trancejeremy
Adventurer
Seeing the recent sell off of d20 backstock by a lot of the remaining d20 companies got me thinking, I was greatly amused at how they don't mind selling them for $2 (or so each), but are loathe to send out review copies (which would really only cost them shipping and probably be tax deductible).
A few years ago, after I had something like 100 reviews under my belt, I approached just about every d20 company around (and a few others) asking to be considered for review copies. The only responses I ever got was a rather rude brush off from one company, and another mention that they found it wasn't worth the effort. Something that I think the Green Ronin guy and Monte Cook have echoed. (And I would note, I have been sent quite a few review copies from some companies, most of those were unsolicited by me (exception being Bastion). So don't think I'm knocking them. Just curious)
They're probably right (though it still amuses me to see them dump their back stocks so cheaply, at those prices it seems like even if a review had sold 1-2 copies at full price it would be worth it). But why is that RPG reviews don't have more of an impact on sales?
In videogames, reviews are quite important. At least one certain sites, fans place great importance on them, not buying a game if so and such magazine doesn't give them a high enough score. Apparently it's even worked into contracts, if a game gets a aggregate rating of X on gamerankings or metacritic, they get a bonus. There was just a mini-scandal where a reviewer for Gamespot may or may not have been fired for giving a game which had been heavily advertised on the site, a low score.
Low readership? ENWorld doesn't have stats, but RPG.net does. Usually reviews range from 500 (for a small press game or PDF) to 5000 (for a WOTC/WW product).
Lack of reviewer credibility? I know John Cooper has always impressed me, especially with his technical knowledge of d20. But for the most part, I don't think most others (including me) stand out much. (Not to say bad, but simply mostly generic). I think Monte Cook has also remarked on the unremarkable quality of review writing.
Just the nature of RPG reviews? I mean, unlike game reviews, a lot of RPG reviews are done just by reading the book, not playing it. But that often simply can't be helped. With sourcbooks you'd have to run a campaign that allowed you to simply drop in new classes/monsters/rules at a moments notice. And adventures can take weeks or months to run.
Lead in time? It takes about 2 weeks at the earliest to write a review of the product, probably a month, then at RPG.net at least, a week or two to get it posted. But if the first month is when most sales come, then obviously it's too late. (On a few occasions, I have been sent manuscripts of products, so I could get the review done around release date),
At the same time, the reverse is almost true of review hits (based on RPG.net). You get a pretty decent initial burst the first week. But after that, maybe 100-200 hits more per month fairly steadily (which make me wonder if it's bots or something, actually)
A few years ago, after I had something like 100 reviews under my belt, I approached just about every d20 company around (and a few others) asking to be considered for review copies. The only responses I ever got was a rather rude brush off from one company, and another mention that they found it wasn't worth the effort. Something that I think the Green Ronin guy and Monte Cook have echoed. (And I would note, I have been sent quite a few review copies from some companies, most of those were unsolicited by me (exception being Bastion). So don't think I'm knocking them. Just curious)
They're probably right (though it still amuses me to see them dump their back stocks so cheaply, at those prices it seems like even if a review had sold 1-2 copies at full price it would be worth it). But why is that RPG reviews don't have more of an impact on sales?
In videogames, reviews are quite important. At least one certain sites, fans place great importance on them, not buying a game if so and such magazine doesn't give them a high enough score. Apparently it's even worked into contracts, if a game gets a aggregate rating of X on gamerankings or metacritic, they get a bonus. There was just a mini-scandal where a reviewer for Gamespot may or may not have been fired for giving a game which had been heavily advertised on the site, a low score.
Low readership? ENWorld doesn't have stats, but RPG.net does. Usually reviews range from 500 (for a small press game or PDF) to 5000 (for a WOTC/WW product).
Lack of reviewer credibility? I know John Cooper has always impressed me, especially with his technical knowledge of d20. But for the most part, I don't think most others (including me) stand out much. (Not to say bad, but simply mostly generic). I think Monte Cook has also remarked on the unremarkable quality of review writing.
Just the nature of RPG reviews? I mean, unlike game reviews, a lot of RPG reviews are done just by reading the book, not playing it. But that often simply can't be helped. With sourcbooks you'd have to run a campaign that allowed you to simply drop in new classes/monsters/rules at a moments notice. And adventures can take weeks or months to run.
Lead in time? It takes about 2 weeks at the earliest to write a review of the product, probably a month, then at RPG.net at least, a week or two to get it posted. But if the first month is when most sales come, then obviously it's too late. (On a few occasions, I have been sent manuscripts of products, so I could get the review done around release date),
At the same time, the reverse is almost true of review hits (based on RPG.net). You get a pretty decent initial burst the first week. But after that, maybe 100-200 hits more per month fairly steadily (which make me wonder if it's bots or something, actually)
Last edited:
