Forked Thread: Changeover poll

[Hussar]

Besides, we also know that 3.5 sold a bigger print run than 3.0. I guess by your standard of proof than means that 3.5 was more popular than 3.0. If you believe that I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. I personally thought 3.5 was a great improvement. But my personal preference doesn't cloud my ability to see that it wasn't universally popular.

Umm, what?

Yes, there was a VERY small number of people who stayed with 3e, but, are you honestly going to try to argue that 3.5 didn't absolutely bury 3.0?

If such a large number of gamers stayed 3.0, why didn't anyone try to sell to them?

What I see is you trying to project your personal take on things onto everyone else.

Which you did intentionally, because you knew that the number of respondents on ENWorld who'd say they didn't convert to 3E at all and never intend to would be tiny - making the 45% who are turning up their noses at 4E look huge.

Actually I didn't include them because they don't matter when it comes to the question. BryonD claimed that the overwhelming majority of people who changed from 2e to 3e did so almost immedietely.

Now, I am surprised that so many did change so quickly. However, 50% is HARDLY an overwhelming majority. It's barely a majority AT ALL. I honestly thought it would be smaller, true, but, that doesn't change my point.

From the other thread:

There certainly would have been a few individual votes that way. I find it inconceivable that the proportions would have been anywhere near the same.

Yet, the proportions are pretty damn close.

My personal experience, along with the experiences related to me by a vast number of people. Seriously, it goes way beyond anecdote. I don't doubt for a second that there were people that stayed. But I would have been hard pressed to find 1 in 30 that wanted to stay, far far less 1 in 3.

Heck, I thought it was simply an accepted fact that part of the reason 3E generated such a boom in interest was how the market as a whole was done with 2E. Does that mean that there were no exceptions? Of course not.

Quote:
And, even after release, there were also quite a few people who were perfectly content with their 2e or 1e games.

Agreed. Lots. Just not 1 in 3.

According to this thread it is EXACTLY 1 in 3 that didn't make the switch initially. Actually, it's closer to 50%.

That's my entire point all the way along. It's way too premature to make any sort of conclusions in any direction. Sure, 4e might crash and burn in a year. That's entirely possible. Yet, judging from how people made the switch from 2e to 3e, the numbers look fairly close to me. Given the statistical variance and the obvious bias of the polls in question.

See, BryonD keeps claiming that those he knows don't like 4e. That's fine. But, OTOH, all the players I know like 4e. So, personal anecdote doesn't amount to a whole lot.

 

[mmu1]

Actually I didn't include them because they don't matter when it comes to the question. BryonD claimed that the overwhelming majority of people who changed from 2e to 3e did so almost immedietely.

Now, I am surprised that so many did change so quickly. However, 50% is HARDLY an overwhelming majority. It's barely a majority AT ALL. I honestly thought it would be smaller, true, but, that doesn't change my point.

If you're going to make comparisons to the other thread, they do matter. If you don't know how many people chose not to convert to 3E at all, you can't make any real comparisons with Edena's poll. (unless, of course, you accept that it was a small enough number to be negligible - which it might have been, but the fact many people weren't so much switching to 3E as going back to D&D after giving up on it years before, complicates the matter)

Also, having one option be "upon release" and the next one "three months" when you're using the information to compare it with what's happening one month after 4Es release is another big flaw in your poll. Again, you're making comparisons that you shouldn't be.

Now, I feel very confident that when the 3-month point for 4E rolls around, the situation won't change much, and we'll still have less than 50% of people mostly playing 4E... at which point you will naturally claim that the numbers still basically support your assertion, but we have to wait until the 6 month mark to really nail it down.

 

[BryonD]

Umm, what?

Yes, there was a VERY small number of people who stayed with 3e, but, are you honestly going to try to argue that 3.5 didn't absolutely bury 3.0?

If such a large number of gamers stayed 3.0, why didn't anyone try to sell to them?

I didn't say they didn't switch. I said that people were unhappy about it.

What I see is you trying to project your personal take on things onto everyone else.

OMG!!!!! Talk about the pot calling the silver spoon black!!!

Actually I didn't include them because they don't matter when it comes to the question. BryonD claimed that the overwhelming majority of people who changed from 2e to 3e did so almost immedietely.

Now, I am surprised that so many did change so quickly. However, 50% is HARDLY an overwhelming majority. It's barely a majority AT ALL. I honestly thought it would be smaller, true, but, that doesn't change my point.

Um, it is close to 75% with 3 months. And it kicks your point in the teeth, blood everywhere.

From the other thread:

There certainly would have been a few individual votes that way. I find it inconceivable that the proportions would have been anywhere near the same.

Yet, the proportions are pretty damn close.

Again, you either don't get it or you are intentionally playing fast and loose with the numbers. You are completely neglecting the "don't plan to ever change" element from the analysis and that is a huge error.

That's my entire point all the way along. It's way too premature to make any sort of conclusions in any direction. Sure, 4e might crash and burn in a year. That's entirely possible.

Hey, progress.

Yet, judging from how people made the switch from 2e to 3e, the numbers look fairly close to me. Given the statistical variance and the obvious bias of the polls in question.

And again you are leaving out critical elements of the analysis.

See, BryonD keeps claiming that those he knows don't like 4e. That's fine. But, OTOH, all the players I know like 4e. So, personal anecdote doesn't amount to a whole lot.

OK, so when you claimed earlier that there was no divide, you were wrong? The correct statement is "there is a divide right now, but it will go away" and the proof is your faith in the matter?

The fact is that the polls show that people switched much faster last time and nothing you have shown demonstrates that a significant fraction of those who have not switched will do so.

You claim that personal anecdote doesn't account for much. The problem is, in this case our combined anecdotes contradict your position and exactly fit with mine. You claim there is no divide, I claim there is one.

Again I'll ask please reconcile your "it happened last time, therefore it will happen this time" position with game quality. Please I really want to hear this.

You are fixating on rate of change. I can completely buy that the rate of change is the same for those that change. But, if 90% of 2e players ultimately switched to 3E and only 65% of 3e gamers switch to 4e, then the rate isn't really an important factor. And I think that is why the data does show a slower switch.


But really really please. Explain to me why people who think the game has real problems will switch "because they did last time". I don't get that.

 

[BryonD]

It really should be stressed that you have greatly bastardized my quote. I stand by my claim that you would have a hard time finding 1 in 30 people who stayed with 2e. I never said that was the case one month after 3E came out. Yes, I think most people changed quickly, but we both agree that there are other factors, such as money and incomplete campaigns that would motivate people to change later.

But my claim had nothing to do with quickness of change. That is a red-herring that you threw into the mix. Clearly, the rate of change was somewhat higher then. And clearly, some people will still switch. But a lot of people won't.

You claimed I was projecting my views on everyone else. That is a foolish claim. My entire point is that there is a divide. That fundamentally contradicts the idea that everyone is in any one camp, mine or otherwise. You are the only one claiming there is no divide. So it seems you must be the one convinced that your views must unquestionably be projected onto the masses.

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

A lot of people clearly love 4E. My views are clearly not projected on them and in no way at all reflect their position.
Now, can you step up to the plate and say the same? Can you agree that a lot of people don't agree with your view and don't like 4E and therefore there is a divide? Or do you claim that your views are projected onto the masses with the exception of a very small minority?

Show me some evidence that the majority of people who haven't changed will change.
Show me some evidence that people who say they really dislike 4E will change their mind.

You asked what the difference is. The difference is, a much bigger fraction of 2e players liked 3e than the fraction of 3e players who like 4e. It is that simple.

What is the same? Just as last time the majority of people who didn't like 3E continued to not like 3E, the majority of people who don't like 4E will continue to not like 4E. If you only count those people who switch, the the rate among that subgroup is probably in the same range. And if you look at the anti-change group, there will be a fraction of them that "come around", and that fraction of the anti-change group will probably be roughly the same this time as well. But, and this is a big but, the initial anti-change group is a lot bigger this time. It is that simple.

 

[BryonD]

at which point you will naturally claim that the numbers still basically support your assertion, but we have to wait until the 6 month mark to really nail it down.

LOL

Well, we know that people are unfairly rushing to judgment on 4E. After all, we don't know how everything works together. Heck, the PHB3 won't be out for a couple years yet.

 

[Hussar]

You asked what the difference is. The difference is, a much bigger fraction of 2e players liked 3e than the fraction of 3e players who like 4e. It is that simple.

And that's the whole point that I'm questioning. Right there. You claim that there is a larger fraction of 2e players who liked (and presumably switched) to 3e than there is 3e to 4e.

I don't see how you can claim that. In Edina's poll, about 60% of people have made the switch, at least partially. 50% have made the switch fairly strongly. It's currenly less than a month after the release of 4e. In this poll, of those that made the switch to 3e, only 53% had done so by this same point in time.

You repeatedly claim that the remaining 40% will not switch. Or, at least large numbers of them will not. But, the last time around, we had about the same numbers switching immedietely, with the remainder coming in at a later time.

Note, I'm only looking at those who actually did move to 3e. It's pointless to include those who never made the move in here because it doesn't answer the question.

You're claiming that large numbers of that 40% who have not switched will not ever switch over. That's the only way you get your "large divide" in the community. Note the "large" part there. I never claimed that there was no divide. That would be silly all things considered. I'm questioning the "large" part.

Half of the people who moved from 2e to 3e did so sometime AFTER the release of 3e. A large chunk pretty much immedietely after, with about another third trickling in later.

I have heard no evidence as to why this trend should not repeat in 4e. All of the factors that slowed people's change before still apply.

You asked what the difference is. The difference is, a much bigger fraction of 2e players liked 3e than the fraction of 3e players who like 4e. It is that simple.

No, it is not that simple.

You have absolutely no evidence to back that up with other than personal annecdote.

One thing I will certainly grant you though is that in straight number terms, you are likely right, for the simple fact that there are a hell of a lot more gamers now than there was 9 years ago. Gaming's considerably more popular today than it was in 1999.

Percentagewise, I think you're out to lunch. But, in straight number terms? You're probably dead on.

 

[DM_Jeff]

We switched about 8 months prior to release, as we were playtesting the 3rd Edition Forgotten Realms campaign setting.

-DM Jeff

 

[Hussar]

If you're going to make comparisons to the other thread, they do matter. If you don't know how many people chose not to convert to 3E at all, you can't make any real comparisons with Edena's poll. (unless, of course, you accept that it was a small enough number to be negligible - which it might have been, but the fact many people weren't so much switching to 3E as going back to D&D after giving up on it years before, complicates the matter)

Also, having one option be "upon release" and the next one "three months" when you're using the information to compare it with what's happening one month after 4Es release is another big flaw in your poll. Again, you're making comparisons that you shouldn't be.

Now, I feel very confident that when the 3-month point for 4E rolls around, the situation won't change much, and we'll still have less than 50% of people mostly playing 4E... at which point you will naturally claim that the numbers still basically support your assertion, but we have to wait until the 6 month mark to really nail it down.

No they don't matter. And I'll tell you why. Nothing in the other poll gives any indication on intention. For myself, I voted Never Played 4e. Because I haven't. Not out of any ideological issues with the game, but, simply because I have never played it.

Nothing in the other thread gives any indication as to whether those who play will continue playing or those who don't will start. Thus, I cannot include that information in my poll for comparison. It would skew the numbers.

You think the numbers won't change in three months. I think the trend will be IDENTICAL to the last time around.

Let's see in three months shall we?

 

[paradox42]

I voted "switched upon release" because although I happened to be between campaigns at Gen Con that year (I picked up my 3E PHB in Milwaukee and even got it signed by Dave Arneson), I started converting all of my prior campaign's world elements even while I was still reading the book. I had to wait for the Psionics Handbook to finally complete everything and run a game, but I was already cooking stuff up right at the release (and would have run one sooner if psionics weren't such a big part of my world). That game that started in April of 2001 is still going today.

4th Edition, by contrast, rubbed me the wrong way, and I don't plan to convert at all (even after the psionics stuff is released in two or more years).

 

[Cergorach]

I'm missing an option "Started playing 3E before official releas thanks to Eric Noah"...