PHB2 comes in at number 28 on USA Today top 150 list

Status
Not open for further replies.
But the 3.x books were on the USA top150 list, as I (amongst others) have posted on these very boards. So there is a basis for comparison.

There is no basis for comparison without sales numbers. Both movies and music give actual sales data with their rankings. Without sales data there is only a comparison vs. other things at the same time, and even that data is not relevant for comparison.

This week Monsters vs. Aliens was number 1 with $58 million in sales. A Haunting in Conneticut was number 2 with with $23 million, and Number 7 was 12 Rounds with $5 Million.

Last week Knowing was number 1 with $24 Million, I love you Man was number 2 with $17 Million and Medea goes to Jail was number 7 at $2 Million.

Last July the Dark Knight was number 1 with $158 Million.

By just looking at rankings The Dark Knight and Knowing were equally popular and successful. The number 7 movies were equally popular and successful as well. But no, they wern't. Sales data is what matters and can be compared, individual rankings cannot.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I am mostly a fan of 3E over 4E; but why do people want 4E to fail. Clearly the books are doing well. Good. I hope they keep selling. Just because you like another game or edition doesn't mean you need to pray for 4E failure. Though it doesn't suit my gaming needs, I can admit its a good system. Come on; D&D is doing well, which means the hobby is doing well. If 4E sales fall, you will probably see sales for your favored system fall also.
 

I am mostly a fan of 3E over 4E; but why do people want 4E to fail. Clearly the books are doing well. Good. I hope they keep selling. Just because you like another game or edition doesn't mean you need to pray for 4E failure. Though it doesn't suit my gaming needs, I can admit its a good system. Come on; D&D is doing well, which means the hobby is doing well. If 4E sales fall, you will probably see sales for your favored system fall also.

Who are you talking about? I havn't seen any anti-4e stuff in this thread. If it is about me I never mentioned 4e or 3e, just that book lists arn't useful for drawing conclusions one way or another without sales figures.
 


Who are you talking about? I havn't seen any anti-4e stuff in this thread. If it is about me I never mentioned 4e or 3e, just that book lists arn't useful for drawing conclusions one way or another without sales figures.
Oh, you can absolutely draw conclusions from that.

The only question is, what conclusions?

Can you say that 4e is successfully selling? I'd say, by any objective measure, absolutely. Even if the book market is poor, hitting spots this high is big news, and you can't hit them without selling quite a few books.

You only run into problems when you try to directly compare two books on different lists. And you might have to explain why that's relevant, too.

-O
 

Verdict? This whole "one PHB Per Year" thing is boffo.

Here's hoping the MM2 and the DMG2 will rock the socks, too.
I have no clue what's going into DMG2, but the MM2 has the Rust Monster. You know what that means right? A dungeon filled with druids and rust monsters! Few things fill the void where my heart is supposed to be like that.

I'm not entirely sure the "PHB 8" or whatever will be quite as huge, but by then we're probably talking 5e anyway. Ah, edition treadmill....
You realize that we are talking about the company that, on the 16th anniversary of it's flagship product, will have produced eleven editions of it? If anyone can pull-off D&D edition treadmill, it's WotC. ;)
 
Last edited:

If we try for a more apples-to-apples comparison, and look at 4e module sales, the situation becomes even more murky... If "the game" is doing well, then why aren't the mods selling? A canned scenario is closer to a movie/vidgame in that it's "prepackaged fun" as well as "cheaper" (the argument that they should be priced in the $15-18 range, rather than $25-30, is a separate topic, I guess...). Less investment, less frustration, and hence a better indicator of a "recession hobby", yes?

As for comparing the sale of something like a PHBII to a module:

(a) Only the DM would buy the module, but the players, at least some of them, would buy the books that are for players (PHBs and Power books)

(b) Many groups that would buy modules would also buy the rulebooks as well. This is, I think, the real reason that module sales would lag behind books like PHBII. You can play the game without the module, but playing the game without the rules is a bit harder. Making your own adventure is a bit easier than building a new class.

(c) Modules of comparable levels compete with each other, and there can only be one module at a time, more or less. With the rulebooks, they complement each other, and each player could be using a different ruleboook for their character. And with some situations, you may be using multiple books (multiclassing, the power books that supplement existing classes, race/class combinations that are cross book).

(d) while comparing a module to a video game or movie may be more accurate, it's probably a case of niche marketing. If someone is choosing to play a tabletop game like a pen and paper RPG instead of a board game, or video game, or going to watch a movie, it is perhaps as an alternative to the other options.

The market for any book after the core 3 would be people that purchased the original. To sell someone on picking up the PHBII is to sell them on the game of D&D and the core books. So any PHBII sale has a PHB1 sale, either in the past or at the same time.

With the core set of 4e, it was a sort of unknown property, and sales were likely spread over a longer period of time. With PHBII, people knew, to some extent, what they were getting going in. If they owned and used the core rules, their decision to buy the PHBII was likely made before the book hit, so most of the sales will be right away. The residual sales over time will likely be similar to, but a bit lower than, the first PHB.
 

There is no basis for comparison without sales numbers. Both movies and music give actual sales data with their rankings. Without sales data there is only a comparison vs. other things at the same time, and even that data is not relevant for comparison.

This week Monsters vs. Aliens was number 1 with $58 million in sales. A Haunting in Conneticut was number 2 with with $23 million, and Number 7 was 12 Rounds with $5 Million.

Last week Knowing was number 1 with $24 Million, I love you Man was number 2 with $17 Million and Medea goes to Jail was number 7 at $2 Million.

Last July the Dark Knight was number 1 with $158 Million.

By just looking at rankings The Dark Knight and Knowing were equally popular and successful. The number 7 movies were equally popular and successful as well. But no, they wern't. Sales data is what matters and can be compared, individual rankings cannot.

Let me get this straight. Did you just try to "argue" that I can not compare the sales results from 4e and 3.5 based on those lists, by showing off an example from the film industry?

But, just for fun, let me pick that apart. If you look at the box office going back 10 years, you will notice that if you pick a specific date for example, and look at the lower spots on the list, say number 20, the variation is much much smaller than amongst the top. If you go even lower (no data available) you will find that the variation becomes even smaller. This is in general, and not necessarily tied to a specific date.

So, what does this mean in terms of the D&D sales? This means that (if you assume that the bookmarked fluctuates as much as the movies) despite the fact that the top5 books might vary wildly in sale, the bottom 145 is fairly stable from year to year. You need to sell X books to get in on the list and you need to sell Y books in order to get in the top 50. Now, we do not know what X and Y are, but we do know that they are fairly constant, so that within reason, we can assume that a nr28 spot in 2009 is significantly better than a nr129 spot in the year 2005. Hell, we can probably even assume with a good deal of chance at being right that a nr37 spot in 2009 means something sold more than a nr58 spot in 2000.

All this if we assume the book industry fluctuates a lot. If we on the other hand assume it fluctuates less than the movie industry (which is much more likely, frankly, since the movie industry has always had a reputation for pretty big fluctuations), our guesses/assumptions become even more probable.

Cheers

mearls said:
Giving out hard numbers is tricky, because it doesn't necessarily do any good. Presumably, we'd give out numbers to debunk the talk that 4e hasn't been a success.

Realistically, though, whatever number we put out there someone would just say that 3e, or 1e, or Bunnies and Burrows, actually sold way, way, way more copies.
 

I am mostly a fan of 3E over 4E;

From what I have seen so far some diehard 3E fans want 4E fails just to show to 4E fanboys that 3E is the best :-S

From what I have seen so far some diehard 4E fans want to prove 3E sold less just to show to 3E fanboys that 4E is the best :-S

I have no clue why some people thinks selling numbers means quality. I still think that Blade Runner is far better than Titanic.
 

From what I have seen so far some diehard 3E fans want 4E fails just to show to 4E fanboys that 3E is the best :-S

From what I have seen so far some diehard 4E fans want to prove 3E sold less just to show to 3E fanboys that 4E is the best :-S

I have no clue why some people thinks selling numbers means quality. I still think that Blade Runner is far better than Titanic.

Yeah... I posted the same thing several times already, but the war rages on... :(

As I wrote upthread, I really didn't like Twilight. Doesn't change that it was a smash hit.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top