Search results

Your last point is absolutely true. But I'll again point out that the multiple lines of evidence that it isn't doing any better than PF was doing isn't tied to the rankings. The rankings are clearly a potential positive sign because PF2E IS #2. But the value of that ranking is clearly very...

I was under the impression it is "updated hourly", but that update is a rolling average of a couple days or more. So it would take a pretty big slug to suddenly swing the number. But maybe I'm just wrong there.

I think that is part of it. But this has happened at least three times now. So there does seem to be some underlying pattern. I wonder if there are large(ish) groups of related purchases. Or maybe it is just what you are saying. I dunno. Up is good. How's that for a conclusion?

OK. I think I agree with the points along the way. At this point I can't even really tell if I agree with you or not on the bottom line conclusion. But it seems another case of overcomplicating the analysis. And I don't see anything here that changes the big picture. So I'm good with...

link? nevermind, I found it. They are saying "doubling" so I think they mean 99% "growth" or 199% of the prior quarter. But growth is growth.

I was about to post exactly this. 0.5 to 1.1 is 120% and 1.1 to 1.2 is another 9%. I doubt that those hard values are meaningful, but, as with everything else, the trend appears to be there. Going from zero lines of evidence to one is a big step.

roughly 1/3 of PF

I hate this post. It ain't wrong. But I hate it.

In an effort to get back on track, I'll restate what I do think. This is purely recycle from 23 hours ago, but everything seems to be tangents since then. Maybe there is more to discuss here and maybe this is the end of the conversation until more information comes along. But that said...

Ok, that's funny. (seriously that is well played)

Right, you don't understand confirmation bias.

OK, but that was not at all clear. There was a clear context regarding a how quickly 5E was adopted. You replied within that context. If we are discussing what to have for dinner and you say "eggs" and I question if you really want eggs for dinner or not and you reply "I was talking about...

OK - here is what was read: "My old group waited for about a year to start 5e because we were still playing our Pathfinder 1 game. They were not too thrilled when initially looking at 5e, but a few of them are now "play nothing but 5e" people. IME, it's not as "right away" as you may imagine...

I totally agree that this is a consistent thing.

Well, isn't that completely irrelevant then? No offense at all because having a preference for pre-3E to 3E is totally cool. But do you dispute that 3X and the OGL created the "second golden age" and/or "the glut" depending on how you want to look at it? If you are saying that 3E NEVER got...

I don't know man. I remember that there were SOME people who were opposed to the change. But, then again, this was the days when there were people driving around with bumper stickers which said "Save D&D, kill a Magic Player". D&D was hurting bad. Around here I had to leave work early to go...

What? It takes a bit more than that to claim confirmation bias. If you think that 5E had a slow reception, then noted. I stayed with PF at first myself, and then after playing 5E for a bit switched BACK to PF because I like it more. So no idea why you would suggest I have a pro-5E bias...

Wait a second, that word was specific to a comparison to AD&D 2E. Nothing more or less. It think you misinterpreted.

3E had massive immediate adoption. 2E, maybe not. But then again, people talked about the inverse Star Trek rule, so I don't think 2E is a comparison that PF2E is craving.

Yeah. I'll just repeat that I don't think trying to tea leaf out these kind of sales numbers is fruitful. Is there a trend? How does the behavior mesh with other lines of evidence? What do we see in terms of who is really playing the game/ how widespread is play?