[Gen Con 2008] Post-Mortem

[Steve Segedy]

I've found these post-Gen Con discussions interesting and helpful in the past, so let's start a new one for Gen Con Indy 2008.  What worked in the booth (and in the extended "diaspora" game space) and what didn't?  What can we improve on for next year?  Also, while there are celebratory threads elsewhere, feel free to share the best things about Gen Con here. 

For my part, this was the best year yet in Indianapolis.  I think I've finally found the balance between working the booth, seeing the show, and playing games.  How about the rest of you?

[iago]

My no-Brennan IPR bent left me seeing the same 400 square feet for most of the show. Not my favorite GenCon, but it was still a good time (helps that I'm a bit of a workaholic).

The demo-to-"sales corridor" flow seemed a bit anemic this year.  I am not sure of all of the factors, but over the course of the con I developed a hunch that it might have had something to do, in part, with the Forge regularly exporting the expertise it develops to other booths.  This is not meant as a bash on the folks who were new to the booth, and there certainly were still some standouts.  I just feel like I've seen it stronger.

Sales-wise from IPR's perspective this year was a significant (several thousand dollars) drop over last year.  There are a LOT of factors going into this.  Certainly the fact that Design Matters and Play Collective both were able to process credit cards this year helped draw some sales traffic away. Also Forge booth policy meant we could not, last minute, get John Wick a buy-in -- which sent him elsewhere with hot ticket item/traffic-draw Houses of the Blooded.  Elsewhere, he sold nearly 100 copies of Houses of the Blooded, which would have put him in first place at the Forge booth in a "doubling the top seller's sales" sort of way.  Also, IPR ended up shipping a number of hot-seller items to the show that then were taken away and not sold by IPR, but by other booths (which honestly is no problem from my perspective so long as the folks taking books away are paying a portion of the costs to ship those books to and from the show).

At the end of the convention, Ron said that it was time for the Forge and IPR to split into separate booths. I tend to agree, not as a sour grapes thing, but as a "the priorities of the two halves are definitely not lining up" way.  This has not been the healthiest of years for conventions for IPR.  We lost money by attending Origins, and I don't yet know how our costs will stack up against our revenue for GenCon.  It's clear to me, still, that IPR must have a presence at GenCon, but there will be enough changes and there are enough questions that it's also clear to me that IPR at Gencon 2009 will look significantly different from what it's been before.

[Tim C Koppang]

To be clear, it wasn't (from my perspective) that we weren't running demos.  In fact, compared with previous years, I think the downtime was pretty minimal.  Except for the usual lunch-time lull, the tables were regularly full and I had to send designers and customers to the tables in back of the booth as a matter of course.

But man, did it seem like everyone was having a tough time turning demos (even spectacular demos where everyone was laughing and yelling) into sales.  In my more frustrated moments, I kept thinking to myself: "You obviously just had a great time.  Why won't you buy this game?"

So either the attendees were tight with cash this year, or I really mis-read their reactions.

[iago]

Yes, thanks for that, Tim. That's exactly what I was meaning to indicate.

There's also a real possibility that some folks are coming by the booth to demo games they already own with the designer, so they can "see how the designer runs it".

But there was definitely also an anecdotally "fair amount" of demos that just weren't turning into sales despite all indicators to the contrary.

Definitely felt like the indie dollars were coming to the con this year, but that dollar may have been stretched out over more destinations than before.

[JustinB]

I'm with Tim. I know I did demos this year that would have been sales of the game last year. The feeling I got was that people were coming over for books they had heard buzz about before, mostly, and then not picking up much in the way of unplanned purchases. Whether demos will turn into post-GenCon sales remains to be seen. I don't actually know how Fae Noir sold this year in specific numbers, but I'd be surprised if it topped 15 or so sales and pre-con I expected it to go 20 at least. By Sunday it felt like there was no point to running demos since even from the best demos I wasn't getting sales.

I was especially disappointed with the CandyCreeps sales. We did about 15 of those and I had expected 30 to be the low-end sales number for the game, possibly even 40-50. A $13 game with fun character creation that's a good read would have been an easy impulse purchase last year, but even though we demo-ed to over 100 people this year (mostly laughing and having a good time), only one or two actually picked it up.

I'm blaming the economy, but still.

I think pretty clearly the game that really broke out was Zombie Cinema, since that DID get a ton of sales right out of demos. Anyone know what the price point on it is?

[jenskot]

I bought about 6-7 games at the Forgebooth but I didn't play any demos. They were mostly games that I heard about at Games on Demand and the Embassy Suites or before Gencon via blogs and were games I couldn't buy directly from the designer's themselves at Gencon. Talk at GoD and ES 100% influenced my decisions of what games to play and buy.

I heard much talk from others that they wouldn't buy a game unless they were sure they would play it. A few people also seemed concerned about new games they hadn't heard about and wondered why they weren't available as ashcans or preview copies first.

My attention felt split in many directions. Between all the different booths, Forge, Play Collective, Ashcan, Design Matters, Pelgrane, Burning Wheel, John Wick, wherever Andy K was... I felt I needed to check them all out first before making final purchase decisions. That being said, I felt the Forge booth was the absolute best place to browse games. Where some of the other booths felt like great places to "hang out". I don't know how that influenced sales.

Some people seemed concerned about the amount of purchases they would have to carry home (trying to avoid checking in bags at the arport) but given the small sizes of most of the games for sale, I don't think this was a significant factor.

Pitches seemed off to me. People kept pitching me based on setting and when I would ask about the mechanics they didn't seem to have an answer. Zombie Cinema kept coming up as the "hot" game but no one I spoke to could tell my why it was good other than it was awesome.

I definitely think some people play demos to learn how to play games they already own. Which could be great long term.

CandyCreeps sounds cool but I've never heard of it until now. I didn't notice it at the booth.

Related, we're discussing why 3:16 was a success here:
http://www.story-games.com/forums/comments.php?DiscussionID=7375

Rock,
John

[Ron Edwards]

Hiya,

My impressions of the demos and sales match what's been stated so far. That said, Space Rat moved quite well after all, and my impression was that most of the sales were spread through the weekend days, perhaps influenced by all the fun demos on Friday which didn't necessarily prompt immediate sales. Again, my experienced eye picked up that demo success in terms of enjoyment was very high.

Some personal discussions with other publishers, some non-independent and with very high-ticket promotion, led me to think that the con-goers were a bit tight-fisted this year, but now, other more general discussions reveal that a number of companies did quite well. I've found that public discussions of company success are a bit dubious in the non-independent business, though; people always say "it went fine! it's going great!" no matter what. So I remain a little inclined to point to the economy too, or at least willing to wait for harder data.

It's absolutely predictable that more and better independently-oriented booths, con-wide, will drop some sales for a booth that up until then was the destination site and literally the only place to get the games. I don't mind saying that as the main proprietor of the Forge booth endeavor, that's what I call success, not failure. This was and is a revolutionary strike at how the industry operates, not a venture that's measured in terms of Small Business for Dummies. Another reason to point out that the Forge, and specifically the Forge booth, is not a company or even an organization.

Anyway, though, that still leaves open the main priority at the booth, for me, which is to maximize the chances of success for the buy-in companies. This year was actually about equivalent in that regard: some of them actually sold out in the several-dozens print run; some had a harder time but I think generated recognition along with minor/moderate sales, and I don't think anyone sat lonely with no fun and no sales. I think the big surprise was How to Host a Dungeon, which by name probably generated some nervousness (it did for me), but upon arrival flew off the shelves. Still, I would have liked to see more raw funds get spent on those games overall. It kind of hurts me that we can't promote former games at the booth as well as I'd like, especially those whose designers are more focused on new projects at the con. I'd like to see Dogs and PTA and Polaris and MLWM and Unversalis and Dust Devils demos going full blast there ... but maybe I'm too ambitious about that.

Anyway, the Forge booth will be amicably separate from IPR next year - it was a great match at first but now the visions are understandably divergent. The demo tables and shelves need to be integrated again. I have some notions but will develop them further and will post them well before the end of 2008 so people won't be scrambling to make their plans. That'll be another thread.

Umm, where was I? Oh yeah, I'd like to talk about new booths and how they do and don't work, and what I (myself, on my lonesome) think might be good to consider. That's more than merely my pontificating, because what I think will inform my decisions about the Forge booth strategy for next year. I'll work up a post about that for later. All I'm sure of now is that whatever it is, it'll focus on those buy-ins as the priority, and not operate, or expect to operate, as the One Stop Shop any more. Sort of back to the energy of 2002 in a way, maybe a kind of Ashcan Front Step Two.

Best, Ron

[Steve Segedy]

I hear you about the pitches.  I feel like I did better this year than in the past, but there are just too many games at the booth to get a good grasp on them during the con.  I think the demo session on Wednesday was a good start, but due to a variety of complications, wasn't as successful as it should have been.  For next year I'd try to get it started earlier (meaning booth setup has to finish earlier) and plan to do it in a reliable space (the Embassy was off-limits to non-guests).

Without seeing a demo or reading the book, it's hard to grok the key mechanics of a new game.  It's much easier to pitch the setting.  I liked Josh's pitch for Sons of Liberty ("Do you like Freedom?") and Nick's for Candycreeps ("It's like Tim Burton's high school!").

[iago]

Some numbers.

Top selling products at the booth sold between 40 and 50 units.  (Compare to other-booth sales of hot ticket items: Houses of the Blooded close to 100, Maid RPG close to 75, etc.)

Anything in the 20's was doing VERY healthily for relative booth performance.

Anything in the teens was still fairly solid.

[rafael]

Fred, thank you for posting those numbers. It's quite reassuring.

This was my first GenCon, so I've nothing to compare it to. However, it went well for me. Though I didn't arrive until just before lunch on Friday, I was able to squeeze in a fair amount of demonstration. None of these demos led to immediate sales of my game, though I imagine that some of the demos may have led to purchases later in the con.

Fred and the IPR crew were very kind -- my game enjoyed a really nice placement on a top shelf, and they made sure that the game (all of the games, in fact) remained well-stocked throughout the event.

Ron gave several demonstrations of my game on Thursday, and people were still talking about them on Friday and Saturday. Damned decent of him.

I tried to learn other designers' games, but despite playing in several demos (Space Rat, The Shab Al-Hiri Roach, How to Host A Dungeon, Zombie Cinema, Story Cards, Thou Art But A Warrior, Grey Ranks), I didn't feel comfortable running these demos myself. However, after participating in these demo, I was better equipped to describe these games (in terms of setting, mechanics, and overall feel/theme) to customers, which proved useful more than once.

Jason's "one-sentence descriptions" document proved invaluable. This list of games featured a single-sentence description next to each title, which piqued the interest of several potential customers. There were only one or two copies left on the last day of the con, so the number brought to the event was adequate.

As far as I could tell, the demo tables were near capacity through much of the con. Despite occasional lulls, the activity was generally quite frenetic. As noted, this didn't always translate into sales, but it seems that there are several possible explanations for this.

[Nathan P.]

From across the aisle, the energy at the Forge/IPR booth seemed high and positive, but it seemed like there were two audiences (understandably) - the people there to buy games, and the people there to check out the demos. With the demos being "the Forge Booth Thing" by now, I don't think it's a wonder that people coming to the booth are aiming to experience those without necessarily having the intention to actually buy anything. That's a "in my head" thing, not something I can back up, but maybe it'll be helpful to consider. I know analyzing the successes and failures of our in-booth demo experiences led to Kevin and I deciding not to have demos at our booth.

For what it's worth, we will be publishing all of the information we can about how the Design Matters booth worked out, in terms of sales, units moved, and so on, hopefully next week (as we all take some time to breath, run the numbers, and draw some conclusions). We want to be a solid data point for future booth endeavors. Some quick things: we moved 161 units over the weekend, with 3:16 being the standout (at 50 even). Here's the initial breakdown, pending a final doublecheck:

3:16 = 50
Sweet Agatha = 37
Empire of Dust = 18
Solipsist = 8
Urchin = 2
Roanoke = 5
Best Friends = 4
Bizenghast = 6
carry = 4
Dread = 14
Annalise = 12

Our goal for the con was to break even, and we ended up turning a small profit. I'll be interested to see how our sales of back-catalog items compares to IPR sales.

Anyway, I apologize if this is diluting the thread, but I hope some of that info is helpful to you as you start thinking about next year, Ron.

[Steve Segedy]

Not a dilution at all, Nathan!  That's good, solid information and I'm glad you guys made your money back and then some.  I look forward to seeing the rest of your analysis.

[Andy Kitkowski]

Heya, this is just coming from an outsider this year (and IPR big spendah), but I too think that a Forge/IPR split would be best, after seeing the booth and hearing reactions about sales.

I'm wondering if the Forge booth is too big, basically. And the stress of tying the Forge booth (in the dealer's hall)'s original goals of "help promote and demo independent games, show awareness" is direct in conflict with the feelings bound up with wanting to/expecting to sell product.

In short, I'm wondering if having an IPR booth with a very small play demo area, and then having all the people who normally sell their wares run *actual, scheduled events of their games in the GenCon event catalog* might be a better way to meet both the goals of the Forge to introduce independently produced games and the DIY culture, and the IPR goals of turning product.

Maybe turn those 15 minute demos into several 1-hour demos in the gaming area, or full 4-hour sessions. List them in the catalog, so that people actually show up with tickets to play. Games on Demand might also assist in this purpose, but I'm also kinda loathe to see *everyone* showing up to run their 15 minute demos there instead, when people are expecting to play in something new for 4 hours or so.

Some models I saw:
Remember Ad Astra games, who historically ended up with a booth next to The Forge? Ken, realizing that exhibition floor space wasn't cutting it, took his show to a corner of the miniatures hall, and "set up shop" there. They ran lots of scheduled events, as well as constant 15-minute demos of the game (and also were cleared, I believe, to sell their game from the minis room). It worked out well for them: Raised a lot of awareness, they had a lot more space to stretch out, and they sold out of all their product.
In the case of The Forge, a takeaway might be to emulate that sort of thing, but simply handing out fliers at the end of their demos or sessions to lead people to the IPR booth in the con hall instead of selling directly from non-dealer space.

In any case, I'm thinking that actually scheduling demo events (be it 4-hour "real sessions" or multiple 1-hour "demo sessions", each GM listing and running their own game's events) might be hotter, and quieter, than running small demos for passersby and eagerly hoping that they then buy the game.

-Andy
(oh, forgot my experience, will share in next post)

[Andy Kitkowski]

But man, did it seem like everyone was having a tough time turning demos (even spectacular demos where everyone was laughing and yelling) into sales.  In my more frustrated moments, I kept thinking to myself: "You obviously just had a great time.  Why won't you buy this game?"

So again, I think a split between the expectations of Promoting Games through demos and Selling Games will be healthy and helpful here.

But, having said that: I sat in two demos (both which were awesome, BTW: Story Cards and How to Host a Dungeon): I couldn't help but overhear a cry that was brandied about by the booth folks, "Ropers!": It seemed to me that it was to "rope" passersby into trying a demo.
I would totally not expect sales from people roped into demos. I'd expect more sales from people who came in, saw a game, and *asked* for a demo before purchasing.

Ex: I saw the Blasphemy board game. The guy running the booth launched forward and gave me the breakdown of his game as I was passing by. Really nice guy, mind, and not pushy or anything at all. But I was just passing by and peeking at the thing because it was big, blasphemous and colorful, not because I cared one way or the other about buying it. So I heard his 10 minute thing, smiled and walked away thinking that I'd like to play a game or two before buying. Essentially, that's little different than being roped into a demo: It's colorful and fun-looking, and I'm there to see what it's all about, not to commit to buy. So, in other words, I'm wondering if these feelings aren't another way that the blend of "promoting games" and "selling games" aren't causing false expectations/stress.

Now, for my own experience with the Forge Booth: On my *second* run through to pick up a bunch of stuff (Solar System, frex) I saw the Story Cards decks. Looking around the white table, I found the demo packet, which had the deck of cards. The cards looked evocative and very interesting. The demo pack had a full-color 8x11 instruction book and character sheets. I picked up a deck of cards (sealed) but couldn't find the character sheets. I asked around, 5 people in total, where the instructions for the game were. No one knew. No one knew who the author was, either (the next day I found out that he was *actually at the Forge booth*, and I got a demo from him). After looking around the stacks, the buy sheet etc for help, I gave up, and put the cards back on the table.
It was only then that one of the booth people (forgot who, very helpful though) looked closely at the deck box, and noticed that it indicated that the rules and character sheets were freely downloadable PDFs online from the clearly listed URL on the box. So I ended up picking up the card deck after all, now that I knew it was expected that one downloads the instructions online. But it struck me afterwards that 5 people had no idea what was up with the game, knew the author (who was probably actually standing a few feet away at the time), and that only after looking at the product for the first time were they able to help me square up with my questions.

Not that I'm beating a drum or anything, I rolled with the Forge booth a few years and had a great time. It's just that I think cutting the umbilical cord between "promoting independently-created games and the DIY process" and "selling games" is going to be healthier in the long run, even if it means that the presence in the dealer's hall shrinks some.

-Andy

[Jason Morningstar]

Since everything is getting shaken up, many of my comments have been obviated.  Here are some general thoughts.

1.  The Forge Booth has been a "tentpole" destination.   People will come to Gen Con 2009 looking for the Forge Booth. 

2.  Other booths either rejected the Forge Booth association or rallied to it, but either way there was both some direct benefit and sales cannibalism going on.

3.  Regarding sales cannibalism, this will be an issue for IPR when it stands alone.  If Bully Pulpit Games is shilling our products from our own booth, say, that's going to have a negative impact on both of us. 

4.  I'm concerned about new guys and cheap buy-ins.  The Forge booth plan helped support me for two years and I feel that there needs to be a conscious effort to support new creators.  I'd love to see Design Matters or Play Collective embrace cool weird people outside their circles, for example.  What happens to Ashcan Front alumnus? 

Thinking, thinking,

--Jason