4e = the Titanic? and other insanity or irony

[WizarDru]

ICv2 reported that in the 3rd quater of 2010 Pathfinder and D&D were tied for 1st place.

ICv2's data is interesting, but it sounds like it's entirely based on polling retailers...primarily comic-book and hobby shops. AFAIK, they don't poll distributors directly, nor do they get data from large chains (such as B&N and Borders), regular bookstores, toy stores like TrU or from the publishers themselves, not to mention online sellers. Amazon's lists are no better at illuminating these points (and I would argue are far worse).

It's an interesting data point to use for discussion, but we don't have any actual hard numbers that are reliable. I think a lot of people are taking this as literal fact, rather than an indicator. I don't think we have enough data to say anything other than "for the stores that ICv2 interviewed, they noticed the following surprising trend".

I have no idea how well one game sells versus another. It's possible Pathfinder is outselling or equaling D&D. I find it less likely once you broaden the scope, given that I've never seen Pathfinder for sale outside of a game shop, but I can find D&D at several local book sellers. I don't know how significant a sales difference that is...but unless WotC and Paizo share their numbers, we can only speculate.

Sorry, don't mind me sitting here. I'm just still laughing about "2E and 3E were very well-received by the majority of the D&D community". Seriously, this is the funniest thing i've read all day. Ah, the Palassassin flamewars over at the old PlanetAD&D... how soon we forget.

Yeah, I found that assertion pretty LOLtastic. Back when Eric was running the site in 2000, the idea that 3E was universally accepted and non-controversial would have been met with incredulity. And the only way you could claim that 2E was well-received by the D&D community is if you discount all the players that dropped D&D when it came out, I guess.

Honestly, it seems like twice a year, the new 'WotC is DOOMED' cycle begins, as Umbran says.

 

[Wicht]

ICv2's data is interesting, but it sounds like it's entirely based on polling retailers...primarily comic-book and hobby shops. AFAIK, they don't poll distributors directly,...

Actually, if I remember the discussions at the time, they base their report on discussions with 1) Retailers, 2) Manufacturers, and 3) Distributors. So I'm pretty sure you are wrong on the above point. Though my memory might be faulty.

For what it is worth, Paizo, at the time, said the ICv2 report matched up with their own internal gauges and accepted it at more or less face value. That is, they were very pleased with it.

 

[Solvarn]

Actually, you did.

It's a classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees. You are here every day, reading the forums, so your perspective is slightly skewed. I log in maybe 3-4 times a year at this point, and the sole reason I am here today is because a fellow gamer sent me Ampersand article to read.

Yes, every time I come here I see a *few* posts about the "death of 4E/WotC/Profion," but today reads like a panic is in progress. And understandably so, as WotC has made some major announcements without explaining their business rationale behind them. Which is entirely business as usual for any company. Only time will tell what these changes mean, but I see what prompted Azgulor's original post, and there is a panic going on today because of these announcements.

Going to have to disagree with you there. They cancelled products really, really late, with nothing to substitute it.

 

[Reigan]

I think things are a little different now, previously when WotC did things that pissed people off, most of loudest complainers were the anti-4e crowd. This time around WotC have done a few things that really have affected core 4e players.
The fiasco over the character builder and the lack of descent Dragon/Dungeon content seems to have cost them a lot of ddi subscribers. It's noticeable a lot of the most vocal 4e defenders on the WotC forums no longer have the ddi icon on their posts. Although Essentials has largely been well received, there are lot of people who don't like the idea of the Essentials design philosophy being used going forward. I wouldn't be surprised under these circumstances, that Pathfinder is picking up a few of these players (I went for WHFR3 myself).

The best strategy for WotC would be to get rid of their upper management who clearly don't understand RPGs or their players.

 

[Wicht]

I think things are a little different now, previously when WotC did things that pissed people off, most of loudest complainers were the anti-4e crowd. This time around WotC have done a few things that really have affected core 4e players.

Heh. Its always different when its your own ox being gored.

 

[WizarDru]

Actually, if I remember the discussions at the time, they base their report on discussions with 1) Retailers, 2) Manufacturers, and 3) Distributors. So I'm pretty sure you are wrong on the above point. Though my memory might be faulty.

For what it is worth, Paizo, at the time, said the ICv2 report matched up with their own internal gauges and accepted it at more or less face value. That is, they were very pleased with it.

After checking around, you are correct...although for the most part 'distributors' in this sense mostly means just Diamond. ICv2 themselves mention that they also balance the data with their experience and opinions. Given their history with the industry, that's not a poor choice...but it should be noted that their white papers are partially educated-guesswork. They do surveys and interviews...which means that while their information is the most reliable we have, it's still a self-selected sampling. That isn't to say that I think the numbers are dramatically incorrect...but we really don't know how accurate they are. The only way we could is if both Paizo and WotC released exact sales figures....and I don't see how that's in their best interest to do.

I think it's likely that they are correct...Paizo and WotC probably generated equal sales. Good for Paizo...or alternately, bad for WotC. Without knowing what kind of sales figures we're talking about, even that conclusion is hard to reach. Did WotC massively undersell this last quarter, did Paizo experience huge gains or was it just mediocrity combined with few releases and a bad economy? Who knows?

 

[Wicht]

I think it's likely that they are correct...Paizo and WotC probably generated equal sales. Good for Paizo...or alternately, bad for WotC. Without knowing what kind of sales figures we're talking about, even that conclusion is hard to reach. Did WotC massively undersell this last quarter, did Paizo experience huge gains or was it just mediocrity combined with few releases and a bad economy? Who knows?

My guess is that its a bit of both: Paizo has made definite gains even as WotC seems to be underselling. I don't think Paizo is selling as much as WotC did when it was at the top with 3e, but I think they are selling as well as WotC is now and may eclipse them in the next 6 months. (note: I am aware WotC is more than RPGs; this is only in reference to RPG sales)

 

[WizarDru]

My guess is that its a bit of both: Paizo has made definite gains even as WotC seems to be underselling. I don't think Paizo is selling as much as WotC did when it was at the top with 3e, but I think they are selling as well as WotC is now and may eclipse them in the next 6 months. (note: I am aware WotC is more than RPGs; this is only in reference to RPG sales)

What I'm really curious about is how well DDI and Pathfinder subscriptions are doing and how they factor into the overall sales picture. I think Ryan Dancey's discussion on his first blog post here puts some focused perspective on WotC's strange strategy as of late. They're definitely shooting their foot over and over.

But Paizo puts out the best product on the market right now (as good or better than WotC, IMHO) and deserve every sale they get.