To kill a myth: 4e did fine financially. It didn't do as well as Wizards/Hasbro hoped in the long term (7), but the game did fine early in its life cycle. I assure you it outsold Pathfinder by a large factor. The idea that it was otherwise is optics, popular myth, not truth. 1/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 22, 2021
And, yes, Pathfinder was very successful. It was selling well in core game shops during the era. That’s where the charts in ICV2 came from. The truth that PF was selling well in core stores doesn’t mean it was outselling 4e D&D in the whole marketplace. It wasn’t at all. 2/7 Other factors did more harm to D&D and WotC at the time, from a business perspective, than 4e falling slightly short of its numbers. Gleemax, anyone? (That failed network is the main reason D&D digital tools never materialized.) Dreamblade? Hecatomb? 3/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 22, 2021
It was a time when Hasbro was looking to spend on the next big thing. WotC gambled on a lot of properties at the time, from attempting to create that ill-fated social network to new IPs and game tech. Little panned out. And D&D marketing wasn’t steller then, either. 4/7 The vitriol 4e evoked in its time, along with the birth of Pathfinder and its success in the core hobby market, created an illusion that 4e was some kind of problem child for WotC. But, even when overproduction led to Essentials in the midterm, that was just an illusion. 5/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 22, 2021
The 4e myth seems plausible. It had some strong if disingenuous proponents. Part of 4e’s problem was too many books too quickly from the game’s inception. And developing 5e was an intentional and successful bid to boost sales as 4e waned. But 4e did okay in its time. 6/7 Anyone with an idea of how corporate finance and accounting works knows that "not hitting the numbers" is not the same as objectively unsuccessful. 4e didn't always hit its numbers but it was never a financial disaster. That's the point. 7/7
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 22, 2021
PS–I know this thread won’t kill the myth. It’s like any popular legend. It abides. But from hell’s heart, I stab at it. For hate’s sake, I tweet one more tweet at it. PPS–Overproduction wasn't 4e's only problem, but the release rate sped the waning of sales, and that was part of what brought on Essentials. The aggressive release schedule was an issue for 4e's long-term success. 1/2
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 22, 2021
Also, games such as Dreamblade and Hecatomb were fun games with intresting mechanics. My mentioning them isn’t a value statement on those levels. They weren’t as financially successful as they were budgeted for, though. Which, once again, isn’t an objective failure. 2/2 PPPS–Hasbro's financials are available publicly. Paizo's aren't. People follow me who could correct me, too. I welcome being proven wrong or a debate with someone who knows the facts. This isn't about how anyone feels about the 4e game but that it wasn't a financial disaster.
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 23, 2021
Your insights as a historian are one reason I follow you. 😀
— Chris S. Sims (@ChrisSSims) December 23, 2021