I know, fill in the good excuses, a good excuse doesn’t make stock appear. All I want to say is next time FFG rolls out a copy of an actually good game like Descent, they should keep the supplements in stock. I just don’t buy games like I used to from ffg because of this.

Searching other retailers is painful, and none I know have everything since FFG doesn’t. If the game is good enough, it should keep selling.

Unless I’m wrong and people don’t think it’s as good a game as I do. But I have a hard time imagining that.

As someone who owns everything D1e & D2e, and is a game completionist, I feel your pain ...

Still, I am honestly curious about something ...

How long do you expect a company to continue producing and selling a game?

D1e was originally released in 2005. D2e in 2012. Should they have stock of everything for 5 years? 10 years, 50 years? At some point, it becomes unreasonable to expect the game to be in active publication. Nor would it be reasonable to have stock maintained after a certain point in time.

What is your expectation? Say the game could sell 10 or 50 or 100 or 1000 copies a year worldwide? What is sufficient sales to maintain stock?

Further, if a new version of a game (however loosely tied it is to the previous version) is released, such as D2e to D1e, how long should you still be able to get D1e?

Just from Asmodee catalogue: Catan and Ticket to Ride. Will they suffer the same treatment as Descent?

FFG was customer driven (i.e. provide good products to players); Asmodee is money driven (i.e. drop games that don't sell "enough"). FFG "must" follow Asmodee "rules.

Catan was out in 1995, TtR in 2004: are they better than Descent? Maybe or maybe not, but they sell more copies and that's why the are not dropped.

Another thing: why a 3rd Descent iteration when people still want Descent 2nd? We will see what they offer, but IMHO they are just chasing "easy money".

Finally, I enjoyed FFG in the Petersen era; I don't like Asmodee/FFG and I don't think it is FFG fault.

Reversi (1883) remained relatively unchanged for 88 years until it was revamped as Othello in 1971. If they don't release an Othello big box expansion soon, I'm just going to sell and move on to Ming Mang.

@any2cards How long? There is no time limit at all on how long a good game sells for. The only reason games are cut off is to make you buy the game again. If there's no Descent 2, then when Descent 3 comes out, people have to buy it. It's completely manufactured.

Risk isn't that good a game, and yet do you think anyone is going to stop producing Risk? Things were never different until people started participating in the disposable economy. And that's when you started having 'special editions' of Risk come out. But you can still buy Risk, the base game, forever.

In fact, as someone mentioned, Ticket to Ride, you can buy that game forever.

Editions are a fallacy. There is no scarcity in gaming except that instituted by game companies themselves, and when it comes to Descent, I have to think it is straight greed. Descent would sell plenty, 1st or 2nd edition if it was around.

Anyway, I'm on my soap box. There's something wrong with a company that can't be happy selling a good game and keeping it in stock. I just think it makes little sense and this is why I end up buying less FFG games now. I really don't want to, I'd rather buy Descent 2nd ed from FFG. But I feel forced to look other places now, that's all.

The competitive market is what drives a new version of Descent. Catan and Ticket to Ride do not have a competitive theme like Descent. Gloomhaven, and other dungeon crawls are pushing new versions of Descent. I do wish instead of a new versions or re-brands they would keep the old sets relevant and playable through conversion kits. I believe Descent 2 ed could stay the way it is and continue to have new campaigns. The base system is strong and should be updated with RPG options and a skirmish mode. They could also create a legacy style campaign, which is where I think the new game version is going.

On 8/15/2020 at 2:46 PM, brikabrakafirecraker said:

The competitive market is what drives a new version of Descent. Catan and Ticket to Ride do not have a competitive theme like Descent. Gloomhaven, and other dungeon crawls are pushing new versions of Descent. I do wish instead of a new versions or re-brands they would keep the old sets relevant and playable through conversion kits. I believe Descent 2 ed could stay the way it is and continue to have new campaigns. The base system is strong and should be updated with RPG options and a skirmish mode. They could also create a legacy style campaign, which is where I think the new game version is going.

I love descent, but the game does have flaws. Sometimes a new edition is exactly what a game needs.