ICv2 Reports On RPGs Growth This Year

ICv2 has published its latest quarterly hobby channel game rankings for Spring 2022. The Top 5 contains D&D twice (once from WotC, and once from third parties Goodman Games and Darrington Press/Critical Role), along with two licensed Hasbro (owner of WotC) properties, plus Pathfinder. "RPGs are the story of the year so far," a hobby distributor told ICv2. "D&D’s king by leaps and bounds...

ICv2 has published its latest quarterly hobby channel game rankings for Spring 2022. The Top 5 contains D&D twice (once from WotC, and once from third parties Goodman Games and Darrington Press/Critical Role), along with two licensed Hasbro (owner of WotC) properties, plus Pathfinder.

"RPGs are the story of the year so far," a hobby distributor told ICv2. "D&D’s king by leaps and bounds, don’t get me wrong, but the number of RPGs that were [significant contributors to] sales was 40 different brands."

AFDD50F7-33FA-4C4A-B12E-616950A20989.jpeg
The chart is based on interviews with retailers, distributors, and manufacturers. As always you can see the compiled chart going back to 2004 here.

 

log in or register to remove this ad

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I’m not sure the 5e OGL was a done deal before or at the roll out of 5e. Yes it was decided it was the way forward at some point but I think the DMSGUILD was a defacto requirement before it could be released. Though I’m not sure it was announced at the same time.
Just as a note, there isn’t a ‘5E OGL’. There’s just the OGL, published 20 years ago. It’s the same OGL.
 

log in or register to remove this ad






JThursby

Adventurer
“D&D 5E products produced directly by Wizards” = one category.

“D&D 5E products produced by Goodman Games + Darrington” = another category.

Why? What is the defining criterion for this grouping? Is it all WotC licensees? Does it also include those companies’ non-Wizards-licensed “5E compatible” products as well?
My speculation is that they are trying to say that third party published 5e is the #3 seller right now, underneath 5e first party and Pathfinder first party. This reads like a hint towards the vast swath of smaller publishers that are looking for trends to follow from the data. In other words, the message they're trying to convey is "if you are not Paizo or Hasbro, make a 5e book if you value making money."
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
My speculation is that they are trying to say that third party published 5e is the #3 seller right now, underneath 5e first party and Pathfinder first party. This reads like a hint towards the vast swath of smaller publishers that are looking for trends to follow from the data. In other words, the message they're trying to convey is "if you are not Paizo or Hasbro, make a 5e book if you value making money."
This a publication for store owners: the message is "stock 3rd party 5E and Power Rangers."
 

JThursby

Adventurer
This a publication for store owners: the message is "stock 3rd party 5E and Power Rangers."
Man, even when Pathfinder is #2 stores don't want to carry it. Maybe it's just the few FLGS in my area, but even during the days of Pathfinder dominance there was some kind of antipathy they held toward it. Perhaps the ICv2 numbers are inflated by Paizo's online sales/PDFs which don't translate to store sales, I don't really know.

I'm also interested to see how RPGs compare to TCGs and Wargames. Personally I hate it when a FLGS pivots to be TCG-centric, it feels like they're pressuring me to gamble on card packs, overpay for a card I actually want, or leave. If TCGs are diminishing in relevance that's good news for my store experience, the less I'm expected to participate in them the better.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top