Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6556563" data-attributes="member: 22779">That would be true if it only applied to 4e though.&nbsp; The boom and bust cycle of editions is at least as old as 3e and probably longer.&nbsp; The reason we got the 1e Unearthed Arcana is because sales fell out of the bottom of 1e.&nbsp; And that was in the day when it was a HELL of a lot cheaper to print books.&nbsp; People tend to ignore the fact that printing prices have far, far outstripped inflation over the past twenty years or so.&nbsp; The margins on books have been getting slimmer and slimmer all the way along.Heck, they printed 3e books at a loss.&nbsp; That's common knowledge.&nbsp; The core 3 for 3e were sold at below cost, just to get people to buy the books.&nbsp; And even then, sales tanked so quickly that we got 3.5 edition two years early.&nbsp; The supplements just couldn't make up the difference.&nbsp; So, if people rejected 4e because they &quot;master it&quot; or &quot;figured it out&quot;, what's your explanation for 3e dying in even less time than 4e?&nbsp; Even if you consider Essentials to be a new edition, 4e and 3e last about the same amount of time.&nbsp; So, if 4e died because people &quot;moved on&quot;, then what was wrong with 3e?&nbsp; And, really, it's not like 3.5 won any longevity awards either.&nbsp; Sure, it managed to go another two or three years longer than 3.0, but, that's not exactly setting any records here.&nbsp; If supplements drive editions, why did we get 4e at all?&nbsp; Shouldn't the supplements have kept 3.5 afloat?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6556563, member: 22779"] That would be true if it only applied to 4e though. The boom and bust cycle of editions is at least as old as 3e and probably longer. The reason we got the 1e Unearthed Arcana is because sales fell out of the bottom of 1e. And that was in the day when it was a HELL of a lot cheaper to print books. People tend to ignore the fact that printing prices have far, far outstripped inflation over the past twenty years or so. The margins on books have been getting slimmer and slimmer all the way along. Heck, they printed 3e books at a loss. That's common knowledge. The core 3 for 3e were sold at below cost, just to get people to buy the books. And even then, sales tanked so quickly that we got 3.5 edition two years early. The supplements just couldn't make up the difference. So, if people rejected 4e because they "master it" or "figured it out", what's your explanation for 3e dying in even less time than 4e? Even if you consider Essentials to be a new edition, 4e and 3e last about the same amount of time. So, if 4e died because people "moved on", then what was wrong with 3e? And, really, it's not like 3.5 won any longevity awards either. Sure, it managed to go another two or three years longer than 3.0, but, that's not exactly setting any records here. If supplements drive editions, why did we get 4e at all? Shouldn't the supplements have kept 3.5 afloat? [/QUOTE]

Verification