Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jer" data-source="post: 8689064" data-attributes="member: 19857">The thing that I think is missing in this post, which is good overall, is the difference between the casual player and the hard core player.&nbsp; IME AD&amp;D attracted more of the hard core players - the folks who were going to go all in on the game, make it a big part of their social life and, most importantly to TSR, buy more AD&amp;D books.&nbsp; Basic D&amp;D IME had their hard core players (I mean, by my definition I was one) but was more played by folks who were happy to play for a few hours and then walk away and do something else.Number-wise I suspect that if we compared the average number of copies sold on non-core supplements across the two lines AD&amp;D would come out on top (not total number because they made more AD&amp;D stuff, but average per unit).&nbsp; Because more AD&amp;D folks were making it part of their life and not just a boxed set they pulled out to play when their incredibly nerdy DM friend convinced them to come join a game.As I was reminded in another thread - the creative folks at TSR revealed after the Wizards purchase that the sales folks never shared sales information with them. They just made games based on their perception of what they thought would sell.&nbsp; If TSR was a well managed company at the time then &quot;what they were producing&quot; would probably be a good metric of actual popularity, but given that TSR was the particular shade of dysfunctional that it was it's possible that the creative folks were just making books they thought people wanted.&nbsp; Without seeing sales numbers comparisons I'd hesitate to give TSR the benefit of the doubt on this one (even though it agrees with my own gut instinct above).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jer, post: 8689064, member: 19857"] The thing that I think is missing in this post, which is good overall, is the difference between the casual player and the hard core player. IME AD&D attracted more of the hard core players - the folks who were going to go all in on the game, make it a big part of their social life and, most importantly to TSR, buy more AD&D books. Basic D&D IME had their hard core players (I mean, by my definition I was one) but was more played by folks who were happy to play for a few hours and then walk away and do something else. Number-wise I suspect that if we compared the average number of copies sold on non-core supplements across the two lines AD&D would come out on top (not total number because they made more AD&D stuff, but average per unit). Because more AD&D folks were making it part of their life and not just a boxed set they pulled out to play when their incredibly nerdy DM friend convinced them to come join a game. As I was reminded in another thread - the creative folks at TSR revealed after the Wizards purchase that the sales folks never shared sales information with them. They just made games based on their perception of what they thought would sell. If TSR was a well managed company at the time then "what they were producing" would probably be a good metric of actual popularity, but given that TSR was the particular shade of dysfunctional that it was it's possible that the creative folks were just making books they thought people wanted. Without seeing sales numbers comparisons I'd hesitate to give TSR the benefit of the doubt on this one (even though it agrees with my own gut instinct above). [/QUOTE]

Verification