Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7667334" data-attributes="member: 996">If only a third of existing D&amp;Ders played 4e, how did it beat out Pathfinder in 2009 store sales, even though pitting supplement releases against always-strongest core releases, /and/ simultaneously cannibalizing store sales with DDI?&nbsp; There are a number of possibilities:&nbsp; goldomark could be wrong about what Mr Cook said, what he said could have be mistaken or taken out of context, Pathfinder could have attracted significantly less than a third of existing D&amp;D players (or, as you suggested, 'D&amp;D players' could have referred&nbsp; to everyone who ever played D&amp;D - in which case 3.x also pulled in significantly less than a third, since the highest single-product D&amp;D sales were over a million (at a time when there were two or three separate lines of D&amp;D being published at once), while the highest single product 3e sales were around 300k units, when it as the only D&amp;D line).&nbsp; Or, of course, 4e could have made up the difference with new players.&nbsp; Which, since 4e players seem to have blithely accepted 5e, could help explain it's robust sales.You can really make almost any confirmation-bias-catering narrative plausible with the bits and pieces of 'information' we have about D&amp;D's success in the market place.&nbsp;&nbsp; It really doesn't matter much when put in perspective, since that marketplace (the whole TTRPG hobby) is so trivial compared to the rest of WotC's, let alone Hasbro's, business.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7667334, member: 996"] If only a third of existing D&Ders played 4e, how did it beat out Pathfinder in 2009 store sales, even though pitting supplement releases against always-strongest core releases, /and/ simultaneously cannibalizing store sales with DDI? There are a number of possibilities: goldomark could be wrong about what Mr Cook said, what he said could have be mistaken or taken out of context, Pathfinder could have attracted significantly less than a third of existing D&D players (or, as you suggested, 'D&D players' could have referred to everyone who ever played D&D - in which case 3.x also pulled in significantly less than a third, since the highest single-product D&D sales were over a million (at a time when there were two or three separate lines of D&D being published at once), while the highest single product 3e sales were around 300k units, when it as the only D&D line). Or, of course, 4e could have made up the difference with new players. Which, since 4e players seem to have blithely accepted 5e, could help explain it's robust sales. You can really make almost any confirmation-bias-catering narrative plausible with the bits and pieces of 'information' we have about D&D's success in the market place. It really doesn't matter much when put in perspective, since that marketplace (the whole TTRPG hobby) is so trivial compared to the rest of WotC's, let alone Hasbro's, business. [/QUOTE]

Verification