Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4571453" data-attributes="member: 2067">Right, but realistically, that proves nothing about 4e's overall &quot;success.&quot;First of all, they could be &quot;gaming the numbers&quot; a little bit, like when Nintendo didn't make enough Wiis to appease demand. Suddenly, selling out of a Wii was a news story and having a Wii in stock was an event, and this drove up awareness and curiosity. Perhaps they went with an overly conservative estimate for their first printing so they could have some good news to report early on.Second, even if they didn't do this kind of par-for-the-course kind of PR generation, it's also true that D&amp;D has a lot of brand recognition, and that everyone playing 3e probably would at least check out 4e's core rulebooks. They could've slapped FATAL in between the covers and sold like gangbusters. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> That's not to say it would continue to sell over the long term.Anyone claiming that second printing bit as evidence for success is kind of being as clueless as someone claiming a local negative buzz as evidence for failure. Neither is strong evidence.All we really have is rampant speculation and hearsay. But the OP is right in that, ultimately, it doesn't matter either way. Sales don't tell you what kind of game it is, or whether you should like it or not. They just might tell you how long until 5e, if you were a betting man. Other than nerd rage on either side, it's kind of a pointless conversation.Man, I wish I could figure out how to turn my FFZ work into something folks could pay for right about now...Still, labor of love and all that.... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4571453, member: 2067"] Right, but realistically, that proves nothing about 4e's overall "success." First of all, they could be "gaming the numbers" a little bit, like when Nintendo didn't make enough Wiis to appease demand. Suddenly, selling out of a Wii was a news story and having a Wii in stock was an event, and this drove up awareness and curiosity. Perhaps they went with an overly conservative estimate for their first printing so they could have some good news to report early on. Second, even if they didn't do this kind of par-for-the-course kind of PR generation, it's also true that D&D has a lot of brand recognition, and that everyone playing 3e probably would at least check out 4e's core rulebooks. They could've slapped FATAL in between the covers and sold like gangbusters. ;) That's not to say it would continue to sell over the long term. Anyone claiming that second printing bit as evidence for success is kind of being as clueless as someone claiming a local negative buzz as evidence for failure. Neither is strong evidence. All we really have is rampant speculation and hearsay. But the OP is right in that, ultimately, it doesn't matter either way. Sales don't tell you what kind of game it is, or whether you should like it or not. They just might tell you how long until 5e, if you were a betting man. Other than nerd rage on either side, it's kind of a pointless conversation. Man, I wish I could figure out how to turn my FFZ work into something folks could pay for right about now... Still, labor of love and all that.... :) [/QUOTE]

Verification