Predictions of the d20/gaming Industry

[ColonelHardisson]

Part of the problem here is that we have industry professionals thinking that it's cool to come and lay down the law about prices with the fans. Not that it isn't interesting, but it does little to engender confidence or good will in us as consumers. There seems to be very little contrition, very little "well, we hate to charge these prices, but..." It seems very much more like "Look, you guys are getting a free ride, and we're going to lower the hammer on you." It's called diplomacy. While I don't want smoke blown up my sphincter, I do object to the arrogant attitude I see on the parts of the pros who jump in on these discussions. Being gamers, you guys should be most acutely aware of how gamers are: we want everything else to be free, except for the stuff we do. As soon as its us doing the creating, we're as jealous as Gollum with the One Ring with our Precious - the stuff we write. Then, of course, we should receive any sum we can name for our scribblings, which become as important as if they'd come down Mt. Sinai with Moses.

 

[Thorin Stoutfoot]

RPG prices

I have no sympathies for those who complain that higher prices won't let them own multiple campaign settings. If you don't play a campaign, then you're just buying recreational reading material, not a game. I'd much rather own one awesome campaign setting than 6 mediocre ones, so I do hope prices go up.

The other thing is that the only reason $40 seems much is because people are paying retail. I never pay retail for product. Not for bicycles or photography, and not for RPGs. I buy everything mail order. If necessary, I get together with friends to do a bulk buy to reduce shipping costs. I'm happy to wait a month or two to buy it used on eBay if necessary.

Suddenly, that $40 product is now a $28 product. You have to wait, but good things do come to those who wait. (i.e., a fatter wallet) Try it.

 

[Mistwell]

I may be working from faulty data. The last update I saw from a reputable 3rd party estimate was that sales of EQ were slightly higher than .5m units.

If sales volume is 1m units, it will take a couple of years for the 3e PHB to pass EQ.

On the other hand, it's possible that the Sony figure includes all units produced and sold, but does not allow for returns, which may have been significant considering the mass-market distribution the game received (where software returns are quite common).

Figures on play may be more constructive. There were, in 1999, 1.5 million people playing D&D every month in the US, and about 3 million people who reported playing D&D at least once in 1999. I suspect that those figures have gone up, but there is no more recent data available to me.

So even if Sony's number is accurate, and if everyone who bought the game was playing monthly (which they are not), there would still be more regular D&D players than EQ players.

As for Ryan's returns claim, I have no idea. But then, I still have not heard a solid figure on how many 3e PHB's have sold, and if that figure includes returns itself. I did get a false claim from Psion and Rounser that 3e PHB sold 3 million copies. Ryan tells us that figure is just plain wrong (though it may be the number of people who played D&D in 1999 at least one time, it is not the number of people who bough the 3e PHB), that in fact the 3E PHB is a couple of YEARS off of the mere 1 million figure.

Now Ryan is correct that, currently, there are more D&D regular players (about 1.5 M) than EQ players (420,000, who are paying a lot more to play the game than the 1.5M D&D players are). But, of course, that isn't counting the other online games, nor it is examinging growth rates. EQ is still new, relative to D&D's very long history. Online game growth rates are still steep, and I would venture to guess they are steeper than D&D. In addition, computer speeds and connection speeds continue to go up, as their costs go down (one the long term basis, if not at this precise moment), allowing more and more people to play those games who might not be able to right now.

Again, I think people are underestimating online gaming, and I don't understand why. I love pen and paper gaming. I have no plans to move to online gaming (I tried EQ, and it just wasn't as fun). But it is just plain naive to blindly underestimate a market, simply because you do not like it.

To my knowledge, Wizards has only one online element currently for D&D, and that is their web page. There are some current and upcoming video games for D&D, but to my knowledge they are not multi-player.

There is opportunity out there, right now, to make D&D both more accessable and more prominent, if it can be taken online (in addition to Pen & Paper). If Neverwinter Nights is going to be all there is, I think it is unwise to simply dismiss it offhand and pretend it will have no impact on the market. It, and other future online games, will inevitably impact the Pen and Paper RPG market. I don't think the sky is falling, or that you will see some massive drop off in D&D purchases any time soon, but I do think it will mark a longer term lost opportunity for D&D, and it's the longer term impacts that count the most in hobby industries (as Marvel Entertainment Group proved in the mid 80's, taking them over a decade to recover). I think it is a blunder, and that the folks on here who poo-poo the online gaming industries impact sound like the Betamax and Atari supporters of the past (and the current crowd of anti-microsoft Linux supporters). Pretending market realities are not there doesn't make them go away.

 

[Walter_J]

I like games. Games are fun. I predict that as long as people make games, people will buy them so they can play games and have fun. So let it be written. So let it be done.
Now, if you good people don't mind I have some very important business to discuss with Mr. Noah.

Not to derail the thread, but ... the editor is the chief reason I'll buy NWN. I want to put together some of my old PnP dungeons (or as close as possible) and walk through them. That's all!

So, Eric, when exactly will construction be complete on your dungeon(s)? I wouldn't mind taking a gander myself, if you don't mind. Could you use some help? I have a shovel.

Walter

 

[Mistwell]

As for the pricing portion of this discussion, I think it is completely justified, and fair, if prices go up on quality d20 products. I would have paid $49.95 for Forgotten Realms, and $24.95 for Masters of the Wild. These were quality products, and I think they were priced too low for what the market will accept.

On the other hand, I think it is unwise to raise the price on the PHB (though the other two core rulebooks should go up in price). The PHB is the lure for new players, at $20. It's the "First one is free" inhale at the crack pipe. The juicy looking worm at the end of the hook.

This is an addicting game, and we should do everything we can to encourage more people to our addiction. You do that by making the PHB as cheap as possible, and I think it was short sited of WOTC to raise the price on the PHB. Yes, $20 was way too cheap...that was the point. It's what go ME to try this game again (having left it behind with puberty 15 years ago).

 

[The Onion Knight]

I definitely believe that the price of books ($40, soon $50?!) is prohibitive, but there is also an inherent problem in the d20 system that combines with the cost to equal less volume of product sold.
Let me explain.
When Call of Cthulu, Dungeons and Dragons, Star Wars, and Deadlands were all seperate and unique game systems, everyone (at least all the serious gamers) in our group (I game with King_Stannis) went out and bought copies of those games (or core rulebooks) at around $20 -$25 a pop.
Now that all these games are under the d20 system, everyone owns the core D&D rule books, but only one or maybe 2 people own the books for Star Wars d20 or Call of Cthulu. Why is this?
At $30-$40 (and soon $50?!) a piece these books are not seen as desirable or necessary (because the core d20 rules are in the D&D rule books) by all the members of the group.
If our group is exemplary (and it is a pretty good economic cross section), this all adds up to fewer units sold, and less money made.

 

[King_Stannis]

Re: RPG prices

I have no sympathies for those who complain that higher prices won't let them own multiple campaign settings. If you don't play a campaign, then you're just buying recreational reading material, not a game. I'd much rather own one awesome campaign setting than 6 mediocre ones, so I do hope prices go up...

okay, let me give this a try:


the world now:

gamer buys 3 hardback books because the price is reasonable:

FRCS $40
OA $35
Kalamar $40

cost to gamer = $115, but gamer has 3 good products.



ryand's world:

FRCS $50
OA $40

cost to gamer = $90, gamer has 2 good products but sticker shock makes him think twice about Kalamr. Gaming industry just lost $25 because of ryand's "raise prices till people stop buying" plan.

explain to me again why you hope prices go up?


===========================================

as for monte's list, i recognized some names, colin mccomb and david cook most prominently, but some of those people are not in any way premier rpg people. they may have been friends of yours, monte, but some of them are no more or less talented than the current crop of writers. show me any industry that can hold onto their workforce for 20+ years.....

============================================

and ryan, i don't think it's your place to tell any independent company what to do with their money. what if D20 company X wants to raise prices because the owner wants to buy a jaguar? is it your intention to break down his door and make sure he's using that price increase to feed his writers?

again i ask, who do you speak for, ryan? which companies? which writers? How much are you going to raise prices for those companies?

if i was a competitor and you jacked up your price to $50, you better damn well believe i'd put out my book at $40 to garner more sales.

 

[King_Stannis]

I definitely believe that the price of books ($40, soon $50?!) is prohibitive, but there is also an inherent problem in the d20 system that combines with the cost to equal less volume of product sold.
Let me explain.
When Call of Cthulu, Dungeons and Dragons, Star Wars, and Deadlands were all seperate and unique game systems, everyone (at least all the serious gamers) in our group (I game with King_Stannis) went out and bought copies of those games (or core rulebooks) at around $20 -$25 a pop.
Now that all these games are under the d20 system, everyone owns the core D&D rule books, but only one or maybe 2 people own the books for Star Wars d20 or Call of Cthulu. Why is this?
At $30-$40 (and soon $50?!) a piece these books are not seen as desirable or necessary (because the core d20 rules are in the D&D rule books) by all the members of the group.
If our group is exemplary (and it is a pretty good economic cross section), this all adds up to fewer units sold, and less money made.

absolutely. as i alluded to earlier, Davos, ryand may have been his own worst enemy by having the foresight to create the open license agreement.

 

[King_Stannis]

Part of the problem here is that we have industry professionals thinking that it's cool to come and lay down the law about prices with the fans. Not that it isn't interesting, but it does little to engender confidence or good will in us as consumers. There seems to be very little contrition, very little "well, we hate to charge these prices, but..."

very little indeed, colonel! in fact, if i didn't know any better, i'd say that by the tone of his earlier post, ryan is positively rubbing our noses in it. all because he perceives we've been getting a free ride?

what if Ford raised their car prices by $5,000 and told you the reason was "you don't know the kind of car that we're capable of producing because you've been underpaying all of these years. so now we're gonna raise your price 5 grrr, and get to working on a new design....a few years down the road."

utter nonsense.

 

[mearls]

Re: Re: RPG prices

if i was a competitor and you jacked up your price to $50, you better damn well believe i'd put out my book at $40 to garner more sales.

For years, miniatures companies have tried that exact tactic to topple GW.

Target tried it, and they went under.
FASA/Ral Partha tried it, and they went under.

In fact, take a look at the miniatures market now compared to 15 years ago. Once, GW was one company amongst many. Now, it's GW. Reaper's on the map, but they're not in the same city, never mind neighbourhood, as GW.

For years, GW has consistently and steadily raised their prices, despite howls on the Internet.

And right now, GW has grown from a company that published American titles for the UK market to a hobby gaming juggernaut. All while raising their prices to "unacceptable" levels.

Not surprisingly, people were willing to pay higher prices for higher quality product. When offered cheaper, lower-quality alternatives, they ignored them en masse.

RPG prices have far less effect on sales that most gamers or game manufacturers realize. The challenge now facing the RPG biz is in producing quality books like CoC or the FRCS that are worth a higher price tag. Slapping higher price tags on the current stuff sitting on the shelves isn't the answer.