotC's attempt to merge "Core" with "supplements" will have in this regard.

They've said before that they don't want people to just think of the 4E PHB, DMG, and MM as being the "Core" rulebooks, but while I can understand why they'd want to do this - to make later releases seem more necessary - that sort of viewpoint seems like it'd make a lot of newcomers, particularly casual players, less inclined to play because it makes them feel like their game is incomplete without every single 4E book WotC puts out.

I wonder how much effect that's having on people (not) purchasing 4E books.

This is a BIG part of what kept me, and every player I know, away from 4th edition.

With 3rd edition we felt we had a complete, though somewhat bland, game with 3 books.

With 4th edition it feels like WotC deliberately spread out what should be core info into many books, so that you don't have a complete game without a full set of books. At the same time, missing rules are first previewed and released via DDI in order to drum up interest in what should be a completely optional tool for loyal customers.