Forked Thread: ... with an interesting note about 4th edition

[The Little Raven]

where is the proof that 4e has sold better than 1e, 2e, 3e or 3.5?

Where did I say that it did? I said that it had a higher print-run than 3e/3.5, and sold through that print-run (and the second print-run) faster, which, by simple examination shows that it was selling faster at the same period in its lifespan than 3e did (note that I don't say 3.5, since I don't have the dates on when second print-runs and such came about for 3.5).

Don't ask me for proof of things I never said just because you can't provide proof of things you actually did say.

Because numerous people (including you I believe) have used anecdotal evidence to make proclamations about 4e's sales, when in fact there is no real proof.

No, I've used things like the NYT Bestseller List, which uses Nielsen BookScan data (actual data, not the survey they used to determine the list before 2001) for retail sales in the book trade. It accounts for roughly 70% of the book trade, as most retailers that sell books use the system, but some (like Wal-Mart) do not. I've used things like Amazon's book bestsellers list for the entire year 2008 (not the current bestsellers list, which don't track year-to-date sales), on which 4e was #25 a couple months back (not sure of its standing currently). These are points of data based on direct sales to consumers, not distributors or retailers.

 

[Fifth Element]

Hey!

You! Yes you! The poster who is thinking that Dragon Snack is calling all 4e fans sheep!

Calm down!

Oh, I'm quite calm. But based on two comments in the post:

"Sadly, people are sheep.", and

"As to the sales figures, of course it sold well - they are the core books and they have D&D on their cover.",

the implication is strong.

You're correct that I could have been more charitable. Perhaps I wasn't because the same charge has been leveled at 4E fans several times on these boards. And notice I wasn't the only one to read it that way.

 

[Imaro]

Where did I say that it did? I said that it had a higher print-run than 3e/3.5, and sold through that print-run (and the second print-run) faster, which, by simple examination shows that it was selling faster at the same period in its lifespan than 3e did (note that I don't say 3.5, since I don't have the dates on when second print-runs and such came about for 3.5).

Don't ask me for proof of things I never said just because you can't provide proof of things you actually did say. .

And technically what I’m saying doesn’t dispute any of what you claim above… what it calls into question is which corebooks “sold out” (gift set or single… or both) and which were reprinted…since WotC could have just reprinted the gift set corebooks and still be on the first printing of single sold books. Thus technically though the “core books” are on a second or third printing. And like I said earlier it’s not something I can prove since I don’t work at WotC… but let’s see what comes out some time down the road either from former employees or when 5th ed. Is about to be released.

No, I've used things like the NYT Bestseller List, which uses Nielsen BookScan data (actual data, not the survey they used to determine the list before 2001) for retail sales in the book trade. It accounts for roughly 70% of the book trade, as most retailers that sell books use the system, but some (like Wal-Mart) do not. I've used things like Amazon's book bestsellers list for the entire year 2008 (not the current bestsellers list, which don't track year-to-date sales), on which 4e was #25 a couple months back (not sure of its standing currently). These are points of data based on direct sales to consumers, not distributors or retailers.

Very simple, very quick question... these sources you cite, do they refer to the core rulebooks individually... or the gift sets? Here you are talking about “sales” not print runs and if I remember correctly, the gift set (and perhaps the PHB) were the major one on all these lists not the single produced books (And if I remember correctly the 4e MM and 4e DMG did worse on the lists than the 3.5 versions.)… and I’m not even sure if they were on there longer than 3.5.

 

[Jack99]

Wasn't this the debate of last week's 30-page thread?