Decline of RPG sales

[buzz]

I agree with you. I'm just pointing out that the argument "innovative=good" is false. Innovation (since we seem to be talking about innovation in a more artistic sense) is not always good. Sometimes it flops badly.

Gotcha, and agreed.

 

[WizarDru]

Lightning rails, airships, technomages, robots, mutants, crystals, trantor/coruscant(sp?), and the artwork has a serious cartoon/anime feel in the Eberron products.

None of this stuff is especially bad, but it is not hard to see where things were influenced.

As others have mentioned, if anything, Eberron does a direct steal from Mike Mignola and Tim Truman's artwork, not anime.

As for the other elements, I'm not sure why you classify those as exclusively Final Fantasy's domain. Elements like these appear, for example, in Fred Saberhagen's Empire of the East from the 70s and his Swords series from the 80s. The Dark Crystal is about as classic to the tropes of High Fantasy as you can get. Artificers are hardly 'technomages'....at least any more than the conventional magic item crafter is. Gnomes as techno-cogwork makers have been a part of D&D for some time, too. Airships are hardly new to D&D fandom, either. I remember those in one of the realms comics, and I had them in my games all the way back in the 80s. (and let's be honest, flying airships aren't that unique an idea). I'm just not seeing something specific here to anime and it's ilk. Exalted this ain't.

You lost me with the Asimov reference, there. What's that referring to?

Rabid fanboys on the internet do not equate with overall audience. The fact that WOTC produced the setting alone would generate a high number of sales. It was not that risky a move.

That's circular logic, isn't it? By that definition, WotC is unable to take a risk because everything they publish is a guaranteed success. That's clearly not the case, though. Even now, people on the DDO boards are talking about the lightning rail and debating it as a choice for the setting, and in fact are debating the use of Eberron itself ...and while they may be fanboys, many aren't D&D fanboys. If everything WotC touched was a success, they wouldn't have farmed out material to companies like Sovereign Stone or S&SS. Clearly, they perceive some risk. That they worked long and hard on Eberron before releasing it is an indicator of how seriously they took the setting...and how they planned to agressively market it. But agressive marketing doesn't equal sales; take a look at things like the Pokemon RPG and Harry Potter TCG...failures that WotC cut their losses with and moved on.

As to the 'best' issue, I think you guys are arguing different points. From a companies perspective, whatever produces the most profit is, by their definition, the best. From a consumer's standpoint, whatever produces the highest quality product is best. The two are note necessarily mtually exclusive.

 

[buzz]

How is Eberron not a "safe" book? ...The setting is not really that innovative.

Well, basically we have an "is" vs. "is not" argument here. I don't think Eberron is much like any other campiagn setting TSR or WotC has ever released, nor much like other campiagn settings released by d20 publishers. I also don't think it was particularly "safe" based on initial public reaction. "Safe" would have been something like Kalamar.

The point is really that, regardless of whether you've seen elements in the setting elsewhere (e.g., the "It's just Final Fantasy!" argument), it was released as an official setting by WotC. It seemed to polarize the fanbase, and then gradually win people over. Ergo, there was risk. WotC tried something different, and succeeded.

 

[buzz]

So, WotC is criticized for not producing any risky products, and many would apparently like WotC to take risks and innovate. However, the fact that WotC produces a product means, appearently by definition, that the product is not risky. Am I the only one who sees the problem in the train of logic?

Bingo. Give that man a prize.

 

[buzz]

The fact that they never updated the core FR book to 3.5 means that they are already planning the coffin for that setting. 3.0 FR setting books are not selling. Not one store in my area bothers to stock them anymore.

This is BS anecdotal evidence. First off, I can't think of a single game store or bookstore (that carries RPGs) near me that doesn't stock FR books. Second, the PGtF updated the setting to 3.5, and the FR release schedule hasn't slowed down; it's keeping pace with Eberron.

Honestly, if WotC had released a revised 3.5 FRCS, you'd probably be criticizing tem for that "money grab", too.

The argument you three are making here seems to boil down to "WotC bad."

 

[buzz]

However, it is a possibility that a company can churn out consistantly good products that are a little bland, yet sell well. It is equally possible that a continuous lack of innovation combined with a stagnate or negative growth in the consumer base could create an even larger exodus of the base and push them towards other mediums for enjoyment.

I am not saying that this is happening, but it could happen, and could be one way to describe the current marketplace situation.

What exodus? There's a NPR story on the ENWorld news page right now that was spurred on by D&D having "made a surprising comeback as of late".

WotC is doing good work; the d20/OGL thing alone merits them much karma. d20 publishers are producing amazing stuff. Quality is not the issue.

 

[Belen]

This is BS anecdotal evidence. First off, I can't think of a single game store or bookstore (that carries RPGs) near me that doesn't stock FR books. Second, the PGtF updated the setting to 3.5, and the FR release schedule hasn't slowed down; it's keeping pace with Eberron.

Honestly, if WotC had released a revised 3.5 FRCS, you'd probably be criticizing tem for that "money grab", too.

The argument you three are making here seems to boil down to "WotC bad."

No. I am not saying that Wizards is bad. I like Wizards, obviously, or I would not be a delagate for them. I enjoy their product and choose to purchase it above other companies. However, I can say that I am not allowed to demo D&D with any world other than Eberron.

Also, PGtF may have updated the rules to 3.5, but you still need a 3.0 book to run the setting. The stores in my area will not stock the FRCS because it is 3.0. They will not stock the PGtF because it is incomplete. Anyone interested in 3.5 FR who has never played before needs both.

FR may be supported, but it is not being promoted.

 

[JoeGKushner]

No. I am not saying that Wizards is bad. I like Wizards, obviously, or I would not be a delagate for them. I enjoy their product and choose to purchase it above other companies. However, I can say that I am not allowed to demo D&D with any world other than Eberron.

Also, PGtF may have updated the rules to 3.5, but you still need a 3.0 book to run the setting. The stores in my area will not stock the FRCS because it is 3.0. They will not stock the PGtF because it is incomplete. Anyone interested in 3.5 FR who has never played before needs both.

FR may be supported, but it is not being promoted.

By your store. Games Plus and all the Gamer's Paradise stores in the Chicago land area have no problem stocking it. Or the Borders. Or the Barnes & Nobles. Or the Waldenbooks.

 

[Belen]

So, WotC is criticized for not producing any risky products, and many would apparently like WotC to take risks and innovate. However, the fact that WotC produces a product means, appearently by definition, that the product is not risky. Am I the only one who sees the problem in the train of logic?

Actually, I am not condemning them for a lack of risky products. I am only saying that Eberron was not that risky in hindsight. It is more modern, which is a good thing. They have even added a good amount of flavor to the setting, which is also a good thing.

I just wanted to say that I thought Shaman had a valid opinion. It is an opinion that can only be proven in hindsight or by gathering a large amount of data that we do not have.

As for the decline, I think that is an industry wide syndrome where the presence of WOTC plays a part, although I think that Wizards may understand the problem better than I had first thought now that I have learned they will be attending ALA this year. That is an extremely savvy business move.

The decline has a lot of components to it and a ton of them can be laid at the feet of the other publishers.

 

[Belen]

By your store. Games Plus and all the Gamer's Paradise stores in the Chicago land area have no problem stocking it. Or the Borders. Or the Barnes & Nobles. Or the Waldenbooks.

On the shelves or will the special order? And how long have then been there?

The B&N and Borders are not carrying the FRCS around here. I just visited them recently and had some discussions with the store managers. I am hoping that they will let me run a marketing campaign there for the Wizards products they are carrying.