Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="13garth13" data-source="post: 6041692" data-attributes="member: 16979">Hmmmm....I hear you, I really do.  It is entirely likely that the numbers on 3.5 books towards the end of its lifespan were so abysmal that anything would be an improvement.  And (as I said) there is little doubt that for the first year or two of its lifespan, 4E was kicking butt and taking names.  But after that....I just really think that you pay one heck of a lot less of your rent when your sales and percentages of total RPG sales place you in #2, yeah?  Because that loss of market share doesn't just come with something metaphorical like the loss of the hearts and minds of a particular segment of the RPG buying population, it also comes with a loss of their revenue/purchasing power.I don't think Scott Rouse said "<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?p=5769720" target="_blank">4e is broken as a game and business and it needs to go away.</a>" because the D&D brand was/is thriving at any level that could be defined as a success.  Now I realize that just because something is not a success doesn't necessarily make it a failure (the real world is thankfully not quite that binary {yet}), but c'mon, man.....Cheers,Colin</blockquote>