| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Kuje |
Posted - 18 Jun 2009 : 23:29:18
I found this really interesting considering Clark was one of the major players trying to get the GSL revised.
http://necromancergames.yuku.com/topic/10808
"Hey everyone.
I know its been a long time between updates for a lot of reasons and that can be frustrating. Sorry for that.
I'm still hopeful to do Pathfinder print products and perhaps a key 4E print product or two (a Tome 4E perhaps), but abiliity to product the 4E print stuff is proving to be difficult. Retailers are less than excited about 4E supplemental material. Distributors even less so. Print partners still less excited.
All you know my desire to support 4E and my many plans, some of which are even under way. Right now, the 4E PRINT plans dont look like they are going to happen.
I dont want this to turn into a "yeah Pathfinder, boo 4E" thread. Any such posts will be deleted. This is an update thread, not an edition wars thread.
Other than a key 4E product, such as a Tome 4E, I dont see Necro doing much in the way of print 4E products. That leaves us with the possibility of pdf products. That is not necessarily bad, but it would reflect a shift in our traditional product strategies and will require different analysis on how to go forward.
In large part this situation is due to the delay of an acceptable GSL. Not having one at launch created a huge slowdown of momentum as well as a retailer and distributor gap where distributors didnt have 3Ps plugged in to the product array for 4E. Now, having no 3P track record for 4E they are wary (and probably happy to have some of it go away). Had there been a GSL at launch I think we would have hit a few big products and gotten distributors on board for 3P products for 4E. But that didnt happen. Now I think we have a chasm we just cant cross with anything but a tiny selection of key 4E products, such as a Tome 4E. But that said, even the idea of a Tome 4E has been floated by those who matter and even for a product like that there is less than total enthusiasm.
All that said, we are exploring pdf and print on demand options.
It would be fair to say that I am frustrated by the path 4E and 3P support for 4E has taken and that we, essentially, had the ability taken from us to support 4E by the mishandling of the GSL. I say that while at the same time applauding Scott Rouse's tireless fight to get the GSL revised--which he did and did well. I just wish there were more people at Wizards who "got it" like Scott did and were on board. Its really too bad. 3E was truly a golden age of D&D, a revival of all that was great from the early years of the game. Its too bad that same feeling and fervor couldnt happen for 4E. Maybe I was naive to ever think it could, but I did think that.
All this means is likely no big 4E print products (maybe one or two at most) and perhaps only a few Pathfinder print products. We are still in contact with Paizo and have a good relationship there. We still have great connections for online and print on demand products and are working with OBS to achieve those things. Its just that our hoped for print lineup will likely not happen.
I know this means more waiting for all of you and I am sorry for that.
I hesitated to post this because some will say "Necro is folding." Thats not the case at all. We are just being forced by external factors to shift our product plans. I felt all of you were owed an update and an explanation about that.
Clark" |
| 18 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 22 Jun 2009 : 16:18:17
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Its all smoke & mirrors? 
SNIP
I have a feeling that WotC has hired some former Enron accountants. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 22 Jun 2009 : 15:52:54
Its all smoke & mirrors?
Only time will tell, thats why I spend a lot less time pissing and moaning over 4e... things will sort themselves out eventually, one way or the other.
I'm just glad I have no vested interest in it, aside from it being my favorite hobby. I can always get a new hobby... I'd hate to be one of the people who needs to get a new career. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 22 Jun 2009 : 14:50:26
Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear guys! 
Oh and I am a supporter of both 4E and 3.5E |
| Nightseer |
Posted - 22 Jun 2009 : 07:18:27
3.5 Survives!
3.5 Thrives!
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 22 Jun 2009 : 02:30:25
Actually, it sounds a lot like the kind of arguments I enjoy making - spinning the facts so that they say exactly what I want. 
Basically, what he said is that AD&D was phenomenal, and that D&D didn't do nearly as well until 3e was released.
Going by those facts and those facts alone, I would say one should skip every other edition of the game... meaning we should all wait around until the 'good' 5th edition becomes available.
You know... it's like Star Trek movies... but in this case, the odd-numered ones are the "good ones". 
Also, he brings up how many game stores he's had business with, and how they support 'Free Games day'... last time I checked, that particular even was multi-platform, multi-genre supported, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with 4e and D&D (aside from it being one of the participants).
Thats like me saying Uruguay is an exceptionally athletic country because they sponsor at least one Olympic team. 
In other wortds... the statement is meaningless, and he never actually goes on to say what attitudes he encountered at said game stores that he professes to be familiar with. Did they drum him out of town with rotten vegetables? We'll never know, because all he says is that he's been to that many, making him an 'expert' in the subject.
Every impression I get from the decisions being made at WotC is that they appear to be made out of desperation. Someone (at the top) is demanding the kinds of numbers they saw in 2001... and the guys left over there simply aren't up to the job.
Another analogy - does anyone rememeber the old Saturday morning cartoon show The Bugs and Daffy Hour? Do you rememeber how Bugs Bunny one-upped Daffy every single time, and got all the applause. Finally Daffy goes and blows himself up at the end, and gets more applause then Bugs, and Bugs congratulates him on being 'a hit'.
And then we see the ghost of Daffy rising into the heavens, and he says "there's just one problem... I can only pull that trick once".
Wellllll... the Realms was Daffy Duck. 
Blowing them up caused just enough commotion to stir things up... I doubt they will EVER generate that kind of interest again. I'd be willing to bet that more then half the 4e books sold were to people like me, who wanted to read what they did just out of morbid curiousity. The Spellplague was a one-trick pony, and when the pony express runs out of steam, so will D&D.
Or at the very least, the Forgotten Realms...  |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 22:02:58
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
Wooly, don't trust a statistic you haven't tampered with yourself...
Heh, that's a lesson I've known for years... Even before finding out Mark Twain's borrowed quote "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics", or seeing the correlation between global warming and the decline of piracy (look here), I knew that you could only trust raw data -- and even then, you couldn't always trust it if you didn't have all the data. Anyone can make numbers dance and sing, if they spin them right.
It's actually a personal irritant to me when I see one data point being presented as evidence of something, when no relevant factors are considered. |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 21:44:09
Wooly, don't trust a statistic you haven't tampered with yourself... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 15:51:16
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
Yes. In the 35 year history of D&D, we stand at a high point. D&D is selling more copies, reaching more customers, supporting more game stores, than it has during most of its history.
I'm not convinced that this statement is relevant. For most of D&D's history, there were less game stores to sell it, less ways for word of the game to spread, less material to buy, and simply less of a gaming market to sell to. Major bookstores didn't carry much gaming material, if any at all, and the internet was not yet a factor in finding places to buy stuff, either online or offline. You either found a hobby shop with a game section, or bought something out of a magazine.
Until recently, the gaming industry has been a very small niche market. It's only been since the 90's when it really took off as a distinct industry.
I myself never set foot in a proper game store until prolly 1994 or 1995. My first dice -- crystal ones with uninked numbers! -- came from a hobby store in 1987. I only noticed them because I was wandering around the store while my dad was looking at model railroad stuff.
All of my early game purchases were from a comic store that carried a small stock of gaming material -- it was less than a quarter of his total space, and poorly organized, at that. I made a couple purchases from a catalog I got from Dragon (also bought at that same lousy comic store), and then finally found a store where gaming material was a prominent part of the store, instead of an afterthought.
And until TSR started the splatbook thing, most people got by with the PHB, the DMG, and the three monster books of 1E. DMs might also get Legends and Lore or some modules, but that was it.
So I don't think it's valid to compare a market that's larger, more well-defined, more well-informed, and that simply has more options to an earlier version of that same market that didn't have those advantages.
You could say the car industry is doing better now than it was in 1909, but since there were only one or two places back then that were mass-producing cars, no one is going to take that claim seriously. I think the gaming market should be regarded in the same manner. |
| Thauramarth |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 09:30:22
On the subject of whether 4e is selling well or not, some food for thought - a post by Joe Goodman of Goodman Games:
http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6207&p=25324#p25324.
quote:
And now to the question at hand: How is 4E doing?
4E is doing well, very well. I'll define the parameters of "well" below. First, let's dispel a couple myths.
Myth #1: "We can publish the same book in 4E that we did for 3E, and use that as a yardstick for sales." Simply not true. Log on to dndinsider.com and you'll understand why. You have to understand Wizards' digital initiative (and its many ramifications) if you intend to publish 4E books at all. Sales of many categories have changed based on what the digital initiative provides customers free of charge. Sales of character record books in 3E and 4E are apples and oranges, not suitable for comparison, and there are other categories affected as well.
Myth #2: "Distributors do not support 4E." Simply not true. The pre-orders on Dungeon Crawl Classics #53, #54, and #55 were larger than anything I had seen in years. More recently, Level Up #1 sold out its first wave of distribution sales in under 48 hours, then sold out the second wave of distributor restocks a week later, and distributors continue to place huge restocks. There is significant distributor support for 4E.
Myth #3: "Retailers do not support 4E." Simply not true. This sort of claim is where the debate breaks down, because one gamer can say, "4E isn't selling at my local store," and it's hard to refute that. Store-by-store experiences do indeed vary widely, and the truth is that there are many individual stores where 4E isn't selling well. It is these stores, and gamers who trumpet these stores, that have led to many claims regarding 4E not selling. What can I say to refute that? I will rely on my credibility regarding direct retailer feedback.
I've personally visited 47 different game stores so far this year. Yes, 47 -- see viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5197 for some details. Next time someone tells you "4E isn't selling at my local store," remind him that he's discussing 1 store. Aside from those personal visits, I've spoken on the phone with probably 100+ other game stores, gotten direct feedback via a Dungeon Crawl Classics sale (see list of stores in the download at http://www.goodman-games.com/dcc-sale-09.html ), sponsored another year of Free RPG Day (see list of stores at http://www.freerpgday.com/stores.htm ), and run two Worldwide D&D Game Day promotions involving every store participating in Worldwide D&D Game Day (see http://www.goodman-games.com/WWDDD5-23.html and http://www.goodman-games.com/WWDDD3-21.html ). There are hundreds of stores that participate in each of these events individually, probably thousands overall if you compile the various lists. Naysayers who post claims of "4E doesn't sell well at my local store" seem to omit these massive lists of supporting retailers.
Back to myth #3: "retailers do not support 4E." Simply not true. Why not? Because Joe Goodman says so, and I know more about game stores than you do. Show me someone with the same list of credentials regarding direct retailer feedback, and I'll back down. Until then, the statement stands.
With these myths dispelled, let's discuss the meaning of "doing well." First, some historical context. Before I founded Goodman Games, I wrote a book on the history of this industry. It was something of a research project that turned into a book. I was planning to start a game company, and I wanted to do it right, so I researched the history of the three primary publishing categories. Most of the gaming history that gets published these days is product-focused, with an emphasis on creators, artists, inspirations, and the like. My research was focused on the business strategies of the companies involved. For example, in the early 1980's when Games Workshop got the license to produce official D&D miniatures from TSR, they did absolutely nothing with it and effectively used it to shut down their competitors so they could launch their own fantasy miniatures line. Has anybody else here studied the retail locator lists in White Dwarf magazine over the 1980's? Cross-reference the independent hobby shops listed in the early 1980's against the addresses of the GW company shops listed in the late 1980's. It's fascinating; you can see the pattern of how GW opened shops in close proximity to their hobby accounts. If you ever want to learn actual TSR sales figures, do your homework and find all the lawsuits against them. It's all public record, and I've read it all. Dave Arneson sued TSR three times for unpaid royalties, and each of the court filings lists TSR sales figures for the years where he challenged.
All of this research (which I ultimately decided not to publish) forms the historical context for my opinion of D&D 4E. Dungeons & Dragons has had two, and exactly two, peak years. The first was 1982. The second was 2001. The mid-80's were a declining period, and the 90's were a trough. From a business perspective, the creatively-much-admired 1970's were really a low point for D&D. Fast growth, but very low sales volume compared to the years to come.
From 1974 to 2009 is 35 years. Or, roughly two generations. D&D has roughly one peak every generation. 35 years total, 2 of which were great, and the other 33 of which were "okay."
But what do people compare 4E to?
One of the two best sales years in the past 35 years of D&D. Not the other 33 years.
Is 4E doing as well as 3E sales in 2001? Definitely not. That was the high point in a generation.
Is 4E doing as well as D&D sales in the times of 1974-1981? 1983 through 2000? And approximately 2002 through 2008?
Yes.
So, is 4E doing well?
Yes. In the 35 year history of D&D, we stand at a high point. D&D is selling more copies, reaching more customers, supporting more game stores, than it has during most of its history.
Will 4E do as well as 3E?
Maybe. But frankly, who cares? That's like asking if 4E will do as well as AD&D did in 1982. Or as well as 2nd edition did. Or as well as the little white box. Anybody who's ever had a job where they're accountable for sales numbers -- and I've had a lot of these -- knows that there are some marketing events that simply hit the ball out of the park. 3E was one of those, and it will be hard to top for a generation to come. It was a once-in-a-generation feat, just as D&D sales in 1982 were a once-in-a-generation feat. For twenty years following 1982, D&D sales never recovered their peak. Twenty years. From the vantage point of 1983, was D&D dying? In 1983, you could have said that. The twenty-year decline was starting. But D&D went on to have another peak in 2001.
From where we stand now, at the very beginning of 4E, I see a long, strong run ahead of us. Just as in 1982, it may be another twenty years before the generational peak of 3E is reached again. Or it could be next year, when the economy improves. Just as in 1983, who can say?
In the meantime, there are thousands of game stores clamoring for 4E product. And I'll be here publishing it for a long time.
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 09:10:59
4E better be seeling well. I would think that most of the jobs at WotC are reliant upon that singular fact.
-- George Krashos
|
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 08:23:55
Clark is a lawyer, he knows how to phrase things...I doubt is is your dislike of 4e (and mine), Wooly |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 00:25:30
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I think thats the point Clark was making - WotC hasn't really gone out of its way to show they care about 3rd-party support, and vendors would have to be nuts to buy-into that business-model.
I don't think they've ever cared about third party support... And I'm not saying that to be negative; I simply doubt that third party stuff was ever given much consideration at all by WotC.
The 3E OGL, in my mind, wasn't about 3rd party stuff -- it was a brilliant maneuver that allowed third party companies to use WotC's rules. This means that anyone who gets into one of these third party games still has to buy the core books from WotC (sales that otherwise would have gone to someone else!), and once they get tired of or bored with that third party thing, they already know how to play and can thus flip over to straight D&D. In other words, having the OGL broadened WotC's share of the market -- supporting the third party stuff was incidental to them.
Back to Clark's statement... While it's possible he was referring specifically to 3rd party stuff, he doesn't actually say that -- he just refers to 4E material in general. It could have been a simple omission, but since he does specifically refer to 3rd party stuff later, I'm not so sure it was an omission earlier. It must be admitted, though, that my healthy dislike of 4E could be influencing how I'm reading his statement. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 20 Jun 2009 : 16:31:51
Just to clarify - because I got confused myself while reading that - I'm going to assume that when he says '3P' he means 3rd party, as in "3rd party products", and NOT Pathfinder (which is often abbreviated "3P", and is the D20 ruleset used in conjunction with Paizo's Golarion setting.)
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
I dont want this to turn into a "yeah Pathfinder, boo 4E" thread. Any such posts will be deleted. This is an update thread, not an edition wars thread.
Ohhh! Ohhh! Can THIS be an edition wars thread?
I kid... I kid...
Although this is all just more fuel for the fire, I really don't think the fire, being a raging inferno at this point, needs any more fuel, truth be told.
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Retailers are less than excited about 4E supplemental material. Distributors even less so. Print partners still less excited.
This kind of statement makes me wonder if 4E is selling as well as WotC would have us believe.
Felt that way myself but I wasn't going to say so. :)
I don't think its so much that 4e isn't selling well (I think it did, at least at first), but rather the 'model' that WotC imprinted on the community at-large (which is what Clark was trying to get-at, IMHO).
Wizbro created a 'Them' and 'Us' attitude, whether on purpose or quite by accident (I think it was just a series of very incompetent business decisions). The gamers who are on-board for 4e are basically 'WotC cheerleaders' - they think 4e is the Holy Grail, and anything else is doggy-poo. THAT's the attitude WotC created.
That means RPG fans have become almost entirely "all or nothing" - you either buy exclusively into WotC products, or you support 3e (or other 3rd-party systems) and are 'against' WotC and everything it stands for.
That's a very generalized statement, but I think it is true for the most part. Sure, there are follks that are somewhere "in the middle", but that group isn't a large enough sub-niche in an already niche hobby that has already divided itself into two seperate camps. Vendors won't support a line of products that only a few thousand people may be interested in world-wide - its just not sound business to do so.
For those of you old enough to remember 'The Cold War', I'll use this analogy: Suppose the U.S. and Russia did get into that war everyone thought was going to happen, and all the countries line-up on one side or the other for 'WWIII'. However, you decide to 'throw-in with Switzerland'.
You'd be choosing a side that just CAN'T win... because it's not even trying. Thats what supporting 3rd-party products for 4e would be like. 'Neutrality' isn't really an option, at least not for companies trying t make a buck, and WotC isn't even trying to garner allies to it's side, it's acting more like The Terminator...
"Come with me if you want to live"
Except in the end, John Conner becomes just another slave...
I think thats the point Clark was making - WotC hasn't really gone out of its way to show they care about 3rd-party support, and vendors would have to be nuts to buy-into that business-model. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 20 Jun 2009 : 07:47:27
I don't know if 4E isn't selling well. My gut feeling is that it is selling well, but whether selling well equals hitting the sales goals set for the line is a whole other matter. That having been said, I do think that 4E has not attracted as much third party support because the GSL was originally non-existent, and later unfavorable, especially for publishers with a 3rd edition track record with its implied edition exclusivity.
With the open ended nature of the OGL, 3rd edition had support from several freelancers under the Sword and Sorcery banner of White Wolf, Green Ronin and its Freeport setting and adventures, AEG's various "toolbox" style books, and so on. Some people became very attached to various settings that never had anything to do with official D&D products, such as the Scarred Lands setting.
4E just didn't have the same excitement and drive to it (for the third party developers). I think a lot of publishers played it safe, especially after the 3.5 bomb that kind of wiped out many of them that couldn't afford to update their lines during the last "sub" edition change.
I also get the feeling sometimes that 4E's stressed "precision balance," where the developers are very careful to say that every ability and class and monster and magic item has precise math behind it that works a specific way, makes consumers a little leery of trusting third party people with that math.
On top of this, among 4E players that are fans of the D&D Compendium online or the Character Builder, these tools can save a lot of work, but all of that time saved is out the window once you have to start doing all of your third party material by hand to get it to work.
So, I think the lack of momentum from third party developers boils down to:
1. Imprecise plan from WOTC at 4E launch.
2. WOTC's stressing precise math and the "officialness" of all 4E WOTC products.
3. WOTC's stressing of online tools to support the new ruleset.
In the end, I think that WOTC has made it possible to support 4E by third parties, but they haven't made it attractive. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 15:28:39
Okay, um, good analogy and all... But we're speaking of 4E in general, as a ruleset, and not what's been done to the Realms. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 07:18:15
I've deleted my post b/c Wooly's post below is right: It was a WAY off-topic rant that had no place in this thread. Truth is, I need to install a breathalyzer on my computer. Posting under the influence (PUI) is gonna get me in trouble one of these days. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 01:48:25
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Retailers are less than excited about 4E supplemental material. Distributors even less so. Print partners still less excited.
This kind of statement makes me wonder if 4E is selling as well as WotC would have us believe.
Felt that way myself but I wasn't going to say so. :) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 01:33:46
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Retailers are less than excited about 4E supplemental material. Distributors even less so. Print partners still less excited.
This kind of statement makes me wonder if 4E is selling as well as WotC would have us believe. |
|
|
