One thing that I have noticed, over the last ten years or so, is that GW is not exactly shining in the public eye - and in this past year or so they have started looking downright awful, in regards to good public relation.

Their public image is becoming tarnished.

So, quite aside from monetary matters - what can GW do to put some shine back on their image?

Once upon a time they backed tournaments that benefited charity - some of those tournaments still happen, but as far as I know they no longer get any support from GW, just from the clubs and groups that sponsor them.

I think that GW needs to start doing that again - They need to be seen in public wearing the white hats, now and again.

The Auld Grump

I dont know. Stop the human and kitten sacrifice?

Kidding aside. They need a social media manager and an actual plan of how to engage with the customer.

Engage in social media.

Host tournaments. They don't have to be ultra-competitive hard boys tournaments. Just some 30k events (fully painted) or some other themed tournaments with prizes given for sportsmanship and paint jobs. Show case your goddam hobby! Bring in new people.

Release a "mini-rulebook" thats ~$20.

Free hugs.

Having a bit of feed back and a better FAQ system would help.


and the generic lower prices yadiyadda.

The first step must be to start engaging with the fans and customers a little more. Take player feedback on board or at least answer their questions as openly as they can. I believe when GW Digital had a presence on Facebook it was pretty well received, and they were fairly active in answering questions and teasing releases.

They also need to stop their violent persecution of non-GW minis. People are becoming far more cosmopolitan in gaming as more games and minis become available, and GW need to realise and accept that there is a thriving hobby beyond their own system. I'm not asking them to suddenly start advertising Mantic or Wyrd or Infinity, but less of the 'there is only GW, nothing else exists' would be nice. Instead of discouraging conversion kits and the like, start being accepting of them and realise that people still need to buy GW kits to use Chapterhouse/Kromlech/Anvil parts.

Basically, they need to be nicer.

Having enough manpower in their stores to run events.

Actually my every interaction with official GW has been very pleasant. I played some games in their store without buying anything and never felt unwelcome. When I did buy something, the dude gave me extra bits that I needed (instead of just telling me to buy another kit).

When I was a kid they let me play in an event despite my having an illegal force composed almost entirely of the Gretchen from the starter box. I have friends who say that GW customer service is second to none concerning damaged or miscast models.

Honestly I think most of the hate they get is related to their handling of the game itself. This, in my opinion, is almost inevitable. Whenever you have a game played by a large community, any change you make is going to ruffle some feathers.

That and the price/quality of codexes.

Write a clean ruleset. Less changing between editions and more fixing. Do that, and all is forgiven.

Basically, they would have to change everything about them.
Stop taking people to court and threatening legal action on every carbon based life form.
Start interacting with the customers, those dirty peasants clambering about their fortress walls.
Recognize problems and address them.
Run events again.
Stop treating FLGS's like they're the enemy.

Some of this has already been stated, but i will repeat for effect.

1. Better PR. - GW makes a good product, but the perceived image is that it is over costed. Please notice I said good, and not great or the best.

2. Value - I have been playing since around 2000. I have seen prices increase and I have seen people scream about it, myself included. I recently found a Tact squad from that era. It included 7 regular bolter guys, a Sgt with pistol and Chainsword, a Missile Launcher guy and a flamer. Compare that to what you get now, you now get the bits to make a plasma gun, melta, flamer, power sword, power fist. Is it worth the increase in price? That's up to the buyer. However, other kits have increased in price and decreased in number of models. I'm looking at guardian squads and Dire Avengers. They can add value to the kits without raising prices and it can help with this issue.

3. Bits - Bring back the bits catalog and bit ordering.

4. Community support - GW use to give prize support for local tournaments. This helped the community grow. Games Day and GT's also helped to support and grow the community. As I have mentioned in other post, GW cannot lower prices without dramatically increasing the number of units sold. The only way to do that is to reach out and grow the community.

Fire Tom Kirby

Apologize for the Chapterhouse Studios litigation (blame Tom Kirby)

Apologize for Spots the Space Marine (blame Tom Kirby)

Revise trade terms with retailers (blame Tom Kirby)

Bring back specialist games

Make a gutsy, risky rules update, even if it is in the form of a brand new game/product line

Attend more conventions with a bigger presence (and give away some free gak)

Reduce the price of digital supplements

IMO Games Workshop's bad public image is concentrated among veterans. Most new recruits either have a positive view or, like the majority of the public, don't have any view.

Thus if GW want to improve the situation they ought to stop doing the things veterans have been complaining about, and start doing the things that veterans are asking for.

Unfortunately this would seem to require GW to reverse 80% of the decisions they have taken over the past five years., and a lot of the stuff cannot easily be reversed now.

Get more involved with the players. Make a rules system and codices that favor a cleaner and more balanced game. Lose the whole 'We're not a game company, we're a narritive company that sells loose rules, so the players can forge a narritive' attitude. Take some responsibility for your product, most people will abuse crappy rules sets to make Cheesy and/or Uber powered list to make for unfriendly and no fun games, which result in dwindling player base and thus losing profits.

Get rid of the Kirby cronyism gravy train.

Put the blokes in charge of customer service in charge of public relations.

Re-release specialist games. Or allow FW to run with them as official products.

As Weeble said, release a new game to pull people back into the fold. EG, release a skirmish game designed purely for a small number of figures.

Step back and reconsider the rules for their core games and rather than cash grab, issue a concise clearly written rules. I, personally, wouldn't mind paying £70/£80 for a set of rules if no-one could drive a bus through them.

War gear. Re-release the old war gear book, updated of course and deconflict them!

Start treating their customers as an asset, not a money pit.

Cheers

Andrew

PS, accept that the internet exists and is not some passing fad.

Right now the focus is on minimal effort to get dividends.
No real plan for the future of the company (the one in charge does not need to think that far).

ANY kind of media footprint other than an online store would be a great start.

Host some events like any other competitor is doing.

Only litigate obvious rip-offs of their stuff, not those they think can't fight back (perceived as a bully).

Some form of two-way communication / interaction with customers.

This would be a great start, there could be much more but baby steps...

Start communicating with customers in a genuine manner. They don't even feign respect for customers, with a 'they buy what we sell' attitude as well treating everyone that comes in the door as a cash machine rather than any part of a hobby community.

Stop treeing their weight around regarding other companies and third party suppliers. They don't hurt the 'GW hobby' and it looks petty and mean spirited. It doesn't win many fans and breeds a lot of resentment.

Hypothetically, if GW engages in social medial, even if disgruntled veterans are mainly reasonable people who post constructive comments, there may still be a minority who may choose to bring their vents into whatever social media GW may come up with.

In these cases, should they self-censor? By deleting the vents? Or might that be construed by some as still hearing what they want to hear? Or ignoring it and leaving everything for the public to read? Rant/vent/trash and all?

 milkboy wrote:
Hypothetically, if GW engages in social medial, even if disgruntled veterans are mainly reasonable people who post constructive comments, there may still be a minority who may choose to bring their vents into whatever social media GW may come up with.

In these cases, should they self-censor? By deleting the vents? Or might that be construed by some as still hearing what they want to hear? Or ignoring it and leaving everything for the public to read? Rant/vent/trash and all?

Greatly depends on the person posting, the nature of the comment, and the frequency of the comment.

Let's just say, for instance, that GW- Valhalla opens up, and they have their GW FB page for shop updates, etc. and someone posts "GW, your products suck monkey nuts, I can't believe you're still around, I hope you die in a fire" then, yeah... that should probably be dealt with. A PM, or even a public message, "hey, that's really not called for. I'm sorry you've had a bad experience in the past. If there's something we can do to fix that, let me know" If this person comments about every other comment on a FB thread, with these same trollish remarks, then yeah, they should be removed.

If I hopped onto a GW social media site, and said "hey, what's the deal with X codex, and the prices of this rule book!? I'm done with this game, it's too damn expensive" that is far less inflammatory, and gives them an opportunity to "make things right" with the customer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As to what I'd suggest personally.. Well, for starters they need to tighten up the rules.release schedules (by this I mean clean things up, give us a better working product, instead of a "deadline" that will be shipped regardless of whether product is ready)

Also, more "sneak peak" time. If I have a month or more to drool over something, it's going to heighten, or lessen my desire to get that product. As well as deciding whether I want something, it allows me time to save up money to get whatever it is.

 milkboy wrote:
Hypothetically, if GW engages in social medial, even if disgruntled veterans are mainly reasonable people who post constructive comments, there may still be a minority who may choose to bring their vents into whatever social media GW may come up with.

Well, yes, of course there will.

That's part of the point of opening up communication with their customer base. It's not just for people to pat them on the head and say 'well done!'...


However they chose to approach it, it would take some time for that negative opinion to thaw.

 insaniak wrote:

 milkboy wrote:
Hypothetically, if GW engages in social medial, even if disgruntled veterans are mainly reasonable people who post constructive comments, there may still be a minority who may choose to bring their vents into whatever social media GW may come up with.

Well, yes, of course there will.

That's part of the point of opening up communication with their customer base. It's not just for people to pat them on the head and say 'well done!'...


However they chose to approach it, it would take some time for that negative opinion to thaw.

I doubt there are many who will be saying well done. Do you?

 milkboy wrote:


I doubt there are many who will be saying well done. Do you?

No, and with good reason.

Hence why they should be engaging with the customer base. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

Shrivel up and die.

Or burn Tom Kirby at the stake.

Either works for me.

As has been mentioned the first thing they should do is re-establish an online social media presence with a team dedicated to that role. It really is quite possibly the cheapest and most effective means of improving their image among fans.

Before GW HQ shut them down the FW and GW Digital facebook pages had little to no ranting and shouting (especailly when compared to your typical forum) despite being the only means of communication between the customers and the design studio. The staff of those pages actively enganged in conversation answering rules questions and product queries.

Beta Testing:
Look at steam early access & Kickstarter, people are paying money to playtest an unfinished product and take on the role of QA. IF GW is that woried about their secrecy do a closed beta and have testers sign NDAs. Public beta testing of their games would improve the relationship between customer & company as well as improving the quality of their games.

They need to engage with the customer. being proud of your ignorance in regards to your customers and stating "we do no market research" is idiotic.

Apparently some people have difficulty realising when I use sarcasm. So I will preface my comment with my sarcasm tags [ sarcasm ] [/ sarcasm ]

How could they improve their public image?

[ sarcasm ]Maybe get the board filmed having their way with a stray goat and have it go viral?

It'd still be an improvement on what they have now. [ / sarcasm ]

 chromedog wrote:
Apparently some people have difficulty realising when I use sarcasm. So I will preface my comment with my sarcasm tags [ sarcasm ] [/ sarcasm ]

How could they improve their public image?

[ sarcasm ]Maybe get the board filmed having their way with a stray goat and have it go viral?

It'd still be an improvement on what they have now. [ / sarcasm ]

I don't think that would work very well. I am taking your post as a serious suggestion.

 chromedog wrote:
Apparently some people have difficulty realising when I use sarcasm. So I will preface my comment with my sarcasm tags [ sarcasm ] [/ sarcasm ]

How could they improve their public image?

[ sarcasm ]Maybe get the board filmed having their way with a stray goat and have it go viral?

It'd still be an improvement on what they have now. [ / sarcasm ]

*Watches film on YouTube*

Hunh, so GW is working on their new line of full scale beastmen....

The Auld Grump, if the video goes viral, does that make the result a Nurgle beastman?

 Blacksails wrote:

 milkboy wrote:


I doubt there are many who will be saying well done. Do you?

No, and with good reason.

Hence why they should be engaging with the customer base. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away.

Actually, that's exactly what appears to be happening to the customer base!

 milkboy wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 milkboy wrote:
Hypothetically, if GW engages in social medial, even if disgruntled veterans are mainly reasonable people who post constructive comments, there may still be a minority who may choose to bring their vents into whatever social media GW may come up with.

Well, yes, of course there will.

That's part of the point of opening up communication with their customer base. It's not just for people to pat them on the head and say 'well done!'...


However they chose to approach it, it would take some time for that negative opinion to thaw.

I doubt there are many who will be saying well done. Do you?

The thing is that just interacting with people helps - I have posted questions on the Paizo message board, and gotten answers from the CEO of the company!

There are places where they have admitted mistakes that they have made, and either asked for or given suggestions on how to fix it.

My favorite on the Paizo board was somebody's idea for a summoner villain - where the eidolon had an agenda of its own, and had been using summoner after summoner to advance that agenda, killing them off as they became a liability.

The reply came back that that was not at all how the eidolon/summoner relationship worked - but that they were so stealing that idea anyway, for their own game.

The Reaper board is also very active - and people from the company interact every day.

And this interaction is building a community. A feeling of shared interests.

The Auld Grump

You will find that kind of interaction and service will allow people to forgive more too. A company that chats to their customers, informs their customers and treats them will will be given the benefit of the doubt. Places that treat customers poorly will not. There are some places that the customer service makes me willing to pay more for and their are other places that I have had bad customer service experience with that I would never buy from again no matter how cheap.

Stop treating their customers like complete morons addicted to their product that will roll over and ask for another " but this time, put some STANK on it!"

The first think is get rid of Tom Kirby and his yes men.
Then appoint a CEO that understands this niche market and the importance of social media in the current market.
Also that the company is called "Games Workshop" not "Miniature Market".

Tom Kirby and the Yes Men.

Sounds like a country band.

1.) Not treat the customers as the enemy

2.) Engage with the customers

3.) Embrace social media like every other company in the 21st century

4.) Listen to customers

5.) Have a PR department. GW actually doesn't have one, which is impressive

6.) End the general mean-spirited, spiteful, secretive attitude GW has with its customer base.

I don't think free beer would help them now.

I dunno about the rest of the world but I'm pretty sure in Australia it has gotten out to the point where GW could give out free puppis with each purchase and people would give 'em the ol' stink eye anyway and try to figure out their angle.

 darefsky wrote:
I dont know. Stop the human and kitten sacrifice?

Kidding aside. They need a social media manager and an actual plan of how to engage with the customer.

+1. There's times I think the problem is not Games Workshop, but the fact that the world changed and they stayed the same.

People talk about the hobby all over the internet and they do nothing to control the message. Having someone build them a new website does little to change the fact that they need to communicate better.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 darefsky wrote:
I dont know. Stop the human and kitten sacrifice?

Kidding aside. They need a social media manager and an actual plan of how to engage with the customer.

+1. There's times I think the problem is not Games Workshop, but the fact that the world changed and they stayed the same.

People talk about the hobby all over the internet and they do nothing to control the message. Having someone build them a new website does little to change the fact that they need to communicate better.

I've been with them from the beginning. They've changed. They used to interact with their players. They used to have whole articles on how to convert minis or make scenery. They used to be passionate about what they did.
I think the reason I feel all their latest products have been boring is because they've bee soulless.

 techsoldaten wrote:

 darefsky wrote:
I dont know. Stop the human and kitten sacrifice?

Kidding aside. They need a social media manager and an actual plan of how to engage with the customer.

+1. There's times I think the problem is not Games Workshop, but the fact that the world changed and they stayed the same.

People talk about the hobby all over the internet and they do nothing to control the message. Having someone build them a new website does little to change the fact that they need to communicate better.

And the new website actually offers less reason to visit, unless all you want to do is engage in your favorite hobby of buying GW miniatures. (Really... some of the things that fall out of Kirby's mouth should have gotten him shot by now....)

The Auld Grump

Make a subsidiary that doesn't use Citadel or the GW name (avoid the brand as much as possible) and make a new game and new line (but you have to do it well*).

It will start slow but sales will increase and hopefully cannibalise their core games and you start diverting funds to it slowly as the core games slowly become irrelevant as they have kept moving upmarket and shrinking.

*Of course, the new line and behaviour around it must be drastically different to their current paradigm.

 Daba wrote:
Make a subsidiary that doesn't use Citadel or the GW name (avoid the brand as much as possible) and make a new game and new line (but you have to do it well*).

It will start slow but sales will increase and hopefully cannibalise their core games and you start diverting funds to it slowly as the core games slowly become irrelevant as they have kept moving upmarket and shrinking.

*Of course, the new line and behaviour around it must be drastically different to their current paradigm.

Mantic

Put the hobby back into the Hobby and actuall try to create a community instead of a customer base.

I don't think GW are trying to create a customer base.

They simply assume it is there.

 adamsouza wrote:

 Daba wrote:
Make a subsidiary that doesn't use Citadel or the GW name (avoid the brand as much as possible) and make a new game and new line (but you have to do it well*).

It will start slow but sales will increase and hopefully cannibalise their core games and you start diverting funds to it slowly as the core games slowly become irrelevant as they have kept moving upmarket and shrinking.

*Of course, the new line and behaviour around it must be drastically different to their current paradigm.

Mantic

Lol. Yea, GW's poor brand management basically created Mantic's business model.

Reduce prices. Sell bits.

I won't hold my breath.

I don't think we'll ever see the return of bitz direct from GW.

There is not enough incentive for GW to do it, especially since there is already a 3rd party aftermarket handling it already.

 adamsouza wrote:

There is not enough incentive for GW to do it, especially since there is already a 3rd party aftermarket handling it already.

The only real incentive that I could see is that they could severely undercut (though they wouldn't) the 3rd party prices due to the parts being in house.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
One thing that I have noticed, over the last ten years or so, is that GW is not exactly shining in the public eye - and in this past year or so they have started looking downright awful, in regards to good public relation.

Their public image is becoming tarnished.

So, quite aside from monetary matters - what can GW do to put some shine back on their image?

Once upon a time they backed tournaments that benefited charity - some of those tournaments still happen, but as far as I know they no longer get any support from GW, just from the clubs and groups that sponsor them.

I think that GW needs to start doing that again - They need to be seen in public wearing the white hats, now and again.

So what you're asking is, "What can GW do to make themselves look superficially better, without actually fixing their behaviour?"

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

There is not enough incentive for GW to do it, especially since there is already a 3rd party aftermarket handling it already.

The only real incentive that I could see is that they could severely undercut (though they wouldn't) the 3rd party prices due to the parts being in house.

They could, but I agree with your assessment that they would not.

GW sees the bitz biz and undercutting the sales of their complete kits.

Also, we are no longer in the age of metal models. It was easy to melt and recast unused portions of a model. The same can not be done with plastic models.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
One thing that I have noticed, over the last ten years or so, is that GW is not exactly shining in the public eye - and in this past year or so they have started looking downright awful, in regards to good public relation.

Their public image is becoming tarnished.

So, quite aside from monetary matters - what can GW do to put some shine back on their image?

Once upon a time they backed tournaments that benefited charity - some of those tournaments still happen, but as far as I know they no longer get any support from GW, just from the clubs and groups that sponsor them.

I think that GW needs to start doing that again - They need to be seen in public wearing the white hats, now and again.

So what you're asking is, "What can GW do to make themselves look superficially better, without actually fixing their behaviour?"

No, I am asking what GW can do to fix their public image at the same time as fixing their other problems.

The quickest, and cheapest is to start talking and to start listening - both to their customers and their independent retailers.

I do not like their current rules - and do not play them.

But there are lots of games that I do not like that are doing just fine.

I... do not like the crap that they are making using CAD software - and there are plenty of much better miniatures being made with exactly that sort of software!

But if I were to point at GW's biggest single failing, it is that they rely on word of mouth advertising, then go and piss on the people that they are relying on for that word of mouth. (Not pissing off - definitely pissing on.)

The indie stores and the veterans.

And fixing that does come down to public relations and fixing their public image.

At this point, even if I did like the rules and miniatures, and felt that they were worth the money, I would not be buying from GW - and that is entirely a matter of having a terrible reputation as being a bunch of complete kneebiters.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

 darefsky wrote:
I dont know. Stop the human and kitten sacrifice?

Kidding aside. They need a social media manager and an actual plan of how to engage with the customer.

+1. There's times I think the problem is not Games Workshop, but the fact that the world changed and they stayed the same.

People talk about the hobby all over the internet and they do nothing to control the message. Having someone build them a new website does little to change the fact that they need to communicate better.

And the new website actually offers less reason to visit, unless all you want to do is engage in your favorite hobby of buying GW miniatures. (Really... some of the things that fall out of Kirby's mouth should have gotten him shot by now....)

The Auld Grump

I honestly find their website much harder to use now than before the redesign. No idea what they spent that money on but it wasn't on improving the customer interface.

I think they kinda messed up when they went public, honestly. So small a niche market should not have a corporation trying to run stores that sell only their niche market product. It's really weird, honestly, and they're the only company I can think of that has made such an insane move. If you want to run a hobby store, run a store that sells all kinds of hobby stuff, not just product that you make. Pretending you don't have competition doesn't mean you have no competition. They need to embrace that single fact and work around that. They really need to work social media, and stop trying to do everything themselves. In the US at least, there's little GW presence. We just have hobby stores that carry the models that we buy from. Help these stores run events to promote the game. And I don't just mean tournaments. Send free paints and brushes and a box infantry models to the shops so they can run paint classes. Send free swag. Instead of selling your digital rules yourself, print out some more accessible physical compilations. The problem right now is that they're trying to run everything like a car company. You make little plastic soldiers, not cadillacs. You don't have car dealerships, you have hobby shops where your models are going to be sitting on a shelf next to a bunch of competitors products. Show some love and stop looking down your nose at everyone. Make starter sets that have rulebooks and codexes in them, so the cost of entry isn't so absurdly high. Face it, this is an addictive hobby. Not making an absurd profit on a starter set shouldn't be an issue. Don't worry about tanks and fancy units, just stick a generic HQ and two small units of infantry and the codex in a box, and charge like 50 bucks. They'd make money on paints when new players get into it. First hit should always be cheap, if not free

Maybe GW was going for Marvel Money. I can just see GW execs with images of 40K movies on the big screen, action figures, and clothing lines. Then being bought out by Disney, who will essentially buy out anyone who can make money with the 15-25 male demographic.

GW has been led too far down the wrong path to come back. Greed has ruined the company, but the 40k IP will survive in spite of the mismanagement.

I dont even want to see them 'turn it around' anymore. The best thing for 40k would be GW dying.

sand.zzz wrote:
GW has been led too far down the wrong path to come back. Greed has ruined the company, but the 40k IP will survive in spite of the mismanagement.

I dont even want to see them 'turn it around' anymore. The best thing for 40k would be GW dying.

As long as they survive to finish the current Codex Cycle, I really don't care.

sand.zzz wrote:
GW has been led too far down the wrong path to come back. Greed has ruined the company, but the 40k IP will survive in spite of the mismanagement.

I dont even want to see them 'turn it around' anymore. The best thing for 40k would be GW dying.

No, just no. If you don't like the 40K wargame, that is fine, but no.

Star Wars RPG & Miniatures Battles from WEG, becomes Star Wars RPG and Collectable Miniatures Games by Wizards of the Coast, becomes Star Wars Pocket Models space combat game, becomes Star Wars multiple RPGs and multiple miniatures and board games by FFG.

They got more expensive, they got dumbed down, and they made previous collections irrelevant.

None of which would be good for the current 40K player base.

 adamsouza wrote:


None of which would be good for the current 40K player base.

I honestly think that if 40k went straight over to someone like FFG, they wouldn't really mess with the scale and models, as FFG already makes money from the setting by making the various RPG games, which, I'd presume would work similar to DnD, only with GW models... Why would FFG really want to mess with that, because I think that they'd see it as the wrong move that alienates more players than it brings in.

 adamsouza wrote:
I don't think we'll ever see the return of bitz direct from GW.

There is not enough incentive for GW to do it, especially since there is already a 3rd party aftermarket handling it already.

I agree.

They still produce a reasonable number of bits but the way forwards is to create sprues for plastic moulding bits collections. This does not seem as productive an idea as the creation of entire new kits.

They certainly will never go back to the days when you could order any variety of metal parts you wanted for a project.

 Daba wrote:
Make a subsidiary that doesn't use Citadel or the GW name (avoid the brand as much as possible) and make a new game and new line (but you have to do it well*).

It will start slow but sales will increase and hopefully cannibalise their core games and you start diverting funds to it slowly as the core games slowly become irrelevant as they have kept moving upmarket and shrinking.

*Of course, the new line and behaviour around it must be drastically different to their current paradigm.

Forge World.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 adamsouza wrote:

Star Wars RPG & Miniatures Battles from WEG, becomes Star Wars RPG and Collectable Miniatures Games by Wizards of the Coast, becomes Star Wars Pocket Models space combat game, becomes Star Wars multiple RPGs and multiple miniatures and board games by FFG.

They got more expensive, they got dumbed down, and they made previous collections irrelevant.
None of which would be good for the current 40K player base.

Bad examples. You're talking about a licenced IP (Star Wars) and a number of distinct, separate products that have been produced over a period of 27 years by a variety of licence holders.

You could, by the way, make the same argument with Rogue Trader, Warhammer Fantasy Battle and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, not to mention every side game, both licenced and 1st party.

I had the West End Games Star Wars RPG when it was new. It was a good game, done very nicely with good production values. I rather regret selling it in the mid-90s.

However I do not consider the publication of the Fantasy Flight Star Wars RPG to have invalidated the WEG one. Both are separate, self-contained systems. If I had kept my WEG stuff it would be just as playable today as ever. The only problem would be that players would find it hard to get copies for their own use if they wanted them. You don't need them, though. Any models produced by FFG would be entirely usable with the WEG rulebooks.

40K is different. It never gets to a complete state within an edition of the rules, and every time GW change the game either with new codexes, dataslates, or new rulebooks, they make your existing collection a bit more irrelevant.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

 darefsky wrote:
I dont know. Stop the human and kitten sacrifice?

Kidding aside. They need a social media manager and an actual plan of how to engage with the customer.

+1. There's times I think the problem is not Games Workshop, but the fact that the world changed and they stayed the same.

People talk about the hobby all over the internet and they do nothing to control the message. Having someone build them a new website does little to change the fact that they need to communicate better.

I've been with them from the beginning. They've changed. They used to interact with their players. They used to have whole articles on how to convert minis or make scenery. They used to be passionate about what they did.
I think the reason I feel all their latest products have been boring is because they've bee soulless.

Yeah, I still have all my old White Dwarfs, and my 'Eavy Metal collections, and my Codex Eye of Terror, and all the other things that made GW so great .They were so full of imagination I could just look at these things for hours.

That part of the company has changed. I miss it and think everything they've published since the start of 6th edition is trash by comparison. This Warhammer Visions thing they insist on sending me goes straight into the garbage when it arrives.

What I really mean to say is we live in a world of instantaneous customer service through social media. I posted a message on Facebook about a bad experience on an airline once and had a rep from the airline on the phone with me about 4 hours later. Someone complains about a bad experience with GW and there's silence. Sure, if your model broke, they get you a new one. But the company seems driven to ignore the feedback they get from their customers, and this is insane.

One of the first thing as a newly started player is:

- I go to a GW with a bucket list; and walk out the store with only 50% because its not in stock at a GW, but only online. Then my question raises: why is there even a GW? (beside you can play there).
- They shorted the staff at a GW (money money money), and the only thing i notice on facebook of my local GW = store closed on.... store closed on... store closed on....
- Why the heck are there still army's with the 7th rule army book.
- Beside im new to dakka dakka (and i like it), where is the official community in words of a GW FORUM.
- (social)Media, like they still live around 1990 and think that a 56k modem is a blender.
- And ofcourse: make the game cheaper, prices are now way to high. Prices should be done on how much plastic/work there has been done, not a pricetag on how good a minature is. Paying 70 euro for a rulebook, where other books have more pictures/pages and so on for less then half the price. In my eyes; they are now letting potential costumers run away. (which is bad for them, and the community)

This came to mind for what GW could do ; p

Sell all their stores and just be a manufacturer. Then get a real marketing department.

 adamsouza wrote:

sand.zzz wrote:
GW has been led too far down the wrong path to come back. Greed has ruined the company, but the 40k IP will survive in spite of the mismanagement.

I dont even want to see them 'turn it around' anymore. The best thing for 40k would be GW dying.

No, just no. If you don't like the 40K wargame, that is fine, but no.

Star Wars RPG & Miniatures Battles from WEG, becomes Star Wars RPG and Collectable Miniatures Games by Wizards of the Coast, becomes Star Wars Pocket Models space combat game, becomes Star Wars multiple RPGs and multiple miniatures and board games by FFG.

They got more expensive, they got dumbed down, and they made previous collections irrelevant.

None of which would be good for the current 40K player base.

An obscure star wars game =/= 40k. thats such a terrible comparison it ruins your attempt a making a point. and shame on you for using 'No, just no.'

sand.zzz wrote:

An obscure star wars game =/= 40k. thats such a terrible comparison it ruins your attempt a making a point. and shame on you for using 'No, just no.'

No, just no

I'm not going to argue with you over a matters of opinion.

However, as a matter of fact NONE of the Star Wars games I mentioned were obscure.

WEG produced Star Wars games from 1987 to 1999 up until around Episode I dropped. It formed the expanded universe to the point where Star Wars authors were given the RPG books are source material. They were available in gaming shops and major book retailers.

WOTC produced Star Wars RPGs from 2000-2010 and their prepainted figures (2004-2010) were majorly popular available in any gaming shops ,major book retailers, and even ToysRus

WIZKIDS produced over a half dozen expansions for the Star War Pocket Model game from 2007-2008, available in gaming shops, ToysRus, and Target

3 major gaming companies in their time, with a license bigger than 40k, which one are you trying to call obscure ?

 adamsouza wrote:

sand.zzz wrote:

An obscure star wars game =/= 40k. thats such a terrible comparison it ruins your attempt a making a point. and shame on you for using 'No, just no.'

No, just no

I'm not going to argue with you over a matters of opinion.

However, as a matter of fact NONE of the Star Wars games I mentioned were obscure.

WEG produced Star Wars games from 1987 to 1999 up until around Episode I dropped. It formed the expanded universe to the point where Star Wars authors were given the RPG books are source material. They were available in gaming shops and major book retailers.

WOTC produced Star Wars RPGs from 2000-2010 and their prepainted figures (2004-2010) were majorly popular available in any gaming shops ,major book retailers, and even ToysRus

WIZKIDS produced over a half dozen expansions for the Star War Pocket Model game from 2007-2008, available in gaming shops, ToysRus, and Target

3 major gaming companies in their time, with a license bigger than 40k, which one are you trying to call obscure ?

Star Wars is the IP, as such, different companies will do different things with it.
Warhammer 40k is a much more focused IP. It's a miniatures game with a lot of lore and stories behind it. It could happen that the new company turns it into something unrecognizable, but that's unlikely because everything is in place already. (molds and machinery, logistics network, etc.) A table top RPG based on a movie is a very different IP than a miniature based wargame.

The coversation was about 40Ks IP surviving beyond the death of the parent company, and my apt analogy was for a scifi IP that had survived past multiple companies holding it, and were not obcure references. ALL 3 companies produced Star Wars Tabletop minatures based games.

Since GW is the largest tabletop miniatures gaming producer and they were to fail, who would have the resources to produce anything along the scope of what they currently produce ?

 adamsouza wrote:


Since GW is the largest tabletop miniatures gaming producer and they were to fail, who would have the resources to produce anything along the scope of what they currently produce ?

Were it to fail, someone like FFG would more than likely pick it, and the mfg capabilities up for a "bargain" price.... The only other companies that I can see that already have that kind of resourcing have no reason to even bother getting the 40k IP.... I'm talking about groups like PP, WGF, Corvus Belli, Hobbico (the parent company of Revell/Monogram) and the like. With the exception of Hobbico, almost all the others offer some form of competition for the marketplace that GW currently is competing in... IF someone like PP bought 40k/GW, it would literally be to kill it.

 Yonan wrote:
This came to mind for what GW could do ; p

Not that I actually suggest it, figuratively, let alone literally. Though I wouldn't be entirely opposed to the missing second, poised and ready to cut off the 'head'.

 adamsouza wrote:


3 major gaming companies in their time, with a license bigger than 40k, which one are you trying to call obscure ?

I called the WEG Star Wars RPG from the late 80's obscure, the one you compared to 40k. I didnt call Star Wars obscure. Dont say you 'dont want to argue', then put words in my mouth. I stand by what I said, that WEG rpg is not a good comparison to 40k. And yes, its obscure. Few people outside the avid TT or rpg enthusiast would even know it existed. You cant really say that about 40k. But lets not argue, your comparison was bad - leave it at that.

OK, here's a scenario: GW goes bankrupt and the official receiver sells off the assets for whatever he can get in order to pay off creditors.

None of the big toy companies like Hasbro are interested because the product line does not fit into their portfolio.

The small wargame companies are interested but can't afford to pay a lot. However the stuff has to be sold, so it is sold for a knock-down price to say Privateer or Fantasy Flight.

Once one of one of them buys 40K on the cheap they have an already popular fluff background, a load of plastic moulds for nearly all the models in the game, a shonky ruleset and possibly a warehouse full of kits and books.

Given the capital to invest in new production of kits, either of those companies can easily rewrite the rules to a much higher standard, issue new codexes for all the factions, and relaunch the game. All existing rulebooks would be invalidated -- but GW do that frequently anyway -- however all your existing armies would continue to be useable.

There is already a huge audience consisting of veterans who were so pissed off by GW's stewardship that they left, and they are itching to get back in at the right price and quality points.

The new rules are priced to sell well and do. After a successful relaunch, the new owner continues to produce high quality add-ons that extend the franchise in various directions without modifying or invalidating any of the existing rules and kits.

Unless you think the current 40K rules to be the acme of game design, this scenario is a much better one for the continuation of 40K into the future than Games Workshop continuing

The WEG Star Wars RPG wasn't obscure, there was a huge figure range and loads of supplements. It's only obscure to gamers now because it seems a long time ago. It wasn't at the time. I recall it being advertised in related magazines, maybe even Marvel comics or similar.

 adamsouza wrote:

WOTC produced Star Wars RPGs from 2000-2010 and their prepainted figures (2004-2010) were majorly popular available in any gaming shops ,major book retailers, and even ToysRus

WIZKIDS produced over a half dozen expansions for the Star War Pocket Model game from 2007-2008, available in gaming shops, ToysRus, and Target

Just to focus on this bit for a moment, the WotC minis game didn't 'become' the pocket model game, as you originally stated. The two games were produced concurrently, as WotC had a licence to produce a miniatures game, and Wizkids had a licence to produce a collectible card game (which the pocketmodels were technically classed as due to coming flatpacked on cards).

There's no progression there. Just two different products that were both based on the Star Wars IP.

Before I did anything I'd re-brand. GW has about as much goodwill with gamers as Phillip Morris has with pulmonologist.

Just relaunching with a new face and making a concentrated effort in improving customer/seller relations would help things dramatically.

 insaniak wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

WOTC produced Star Wars RPGs from 2000-2010 and their prepainted figures (2004-2010) were majorly popular available in any gaming shops ,major book retailers, and even ToysRus

WIZKIDS produced over a half dozen expansions for the Star War Pocket Model game from 2007-2008, available in gaming shops, ToysRus, and Target

Just to focus on this bit for a moment, the WotC minis game didn't 'become' the pocket model game, as you originally stated. The two games were produced concurrently, as WotC had a licence to produce a miniatures game, and Wizkids had a licence to produce a collectible card game (which the pocketmodels were technically classed as due to coming flatpacked on cards).

There's no progression there. Just two different products that were both based on the Star Wars IP.

Two different posts. I didn't look up the actual dates until the second post.

sand.zzz you are just flat out wrong about the Star Wars RPG being obscure in it's time. Your ignorance of it, and constant insistance otherwise, doesn't change that situation.

KillKrazy, I think your scenario is a best case situation that it not likely to happen.

Also, people here on Dakka are ready to burn GW to the ground for small codex changes that invalidate a power strategy here and there, but somehow they are going to okay with entirely new rules book to buy (like 7th), new codexes (like the hardcovers), and the smaller selection of models (because it would take them years to match the selection)?

The phrase "The grass is always greener on the other side" comes to mind

 adamsouza wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

WOTC produced Star Wars RPGs from 2000-2010 and their prepainted figures (2004-2010) were majorly popular available in any gaming shops ,major book retailers, and even ToysRus

WIZKIDS produced over a half dozen expansions for the Star War Pocket Model game from 2007-2008, available in gaming shops, ToysRus, and Target

Just to focus on this bit for a moment, the WotC minis game didn't 'become' the pocket model game, as you originally stated. The two games were produced concurrently, as WotC had a licence to produce a miniatures game, and Wizkids had a licence to produce a collectible card game (which the pocketmodels were technically classed as due to coming flatpacked on cards).

There's no progression there. Just two different products that were both based on the Star Wars IP.

Two different posts. I didn't look up the actual dates until the second post.

sand.zzz you are just flat out wrong about the Star Wars RPG being obscure in it's time. Your ignorance of it, and constant insistance otherwise, doesn't change that situation.

KillKrazy, I think your scenario is a best case situation that it not likely to happen.

Also, people here on Dakka are ready to burn GW to the ground for small codex changes that invalidate a power strategy here and there, but somehow they are going to okay with entirely new rules book to buy (like 7th), new codexes (like the hardcovers), and the smaller selection of models (because it would take them years to match the selection)?

The phrase "The grass is always greener on the other side" comes to mind

I'm ready to burn GW to the ground for a whole lot more than changes to a codex.

I can't speak for other people, only speak for myself. I know GW is out there to make money. Problem is, GW doesn't have to act so bullish in doing so.

So for me, what GW would have to do for me to come back is

1) Lower the Prices. I have been priced out of the Hobby. Talking to GW, I shouldn't have to feel I am not part of your player base. I shouldn't have to feel like I am a poor slob and all I should be able to do is savour at the product.

2) Make sure there is value in the product? I know things can be expensive, and I don't mind buying even expensive products, thing is, I don't see the VALUE in GW products. Minis are expensive BUT their books are way over priced by double for me. So I don't see no value, especially after paying $100 for the rules. For me, rules should last more than 4 years, not the 2 year cycle that GW seems to be doing now.

3) Don't be so arrogant and treat the customers like they are crap. I am sorry those CEO or what ever Kirby is, and how he talks about us the customers make me sick. If that is how you truly feel about me, I guess you don't want me as a customer.

4) Again Prices. I live in Canada. Why are the prices I pay way more than 30% more than the US while there is only a 10% difference in the dollar? What made it worse for over a year the Canadian dollar was More than the US green back and I still had to pay 30% more. Talk about being spat in the face.

If that changes, then I need

5) Clear concise rules. I am tired of the arguments in person, arguments on the internet. How come there is no editor? Bad enough the authors are idiots (I don't think so, but it seems they are sometimes).

6) Have fun rules. For me, and my son 40K is not fun anymore. For me and my son, not being able to do anything while the other person is shooting at you is not fun at all.

If that changes, then maybe I would come back. The Nagash thing they are releasing, seems really interesting, and thought maybe a good time to start Fantasy, but why do I want to start something that is Over priced, bad rules, and will have no support?

I already did Lord of the Rings, don't get me started on that fiasco. I just don't want that no more from GW. Sooooooo

Oh yeah I forgot, Tyranids.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
The WEG Star Wars RPG wasn't obscure, there was a huge figure range and loads of supplements. It's only obscure to gamers now because it seems a long time ago. It wasn't at the time. I recall it being advertised in related magazines, maybe even Marvel comics or similar.

My group really enjoyed this and I still have the books - which I've been referring to for FFGs Star Wars Armada ; p It was a really well fleshed out system, though the basic mechanics weren't the best.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
Also, people here on Dakka are ready to burn GW to the ground for small codex changes that invalidate a power strategy here and there, but somehow they are going to okay with entirely new rules book to buy (like 7th), new codexes (like the hardcovers), and the smaller selection of models (because it would take them years to match the selection)?

The phrase "The grass is always greener on the other side" comes to mind

I'm ready to burn GW to the ground for a whole lot more than changes to a codex.

Legal bullying (to the point of itself being illegal)
Attacking fan sites
Shutting themselves off from the community as a whole
Charging an absolute premium for merely adequate or sometimes even vastly inferior products
Attacking FLGSs*
Blatantly unfair regional pricing
Apparent lack of respect for customers
Blatant money grabs (day one DLC, 7th ed releasing after 23 months)
And worst of all, removing the 'hobby' from 'The Hobby'

Yeah, I'd say there are probably a few extra reasons on top of 'my Deathstar isn't super OP anymore '


(*could someone please tell me if that is correct or if the plural of FLGS is just FLGS, it annoys me every time I have to type it)

Bear in mind that NECA snatches up licened properties all the time for HEROCLIX.

Imagine 40k reduced to prepainted figures in individual blind packs for $4 each. Sure it may be cheaper.....

 adamsouza wrote:




Also, people here on Dakka are ready to burn GW to the ground for small codex changes that invalidate a power strategy here and there, but somehow they are going to okay with entirely new rules book to buy (like 7th), new codexes (like the hardcovers), and the smaller selection of models (because it would take them years to match the selection)?

The phrase "The grass is always greener on the other side" comes to mind

Sound a like a complete strawman tbh mate. Small codex changes and not being able to use power strategies are not the reason most people here are unhappy with GW. Surely you know that if you read anyone's complaints about them.

 carlos13th wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:




Also, people here on Dakka are ready to burn GW to the ground for small codex changes that invalidate a power strategy here and there, but somehow they are going to okay with entirely new rules book to buy (like 7th), new codexes (like the hardcovers), and the smaller selection of models (because it would take them years to match the selection)?

The phrase "The grass is always greener on the other side" comes to mind

Sound a like a complete strawman tbh mate. Small codex changes and not being able to use power strategies are not the reason most people here are unhappy with GW. Surely you know that if you read anyone's complaints about them.

In fact, there's a whole thread about that.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/603134.page

 Kilkrazy wrote:
However I do not consider the publication of the Fantasy Flight Star Wars RPG to have invalidated the WEG one. Both are separate, self-contained systems. If I had kept my WEG stuff it would be just as playable today as ever.

I can confirm that they are just as playable today as they were then...we played a couple games last weekend because of the other thread that brought it up - and the dice still rolled just as well now.

Regarding 40K surviving though...not to sure it would (and I really doubt WFB would survive in any significant manner). Although not a strictly scientific manner to judge things by - if you look at pages which link to GW or within sites like Wikipedia, how many outside interest pages refer back to it...the vast majority are somewhat circular. They don't link to 40K unless they are talking about 40K specifically. You don't have it opined as being influential by outsiders (who see the significance, but not necessarily share the interest in franchises like Star Trek, Star Wars and even Stargate, Firefly, Red Dwarf, Battlestar Galactica...).

It just doesn't have a significant impact on culture - even within gaming, there are a lot of people who really are not familiar with GW at all, let alone 40K...especially here in the US. That isn't something that a company with the means to do so would be interested in going through the trouble of trying to rebuild.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

The new rules are priced to sell well and do. After a successful relaunch, the new owner continues to produce high quality add-ons that extend the franchise in various directions without modifying or invalidating any of the existing rules and kits.

Unless you think the current 40K rules to be the acme of game design, this scenario is a much better one for the continuation of 40K into the future than Games Workshop continuing

I could definitely see this happening, but NOT if Privateer get the IP. I think that PP could/would honestly buy the IP to let it die, so that they'd become the "big kid on the block"

Fantasy Flight has a legitimate reason to get "former GW" IP (should the ship finally hit that iceberg), and that is that they already run a number of other products from the setting/IPs... In order to continue making money off of it, they'd need to be able to have access to it, and the best way to ensure that would be to simply buy it. The question would come up of whether FFG could take on all that GW has, without sacrificing in some other areas of the company; Which I personally think we'd see a brief lull in quality from their other products, but they'd get used to the added "weight" and the quality would pick back up.

 MWHistorian wrote:

In fact, there's a whole thread about that.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/603134.page

Would you please stop pimping your thread ?

 carlos13th wrote:

Small codex changes and not being able to use power strategies are not the reason most people here are unhappy with GW.

I never said it was "the" reason most people are unhappy with GW.

My point was that peolple flip out over stuff as minor as codex changes, and to expect them to be all right with buying new rules and codexes if another publisher took over, was overly optimistic at best.

 adamsouza wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

In fact, there's a whole thread about that.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/603134.page

Would you please stop pimping your thread ?

 carlos13th wrote:

Small codex changes and not being able to use power strategies are not the reason most people here are unhappy with GW.

I never said it was "the" reason most people are unhappy with GW.

My point was that peolple flip out over stuff as minor as codex changes, and to expect them to be all right with buying new rules and codexes if another publisher took over, was overly optimistic at best.

But that is not why they flipped out, they are mad becouse GW is charging more for removing options then selling you the options they removed on top of the higher priced codex. But I think you know that, don't you.

If a new company scraped the current rule and rebuilt them from the ground up with playtesting. I'm willing to bet, more then a few of us would be willing to give it another shot.

Noir wrote:

But that is not why they flipped out, they are mad becouse GW is charging more for removing options then selling you the options they removed on top of the higher priced codex. But I think you know that, don't you.

I do know that. Everyone evidently has their pet reason to hate GW, and I can respect that. Just please respect that I don't care what anyone else's reasons are. They don't matter to me, and repeating them ad nasum to me like I'm suddenly going to change my mind about it is counter productive.

If a new company scraped the current rule and rebuilt them from the ground up with playtesting. I'm willing to bet, more then a few of us would be willing to give it another shot.

In all honesty I would give it a shot.

I'd also consider anyone who rage quit 40K over edition changes a hypocrite when they did so as well, but I'd keep it to myself, and just point and laugh at them when they weren't looking.

People tend to quit because they don't like the changes not just because there are changes.

 Boggy Man wrote:
Before I did anything I'd re-brand. GW has about as much goodwill with gamers as Phillip Morris has with pulmonologist.

Just relaunching with a new face and making a concentrated effort in improving customer/seller relations would help things dramatically.

Right, if for no other reason than the term 'Games Workshop' sounds like a sarcastic misnomer in terms of what the company actually does these days. The plural needs to be removed for a start, and possible change 'Workshop' to something like 'Re-cycling'.

The best way to show respect to another person's concerns is to say that you don't care about their concerns. Nice.

Maybe if you had read that thread, he wouldn't have to "pimp" it. Trying to shoe horn everbody into one WAAC based reason is just an easy way for you to dismiss everybody else's arguments without having to do some critical thinking.

 carlos13th wrote:
People tend to quit because they don't like the changes not just because there are changes.

Not always true. My D&D Group had two major large groups quit over 3rd and 4th, both only months after they were announced, be fore they even got to look at the rules. There are many out there who Quit over Change.

I quit over pricing and obvious gouging.

Like removing units from codices and jacking up the price. Then selling those removed units separately.

They've been changing rules to sell more models for 20+ years.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
People tend to quit because they don't like the changes not just because there are changes.

Not always true. My D&D Group had two major large groups quit over 3rd and 4th, both only months after they were announced, be fore they even got to look at the rules. There are many out there who Quit over Change.

Though sometimes it is relatively easy to see whether the changes are ones that you will support or not.

In the case of 4e D&D I went from mildly hopeful to complete hate before the game came out - and it was because of the changes that they had already announced, their attitude when announcing them, the lack of support for third party publishers, and the fact that they spent as much time trying to denigrate their older 3.X system as they did trying to praise 4e... (Folks interested can look up the faerie rings quote and the guards at the gate quote... WotC was trying to narrow the focus of the game down to a single play style.)

When I finally saw the game, all the parts that I thought that I would not like, I did, in fact, not like.

And remember, the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works.

Lying to your customers tends to leave them a bit wary.

That their shenanigans led to Paizo releasing Pathfinder - which outsold 4e - was something that the folks in charge of WotC realized that they could only blame themselves for.

WotC had created their own competition by the way they were treating their supporting 3P companies and their players....

Still no license for 5e - but that's okay, Pathfinder has a license, and 3PP support....

On the other hand - WotC spent a lot of time, and not a little money, researching the market this time around. With 4e they took the same view that is wrecking GW - 'They will buy what we sell' and with 5e they are taking the view that they need to sell what people will buy.

That much, at least, they have learned.

I am not buying 5e - the system looks okay, but I still prefer Pathfinder.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
People tend to quit because they don't like the changes not just because there are changes.

Not always true. My D&D Group had two major large groups quit over 3rd and 4th, both only months after they were announced, be fore they even got to look at the rules. There are many out there who Quit over Change.

Though sometimes it is relatively easy to see whether the changes are ones that you will support or not.

In the case of 4e D&D I went from mildly hopeful to complete hate before the game came out - and it was because of the changes that they had already announced, their attitude when announcing them, the lack of support for third party publishers, and the fact that they spent as much time trying to denigrate their older 3.X system as they did trying to praise 4e... (Folks interested can look up the faerie rings quote and the guards at the gate quote... WotC was trying to narrow the focus of the game down to a single play style.)

When I finally saw the game, all the parts that I thought that I would not like, I did, in fact, not like.

And remember, the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works.

Lying to your customers tends to leave them a bit wary.

That their shenanigans led to Paizo releasing Pathfinder - which outsold 4e - was something that the folks in charge of WotC realized that they could only blame themselves for.

WotC had created their own competition by the way they were treating their supporting 3P companies and their players....

Still no license for 5e - but that's okay, Pathfinder has a license, and 3PP support....

On the other hand - WotC spent a lot of time, and not a little money, researching the market this time around. With 4e they took the same view that is wrecking GW - 'They will buy what we sell' and with 5e they are taking the view that they need to sell what people will buy.

That much, at least, they have learned.

I am not buying 5e - the system looks okay, but I still prefer Pathfinder.

The Auld Grump

I was not talking about after the preview, I am talking when Dragon Magazine announced "We are coming out with 3rd [4th] Edition, look for Information in upcoming issues" They quit without even seeing the first rules change. Their Quote was "They are just looking to make money, we quit."

 adamsouza wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

In fact, there's a whole thread about that.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/603134.page

Would you please stop pimping your thread ?

 carlos13th wrote:

Small codex changes and not being able to use power strategies are not the reason most people here are unhappy with GW.

I never said it was "the" reason most people are unhappy with GW.

My point was that peolple flip out over stuff as minor as codex changes, and to expect them to be all right with buying new rules and codexes if another publisher took over, was overly optimistic at best.

I'll stop as soon as GW apologists stop misunderstanding why people leave.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
People tend to quit because they don't like the changes not just because there are changes.

Not always true. My D&D Group had two major large groups quit over 3rd and 4th, both only months after they were announced, be fore they even got to look at the rules. There are many out there who Quit over Change.

Though sometimes it is relatively easy to see whether the changes are ones that you will support or not.

In the case of 4e D&D I went from mildly hopeful to complete hate before the game came out - and it was because of the changes that they had already announced, their attitude when announcing them, the lack of support for third party publishers, and the fact that they spent as much time trying to denigrate their older 3.X system as they did trying to praise 4e... (Folks interested can look up the faerie rings quote and the guards at the gate quote... WotC was trying to narrow the focus of the game down to a single play style.)

When I finally saw the game, all the parts that I thought that I would not like, I did, in fact, not like.

And remember, the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works.

Lying to your customers tends to leave them a bit wary.

That their shenanigans led to Paizo releasing Pathfinder - which outsold 4e - was something that the folks in charge of WotC realized that they could only blame themselves for.

WotC had created their own competition by the way they were treating their supporting 3P companies and their players....

Still no license for 5e - but that's okay, Pathfinder has a license, and 3PP support....

On the other hand - WotC spent a lot of time, and not a little money, researching the market this time around. With 4e they took the same view that is wrecking GW - 'They will buy what we sell' and with 5e they are taking the view that they need to sell what people will buy.

That much, at least, they have learned.

I am not buying 5e - the system looks okay, but I still prefer Pathfinder.

The Auld Grump

I was not talking about after the preview, I am talking when Dragon Magazine announced "We are coming out with 3rd [4th] Edition, look for Information in upcoming issues" They quit without even seeing the first rules change. Their Quote was "They are just looking to make money, we quit."

Okay, then. I was speaking of my own reasons for dropping 4e.

I was irked because WotC had just made a statement denying that 4e was in the works.... But I did not make my decision right away... but painfully, over the months leading to the release... hoping that it wouldn't suck. Then it came out, and... it sucked.

Yours was a different experience.

Though... your friends were right - 4e was pretty much just a money grab.

On the other hand... I remember when work began on 3e - no secrecy, open communication, a very robust third party license.

My feeling at the time was 'this is gonna be good!

And it was!

So we had gone from having a system that made changes that I liked to a system that made changes that I loathed.

4e was as much (or more) a failure of PR as it was of game design. WotC could have avoided the pitfall just by engaging their customer base - asking what the customers wanted... instead they told the customers what they wanted, and the customers disagreed.... With the predictable result.

But WotC learned from that experience - I see no signs of GW bothering to learn from theirs....

The Auld Grump


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

In fact, there's a whole thread about that.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/603134.page

Would you please stop pimping your thread ?

 carlos13th wrote:

Small codex changes and not being able to use power strategies are not the reason most people here are unhappy with GW.

I never said it was "the" reason most people are unhappy with GW.

My point was that peolple flip out over stuff as minor as codex changes, and to expect them to be all right with buying new rules and codexes if another publisher took over, was overly optimistic at best.

I'll stop as soon as GW apologists stop misunderstanding why people leave.

But then he would have to admit to being wrong.

The Auld Grump

I was never around for the 3.5/Pathfinder/4th stuff but having played 5th and thoroughly enjoyed it it really does feel like they sat down, worked out what people want out of the game and then made that.

The same happened with Dystopian Wars and their 2nd edition and that has turned out great too.

It's not exactly a hard concept...

WotC's problem with 4e was they changed the paradigm of the game too much. They took away a lot of flexibility for something that played like a streamlined MMO on the tabletop (and speaking as a WoW player I don't mind that but it wasn't for everyone), especially the idea that everything was based on a party so you needed a tank, a healer, etc.

They also tried too hard to push everything Wizards; I remember the days of Gleemax and the Digital Initiative that turned into probably the greatest failure since the collapse of TSR; their digital tools were unpolished crap and the main selling point (Virtual Tabletop) was vaporware that didn't materialize for years and when it did it was a poorly done version of tools like Fantasy Grounds and others that had been around for years. Gleemax was touted as "MySpace for gamers", a place to connect and network and share ideas, but barely worked half the time due to a half-assed implementation and the fact sites like EN World already had that. And of course there was getting rid of the OGL which just annoyed lots of people and paved the way for Pathfinder and others.

They thought they were too big and could dictate to the market, which is just what GW is doing. The difference is that WotC had a wakeup call when Pathfinder beat them at their own game. GW still technically dominates the market (although it's eroding) so in their eyes they have no reason to worry. While something like Dystopian Wars or w/e it was that outsold 7th edition is out there, it's not enough impact in the overall market to get GW to wake up and realize "Hey we are losing this battle, we need to fix it".

WayneTheGame wrote:
WotC's problem with 4e was they changed the paradigm of the game too much. They took away a lot of flexibility for something that played like a streamlined MMO on the tabletop (and speaking as a WoW player I don't mind that but it wasn't for everyone), especially the idea that everything was based on a party so you needed a tank, a healer, etc.

They also tried too hard to push everything Wizards; I remember the days of Gleemax and the Digital Initiative that turned into probably the greatest failure since the collapse of TSR; their digital tools were unpolished crap and the main selling point (Virtual Tabletop) was vaporware that didn't materialize for years and when it did it was a poorly done version of tools like Fantasy Grounds and others that had been around for years. Gleemax was touted as "MySpace for gamers", a place to connect and network and share ideas, but barely worked half the time due to a half-assed implementation and the fact sites like EN World already had that. And of course there was getting rid of the OGL which just annoyed lots of people and paved the way for Pathfinder and others.

They thought they were too big and could dictate to the market, which is just what GW is doing. The difference is that WotC had a wakeup call when Pathfinder beat them at their own game. GW still technically dominates the market (although it's eroding) so in their eyes they have no reason to worry. While something like Dystopian Wars or w/e it was that outsold 7th edition is out there, it's not enough impact in the overall market to get GW to wake up and realize "Hey we are losing this battle, we need to fix it".

To me, most of the problems was all the change of Nomenclature and lack of "Reverse Compatibility". Once I got my group back to the table they were upset that their Characters changed to much and lost their "Iconic" Items.
Personally I love 4th Edition, 5th though seems to be the case of trying to please every one.
7th Edition WH40k has the same feeling of trying to please everyone without the research.
The main issue I have been reading before 7th was "The Game is to Restrictive, you cant play [Insert Army] the way I want. They gave us "Unbound" in 7th and now you can take what you want and many of the same people want to ban it.

GW needs to cut its prices by about 50%.
Then, once that is done they need to work on their public and online profiles, lose the "only allowed in if your buying or playing" attitude and actually accept that there are other game companies out there that are as successful as they are (Privateer Press, BOLS, etc) and that sometimes people want to utilise conversions that incorporate parts of other companies kits-like my counts as Hellhound Mech that I built out of an old Airfix 'Madbull' kit.
Not to mention the firing of all the upper management and the replacing of this "sell all models" policy with a "Hobby first" policy.
After that many of the models need to be moved away from this "kiddies cartoon" look and the old styles brought back in.

Oh, and the Daemonettes need to be scrapped and resculpted by Diaz.

WayneTheGame wrote:
They thought they were too big and could dictate to the market, which is just what GW is doing. The difference is that WotC had a wakeup call when Pathfinder beat them at their own game. GW still technically dominates the market (although it's eroding) so in their eyes they have no reason to worry. While something like Dystopian Wars or w/e it was that outsold 7th edition is out there, it's not enough impact in the overall market to get GW to wake up and realize "Hey we are losing this battle, we need to fix it".

Heck, Paizo beat them with their own game.

But, yeah... the lead that GW has over the competition is such that by the time they react... it may be too late. (Heck, it may already be too late.)

*EDIT* But, good gods! Why aren't they doing any market research?! Even when you dominate the market, you should always be looking to make that market grow! Instead they are trying to make more money out of fewer customers.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
They thought they were too big and could dictate to the market, which is just what GW is doing. The difference is that WotC had a wakeup call when Pathfinder beat them at their own game. GW still technically dominates the market (although it's eroding) so in their eyes they have no reason to worry. While something like Dystopian Wars or w/e it was that outsold 7th edition is out there, it's not enough impact in the overall market to get GW to wake up and realize "Hey we are losing this battle, we need to fix it".

Heck, Paizo beat them with their own game.

But, yeah... the lead that GW has over the competition is such that by the time they react... it may be too late. (Heck, it may already be too late.)

*EDIT* But, good gods! Why aren't they doing any market research?! Even when you dominate the market, you should always be looking to make that market grow! Instead they are trying to make more money out of fewer customers.

The Auld Grump

Sheer arrogance is the only thing I can think of. I think they vastly overestimate the GW "brand", especially in the UK because they're still resting on the laurels of the old "GW on every corner" situation.

I loved D&D and have been playing it since "Advanced" days. I'm not adverse to change, but the change has to be good. When 3rd switched to 4th, I bought all the books and was excited. Then I started playing and everything felt overly simplified and dumbed down and I hated it. So, for me, it was absolutely the rules.

When 40k switched to 7th, again it was the rules that made me say "I've had enough." The horrible business practices were getting to me and would have pushed me away soon enough, but the "Money Grab Edition" just kicked me right out.

I want to address the silly notion of someone like PP buying GW out just to get rid of the IP.

That's just silly talk. Why would they drop conceivably millions on something to then just dump it? There is no revenue recovery there. So lets say they have fond memories of that game that got them into mini's and want to bring it back for old times sake, restore it to glory as they say? Heck you buy it and you still have to deal with the massive infrastructure of the stores, warehouses. employees. Fixed costs that will sink your companies faster than the Iceberg did in the Titanic. Doesnt make a lick of sense.

Agreed.

Buying and burying is what you do with a property that is competition, but less popular/well known than your own.

TSR used to do it - or, in the case of DragonQuest, made a single print run, then buried it.

PP might actually be a good home for WH40K - but I doubt that they would try to keep the retail arm of GW alive - so they would most likely only buy GW's IP at liquidation.

The Auld Grump

They need to stop thinking Word of Mouth and a magazine that few non-wargaming stores stock is going to sell there products. Actually making an advertising department to create commercials to be shown via popular media to the public and then improving the capacity of their stores to take advantage of the new interest from said advert would boost the relevance to the general public no end. Then they would have to stop being Jerks to anyone who wants to something cool with the 40k setting and improving the price to quality ratio so they can a widespread image of them as being a great business who tries to satisfy their fans instead of having a focussing on making a profit.

If Kirby ran into a burning house and saved a baby, maybe that would change his image

Yeah... real likely scenario there....

[Joking]I'm not saying that if he were on fire, I wouldn't piss on him to put it out - but I am saying that I would take the opportunity to piss on him, even if I had a bucket of water handy.[/Joking]

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Yeah... real likely scenario there....

[Joking]I'm not saying that if he were on fire, I wouldn't piss on him to put it out - but I am saying that I would take the opportunity to piss on him, even if I had a bucket of water handy.[/Joking]

The Auld Grump

You would need that excuse? I would set him on fire just to piss on him

 Anpu42 wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
People tend to quit because they don't like the changes not just because there are changes.

Not always true. My D&D Group had two major large groups quit over 3rd and 4th, both only months after they were announced, be fore they even got to look at the rules. There are many out there who Quit over Change.

Though sometimes it is relatively easy to see whether the changes are ones that you will support or not.

In the case of 4e D&D I went from mildly hopeful to complete hate before the game came out - and it was because of the changes that they had already announced, their attitude when announcing them, the lack of support for third party publishers, and the fact that they spent as much time trying to denigrate their older 3.X system as they did trying to praise 4e... (Folks interested can look up the faerie rings quote and the guards at the gate quote... WotC was trying to narrow the focus of the game down to a single play style.)

When I finally saw the game, all the parts that I thought that I would not like, I did, in fact, not like.

And remember, the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works.

Lying to your customers tends to leave them a bit wary.

That their shenanigans led to Paizo releasing Pathfinder - which outsold 4e - was something that the folks in charge of WotC realized that they could only blame themselves for.

WotC had created their own competition by the way they were treating their supporting 3P companies and their players....

Still no license for 5e - but that's okay, Pathfinder has a license, and 3PP support....

On the other hand - WotC spent a lot of time, and not a little money, researching the market this time around. With 4e they took the same view that is wrecking GW - 'They will buy what we sell' and with 5e they are taking the view that they need to sell what people will buy.

That much, at least, they have learned.

I am not buying 5e - the system looks okay, but I still prefer Pathfinder.

The Auld Grump

I was not talking about after the preview, I am talking when Dragon Magazine announced "We are coming out with 3rd [4th] Edition, look for Information in upcoming issues" They quit without even seeing the first rules change. Their Quote was "They are just looking to make money, we quit."

Wouldn't that just be a way of saying as qouted above, "the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works." Seem pretty simple they lie about no 4th ed so you keep buying 3rd ed books then try to sell you 4th ed for more of your money.

Hire me as CEO and give me the power to actually fix up the place.

Bring out Bretonnians and (Sisters of Battle in plastic) and be done with it.

And above all no army/faction should never be left to rot for over a decade.

Come out with multiple armies in each book - Armies of Men: Empire & Bretonnia. Realms of Chaos: Beastmen, Chaos Warrirs, & Daemons. Lands of the Dead: Tomb Kings & Vampire Counts. The Beasts that Walk like Men: Lizardmen & Skaven. The Brutes: Ogres and Orcs.

Or have a big book of army lists that cover everybody - adding new books for specific wars.

Call it, oh, I don't know... Warhammer Armies or something?


The Auld Grump

This topic seems to be getting away from its stated purpose a bit before its time, I reckon!

Apologies in advance as this gets a bit rambling and tangential at times. It's the only way I can see to explain my thoughts on the subject, I'm afraid, but hopefully some of you will manage to wade through the prose and find the train of thought

Anyway, thinking about it I would say that GW need to consider the future. Unless World War 3 wipes out the current way the world runs then we can say a few things about where the future seems to be going:

Digital and internet-related things aren't going away. I don't mean they need to think about setting up a forum or anything like that. What I feel they need to consider is where miniature wargames fit into an even more digital future. Either they accept where the tide seems to be taking them - a very niche position - or they consider where they set a course for.

Personally I hate stuff that serves no purpose. I don't want a stack of DVDs when the videos could be provided from a hard drive or through a streaming service. I don't want a library full of books making my tiny British flat feel even smaller (reference books fall into a different category - I'm talking about books that are read beginning to end here). I don't even want to have to go out and buy most replaceable goods. If I need more bog roll I'd rather chuck it in my next online supermarket order and have someone lug it and my other groceries to my front door. That way I've got more time to do stuff I want to do.

What I'm getting at is that there's now a situation, at least in the UK, where there's pretty much no point going to another city to go shopping. Mass production means they have the same shops selling the same stuff. There's very little of the old joy of browsing to find new stuff these days, at least from what I see. Most things I know enough about to just order online so I don't have to cart the stuff home. Essentially this adds up to a world where physical things aren't as important. Social media, Netflix (or equivalent), and video games.

Where does a physical shop that sells expensive plastic minis fit into that world?

Sure, those of us who know about the world of wargaming have opinions but we're already informed. How does GW fit into the future of young people today? Why should a parent spend hundreds of pounds on miniatures when the latest games console and some games will keep them entertained more easily? Video games are everywhere now and multiplayer console gaming exists in a way that it simply didn't ten years ago.

Something I love about wargaming that I can't get from video games is the tangible aspect. Whenever I see a bit of plastic piping in a skip I have to force myself not to take it home. I can explore digital worlds at my computer but there's something very primal about physical objects.
Then of course there's the game theory stuff. Figuring out good ways to spend points in equipping an army and the likelihood of a setup working the way I want it to exercise mental faculties that I don't use to anywhere near the same extent whilst playing video games.

So perhaps something to consider is how to reach parents. Pricing structures should probably be revised somewhat, obviously, but more of a priority should be considering entrance vectors.
What should the journey of a young new player be? What do they buy first? What can they expect to learn from that? How quickly does it generate a feeling of satisfaction and fun?
It doesn't need to be instantaneous but if it's too slow then their patience is likely to wear thin.

Extremely importantly - if they don't have £30 to spend on a new unit right now what's there to do until they can afford it?

I was looking at White Dwarf 212 (August 1997) the other day and saw a feature on building a modular boards. They managed to make 32 square feet of terrain for £40 (about £55 in 2013 money) (as an aside - they actually made them double sided to bring it up to 64 square feet!). Clubbing together with a few friends and being inspired to have a go at scavenging materials seems like a good way to keep them engaged!
What really stood out was that the article mentioned that certain things could be bought from GW but also mentioned free or cheap alternatives (like using sand instead of GW bought flock).

These days GW seems to be aiming for terrain to only be store bought. Perhaps this'll mean that the remaining boards owned by their players will look nicer but it seems likely that it'll mean fewer of them!

Similarly smaller scale games that link into "proper" 40K seem important. The one thing that Gorkamorka really had over Necromunda was that an Ork mob could become the basis for a 40K army of Orks in a way that Goliath gangers couldn't.

I'm not suggesting Specialist Games need to return (although if they could be done in a cost effective way I'm sure lots of us wouldn't complain) what I am thinking about is things like Kill Team. A way to get games going without needing 1500 points or more on the table. 12 year old me really had to battle to get his unit of slugga boyz painted, I can tell you!

The point I'm laboriously building to is that a GW that is looking forwards and not trying to squeeze every penny from new entrants to the hobby would help a great deal. That attitude affects everyone that deals with GW. I wouldn't feel particularly comfortable letting my (hypothetical!) kids spend time in a GW store. The company line when it comes to people buying stuff from them makes me massively uncomfortable and that's after years of dealing with money-grubbing companies and the resultant thick skin.

Furthermore a "re-entrance" vector would probably do them a world of good too. How many of us stopped playing as teenagers and then started to get back into it when we had some disposable income later in life? It's a common story. Planning for this sort of behaviour and figuring out how to ease people back into "the hobby" without alienating them immediately would do a world of good.

Realistically I don't see that sort of attitude shift happening any time soon but I live in hope.

 Chute82 wrote:
If Kirby ran into a burning house, saved a baby, and never made it back out again maybe that would change his image

Fixed.

 Achaylus72 wrote:
Hire me as CEO and give me the power to actually fix up the place.

Bring out Bretonnians and (Sisters of Battle in plastic) and be done with it.

And above all no army/faction should never be left to rot for over a decade.

Is this your campaign promise to bring Squats up to date?

Noir the case of 4e D&D: that just be a way of saying as qouted above, "the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works." Seem pretty simple they lie about no 4th ed so you keep buying 3rd ed books then try to sell you 4th ed for more of your money.

edited your post a bit.

GW did the exact same thing with the re-release of Space Hulk. UK Games Day they hinted at it, US Games Day they scoffed at the idea in fact replying that "no, SH was not going to be released this year", DEU Games Day they made a big deal about a "Special Announcement", the world waited.. Jervis hobbled up to the podium and loudly announced that "We have something special to announce, but to find out what it is you'll have to check your e-mail tomorrow". Was it to be SH? We wanted to know "just look online tomorrow" is all he replied.

So no cheering masses at GWGD that year, and a massive jerk move by Jervis and the rest of them. The worst is the limited nature of the product and the fact that a massive presence in retailers with such an introductory game wouldn't be a bad deal at all.

Lying about a product does not generate hype but is a wet blanket towards any enthusiasm.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:
Hire me as CEO and give me the power to actually fix up the place.

Bring out Bretonnians and (Sisters of Battle in plastic) and be done with it.

And above all no army/faction should never be left to rot for over a decade.

Is this your campaign promise to bring Squats up to date?

HELL YEAH

xraytango wrote:

Noir the case of 4e D&D: that just be a way of saying as qouted above, "the month before the big announcement of 4e WotC had made a statement that 4e wasn't in the works." Seem pretty simple they lie about no 4th ed so you keep buying 3rd ed books then try to sell you 4th ed for more of your money.

edited your post a bit.

GW did the exact same thing with the re-release of Space Hulk. UK Games Day they hinted at it, US Games Day they scoffed at the idea in fact replying that "no, SH was not going to be released this year", DEU Games Day they made a big deal about a "Special Announcement", the world waited.. Jervis hobbled up to the podium and loudly announced that "We have something special to announce, but to find out what it is you'll have to check your e-mail tomorrow". Was it to be SH? We wanted to know "just look online tomorrow" is all he replied.

So no cheering masses at GWGD that year, and a massive jerk move by Jervis and the rest of them. The worst is the limited nature of the product and the fact that a massive presence in retailers with such an introductory game wouldn't be a bad deal at all.

Lying about a product does not generate hype but is a wet blanket towards any enthusiasm.

I think Jervis could have taken a page out of that Ferguson cop's playbook and said "I will Kill you, Go F*&% Yourself!" and SH would still have sold out. It was that good of a box at the time.

It sucks, but it's the truth.

Dreadfleet though.... whew.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Okay, then. I was speaking of my own reasons for dropping 4e.

I was irked because WotC had just made a statement denying that 4e was in the works.... But I did not make my decision right away... but painfully, over the months leading to the release... hoping that it wouldn't suck. Then it came out, and... it sucked.

Yours was a different experience.

Though... your friends were right - 4e was pretty much just a money grab.

On the other hand... I remember when work began on 3e - no secrecy, open communication, a very robust third party license.

My feeling at the time was 'this is gonna be good!

And it was!

Yep yours mirrors mine. We heard about 3E and thought "this sounds great!". We heard about 4E and thought "ffs!". Both were borne out by later playtesting - e3 after buying the books, 4e after downloading them and therefore thankfully avoiding getting burnt. So much about 4E still irritates me and I really hope 5E improves it all. If not, I'll probably pick up 3E again at some stage thanks to the extensive D20 support for it... although yeah I hear pathfinder basically replaced it thanks to the feth-up that was 4E.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I loved D&D and have been playing it since "Advanced" days. I'm not adverse to change, but the change has to be good. When 3rd switched to 4th, I bought all the books and was excited. Then I started playing and everything felt overly simplified and dumbed down and I hated it. So, for me, it was absolutely the rules.

When 40k switched to 7th, again it was the rules that made me say "I've had enough." The horrible business practices were getting to me and would have pushed me away soon enough, but the "Money Grab Edition" just kicked me right out.

Exactly, people often say "people cry about change" and while that may be true for a very small number of people, the cast majority are happy with good change - or at least, change that is good in their subjective opinion. Some change is just objectively good too and anyone arguing against it is likely doing so out of an information deficit or they stand to lose somehow (nerfed favourite build, obsoleted books/models etc - think an obviously OP class in an MMO).

---

To tie all that into GW - We don't just dislike 7th ed, codex changes, whatever because it's change. We dislike it because it's bad change. Bad change done out of both incompetence in not knowing what the market wants and greed in changing the game in order to sell more models rather than making a good game that makes people want to buy more models. GW need to stop acting like that as one of the many things they need to do to improve their public image. AD&D 2E to D&D3E was an amazing edition change. It simplified and optimized mechanics without reducing depth (feth off THAC0!!) and created a basis for which 3rd parties could create their own custom modules to tie into the game and implemtned many new and well thought out systems. 40k Really needs something like this. REALLY needs it.

 Achaylus72 wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 Achaylus72 wrote:
Hire me as CEO and give me the power to actually fix up the place.

Bring out Bretonnians and (Sisters of Battle in plastic) and be done with it.

And above all no army/faction should never be left to rot for over a decade.

Is this your campaign promise to bring Squats up to date?

HELL YEAH

The weird thing is I realized the other day just how hilariously easy that would be. Just release a Demiurge supplement for the Tau codex. Glue some Dwarf bits to Battlesuits and update the fluff.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

Dreadfleet though.... whew.

...Dreadfleet XVIII: The Dread Pool...

We are not interested in change, we are interested in improvement.

If GW was the world's only car manufacturer we would all be driving around in Model T Fords, and every two or three years the wheels would change, or the pedal configuration, or the fuel type, not because the new car was safer or faster, or more reliable or easier to drive, but because GW could then charge people more for the new version.

No, the new model wouldn't come with wheels, cost more, and the wheels would be extra.

The answer is simple. GW needs to make better products. Finecast and the luck luster rules of 6th (with the quick turn around on 7th) has turned alot of people off.

 Lockark wrote:
The answer is simple. GW needs to make better products. Finecast and the luck luster rules of 6th (with the quick turn around on 7th) has turned alot of people off.

What is a better product? Would a better product be something that people want to buy? For that wouldn't you need to know what people want to buy instead of putting stuff out that only a very few people have any interest in?

Davor wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
The answer is simple. GW needs to make better products. Finecast and the luck luster rules of 6th (with the quick turn around on 7th) has turned alot of people off.

What is a better product? Would a better product be something that people want to buy? For that wouldn't you need to know what people want to buy instead of putting stuff out that only a very few people have any interest in?

-How about haveing the rules written by someone who didn't go on record saying that they want to discourage competitive/tournament play?
-A core rule book that wasn't so broken that you needed to be replaced in 2 years?
-Models that aren't full of more holes then swiss cheese?
-How about not priceing Plastic core troops for a WHFB army at $7 CAD per model?


GW products keep going up in price, well the quality of product drops. Can you blame people for leaving?

 Lockark wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
The answer is simple. GW needs to make better products. Finecast and the luck luster rules of 6th (with the quick turn around on 7th) has turned alot of people off.

What is a better product? Would a better product be something that people want to buy? For that wouldn't you need to know what people want to buy instead of putting stuff out that only a very few people have any interest in?

-How about haveing the rules written by someone who didn't go on record saying that they want to discourage competitive/tournament play?
-A core rule book that wasn't so broken that you needed to be replaced in 2 years?
-Models that aren't full of more holes then swiss cheese?
-How about not priceing Plastic core troops for a WHFB army at $7 CAD per model?


GW products keep going up in price, well the quality of product drops. Can you blame people for leaving?

No I don't blame people at all for leaving. I am one of them. What I meant was what does "a better product" mean. Ask 100 people you can get 100 different answers.

Oh I so wanted to try Fantasy. You exact reason, $7 a mini is just insane.

Davor wrote:

 Lockark wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
The answer is simple. GW needs to make better products. Finecast and the luck luster rules of 6th (with the quick turn around on 7th) has turned alot of people off.

What is a better product? Would a better product be something that people want to buy? For that wouldn't you need to know what people want to buy instead of putting stuff out that only a very few people have any interest in?

-How about haveing the rules written by someone who didn't go on record saying that they want to discourage competitive/tournament play?
-A core rule book that wasn't so broken that you needed to be replaced in 2 years?
-Models that aren't full of more holes then swiss cheese?
-How about not priceing Plastic core troops for a WHFB army at $7 CAD per model?


GW products keep going up in price, well the quality of product drops. Can you blame people for leaving?

No I don't blame people at all for leaving. I am one of them. What I meant was what does "a better product" mean. Ask 100 people you can get 100 different answers.

Oh I so wanted to try Fantasy. You exact reason, $7 a mini is just insane.

Yah don't worry. I knew what you meant. Was more or less just trying to clarify some examples of how GW products have been lowering the bar.

I realize now the post read kinda "angry". Sorry about that.

Its really easy: Just do the exact opposite of everything that is on my sig (which comes from GW themselves).

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Its really easy: Just do the exact opposite of everything that is on my sig (which comes from GW themselves).

Ouch. I can never understand how someone can be so proud of that.

 kronk wrote:
Engage in social media.

Host tournaments. They don't have to be ultra-competitive hard boys tournaments. Just some 30k events (fully painted) or some other themed tournaments with prizes given for sportsmanship and paint jobs. Show case your goddam hobby! Bring in new people.

Release a "mini-rulebook" thats ~$20.

Free hugs.

By 30k I assume you mean 40k, since one is a game they sell In their stores, the other is a niche market for a niche market.

Davor wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Its really easy: Just do the exact opposite of everything that is on my sig (which comes from GW themselves).

Ouch. I can never understand how someone can be so proud of that.

It is the apotheosis of bad business planning.... And just what you want to tell your shareholders....

The Auld Grump

Give new releases away for free. Invite nay-sayers over for holiday meals. Champion baby seals...

 Byte wrote:
Give new releases away for free. Invite nay-sayers over for holiday meals. Champion baby seals...

And here is the riductio ad absurdum response - still not addressing the problem.

Ho-hmmm.

The Auld Grump

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Give new releases away for free. Invite nay-sayers over for holiday meals. Champion baby seals...

And here is the riductio ad absurdum response - still not addressing the problem.

Ho-hmmm.

The Auld Grump

Go ahead and solve their problem, I'm sure GW HQ is standing by with bated breath.

I'll pass.

We'll move on from here then yes ?

thanks.

 Byte wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Give new releases away for free. Invite nay-sayers over for holiday meals. Champion baby seals...

And here is the riductio ad absurdum response - still not addressing the problem.

Ho-hmmm.

The Auld Grump

Go ahead and solve their problem, I'm sure GW HQ is standing by with bated breath.

I'll pass.

I don't think that the problem will be solved.

I think that GW is going to go under - the question is when.

And I do not give them all that long - two years, maybe three at the current rate.

And that folks that think that GW didn't need to fix their problems will be asking themselves 'What went wrong? GW was doing everything right!

And an awful lot of curmudgeonly sorts will be saying 'Toldja so!'

Believe it or not, the folks wondering how GW can set itself back upright are the folks that don't want GW to go under.

Me, I would have a hard time caring about GW itself - but the third party support companies - those I have a lot of sympathy and respect for.

Back on topic -
GW has done a lot of damage to themselves suing people over the last few years - and one thing that they can do - which will save them money into the bargain - is to just stop with the frivolous suits.

Which means making Merret go to school and learn about all that IP stuff that he is supposed to be in charge of.

The Auld Grump

One must understand the mindset of middle and upper management and this old man does. I fully believe I know Kirby's end game and been commenting about it in the past. There is no turning around. You can not go back to the way it was. The glory days are gone.

Well the erosion of public exposure to common consumer in the last 8 years is the company's downfall. Dumb assed mistakes with the lack of marketing??? In this era where marketing is key to essential growth?

Well to the man in the Glass Castle in jolly o' England....


DEATH TO THE FALSE EMPEROR!!!

One thing Kirby can do to improve his image is to quit comparing himself to Steve Jobs. It reminds me when VP Dan Quail compared himself to Jack Kennedy during the VP presidential debate. Steve Jobs knew to ask Microsoft for money to save Apple. Does this mean Kirby is going to ask PP for money to save GW?

I think Tom Kirby will be asking for money, from GW plc to buy back £4M of his shares before he retires.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Its really easy: Just do the exact opposite of everything that is on my sig (which comes from GW themselves).

Ouch. I can never understand how someone can be so proud of that.

It is the apotheosis of bad business planning.... And just what you want to tell your shareholders....

The Auld Grump

What Kirby is essentially implying is GW customers are stupid. They are stupid lemmings who buy whatever crap the company puts out. And the company laughs at the little idiots the whole time, and there is no reason this should change because the customers are too dumb to understand.

THIS is what GW has to change to improve their image...they actually have to give a damn about their image. Now saying that, what it means IMO is they have to experience a complete 180 in attitude. Which they can do, after all, they *used* to see value in their customers beyond their wallets, so hopefully they can make the change again!

 Accolade wrote:

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Its really easy: Just do the exact opposite of everything that is on my sig (which comes from GW themselves).

Ouch. I can never understand how someone can be so proud of that.

It is the apotheosis of bad business planning.... And just what you want to tell your shareholders....

The Auld Grump

What Kirby is essentially implying is GW customers are stupid. They are stupid lemmings who buy whatever crap the company puts out. And the company laughs at the little idiots the whole time, and there is no reason this should change because the customers are too dumb to understand.

THIS is what GW has to change to improve their image...they actually have to give a damn about their image. Now saying that, what it means IMO is they have to experience a complete 180 in attitude. Which they can do, after all, they *used* to see value in their customers beyond their wallets, so hopefully they can make the change again!

This is one of the reasons why I left GW. Haven't bought anything no more after Tyranids and the 7th edition rule book on iPad. Last final purchase. All my money now has gone to X-wing, Star Trek Attack Wing, Dropzone Commander and video games now. Money that would have gone to Games Workshop, but no more. Well I shouldn't say no more. If they change they can always earn me back as a customer.

Problem is, do they want me back? I have a feeling no. I can't believe a company will say "No we don't want your money". That is how I feel everytme I have the itch for 40K or Lord of the Rings. Just when I get the GW bitterness away from me, I go to try and buy something and that bitterness just comes back.

Davor wrote:
No I don't blame people at all for leaving. I am one of them. What I meant was what does "a better product" mean. Ask 100 people you can get 100 different answers.

Ask 100 players to list 10 things GW could do to improve the product and 80+ would give about 5 that are the same. Ignore the remaining 20 people and the 5 that no one can agree on. Voila, greatly improved product that the majority of the core users want. Perfect? No. Much better for most people? Yes.

I imagine they'd include - rule quality, codex balance, pricing and communication to start with.

Chill out with the ligitation-happiness perhaps? As far as I know, PP's new model conversion rules for tournaments that ban recognizeable "foreign" products and logos (the earlier were aimed simply at making models recognizeable because counts-as is a nightmare in WMH) were implemented because they were getting worried that their official photos would include GW parts and the lawyers were going to come after them (similarily to how Eternal War was renamed to Iron Arena).

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:
Chill out with the ligitation-happiness perhaps? As far as I know, PP's new model conversion rules for tournaments that ban recognizeable "foreign" products and logos (the earlier were aimed simply at making models recognizeable because counts-as is a nightmare in WMH) were implemented because they were getting worried that their official photos would include GW parts and the lawyers were going to come after them (similarily to how Eternal War was renamed to Iron Arena).

LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh? Start small, but once rolling, can't stop.

Why do I see Padme saying "So this is how it all starts...." and this is how PP becomes the new Galactic Empire.

Davor wrote:

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:
Chill out with the ligitation-happiness perhaps? As far as I know, PP's new model conversion rules for tournaments that ban recognizeable "foreign" products and logos (the earlier were aimed simply at making models recognizeable because counts-as is a nightmare in WMH) were implemented because they were getting worried that their official photos would include GW parts and the lawyers were going to come after them (similarily to how Eternal War was renamed to Iron Arena).

LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh? Start small, but once rolling, can't stop.

Why do I see Padme saying "So this is how it all starts...." and this is how PP becomes the new Galactic Empire.

PP's conversion rules have always been much more restrictive than GW's and this latest set of restrictions has nothing to do with fear of being sued by GW, but it does have everything to do with fear of being sued by Disney.

Davor wrote:
LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh?

Personally, I thought that when they first showed up...

 Vermis wrote:

Davor wrote:
LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh?

Personally, I thought that when they first showed up...

In some ways, PP has moved in that direction. For example, when the game first came out, a typical game consisted of less than 20 models. For a Khador army, it might have had fewer than 10. Games today consist of significantly more models, even in smaller formats.

However, I feel it is very unlikely that PP will ever abandon their attention to the quality of their rules or their engagement with their customer base.

Saldiven wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

Davor wrote:
LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh?

Personally, I thought that when they first showed up...

In some ways, PP has moved in that direction. For example, when the game first came out, a typical game consisted of less than 20 models. For a Khador army, it might have had fewer than 10. Games today consist of significantly more models, even in smaller formats.

However, I feel it is very unlikely that PP will ever abandon their attention to the quality of their rules or their engagement with their customer base.

Not really disputing anything you've said, but I'm sure there we many people who thought the same thing about Games Workshop back in the day.

PhantomViper wrote:

PP's conversion rules have always been much more restrictive than GW's and this latest set of restrictions has nothing to do with fear of being sued by GW, but it does have everything to do with fear of being sued by Disney.

The new policy came shortly after a Legion Harrier with a Tyranid undercarriage and wings was disallowed on Adepticon with the reason given it had too recognizable GW parts (which it did, it didn't look like a Harrier at all). So while it also of course covers Disney (and FC Barcelona for that matter) it seems it was primarily intended to cover against that there ole' Lawhammer.

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:

PP's conversion rules have always been much more restrictive than GW's and this latest set of restrictions has nothing to do with fear of being sued by GW, but it does have everything to do with fear of being sued by Disney.

The new policy came shortly after a Legion Harrier with a Tyranid undercarriage and wings was disallowed on Adepticon with the reason given it had too recognizable GW parts (which it did, it didn't look like a Harrier at all). So while it also of course covers Disney (and FC Barcelona for that matter) it seems it was primarily intended to cover against that there ole' Lawhammer.

I thought it was due to the acquisition of Marvel by Disney, but I stand corrected then.

 Coldhatred wrote:
.

Not really disputing anything you've said, but I'm sure there we many people who thought the same thing about Games Workshop back in the day.

Indeed there were, we never ever imagined a games day with no actual games to play though !

Why not? The company is called 'Games Workshop', and hasn't created a new game (with the exception of Dreadfleet) in many years.

Prices aside(which need to be more comepetitive) its not the minatures but the #1 problem is the game development. Creating rules that are designed to make players buy more minatures at the cost of game quality is the problem gw has.

GW needs to omni-channel-ize their organization. With the rest of the world moving that way, GW needs to do the same in order to streamline. Basically (if you don't know what omni-channel is) they need to create a universal standardized supply chain. So I could go to the store, website, or app (ding ding) and order a product. The system automatically finds where that product is closest and cheapest to ship to my store or home. At the same time, they need to really fix their store incentives. I love my local GW shop (it's less than a mile from my house) but I never buy anything there. Most of the stuff I need they don't carry in house (IE Beastmen, Nightlords) so if I order it it takes a week to get there because they're closed on mon/tues. Why would I possibly pay retail for most items and wait that long when I could pay less at most online retailers and get them quicker? I honestly don't ever feel bad when I walk into my GW with something and my GW rep asks where I got it. I once had one at my old GW get mad at me when I purchased 3 Imperial Knights off ebay, claiming that was commission his store could have made. Told him it wasn't my problem, take that up with corporate. I filed a complaint against him (that being a common problem with him among other things) he was fired so I have to assume others did too. I think a lot of fans want to work at GW shops thinking it will be awesome to sit and paint all day but have no idea how to run a shop.

PhantomViper wrote:


PP's conversion rules have always been much more restrictive than GW's and this latest set of restrictions has nothing to do with fear of being sued by GW, but it does have everything to do with fear of being sued by Disney.

Why would they worry about Disney? I don't get it? Can you please explain?

Davor wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:


PP's conversion rules have always been much more restrictive than GW's and this latest set of restrictions has nothing to do with fear of being sued by GW, but it does have everything to do with fear of being sued by Disney.

Why would they worry about Disney? I don't get it? Can you please explain?

Because the mouse goes after everyone. They make GW look tame.

In what way though Grimtuff? What does PP have to fear about Disney? They don't have any "ears" on their product and from what I see, I don't see anything remotely to Disney in their product.

What can Disney sue PP over for?

 Coldhatred wrote:

Saldiven wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

Davor wrote:
LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh?

Personally, I thought that when they first showed up...

In some ways, PP has moved in that direction. For example, when the game first came out, a typical game consisted of less than 20 models. For a Khador army, it might have had fewer than 10. Games today consist of significantly more models, even in smaller formats.

However, I feel it is very unlikely that PP will ever abandon their attention to the quality of their rules or their engagement with their customer base.

Not really disputing anything you've said, but I'm sure there we many people who thought the same thing about Games Workshop back in the day.

Haha...having played since Rogue Trader, GW rules always kind of sucked. They might have been cool or interesting, but they always had wonky interactions that required the players to figure out how to handle it mid-game.

It's just always been an idiosyncrasy of GW; they've never thought that quality rules matter that much.

I can remember when Avalon Hill went under. I remember several of our gaming group hoping that GW would hire some of the rules writers from there to write GW rules. Sure, the rules wouldn't be as interesting to read, since they'd have almost all been written in outline form rather than paragraph form, but there would have been a lot less room for misinterpretation.

Davor wrote:
In what way though Grimtuff? What does PP have to fear about Disney? They don't have any "ears" on their product and from what I see, I don't see anything remotely to Disney in their product.

What can Disney sue PP over for?

I think it would be if people made like a marvel-themed army or something.

The way they presented the new conversion rules on the forums was basically that they stream some games and they didn't want to have a heavily converted army using parts from someone else (e.g. GW) appearing all over Twitch and Youtube as it might cause them problems.

Thank you WayneTheGame. Now I understand why can happen.

So what could happen if someone made say a paint scheme in Iron Man, or Spiderman? PP can't be sued if someone made it. Is the idea that PP wouldn't be able to publish that art because that could be considered advertising for PP?

At least now I understand.

Davor wrote:
Thank you WayneTheGame. Now I understand why can happen.

So what could happen if someone made say a paint scheme in Iron Man, or Spiderman? PP can't be sued if someone made it. Is the idea that PP wouldn't be able to publish that art because that could be considered advertising for PP?

At least now I understand.

First, I Am Not a Lawyer, so just my viewpoints. I'm not quite sure honestly. I mean, when they announced the conversion rules it was pretty much implied they were referring specifically to using GW parts in conversions, although they never outright said that and made some broad statements about others copyrights, but it was pretty clear they meant GW (IMO anyways). I never got the impression it was about anyone other than GW.

Saldiven wrote:

 Coldhatred wrote:

Saldiven wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

Davor wrote:
LOL so Privateer Press is finally going down the Games Workshop slope now eh?

Personally, I thought that when they first showed up...

In some ways, PP has moved in that direction. For example, when the game first came out, a typical game consisted of less than 20 models. For a Khador army, it might have had fewer than 10. Games today consist of significantly more models, even in smaller formats.

However, I feel it is very unlikely that PP will ever abandon their attention to the quality of their rules or their engagement with their customer base.

Not really disputing anything you've said, but I'm sure there we many people who thought the same thing about Games Workshop back in the day.

Haha...having played since Rogue Trader, GW rules always kind of sucked. They might have been cool or interesting, but they always had wonky interactions that required the players to figure out how to handle it mid-game.

It's just always been an idiosyncrasy of GW; they've never thought that quality rules matter that much.

I can remember when Avalon Hill went under. I remember several of our gaming group hoping that GW would hire some of the rules writers from there to write GW rules. Sure, the rules wouldn't be as interesting to read, since they'd have almost all been written in outline form rather than paragraph form, but there would have been a lot less room for misinterpretation.

I've always equated GW to British cars...definitely stylish and a little quirky, but in the shop more than you'd like.

WayneTheGame wrote:

Davor wrote:
Thank you WayneTheGame. Now I understand why can happen.

So what could happen if someone made say a paint scheme in Iron Man, or Spiderman? PP can't be sued if someone made it. Is the idea that PP wouldn't be able to publish that art because that could be considered advertising for PP?

At least now I understand.

First, I Am Not a Lawyer, so just my viewpoints. I'm not quite sure honestly. I mean, when they announced the conversion rules it was pretty much implied they were referring specifically to using GW parts in conversions, although they never outright said that and made some broad statements about others copyrights, but it was pretty clear they meant GW (IMO anyways). I never got the impression it was about anyone other than GW.

Boils down to:

*Why do we sponsor events, and appearance contests? To advertise our product in the best possible light.
*What do we do when we have official events? Take lots of pictures to show customers what they can get from our company and our game.
*What happens if you have models with other companies parts, or other companies IP? Pictures which you don't want to use to advertise your own product.
*What happens when the 'best painted/appearance' army or 'best overall/General' army is a total conversion army based upon other companies models or IP? You can't share pictures of the winners for your event you spent a ton of time and effort sponsoring and have basically nullified your social media presence and intent for the event to even exist.

It basically makes the event into a landmine of 'don't get those models in any images', and prevents the 'Woooooooooooow, this game is so cool! I want that model... what? what do you mean PP doesn't make that model? oh buy from someone else?'

Long and the short of it, officially sponsored events means all the participants are functioning as corporate shills and free advertising if you like it or not. Take the King's coin, do the King's bidding. Besides fearing the mouse if you make a marvel-themed paint job, there is the simple 'our goal is to promote our companies models' so it is not unreasonable to expect models to not be other companies stuff in official events with prize support and such.

nkelsch wrote:


Boils down to:

*Why do we sponsor events, and appearance contests? To advertise our product in the best possible light.
*What do we do when we have official events? Take lots of pictures to show customers what they can get from our company and our game.
*What happens if you have models with other companies parts, or other companies IP? Pictures which you don't want to use to advertise your own product.
*What happens when the 'best painted/appearance' army or 'best overall/General' army is a total conversion army based upon other companies models or IP? You can't share pictures of the winners for your event you spent a ton of time and effort sponsoring and have basically nullified your social media presence and intent for the event to even exist.

It basically makes the event into a landmine of 'don't get those models in any images', and prevents the 'Woooooooooooow, this game is so cool! I want that model... what? what do you mean PP doesn't make that model? oh buy from someone else?'

Long and the short of it, officially sponsored events means all the participants are functioning as corporate shills and free advertising if you like it or not. Take the King's coin, do the King's bidding. Besides fearing the mouse if you make a marvel-themed paint job, there is the simple 'our goal is to promote our companies models' so it is not unreasonable to expect models to not be other companies stuff in official events with prize support and such.

Great explanation. I never even thought of that. Now it really makes sense and there is no ulterior motives or anything sinister about it at all.

 Pacific wrote:
Why not? The company is called 'Games Workshop', and hasn't created a new game (with the exception of Dreadfleet) in many years.

Non one guessed this back in the day though, as i was referring to.
They were going from strength to strength for a long while.

Being sorta new the game...well stop raking customers with crazy prices, the price of a vehicle fig is equal to the price of one months worth of gas(petrol to you brits)...last i looked the figs are not sprinkled in gold nor do they drive themselves around. two: prices, if you want a game to continue to boom then make it affordable, plastic is not a rare material..price is a big big turn off to anything games workshop makes, yes its imported in my neck of the woods but sometimes quantity overules quality as far as commerce, theres a zillion other cheaper games, prices drive consumers nowadays with the world being broke. Third: throw a bone to the merchants, dicking people that want to sell your product is no way to create a legacy at all or create profits, the nearest games workshop retailer from me is 2 hours away otherwise i find myself picking the bones of the left overs at a few local stores...as a consumer i should be able to walk in to a store within reasonable distance and find what i need, not go on a deep woods boondoggle across the lands to find what i want...this isen't the dark ages, hell the 40k scene around here has been ground out to a handful of players because there is no bloodflow because merchants have to be shackled and chained to even carry anything labeled as a games workshop product. Fourth: f^ckin support merchants and players, give incentives to carry and sell your product, give players incentive to show up and play...i love the game and the fluff but i feel like games workshop is living in this 80s xenophobic stage where they think that one store in a 500 miles radius with prices higher then oil will save the day


end of rant...

A month worth of gas? You must work across the street and never go anywhere else. I spend $100 a week on gas and barely go anywhere but work. I drive a 4 cylinder in Alabama where gas is $2.15 a gallon. Yes the prices are high but I think 90% of working Americans with a car spend far more than 40k vehicle price per month on gas.

I watched the short documentary about Lego today and I couldn't believe all the parallels. What did Lego do to turn things around?
- Get back to their core of making stuff that people want
- Do MARKET RESEARCH to find out what people want, because when you tell the market what it wants and lose 10-20% of your revenue from one year to the next, obviously the market isn't listening to you and it's time for you to listen to the market!
- Know your demographic. Lego thought that girls didn't like building things. Then MARKET RESEARCH showed them girls would build lego sets if lego did a better job of offering products that appealed to them.
- Fill gaps in their product based on MARKET RESEARCH. If you have humvees, tanks and battleships, and the military lego collectors want A-10s and F-22s, you make some freaking military plane kits to round out the product line.
- Engage with customers through social media.
- Host lego events where people can showcase their creativity by making things with Legos that aren't sold as kits. When someone really impresses them, offer that guy a job.

What has GW done?
- Proudly exclaim to their shareholders and customers that market research is otiose in a niche market.
- State their demographic without any market research to actually back up what they think their demographic is.
- Throw a bunch of ideas out there and see what sticks. You could've asked 1000 long time players, I doubt a single one would list close combat dreads and Logan Clause on a stupid sleigh pulled by wolves as holes in their product line.
- Run away from social media.
- Discourage conversion at events and then turn them into a 2 day giant GW store.

Lego's big turnaround came when they hired a new CEO and said "our way isn't working, let's try things your way". If GW hires the right person and has this attitude, they could turn the company around and be more profitable than ever before. If they hire the wrong person, don't give him any freedom to make changes or a combination of the two, it could go very badly.

Toofast wrote:
A month worth of gas? You must work across the street and never go anywhere else. I spend $100 a week on gas and barely go anywhere but work. I drive a 4 cylinder in Alabama where gas is $2.15 a gallon. Yes the prices are high but I think 90% of working Americans with a car spend far more than 40k vehicle price per month on gas.

I watched the short documentary about Lego today and I couldn't believe all the parallels. What did Lego do to turn things around?

I would love to see that documentary, if you could link it (assuming you watched it someplace like Youtube or something).

To the point of prices here's a fairly good example, in my mind of what is wrong with GW's prices:

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Space-Marine-Rhino

This is the US page for the Space Marine Rhino, listed at somewhere between 35 and 40 dollars (I almost forgot the rules about posting actual prices )

http://www.tamiyausa.com/items/plastic-model-series-20/1-48-scale-military-miniatures-10500/german-tiger-i-late-production-32575

That link goes to Tamiya's US page, and is of a German Tiger I, late production tank. It is 1/48 scale (useful for 1/48 aircraft dioramas, and conveniently a fairly appropriate size for a 40k game), and is listed with an MSRP of $38.


My point is that, if you look at the "quality" and detail contents, if you put the two, side by side and asked someone who'd never been exposed to ANY sort of plastic models before how much they thought each vehicle sold for, the GW one would be much, MUCH cheaper than the German tank. You certainly lose some details in the guy sitting in the cupola of the German tank, compared to a figure sticking out of a GW tank, but the rest of the model is almost barren of details (leaving realism aside here)

It's on Netflix, just search lego and scroll through all the dumb kids movies. It's only 21 minutes so it's a quick watch but replace "lego" with GW and "bricks" with plastic models and it's basically a story of what GW could do(but probably wont) to turn things around.

 Rayvon wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Why not? The company is called 'Games Workshop', and hasn't created a new game (with the exception of Dreadfleet) in many years.

Non one guessed this back in the day though, as i was referring to.
They were going from strength to strength for a long while.

Yes exactly - it was the perfect description back in the 90's, when there were so many different games available and new ideas being launched all of the time.

Now it is something of an ironic reminder of the company's past.

 Pacific wrote:

 Rayvon wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
Why not? The company is called 'Games Workshop', and hasn't created a new game (with the exception of Dreadfleet) in many years.

Non one guessed this back in the day though, as i was referring to.
They were going from strength to strength for a long while.

Yes exactly - it was the perfect description back in the 90's, when there were so many different games available and new ideas being launched all of the time.

Now it is something of an ironic reminder of the company's past.

Yea and quite a sad one too if you think about what could have been.

There are plenty of these customers that they bang on about all the time as well, the ones that only buy miniatures and don't play any games, but most are in that position because they have been put there with the removal of the specialist games.

Bringing back some more games would do wonders for them I think.

I think GW could disclose their production pipeline and costs. Tabletop gaming is a niche market, that much I have to admit. I assume it is a hard job offering what they offer over 25 years, in that time many systems an companies came and closed. If they showed that is is costly to model things, that the material is x% of the price, that marketing and the shops take x% then maybe it would be easier to accept the prices and the problems. After all I prefer a price increase to having the game discontinued.

But somehow I'm afraid that they don't do it because their margin is not that bad... It's about investors, and not about creating games for the players and earning some money with it as well. So I guess they would need to shift the balance a bit in that direction and show it to the players. They have done so much to piss us off... establishing themselves as a partner of players would be a loooong way I guess.

Toofast wrote:

What has GW done?
- Throw a bunch of ideas out there and see what sticks. You could've asked 1000 long time players, I doubt a single one would list close combat dreads and Logan Clause on a stupid sleigh pulled by wolves as holes in their product line.

After some years in the video game industry I have to say that doesn't work in most cases. Players are not always the best people to ask about how to improve a game. E.g. if you ask 1000 players of some MMORPG if everyone should receive a free top tier sword or a lot of gold the majority will answer yes. If this was a majority decision you might ruin your game economy. Sometimes you need someone impartial to design this - and this could mean that he may not be too involved in the game. In terms of GW this could mean that 60% of all players play Space Marines and would appreciate if SM got some more love and power. Still that might be exactly the wrong thing. Many people would only realise that it is not much fun to be overpowered until after they won 99 out of 100 games and nobody wants to play them anymore.

 Murenius wrote:
I think GW could disclose their production pipeline and costs. Tabletop gaming is a niche market, that much I have to admit. I assume it is a hard job offering what they offer over 25 years, in that time many systems an companies came and closed. If they showed that is is costly to model things, that the material is x% of the price, that marketing and the shops take x% then maybe it would be easier to accept the prices and the problems. After all I prefer a price increase to having the game discontinued.

But somehow I'm afraid that they don't do it because their margin is not that bad... It's about investors, and not about creating games for the players and earning some money with it as well. So I guess they would need to shift the balance a bit in that direction and show it to the players. They have done so much to piss us off... establishing themselves as a partner of players would be a loooong way I guess.

That is all in the annual reports. Cost of manufacture is pretty low as a percentage of RRP (<20%), and most of the cost is in the stores.

Herzlos wrote:


That is all in the annual reports. Cost of manufacture is pretty low as a percentage of RRP (<20%), and most of the cost is in the stores.

Thanks, I will have a look at that. The big question is then: if they stopped having the stores, could they still maintain a customer base big enough to support such a model range and all the other stuff? How many people play because of the stores, how many would stop if they couldn't go to one?

I, for one, always hated playing with the people in the stores and almost entirely play with friends, aquaintances and their friends.

 Murenius wrote:

Herzlos wrote:


That is all in the annual reports. Cost of manufacture is pretty low as a percentage of RRP (<20%), and most of the cost is in the stores.

Thanks, I will have a look at that. The big question is then: if they stopped having the stores, could they still maintain a customer base big enough to support such a model range and all the other stuff? How many people play because of the stores, how many would stop if they couldn't go to one?

I, for one, always hated playing with the people in the stores and almost entirely play with friends, aquaintances and their friends.

Outside of Great Britain, I get the feeling that a relative minority of players solely shop and/or play at GW stores.

However, significantly reducing or eliminating entirely their retail branch network is something I don't think they have the intestinal fortitude to even consider. It would involve a lot of backtracking on the way they've engaged the customer base and the independent retailer over the last decade. The short term negative impact on their bottom line from such a move is something that GW would have a hard time to survive.

 Murenius wrote:

Herzlos wrote:


That is all in the annual reports. Cost of manufacture is pretty low as a percentage of RRP (<20%), and most of the cost is in the stores.

Thanks, I will have a look at that. The big question is then: if they stopped having the stores, could they still maintain a customer base big enough to support such a model range and all the other stuff? How many people play because of the stores, how many would stop if they couldn't go to one?

I, for one, always hated playing with the people in the stores and almost entirely play with friends, aquaintances and their friends.

I think they could. The stores are really only a big thing in the UK; they are too scattered in the US and I would assume Canada, Europe and Australia. Most games in the US (and I would assume elsewhere) take place in independent game stores, not in a GW store because often there are established independent game stores. In my state (Florida) for example I think there's only 1 GW store in the entire state, but dozens of independent stores all over in most metro areas. So I think they're keeping the stores out of this delusional idea that the GW store is the "hub" of gameplay all over the world, when it really isn't.

I think they could comfortably drop half of the gw stores in the uk too. It's probably the only way they can remain profitable

GW's Cost of Goods is about 29% in the latest financial statement, about 25-26% in various previous years' statements.

WayneTheGame wrote:

I think they could. The stores are really only a big thing in the UK; they are too scattered in the US and I would assume Canada, Europe and Australia. Most games in the US (and I would assume elsewhere) take place in independent game stores, not in a GW store because often there are established independent game stores. In my state (Florida) for example I think there's only 1 GW store in the entire state, but dozens of independent stores all over in most metro areas. So I think they're keeping the stores out of this delusional idea that the GW store is the "hub" of gameplay all over the world, when it really isn't.

In Germany there are quite some official stores, at least one in every major city. However, I avoid those stores, even more in the last years. In the past those stores allowed some discussions with fellow hobbyists and I liked picking up some impulse buy, e.g. some character model I still missed. But at least in those stores I was in they rarely have what I want. The standard answer is "You can order it and have it delivered here". Usually I reply with "If I wanted to do that I could order from my couch and have it delivered to my door without having to drive here again." Also the clerks are usually not that deep into the hobby. Maybe you can sell Chaos Havocs to a 12 years old as a viable AA option, but I feel like they are either stupid or trying to cheat me. These days I rather order, either with Wayland or with GW's store for those models I can't get elsewhere.

Toofast wrote:
A month worth of gas? You must work across the street and never go anywhere else. I spend $100 a week on gas and barely go anywhere but work. I drive a 4 cylinder in Alabama where gas is $2.15 a gallon. Yes the prices are high but I think 90% of working Americans with a car spend far more than 40k vehicle price per month on gas.

I watched the short documentary about Lego today and I couldn't believe all the parallels. What did Lego do to turn things around?
- Get back to their core of making stuff that people want
- Do MARKET RESEARCH to find out what people want, because when you tell the market what it wants and lose 10-20% of your revenue from one year to the next, obviously the market isn't listening to you and it's time for you to listen to the market!
- Know your demographic. Lego thought that girls didn't like building things. Then MARKET RESEARCH showed them girls would build lego sets if lego did a better job of offering products that appealed to them.
- Fill gaps in their product based on MARKET RESEARCH. If you have humvees, tanks and battleships, and the military lego collectors want A-10s and F-22s, you make some freaking military plane kits to round out the product line.
- Engage with customers through social media.
- Host lego events where people can showcase their creativity by making things with Legos that aren't sold as kits. When someone really impresses them, offer that guy a job.

What has GW done?
- Proudly exclaim to their shareholders and customers that market research is otiose in a niche market.
- State their demographic without any market research to actually back up what they think their demographic is.
- Throw a bunch of ideas out there and see what sticks. You could've asked 1000 long time players, I doubt a single one would list close combat dreads and Logan Clause on a stupid sleigh pulled by wolves as holes in their product line.
- Run away from social media.
- Discourage conversion at events and then turn them into a 2 day giant GW store.

Lego's big turnaround came when they hired a new CEO and said "our way isn't working, let's try things your way". If GW hires the right person and has this attitude, they could turn the company around and be more profitable than ever before. If they hire the wrong person, don't give him any freedom to make changes or a combination of the two, it could go very badly.

I drive a v8 pick up truck in the midwest, i go to work daily but really i don't drive very far...that statement was based off of my personal expense...also if you burn 100 dollars worth of gas at 2.15 a gallon a week that means you burn on average 200 gallons, which is quite extreme for a 4 cylnder unless its got a displacement of 12 litres and the pistons the size of a cruise missile. Not flaming you just trying to wrap my head around your rebuttle. I also have watched that lego documentry, The core issues GW is facing is lack of image, if there was a GW store which events going in most major towns i think people would notice the brand and investigate, i've played countless mini war games and none have had the depth that GW has but also i've never had the extremely high price tag to pay in other mini games..which is a large turn off for people in my area, the fact that you have to pay on average 25-50 bucks for something you have to assemble and paint yourself then purchase a 50 dollar put on top of another 50-80 dollar rule book to play really hurts people...now keep in mind as an adult mini player i don't mind glueing,painting and so fourth but to younger gamers with smaller budgets..other mini games seem more easily to play and to purchase.

on a side note, i feel like GW is a good game company i really do, their products are nice quality and for the most part their rules and game phsyics have enough depth to hold attention

The testimonies from court cases and past actions make me think that GW is not a good company at all.

 MWHistorian wrote:
The testimonies from court cases and past actions make me think that GW is not a good company at all.

thats with any company...auto makers create countless death with poor designs/components yet people still flock to buy that brand...

And one million people doing a bad thing doesn't make it the right thing.

There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Oh, cut it out. That kind of reasoning does nothing useful. You hear so much criticism about GW because there's a heck of a lot to criticize and GW does nothing to address those criticisms. If they tried to change for the better you'd see many more people being far more friendly with them.

Despite what you think, people with complaints about GW aren't one dimensional, mustache twirling villains.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Better late than never coming to defend fair lady GW...

I can see why people think the stores are a waste of space, in the UK I am pretty much sure that they just serve as very expensive billboards.
The last three times I went in, they never had what I was after, this is Nottingham, Loughborough and Leicester, stores right near the factory too. The icing on the cake is when they tell you, in store that they don't stock several items because they are mail order only......
Thats three sales lost right there, I am a sucker too and I would probably have spent more on an impulse purchases as well if I was not let down by them holding such a crappy little amount of stock, but they don't really seem to care.

I am not really one to moan about GW that much, but the stores really irk me !!

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Better late than never coming to defend fair lady GW...

*Gasp* How DARE I find the endless torrents of "GW SUXX I BET I COULD RUN A HUGE COMPANY MUCH BETTER THAN THEM BAAAAWWWWW!" tiresome! I must flagellate myself and bow before the shrine of Infinity and crappy kickstarter projects!

Are you familiar with the concept of the Unpleasable Fanbase? Because I'm pretty much convinced that's exactly what GW's fandom is. In fact I'd compare them to Transformers, Star Wars and Pokemon; it doesn't have any fans, just lots of people who allegedly liked it so they have an excuse to complain about how terrible it is now and how it's been ruined forever.

[MOD EDIT: RULE #1 - Alpharius]

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Maybe so.

It would be nice to have a live test of that!

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Better late than never coming to defend fair lady GW...

*Gasp* How DARE I find the endless torrents of "GW SUXX I BET I COULD RUN A HUGE COMPANY MUCH BETTER THAN THEM BAAAAWWWWW!" tiresome! I must flagellate myself and bow before the shrine of Infinity and crappy kickstarter projects!

Are you familiar with the concept of the Unpleasable Fanbase? Because I'm pretty much convinced that's exactly what GW's fandom is. In fact I'd compare them to Transformers, Star Wars and Pokemon; it doesn't have any fans, just lots of people who allegedly liked it so they have an excuse to complain about how terrible it is now and how it's been ruined forever.

But I must be quiet and go along with the hate bandwagon like a good little dakkatard, lest I be noticed for not hating everything GW does and be banned again.

How about this. When GW starts addressing those concerns, then we can talk about the fanbase being rational or not.
They don't listen. Do no market research and have no open channels back and forth.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Better late than never coming to defend fair lady GW...

*Gasp* How DARE I find the endless torrents of "GW SUXX I BET I COULD RUN A HUGE COMPANY MUCH BETTER THAN THEM BAAAAWWWWW!" tiresome! I must flagellate myself and bow before the shrine of Infinity and crappy kickstarter projects!

Are you familiar with the concept of the Unpleasable Fanbase? Because I'm pretty much convinced that's exactly what GW's fandom is. In fact I'd compare them to Transformers, Star Wars and Pokemon; it doesn't have any fans, just lots of people who allegedly liked it so they have an excuse to complain about how terrible it is now and how it's been ruined forever.

But I must be quiet and go along with the hate bandwagon like a good little dakkatard, lest I be noticed for not hating everything GW does and be banned again.

How about this. When GW starts addressing those concerns, then we can talk about the fanbase being rational or not.
They don't listen. Do no market research and have no open channels back and forth.

I'm with MWHistorian here... IF later on today, I got an email from GW (since I'm still subscribed to them) asking for input on a poll of some kind for ANYTHING... I may vote on it, but I wouldn't hold my breath that anything would actually be affected. If this poll was something like "Should the assault phase be removed from 40k?" and they showed the voting percentages (which basically anyone who runs an online poll would do), and the general public voted "Yes", I would expect somewhere in the near future to be seeing an announcement that they've removed the Assault Phase.

IF something like that happened, I would probably pay slightly more attention to what GW does, because it would show that they've taken at least one step towards fixing what ails them. That whole "the customer is always right" thing, still rings true, and while ya can't please everyone, you should at least attempt to garner favor/support from a larger number of people than GW currently does.

If it was just the fan base, how come these same people are perfectly happy posting about other games? Check out the WMH or Infinity forums. You don't see anywhere near the level of complaining as you do in the GW forums, and these are often the same people. It MIGHT be the game and not the players then. Hmmmm

 MWHistorian wrote:
The testimonies from court cases and past actions make me think that GW is not a good company at all.

Who is better? Games Workshop or WizKids?

 Squigsquasher wrote:


Are you familiar with the concept of the Unpleasable Fanbase? Because I'm pretty much convinced that's exactly what GW's fandom is. In fact I'd compare them to Transformers, Star Wars and Pokemon; it doesn't have any fans, just lots of people who allegedly liked it so they have an excuse to complain about how terrible it is now and how it's been ruined forever.

But the same fanbase are largely pleased by other companies. Is that because they are running things better, or are they just popular as some sort of protest?

Herzlos wrote:

But the same fanbase are largely pleased by other companies. Is that because they are running things better, or are they just popular as some sort of protest?

The gist of the matter is that the fanbase of GW is rather large, arguably the largest customer base in tabletop gaming. It's heterogeneous and consists of many groups (e.g. painters, gamers, those who love the fluff, those who like the brutal setting, those who like the models...). Now the other companies are smaller and it's easier to design something that pleases one or two of those subsets. Usually since they are smaller companies, have no shops, etc. they are also more flexible and can fulfil their wishes easier and more spontaneously.

I am pretty sure that if one niche games got very successful and their marketing guys realize that the next big step can only be achieved by getting into existing toy shops ...they would become more and more like GW is now. The RPG history has quite some examples of how this happens. Here in Germany the biggest local RPG system, 'The Dark Eye' basically has the same history as GW and the fanbases' attitude towards them is very similar. People think they are greedy, regardless of how they publish something there is always a group that cries "the end is nigh" and so on. I had the chance to speak with someone of their core team at a gaming event and learned that this system is mostly a zero sum game. And that it has been sold twice or thrice in all the years confirms that this is not really a money maker.

That makes sense, thanks

 Murenius wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

But the same fanbase are largely pleased by other companies. Is that because they are running things better, or are they just popular as some sort of protest?

The gist of the matter is that the fanbase of GW is rather large, arguably the largest customer base in tabletop gaming. It's heterogeneous and consists of many groups (e.g. painters, gamers, those who love the fluff, those who like the brutal setting, those who like the models...). Now the other companies are smaller and it's easier to design something that pleases one or two of those subsets. Usually since they are smaller companies, have no shops, etc. they are also more flexible and can fulfil their wishes easier and more spontaneously.

Why? What does the customer base size has to do with it being more or less heterogeneous? Why wouldn't other companies customer bases also be as diverse as GW's? Also, what proof do you have to make those claims?

GW is not a unique snow flake, they cater and sell to the exact same demographics as every other wargaming miniature company out there. The reason that they receive a much larger amount of criticism than any of its competitors is because their attitudes towards their customers and fans is allot worse than that of their competitors. There is no mystery here.

 Murenius wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

But the same fanbase are largely pleased by other companies. Is that because they are running things better, or are they just popular as some sort of protest?

The gist of the matter is that the fanbase of GW is rather large, arguably the largest customer base in tabletop gaming. It's heterogeneous and consists of many groups (e.g. painters, gamers, those who love the fluff, those who like the brutal setting, those who like the models...). Now the other companies are smaller and it's easier to design something that pleases one or two of those subsets. Usually since they are smaller companies, have no shops, etc. they are also more flexible and can fulfil their wishes easier and more spontaneously.

MtG has a larger fanbase than GW. Sure, they can't please all of their fans and some people will complain no matter what, but they're taking less criticisms for what they do. Hell, look at their official forums. There's a negative thread here and there but not as much as the flak that GW is taking right now.

A larger fanbase might be harder to please, but that doesn't mean you have to stop trying to please them.

PhantomViper wrote:

Why? What does the customer base size has to do with it being more or less heterogeneous? Why wouldn't other companies customer bases also be as diverse as GW's? Also, what proof do you have to make those claims?

GW is not a unique snow flake, they cater and sell to the exact same demographics as every other wargaming miniature company out there. The reason that they receive a much larger amount of criticism than any of its competitors is because their attitudes towards their customers and fans is allot worse than that of their competitors. There is no mystery here.

I've seen GW stuff in toy shops that do not even have RPGs, all over Europe. To my knowledge this is unique, and no other tabletop has ever been available outside of specialist game stores. Also, what proof do YOU have for your opinion.

They are unique in that they are the biggest company in the tabletop sector and have managed to stay in business for over 25 years. Is there any other comparable company? And sorry, but "their attitude towards fans" is inevitably "worse" since they are a bigger company than most. Comes with the requirements of bigger turnovers, owners, stakeholders, etc. Just compare the video/computer game industry, people also whine there about companies "ripping them off", even companies they once loved like Blizzard. They are friggin companies. They are there to make profit, not to make people happy. Smaller, newer companies come from the scene themselves usually. They often start since they wanted to make the game that GW doesn't make anymore. If they stay small and niche they can continue to do this. If they become a big international company, go to the stic market and so on they will change. For sure. Success seems to doom gaming companies.

 heartserenade wrote:

MtG has a larger fanbase than GW. Sure, they can't please all of their fans and some people will complain no matter what, but they're taking less criticisms for what they do. Hell, look at their official forums. There's a negative thread here and there but not as much as the flak that GW is taking right now.

A larger fanbase might be harder to please, but that doesn't mean you have to stop trying to please them.

I'm afraid MtG can't be compared that well to tabletop gaming. If you're pissed off by MtG's constructed environment and do not want to pay 1000$ for rares that you need to play in a vintage tournament you can still choose to play just in standard or the latest block. Or (like me) you just play drafts in tournaments and retro highlander decks in a friendly environment. You don't really have that choice in 40k. Also, for the price of an edition playset of commons and uncommons I get one vehicle in 40k or maybe 2 squads.

However, I think that Wizard is doing a better job updating their rules. They were the first ones to use USR like removing the card text and just calling it "Deathtouch". GW picked that up in 6th and 7th... poorly, compared to MtG.

 Murenius wrote:

I've seen GW stuff in toy shops that do not even have RPGs, all over Europe. To my knowledge this is unique, and no other tabletop has ever been available outside of specialist game stores. Also, what proof do YOU have for your opinion.

Stop moving the goalposts.

Your statement was that the reason that GW received more criticisms was because they have a more eclectic customer base. What does having their product available for sale through toy stores has anything to do with this?

Also, you're the one making claims, so you're the one with the burden of proof.

And X-Wing is also available outside of specialist stores, so are a myriad of other similar products including card games and board games: why aren't those companies subjected to the same amount of criticism as GW?

 Murenius wrote:

They are unique in that they are the biggest company in the tabletop sector and have managed to stay in business for over 25 years. Is there any other comparable company? And sorry, but "their attitude towards fans" is inevitably "worse" since they are a bigger company than most. Comes with the requirements of bigger turnovers, owners, stakeholders, etc. Just compare the video/computer game industry, people also whine there about companies "ripping them off", even companies they once loved like Blizzard. They are friggin companies. They are there to make profit, not to make people happy. Smaller, newer companies come from the scene themselves usually. They often start since they wanted to make the game that GW doesn't make anymore. If they stay small and niche they can continue to do this. If they become a big international company, go to the stic market and so on they will change. For sure. Success seems to doom gaming companies..

No, it doesn't. That is just a load of bullgak!

GW might be the biggest miniature wargaming company but they are barely a blip in the gaming and toy market and you don't see any of the big boys in that industry having the same problems with customer relations as GW have.

And your statements don't make any sense: "They are friggin companies. They are there to make profit, not to make people happy." Really? Do you think that companies don't make money by keeping their customers happy?

These companies make luxury goods, if people don't like them then they will stop buying their products and the companies will shutdown, like its starting to happen to GW.

PhantomViper wrote:

Stop moving the goalposts.

Your statement was that the reason that GW received more criticisms was because they have a more eclectic customer base. What does having their product available for sale through toy stores has anything to do with this?

Also, you're the one making claims, so you're the one with the burden of proof.

And X-Wing is also available outside of specialist stores, so are a myriad of other similar products including card games and board games: why aren't those companies subjected to the same amount of criticism as GW?

(quote removed)

No, it doesn't. That is just a load of bullgak!

GW might be the biggest miniature wargaming company but they are barely a blip in the gaming and toy market and you don't see any of the big boys in that industry having the same problems with customer relations as GW have.

And your statements don't make any sense: "They are friggin companies. They are there to make profit, not to make people happy." Really? Do you think that companies don't make money by keeping their customers happy?

These companies make luxury goods, if people don't like them then they will stop buying their products and the companies will shutdown, like its starting to happen to GW.

Oh, so we are at the "calling the others' arguments BS" point now. Can we please just have a discussion? Its not like any of our lives depended on this And yes, I know we're on the Internet here

Their product being available in non-specialist stores (and other tabletop strategy games not) is just a strong hint at their unique position and market power. X-Wing is not available in toy stores in Germany at least to my knowledge, only in gamestores/RPG stores. Your mileage may vary.

And yes, you are right, there are other big companies in games and toys, but we're discussing the miniature wargaming market here... talking about shifting the goalposts.

Also, again namecalling... my arguments make perfect sense *in my eyes*. They are a company and keeping customers happy may be a means to make profit - but you're mistaking a means for the goal. There are indeed companies that make profit by deciding that profit goes over happy customers. Just take hedgefonds as an example. The German TV market is another one. Cheap productions that many people despise are still the better economical choice since they are so cheap and it takes a lot less viewers to make them profitable... however many viewers (=customers) are not happy with this.

"and the companies will shutdown, like its starting to happen to GW." Now you are the one claiming things without proof. GW's revenue is pretty constant since 2009, so on what do you base your assumption?

The idea that GW can't improve its interactions with the customer base is absurd. They have little to no interaction so anything would be a step up.

Instead of assuming that the complaints are some kind of hive-mind irrational hatred, maybe consider that the complaints are real, but they're not being addressed or acknowledged.
Much, much bigger companies manage to please most of their customers most of the time.
GW doesn't because of their arrogance and ineptitude.

 Squigsquasher wrote:



Are you familiar with the concept of the Unpleasable Fanbase? Because I'm pretty much convinced that's exactly what GW's fandom is. In fact I'd compare them to Transformers, Star Wars and Pokemon; it doesn't have any fans, just lots of people who allegedly liked it so they have an excuse to complain about how terrible it is now and how it's been ruined forever.

But I must be quiet and go along with the hate bandwagon like a good little dakkatard, lest I be noticed for not hating everything GW does and be banned again.

Its a really good point, a lot of people will never be pleased to matter what, and even if the majority are, you will never be able to please everyone.
I only really see the hate when i come on this Forum, IRL in the clubs and stores the hate is nowhere near as bad as it is on here, well not in the UK anyway.
Most people i speak to only have one issue, the prices.

Its to be expected though, there will always be a few people with an obvious agenda,but some people really cant afford it, some people really dont like the rules and some people feel really let down.
Those not happy will always speak more and louder that those that are happy, especially if it is a subject that is important to them, thats just the way the internet, and forums work for the most part.

So it's okay to use other companies that are not in the miniature wargaming business as an example, but when other people do it it's moving goalposts?

Wait so your argument is that GW's problems are due to being a big company, and not because they're run by fething morons?

GW is a small portion of the wargaming market; they might be the largest currently but they're also steadily declining when their competitors are slowly increasing.

Also, a lot of knowledgeable people with backgrounds in finance/economics/business have analyzed GW's financials and statedt that the company is in a bad way. I'd trust the opinion of someone with actual background in running a business or financials than someone who just looks at the profit and says "Well, they were profitable. No issue here".

Blizzard gets a lot of flak with stuff for WoW, but at least they will talk about it. Even if I disagree with some of their reasons for let's say nerfing a class, at least they state their reasons it's not the voice of god from the mountain and no mere mortal may dare question the divine word of truth because the gates of Olympus are shut.

GW gets flak because they are borderline insulting, and consider their customers to be drooling idiots that buy anything with a GW logo on it because it has a GW logo on it, no matter the price or usefulness (which again is outright insulting and insinuates that their customers just think "Oooh shiny!" like an animal or someone with a mental disability) and it shows with some of their releases. That's a big reason why they get flak. It's not some "GW Haters Club" on the internet a la 4chan or similar troll sites that get together and decide to go trolling the web putting down GW, it's legit complaints often from former customers that want to be customers again but don't want to deal with a company that has such vitriol and disdain for the people helping them stay in business.

 Murenius wrote:

"and the companies will shutdown, like its starting to happen to GW." Now you are the one claiming things without proof. GW's revenue is pretty constant since 2009, so on what do you base your assumption?

GW's revenue dropped almost 9% in the past year and their profits dropped 42%, despite having re-released their two biggest selling lines during that period (SM and 7th ed 40k), if you don't even know this...

WayneTheGame wrote:
Wait so your argument is that GW's problems are due to being a big company, and not because they're run by fething morons?

GW is a small portion of the wargaming market; they might be the largest currently but they're also steadily declining when their competitors are slowly increasing.

No, they're not. These are their figures for the last 9 years.

Year, Rev, Prof, Rev(IA)
2014, 123.5, 12.3, 123.5
2013, 134.6, 21.3, 134.6
2012, 131.0, 19.1, 135.0
2011, 123.1, 15.3, 130.8
2010, 126.5, 16.0, 141.5
2009, 125.7, 9.0, 147.1
2008, 110.3, 2.5, 128.4
2007, 109.5, (1.8), 132.6
2006, 115.2, 4.2, 145.2

WayneTheGame wrote:
Also, a lot of knowledgeable people with backgrounds in finance/economics/business have analyzed GW's financials and statedt that the company is in a bad way. I'd trust the opinion of someone with actual background in running a business or financials than someone who just looks at the profit and says "Well, they were profitable. No issue here".

Blizzard gets a lot of flak with stuff for WoW, but at least they will talk about it. Even if I disagree with some of their reasons for let's say nerfing a class, at least they state their reasons it's not the voice of god from the mountain and no mere mortal may dare question the divine word of truth.

GW gets flak because they are borderline insulting, and consider their customers to be drooling idiots that buy anything with a GW logo on it because it has a GW logo on it, no matter the price or usefulness (which again is outright insulting and insinuates that their customers just think "Oooh shiny!" like an animal or someone with a mental disability) and it shows with some of their releases. That's a big reason why they get flak. It's not some "GW Haters Club" on the internet a la 4chan or similar troll sites that get together and decide to go trolling the web putting down GW, it's legit complaints often from former customers that want to be customers again but don't want to deal with a company that has such vitriol and disdain for the people helping them stay in business.

The point that most critics elude is that if it really was that simple people wouldn't be buying the stuff. The only argument that you get for this (as you do) is claiming they are idiots. Now let's take a step back and look at other possible explanations. And in my eyes the most probable is: summed up the customers like what is offered and they are willing to pay for it. Calling them idiots (or comparing them to disabled people... very mature) is hardly an argument. I rather think people on the internet hate the fact that there are people with another opinion And if someone does not agree to your point of view he obviously must be a moron since he doesn't see the shiny truth, even if it is rubbed into his face...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

PhantomViper wrote:

 Murenius wrote:

"and the companies will shutdown, like its starting to happen to GW." Now you are the one claiming things without proof. GW's revenue is pretty constant since 2009, so on what do you base your assumption?

GW's revenue dropped almost 9% in the past year and their profits dropped 42%, despite having re-released their two biggest selling lines during that period (SM and 7th ed 40k), if you don't even know this...

Check the figures above. Compared to the last 9 years this is not really a strong fluctuation. Taking one year out of the context doesn't say anything about the trend.

GW are also having some redevelopment work done on warhammer world this year, it does not look cheap either.
Im not sure this has been mentioned.

 Murenius wrote:

Check the figures above. Compared to the last 9 years this is not really a strong fluctuation. Taking one year out of the context doesn't say anything about the trend.

I'm not going to re-hash with you the discussions that have been going on about this in the past months / years suffice it to say that you've just demonstrated that you don't know anything about the history of GW in the past 10 years and their progress after the burst of the hobbit bubble. Please go read and inform yourself about it.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rayvon wrote:
GW are also having some redevelopment work done on warhammer world this year, it does not look cheap either.
Im not sure this has been mentioned.

I'm sure that come next financial statement it will be shown that those redevelopment works will have cost about as much as the new site...

 Squigsquasher wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
There's nothing GW can do. The internet's GW hate cult is so massive that even if GW gave out their models for free, released the most solid set of rules ever, allowed any and all conversions and made a cure for AIDS, people would still be decrying them as the Wargaming Great Satan and whinging on about how much better Warmachine is.

Better late than never coming to defend fair lady GW...

*Gasp* How DARE I find the endless torrents of "GW SUXX I BET I COULD RUN A HUGE COMPANY MUCH BETTER THAN THEM BAAAAWWWWW!" tiresome! I must flagellate myself and bow before the shrine of Infinity and crappy kickstarter projects!

Are you familiar with the concept of the Unpleasable Fanbase? Because I'm pretty much convinced that's exactly what GW's fandom is. In fact I'd compare them to Transformers, Star Wars and Pokemon; it doesn't have any fans, just lots of people who allegedly liked it so they have an excuse to complain about how terrible it is now and how it's been ruined forever.

But I must be quiet and go along with the hate bandwagon like a good little dakkatard, lest I be noticed for not hating everything GW does and be banned again.

Or, you could accept the fact that much of the criticism is justified.

And, you could understand that most of the people who are complaining are people who have a long standing relationship and extensive investment of time and money with GW. These aren't people who are merely fans of another game that are trying to pull down another company. They are fans of what GW used to be and could still be in the future who are unhappy with what GW is today.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Murenius wrote:


"and the companies will shutdown, like its starting to happen to GW." Now you are the one claiming things without proof. GW's revenue is pretty constant since 2009, so on what do you base your assumption?

Their most recent annual report?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Murenius wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Wait so your argument is that GW's problems are due to being a big company, and not because they're run by fething morons?

GW is a small portion of the wargaming market; they might be the largest currently but they're also steadily declining when their competitors are slowly increasing.

No, they're not. These are their figures for the last 9 years.

Year, Rev, Prof, Rev(IA)
2014, 123.5, 12.3, 123.5
2013, 134.6, 21.3, 134.6
2012, 131.0, 19.1, 135.0
2011, 123.1, 15.3, 130.8
2010, 126.5, 16.0, 141.5
2009, 125.7, 9.0, 147.1
2008, 110.3, 2.5, 128.4
2007, 109.5, (1.8), 132.6
2006, 115.2, 4.2, 145.2

None of those figures have anything to do with what percentage of the overall market share GW possesses.

In the USA, at least, the wargaming market has been growing, year over year, at about a 15% for several years. GW's sales numbers during that time have been flat or declining. That indicates that GW's percentage of the market share is declining.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Murenius wrote:


Check the figures above. Compared to the last 9 years this is not really a strong fluctuation. Taking one year out of the context doesn't say anything about the trend.

You mean the trend in gross revenue that has been moving downward since 2009?

Profits are nice, but if revenue consistently drops, eventually it has to come home to roost. That's pretty basic business school stuff.

GW's most recent business year's gross revenue was almost 17% lower than 2009. The general trend over that period is downward. Their profitability remained high during that period primarily through dramatic cost-cutting measures combined with price increases. If one combines their price increases with the revenue decreases, it's easy to show that the company is selling somewhere in the neighborhood of 25% fewer units than they were in 2009.

Their last annual report, put into context with the last 9 year - as posted - is not really showing a company on the downgrade.

Btw, I'm not saying that the criticism is not justified, at least partly. The trush, as always, lies somewhere in the middle of the positions. They COULD do things better and more customer friendly. But many smaller companies revered as being better would become similar if they got more success and their game widespread.

@PhantomViper: As you please, it's not like I'll miss insults to disabled people in the discussion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Saldiven wrote:

In the USA, at least, the wargaming market has been growing, year over year, at about a 15% for several years. GW's sales numbers during that time have been flat or declining. That indicates that GW's percentage of the market share is declining.

Do you happen to have those figures about the US market somewhere in context? I'd be very much interested in reading those.