Chart of ICv2 Rankings Back To 2004

I created a spreadsheet with all the ICv2 rankings going back to 2004, and then output it into a chart. This is what that looks like. You can click on the image to enlarge it.

And this is a (reverse) total of the rankings over the last 15 years for each RPG listed. Higher is better:

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

No real surprises there, although if "V5" is the most recent edition of Vampire: The Masquerade, ouch.

Also, for the amount that GURPS is talked about, I would have thought it would have been in that middle tier with Shadowrun.

 

[teitan]

No real surprises there, although if "V5" is the most recent edition of Vampire: The Masquerade, ouch.

Also, for the amount that GURPS is talked about, I would have thought it would have been in that middle tier with Shadowrun.

it’s a fairly recent release and is just now starting to get some support after a controversial launch.

 

[aco175]

Where on the chart would you consider a game to be a success? Look at Marvel, which I played once or twice back in the 80s and it has a score of 1. Does it need to be around 5 like L5R to make it worth upgrading?

 

[Morrus]

Where on the chart would you consider a game to be a success? Look at Marvel, which I played once or twice back in the 80s and it has a score of 1. Does it need to be around 5 like L5R to make it worth upgrading?

I would say being on the chart at all is a success. There are thousands of games not on it.

 

[macd21]

Yeah, only getting on the chart once (or 5 times) doesn’t mean much without more context. A game may have been a successful one-and-done. Comparing it to a game that’s had multiple editions and dozens of supplements doesn’t really give you the full picture.

 

[Morrus]

Yeah, only getting on the chart once (or 5 times) doesn’t mean much without more context. A game may have been a successful one-and-done. Comparing it to a game that’s had multiple editions and dozens of supplements doesn’t really give you the full picture.

It's just a chart of games which have been in ICv2's top five games for a quarter, going back to 2004.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Unasked for Editors Note: Your chart legend says WH70k instead of WH40k if you want to fix it for the future.

 

[TrippyHippy]

I did regard the presence of V5 in the Top 5, for three consecutive quarters, as a big explanation for Modiphius choosing to publish the license, despite White Wolf folding after a difficult year.

For White Wolf, who may have been hoping to recapture the whole WoD market they controlled in 2004, V5 didn’t quite get there. For Modiphius, however, V5 is evidently their biggest hit ever. It was a similar tale with Games Workshop abandoning Dark Heresy and the 40KRP line immediately on release. It wasn’t considered profitable enough for GW, but for Fantasy Flight Games who took over the license, it was a big hit. It just goes to show how different companies have different measures/scales on what is successful or not.

Regarding other titles, it looks like the D&D/Pathfinder dominance (in that order) looks here to stay. Star Wars may decline, I suspect, as Disney takes a rest from making new movies. The biggest surprise for me is that Savage Worlds has never been ranked. There are no 'Powered by the Apocalypse’ games either, although Fate made a breakthrough for a while.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm not sure which Powered By the Apocalypse game would be the biggest seller. My guess is that each is pretty small, although influential with game designers and popular with their niche. The fact that most are published by separate tiny publishers helps keep them off the chart, too.

Still, it'd be nice to see, say, Monster of the Week get the attention that ranking high in the sales chart would help bring it.