Is Wotc Slipping?

[MrMyth]

Yesterday I was not directly responding to Umbran's mixing and matching. That is a separate point, but they are compatible and consistent.

This is doubly humorous considering your defense when I showed your double standard was little more than "no it isn't".

I still don't see any double standard at work on my behalf. I've explained several times why I said what I did, without you responding to those explanations in any way. "4E is failing" is a statement that has made, and I don't see particular difference between it, "WotC is slipping", and "4E's decline nearly destroyed the market".

Anyway, if you are clarifying that your statements are different because one is a response to Umbran and the other criticism of Dannager... well, it still doesn't quite make sense to me, since he was specifically commenting on that criticism.

But let me see if I can get this any clearer. From what I can tell, your criticism is for Dannager, for giving XP to ProfessorCirno for a personal anecdote about a store owner failing, and this criticism is based on the fact that Dannager has previously objected to the claims made by Black Diamond or personal accounts of game stores about the decline of 4E. Is this correct?

I may be wrong, but I don't think I've seen Dannager claim anywhere that those anecdotes or claims are specifically wrong. Has he mockingly dismissed Black Diamond's info as 'meaningless', as you accuse him of? Or has he simply said that regardless of how true those claims are on an individual or local scale, that isn't enough to make assumptions about the industry as a whole?

And even aside from that, I still think you are reading far more into Dannager's XP comment than is there.

So I ask - what do you feel he was saying with his comment? ProfessorCirno shares a story in which a game store owner behaved foolishly, and had a comment equivalent to Dannager shaking his head in amused dismay at such behavior. At least, so I read it, apparently due to my own bias. Do you genuinely feel that Dannager's comment was somehow connected to a pro-4E agenda, or was truly somehow 'mocking' your side of the argument? If so, why?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

A: It's one, local Borders
B: Borders has a LOT bigger problems than RPG book sales. They're having trouble competing period (Hence the Chapter 11 filing)

I gave up reading after a few pages because I got tired of being delayed by edition warriors. There are a few things to keep in mind:

1. Amazon sales figures are crap. They're simply too narrow in focus to give us the big picture.

2. Paizo and WotC customers are not mutually exclusive. Sure a few of the most fervent edition warriors go out of their way to avoid anything having to do with WotC but they're irrelevent in the grand scheme of things. Most Paizo accessories work with Wotc products and vice verse. By design (duh!)

So by 'narrow' you mean 'single largest online book retailer'?

[Bill Cosby]Riiiight....[/Bill Cosby]

Waving away evidence that you disagree with does not replace it with sunshine and rainbows. Saying that Amazon does not count, and Borders does not count, and Black Diamond does not count and any of the others mentioned do not count is sticking your fingers in your ears and humming.

For the record, I have not claimed that it is more than my local Borders, though the manager has said that PF Core is outselling any 4e release across the chain (no proof, but seems a reasonable claim) which makes me think that my local Borders is exceptional only in how big the difference in sales is.

And also for the record, my local Borders is doing just fine - and making a profit. It is not one of the Borders that has been scheduled for closure. (It is considered one of the most successful in the region.) I like my local Borders - it has an informed and personable staff, is responsive to questions, and has decent mocha.

Borders 'bigger problems' has no bearing on whether or not Essentials is selling well - and given the cancellations in the Essentials line, I would have to say that WotC is likewise disappointed. Also, please note that I did not say that overstocking was Borders' 'biggest problem' I said that it was the local Borders 'biggest problem with Essentials' - though I suspect that over ordering is one of the places where Borders is having problems, not just for RPGs.

I do not want to see D&D fail, I do not even want to see WotC fail, but I do want to see them do something that actually helps the situation. I had thought that Essentials was that something, but it appears not.... And I have only guesses as to why - it seemed like a good move.

The Auld Grump

 

[S'mon]

I do not want to see D&D fail, I do not even want to see WotC fail, but I do want to see them do something that actually helps the situation. I had thought that Essentials was that something, but it appears not.... And I have only guesses as to why - it seemed like a good move.

I think the content of Essentials Heroes of the Fallen Lands/Forgotten Kingdoms is a good introduction for new players (and is good for old players like me who want a simpler play experience) but it has not been successfully marketed to new players. The Essentials Red Box is so ephemeral, it has made zero impression. WoTC didn't dare market Heroes of the Fallen Lands* as "the new PHB", and IMO the line is really suffering for that. All the new players turning up at my D&D Meetup are bringing along newly purchased copies of the 4e PHB.

*The content of HoTFL closely parrallels that of Moldvay-Mentzer era Classic D&D, and it is highly accessible. But you wouldn't know that from the cover.

 

[Dice4Hire]

That sounds vaguely familiar.

I'm hoping that Paizo manages to avoid the same problems with their new "basic set."

From what I can tell, they need to have...
1) Enough new stuff in it to make it worthwhile, even to existing customers (I think they are going to be good to go here if the box has as much as they say).
2) A lower price point than the Core book ($35 is lower than $50 so again its good).
3) Enough shiny to appeal to a walk-by buyer.

I agree, but even more, it needs to be 100% compatible with the main line, and has to be totally playable in those 1-3 or 1-5 levels. The players should have some monsters, some treasure, several encounters, and a hint of the larger game.

Not easy to do.

 

[Herschel]

So by 'narrow' you mean 'single largest online book retailer'?

[Bill Cosby]Riiiight....[/Bill Cosby]

Waving away evidence that you disagree with does not replace it with sunshine and rainbows. Saying that Amazon does not count, and Borders does not count, and Black Diamond does not count and any of the others mentioned do not count is sticking your fingers in your ears and humming.

And making broad conclusions from single data points is simply wrong. It's bunk scientifically and mathematically. Maybe it's just the extremely stressful day at the office but my patience is ay a minimum for the gang of Paizo edition warriors' BS. Erik Mona made some good points but you keep crowing about a few data points like they're the whole story.

Paizo is doing well catering to those who chose not to move on to 4E. No matter how much some say they have no grudge against WotC, mutliple posts paint a different story.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

And making broad conclusions from single data points is simply wrong. It's bunk scientifically and mathematically. Maybe it's just the extremely stressful day at the office but my patience is ay a minimum for the gang of Paizo edition warriors' BS. Erik Mona made some good points but you keep crowing about a few data points like they're the whole story.

Paizo is doing well catering to those who chose not to move on to 4E. No matter how much some say they have no grudge against WotC, mutliple posts paint a different story.

Single?
No.
Two?
No.
Data point after data point after data point?

You are in fact handwaving. At this point even WotC's release schedules point it out.

They are having problems.

I do have a grudge against WotC, and do not hide it, nor do I say otherwise. I do not like their current business model, and I do not like their current game - but these are separate issues. I can, and do, dislike each on its own merits.

Of the two I would much rather see WotC fix the problems that I have with their current business model then I would like to see them come out with a new edition of D&D - the 4th edition is not going to be a game that I play, but there are a lot of games that I do not play. Not playing 4e is not going to change all that much. Even if they fix their business model it is not at all likely that I will suddenly shout '4e Rocks!'

Seeing what I see to be some fairly major mismanagement, on the other hand, is something that can cripple the brand. While I do not like the current edition of that brand it does not mean that I want to see that brand fall and die.

If you go back and look though, you will find that my early posts about Essentials were largely positive - I felt that the trade paperbacks were a step in the right direction on what I see as the biggest problem that 4e is facing - high returns. Returns make the owners and managers of bookstores grouchy. Stripping and returning covers only is something that they much prefer. (My hate of stripping books is also separate - I think that it is an enormous waste.)

And I am fairly certain that most 4e sales are through the book trade, not game shops. So saying that Amazon does not count, that Borders does not count, that B&N does not count is just plain silly. Discounting major retailers? Not a good idea.

Seeing WotC stumble and fall would not be fun - it could be bad for the hobby in general. D&D is the name most associated with RPGs. While I do not care about WotC, and do not much care about 4e I do care about the health of the RPG industry, and WotC is too big a part of that for me to wave my hand and say 'pfft, unimportant', much as I , personally, may want to.

TSR falling was bad, WotC slipping, and at this point it is only slipping, not falling off of a cliff, is not as bad, but far from good. There just aren't enough names that reach the level of recognition that D&D commands.

The Auld Grump

 

[BryonD]

You must have an interesting definition of "few".

I'm curious what data points are available to the contrary?

I recall when it was completely accepted and understood that D&D was the undisputed, sole 800 lb gorilla of tabletop gaming.
I recall when it was considered a huge deal that World of Darkness really did have ONE data point in which they topped D&D.
I recall a lot of people disliking 3E and rather than foolishly claiming that it wasn't still "D&D 800 lb gorilla", they frequently complained that the exact opposite was happening and the overwhelming popularity of D20 was stifling innovation.
We have a lot of people seeing a lot of data and all that data strongly *suggests* the same thing. And the thing that data suggests just happens to perfectly match what a lot of people are observing in their own personal day to day experiences.
Contrary to popular belief, I'd love to see D&D as a brand doing well. I certainly predicted that this path wouldn't lead to that, though admittedly, reality seems to have exceeded my expectations so much, that I find it hard to think of it as having been right. But looking at a situation and anticipating a result is not the same as wanting that result. I don't think the hobby would die if D&D went away. But I do think it is better off with a strong brand name leader. And even if there were ten great games taking its place, eleven would be better than ten.
But I've been accused of cheering for failure. Really I'm just observing, and I love the debate. And when people want to argue back on this case, its just too easy to resist. I'm not cheering for failure. I'm just enjoying the debate and calling it the way the cards lay.
On the other hand, the insistence that it MUST be false despite having no evidence certainly smacks of emotional investment in wishful thinking.

Even in the depths of 2E's decline this debate would have never happened. Even during the glut/bust post-3.5 3PP exodus, this debate would have never happened. It didn't even come up. If it had the person bringing it up would have just been laughed at.
Today the only defense available is "we don't know".
That in itself is a radical change.

 

[Fifth Element]

You are in fact handwaving. At this point even WotC's release schedules point it out.

They are having problems.

That's an assumption. Their release schedule does not necessarily point to problems. It might simply be a deliberate change in their business model, which is in turn not necessarily the result of problems.

Can it be an indication they're having problems? Of course it can. They might be sinking fast, or just trailing off slowly. But we don't know, and we don't really have anything to go on. We can make as many conjectures as we like, but they remain conjectures.

You can interpret the "evidence" that we do have if you like, and who knows, you might turn out to be correct. But that would not be the result of some deep understanding of WotC's business; it would be a lucky guess. So far as I know, no one here is in any position to do anything other than guess.

I'm not arguing that you must be wrong. I'm not arguing that 4E is going strong and making piles of money, and that WotC is overjoyed with its success. We don't know that either. We don't know anything; we're not privy to the information that would be required to make such a judgment.

 

[Fifth Element]

Even in the depths of 2E's decline this debate would have never happened. Even during the glut/bust post-3.5 3PP exodus, this debate would have never happened. It didn't even come up. If it had the person bringing it up would have just been laughed at.
Today the only defense available is "we don't know".
That in itself is a radical change.

The thing is, Pathfinder is D&D too, regardless of the name on the cover. These are two editions of D&D competing against each other, the radical change is that now, thanks to the OGL, the editions are currently published by two different companies.

When I started playing D&D we had BECMI and AD&D at the same time, both taking up shelf space and competing for my gaming dollars. The difference is that back then the two editions were published by the same company.

 

[BryonD]

Heh, Ok +1 for Fifth Element.


But
A) Are you agreeing that the market is now split between these two versions of D&D?
and
B) I think the BRAND element is a key part of the whole 800 lb gorilla thing.