Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder sales

[MerricB]

I wonder if the majority of the AP sales are to subscribers like me.

Cheers!

 

[BryonD]

I wonder if the majority of the AP sales are to subscribers like me.

I don't think it is simple chance that subscription is now a huge element of the business model of BOTH D&D and Pathfinder.

 

[Umbran]

I'm going to 'pull that assertion' as I can't find the thread, not here, where it was posted.

Apologize for not being able to verify that...

Oh, goodness. No apologies are necessary.

Um, yea, but it's not at all relevant to the discussion. Now if you said you had Pathfinder and/or 4E cookies at your house, then maybe it would be relevant. ;-)

I assume you're not seriously implying that ICV2 or Amazon rankings and the like are of equivalent significance as the number of cookies in your house.

Actually, I kind of am.

Looking at them from the view of statistical science and sampling methodology, ICv2 RPG and Amazon rankings are (pardon my language here) unadulterated CRAP for purposes they're being used here.

For the purposes they're really intended to serve (selling you things), they do pretty well. But, as statistical science to tell you what's happening in the market? They are horrible.

 

[BryonD]

For the purposes they're really intended to serve (selling you things), they do pretty well. But, as statistical science to tell you what's happening in the market? They are horrible.

Eh, that's a pretty rough abuse of "statistical science".

To point at these kinds of information and claim they constitute any kind of "proof" is wrong. No doubt there.

But to call the information "crap" and say it has NOTHING more to offer than fully random data, is actually even more wrong.

 

[IronWolf]

Looking at them from the view of statistical science and sampling methodology, ICv2 RPG and Amazon rankings are (pardon my language here) unadulterated CRAP for purposes they're being used here.

I agree that neither holds up to statistical science and sampling methodology, but they seem fine for the purposes used here - a source of discussion.

 

[Morrus]

I don't think it is simple chance that subscription is now a huge element of the business model of BOTH D&D and Pathfinder.

I can't speak for WotC or Paizo, but I can certainly say that moving to a subscription model for AP sales was the best thing EN Publishing ever did.

 

[mudbunny]

Read the recent article about ATARI losing its license to produce D&D videogames. In it WOTC claims DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS: DAGGERDALE as a #1 Selling XBOX LIVE seller. That was pattently wrong, the Gameinformer site has pretty good data, and Daggerdale did not hit the #1 slot. WOTC still put it there.

Actually, WotC is not lying about Daggerdale being a #1 Arcade title.

Xbox Live's Major Nelson LIVE Activity for week of June 6

Top Arcade Titles (Full Versions purchased)

1. Dungeons & Dragon Daggerdale
2. Pinball FX2
3. Full House Poker
4. Castle Crashers
5. Trials HD
6. Game Room
7. Portal: Still Alive
8. Outland
9. Battlefield 1943
10. Section 8: Prejudice
11. Torchlight
12. Plants vs. Zombies
13. UNO
14. DEAD RISING 2: CASE WEST
15. Yu-Gi-Oh! 5D’s Decade Duels
16. Magic: The Gathering
17. SEGA Rally Online Arcade
18. The Fancy Pants Adventures
19. Peggle
20. LIMBO

The above arcade list is based on full versions purchased.

 

[prosfilaes]

Looking at them from the view of statistical science and sampling methodology, ICv2 RPG and Amazon rankings are (pardon my language here) unadulterated CRAP for purposes they're being used here.

For the purposes they're really intended to serve (selling you things), they do pretty well. But, as statistical science to tell you what's happening in the market? They are horrible.

There's a 50-50 chance that Nobilis is beating D&D 4e in the market, and about 1% that D&D 4e is the market leader. It's simple statistics; if you don't have any data, then you end up having to ascribe equal odds to each of the contenders. If you don't agree with that, then obviously you're finding some source of data not CRAP, and I don't know of anything better than the ICv2 RPG and Amazon data.

 

[Dannager]

There's a 50-50 chance that Nobilis is beating D&D 4e in the market, and about 1% that D&D 4e is the market leader. It's simple statistics; if you don't have any data, then you end up having to ascribe equal odds to each of the contenders. If you don't agree with that, then obviously you're finding some source of data not CRAP, and I don't know of anything better than the ICv2 RPG and Amazon data.

This is not how statistics work. In fact, statistics doesn't even enter into what we're discussing here, since both ICv2 and Amazon provide data that is inadequate from a stats standpoint (they lack in both context and concreteness). So let's not try and use stats to justify this stuff. When we get actual data, then we can talk. Right now what we have can be called little more than "indications".

 

[Dire Bare]

There does not have to be sufficeint data for a bookstore clerk to leave a sign that Pathfinder is outselling D&D. He just placed it there because maybe he wants to focus on those sales.

There also isn't sufficient data for fueling this interwebz brouhaha, but there you go. Whether it was a store clerk or a customer who posted the flyer, I find it childish, inaccurate, and annoying. Admittedly more annoying because of all the storm on the net.

Read the recent article about ATARI losing its license to produce D&D videogames. In it WOTC claims DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS: DAGGERDALE as a #1 Selling XBOX LIVE seller. That was pattently wrong, the Gameinformer site has pretty good data, and Daggerdale did not hit the #1 slot. WOTC still put it there.

As others have pointed out, this is actually accurate. Daggerdale WAS number 1 for a time, if only a day. The marketing speak wasn't inaccurate, but simply failed to give you ALL of the information. Mildly annoying to me, it might be more so if it wasn't common industry practice in just about every industry.