http://gamingtrend.com
September 22, 2014, 06:21:40 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Top 5 Collectible Games and RPG Sales for 2010  (Read 1710 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7920



View Profile
« on: April 12, 2011, 03:52:21 PM »

According to the site ICv2, the top 5 Collectible Games for 2010 for the overall market were.

1 Magic: The Gathering
2 Yu-Gi-Oh!
3 Pokemon TCG
4 HeroClix
5 World of Warcraft

So it looks like MtG is holding on despite some cutbacks in tournament perks. No surprise about Yu-Gi-Oh, Pokemon or WoW - really expected them there. However, I'm surprised to see HeroClix on that list, since in my neck of the woods that game is long dead and rarely sold anywhere. They have another list at the above link that has the top 10 CG's for the 4th qtr 2010 specific to the Hobby sales channel/market. Rounding out the top 10 are D&D Minis, Legends of the 5 Rings, Naruto, Star Wars Minis and Axis & Allies. Again, I'm a bit surprised by the strength of D&DM's and SWM's as they were both discontinued earlier in the year.

Their list of top 5 P'n'P RPG's for the 4th Qtr 2010 for the overall market were:

1 Dungeons & Dragons
2 Pathfinder
3 Dark Heresy/Rogue Trader/Deathwatch
4 Dragon Age
5 Mutants and Masterminds

Great to see Dragon Age doing so well, since it's still just over 1 year old and great that a small publisher like Green Ronin can place 2 RPGs in the rankings. IMO the Pathfinder placing shows D&D 3.5/3.75 still has lots of legs. I fully expected WotC's D&D and Fantasy Flight Games DH/RT/DW to be on that list. I've heard nothing but great things about those FFG RPG's, but on a few sites I've read the occasional criticism that FFG's seems to have abandoned Warhammer Fantasy in favor of their other RPG's. I never played any of them, so I'm not really sure.

I don't know much about ICv2, but they appear to be a marketing company offering consulting services to the tabletop game industry. I'm also not sure why they don't have overall 2010 for the RPGs, but I'm guessing they just started reporting them.
« Last Edit: April 12, 2011, 03:56:03 PM by kronovan » Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6529


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2011, 09:39:05 PM »

Quote from: kronovan on April 12, 2011, 03:52:21 PM

I've heard nothing but great things about those FFG RPG's, but on a few sites I've read the occasional criticism that FFG's seems to have abandoned Warhammer Fantasy in favor of their other RPG's. I never played any of them, so I'm not really sure.

I'm not sure that's quite how I'd put it. FFG got the Warhammer RPG license not long (in the grand scale of things. This was nearly two decades after the 1st edition, I think) after the 2nd edition had been released, then promptly ditched it and went for a 3rd edition that seems to be completely different from the old ones in both tone and rules. It now looks more like a boardgame than an RPG, and I have no interest in buying it. 2nd edition is the pure essence of Warhammer Fantasy roleplaying for me.

What truly makes this puzzling is that the Dark Heresy, Rogue Trader, Deathwatch, and the upcoming Black Crusade (play as Chaos worshipers!) are all built upon the 2nd edition and FFG seems to continue following that line. Why they diverged two very closely related games and settings like that is beyond my comprehension. Perhaps they have some grand plan to it all, but I doubt it.
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7920



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2011, 03:11:02 PM »

I've read that Chris Pramus (Green Ronin) was the person who designed the WH Fantasy 2e. Having now played GR's Dragon Age and dabbled a bit with their True20, I'm not surprised it was quality. I wasn't aware those 3 FFG RPGS were based on the 2e Fantasy setting. I looked into Dark Heresy a few years ago and was quite impressed, and if it wasn't for the very dark setting I probably would have bought it.
Logged
Turtle
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9373



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2011, 11:18:00 AM »

Rogue Trader and beyond have problems though, and FFG's quality control has already buckled under the weight of such an aggressive release schedule.

The system is starting to break down at these scales, and their writing hasn't stepped up to fill the gaps.

I've been running one of their latest adventures, The Emperor Protects for Deathwatch but it's been horrific in terms of balance. I bought it to save time, but now I'm spending as much time trying to plan out encounters. But the way the power scales, if I hit them with something that will actually give them a challenge, they get killed in one round of combat.
Logged
TiLT
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6529


Preaching to the choir


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2011, 11:29:34 AM »

Quote from: Turtle on April 16, 2011, 11:18:00 AM

Rogue Trader and beyond have problems though, and FFG's quality control has already buckled under the weight of such an aggressive release schedule.

The system is starting to break down at these scales, and their writing hasn't stepped up to fill the gaps.

I've been running one of their latest adventures, The Emperor Protects for Deathwatch but it's been horrific in terms of balance. I bought it to save time, but now I'm spending as much time trying to plan out encounters. But the way the power scales, if I hit them with something that will actually give them a challenge, they get killed in one round of combat.

This is only the second time I hear anyone say anything like that about Rogue Trader, and I've been reading a lot of discussions about the system. I get the impression that such complaints (at least in Rogue Trader. I'm not too familiar with Deathwatch yet) come from people who approach the game in the same way they do D&D. It's just not a game about combat. The players will almost always be considerably more powerful than their opposition (in Rogue Trader because they are equipped with some of the best equipment available in the galaxy. In Deathwatch because they are superhuman AND equipped with some of the best equipment in the galaxy), and if they aren't they shouldn't be fighting in the first place. One of the basic tenets about Warhammer (both Fantasy and 40k) is that if you end up in combat, you've done something wrong. That's obviously not true about Deathwatch though, but I'm really not familiar enough with that system to attempt to defend it or even know if it's flawed in the first place.
Logged
Turtle
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 9373



View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2011, 12:50:16 PM »

It's the 40k universe. There is only war. slywink

Seriously though, even in Rogue Trader that fancy equipment is only there so that you aren't killed outright be someone just glancing your way. If you're not getting into fights, you're also doing something wrong.

If this was, say Burning Wheel, or 7th Sea, I could stand the argument that you're not supposed to get into fights, but this is the 40k universe, fighting isn't just a side note, it's given that it's going to happen.

It gets worse in Deathwatch, much much worse to the point where in many encounters that the books list as challenging for a party that's at the level for my players, I simply have to call it and say they just kill everyone because going through all the motions would mean going through the broken combat system for no reason. But then, it's Deathwatch, combat is a big part of it.

Your group my get past one of the major deficiencies in the system by naturally avoiding it. But my group embraces both combat and role playing.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2011, 12:55:25 PM by Turtle » Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.133 seconds with 35 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.027s, 2q)