NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 7981422" data-attributes="member: 957">There is a difference between having and giving the data you do have the level of interpretation it merits.I can't say what the sales are for each thing.  And I have not claimed to.  But I can point to multiple lines of evidence which show a common trend.I don't agree.Pre PF2E release PF was bouncing along at ~3000.  Post PF2E it was bouncing along at ~2500.The release month for PF2E shows a 3300 for PF2E.  So it is roughly the same as PF.  The one data point is 10% above our PF baseline.  I don't see this data as valuable to the 10% level, but it seems fair to say that on release PF2E was on the equal(+) side of where PF had been.  And PF drops about 15%.  It is hard to not call that 15% a "conversation".But then PF2E immediately drops off.  PF stays stable at the new low.  This suggests, very weakly, that the 15% conversion held.  15% of the prerelease PF engagement went away and stayed gone.  Now, 15% on Fantasy Grounds doesn't tell us much about the marketplace.  Maybe 5 sources would average to 10% and maybe they would average to 60%.   But this FG data does not show 50% conversation.We don't know how many of the games represent groups playing both.  Probably a fair number.  After the drop off, PF2E pretty much stabilizes at ~2200 and PF stabilizes at ~2500.  PF is also > PF2E for 5 consecutive months (all ignoring the pandemic bump so far).  It is statistically unlikely for one to exceed the other 5 months running if equality is the expectation.  So, for FG exclusively, PF gets the sustained equal(+) mark.  And, again, for numerous source the average could shift significantly.  The pandemic bump shows 3100 new PF games (+19% from prior month) and PF2E shows 2600 new games (+15%).  Again, this looks to be equal with PF on the Equal(+) side.And, yet again, it would be a bad idea to look at this FG data alone as telling the story.  There is no real point in doing this level of digging.  You called it 50% conversion, so I'm playing along here.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Ultimately it is one line of evidence suggesting something in the ballpark of equity.  It need to be viewed along with several other lines of evidence.Ok, but now you are blatantly putting your thumb on the scale to make a point.  And, obviously we can put our thumb on the other side of the scale just as easily.  I don't claim that the ICV2 number show that PF2E is doing worse.  I just claim that they DON'T show it is doing better.  Which is really what your point here is saying.  We have a list of things that suggest PF2E is in the ballpark of where PF was before PF2E was announced.The list of things suggesting PF2E is exceeding that is NULL.</blockquote>

Verification