D&D General Extra Credits: The History of D&D Hasbro Refused to Learn

[darjr]

There's a difference between "Pathfinder sold more than 4e" and e.g. "Pathfinder sold more than 4e in Q3 2012". Without actual sales data, the second one seems far more likely, particularly since 4e releases had basically stopped at that time.

Note though that it wasn’t just when 4e had nothing new to sell. Though it was still at the tail end of 4e. I was schooled about that not to long ago. I’ll see if I can find that post.

 

[Zardnaar]

Note though that it wasn’t just when 4e had nothing new to sell. Though it was still at the tail end of 4e. I was schooled about that not to long ago. I’ll see if I can find that post.

Yup they also didn't mention Paizo hit 11 million in sales 2012 or the collapse of 4E online games. 3.5 was more popular online, Pathfinder was a magnitude bigger.

Thst doesn't translate to sakesthough s devoted fanbase buying or collectors who buy but don't play would sldo explain it. Paizo also gave the rules away for free so online play could use those.

So collapse in online play and irl can be done easy independent of sales figures.

High 4E sales on release followed by collapse later on would also explain things. 3.0 had that.

 

[darjr]

Another thing. The “Myth” is a profound event in the history of RPGs. Even if you dispute Pathfinder outselling 4e.

It’s as if Coke or Pepsi were arguably outsold by Shasta Cola.

It was a big deal.

 

[Nikosandros]

Another thing. The “Myth” is a profound event in the history of RPGs. Even if you dispute Pathfinder outselling 4e.

It’s as if Coke or Pepsi were arguably outsold by Shasta Cola.

It was a big deal.

I'm not disputing the importance of the great success of PF. I admire Paizo for what they did. The myth I was talking about is about sales.

 

[darjr]

I'm not dipsuting the importance of the great success of PF. I admire Paizo for what they did. The myth I was talking about is about sales.

And I’m not convinced by Teos article.

 

[darjr]

Now that I think about it I should have used Red Bull.

 

[billd91]

Another thing. The “Myth” is a profound event in the history of RPGs. Even if you dispute Pathfinder outselling 4e.

It’s as if Coke or Pepsi were arguably outsold by Shasta Cola.

It was a big deal.

It was a profound event, even if 4e did sell more. The ICV2 surveys indicated PF was matching and ultimately outperforming 4e in the specialty games stores which was going to be far more noticeable to the gamer community and have a bigger impact on how they saw the relative success of the two games than sales via Amazon or Walmart. If I was going to my FLGS regularly and saw the churning sales of PF while the 4e books just sat there, I might come away with impressions.

The fact is 4e became a problem child because of the way it was handled from design to marketing and management even if Amazon and Walmart and other similar supply chain sales were profitable.

 

[Nikosandros]

And I’m not convinced by Teos article.

Fair enough. I consider Chris and Owen reliable, but it is not like I have any information on my own.

 

[darjr]

Fair enough. I consider Chris and Owen reliable, but it is not like I have any information on my own.

I do too. But note Chris talks about overall sales in that first tweet. Which isn’t the point in the first place.

 

[Nikosandros]

I do too. But note Chris talks about overall sales in that first tweet. Which isn’t the point in the first place.

I see what you mean, I think. You are referring to PF outselling 4e in a given time period, but before 4e ceased the release of new products. Is that correct?