Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 4539216" data-attributes="member: 18182">Not really.&nbsp; I don't remember people arguing about sales numbers back in the 1e to 2e transition, but then again I didn't spend way too much of my time on ENWorld back then either.&nbsp; But I do remember similar complaints during each edition change, the sales numbers &quot;debate&quot; is simply one aspect of the anti-4e denial &quot;arguments&quot; some folks put forth here on the boards.&nbsp; (not that disliking 4e necessarily equals being anti-4e)&nbsp;Really?&nbsp; If you can provide any sort of proof that 1e sold better than 2e, I'd love to see it.2e was flawed in many ways.&nbsp; But I'm confident that more people played it than 1e, and that it sold better than 1e.&nbsp; Not so much because it was inherently superior to 1e, it wasn't, but because it built upon the shoulders of the past edition just like all subsequent editions do.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dire Bare, post: 4539216, member: 18182"] Not really. I don't remember people arguing about sales numbers back in the 1e to 2e transition, but then again I didn't spend way too much of my time on ENWorld back then either. But I do remember similar complaints during each edition change, the sales numbers "debate" is simply one aspect of the anti-4e denial "arguments" some folks put forth here on the boards. (not that disliking 4e necessarily equals being anti-4e) Really? If you can provide any sort of proof that 1e sold better than 2e, I'd love to see it. 2e was flawed in many ways. But I'm confident that more people played it than 1e, and that it sold better than 1e. Not so much because it was inherently superior to 1e, it wasn't, but because it built upon the shoulders of the past edition just like all subsequent editions do. [/QUOTE]

Verification