Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I realize I'm (purposefully) late to the party but I recall a few weeks/months back there was some "discussion" as to the ultimate fate of RRPGT based on the sales data posted by a single (or possibly two) online stores. The data that covers Robotech's North American release period from hundreds of stores that use Alliance as a distributor (Palladium's favorite IIRC) is now out.

http://icv2.com/articles/markets/view/30953/top-5-non-collectible-miniature-games-fall-holiday-2014

TL;DR: Robotech is mentioned in the Top 5 about as many times as we get real concrete info on Wave 2 in the weekly updates.

Obviously, it is still too soon to figure out the ultimate fate of the game but it's clearly not a breakout hit with a meteoric rise at this point. Maybe it'll slow boil to the top 5 after wave 2?

I purchased mine at retail, after a friend of mine who backed it received his items. So it is not as if I got my product before local backers.

Kickstarter is not a preorder or get stuff cheap site. I figure that people who back projects really want them to happen, as opposed to simply wanting to get some stuff inexpensively, or before other people.

I am sorry if my comments were offensive, and I appreciate the fact that some backers are waiting for their product, and that it is more than a year overdue. However, I do stand by my point, that I expect that backers who both supported the project, and have money riding on it, would be interested in pushing the game instead of bad mouthing it.

You are correct that at one point everyone who backed wanted the game to succeed, those days had a sunset colored in 50 shades of lies quite some time ago.

 Swabby wrote:
You are correct that at one point everyone who backed wanted the game to succeed, those days had a sunset colored in 50 shades of lies quite some time ago.

I do sometimes feel like I was tricked into entering and then tied up in Kevin's "play room" for a year with RRPGT with only the occasional visit from Wayne "bring out the Gimp" Smith.

 spaceelf wrote:
Kickstarter is not a preorder or get stuff cheap site.

The hell it isn't.

I'm only backing if I think I'm actually going to receive sufficient gaming value for my dollar by preordering directly from the manufacturer.

KS ain't a charity.

TL;DR: Robotech is mentioned in the Top 5 about as many times as we get real concrete info on Wave 2 in the weekly updates.

Obviously, it is still too soon to figure out the ultimate fate of the game but it's clearly not a breakout hit with a meteoric rise at this point. Maybe it'll slow boil to the top 5 after wave 2?

I guess that means that Malifaux, Infinity, Flames of War, Hordes, Warhammer Fantasy, Sails of Glory, Firestorm Armada, Mercs, Kings of War, Wargods, Judge Dredd, Hail Caesar/Black Powder/Pike and Shotte, Heavy Gear, Deadzone, Dreadball, Dust, Battletech, Warzone, Urban War and dozens of others should pack it up since they didn't make the list, either.

 n815e wrote:

TL;DR: Robotech is mentioned in the Top 5 about as many times as we get real concrete info on Wave 2 in the weekly updates.

Obviously, it is still too soon to figure out the ultimate fate of the game but it's clearly not a breakout hit with a meteoric rise at this point. Maybe it'll slow boil to the top 5 after wave 2?

I guess that means that Malifaux, Infinity, Flames of War, Hordes, Warhammer Fantasy, Sails of Glory, Firestorm Armada, Mercs, Kings of War, Wargods, Judge Dredd, Hail Caesar/Black Powder/Pike and Shotte, Heavy Gear, Deadzone, Dreadball, Dust, Battletech, Warzone, Urban War and dozens of others should pack it up since they didn't make the list, either.

It's like you completely didn't read his post or anything.

rigeld2 wrote:

 n815e wrote:

TL;DR: Robotech is mentioned in the Top 5 about as many times as we get real concrete info on Wave 2 in the weekly updates.

Obviously, it is still too soon to figure out the ultimate fate of the game but it's clearly not a breakout hit with a meteoric rise at this point. Maybe it'll slow boil to the top 5 after wave 2?

I guess that means that Malifaux, Infinity, Flames of War, Hordes, Warhammer Fantasy, Sails of Glory, Firestorm Armada, Mercs, Kings of War, Wargods, Judge Dredd, Hail Caesar/Black Powder/Pike and Shotte, Heavy Gear, Deadzone, Dreadball, Dust, Battletech, Warzone, Urban War and dozens of others should pack it up since they didn't make the list, either.

It's like you completely didn't read his post or anything.

I guess putting the word "obviously" at the beginning of the sentence wasn't ironically obvious enough. Lesson learned. Underlined italic large off color text may be necessary for some readers.

I will be very surprised if RRT makes "Top 5".

As a nostalgia purchase, almost all of the value is just in having the classic models / toys in hand.

I suspect many people would be just fine to buy a box of Valkyries over the game itself.

In many ways Robotech should have gone the X-Wing route with a handful of larger, prepainted playing pieces that people can simply collect.

I'm sorry, were you trying to convey a message other than that the game did not make it to the top five and implying that not being there is a bad thing?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I will be very surprised if RRT makes "Top 5".

As a nostalgia purchase, almost all of the value is just in having the classic models / toys in hand.

I suspect many people would be just fine to buy a box of Valkyries over the game itself.

In many ways Robotech should have gone the X-Wing route with a handful of larger, prepainted playing pieces that people can simply collect.

Ironically enough, I plan to use some for X-Wing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n815e wrote:
I'm sorry, were you trying to convey a message other than that the game did not make it to the top five and implying that not being there is a bad thing?

I think that he was implying that now we have more info. Up until now, the only sales point we had was the one from one store.

I also think you're trying really hard to look for a fault in his statement.

For those that haven't been reading along, it was merely a reference to the statements from some posters over the last few months that RRT showing up on "some big distributor's personal online shop" was indicative of big things. While I believe ICV's info is still based on self-reported data and thus not entirely comprehensive, it's not without merit either.

Look, it's entirely possible to carve out a nice niche. To be profitable and expand the line and bring in new players. It's a very naive view that 'IT MUST BE AMAZING, GO BIG OR GO HOME FETHERS!', and yet any commentary on concern regarding sales and community size is often met with a baffling level of defensiveness.

It doesn't need to be top 5 to be a success. It being in the top 5 on some site (still haven't seen a citation that FRP or whatever the hell their name is is 'among the largest distributors') isn't an iron clad indicator of success.

As I noted above, jokingly, the delta between "abysmal failure" and "unparalleled successs" is *massive*, and we probably won't know for certain for some time to come.

Or at least 5 months, because if they haven't at least said something about the line by Gencon, we'll know something is up. Failing to expand upon an allegedly successful product line for an entire year would be something of a red flag.

So Robotech is not a box-office smash, (thanks for the data as proof though!!) but I suspect it is the hottest thing PB has had in a decade or two.

Yes, many of us ARE pushing the game, it just needs a ton of work to get it out there and look descent.

BUT you can wish for a game to succeed but that does not preclude us from holding the publisher's feet to the fire for things promised not met or delayed with no end in sight.
You can love the music but the artist can still be a scumbag and should be held accountable for their actions.

The need is to make PB uncomfortable because they will happily coast along until the next cash-grab opportunity comes within striking distance.
They have a proven history of allowing pre-order of books that still have not been published for years at a time.
Honestly, their only two merits are they have been awarded the IP by HG, and were smart enough to get ND design group to get it going.
It also seems terribly wrong to reward bad behavior by throwing money at them and not demanding what was agreed.

I think this is a fine time to point to the legal obligation of the project creator since some people like to think it is more open than it is:
I also really like the kickstarter requirement of a prototype presented and no photorealistic renderings... so 3D models count?Notes on delivery date (old rules in 2014... updated since), note on main KS page delivery was to be December 2013:I think I would like to turn things on their head:
What is up with PB negativity?
Isn't it strange their "good news!" stuff is all about mouth watering generalities.
All their bad news stuff is very specific "We didn't do this! Here is proof!".
They need to get some actual pictures of stuff getting done before the torches and pitchforks need to get fired up again.

@Forar - I'm pretty sure that RRT was "Top 5" at that particular retailer at that particular time.

I'm also pretty sure that reaching "Top 5" globally for 2015 is a long row to hoe.
____

Update, RRT is now #5 at FRP games for Feb 2015; used to be #2.

Also, Golem Arcana is no longer on the list.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@Forar - I'm pretty sure that RRT was "Top 5" at that particular retailer at that particular time.

[Archer]Nnnnnnnnnope[/Archer]

It was noted, repeatedly, as a Big Fething Thing.

We even had a pleasant discussion establishing that the plural of "Anecdote" is not "Data".

It was stated, rather firmly, that being on That Top 5 for That Site was indicative that 'us haters' could 'suck it'.

Yeah it was a pretty spiteful jab when the "data" was originally posted.

 Talizvar wrote:
So Robotech is not a box-office smash, (thanks for the data as proof though!!) but I suspect it is the hottest thing PB has had in a decade or two.

No worries, you're welcome. I just thought some data (admitedly self reported) from hundreds of stores (supposedly according to ICV) submitted to the largest tabletop games distributor who also happens to be best buds with Kevin and the Palladium crew would be more helpful that the listing of one popular online retailer. As for the last part of your post above, a quote about the one eyed man being king in the land of the blind comes to mind. If I sold even one copy of something RPG or minis related, it would also be the hottest thing made by Warboss Gaming Industries LTD TM R C INC.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 n815e wrote:
I'm sorry, were you trying to convey a message other than that the game did not make it to the top five and implying that not being there is a bad thing?

Forar and Albertorius have already explained it well enough so I'll just echo it above in my previous quote. I would point out though since you brought it up that it is a good assumption that something being in the top 5 sellers from a poll of hundreds of retailers would indeed be a better "thing" than not being in the top 5. Maybe wave 2 will change that. I suspect that Palladium hoped it would be big enough to land in one of the top spots though.

 Forar wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
@Forar - I'm pretty sure that RRT was "Top 5" at that particular retailer at that particular time.

[Archer]Nnnnnnnnnope[/Archer]

It was noted, repeatedly, as a Big Fething Thing.

We even had a pleasant discussion establishing that the plural of "Anecdote" is not "Data".

It was stated, rather firmly, that being on That Top 5 for That Site was indicative that 'us haters' could 'suck it'.

judgedoug wrote:Thought of the day: a game's success is not determined by a half dozen anonymous voices on an internet forum.

Meanwhile, outside of this echo chamber...

judgedoug wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

... Seriously, one e-tailer doesn't tell the whole story.
Needs more data.

and cue the
"Top Seller Lists from one of the largest online gaming retailers (and in fact, the retail side of one of the largest gaming distributors in North America) don't mean anything, not when my perpetual feedback loop is telling me the game is DOA, unsuccessful, and terrible!"

Yeah, pretty much.

Well, in the time that RRT was shipped to backers in America, (october), I've started both Dropzone and Planetfall, painted 3 armies for them and basically, if I'm going to push any games, it's going to be those two. Along with my main staple of WMH.

Maybe if they had come in October, I could have pushed it instead but nope, I still have no news of when my ROW will ship.

So palladium, how long until you have to order another shipment of your boxed game because it's selling so well?
Very quiet in that regard.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 spaceelf wrote:
Kickstarter is not a preorder or get stuff cheap site.

The hell it isn't.

I'm only backing if I think I'm actually going to receive sufficient gaming value for my dollar by preordering directly from the manufacturer.

You don't understand! Kickstarter is exactly what a project creator wants it to be...at any given moment, and there is no requirement or expectation for that to remain consistent from year to year, update to update, or even sentence to sentence in the same update!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Forar wrote:
Or at least 5 months, because if they haven't at least said something about the line by Gencon, we'll know something is up. Failing to expand upon an allegedly successful product line for an entire year would be something of a red flag.

Or an indication of egregious mismanagement. Hmm.

Speaking of updates, let's try something different. Rather than merely copy/pasting the text from the most recent one, let's have a snapshot, to really give YOU, *the viewer*, the full impact of every Word Italicized For Effect, Bolded for EMPHASIS, and oh btw get your address in have we mentioned that you should get your address in?

Edit: for those who don't want to strain themselves reading that or expand the image:



But don't worry guys, just because they let another week go by with actual details about wave two is no reason to be concerned about wave two.

Sometimes I wonder if that sad little man gets royalties on the various trademark, restricted, and copyright symbols.

Forar, I'm sure that no news is good news. The last time we had a real progress news drought of this magnitude that was being filled with half glass full platitudes, it was followed by the epic Xmas 2013 preview of the 3d prints of wave 1 whose stellar reception I'm sure you remember. If that isn't any indication that quality easy to assemble minis with no problems like 98% of the work done being scrapped secretly and needing to be redone being kept quiet until just literally weeks before they'd have to start shipping from china to meet their revised earlier delivery date causing a ripple effect leading to a multiyear delay isn't happening then I don't know what is.

Still no concession that it actually IS available in Australia and Europe (and elsewhere in RoW). They could have put a disclaimer that it'll "officially" be available soon. But yet they close their eyes and pretend it didn't happen.

But accepting reality isn't their strong suit, so...

Just from a curiosity point I'd like to know "officially", if the sales to AU/EU/RoW is actually a breach of contract like they've implied it is (and if they plan to do anything about it), or if they just thought it wouldn't happen.

There's a big difference between "We kept quiet and just hoped they wouldn't sell internationally" to "We asked them not to sell internationally" to "We contractually forbade them from selling internationally".

Because if they didn't put the latter in place, pretending like it's some breach of trust, as they have, is pretty disingenuous.

I thought that PB already stated that the ROW stuff is "grey market" import from US distribution.

There is no "breach of contract" - in the US, "first sale" doctrine says that you can do whatever you like with stuff. If I buy a pallet of RRT in the US, and ship it to EU/Oz/RoW, that's my business. Sure, I'm going to incur customs & VAT, but there is no contract.

PB isn't GW, which controls distribution to prevent global resale. PB doesn't have the same market share as GW's 40k.

How do you define grey market though? Especially in the current state of globalisation where people can get anything from anywhere.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I thought that PB already stated that the ROW stuff is "grey market" import from US distribution.

I don't recall them saying this. Just vague statements that international retailers "shouldn't have it", which doesn't mean a whole lot. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
There is no "breach of contract" - in the US, "first sale" doctrine says that you can do whatever you like with stuff. If I buy a pallet of RRT in the US, and ship it to EU/Oz/RoW, that's my business. Sure, I'm going to incur customs & VAT, but there is no contract.

Which is kind of my point. If there is no legal restriction that stops a US distributor from selling to international distributors/retailers, then it COMPLETELY craps on the PB promise that "backers will get it before retail" that became "international backers will get it before international retail". And as Sining mentioned, how do you define grey market? Because to my knowledge, PB don't have distribution points in most countries. Meaning unless an international retailer purchases direct from Palladium (which is cumbersome and costly unless they're buying a metric crap-ton of it), it's either going to purchase from a local distributor that does (which PB could have restricted), or an international, ie US based one (which you've said as much, PB can't restrict).

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
PB isn't GW, which controls distribution to prevent global resale. PB doesn't have the same market share as GW's 40k.

Maybe not. But I do know MtG (yes, another behemoth) enforces (for some definition of enforce) street dates. Though those do tend to be international.

So, I guess my point is, that after they broke the initial promise (backers before retail), and unilaterally changed it to "backers in country X before retailers in country X", they didn't even stop to consider that it was completely unenforceable, and are now bemoaning the fact that there's apparently nothing illegal, and not even really anything immoral about US distributors doing this, from the distributor's perspective. Either that, or as per the Update, not even recognizing that it's happening.

Remember, we're not talking about individuals buying from Webstores for personal use* which would be tricky, but retailers getting this in, and selling it for profit.
* Even then, some companies like WotC ARE able to enforce in some manner, location restricted shipping. I can't buy non-single MtG from US webstores, apparently due to contracts in place. And that's not one store. Noble Knight, WarStore and another (CSI? MM? I can't recall as I never purchased anything from them), all won't allow purchase of sealed MtG product. Ironically, the only thing I wanted to buy were Preconstructed Decks, but as they now come with boosters, the restriction applies.

So, should this be seen as a weakness of credibility (they knew it was never enforceable, but said it anyway), or a weakness of competency (they don't have the legal framework to enforce it, but think they did)? Cause no amount of shifting goalposts changes the fact that there are significant reports of RRT being offered for sale in retail stores in countries that aren't "supposed" to have it.

Street date is a different matter; those can be enforced contractually for most any good. However, they cannot be enforced internationally. In other words, once the street date in the US has passed, the item(s) can be sent out anywhere from a US retailer. This is typically why release dates for different regions are usually clustered together where the shipping time from A to B is going to be longer than the release window. Doing otherwise generally sours distributors in the regions that are later, as their competitors with tentacles in the earlier regions get a given commodity to market before they do. RTT is not a big enough deal that most distributors are going to notice, but it doesn't help when the lag time is measured in months and they're mulling future orders.

Now, a manufacturer can put into their sales contracts that their distributors are not allowed to sell to overseas entities, but that isn't particularly realistic in stopping things from heading over the pond and it really just nudges the price up a bit higher as it moves through an extra set of (non-contractually bound) hands. Sure, if a company knows Distributor X was doing that they could take action, but PB isn't in the position of GW or MtG to dictate. Those latter two literally keep game stores open and that's a huge amount of economic clout where angering the manufacturer could mean a heavy hit to your bottom line. PB and RTT? Likely a rounding error on most balance sheets, so they aren't really going to be in a position where they can do much more than rail against cruel market fortunes that have undermined them thusly.

Well, they could have not sold the product until they got their act together on shipping, but I have a sinking suspicion that financially that's not really an option owing to their extant contracts and finances. Anyone know how large of a print run they did for retail and where the money for that came from? I'm guessing a company that needs crowdfunding to produce books years late isn't exactly in the best financial health, especially after they've had to endure a Crisis of Treachery® and such. I'm not picking up an "evil" vibe from most of the stuff PB does; most of it is explainable as being comically short-sighted and not thinking things through all the way (which is not a trait PB is unique in possessing).

 Krinsath wrote:
Well, they could have not sold the product until they got their act together on shipping, but I have a sinking suspicion that financially that's not really an option owing to their extant contracts and finances. Anyone know how large of a print run they did for retail and where the money for that came from? I'm guessing a company that needs crowdfunding to produce books years late isn't exactly in the best financial health, especially after they've had to endure a Crisis of Treachery® and such. I'm not picking up an "evil" vibe from most of the stuff PB does; most of it is explainable as being comically short-sighted and not thinking things through all the way (which is not a trait PB is unique in possessing).

The Crisis of Treachery® was announced on April 19, 2006. That's a whole nine years ago. And the great KS announced on May 7, 2007 that they had covered most of their damages. I think they should probably stop relying on that by now.