Thread in which I share my thoughts in response to the below, which might be tired and unhappy and not even useful. If you have things to add, feel free to leave a comment, but I am going to request you not tell me I'm being overly negative even if that's your impression. [1] https://twitter.com/KDavidson925/status/1278915446666752000

Ok. So.
Starting off, I am an aro ace non-binary woman. Those factors make me marginalised. I'm also white, thin and financially stable. That makes me privileged.

Most of the people who do well in the TTRPG industry - and any industry really - are rich white cishet men. [2]

There are a lot of online resources about privilege and discrimination, but for the purpose of this thread, consider the demographics of:
1) leaders of large TTRPG companies.
2) game journalists with large platforms.
3) popular game designers.
4) popular streamers. [3]

Now to Ken's point: how do I get the broader market to look at my games/supplements? Here's where I've had the MOST views:
1) publishing on DMsGuild and using the D&D brand.
2) charity sales, especially the Itch bundle.
3) giving things away for free.

My profit: 50%, 0%, 0%. [4]

There are a bunch of really good reasons NOT to use DMsGuild (IP control, margins, exclusivity, Mike Mearls etc), but it gets me way more sales than the other platforms I use with a fraction of the effort. That's because it's tied to the D&D/WotC brand. [5]

Giving things away for free can absolutely get you more downloads/views than paid stuff, but in my experience that doesn't translate to sales. The freebie market (for want of a better term) seems to be basically a separate customer base to the "buyer" market. [6]

Charity sales are an interesting one. Even though I don't earn revenue off these sales, it's still targeting the "buyer" market, not the freebie market. Customers are buying both a charity donation and a game. Direct donation options exist, but they rely on pure selflessness. [7]

(Cynicism ahoy)

The vast majority of those who bought the Itch bundle paid the minimum $5 price. That's despite the fact that the recommended price was $10 and that customers were prompted to tip, with all funds going to charity. [8]

Of course, there could be many reasons for that, including pandemic related financial pressure, but here's what I'll suggest: while the bundle earned a huge amount of cash for charity (and again: holy shit, $8m), that's not the sole reason why people bought it. [9]

In a way, that's just more evidence that the bundle was a good idea: because you're raising funds for a fantastic cause from people who (again, making unfair generalizations) are stingy with their cash.

(Nearly 2,000 games for $5, c'mon bruh, at least give us $10.)

[10]

Anyway, putting aside selflessness, let's look at the key reasons why that bundle was successful. Sadly, I can't claim much credit here.

Cage of Sand has been downloaded around 3,000 times since the bundle launched. The bundle sold 814,651 copies. [11]

Looking at the tweets from the bundle, here are a few common threads:
1) Whoa, so many games! Where do I even start??
2) Celeste!
3) Overland!
4) Night in the Woods!

The quantity here definitely helped, but the bundle "hype" focused on a small number of popular games. [12]

So, my theory is:

1) people tend to play games based on either direct recommendations from a friend or by hearing it repeatedly hyped by different sources. Or both.

2) most people bought the bundle with a specific game(s) in mind. Some also checked out the "bonus" games. [13]

Good news for me: I've had a bunch of new follows recently, and even a few new sales. Plus that's 3,000 more downloads of Cage of Sand than I usually get. Also: $8m to charity, whoa.

Bad news: turns out the best way to market my game is leeching off the success of others? [14]

In this case, a lot of indie designers sacrificed a lot of income for the sake of raising funds to charity. The bundle was a huge success, even if I wish the minimum donation had been a little higher. But let's say instead that there's a for-profit bundle with similar rules. [15]

Let's say that one of those big name games did a rev share bundle with a bunch of smaller names, especially marginalised devs. Let's say it's much smaller than the ~1,700 game bundle.

Theoretically, the big name dev loses a bunch of cash to the small name dev. [16]

On the one hand, that's great! Eat the rich, comrades. On the other hand:
1) the TTRPG industry is dominated by missing stairs and lacks diversity.
2) the small games are "bonus content" that may or may not get used.
3) since when is WotC or Paizo generous enough to do this? [17]

So, you might be wondering at this point: Luci, how about instead of dragging WotC or Paizo down to your level and expecting them to lift you up you just improve your marketing and compete with them fairly? If they got up there, you can too!

And to that I say HAHAHAHAHAHA [18]

Which is code for "I'm tired and depressed and I can't capitalism alone" ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

Welp. Going back to the point on marketing, to make my product sell I must:
1) have a good product.
2) make people aware of my product.
3) convince them that my product is worth their money. [19]

(This is probably the longest thread I've ever written, and I'm not even done yet.)

My point here is that I've seen a lot of really dedicated people sink a lot of time and effort into marketing and still struggle to gain traction. So yes, I could definitely work harder, BUT [20]

I kinda wish it was acknowledged more often that the big players in TTRPGs - WotC, Paizo, Crit Role or whoever - could absolutely uplift marginalised devs if they wanted. Even if it's not a bundle. Even when it's just saying, "hey, this is cool" to a product that's not D&D. [21]

Anyway. Here's what I CAN do:
1) put more effort into my own marketing once I'm no longer tired and depressed.
2) figure out how to uplift other devs. Things like reviews on my blog or arranging more game swaps.
3) promise I won't get to the point of not caring about #2. [22/end]