TheCustomLime wrote:
Momentum, really. 40k is big because 40k is big. People pick up 40k because that is what everyone else is playing. It's going to be a slow death as GW squanders away it's market domination.

and rich nerds that buy 20k points worth of forgeworld every few months. there seems to be quite a few of those around.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
Because people like me continue to buy the models, play the game and have a good time. I don't give a rat's poop chute about how GW delivers their rules or what gets updated at what time or how balanced it is.

I've got a FLGS and a group of friends to play games with and the friends have similar views on how the game is played, don't go crazy about power levels, enjoy throwing dice and play with the rules presented to us in all but the most obvious 'well this needs to be fixed' case. And when it needs to be fixed, we fix it between ourselves, don't make a fuss about it and carry on with our game.

I understand I'm not the only person in the world and that not everyone has the options that I do, but as long as there's enough casual players like myself playing the game and still enjoying it, the books released with it and the company itself because we interact with them in the 'I'll just buy my models from wherever' sense, GW will do just fine. So will the beer and pretzel companies.

Yeah, there you go.

You know, you could ask: "With movie tickets costing 5 times more than they did 20 years ago, and concession costing 10 times more, and plots being constantly regurgitated, how do movies stay alive and how do studios not go under?" The answer is just that there are enough people who will go to the next Avengers movie to pay Robert Downey Jr. his big, fat paycheck. Not that I begrudge him that; he's exactly what I imagine Tony Stark to be

Jaxler wrote:
So, I'm net to 40k, and been here for a few months. I keep seeing these endless complaints about GW, and stuff, and the more I see the more I wonder how this game and GW stay afloat.

Because the complaints you are seeing are coming from a tiny fraction of the entire armount of wargamers on the planet. Negative comments are also made more readily than positive ones, and the ones being happy with GW aren't here complaining - that's why you only see the negative. And as evidenced by vaurious DakkaDakka polls, the amount of people doing the complaining actively is indeed, a drop in the ocean. You can accept this or deny it, it doesn't matter.

Your view is based on a single/multiple internet forums, and in reality that doesn't account for much in the end. On a global scale things are quite different. In fact, any company making a profit of millions in this economical state and such a niche market is a company that is doing rather well in the scale of things ( be it that their profits have dropped massively. ) This is also simply a fact.

 Runic wrote:

Jaxler wrote:
So, I'm net to 40k, and been here for a few months. I keep seeing these endless complaints about GW, and stuff, and the more I see the more I wonder how this game and GW stay afloat.

Because the complaints you are seeing are coming from a tiny fraction of the entire armount of wargamers on the planet. Negative comments are also made more readily than positive ones, and the ones being happy with GW aren't here complaining - that's why you only see the negative. And as evidenced by vaurious DakkaDakka polls, the amount of people doing the complaining actively is indeed, a drop in the ocean. You can accept this or deny it, it doesn't matter.

Your view is based on a single/multiple internet forums, and in reality that doesn't account for much in the end. On a global scale things are quite different. In fact, any company making a profit of millions in this economical state and such a niche market is a company that is doing rather well in the scale of things ( be it that their profits have dropped massively. ) This is also simply a fact.

to be fair, the complaints about balance and prices being so high people I know had to quit aren't limited to this forum. Also going after community websites isn't exactly smart IMO no matter how you crack it.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Momentum, really. 40k is big because 40k is big. People pick up 40k because that is what everyone else is playing. It's going to be a slow death as GW squanders away it's market domination.

This. A huge , compering to other systems community, although I must say that why a few years ago shops were able to support themselfs by selling GW games, right now in my area the only one left out of four is the one that focused on MtG and board games.

And the people you know are also quite a small sample size. And I wasn't going "after" a community website, simply stated what is true when it comes to quite many internet communities.

I am seeing similar sentiments to what is expressed on here echoed by other players I encounter IRL. This is definitely not isolated to the internet.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am seeing similar sentiments to what is expressed on here echoed by other players I encounter IRL. This is definitely not isolated to the internet.

Me too.

If GW started today, and they released the rule sets they have for the price they charge, I'm willing to bet they would gain almost no traction at all. They grew big in a time when they had no competition, but it mostly is momentum keeping them going at the moment. Judging by their falling profits their momentum is definitely slowing. So it isn't just 'people on the internet complaining about everything', there's definitely more to it than that.

 Robisagg wrote:
Mainly because all of this negativity is a very, very vocal minority. Plenty of people are playing 40k and having a blast. Same logic as how a lot of people won't write a good review for a restaurant, but if they feel the need to write a bad review they shout it from the rooftops.

It may be a minority, but it's a large enough minority to cause GWs revenue to drop every year the past 5+ years. 49% is still a minority, but if 49% of your customers are unhappy, it isn't magically less of a problem than if 51% of your customers were unhappy. The "vocal minority" excuse gets thrown around almost as much as "forge the narrative" and "beer and pretzels", it's also just as poor of an argument.

People also love the setting. Space Marines are popular because Space Marines are cool, and people want to play Space Marines even though their rules are not very good.

People love space marines too much to ever let go. Hence GW battering them with prices, bad rules and people still forking over the cash.

 Runic wrote:

Because the complaints you are seeing are coming from a tiny fraction of the entire armount of wargamers on the planet. Negative comments are also made more readily than positive ones, and the ones being happy with GW aren't here complaining - that's why you only see the negative. And as evidenced by vaurious DakkaDakka polls, the amount of people doing the complaining actively is indeed, a drop in the ocean. You can accept this or deny it, it doesn't matter.

Your view is based on a single/multiple internet forums, and in reality that doesn't account for much in the end. On a global scale things are quite different. In fact, any company making a profit of millions in this economical state and such a niche market is a company that is doing rather well in the scale of things ( be it that their profits have dropped massively. ) This is also simply a fact.

To consider this point from another angle - GW does not really care about people's opinions on the Internet. They acknowledge forums like this exist and do everything in their power to keep employees from using them to promote their products.

It's easy to mistake the conversations here as something that have a broader significance. But the truth is GW's sales are not really impacted by the conversations that happen here, and they don't gain from engaging people with wildly differing opinions. If you think about it, how often can you satisfy an Ork and an Eldar player in real life? The best thing to do is avoid the conversation altogether.

What GW does instead is set up hobby centers and release really good looking models. People's impressions of the game are based around colorfully painted figures that display a lot of imagination. The politics of long time players don't have the same impact as seeing the finished product up front, GW knows this and acts accordingly. Despite diminished profits over recent years, they have a great sales model for action figures.

The reason GW is huge and other companies are not is that other companies don't have the marketing and distribution model that GW has, or the capital to make big moves in the marketplace. That would require venture capital, which doesn't seem to be very focused on the tabletop gaming industry at the moment.

Don't get me wrong - I think GW has made a mistake by not working harder to cultivate a more loyal fan base online. Friends of mine work in brand research and licensing products from companies like GW, and the negative exposure / rate of attrition in forums like this impacts GW's opportunities to make traction in other markets such as video games, movies, comics, collateral like bibs and sippy cups and the like. While I have never really waded into the raw attitudinal data they collect about GW and Space Marines, I know that what they find is enough to make licensing GW products less than attractive compared with other brands.

The way it's been explained to me is like this: if someone loved Spider Man as a teenager, there's a good chance they like Spider Man as an adult and would be willing to spend money on a movie to get into Spider Man's world for a little bit. That person might also be willing to buy t-shirts, comics, action figures, board games, etc that were licensed from Marvel Comics. Part of the reason that happens is that people have had no negative interactions with the brand over the years. Maybe there was a storyline that was particularly unappealing and caused someone to stop reading the comic, but that's what retcons are for - they eliminate negative experiences.

With GW, it's a little more complex. They sell you a worldview, take much of your money over an extended period, and create incentives (based on your investment) to keep you from leaving the game. New rulesets ensure you never reach the point where you have everything you need for the game, and variations in the rules keep you locked into this system. The only response for most players is to eventually quit when this system is no longer affordable, which often leaves people with a hole in their lives. GW does nothing to address that, and it leaves people with VERY bad memories where they swear off the product forever. The Internet is where we go to discuss these feelings, because we get a larger audience for them.

From my perspective, GW's lack of attention to it's playerbase is what keeps the company from getting huge, not what influences profits. They do a great job with direct sales at the expense of being a worldwide franchise. But they don't have the resources / vision to make the experience better for long time players which are key to capitalizing on the value of their IP on a global level. We won't see GW go away any time soon, but we will see them operate similarly to a late-stage direct sales operation that has to sell products through direct interaction.

The company they are most similar to is Cutco - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cutco. Great knives, but easily imitated and not universally loved.

^I like his explanation.

Also GW isn't to the point where it's easily imitated yet. The models are still a level above and beyond the competition in almost every way.

Because every gaming system on the planet has a negative and vocal minority. And a minority scales with the size of the player base.

40k has many, many vocal players... because it has many many many many many players, the majority of which are very happy with the game and the experience of playing it.

The same is true for WoW. CoD. Warmachine. Magic the Gathering. etc etc.

The reality is that the vast majority of 40k players enjoy the setting, like the models, enjoy the painting and play friendly games that don't cheese.

GW are a creative, interesting company who work hard on their games. Are they perfect? Not in the slightest. But then no gaming system is. Complex game systems are difficult to balance. Especially one of this scale.

Amayasu wrote:
Because every gaming system on the planet has a negative and vocal minority. And a minority scales with the size of the player base.

40k has many, many vocal players... because it has many many many many many players, the majority of which are very happy with the game and the experience of playing it.

The same is true for WoW. CoD. Warmachine. Magic the Gathering. etc etc.

The reality is that the vast majority of 40k players enjoy the setting, like the models, enjoy the painting and play friendly games that don't cheese.

GW are a creative, interesting company who work hard on their games. Are they perfect? Not in the slightest. But then no gaming system is. Complex game systems are difficult to balance. Especially one of this scale.

They clearly do not work hard on their games. It's pretty obvious that they're not even trying to balance it at this point. If it seemed like there was an effort to balance the game (as in, a strong codex being redone weaker, not stronger still such as Eldar, and other Codexes consistently being sub par, ala Dark Angels), the 'complex games are difficult to balance' argument might hold water, but when game balance gets worse with each release, it's pretty clear they're just awful at writing rules. I mean cmon they've been doing it for 30 years, they should've figured it out by now. Other companies have in 5-10 years.

 ImAGeek wrote:

Amayasu wrote:
Because every gaming system on the planet has a negative and vocal minority. And a minority scales with the size of the player base.

40k has many, many vocal players... because it has many many many many many players, the majority of which are very happy with the game and the experience of playing it.

The same is true for WoW. CoD. Warmachine. Magic the Gathering. etc etc.

The reality is that the vast majority of 40k players enjoy the setting, like the models, enjoy the painting and play friendly games that don't cheese.

GW are a creative, interesting company who work hard on their games. Are they perfect? Not in the slightest. But then no gaming system is. Complex game systems are difficult to balance. Especially one of this scale.

They clearly do not work hard on their games. It's pretty obvious that they're not even trying to balance it at this point. If it seemed like there was an effort to balance the game (as in, a strong codex being redone weaker, not stronger still such as Eldar, and other Codexes consistently being sub par, ala Dark Angels), the 'complex games are difficult to balance' argument might hold water, but when game balance gets worse with each release, it's pretty clear they're just awful at writing rules. I mean cmon they've been doing it for 30 years, they should've figured it out by now. Other companies have in 5-10 years.

Why would they bother trying to balance it? People keeping buying regardless. Unhappy chumps still handing over the cash for a background they once loved.

The sad reality.

From what I can tell it's mainly because they are entrenched from years of essentially a monopoly. So there's a 40k community that sticks around as people don't look at other games for a variety of reasons (usually something related to quality or aesthetics by which they usually mean "It's not identical to 40k") and because people play 40k, people interested in starting wargaming have to play 40k.

For instance, there's a solid 40k community in my area. There's also some Warmachine communities (and maybe others, not sure) but they're much smaller and the "largest" community is still 40k. So someone in that area is likely to pick up 40k just because if they ask what miniatures games go on, the answer is 40k and if they were thinking of Warmachine or whatever they'd get a "Nope, not here" answer.

GW doesn't care about balance, they only care about money. Every new codex is more powerful than the last one, so that they keep selling that army. And they don't understand what makes 40K unique and interesting.

... this has been a common accusation back in the day of 2nd edition (this was before the internet was really a thing, so I can only speak about local gamers). A very vocal minority. Some quit after RT, others never bought anything by GW/Citadel, and others still bought their stuff.

I myself quit some time later, around the time 3rd edition hit. Now I'm back at it, along with a few of my friends, and we're having a blast. All that doom & gloom is just business as usual, as far as I'm concerned. It never was any different.

Amayasu wrote:
Complex game systems are difficult to balance. Especially one of this scale.

They're especially difficult to balance when you make absolutely no effort to do so, then tell anyone who asks for balance that they're having fun wrong and if they don't like it, they should fix the $135+ rules system themselves.

GW does some pretty lousy stuff, despite what some posters say about how they are unfairly characterized.

They tried to destroy a children's book because it used the words "Space Marine" in the title, they spent their time litigating every third-part bits maker out of the market until one of them (CHS) had enough support to actually defend themselves, and then GW got really messy- they made claims of ownership for every concept under the sun, from Roman numerals and fur on shoulder pads to space marines, power armor, you name it. They got caught trying to get authors to sign off ownership of things GW never actually acquired. In the end, it turned out that their claims barely had any merit (because it IS entirely legal to sell third-party accessories, GW just couldn't take that someone else was getting a piece of the pie). And on top of it all, during the trial themanagement made continuous disparaging remarks about their customers, touting how we all buy for the thrilling hobby of "purchasing Citadel miniatures."

Beyond their affairs outside of the game, inside is a mess as well. There has been a concerning trend of accelerating rule cycles to the point where the last core rule set was shorted by two years. They moved over to hardback versions of the army books and people thought that was so they could get everything solid for a time, but they've already gone and invalidated the hardback Eldar book, so that wasn't right.

The army books are all over the place. Some are more reasonable, others like this Eldar book blow everything out of the water. This has the effect of keeping the game so out-of-balance they people are always clamoring for new rules, even if there is never an intention of new rules actually fixing anything.

GW has been the juggernaut of the industry for many years. Its business practices were sometimes questionable in the past, but it has a captivating story and the best models around. These last five years, these attributes are starting to become less absolute, and the amount required to play 40k is becoming grossly excessive for a lot of people.

Time will tell what ends up happening to 40k, but if WHFB is anything to go by, the game might not be as universal and it once appeared to be.

It's quite funny this "vocal minority" argument. I've yet to see any evidence from the people spouting it so emphatically.

Given GW's relatively recent financial reports, we can see it's pretty much kept afloat simply by its bulk and its name. They've had to raise prices and cut assets, both signs that they're not moving as much product as they used to. If their customer base has increased, then that's not exactly a good sign. Unfortunately for GW, it is in decline, no matter how much the faithful wish to deny it.

To answer your question OP, GW lives because it's big, and there are enough naysayers and people that just don't care how GW treats them pumping their money into the problem to make it not die.

My bet would be that in two or three years these same people defending GW will be turning their backs on it too. If GW had its way, that would happen sooner rather than later.

 liquidjoshi wrote:
It's quite funny this "vocal minority" argument. I've yet to see any evidence from the people spouting it so emphatically.

People who spout that the active hence vocal users on the internet make up a majority of wargamers on a global scale are even quite funnier.

Some good points were made , but to me it's basically the unique IP and artstyle, not to mention the quality of the models....except for the odd comic relief pg13 models, but you always have forgeworld to offer appropriately grimdark versions for that.

I would start other games, but none of them appeal to me in the setting and style quite like 40k. If somebody made a skirmish game of 40k, like malifaux/inifinty etc, then I would pick that up wihtout a second thought.

Stockholm Syndrome.

 Runic wrote:

 liquidjoshi wrote:
It's quite funny this "vocal minority" argument. I've yet to see any evidence from the people spouting it so emphatically.

People who spout that the active hence vocal users on the internet make up a majority of wargamers on a global scale are even quite funnier.

Prove me wrong.

Vocal minority makes things seem worse than they are. People like me are taking 40k for what it is, an over-the-top super tech game where we do extremely rude things to eachothers models, and have fun doing so.

Also, IMO at least, 40k has no viable competitors with model ranges for they type of game it is. WM seems to be the most popular competitor, bust streampunk is a very niche aesthetic, the models at least look more CC oriented with very limited shooty options, and the Hordes side of things looks more fantasy than super tech, to me at least.

The X wing game is popular in my area, but obviously a very different type of game.

Locally, theres a large market amongst people in my age group for historicals, but again a very different type of game, and a different market where viable models can be had from numerous suppliers, some of which are very reasonably priced, even cheap.

To me, one of GWs blindspots is catering to young people. I suppose that the starter sets are good values, but they typically throw some of the worst unit options in them, so when Johnny takes his models to the FLGS he'll tend to get stomped, and tell his mom and dad he needs more and more money to build a viable army. For non-rich parents , or those who don't want to spoil their children with lavish luxury expenditures, this game is a no-go. And if kids aren't playingn the game, GW won't be able to cash in on nostalgia or continuance of an ongoing hobby from childhood into adulthoid, and will have to try to grab new adult customers some other way.

Also, they could do alot for themselves by developing some halfway decent video games. Maybe there are some decent games, but everything I've seen has been horriblwe.

Pretty much every game Relic pushed out was great. Too bad they're gone now. All GW is releasing now is mobile junk, and I'm not exactly looking forward to eternal crusade.

MarsNZ wrote:
As a new player it's probably best to stay away from websites like this one. The (very) vocal minority who decries literally everything the 'Evil Empire' does is the height of tedium yet they are a tireless bunch and some mods even jump in on it, so it's here to stay unfortunately.

Well, to be completely fair, it's the pro-GW side that tends to get threads locked. I won't name anyone, but if you go through threads where the text was removed, it seems to be the same few offenders. If I see them frequently posting in a thread I know it's going to get closed quite soon

I am not buying the vocal minority argument either. In some companies, there are clearly a vocal minority. Blizzard and CoD are perhaps the biggest examples, perhaps the madden games too. These companies/games tend to have a large player base that grows every time something is released, so it's easy to say that the people complaining about the game is a minority.

However, with GW, this is not the case. With costs up for models and profits down, the most obvious logical conclusion is that less sales are being made. (You could argue they make a lot less per model then they use to, but I don't see how that is possible). Less sales doesn't mean less players, a lot of people own models from earlier editions and only buy new codexes, but it is a downward trend that has recently started, so it's easy to make that statement.


As to how they stay in the game, they are the only large sci-fi game that caters to a large variety of tastes.

Warmachine is steam punk, which isn't sci-fi. It also isn't a collector's game, it is a war gamer's game. It's why you see it put out as an example of a superior game. Outside of prices, the biggest problem with GW is that the rules are terrible. Warmachine fixes the pricing problem from a war gamers view point (armies are cheaper to field) and has a much better collection of rules.

X-wing is sci-fi but it's not armies, it's starships. There are people who seem really into starships, but I don't know many.

I can go on comparing model companies and games, but you'll find that other companies either cater to the wargaming crowd or the collector's, not both. GW has issues because of the price, terrible rules, and their inability to cultivate a playerbase (warmachine's press gangers, for example).

The part that always get me is the "no other company makes models as good as GW".

If you haven't even bothered to give a look at other companies' models, don't go around making these kind of absolute statements. Because as much as I think some of the plastic kits GW has released in recent years are truly neat and a pleasure to assemble and paint, in the overall scheme of things I believe they're actually falling behind the competition when it comes to quality (and don't even get me started on the quality/price issue).

This is probably more evident in regards to fantasy miniatures, and I'd bet something it's one of the reasons they're probably going to get rid of Fantasy as we know it, but even in the sci-fi range other companies are currently releasing models that are as good or even better than GW and (usually) at a fraction of the price.

As for the OP question, it's already been answered so I won't get into detail: for a long time GW has been the huge fish in the tiny pool. Their problem right now is they're steadily losing weight, while the pool is getting bigger and bigger, and the competition stronger.

 Toofast wrote:

 Robisagg wrote:
Mainly because all of this negativity is a very, very vocal minority. Plenty of people are playing 40k and having a blast. Same logic as how a lot of people won't write a good review for a restaurant, but if they feel the need to write a bad review they shout it from the rooftops.

It may be a minority, but it's a large enough minority to cause GWs revenue to drop every year the past 5+ years. 49% is still a minority, but if 49% of your customers are unhappy, it isn't magically less of a problem than if 51% of your customers were unhappy. The "vocal minority" excuse gets thrown around almost as much as "forge the narrative" and "beer and pretzels", it's also just as poor of an argument.

100% agree.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
Stockholm Syndrome.

Basically. put 5k-10k into a game and you become a prisoner. Glad I've taken on painting - now I can sell my stuff and maybe move onto something else.

Most other companies who's models are as good as - or better than - GW are much, much less modifiable/kitbashable.

At the end of the day, GW really does put out some really nice kits.

I put in a bit over 1800 and I am one. I just though about how long did I have fun with the army I bought. And it was more or less 2 years. For the same cash I could buy a new PC or keep buying books for 10 years every month, and still have left over money.

 Runic wrote:

 liquidjoshi wrote:
It's quite funny this "vocal minority" argument. I've yet to see any evidence from the people spouting it so emphatically.

People who spout that the active hence vocal users on the internet make up a majority of wargamers on a global scale are even quite funnier.

In my experience most 40k gamers know that there are serious problems with the game. I have met like 3 people who deny anything is wrong. Most of them just chug along anyway because they enjoy the game despite its problems.

There is a vocal minority. The vocal minority who stick up for GW no matter what they do. The vocal minority who can't differentiate between GW and 40k. The vocal minority who refuse to engage in rational debate and instead revert to insults.

And they are a vocal minority as any poll in recent times has shown.
The majority who like 40k in some form, be it the gaming, the modelling or the fluff actually accept that GW is a very poor company when it comes to rules designs, pricing and community relations/public relations.

 Toofast wrote:
they should fix the $135+ rules system themselves.

I did. Nobody wanted to play it.

That has nothing to do with the game though. My group for one will sooner play with the official rules of any game than pick up fan made rules. We only house rule when we absolutely have to.

There are bulletin board posts from the beginning of (internet) time decrying GW's rubbish business practices and forseeing their demise

The arguments are all exactly the same.

 Flinty wrote:
There are bulletin board posts from the beginning of (internet) time decrying GW's rubbish business practices and forseeing their demise

The arguments are all exactly the same.

"It hasn't happened yet so it won't happen" isn't a strong argument. "I haven't gotten the flu yet, so I must be immune!"
Look at their financial reports compared to business practices and you'd get a clearer picture.

To answer the op...

It is the psychology of elitism. It is the same reason that some people clamour to pay $20,000 us for a gaudy/ugly handbag or a ridiculous amount of money for shoes with a red sole.

People with more money than brains will line up and demand to be overcharged for an average or even low quality product if that product is "perceived" as the "elite" product of its type.

Such individuals want to, not only be a part of the crowd, but perceived as superior to the rest of the group. They do this by showing that they can afford to waste money in such a manner(whether they really can afford to or not).

Also, recent sales and financials do show a steady erosion of GW's customer base. The company is primarily surviving on the fact that they have a huge well of cash from years of overcharging their customers. And........

Imo, they won't change. The exec's know that the type of model making business as GW is will soon be obsolete(if not already). The Board of directors is most likely going to price gouge and ride the current system into a bankruptcy nose dive and will then deploy their golden parachutes just in time for their retirement.

Because the setting is awesome.

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Not from quality of rules.
Also, look at their declining sales. Something else is going on.

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Again, due to momentum.

Does anything you just said have anything to do with anything that I've said? I know you have a chip on your shoulder and all, but your post seems pointless as a response to me.

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Source please. By Dakka's latest polls Warmahordes are almost dead even in popularity and Dakka started as a 40k site.

 Melissia wrote:
Does anything you just said have anything to do with anything that I've said? I know you have a chip on your shoulder and all, but your post seems pointless as a response to me.

Yes it does. The game can be garbage and still be the most popular game, because of momentum. If it was launched in the state it was in today in a time with more competition, it wouldn't be the most popular. It grew large in a time where it was pretty much the only wargame around. That's why it's still so popular.

It's like you didn't read my post... It was only four words.

 Flinty wrote:
There are bulletin board posts from the beginning of (internet) time decrying GW's rubbish business practices and forseeing their demise

The arguments are all exactly the same.

Go back and read my list of questionable decisions by GW (the CHS case, "Spots the Space Marine") and tell me those aren't legitimate concerns.

 Accolade wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
There are bulletin board posts from the beginning of (internet) time decrying GW's rubbish business practices and forseeing their demise

The arguments are all exactly the same.

Go back and read my list of questionable decisions by GW (the CHS case, "Spots the Space Marine") and tell me those aren't legitimate concerns.

Legitimate concerns don't exist here Accolade. It's just 'whining'.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Accolade wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
There are bulletin board posts from the beginning of (internet) time decrying GW's rubbish business practices and forseeing their demise

The arguments are all exactly the same.

Go back and read my list of questionable decisions by GW (the CHS case, "Spots the Space Marine") and tell me those aren't legitimate concerns.

Legitimate concerns don't exist here Accolade. It's just 'whining' about people who dare to question GW Corporate policy.

Fixed that for you.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Source please. By Dakka's latest polls Warmahordes are almost dead even in popularity and Dakka started as a 40k site.

Dakka polls are hardly scientific. And if you look at the number of posts being made daily for 40k vrs WMH I think you'll see a different story.

confoo22 wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Source please. By Dakka's latest polls Warmahordes are almost dead even in popularity and Dakka started as a 40k site.

Dakka polls are hardly scientific. And if you look at the number of posts being made daily for 40k vrs WMH I think you'll see a different story.

Dakka polls are not scientific but posts on a mainly 40k forum are?


For the record, I'm surprised anyone thinks 40k is smaller then WMH. It's true in my meta, but that's because 40k has been dying out. We all own way more 40k stuff then WMH, and if we actively played, it would shift in 40k's favor.

confoo22 wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Source please. By Dakka's latest polls Warmahordes are almost dead even in popularity and Dakka started as a 40k site.

Dakka polls are hardly scientific. And if you look at the number of posts being made daily for 40k vrs WMH I think you'll see a different story.

Just my point. A poll on a 40k fan site would not be scientific and would be horribly biased ...yet Warmahordes pulled a tie.

As to the number of posts? Easy, GW sells flawed rules that they don't properly support. The majority of 40k posts are about rules conflicts, questions of how to play or about buying/building armies. Between poor rules, lack of consistent support, people who spend all their time being built/painted, 40k people spend all their time here while Warmahordes players are out actually playing their games.

Edit for auto-correct

Akiasura wrote:
Dakka polls are not scientific but posts on a mainly 40k forum are?

Nope, sorry, my point was you can pluck evidence to support your theory, should have been a little more clear on that. So just to sum it up: You can't base an entire blanket argument based on a single online forum.

 Accolade wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
There are bulletin board posts from the beginning of (internet) time decrying GW's rubbish business practices and forseeing their demise

The arguments are all exactly the same.

Go back and read my list of questionable decisions by GW (the CHS case, "Spots the Space Marine") and tell me those aren't legitimate concerns.

 Captain Avatar wrote:
As to the number of posts? Easy, GW sells flawed rules that they don't properly support. The majority of 40k posts are about rules conflicts, questions of how to play or about buying/building armies. Between poor rules, lack of consistent support, people who spend all their time being built/painted, 40k people spend all their time here while Warmahordes players are out actually playing their games.

Edit for auto-correct

That is a whole lot of assumption on your part based off of no evidence. I usually play two to three 40k games a week, paint several minis, spend time with my family, work my full time job, and still find time to post on here and several other sites. It's not some kind of crazy juggle in your life to do so.

confoo22 wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
As to the number of posts? Easy, GW sells flawed rules that they don't properly support. The majority of 40k posts are about rules conflicts, questions of how to play or about buying/building armies. Between poor rules, lack of consistent support, people who spend all their time being built/painted, 40k people spend all their time here while Warmahordes players are out actually playing their games.

Edit for auto-correct

That is a whole lot of assumption on your part based off of no evidence. I usually play two to three 40k games a week, paint several minis, spend time with my family, work my full time job, and still find time to post on here and several other sites. It's not some kind of crazy juggle in your life to do so.

Pretty sure he was joking, mostly.

Thankfully I didn't invest much in 40k. I was hesitant from things I heard of GW and the player base. All proven right unfortunately.

GW will die. It is dying. I will speed that up by not playing the game. I always got the RPG's.

confoo22 wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Dakka polls are not scientific but posts on a mainly 40k forum are?

Nope, sorry, my point was you can pluck evidence to support your theory, should have been a little more clear on that. So just to sum it up: You can't base an entire blanket argument based on a single online forum.

Please to note that while my evidence was, admittedly anecdotal..at least I provided some info as oppoaed to an unfounded and unsubstantiated claim as to 40k's unchallenged dominance.
You seem to be cherry picking here in order to avoid(distract from?) ..the fact that times have changed and GWs dominance is no longer an assured thing.

 Gamgee wrote:
Thankfully I didn't invest much in 40k. I was hesitant from things I heard of GW and the player base. All proven right unfortunately.

GW will die. It is dying. I will speed that up by not playing the game. I always got the RPG's.

So you didn't get too heavily involved, didn't like it, decided to move on, and have decided you're going to try and ruin the game for others who do still enjoy it? If you didn't invest too heavily, then what do you care if people are still playing? It sounds like you DID enjoy it if you're so upset you're willing to try to tank the game for others just to punish GW, that or you're just being kind of petty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
You seem to be cherry picking here in order to avoid(distract from?) ..the fact that times have changed and GWs dominance is no longer an assured thing.

Uhm, you're the one who cherry picked a poll, and I never said that GW would forever have market dominance. Anyone who's been in a tabletop store regularly for the last five year can tell you that GW's being crowded by newer games.

Going to answer this one because there is nothing else like it you may claim all these games are better and such and such but they are simply pretenders to thevthrone. No game has the back ground scope of 40k. No game has the balance between detail and quantity it does. More importantly lots of model designs something new all the time and its not slowing down that's why it won't die simple variety.

7th edition is great for 40k

What can replace 40k ?
Warpath please there models suck so do the rules and no where near a 10th of the models of 40k and background is just a scrible on a napkin
Infinity ha please metal models no thanks skirmish game dull give us huge army's any day I want a 100 guys to die and still have a hundred more.
Drop zone commander a bigger rip off than gw by far and is forever in the shadow of old epic.
There is nothing to replace it and that is the problem so until there is hail to the king baby

Pmsl

 Melissia wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Because the setting is awesome.

There are books and RPG's to satisfy that. The game is still garbage.

And yet the game remains the most popular of the tabletop wargames.

Wonder if this will hold true come this December.

confoo22 wrote:

 Captain Avatar wrote:
You seem to be cherry picking here in order to avoid(distract from?) ..the fact that times have changed and GWs dominance is no longer an assured thing.

Uhm, you're the one who cherry picked a poll, and I never said that GW would forever have market dominance. Anyone who's been in a tabletop store regularly for the last five year can tell you that GW's being crowded by newer games.

No, you misunderstand. I meant cherry picking as in you are choosing to argue with the person who at least brought some evidence (though anecdotal) as opposed to commenting upon Melissa's unsubstantiated claim. It is the decision to demand that I provide better evidence while not asking the same of the person who made an unsubstantiated claim.

Truth is that there is no way to accurately tell which game is the dominant without a massive worldwide statistical analysis. It is for this reason people should avoid unsubstantiated claims and stick to offering up "qualified" personal observations (local gaming scene, changes to forums ,ect., ect. ...). Then we can compare observations.

10penceman wrote:
Going to answer this one because there is nothing else like it you may claim all these games are better and such and such but they are simply pretenders to thevthrone.
Pmsl

Each to their own. Me? I disagree. T

10penceman wrote:
No game has the back ground scope of 40k.

I can't apgree. I think the lore is given far more credit than it deserves - a lot of it, especislly stuff written in the last few years is extremely poor.

10penceman wrote:
No game has the balance between detail and quantity it does.

You call it detail, I call it bloat.

10penceman wrote:
More importantly lots of model designs something new all the time and its not slowing down that's why it won't die simple variety.
Pmsl

Depends really. I've read elsewhere that companies entering the death spiral tend to move to a model of 'sell anything/everything' regardless of quality. And typically with escalating prices. Whether that applies to gw is up for debate. that said - I've been less than impressed with the majority of their new releases.

10penceman wrote:

7th edition is great for 40k

A lot if people disagree though.

10penceman wrote:

Infinity ha please metal models no thanks skirmish game dull give us huge army's any day I want a 100 guys to die and still have a hundred more.

Indeed. Personally, I'm not gonna spend four hours per model painting/modelling only for them to be removed a dozen at a time. Kinda pointless, IMO. Massive casualties belong to epic-skale games like epic, or dzc. As for the metal thing - metal is awesome. Regarding skirmish - lots if people find them very engaging. I liked the fact that I've only got a dozen guys on the board - each guy matters.

10penceman wrote:

Drop zone commander a bigger rip off than gw by far and is forever in the shadow of old epic.

It's a pretty solid game, actually. At least it's supported (rip specialist games).

10penceman wrote:

There is nothing to replace it and that is the problem so until there is hail to the king baby

The question is: should one game replace it? Personally, I feel that the hobby is better served by a variety of smaller games, rather than one singke behemoth.

Deadnight wrote:


Indeed. Personally, I'm not gonna spend four hours per model painting/modelling only for them to be removed a dozen at a time. Kinda pointless, IMO. Massive casualties belong to epic-skale games like epic, or dzc. As for the metal thing - metal is awesome. Regarding skirmish - lots if people find them very engaging. I liked the fact that I've only got a dozen guys on the board - each guy matters.

40k is definitely not the game for you. There is nothing wrong with that; you just won't ever be happy playing 40k no matter what GW does. It's like trying to fit a round peg into a square hole.

1. 40k is an ideal game for people who enjoy spending endless hours modelling, and proudly play their collections on a large scale; inevitably, that means dozens must be removed. This is the game and hobby, and if you don't like that, you won't enjoy 40k. Personally, I spend 10-25 hours per model (including troops), and since my typical army has 100 models and typical collection has 200+ models (or more!), that's 1000-5000 hours per collection in hobby, which I enjoy immensely -- every much as bit as playing opponents.

2. If skirmish games are your preference, 40k is not the right game for you. There are much better skirmish games. On the other hand, there is no Cool Factor in skirmish games, to me. On my tables, I have more time, money, and models invested in TERRAIN than 100% of skirmish games I see -- never mind the models. Heck I probably have more time and effort spent on my table tiles than everything on the table in most skirmish games I see.

GW stays afloat because they cut costs over the last 5 years while raising prices of their product to milk their customers.

 Talys wrote:
2. If skirmish games are your preference, 40k is not the right game for you.

And what is 40k, after all, if not an oversized sci-fi skirmish game?

 Korinov wrote:

 Talys wrote:
2. If skirmish games are your preference, 40k is not the right game for you.

And what is 40k, after all, if not an oversized sci-fi skirmish game?

No, a game recreating an epic battle is not an oversized skirmish game at all.

I mean, I could go on forever, but I won't. But just look at the mechanics of WM/H compared to 40k -- they are totally different. WM/H rules are not enjoyable if you had 200 points per side. It just isn't designed for that. 40k is playable at low point values (eg Kill Team), but other games with better mechanics are simply superior at that scale.

Look at real life: two elite squads fighting in city ruins (alone) would be totally different than two battalions advancing upon each other in the same city ruins. For one, you want need exceptional heroes; for the other, you want regimented discipline.

You can't write a tabletop game (one set of rules) that's simultaneously as efficient at moving 75-150 models as is efficient for commanding 10-20 models. I mean, that's just common sense.

 Talys wrote:

 Korinov wrote:

 Talys wrote:
2. If skirmish games are your preference, 40k is not the right game for you.

And what is 40k, after all, if not an oversized sci-fi skirmish game?

No, a game recreating an epic battle is not an oversized skirmish game at all.

I mean, I could go on forever, but I won't. But just look at the mechanics of WM/H compared to 40k -- they are totally different. WM/H rules are not enjoyable if you had 200 points per side. It just isn't designed for that. 40k is playable at low point values (eg Kill Team), but other games with better mechanics are simply superior at that scale.

Look at real life: two elite squads fighting in city ruins (alone) would be totally different than two battalions advancing upon each other in the same city ruins. For one, you want need exceptional heroes; for the other, you want regimented discipline.

You can't write a tabletop game (one set of rules) that's simultaneously as efficient at moving 75-150 models as is efficient for commanding 10-20 models. I mean, that's just common sense.

It is an oversized skirmish game. Mechanically it is. There's far too many rules for the size of armies that you play, it's bloated and unwieldy, it either needs to be big armies with simplified rules, or smaller armies with complex rules. Saying the mechanics are different to WMH is a strange argument, the mechanics of WMH are also completely different to infinity, another skirmish game, which is completely different to Malifaux, another skirmish game, etc...

I offer my opinion on how 40k stays alive and how Games Workshop does not go under:

40k seems to be Warhammer Fantasy set in a science fiction environment, and Warhammer Fantasy seems to be Tolkein's writings. As far as I have read The Lord of the Rings is the best selling fiction work in the history of the modern world. Therefore, 40k draws on a rich intellectual property to which another layer of creativity from artists, sculptors, other writers etc., have added their own ideas. Each layer in turn helps keeps 40k going.

Games Workshop does not go under, in part, due to Tolkein's works and the works of many other creative people. Also, its customer base itself is creative: they take the product and add to it their creativity, painting, sculpting, even strategy and tactics, etc. Now many may have moved on, but regardless, the inertia is already there. Another post suggested a slow death if the company were to end. 40k has a depth to it that reaches back to the 1930s or 40s (Tolkein).

40K isn't deep, the fanbois just assume it is. Once you get off the jarhead coloured armour fiction, you see how rubbish and shallow it actually is.

 ImAGeek wrote:


It is an oversized skirmish game. Mechanically it is. There's far too many rules for the size of armies that you play, it's bloated and unwieldy, it either needs to be big armies with simplified rules, or smaller armies with complex rules. Saying the mechanics are different to WMH is a strange argument, the mechanics of WMH are also completely different to infinity, another skirmish game, which is completely different to Malifaux, another skirmish game, etc...

In that case, are you trying to assert that all large scale wargames are just oversized skirmish games? If so, that's fine; I'll just disagree, as I believe that certain games (like WMH or Infinity) would be unplayable, or at the very least very unenjoyable given 100 models vs 100 models. Also, because all of the models are monopose, the table would become extremely repetitive.

My opinion is that not everyone wants to play 100 vs 100 models; just as not everyone is interested in playing 20 models vs 20 models. But I'll just leave the difference between skirmish/epic battle games at that, as there is nothing constructive to be gained by further arguing it.

For myself only, I can state it pretty simply. My attraction to tabletop miniature wargames requires three elements: awesome miniatures, an awesome tabletop, enacting an epic battle. Yes, I am shallow. It's not just the Rule of Cool -- it's ALL about the Rule of Cool, for me.

Removing any of those 3 elements instantly kills it for me, and I'd simply rather play a PC game, where at least there is no setup time, and the graphics are great. I am not interested in a tabletop miniature game that doesn't involve awesome miniatures exquisitely modelled, that doesn't have terrain that makes me go, "Wow!", or that feels puny. I want to see the fall or salvation of Hollonan, not some elite soldiers fighting in city streets.

Now, do I actually enjoy the game? YES! I love playing my Grey Knights, Ultramarines, Dark Eldar, Eldar, Blood Angels, or Imperial Guard. Do I try to win? Of course! And I am happier if I win than if I lose. On the other hand, I'm way more unhappy if my opponent isn't having a good time, and if I need to make adjustments I will gladly do so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
40K isn't deep, the fanbois just assume it is. Once you get off the jarhead coloured armour fiction, you see how rubbish and shallow it actually is.

Like every tabletop miniature game or RPG, 40k is what you and your friends want to make of it. A crappy, frustrating cheesefest of grey plastic soldiers going pew pew, I win -- or awesome armies colliding in a jaw-dropping tabletop. It's what you're willing to put into it, and what you want to get out of it. If everybody actually agreed with you, they'd stop buying GW products, and GW would *actually* go under.

 Talys wrote:
No, a game recreating an epic battle is not an oversized skirmish game at all.

I mean, I could go on forever, but I won't. But just look at the mechanics of WM/H compared to 40k -- they are totally different. WM/H rules are not enjoyable if you had 200 points per side. It just isn't designed for that. 40k is playable at low point values (eg Kill Team), but other games with better mechanics are simply superior at that scale.

Look at real life: two elite squads fighting in city ruins (alone) would be totally different than two battalions advancing upon each other in the same city ruins. For one, you want need exceptional heroes; for the other, you want regimented discipline.

You can't write a tabletop game (one set of rules) that's simultaneously as efficient at moving 75-150 models as is efficient for commanding 10-20 models. I mean, that's just common sense.

If you want an "epic battle" go play Epic. Fifty infantrymen, ten bikes and three tanks is not an army. Specially not in a setting where Imperial Guard is said to deploy troops by the millions. 40k has never been more than a skirmish game, it just got incredibly more bloated and oversized than ever in its latest editions. 28mm scale is simply not suited for mass battle games, unless your gaming table is the size of a basketball court.

I do not play WM/H, but for the looks of it, it seems to be an skirmish game. A true skirmish game. What 40k was in 2nd edition. Unlike its current iteration which is an oversized and bloated skirmish game with too much special rules it can't handle well.

 Talys wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:


It is an oversized skirmish game. Mechanically it is. There's far too many rules for the size of armies that you play, it's bloated and unwieldy, it either needs to be big armies with simplified rules, or smaller armies with complex rules. Saying the mechanics are different to WMH is a strange argument, the mechanics of WMH are also completely different to infinity, another skirmish game, which is completely different to Malifaux, another skirmish game, etc...

In that case, are you trying to assert that all large scale wargames are just oversized skirmish games? If so, that's fine; I'll just disagree, as I believe that certain games (like WMH or Infinity) would be unplayable, or at the very least very unenjoyable given 100 models vs 100 models. Also, because all of the models are monopose, the table would become extremely repetitive.

No, that's not what I'm saying. Large scale wargames have simpler rules, so the game isn't bloated. 40k has the rules of a skirmish game, but the model count of a large scale wargame.

 Runic wrote:

 liquidjoshi wrote:
It's quite funny this "vocal minority" argument. I've yet to see any evidence from the people spouting it so emphatically.

People who spout that the active hence vocal users on the internet make up a majority of wargamers on a global scale are even quite funnier.

Not a majority, just a large enough percentage to cause GWs revenue adjusted for inflation to fall every year for nearly the last 10 years. I'm not sure what universe you live in but here in the real world, that's a problem for any business.

 Korinov wrote:


If you want an "epic battle" go play Epic. Fifty infantrymen, ten bikes and three tanks is not an army. Specially not in a setting where Imperial Guard is said to deploy troops by the millions. 40k has never been more than a skirmish game, it just got incredibly more bloated and oversized than ever in its latest editions. 28mm scale is simply not suited for mass battle games, unless your gaming table is the size of a basketball court.

The reason Epic never took off in my local meta is that it fails at the Rule of Cool. Awesome Epic tabletops don't look anywhere NEAR as impressive as awesome 40k tabletops. At least, I have never seen one. And, because of the scale of the miniatures, you can't really make them awesome. So, it only meets one of my 3 criteria.

 Korinov wrote:


I do not play WM/H, but for the looks of it, it seems to be an skirmish game. A true skirmish game. What 40k was in 2nd edition. Unlike its current iteration which is an oversized and bloated skirmish game with too much special rules it can't handle well.

It is definitely a skirmish game, and it would be much worse than 40k, if you were to try to adapt it to the model count of typical 40k games.

I'd would welcome another awesome, high-model count, impressive scifi miniature wargame. Such a beast does not exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying. Large scale wargames have simpler rules, so the game isn't bloated. 40k has the rules of a skirmish game, but the model count of a large scale wargame.

To my previous point, there are no other large scale scifi miniature games, whatever you want to call it. If there were, I assure you, I'd be modelling and playing it, in addition to 40k

But really, our group has a lot of fun playing 40k. The general flow of the game is quite simple, and really, it's just a matter of learning special rules. No biggie. Keep in mind also that a lot of the original 40k crowd were AD&D fans -- in fact, I learned of 40k, because I used to read White Dwarf, as an AD&D supplement -- and there never existed a more complicated set of rules than AD&D, where Gary Gygax made a table for everything conceivable, and where every month Dragon Magazine piled on more rules to the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Toofast wrote:

Not a majority, just a large enough percentage to cause GWs revenue adjusted for inflation to fall every year for nearly the last 10 years. I'm not sure what universe you live in but here in the real world, that's a problem for any business.

When GW's revenue was increasing year over year (for decades, really), there were also very vocal players who piled on about what a horrible game 40k was, how awful GW was, and how it would go bankrupt. Some things never change, and it really doesn't matter if GW's profit doubled next year, or dropped into the red; the folks who wish it would just die would still wish the same

So because people complained when their revenue was increasing YoY, it makes it irrelevant that people complaining now have yearly financial reports to back up their position? Wow, so many logical fallacies there I don't even know where to start.

I remember back in the late nineties we had three stores that all kept themselves afloat on mainly GW products. I mean sure, they all sold other stuff, but you could walk into any of these three stores at almost any time and there would surely be either a 40K or WHFB game going. Fast forward to now, and one of those three stores has gone completely out of business. One still keeps itself afloat on main GW products, but both the owner and his wife work other jobs and pay for a chunk of the store out of pocket. They do it for the community, but I don't know how long that'll last. The other store keeps a bare minimum of GW products in, and mostly makes it's money through board games, MTG, anything WOTC, and the very occasional game of 40K.

I feel that GW is trying to push their fanbase away, though they don't realize it. They try to bring new people in and to keep their old players loyal, but it's mostly through terrible tactics such as anything that has Matt Ward. Don't get me wrong, Grey Knights look so cool and the lore is awesome (my point), but it doesn't fit in, was unnecessary, and breaks the lore. I used to play me some WHFB along with the rest of the community, but then GW started this End Times crap and now we're afraid with where it's going to go. Yeah, there's the option of playing with the older rules after the new ones come out but that shouldn't have to be our option. Now, I used to play 40K and have recently picked it up again with a new army, but I have noticed a trend since the older days. Every time it's a new army that gets boosted to the fore, requiring anyone wanting to play competitively to go pick up this new army. They make no attempt to balance things because they don't care, they just want to sell models. That is how GW thinks: Money. They don't care because they assume they will continue to pick up new players, and that older ones will stay. But the numbers aren't lying. Some of us, like myself, will try to stay because for the most part the lore is awesome and the game is fun, but eventually we'll be pushed away as well.

If GW doesn't change their tactics, which I noticed they are by a recent, massive push in video games, then they're doomed. It might take a decade or two, but it will happen.

GW's implosion is visibly beginning over the last year. I give them 4-5 years at most before they're bought out or reform themselves so heavily they're an entirely different company.

Their current model is unsustainable.

 Toofast wrote:
just a large enough percentage to cause GWs revenue adjusted for inflation to fall every year for nearly the last 10 years.

Since you're talking about parallel universes, I highly doubt the vocal minority on an internet forum has caused a profits drop of tens of millions, which is in essence exactly what you're saying in this sentence word for word. Turn the ten millions into tens of thousands of dollars and we're probably getting close.

( Which is an amount GW makes in a day or two. )

Jaxler wrote:
So, I'm net to 40k, and been here for a few months. I keep seeing these endless complaints about GW, and stuff, and the more I see the more I wonder how this game and GW stay afloat.

The game is horribly balanced from what I see, and things like the new eldar aren't even rare from what I've heard.

The company has people who wright lore do the crunch, and people who do crunch wright lore.

The game keeps getting more and more expensive until large portions of the community leave. Literally most of the people who got me interested in 40K say they stopped playing/buying models because the prices are stupid high. It's like they enjoy killing off their customer base.

They go after fan and community sights, basically alienating more of their customer base.

They act like they have a monopoly when they don't.

They're website is useless, and only works as a marker place.

They release stuff that could have been easily balanced by less than a day's worth of play testing.

Seriously, I don't see why GW hasn't died yet, or at least 40k. It seems like a war game that the company doesn't want to treat like a game, while also having a company that wants to kill the community. How is GW and 40k not dead? They've been doing this for like 10 years. It doesn't make sense to me.

well, it seems obvious to me, they have incredible fluff, several games, the site isn't as useless as you might think, everyone is playing it so more people want to play it, the models are easy to built and look cool, it's not balanced but isn't terribly un-balanced, i mean a DA army could destroy an Eldar army. And it's a great community.

 Toofast wrote:
So because people complained when their revenue was increasing YoY, it makes it irrelevant that people complaining now have yearly financial reports to back up their position? Wow, so many logical fallacies there I don't even know where to start.

Nobody has to back up their position at all. I'm just saying that there are people who don't like GW and don't like 40k, who will have a negative outlook on GW, regardless of their revenue, sales or anything else. There are players who simply have a grudge against GW and would like it to see it fail as a company. For these people, no matter how well GW performs, even if it becomes a billion dollar company, they will STILL never say that GW did something right.

If you want a comparison, just take Apple and Microsoft. There are people who just despise one of these companies or the other (sometimes both), and are extremely vocal about it. But no matter how loud they scream, Microsoft will probably outlive them, as, likely, will Apple. Windows or iOS can't die fast enough for these folks. Just like there are people who wish GW would go bankrupt and 40k put out of its misery so some other magical, awesome, player-friendly company can have a chance to gestate.

The behavior of this group of people is rooted in emotion rather than rational decision-making. Which is fine, and they're allowed to express their opinion.

However, the existence of these folks is not an opinion; it's an observable fact.

There is also a group of people who hold the belief that if GW fails badly enough -- coming close to the flame, but not being enveloped by it -- GW will suddenly see the light, and become some magical, awesome, player-friendly company (with cheaper products). And so they hope, year over year, that GW will do badly enough to realize the error of their ways, but not badly enough to actually go bankrupt. I am pretty sure this is just fanciful thinking.

I have been on the 40k Trukk since pretty much the beginning, and I can say that although the corporate attitude of GW has changed, the tenor 40k has not. It never was a particularly balanced game, it never really made any scientific or logical sense, it never had rules that were simple or straightforward. Just like Gary Gygax's AD&D, we all wondered which parts were scribbled on a dinner napkin, and which parts were written while under the influence of recreational hallucinogens. And yet, for us, it was always a blast and for us, the miniatures and armies were so cool that really, nothing else mattered.

Speaking as someone with a very negative view of GW currently, I absolutely don't want them to fail. I'd like to see them turn things around, and frankly it would be almost sad for them to fail. They're basically an institution in the Wargaming field.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Speaking as someone with a very negative view of GW currently, I absolutely don't want them to fail. I'd like to see them turn things around, and frankly it would be almost sad for them to fail. They're basically an institution in the Wargaming field.

In my opinion, 40k has enough of a die-hard, loyal fanbase that needs not much more than a model and rules treadmill to keep it in business for a pretty long time (no different than Apple die-hards that will keep buying iPhones and iPads every year, even the ones that are virtually identical to their last year's model). The only question is, does it shrink, does it grow, does it bring in new blood, and does it remain relevant?

If GW made certain changes, would those answers be more positive? Would the company be more profitable? Would that be the vision of the company that management sees?

I don't pretend to know the answers.

 Talys wrote:

 Korinov wrote:

 Talys wrote:
2. If skirmish games are your preference, 40k is not the right game for you.

And what is 40k, after all, if not an oversized sci-fi skirmish game?

No, a game recreating an epic battle is not an oversized skirmish game at all.

I mean, I could go on forever, but I won't. But just look at the mechanics of WM/H compared to 40k -- they are totally different. WM/H rules are not enjoyable if you had 200 points per side. It just isn't designed for that. 40k is playable at low point values (eg Kill Team), but other games with better mechanics are simply superior at that scale.

Look at real life: two elite squads fighting in city ruins (alone) would be totally different than two battalions advancing upon each other in the same city ruins. For one, you want need exceptional heroes; for the other, you want regimented discipline.

You can't write a tabletop game (one set of rules) that's simultaneously as efficient at moving 75-150 models as is efficient for commanding 10-20 models. I mean, that's just common sense.

I hate retro-future settings to ever call them "epic'. The only thing epic about 40K is the price.

To be honest, I'd give me some measure of satisfaction to see GW go out of business permanently and have the IP passed on to someone competent.

 Runic wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
just a large enough percentage to cause GWs revenue adjusted for inflation to fall every year for nearly the last 10 years.

Since you're talking about parallel universes, I highly doubt the vocal minority on an internet forum has caused a profits drop of tens of millions, which is in essence exactly what you're saying in this sentence word for word. Turn the ten millions into tens of thousands of dollars and we're probably getting close.

( Which is an amount GW makes in a day or two. )

1. You do know that profit and revenue are 2 completely different things, right?
2. If unhappy customers don't cause a drop in sales, what does? The weather?
3. A quick glance at GWs past 2 yearly financial reports would show you that, adjusted for inflation, their REVENUE has dropped tens of millions of dollars.

Revenue in 2013 - £134.6 million
Revenue in 2014 - £123.5 million
£11.1 million drop in revenue. Converted to USD, that's just shy of $20 million. Keep in mind that this sharp decline in revenue included imperial knights and SM codex, 2 of GWs best selling products.

I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers from, possibly the parallel universe you speak of. The half year results for 2014 aren't looking much better.
Half year 2012 - £67.5 million
Half year 2013 - £60.5 million
Half year 2014 - £56.5 million

Hmm, I'm seeing a pattern here...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also this might help
Profit - the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something
Revenue - income, especially when of a company or organization

How does 40k stay alive?

In Australia it simply doesn't. 7th edition got outsold 7-1 by Dystopian Wars 2nd ed. GW sales have fallen to 10-15% of the total revenue* of our largest FLGS and are still falling.

GW has done this to themselves here by gaking on us with absurd prices and anti consumer practices, the same practices and prices that are now becoming more and more common in the American market, which they seem to be loosing a lot of ground in as well.

40k stays alive because GW are not working quite fast enough to kill it.

 jonolikespie wrote:
How does 40k stay alive?

In Australia it simply doesn't. 7th edition got outsold 7-1 by Dystopian Wars 2nd ed. GW sales have fallen to 10-15% of the total revenue* of our largest FLGS and are still falling.

GW has done this to themselves here by gaking on us with absurd prices and anti consumer practices, the same practices and prices that are now becoming more and more common in the American market, which they seem to be loosing a lot of ground in as well.

40k stays alive because GW are not working quite fast enough to kill it.

Good to hear. Couldn't happen to a nicer company.

 Toofast wrote:


1. You do know that profit and revenue are 2 completely different things, right?
2. If unhappy customers don't cause a drop in sales, what does? The weather?
3. A quick glance at GWs past 2 yearly financial reports would show you that, adjusted for inflation, their REVENUE has dropped tens of millions of dollars.

1. I do, and I originally talked about profit, you switched over to revenue. Shall I inquire if you know the difference between profit and revenue just the same?
2. You don't know any other reason that might cause a drop in both revenue and profit than unhappy customers? Oh wow. I wonder if there's a point to even explaining.
3. And so has their net profit.

And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

In any case, I find you a bit odd. You talk about crushing other people in tournaments with your new and shiny Eldar, and at the same time you flame GW and the game in vaurious posts. What's up with that? Just a side question. You can also turn off your offensive tone if capable, it does nothing aside from collecting reports.

I quite like the fluff and the *idea* of the game, even if the execution is messy and the rules over-complex.

The models can be fun and are very flexible in many cases (multi-pose and so on).

This is why I buy from discount retailers (who in turn buy from GW). GW still make money from the sales and I get my models. I don't expect I am alone in this, and so GW persists.

 Runic wrote:

 Toofast wrote:


1. You do know that profit and revenue are 2 completely different things, right?
2. If unhappy customers don't cause a drop in sales, what does? The weather?
3. A quick glance at GWs past 2 yearly financial reports would show you that, adjusted for inflation, their REVENUE has dropped tens of millions of dollars.

1. I do, and I originally talked about profit, you switched over to revenue. Shall I inquire if you know the difference between profit and revenue just the same?
2. You don't know any other reason that might cause a drop in both revenue and profit than unhappy customers? Oh wow. I wonder if there's a point to even explaining.
3. And so has their net profit.

And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

In any case, I find you a bit odd. You talk about crushing other people in tournaments with your new and shiny Eldar, and at the same time you flame GW and the game in vaurious posts. What's up with that? Just a side question. You can also turn off your offensive tone if capable, it does nothing aside from collecting reports.

The vocal minority might be the only ones complaining on the internet but their opinions reflect a much larger group that isn't a minority - it's the majority of their customers.

10penceman wrote:Going to answer this one because there is nothing else like it you may claim all these games are better and such and such but they are simply pretenders to thevthrone. No game has the back ground scope of 40k. No game has the balance between detail and quantity it does. More importantly lots of model designs something new all the time and its not slowing down that's why it won't die simple variety.

Battletech has a greater scope of background than 40K. It also does not regurgitate the same story 80 million times and call it new. Of course the premise is always the same, one royal house/clan is always trying to take out another. Factions have been destroyed, and it is looking like there may be another casualty or two in the future.

The game is far more detailed than 40K also, but it is a skirmish game. It does have a mass battle version with different rules, that appears to be growing in popularity also.

There are new models coming out every month or so, and they are usable by everyone. Sure, the scale precludes the excessive amounts of crap....i mean detail that GW models have on them, but they are decent models, most of the time.

The game has a much better balance to it overall, yes there are issues, but not as horrendous as GW games have.

There is not as much "variety" in 40K either. When a decent portion of your range is the same model with different weapons..... At least Battletech has over 200 unique models, just in Mechs, that is not including the Fighters, tanks, helicopters, infantry, or wet navy stuff. Then of course there is the space warship stuff, and dropships.

Don't get me wrong, I like playing 40K, but the balance has been what is slowly making me not care anymore. The stuff you claim is also quite false. Also, from what I can tell, the Warmahordes game is getting a decent amount of background now too. So every thing in your list is not only already false, but it is eroding with newer games as well.

What makes 40K most played by me, is that finding local Battletech players is difficult.

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

 clamclaw wrote:

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

People who have been complaining about the game generally aren't even power gamers or people who try to maximise their lists, generally it's casual/theme/fluff players, because they're the ones screwed over most by the crappy rules. Competitive players will just play what's competitive.

 clamclaw wrote:

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

The vocal minority that complain on the forums are currently a direct reflex of the silent majority that simply drop the game and walk away. GW's own reports show this.

GW's reports do not indicate people walking away from the game, nor does a vocal internet minority reflect a majority.

Not buying doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer. Buying less doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.
Buying used goods doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.

I'm doing all of the above in turns currently. And I'm a satisfied customer.

Infact, most likely the majority of GW's customers are satisfied instead.

 Runic wrote:
GW's reports do not indicate people walking away from the game, nor does a vocal internet minority reflect a majority.

Not buying doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer. Buying less doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.
Buying used goods doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.

I'm doing all of the above in turns currently. And I'm a satisfied customer.

Infact, most likely the majority of GW's customers are satisfied instead.

Those satisfied customers must all be Eldar players!
Conspiracy!

Runic wrote: (snip)....I highly doubt the vocal minority on an internet forum has caused a profits drop of tens of millions, which is in essence exactly what you're saying in this sentence word for word. Turn the ten millions into tens of thousands of dollars and we're probably getting close.

( Which is an amount GW makes in a day or two. )

No, my group leaving the game cost GW 10's of thousands of dollars. A group of 15 players with model collections running into the 150k to 200k points worth for our senior players and the newer players having at least 40k points worth.
"We" were collecting 10's of thousands of dollars worth each year .... until 6th and 7th editions.

This is just one group, there are many more. Enough to offset any gains from new players brought into the community.

clamclaw wrote:

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

This...a thousand times this, is what is wrong with the community and why players are steadily leaving.
People who insist that we are "powerless" to affect positive changes. That we should shut up and just keep buying whatever crap GW puts out. Attitudes like this are driving just as many people away from 40K as GW's recent policies have.

This delusion that this is an "internet only" problem of just a few malcontents is ridiculous.
Some of us travel extensively and have witnessed first hand, on a nationwide scale, the damage that GW has done to themselves, the 40K community and tabletop miniature gaming in general.

And, fyi, None of our group played tournaments. We just hated the new rules.

Edit for spacing

 Runic wrote:
GW's reports do not indicate people walking away from the game, nor does a vocal internet minority reflect a majority.

Not buying doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer. Buying less doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.
Buying used goods doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.

I'm doing all of the above in turns currently. And I'm a satisfied customer.

Infact, most likely the majority of GW's customers are satisfied instead.

In fact, every month, millions of dollars are spent by customers around the world on GW products. I'll bet that the majority of these people are actually happily buying product, rather than, say, being forced to do so with a scatter laser pointed at their head, or because their profession demands it, or because of some reason other than genuinely wanting whatever it is GW is selling

You also make a great point, Runic, that just because someone doesn't buy stuff doesn't mean that they're unsatisfied. If a player is happy playing their Ultramarines, they would have not purchased any release last year. That doesn't mean that they're unhappy with the game or hobby. For all the groaning that GW releases things "too rapidly", if you only play 1 faction, it's really quite long between the time that you get new toys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Captain Avatar wrote:

People who insist that we are "powerless" to affect positive changes. That we should shut up and just keep buying whatever crap GW puts out. Attitudes like this are driving just as many people away from 40K as GW's recent policies have.

This delusion that this is an "internet only" problem of just a few malcontents is ridiculous.
Some of us travel extensively and have witnessed first hand, on a nationwide scale, the damage that GW has done to themselves, the 40K community and tabletop miniature gaming in general.

Of course, if you're not enjoying 40k, you should stop spending money on it. That's just common sense.

However, voting with your wallet won't necessarily effect change. For example: just because you stop buying burgers and fries because they're unhealthy doesn't make them get produced with any less cholesterol. Likewise, GW will make less money with each lost customer, but that doesn't mean they want to be something other than what they are.

The difference between the real world and the Internet is that in the real world, most people go do something else and don't really think too much about it anymore. On the Internet, people gripe about it for years after, apparently, which is something I really don't understand, because if I stopped playing 40k, I would not be visiting 40k forums.

Id argue that the increase of criticism on line is indicative of a growing malcontent among the general player populace. Especially coupled with the declining revenue.

 Captain Avatar wrote:

People who insist that we are "powerless" to affect positive changes. That we should shut up and just keep buying whatever crap GW puts out. Attitudes like this are driving just as many people away from 40K as GW's recent policies have.

I wonder if there's actually anyone who thinks what you describe here, or if you among a few others like to make it up. I atleast haven't seen anyone saying anyone should continue buying and shut up.

Stating that a small fraction of the community has no real power over things on a larger scale doesn't translate into that. It translates into a small fraction of the community having no real power over things on a larger scale.

You can make a stand and not spend, and that is fine asfar as I'm concerned atleast.

And just like Talys says, I have a lot of friends who have spent way less during the last year than at the launch of 7th edition. They have the things they need. They do occasionally make small additions. They are not unsatisfied customers or leaving the game. Instead they are satisfied, actively playing the game and having fun with it.

Maybe the argument of someone not buying/buying less translating into an unsatisfied customer/leaving the game could finally be dealt a killing blow because it's such a fail.

I still keep buying stuff. I still keep complaining. But overall, I'm enjoying myself more than I'm complaining. And there are many complaints.

Amayasu wrote:
Because every gaming system on the planet has a negative and vocal minority. And a minority scales with the size of the player base.

And coupled with the fact that that vocal minority continues to pay for and play the game means everything that comes out of their mouths is wasted.

Business don't care what you say, they care what you do ( or more specifically, don't do, as in "don't use their products").

People like, buy, and play 40k. Whining about it is pointless and only wastes everyone's time. The opposite of love isn't hate, it's apathy.

Well maybe some people are just like me. I played CSM and when 7thedition hit, including the first few 7th Edition codices I was happy, really happy. Every new army wasn´t super strong, they all got nerfed overall. It was at that point when I thought about buying new models to aid my CSM Army, maybe even starting deamons or some other kind of allies. Then the Necron Codex came and I was like: "uhhhhhm why?" That book destroyed everything I hoped for. But I didn´t want to quit at that point. Maybe it will be an exception. Then Khorne Deamonkin came out and I didn´t like it. I´m not a fluff player, I just want my own Chaos Warband with all the gods I want to play not just one. But it was optional, so yeah no big deal. The only real problem I had was the fact that the next rumours said that there will be no new chaos book. Instead they will do another Book for one chaos god. I didn´t like that, and then the eldar hit. Buffed straight to hell and it was at that moment where I thought that I no longer want to play. So I started to search for some alternatives, guess what I haven´t found any. There are many games that I find cool but most of the time are super small games, where you only field around 10-20 models max, or they had a setting I don´t enjoy like realistic World War 2, or Star wars for example. Another difficult thing was to find players for that specific game. Whenever I found a game I was interested in, there were no players around where I live. So yeah as it seems I will most likely just stay with GW and wait for the time when my army might be on the top again, or if a competitor sees the light of the day that fits all my needs.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

People who have been complaining about the game generally aren't even power gamers or people who try to maximise their lists, generally it's casual/theme/fluff players, because they're the ones screwed over most by the crappy rules. Competitive players will just play what's competitive.

To be honest I've seen most complaints in reference to tournament play and how broken cheese lists are. Friendly games will not see as big of a change from the new Eldar as the tournament scene, for fair reasons.

 clamclaw wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

People who have been complaining about the game generally aren't even power gamers or people who try to maximise their lists, generally it's casual/theme/fluff players, because they're the ones screwed over most by the crappy rules. Competitive players will just play what's competitive.

To be honest I've seen most complaints in reference to tournament play and how broken cheese lists are. Friendly games will not see as big of a change from the new Eldar as the tournament scene, for fair reasons.

What about a fluffy craftworld list? 2 of the craft worlds would be quite strong now. Even biel-tan isn't bad.
It's weird to me that Ulthwe might be the weaker craftworld....

I didn't play many fluffy games with my CSM unless I used the SM codex. Alpha legion weren't well represented, but I don't want this to turn into a Chaos Dex thread. There has been quite enough of those since the 4th edition codex dropped

 DarknessEternal wrote:

Amayasu wrote:
Because every gaming system on the planet has a negative and vocal minority. And a minority scales with the size of the player base.

And coupled with the fact that that vocal minority continues to pay for and play the game means everything that comes out of their mouths is wasted.

Business don't care what you say, they care what you do ( or more specifically, don't do, as in "don't use their products").

People like, buy, and play 40k. Whining about it is pointless and only wastes everyone's time. The opposite of love isn't hate, it's apathy.

Exalted for truth.

To the OP:

Take a look around the web for any forum dedicated to a franchise, fandom, or product, and you'll see the same story played out again and again. Threads of so-called "financial experts" showing the irrefutable truths the quarterly reports reveal, indicating the looming demise of a company, only to be proven wrong year after year. Self-appointed "game design gurus" showing how unquestionably broken and flawed the core of the experience is, with proposed fixes and patches that nobody else ever uses. Critics with detailed lists about why you should be ashamed for enjoying such an awful, terrible book or movie or game or meal. Not to mention the conspiracy theorists claiming every possible action taken by an entity, positive or otherwise, is being done exclusively to screw over the consumer.

The commonality here is the lack of anything resembling expertise or real, provable knowledge. It's an internet forum; it's not a place for truth or accountability, but rather of absolutes, subjectivity, and emotional response. The opinions here and from other sources online are just that; opinions, to be taken with the appropriate amount of scepticism. Seek the truth for yourself; you'll be happier and more well-informed for it.

Roknar wrote:
Pretty much every game Relic pushed out was great. Too bad they're gone now. All GW is releasing now is mobile junk, and I'm not exactly looking forward to eternal crusade.

There's Warhammer Total War, which I'm probably going to love. I was initially worried that I'd have to wait a bit for patches due to Total War Rome 2's disastrous launch (though they fixed up the game admirably), but Total War Atilla restored my faith in the Creative Assembly. And plus, Total War Rome 2's launch debacle was mostly SEGA's fault and I think Sanic Bum being the hilarious flop it was taught them some humility.

Although that's Fantasy Battle, not 40k.

For 40k, I'd rather see something like War games (total war's formula pretty much breaks down completely when you get to modern squad based warfare and leave big bricky formations behind), something like Red Dragon but 40k would be pretty sweet, though admittedly a base building RTS on Supreme Commander's scale would also be nice.

Back in the day there was no other good alternatives. I mean there was other systems like MTG, but no fantastic Wartable games except those from Games Workshop.

So Games Workshop is the most renowned of all the wargaming companies. Now we got other companies and new games coming out in a similar style. Theres both Infinity and Warmachine now. However, none has the same large scale as 40k.

Also, all wargaming enthusiasts have either played or at the very least heard of 40k and GW, so if they're trying to introduce a friend to a game they'll either tell them about 40k (which is still very easy to find) or try and get them into some of the other smaller games (which are harder to find, we have no infinity sellers near us).

 Kain wrote:

Roknar wrote:
Pretty much every game Relic pushed out was great. Too bad they're gone now. All GW is releasing now is mobile junk, and I'm not exactly looking forward to eternal crusade.

There's Warhammer Total War, which I'm probably going to love. I was initially worried that I'd have to wait a bit for patches due to Total War Rome 2's disastrous launch (though they fixed up the game admirably), but Total War Atilla restored my faith in the Creative Assembly. And plus, Total War Rome 2's launch debacle was mostly SEGA's fault and I think Sanic Bum being the hilarious flop it was taught them some humility.

Although that's Fantasy Battle, not 40k.

For 40k, I'd rather see something like War games (total war's formula pretty much breaks down completely when you get to modern squad based warfare and leave big bricky formations behind), something like Red Dragon but 40k would be pretty sweet, though admittedly a base building RTS on Supreme Commander's scale would also be nice.

I actually really liked Dawn of War 1 until Eldar became overpowered.
Dawn of War 2 is still something I'll play with friends. A few mods allows most of the races to be included too.

 clamclaw wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

 Runic wrote:
And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

A thousand times this... It seems like people on any forum want to feel like they have semblance of power or sway over their hobby/interest.

At the end of the day, it's not much more than a handful of users on a forum agreeing on the same gripes. There is so much more to the hobby than tournaments and maximizing your army list's power, but it's very easy to get tunnel vision when surrounded by like-minded gamers on a forum.

People who have been complaining about the game generally aren't even power gamers or people who try to maximise their lists, generally it's casual/theme/fluff players, because they're the ones screwed over most by the crappy rules. Competitive players will just play what's competitive.

To be honest I've seen most complaints in reference to tournament play and how broken cheese lists are. Friendly games will not see as big of a change from the new Eldar as the tournament scene, for fair reasons.

I didn't just mean about the Eldar dex, I meant in general. Shoddily written unbalanced rules affect fluffy players more. They could either end up with a crappy army or a ridiculously strong one just depending on what theme or models they happen to like. People who are really competitive will just play the most competitive list in their codex, models/theme be damned. I've seen a lot of Eldar players complaining that their fluffy Saim Hann Eldar list is now really powerful and they're worried people won't play them, where as people who play like... Termie heavy SM won't have much of a chance because termies are crap. Balanced rules would benifit everybody, even super fluffy theme players, contrary to the popular belief that fluffy players aren't bothered about rules balance.

 Jambles wrote:
Take a look around the web for any forum dedicated to a franchise, fandom, or product, and you'll see the same story played out again and again. Threads of so-called "financial experts" showing the irrefutable truths the quarterly reports reveal, indicating the looming demise of a company, only to be proven wrong year after year. Self-appointed "game design gurus" showing how unquestionably broken and flawed the core of the experience is, with proposed fixes and patches that nobody else ever uses. Critics with detailed lists about why you should be ashamed for enjoying such an awful, terrible book or movie or game or meal. Not to mention the conspiracy theorists claiming every possible action taken by an entity, positive or otherwise, is being done exclusively to screw over the consumer.

The commonality here is the lack of anything resembling expertise or real, provable knowledge. It's an internet forum; it's not a place for truth or accountability, but rather of absolutes, subjectivity, and emotional response. The opinions here and from other sources online are just that; opinions, to be taken with the appropriate amount of scepticism. Seek the truth for yourself; you'll be happier and more well-informed for it.

Just like all the naysayers that said TSR's days were numbered back in the day because they lost touch with their customers, just put out crap product after crap product because they expected their customers to just buy it because it had their name on it. Meanwhile the fanboys extolled all their virtues and how big they were and it was impossible for them to fall because they were the biggest and the best, and so on and how many people happily played their games, but didn't say anything about it while the numbers slowly slipped more and more. Then one day the company was on the auction block and suddenly the fanboys were at a loss for what happened and as if it was a complete surprise despite many voices stating it was happening and coming. Yeah it has happened before and it will happen again unfortunatel

Yep the internet is full of opinions and some of them are crazy, but that doesn't necessarily make them all wrong either. Wishful thinking can be as blinding on both sides of the equation, though. Some people hope GW fails, while others believe it will never fail. I don't really have an enmity against them, just sadness that the game world I loved has been squandered by them. I hope if the end comes another company pops in and gives the game the solid face lift and improvements it really needs. I might become a 40k buyer again at that point.

Skriker

Akiasura wrote:

 Kain wrote:

Roknar wrote:
Pretty much every game Relic pushed out was great. Too bad they're gone now. All GW is releasing now is mobile junk, and I'm not exactly looking forward to eternal crusade.

There's Warhammer Total War, which I'm probably going to love. I was initially worried that I'd have to wait a bit for patches due to Total War Rome 2's disastrous launch (though they fixed up the game admirably), but Total War Atilla restored my faith in the Creative Assembly. And plus, Total War Rome 2's launch debacle was mostly SEGA's fault and I think Sanic Bum being the hilarious flop it was taught them some humility.

Although that's Fantasy Battle, not 40k.

For 40k, I'd rather see something like War games (total war's formula pretty much breaks down completely when you get to modern squad based warfare and leave big bricky formations behind), something like Red Dragon but 40k would be pretty sweet, though admittedly a base building RTS on Supreme Commander's scale would also be nice.

I actually really liked Dawn of War 1 until Eldar became overpowered.
Dawn of War 2 is still something I'll play with friends. A few mods allows most of the races to be included too.

Never said the Relic games weren't good, they were pretty fantastic as a whole. But the question of if they still have the capacity to make Dawn of War 3 remains very much unanswered.

I just wish somebody would come up with a dedicated last stand kind of game. I probably played that as much as the main game.

Even the third person horde version from space marine was pretty sweet.

 Kain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Kain wrote:

Roknar wrote:
Pretty much every game Relic pushed out was great. Too bad they're gone now. All GW is releasing now is mobile junk, and I'm not exactly looking forward to eternal crusade.

There's Warhammer Total War, which I'm probably going to love. I was initially worried that I'd have to wait a bit for patches due to Total War Rome 2's disastrous launch (though they fixed up the game admirably), but Total War Atilla restored my faith in the Creative Assembly. And plus, Total War Rome 2's launch debacle was mostly SEGA's fault and I think Sanic Bum being the hilarious flop it was taught them some humility.

Although that's Fantasy Battle, not 40k.

For 40k, I'd rather see something like War games (total war's formula pretty much breaks down completely when you get to modern squad based warfare and leave big bricky formations behind), something like Red Dragon but 40k would be pretty sweet, though admittedly a base building RTS on Supreme Commander's scale would also be nice.

I actually really liked Dawn of War 1 until Eldar became overpowered.
Dawn of War 2 is still something I'll play with friends. A few mods allows most of the races to be included too.

Never said the Relic games weren't good, they were pretty fantastic as a whole. But the question of if they still have the capacity to make Dawn of War 3 remains very much unanswered.

To be fair, GW isn't releasing any videogames, others are licensing their IP to make games themselves.

The outfit that did the original Dawn of War games no longer exists, and that's why we haven't seen a Dawn of War 3.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Kain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Kain wrote:

Roknar wrote:
Pretty much every game Relic pushed out was great. Too bad they're gone now. All GW is releasing now is mobile junk, and I'm not exactly looking forward to eternal crusade.

There's Warhammer Total War, which I'm probably going to love. I was initially worried that I'd have to wait a bit for patches due to Total War Rome 2's disastrous launch (though they fixed up the game admirably), but Total War Atilla restored my faith in the Creative Assembly. And plus, Total War Rome 2's launch debacle was mostly SEGA's fault and I think Sanic Bum being the hilarious flop it was taught them some humility.

Although that's Fantasy Battle, not 40k.

For 40k, I'd rather see something like War games (total war's formula pretty much breaks down completely when you get to modern squad based warfare and leave big bricky formations behind), something like Red Dragon but 40k would be pretty sweet, though admittedly a base building RTS on Supreme Commander's scale would also be nice.

I actually really liked Dawn of War 1 until Eldar became overpowered.
Dawn of War 2 is still something I'll play with friends. A few mods allows most of the races to be included too.

Never said the Relic games weren't good, they were pretty fantastic as a whole. But the question of if they still have the capacity to make Dawn of War 3 remains very much unanswered.

To be fair, GW isn't releasing any videogames, others are licensing their IP to make games themselves.

The outfit that did the original Dawn of War games no longer exists, and that's why we haven't seen a Dawn of War 3.

Yeah, I think that for any future Warhammer 40,000 RTS games, we should perhaps not be deadset on recapturing DoW I and II and instead perhaps try something new. Like Sup Com or Wargames as I mentioned above.

Or perhaps a largely unique style; combining the very attrition based warfare of Supreme Commander and it's megalithic bases with the very in depth tactical nuances and squad based unit organization of wargames.

 Skriker wrote:

 Jambles wrote:
Take a look around the web for any forum dedicated to a franchise, fandom, or product, and you'll see the same story played out again and again. Threads of so-called "financial experts" showing the irrefutable truths the quarterly reports reveal, indicating the looming demise of a company, only to be proven wrong year after year. Self-appointed "game design gurus" showing how unquestionably broken and flawed the core of the experience is, with proposed fixes and patches that nobody else ever uses. Critics with detailed lists about why you should be ashamed for enjoying such an awful, terrible book or movie or game or meal. Not to mention the conspiracy theorists claiming every possible action taken by an entity, positive or otherwise, is being done exclusively to screw over the consumer.

The commonality here is the lack of anything resembling expertise or real, provable knowledge. It's an internet forum; it's not a place for truth or accountability, but rather of absolutes, subjectivity, and emotional response. The opinions here and from other sources online are just that; opinions, to be taken with the appropriate amount of scepticism. Seek the truth for yourself; you'll be happier and more well-informed for it.

Just like all the naysayers that said TSR's days were numbered back in the day because they lost touch with their customers, just put out crap product after crap product because they expected their customers to just buy it because it had their name on it. Meanwhile the fanboys extolled all their virtues and how big they were and it was impossible for them to fall because they were the biggest and the best, and so on and how many people happily played their games, but didn't say anything about it while the numbers slowly slipped more and more. Then one day the company was on the auction block and suddenly the fanboys were at a loss for what happened and as if it was a complete surprise despite many voices stating it was happening and coming. Yeah it has happened before and it will happen again unfortunatel

Yep the internet is full of opinions and some of them are crazy, but that doesn't necessarily make them all wrong either. Wishful thinking can be as blinding on both sides of the equation, though. Some people hope GW fails, while others believe it will never fail. I don't really have an enmity against them, just sadness that the game world I loved has been squandered by them. I hope if the end comes another company pops in and gives the game the solid face lift and improvements it really needs. I might become a 40k buyer again at that point.

Skriker

You make a very good example, well said. I would argue, though, that situation was fairly uncommon - like how many internet pundits have been saying for decades that DC Comics is on the verge of collapse, just because it was a popular target for slag? That said, it's still a good point, so I concede that to you.

To your second point, I agree with you that they aren't necessarily wrong either, but that's beside my point. My crux was that, regardless, one should be skeptical, and seek truth for yourself, or risk falling prey to the people that are wrong but claim not to be, which I would argue are the vast majority.

In all fairness TSR died because of changes in technology, CRPG's crushed pen and paper games, not consumer abuse.

ninety0ne wrote:
In all fairness TSR died because of changes in technology, CRPG's crushed pen and paper games, not consumer abuse.

5th edition DnD is doing just fine. World of darkness made quite a comeback as well after having issues too.

 Jambles wrote:
You make a very good example, well said. I would argue, though, that situation was fairly uncommon - like how many internet pundits have been saying for decades that DC Comics is on the verge of collapse, just because it was a popular target for slag? That said, it's still a good point, so I concede that to you.

To your second point, I agree with you that they aren't necessarily wrong either, but that's beside my point. My crux was that, regardless, one should be skeptical, and seek truth for yourself, or risk falling prey to the people that are wrong but claim not to be, which I would argue are the vast majority.

There are enough motives to believe GW may be currently treading into quite dangerous terrain right now. They are still a relatively solid company, generating profits and with no known debt, so they'll stick around for a while no matter how bad they do in the inmediate future. But the latest financial reports show a trend of declining sales and profits. That's no good in a market that seems to be growing at a healthy rate. I'd say it's a worrying sign that, while a specific market is growing steadily, its biggest company is actually shrinking.

As for the comics industry, I don't remember about DC Comics right now, but afaiac Marvel did find itself in a dire situation in the early 00s until the success of the film adaptations came to the rescue.

ninety0ne wrote:
In all fairness TSR died because of changes in technology, CRPG's crushed pen and paper games, not consumer abuse.

Um, no.

 Grimtuff wrote:

ninety0ne wrote:
In all fairness TSR died because of changes in technology, CRPG's crushed pen and paper games, not consumer abuse.

Um, no.

My casual research into sales numbers suggests otherwise, do you have better sales data? I'll admit I could have some confirmation bias in my research as I Remeber Pool of Radience pretty much began the doom of PnP gaming in my personal experience, but the data I looked at prior to posting suggested a "bad" CRPG release would move significantly more units than a highly succesful PnP release.
I did also consider after posting that perhaps falling birth rate would have created an environment that was not conducive to PnP gaming (being party based) and at the same time fertile for CRPG's.

 Runic wrote:

 Toofast wrote:


1. You do know that profit and revenue are 2 completely different things, right?
2. If unhappy customers don't cause a drop in sales, what does? The weather?
3. A quick glance at GWs past 2 yearly financial reports would show you that, adjusted for inflation, their REVENUE has dropped tens of millions of dollars.

1. I do, and I originally talked about profit, you switched over to revenue. Shall I inquire if you know the difference between profit and revenue just the same?
2. You don't know any other reason that might cause a drop in both revenue and profit than unhappy customers? Oh wow. I wonder if there's a point to even explaining.
3. And so has their net profit.

And still as a sidenote, a vocal minor community on the internet causing these losses is still simply untrue. I bet some would like to imagine it so, but sorry, you don't have such power.

In any case, I find you a bit odd. You talk about crushing other people in tournaments with your new and shiny Eldar, and at the same time you flame GW and the game in vaurious posts. What's up with that? Just a side question. You can also turn off your offensive tone if capable, it does nothing aside from collecting reports.

I talked about revenue because it's a better indication than profit. If you slash costs to the bone, release stuff at 4 times the pace and double the price, you're going to stay profitable, at least for a little while. However, when your revenue is sharply declining, cost cutting measures and price hikes can only fix the problem for so long. Eventually, the duct tape you stuck over that hole in the side of the ship is going to peel away and the ship is going to sink. GW has tried to cover up bullet wounds with band aids and so far, it has kept them profitable, although they've still seen a sharp decline in profit as well. If you think that the people complaining on the internet don't have anything to do with this loss of revenue and profit, I'm not sure what to tell you. Corrolation doesn't equal causation but we can make a fairly strong case based on logic and reason at this point.

I can play the game and still be unhappy with the company. This seems to be a position exclusive to GW defenders. People all over this state bashed Alabama's play calling in the sugar bowl. Nobody told us we should all become Auburn fans. Playing the game and calling GW on their bull**** are not mutually exclusive so stop using straw man arguments like that.

I must not be getting reported that much because I have yet to receive a single PM or ban from the forum in all the time I've spent posting on here. Report away, it isn't going to magically fix GWs business model or make your position any more defensible.

ninety0ne wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

ninety0ne wrote:
In all fairness TSR died because of changes in technology, CRPG's crushed pen and paper games, not consumer abuse.

Um, no.

My casual research into sales numbers suggests otherwise, do you have better sales data? I'll admit I could have some confirmation bias in my research as I Remeber Pool of Radience pretty much began the doom of PnP gaming in my personal experience, but the data I looked at prior to posting suggested a "bad" CRPG release would move significantly more units than a highly succesful PnP release.
I did also consider after posting that perhaps falling birth rate would have created an environment that was not conducive to PnP gaming (being party based) and at the same time fertile for CRPG's.

Well, I cant' speak for the whole world, but I'm happy to explain why we quit our RPG nights.

From Grade 5 until I was well into college (say, up to the early 90s), I played RPGs once a week, every week. I bought so many Role Playing games and supplements that my collection literally fills two 7' tall by 2.5' wide shelves. It was a glorious thing. Computer games came, but they were just not as fulfilling. Even though I avidly played Pool of Radiance (the original SSI release with 2D isometric graphics) and all of the successor games (like Curse of the Azure Bonds), it was not social, and was essentially just a dungeon crawling. The Dialogue is as much something to skip over as to read, after the fifth instalment. There was really little role-playing.

Then, far more immersive, and sometimes multiplayer games, with better graphics came along. These were time sinks, but still didn't compete with real, paper and dice role-play. It didn't have the magic of a character sheet, of pencil doodles of your erstwhile heroes, the poetic beauty of writing your own character background. So still we gamed, even though certainly these appealed to us and siphoned off monies that we spent on RPGs and TT wargames.

Then MMORPGs came. Everquest. Anarchy Online. Dark Age of Camelot. WarCaft. THAT was really the death knell for us. Suddenly, you were in an RPG-ish world (though much more grindy than questy), where you could develop your character, and your character had the freedom to go anywhere and do anything they wanted. You could make your character look and feel, and they could talk and socialize to people as you chose. There was no setup, no "Come ON -- what do you want to do?" Character death just meant a respawn and a loss of a little bit of time. It was just a far more efficient way of role-playing; you could play with anyone at any time, with the only caveat being that the adventures weren't really that interesting once you explored all the content.

In a sense, if MMORPGs hadn't come out, we'd probably be playing more 40k, too.

Now, most of us are done with that part of our lives, and I don't think anyone that I know still plays Warcraft. But still, it forever changed the course of our nerd entertainment bucks.

I wholly agree with your chronology and conclusions Talys, I wasn't trying to say that SSI's Pool of Rad. was anything more than the first glimpse of the end for me. We even added the "save game spell" to our PnP gaming after being exposed to such a ground breaking CRPG. Id go further to say it was excellent marketing by TSR to sell the FR setting: we even moved from Greyhawk to the Realms as a result of PoolRad.

I've found the older I've grown, the more my group of friends have drifted steadily back towards TT games and TCG's. The social aspect is the biggest part, and I'm all but burned out on MMO's and the grindfest that comes with them (will I ever experience the magic that was vanilla WoW again?!)

Maybe it's because we've matured? Or the gaming culture has shifted? Not really sure, but it's a welcome change.

Talys wrote: It was just a far more efficient way of role-playing

Eh, MMORPGs took all the role out of role playing.

They basically just streamlined roleplaying for the roll players. As in the people who just wanted to superficially pretend to be a knight and slay dragons by comparing stats and tossing dice. Ie, they took out everything but the combat.

Which, as it turns out, is a massively successful business model. They stripped RPGs down to complicated first-person shooters, which they knew people already liked. And, in turn, first person shooters have now turned into MMORPGs where you level your characters.

Don't get me wrong. My friends and I were in on the earliest days of Everquest (we happened to be "lucky" enough to know people who worked for both Verant and AT&T where the EQ servers were hosted so we had a ton of free accounts). But it never replaced our pen and paper gaming nights, which we still got together for every Sunday night religiously.

The only thing that made our pen and paper nights all but die off was getting older, lol. I spent a decade in the Marines, and my friends got married and had kids.

So, how does GW stay in business? Because 3/4's of the people who rag on GW still buy their stuff. People also complain too much. 40K is an awesome game and GW makes good stuff. When you over-analyse something, it takes the fun out of it. Just play the game and have fun, man.

The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

 Boggy Man wrote:

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Ooo I had forgotten this was today. Apparently it's also the peak of the Lyrid meteor shower tonight.

After reading about all this Eldar nonsense going on in the forums, I'm half expecting to look up into the sky and see this tonight:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

 PoxxxLord86 wrote:
So, how does GW stay in business? Because 3/4's of the people who rag on GW still buy their stuff.

Citation needed.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

I love the setting, own 20k in models for 40k alone, and have been playing for 20 years. I still play specialist games and many of the Rpg's.
I haven't played 40k since jan this year though. The formations, allies, unbound, and everything else was getting to be too much. Sometimes I'll play an apoc game because it looks nice, but I'm playing another game while it is going on since turns can take an hour or more.
The magic is gone. I peak in (a recent codex almost got me playing again, but then Eldar happened so....).

Also, my experiments take hours and my internet isn't good enough for youtube videos to load in a reasonable amount of time

 ClassicCarraway wrote:


If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

For that small hope things that will change. So that maybe we could be voracious fan boys of the game, consuming all without need of willful naiveté or ignorance to the other opportunities in gaming and modeling. To enjoy that spark in a game that likely introduced us to pushing plastic men around a table with dice and tape measures.

Or simply to watch it all burn down. Some men...

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

Maybe I just love saying, "Because I don't have to explain myself to you."

 MWHistorian wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

Maybe I just love saying, "Because I don't have to explain myself to you."

That's a dodge right there. This question has always made me curious. The biggest haters and those that spew the most venom towards the game still actively hangout and spit their crap all over the most popular 40k forums. Why? If the game is no longer fun for you why do you spend time hanging out and bashing it? Why not just move on and enjoy another game and spend time on those forums?

Yeah, that's a total dodge.

Radikus wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

Maybe I just love saying, "Because I don't have to explain myself to you."

That's a dodge right there. This question has always made me curious. The biggest haters and those that spew the most venom towards the game still actively hangout and spit their crap all over the most popular 40k forums. Why? If the game is no longer fun for you why do you spend time hanging out and bashing it? Why not just move on and enjoy another game and spend time on those forums?

It's a dodge because I've answered it eight billion times already.
I'm really curious about the state of affairs of 40k. I don't it want to see it go under unless there's someone willing and competent to snatch the IP up. I've played it for over twenty years and I want it to become the game I once loved, but with the terrible fluff and even worse rules, it tastes sour now. It's like an old friend that's now living in a crack house that you want to see get better but don't think they will.
I'm not a "hater" (see how apologist like to toss out the insults and assumptions?) I just think the game has some very serious problems that aren't being addressed. I call it "being truthful."
Now why don't you tell me all your motivations for why you post? Because that's completely relevant to the topic, isn't it?

Yeah it winds me up when people say 'why are you posting if you don't play?' There's lots of reasons someone would, I've seen many people explain it many different times, what you're basically saying is 'stop posting if you've stopped playing' when actually, I can post where I want, and I don't have to explain why I post there, especially if you can't think of any reason that someone who used to play might still follow the game. I mean it's not exactly difficult.

Also, DakkaDakka isn't a 40k forum. It has lots of games on it.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Yeah it winds me up when people say 'why are you posting if you don't play?' There's lots of reasons someone would, I've seen many people explain it many different times, what you're basically saying is 'stop posting if you've stopped playing' when actually, I can post where I want, and I don't have to explain why I post there, especially if you can't think of any reason that someone who used to play might still follow the game. I mean it's not exactly difficult.

They're looking for excuses to dismiss opinions that differ from their own.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Yeah it winds me up when people say 'why are you posting if you don't play?' There's lots of reasons someone would, I've seen many people explain it many different times, what you're basically saying is 'stop posting if you've stopped playing' when actually, I can post where I want, and I don't have to explain why I post there, especially if you can't think of any reason that someone who used to play might still follow the game. I mean it's not exactly difficult.

They're looking for excuses to dismiss opinions that differ from their own.

Oh I know. That's why it winds me up.

Post edited. If you're not trying to provoke a negative reaction, you might refrain from inflammatory language. --Janthkin

Maybe I am just trying to place logic on something that isn't logical (atleast to me). If I stopped playing and no longer found the game fun I wouldn't want to spend my time involved with aspects of it. I always find it odd that the people that pop up in random threads saying the game sucks in some capacity are the ones who don't play anymore. This goes beyond 40k and applies to pretty much every game I've ever played, tabletop to MMO. Why do people who so dislike a game stick around to make sure other people know how much it must suck because they don't like it? There are many reasons I am sure, and I feel fine about asking it. If anything it provides insight.

Radikus wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

Maybe I just love saying, "Because I don't have to explain myself to you."

That's a dodge right there. This question has always made me curious. The biggest haters and those that spew the most venom towards the game still actively hangout and spit their crap all over the most popular 40k forums. Why? If the game is no longer fun for you why do you spend time hanging out and bashing it? Why not just move on and enjoy another game and spend time on those forums?

I can't speak for MWH but speaking as someone who is often seen ranting against it while I haven't played in close to 15 years, my reason is because I *want* to like the game again, so I keep at least somewhat up to date on what's going on since at least once a month lately I have the faint voice in my head telling me to pick up 40k again (not really, I'm not crazy lol). I live in an area where there's a healthy 40k community and I could get games. I know the fluff. I like the fluff. I like the figures. I flick through old White Dwarfs. I check the GW website every so often to look at the pretty figures.

But everything I read and everything I see just indicates the game is a pile of garbage with no thought to balance or anything other than pushing the next big thing to sell more models. The move to weekly White Dwarfs with "Buy this now now now before it's gone! get your wallets ready!" approaches, the power fluctuating, the rules in general adding more random crap instead of balanced rules and making it so some choices aren't total gak and other choices are amazeballs... that's why I complain, because I used to be a customer, I want to be a customer again, but the company's actions tells me that they don't want someone like me as a customer, because I care about a balanced game and don't want to be unduly punished if I, for example, think Warp Talons are awesome looking and want to use them when they're crap in the game.

I have very fond memories of the "old" GW and older editions of the game, and this thing now doesn't look or sound like the 40k I know and love, and at the current prices and with the current rules I don't want to necessarily invest the money to try it and see.

Radikus wrote:
Maybe I am just trying to place logic on something that isn't logical (atleast to me). If I stopped playing and no longer found the game fun I wouldn't want to spend my time involved with aspects of it. I always find it odd that the people that pop up in random threads saying the game sucks in some capacity are the ones who don't play anymore. This goes beyond 40k and applies to pretty much every game I've ever played, tabletop to MMO. Why do people who so dislike a game stick around to make sure other people know how much it must suck because they don't like it? There are many reasons I am sure, and I feel fine about asking it. If anything it provides insight.

Its a pretty big investment for many people. Often to the tune of hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, an equivalent amount in hours spent reading, building, painting, and gaming, and the memories of games long past and friends they were enjoyed with.

I've stopped buying from GW, but I encourage my friends to pick up some sort of table top game. Some are leaning towards 40k, and I won't turn them away, but I'll lay out its advantages and disadvantages and point out alternatives. If they pick up, I get to play with a friend using a house ruled and heavily modified version of the game.

To that end, its still worth my time to keep up to date and learn what's hot and what's not. Its much easier to keep in touch than try and re-enter after several years of total ignorance.

I quit World of Tanks a few years ago due to balance issues, but since I had invested quite some money and time, and made a lot of friends, I still check the boards and ask around to see what's up with the game and what's changed.

Radikus wrote:


Maybe I am just trying to place logic on something that isn't logical (atleast to me). If I stopped playing and no longer found the game fun I wouldn't want to spend my time involved with aspects of it. I always find it odd that the people that pop up in random threads saying the game sucks in some capacity are the ones who don't play anymore. This goes beyond 40k and applies to pretty much every game I've ever played, tabletop to MMO. Why do people who so dislike a game stick around to make sure other people know how much it must suck because they don't like it? There are many reasons I am sure, and I feel fine about asking it. If anything it provides insight.

The fact that you start with an insult shows that you have no desire to attempt to understand what the 'other side' thinks. That's not going to make a very two-sided discussion. Grow up.

Radikus wrote:


Maybe I am just trying to place logic on something that isn't logical (atleast to me). If I stopped playing and no longer found the game fun I wouldn't want to spend my time involved with aspects of it. I always find it odd that the people that pop up in random threads saying the game sucks in some capacity are the ones who don't play anymore. This goes beyond 40k and applies to pretty much every game I've ever played, tabletop to MMO. Why do people who so dislike a game stick around to make sure other people know how much it must suck because they don't like it? There are many reasons I am sure, and I feel fine about asking it. If anything it provides insight.

Excellent mature start.

It's not just people who don't play who say negative things about the game, so that's your first mistake. Just as people can not play the game but see some positive aspects, people can also play the game and see negative aspects. Anyway, now you know why people still post when they don't play, so at least you don't have to ask anymore.

One reason it's still around is because if you like larger battles and the Sci fi aesthetics of 40k, there isn't a good replacement. WMH has excellent rules but I have a very difficult time getting into the aesthetics and it doesn't scale very well past 50 points. I've painted 2 jacks and I'm already sick of painting WMH stuff. I could paint eldar all day every day and not get tired of it. The tedious movement rules and huge effect of terrain on the game relegate WMH to bland tables with felt representing different types of terrain. Despite how much better the rules are, it just seems bland compared to 40k.

Also, 40k is still far more ubiquitous than WMH. If I move to another city/state or travel for work, I am guaranteed to be able to easily find a place to play. If I play WMH, not so much. If I want a game of firestorm armada or drop zone commander, I might be totally out of luck unless I want to drive 2-4 hours to a group of 3-5 people playing it. Right now I can show up at any FLGS in Birmingham or Tuscaloosa and get a game of 40k within an hour. Only 2 stores in Bham and 1 in Tuscaloosa have any kind of WMH group and it's usually only weekends.

 Toofast wrote:
One reason it's still around is because if you like larger battles and the Sci fi aesthetics of 40k, there isn't a good replacement. WMH has excellent rules but I have a very difficult time getting into the aesthetics and it doesn't scale very well past 50 points. I've painted 2 jacks and I'm already sick of painting WMH stuff. I could paint eldar all day every day and not get tired of it. The tedious movement rules and huge effect of terrain on the game relegate WMH to bland tables with felt representing different types of terrain. Despite how much better the rules are, it just seems bland compared to 40k.

Also, 40k is still far more ubiquitous than WMH. If I move to another city/state or travel for work, I am guaranteed to be able to easily find a place to play. If I play WMH, not so much. If I want a game of firestorm armada or drop zone commander, I might be totally out of luck unless I want to drive 2-4 hours to a group of 3-5 people playing it. Right now I can show up at any FLGS in Birmingham or Tuscaloosa and get a game of 40k within an hour. Only 2 stores in Bham and 1 in Tuscaloosa have any kind of WMH group and it's usually only weekends.

I hate the felt terrain I see in battle reports. Never seen it in real life though.
But the gameplay is not bland and the more you learn about it the more in-depth and thoughtful it gets.
Sometimes I get the impression (correct or not) that some people don't like other games because they're just not 40k. Open your horizons to new possibilities. (Not saying that's the case here, Toofast.)

Oh yeah, and the reinforced platoon size of 40k in 28mm sci-fi is another thing keeping me around.

Thanks TooFast.

 MWHistorian wrote:

Radikus wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Boggy Man wrote:
The sad truth is, for anyone who truly loved what 40K used to be, it's already dead. The fact that it's still moving doesn't mean it's growing, that's just the parasites feasting off its ever shrinking bulk.

Also, Happy Earth Day!

Very true. It's dead to me and the magic is gone. It now just seems kind of silly to me.

If its dead to you and silly (and the magic is gone), then why do you continue to frequent forums threads dedicated to the game? Not trying to be mean or anything, but its obvious you still have more than just a passing interest in the game, so to say its dead and silly seems a bit disingenuous.

Maybe I just love saying, "Because I don't have to explain myself to you."

That's a dodge right there. This question has always made me curious. The biggest haters and those that spew the most venom towards the game still actively hangout and spit their crap all over the most popular 40k forums. Why? If the game is no longer fun for you why do you spend time hanging out and bashing it? Why not just move on and enjoy another game and spend time on those forums?

It's a dodge because I've answered it eight billion times already.
I'm really curious about the state of affairs of 40k. I don't it want to see it go under unless there's someone willing and competent to snatch the IP up. I've played it for over twenty years and I want it to become the game I once loved, but with the terrible fluff and even worse rules, it tastes sour now. It's like an old friend that's now living in a crack house that you want to see get better but don't think they will.
I'm not a "hater" (see how apologist like to toss out the insults and assumptions?) I just think the game has some very serious problems that aren't being addressed. I call it "being truthful."
Now why don't you tell me all your motivations for why you post? Because that's completely relevant to the topic, isn't it?

So then the game isn't really "dead" to you at all. My question was an honest one, not an attempt to label you a hater or anything.

As for why I post? Fair enough, I post because I still play (and enjoy) the game, and I like many of the things GW has done recently, but also dislike a few things. I often wish to partake in discussions about those things.

So then the game isn't really "dead" to you at all. My question was an honest one, not an attempt to label you a hater or anything.

As for why I post? Fair enough, I post because I still play (and enjoy) the game, and I like many of the things GW has done recently, but also dislike a few things. I often wish to partake in discussions about those things.

I don't care about why you post. I said that it was irrelevant to the conversation and was trying to show you how useless it is to worry about such things.

Not an offense, but a serious question. Why do people bother "checking in" to 40k even after they've quit for 3+ years, some of you said up to 15? I quit WoW years ago because it looked like it was going in a boring direction and I haven't checked in since.

I totally understand if 40k isn't your thing, but especially for you who checked out 5+ years ago, why bother to check in when it's obvious the game probably won't change if it hasnt after all this time?

 MWHistorian wrote:

Radikus wrote:


Maybe I am just trying to place logic on something that isn't logical (atleast to me). If I stopped playing and no longer found the game fun I wouldn't want to spend my time involved with aspects of it. I always find it odd that the people that pop up in random threads saying the game sucks in some capacity are the ones who don't play anymore. This goes beyond 40k and applies to pretty much every game I've ever played, tabletop to MMO. Why do people who so dislike a game stick around to make sure other people know how much it must suck because they don't like it? There are many reasons I am sure, and I feel fine about asking it. If anything it provides insight.

The fact that you start with an insult shows that you have no desire to attempt to understand what the 'other side' thinks. That's not going to make a very two-sided discussion. Grow up.

It was an attempt at a joke for taking insult to the word "hater" in the first place. Clearly you are so deep in your salt mine that you want to take insult from anything I say. If anything your attitude explains why you are an assault cannon firing rounds of negativity.

Everyone - Here's a link to the rules of this site:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/core/forum_rules.jsp

Please pay special attention to Rule #1.

Threads like this are difficult to keep polite - so, if you CAN'T stay polite in this thread DON'T post in it, because if you do AND you break one of the rules here, you'll probably get a warning and/or a suspension.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Toofast wrote:
One reason it's still around is because if you like larger battles and the Sci fi aesthetics of 40k, there isn't a good replacement. WMH has excellent rules but I have a very difficult time getting into the aesthetics and it doesn't scale very well past 50 points. I've painted 2 jacks and I'm already sick of painting WMH stuff. I could paint eldar all day every day and not get tired of it. The tedious movement rules and huge effect of terrain on the game relegate WMH to bland tables with felt representing different types of terrain. Despite how much better the rules are, it just seems bland compared to 40k.

Also, 40k is still far more ubiquitous than WMH. If I move to another city/state or travel for work, I am guaranteed to be able to easily find a place to play. If I play WMH, not so much. If I want a game of firestorm armada or drop zone commander, I might be totally out of luck unless I want to drive 2-4 hours to a group of 3-5 people playing it. Right now I can show up at any FLGS in Birmingham or Tuscaloosa and get a game of 40k within an hour. Only 2 stores in Bham and 1 in Tuscaloosa have any kind of WMH group and it's usually only weekends.

I hate the felt terrain I see in battle reports. Never seen it in real life though.
But the gameplay is not bland and the more you learn about it the more in-depth and thoughtful it gets.
Sometimes I get the impression (correct or not) that some people don't like other games because they're just not 40k. Open your horizons to new possibilities. (Not saying that's the case here, Toofast.)

The game play isn't bland at all, it just isn't much to look at. When I show non gamers pics of my 40k games, if they have any nerd streak at all they start getting interested and asking questions about it. My fiance was the same way. "Oh those look so cool! That table is awesome, it looks like a bombed out city!" When I show them pics of WMH games, it's basically a non reaction. I have an entire Battlefoam 1520 XL with riser packed full of $1,700 worth of Cryx models so I'm not saying I hate it. 40k just scratches an itch that WMH never will, and vice versa. If PP made 40k quality models with aesthetics I liked, I would probably sell my marines and eldar. If GW made rules anywhere near the quality of WMH, I probably never would've bought any Cryx.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Not an offense, but a serious question. Why do people bother "checking in" to 40k even after they've quit for 3+ years, some of you said up to 15? I quit WoW years ago because it looked like it was going in a boring direction and I haven't checked in since.

I totally understand if 40k isn't your thing, but especially for you who checked out 5+ years ago, why bother to check in when it's obvious the game probably won't change if it hasnt after all this time?

I've only been gone for a couple of months, but I do check into WoW from time to time. A while ago, I was really into the game, raided constantly, had a big guild going, and really enjoyed the game. After a few expansions I really lost interest. I still pop in now and again to see how it is going, and to see if the game improved. A year ago my friend got me a demo, and I didn't care about it. But every expansion I pop in and see what is going on with the game. I have family similar to league. They don't keep up with the games, they all have lost...I think its challenger?...status, but they keep up on the meta.

None of those games have cost me anywhere near as much as 40k, and 40k introduced me to a lot. I was into it before DnD.
That said, if you've invested money into the game you have a right to post here imo. That's probably my inner capitalist talking.

Radikus wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

Radikus wrote:


Maybe I am just trying to place logic on something that isn't logical (atleast to me). If I stopped playing and no longer found the game fun I wouldn't want to spend my time involved with aspects of it. I always find it odd that the people that pop up in random threads saying the game sucks in some capacity are the ones who don't play anymore. This goes beyond 40k and applies to pretty much every game I've ever played, tabletop to MMO. Why do people who so dislike a game stick around to make sure other people know how much it must suck because they don't like it? There are many reasons I am sure, and I feel fine about asking it. If anything it provides insight.

The fact that you start with an insult shows that you have no desire to attempt to understand what the 'other side' thinks. That's not going to make a very two-sided discussion. Grow up.

It was an attempt at a joke for taking insult to the word "hater" in the first place. Clearly you are so deep in your salt mine that you want to take insult from anything I say. If anything your attitude explains why you are an assault cannon firing rounds of negativity.

"Assault cannon of negativity" is a great analogy . I mean, I agree with you Radikus, but there is really no point in arguing with people on this topic... I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

At the end of the day, they can spend their time how they want. It's easiest to let people justify their fits and ignore it.

 clamclaw wrote:

"Assault cannon of negativity" is a great analogy . I mean, I agree with you Radikus, but there is really no point in arguing with people on this topic... I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

At the end of the day, they can spend their time how they want. It's easiest to let people justify their fits and ignore it.

Let's flip this then, how much have you invested in those other systems? Have you watched those games go from being a cherished hobby, to something where the parent company describes the hobby as "buying citadel minatures", where rules balance isn't on the company making the game but on the players who pay top dollar for the privilege of fixing it themselves. So fair enough you've got zero vested interest in the other systems, but it's an entirely different story when you have invested time, effort and money into it.

Which brings me onto another point, why focus this much on the part of the argument that is "I'm currently not playing" rather than the part of the argument that is "why is X a thing, why did they decide to give it Y rule when Z is functionally the same unit from another codex but has to make do with W"

But why do that when we could pat each other on the back by dismissing arguments based on whether people play the game currently

Jaxler wrote:

They've been doing this for like 10 years. It doesn't make sense to me.

They have been doing a lot longer then 10 years.

I think you mean unbalanced.

How do you know they only play test it for a day?

Expensive compared to what? Other table top games? Have you seen the miniatures of cheap table top games? No thank you.
But yes they are quite high in price, considering it may take a grand or 2 just to build a decent tournament army (that's if you were to buy from GW without any discounts and depending on point size)

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

"Assault cannon of negativity" is a great analogy . I mean, I agree with you Radikus, but there is really no point in arguing with people on this topic... I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

At the end of the day, they can spend their time how they want. It's easiest to let people justify their fits and ignore it.

Let's flip this then, how much have you invested in those other systems? Have you watched those games go from being a cherished hobby, to something where the parent company describes the hobby as "buying citadel minatures", where rules balance isn't on the company making the game but on the players who pay top dollar for the privilege of fixing it themselves. So fair enough you've got zero vested interest in the other systems, but it's an entirely different story when you have invested time, effort and money into it.

Which brings me onto another point, why focus this much on the part of the argument that is "I'm currently not playing" rather than the part of the argument that is "why is X a thing, why did they decide to give it Y rule when Z is functionally the same unit from another codex but has to make do with W"

But why do that when we could pat each other on the back by dismissing arguments based on whether people play the game currently

Well said.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

"Assault cannon of negativity" is a great analogy . I mean, I agree with you Radikus, but there is really no point in arguing with people on this topic... I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

At the end of the day, they can spend their time how they want. It's easiest to let people justify their fits and ignore it.

Let's flip this then, how much have you invested in those other systems? Have you watched those games go from being a cherished hobby, to something where the parent company describes the hobby as "buying citadel minatures", where rules balance isn't on the company making the game but on the players who pay top dollar for the privilege of fixing it themselves. So fair enough you've got zero vested interest in the other systems, but it's an entirely different story when you have invested time, effort and money into it.

Which brings me onto another point, why focus this much on the part of the argument that is "I'm currently not playing" rather than the part of the argument that is "why is X a thing, why did they decide to give it Y rule when Z is functionally the same unit from another codex but has to make do with W"

But why do that when we could pat each other on the back by dismissing arguments based on whether people play the game currently

If I was invested in a hobby that went to utter gak, I would be more liable to separate myself from it. I can understand though that it would be painful to watch your favorite past time turn into something you hardly recognize, I appreciate you pointing that out in a civil manner.

At the end of the day, GW will do as they do regardless of our forum pow-wows debating their new rules. Eldar bikes are going to be broken? Probably, but the 5 or 6 threads on the front page are not going to change that. Is there a way to make GW listen and bring around more balanced books? I hope so, but I personally don't have the time or capital to make that influence real.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Not an offense, but a serious question. Why do people bother "checking in" to 40k even after they've quit for 3+ years, some of you said up to 15? I quit WoW years ago because it looked like it was going in a boring direction and I haven't checked in since.

I totally understand if 40k isn't your thing, but especially for you who checked out 5+ years ago, why bother to check in when it's obvious the game probably won't change if it hasnt after all this time?

Hope that they get a clue. Like I said, I *want* to play again. I've come really close to ordering a couple hundred bucks of stuff. I know I could get games. But I want to make sure the game is worth my time. Call it a vain hope that some day GW wakes up, looks at their dropping sales and says "What the feth have we been doing? We need to fix this the right way"

WayneTheGame wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Not an offense, but a serious question. Why do people bother "checking in" to 40k even after they've quit for 3+ years, some of you said up to 15? I quit WoW years ago because it looked like it was going in a boring direction and I haven't checked in since.

I totally understand if 40k isn't your thing, but especially for you who checked out 5+ years ago, why bother to check in when it's obvious the game probably won't change if it hasnt after all this time?

Hope that they get a clue. Like I said, I *want* to play again. I've come really close to ordering a couple hundred bucks of stuff. I know I could get games. But I want to make sure the game is worth my time. Call it a vain hope that some day GW wakes up, looks at their dropping sales and says "What the feth have we been doing? We need to fix this the right way"

Eh, I can understand that. I guess its just that when I quit a game, I usually quit it for good. That and sadly I don't see GW having any revelations anytime soon

 jreilly89 wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
Not an offense, but a serious question. Why do people bother "checking in" to 40k even after they've quit for 3+ years, some of you said up to 15? I quit WoW years ago because it looked like it was going in a boring direction and I haven't checked in since.

I totally understand if 40k isn't your thing, but especially for you who checked out 5+ years ago, why bother to check in when it's obvious the game probably won't change if it hasnt after all this time?

Hope that they get a clue. Like I said, I *want* to play again. I've come really close to ordering a couple hundred bucks of stuff. I know I could get games. But I want to make sure the game is worth my time. Call it a vain hope that some day GW wakes up, looks at their dropping sales and says "What the feth have we been doing? We need to fix this the right way"

Eh, I can understand that. I guess its just that when I quit a game, I usually quit it for good. That and sadly I don't see GW having any revelations anytime soon

Neither do I

 clamclaw wrote:

I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

I'm an irish guy living abroad in the uk. Just because Im over here instead of over there doesn't stop me being interested in the comings and goings of the old country, or my home town. I still follow irish news both national and local, I keep an eye on the current affairs and I stay in touch with my mates from my hometown so I know what's going on.

It's the same principle for 40K boards. Playing the game is not a prerequisite for having an opinion. 40k is a setting, and one that people can be interested in in any number of ways. I don't play the table top game, but not playing doesn't mean I can't have an opinion, or a desire to stay in the loop. I follow all the football, not just *my* team. For some, they retain their interest in the lore. For others, modelling. For me, I retain my interest in the community and what it has to say, the corporation itself and it's decisions, and in the general state of affairs. But mainly in tgr people. Essentially, it's a topic of interest to me. 40k is a fairly big part of the gaming world, and gw is big player, and it's where a lot of us came from, so it's only natural to want to stay in touch and stay in the loop. If gw do good things, I can comment. If thry do bad things, I can also comment.

Spending 0 time paying people with a different pov 'any heed' does nothing but isolate you from the point of view of that section of the community. It's like an ostrich sticking it's head in the sand. There is no point pretending people don't have legitimate grievances, and there is less point in refusing to try to understand them. Can things get too toxic? Yes. Could there be less negativity? Yes. I think a lot of people are all too willing to complain, and far fewer are willing to do anything about it to fix 'their' game. I think if a tenth of the energy that went into complaining went into positive and proactive endeavours to build the game and community the want to be a part of, it would be a better community. But people are nonetheless pissed off. They're entitled to say their piece. There is no smoke without fire.

Deadnight wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

I'm an irish guy living abroad in the uk. Just because Im over here instead of over there doesn't stop me being interested in the comings and goings of the old country, or my home town. I still follow irish news both national and local, I keep an eye on the current affairs and I stay in touch with my mates from my hometown so I know what's going on.

It's the same principle for 40K boards. Playing the game is not a prerequisite for having an opinion. 40k is a setting, and one that people can be interested in in any number of ways. I don't play the table top game, but not playing doesn't mean I can't have an opinion, or a desire to stay in the loop. I follow all the football, not just *my* team. For some, they retain their interest in the lore. For others, modelling. For me, I retain my interest in the community and what it has to say, the corporation itself and it's decisions, and in the general state of affairs. But mainly in tgr people. Essentially, it's a topic of interest to me. 40k is a fairly big part of the gaming world, and gw is big player, and it's where a lot of us came from, so it's only natural to want to stay in touch and stay in the loop. If gw do good things, I can comment. If thry do bad things, I can also comment.

Spending 0 time paying people with a different pov 'any heed' does nothing but isolate you from the point of view of that section of the community. It's like an ostrich sticking it's head in the sand. There is no point pretending people don't have legitimate grievances, and there is less point in refusing to try to understand them. Can things get too toxic? Yes. Could there be less negativity? Yes. I think a lot of people are all too willing to complain, and far fewer are willing to do anything about it to fix 'their' game. I think if a tenth of the energy that went into complaining went into positive and proactive endeavours to build the game and community the want to be a part of, it would be a better community. But people are nonetheless pissed off. They're entitled to say their piece. There is no smoke without fire.

I completely agree with pretty much everything you're saying, in particular the last bit regarding the community and it's approach to the game. I've mentioned before there are likely better ways to go about discussing and actually trying to solve some of the issues with 40K and GW in general, and I'm all for that. It's the toxic and constantly negative attitudes seen in some areas that's disappointing.

 clamclaw wrote:
. It's the toxic and constantly negative attitudes seen in some areas that's disappointing.

So how many times do I have to kick you in the nuts before you get negative?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:
. It's the toxic and constantly negative attitudes seen in some areas that's disappointing.

So how many times do I have to kick you in the nuts before you get negative?

Give him time azreal. within two editions, he'll have lost all hope in gw, and seen through the charade to the less than glamorous reality and he'll be with us, riding a warhorse of the gwpocalypse as well. or at the very least, he'll have a donkey...

Thing is, from my pov, regarding negativity, I can only do so much negativity. I Can't do all the negativity all the time. I'm generally in agreement with everything you have to say, but given the choice between having a rant on dakka, or being pragmatic and proactive with my gaming buddies, and negotiating/building games with them that make sense, I'll go with the latter. I get more enjoyment out of being creative at the end of the day. I don't hang around with negative people in real life, I'll be damned if I take the attitude and embrace it. I walked down that road before, and if nearly killed me.

But yeah, when it comes to corporate decisions, gw will get both barrels every time

I almost view some of the negative posters as jilted ex-lovers. They had a passionate relationship with 40K for a while, then one day, they walked in to their local gaming store only to find 40K in the arms of another gamer. The breakup was messy to say the least, but like many a jilted ex, they still stalk their former love, keeping tabs on it, quick to proclaim their hatred for 40K and everything it stands for, but secretly pining for the day they can be together again. Sure, they'll parade their new loves, such as Bolt Action or Warmahordes, in front of 40k in an attempt to make it jealous, but deep in the back of their mind, they know they would drop them all just to have 40K back in their arms like it USED to be.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Deadnight wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

I've also tried to figure out why people who do not play and seem to only gripe about 40K spend so much time on forums for it, seems like a waste of time to me. I don't like Bolt Action or Flames of War, so I spend 0 time paying them any heed.

I'm an irish guy living abroad in the uk. Just because Im over here instead of over there doesn't stop me being interested in the comings and goings of the old country, or my home town. I still follow irish news both national and local, I keep an eye on the current affairs and I stay in touch with my mates from my hometown so I know what's going on.

It's the same principle for 40K boards. Playing the game is not a prerequisite for having an opinion. 40k is a setting, and one that people can be interested in in any number of ways. I don't play the table top game, but not playing doesn't mean I can't have an opinion, or a desire to stay in the loop. I follow all the football, not just *my* team. For some, they retain their interest in the lore. For others, modelling. For me, I retain my interest in the community and what it has to say, the corporation itself and it's decisions, and in the general state of affairs. But mainly in tgr people. Essentially, it's a topic of interest to me. 40k is a fairly big part of the gaming world, and gw is big player, and it's where a lot of us came from, so it's only natural to want to stay in touch and stay in the loop. If gw do good things, I can comment. If thry do bad things, I can also comment.

Spending 0 time paying people with a different pov 'any heed' does nothing but isolate you from the point of view of that section of the community. It's like an ostrich sticking it's head in the sand. There is no point pretending people don't have legitimate grievances, and there is less point in refusing to try to understand them. Can things get too toxic? Yes. Could there be less negativity? Yes. I think a lot of people are all too willing to complain, and far fewer are willing to do anything about it to fix 'their' game. I think if a tenth of the energy that went into complaining went into positive and proactive endeavours to build the game and community the want to be a part of, it would be a better community. But people are nonetheless pissed off. They're entitled to say their piece. There is no smoke without fire.

But do you repeatedly write into the Irish newspapers' Letters to the Editor and proclaim how the UK is so much better than Ireland will ever be and everybody currently living in Ireland should wake up, come to their senses, and move to the UK?

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I almost view some of the negative posters as jilted ex-lovers. They had a passionate relationship with 40K for a while, then one day, they walked in to their local gaming store only to find 40K in the arms of another gamer. The breakup was messy to say the least, but like many a jilted ex, they still stalk their former love, keeping tabs on it, quick to proclaim their hatred for 40K and everything it stands for, but secretly pining for the day they can be together again. Sure, they'll parade their new loves, such as Bolt Action or Warmahordes, in front of 40k in an attempt to make it jealous, but deep in the back of their mind, they know they would drop them all just to have 40K back in their arms like it USED to be.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it

Said jokingly but I think that's pretty much how I feel. I mean, I pay Warmachine. I like Warmachine. But I'd play 40k instead if I didn't feel like I was being taken advantage of at every step of the way by GW. It's the combination of awful rules and high prices and no balance and pushing the miniatures over the game.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I almost view some of the negative posters as jilted ex-lovers. They had a passionate relationship with 40K for a while, then one day, they walked in to their local gaming store only to find 40K in the arms of another gamer. The breakup was messy to say the least, but like many a jilted ex, they still stalk their former love, keeping tabs on it, quick to proclaim their hatred for 40K and everything it stands for, but secretly pining for the day they can be together again. Sure, they'll parade their new loves, such as Bolt Action or Warmahordes, in front of 40k in an attempt to make it jealous, but deep in the back of their mind, they know they would drop them all just to have 40K back in their arms like it USED to be.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it

Said jokingly but I think that's pretty much how I feel. I mean, I pay Warmachine. I like Warmachine. But I'd play 40k instead if I didn't feel like I was being taken advantage of at every step of the way by GW. It's the combination of awful rules and high prices and no balance and pushing the miniatures over the game.

But what edition was that ever NOT the case with 40K? Rogue Trader? Nope, it didn't even know what it wanted to be back then. 2nd Edition? Rules bloat and broken codexes started here. 3rd-5th? All three editions had their problems and fair share of broken armies. 6th-7th? Same trend.

GW products have always been priced at a premium, ALWAYS! GW has always been about pushing models off of shelves, ALWAYS! Warhammer was created as a means to sell models, and it remains so.

The only thing that is truly different now then "the way things used to be" is the level of player support GW shows, and I completely understand the frustration with that. Scarce and largely useless FAQs, WD going from a great magazine filled with fluff, rules, terrain/painting tutorials, and battle reports to being largely a new release showcase, no real communication with the player base (although, would YOU want to be in charge of that thankless job?), no official tournament support, all of those things can leave fans of the game feeling a bit cold. Of the myriad complaints I read, this one is really the only one that can be said to have been better in the past. Balance issues and broken armies, these are things that have been a part of 40K since day one and will likely continue to be so long into the future.

Deadnight wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:
. It's the toxic and constantly negative attitudes seen in some areas that's disappointing.

So how many times do I have to kick you in the nuts before you get negative?

Give him time azreal. within two editions, he'll have lost all hope in gw, and seen through the charade to the less than glamorous reality and he'll be with us, riding a warhorse of the gwpocalypse as well. or at the very least, he'll have a donkey...

Thing is, from my pov, regarding negativity, I can only do so much negativity. I Can't do all the negativity all the time. I'm generally in agreement with everything you have to say, but given the choice between having a rant on dakka, or being pragmatic and proactive with my gaming buddies, and negotiating/building games with them that make sense, I'll go with the latter. I get more enjoyment out of being creative at the end of the day. I don't hang around with negative people in real life, I'll be damned if I take the attitude and embrace it. I walked down that road before, and if nearly killed me.

But yeah, when it comes to corporate decisions, gw will get both barrels every time

Eh, I've been with 40K since 3rd. Though I mainly focus on modeling and fluffly lists than competitive games, so I suppose a lot of the issues people find with broken units go around me.

I'll by no means defend all of GW's actions, they make some pants-on-head stupid decisions for sure. But some of the venom people spit at GW is intense, it's like, GW is a business. They're not hear to listen to each and every persons gripes. They want to make that sweet plastic crack monies. The game seems to be going a more casual route (read: sell models / less rules) and I'm just okay with that.

And the ex-lover analogy is fantastic You know they treated you bad... but with rose tinted glasses you remember the good times! When GW used to romance you on sweet dates! And hold your hand through the battlefield! But now they just spit in your face and ask if you like it...

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

But do you repeatedly write into the Irish newspapers' Letters to the Editor and proclaim how the UK is so much better than Ireland will ever be and everybody currently living in Ireland should wake up, come to their senses, and move to the UK?

Letters to the editor? How cute. There's other ways of communicating.

But in real life conversations, and Interactions, Yeah, I do, actually. And I'm far from the only one. I frequently chat to other diaspora, and folks back home when I'm home as to how much I enjoy living in the uk. It comes up quite often, since almost every second person of my generation has upped sticks and moved abroad. Sons and daughters coming home at Xmas from godknowswhere and waiting at the airport for them is our new xmas tradition. I frequently tell them of the better opportunities, and the better quality of life I have over here, that moving to scotland was literally the best decision of my life. I've had folks visit and say that they get it, when they see where I live, and why I say the things I say. They also agree with me that as much as we complain over here in the uk, theyre still better than back home, there is a reason I'm not the only irish person to move over either. My parents still tell me thry don't want me back As opportunities are so limited.

And if you want irish people to moan, just say 'something sonething economy, mumble mumble bloody bankers'. Thing is, they get it. like I said, moving abroad is the best decision of my life. Damn straight I'm gonna tell them about it and encourage them to move over. Worst case scenario is there's more people wearing the green when we beat the bloody English at the rugby!

 clamclaw wrote:

Eh, I've been with 40K since 3rd. Though I mainly focus on modeling and fluffly lists than competitive games, so I suppose a lot of the issues people find with broken units go around me.

Same here, actually. Thing is, my mates who played played at the competitive end of the spectrum. So I saw all the problems first hand and thry eventually burned me out of the hobby altogether. Because the issues don't affect,you doesn't mean there aren't issues, and that they really do get in some people's way.

 clamclaw wrote:

I'll by no means defend all of GW's actions, they make some pants-on-head stupid decisions for sure. But some of the venom people spit at GW is intense, it's like, GW is a business. They're not hear to listen to each and every persons gripes. They want to make that sweet plastic crack monies. The game seems to be going a more casual route (read: sell models / less rules) and I'm just okay with that.

ultimately, companies live and die by their customers or lack of them, and gw don't do a good job of listening, placating, humouring or pleasing theirs - hence so many ex players with gripes. Should they listen to every single gripe? No, but when you zoom out a bit, and see the trends and hot topics, you see something Is amiss. but if they're here to sell plastic soldiers for moneys, why are they doing it in such a hamfisted and counter productive manner? Sure, they're a business. But they're a badly run business that could be so much more than what it actually is.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
I almost view some of the negative posters as jilted ex-lovers. They had a passionate relationship with 40K for a while, then one day, they walked in to their local gaming store only to find 40K in the arms of another gamer. The breakup was messy to say the least, but like many a jilted ex, they still stalk their former love, keeping tabs on it, quick to proclaim their hatred for 40K and everything it stands for, but secretly pining for the day they can be together again. Sure, they'll parade their new loves, such as Bolt Action or Warmahordes, in front of 40k in an attempt to make it jealous, but deep in the back of their mind, they know they would drop them all just to have 40K back in their arms like it USED to be.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it

Said jokingly but I think that's pretty much how I feel. I mean, I pay Warmachine. I like Warmachine. But I'd play 40k instead if I didn't feel like I was being taken advantage of at every step of the way by GW. It's the combination of awful rules and high prices and no balance and pushing the miniatures over the game.

But what edition was that ever NOT the case with 40K? Rogue Trader? Nope, it didn't even know what it wanted to be back then. 2nd Edition? Rules bloat and broken codexes started here. 3rd-5th? All three editions had their problems and fair share of broken armies. 6th-7th? Same trend.

GW products have always been priced at a premium, ALWAYS! GW has always been about pushing models off of shelves, ALWAYS! Warhammer was created as a means to sell models, and it remains so.

The only thing that is truly different now then "the way things used to be" is the level of player support GW shows, and I completely understand the frustration with that. Scarce and largely useless FAQs, WD going from a great magazine filled with fluff, rules, terrain/painting tutorials, and battle reports to being largely a new release showcase, no real communication with the player base (although, would YOU want to be in charge of that thankless job?), no official tournament support, all of those things can leave fans of the game feeling a bit cold. Of the myriad complaints I read, this one is really the only one that can be said to have been better in the past. Balance issues and broken armies, these are things that have been a part of 40K since day one and will likely continue to be so long into the future.

Perhaps you're right, but it didn't feel as bad. I had no problem spending money when I was younger on 40k. Now I look at the prices and are like how the hell are they charging that much, yet now I work a good job and make enough money. It's not even the prices per se, I frequently spend $100-200 a month on Warmachine figures, but I feel I get a lot more value for my money there due to how things are costed and how much a unit box is worth in the game.

It might all be perception, but it still largely feels like the game today is nothing like the game before, even if it was fairly crazy back then.

WayneTheGame wrote:

Perhaps you're right, but it didn't feel as bad. I had no problem spending money when I was younger on 40k. Now I look at the prices and are like how the hell are they charging that much, yet now I work a good job and make enough money. It's not even the prices per se, I frequently spend $100-200 a month on Warmachine figures, but I feel I get a lot more value for my money there due to how things are costed and how much a unit box is worth in the game.

It might all be perception, but it still largely feels like the game today is nothing like the game before, even if it was fairly crazy back then.

I agree with you. The more money I make, the more loathe I am to spend it on GW products as the value just isn't there for me anymore. Just think of the people who purchased 4 or 5 Wraithknights and now the silly thing's a LoW. GW has a tendency to invalidate units with "updates" so that the new shiny gets sold whereas PP pretty much maintains unit viability while adding more variety into the game. I am just unable to get my regular gaming buddies into WM/H so I'm stuck with 40K if I want to wargame with the little hobby time that I have available.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Not an offense, but a serious question. Why do people bother "checking in" to 40k even after they've quit for 3+ years, some of you said up to 15? I quit WoW years ago because it looked like it was going in a boring direction and I haven't checked in since.

I totally understand if 40k isn't your thing, but especially for you who checked out 5+ years ago, why bother to check in when it's obvious the game probably won't change if it hasnt after all this time?

In my case, keeping tabs on the comedy value of GW's latest wacky antics is more entertaining than playing the game ever was. Like the Total War game that will showcase the Fantasy setting.....that they just blew up whoops. I kind of want to see just how absurdly far they can go in the current direction before the floor falls out from under them.

 Toofast wrote:

 Robisagg wrote:
Mainly because all of this negativity is a very, very vocal minority. Plenty of people are playing 40k and having a blast. Same logic as how a lot of people won't write a good review for a restaurant, but if they feel the need to write a bad review they shout it from the rooftops.

It may be a minority, but it's a large enough minority to cause GWs revenue to drop every year the past 5+ years. 49% is still a minority, but if 49% of your customers are unhappy, it isn't magically less of a problem than if 51% of your customers were unhappy. The "vocal minority" excuse gets thrown around almost as much as "forge the narrative" and "beer and pretzels", it's also just as poor of an argument.

Roll Tide!

I just had to say that. Anyhow, I think 40k owes a lot to the expansiveness of the setting and the rabid-ness of old fans. They don't have the safe monopoly they used to, and the business tactics they're using at the moment are a little unethical and outdated, but the new models are consistently cool as heck and I for one am too invested both monetarily in the hobby and emotionally in the story to quit as a result of these practices.If they ever get bad enough for me to lose the desire to spend money there, so be it; I'll probably still play with friends. They're testing their fanbase's patience a bit but with careful shopping I still get entertainment value proportional to the money I spend with them.

 Runic wrote:
GW's reports do not indicate people walking away from the game, nor does a vocal internet minority reflect a majority.

Not buying doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer. Buying less doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.
Buying used goods doesn't translate into an unsatisfied customer.

A "satisfied customer" who buys used from a third party, or doesn't buy, isn't functionally a customer anymore.


Anyway, Peregrine nailed the answer to the OP right on the first page like 5 posts in: they're coasting on years of momentum.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
like many a jilted ex, they still stalk their former love, keeping tabs on it, quick to proclaim their hatred for 40K and everything it stands for, but secretly pining for the day they can be together again.

I think the problem is that they don't understand that their ex-lover was never their lover; they were always in it for the money. This is the source of the disconnect.

People dream that in the distant past (2nd edition, 3rd edition, 5th edition, or usually the edition when their army was at its most powerful) it wasn't about the money. But it always was. And of course now that GW is a publicly-quoted company, the need for £££ and short-termism is, in reality, even more acute.

The most constructive way forward would be for the disenchanted to group together and re-write the rules. Maybe even pay someone to do it via Kickstarter. Would be great, wouldn't it? But we know that here, as in life, some people prefer complaining about an issue to doing something about it.

It was about the money, but it actually seemed like they cared about their customers back then. They had forums, their Web site had all kinds of painting and modeling articles, white dwarf was more than a weekly ad you had to pay for, they had a facebook, they ran tournaments with prize support, they had the skulls program, favorable terms with retailers encouraged them to stock GW product and the rules weren't perfect but they had less random and more balance. Now, well they uh...make the "best miniatures in the world", some of the worst rules and have raised the price 3x the rate of inflation while taking away all those great services they used to provide. It might have been all about the money before, they just didn't go out of their way to make it painfully obvious that it was all about the money. They actually had some pretense of giving a feth about the customers and their experience with the product after the purchase.

 Toofast wrote:
It was about the money, but it actually seemed like they cared about their customers back then. They had forums, their Web site had all kinds of painting and modeling articles, white dwarf was more than a weekly ad you had to pay for, they had a facebook, they ran tournaments with prize support, they had the skulls program, favorable terms with retailers encouraged them to stock GW product and the rules weren't perfect but they had less random and more balance. Now, well they uh...make the "best miniatures in the world", some of the worst rules and have raised the price 3x the rate of inflation while taking away all those great services they used to provide. It might have been all about the money before, they just didn't go out of their way to make it painfully obvious that it was all about the money. They actually had some pretense of giving a feth about the customers and their experience with the product after the purchase.

This. I know Privateer, for example, are after my money, but I get the impression they want me to help me have fun with their games and that they like their community. With GW, the greed may or may not be bigger, but it's far more off-puttingly naked. They don't seem to see any value in making customers feel like more more than a tiresome necessity that must be dealt with to get hold of money.

Every company is about making a profit, but some decide that maybe treating your customers with respect will help their product.

Wyrd Games put out an amazing skirmish game ruleset, that is very balanced despite having incredibly unique crews across factions.

They tell us about what they are planning on doing and give us information on what is coming up in the next month or two.

They playtest their rules, and while they don't just stupidly take the forum-posters opinions as absolute truth, they do listen to it, so if someone finds a way to break the game, they fix it.

They release FAQs that fix any holes they have missed.
They have people from their office on the forums talking to us and they even support things like writing contests with prizes.

I feel like they want me to enjoy their game. GW is the opposite of everything I mentioned above.

They sit at the top of their tower and vomit rules over the side. They are too far above us to hear anything we say and can't be bothered to give us any information as to what is inside their heads. I have never experienced a company less transparent than GW.

But yeah, I can't deny that the GW plastic kits are fantastic.

40k is an amazing game, has brilliant quality of models, rulebooks and all the other stuff like rulebooks, supplements, novels, games etc are really, really good.

I absolutely love everything about it. I'm sure the reason why it and GW haven't died is that despite some people complaining, the majority like me absolutely love it all. More people feel the need to complain about things and give negative reviews, whereas people that like things are less inclined to make the effort to shout about how much they enjoy it.

For me, 40k gets better and better and the amount of people still playing it speaks for itself.

 Slaphead wrote:
40k is an amazing game, has brilliant quality of models, rulebooks and all the other stuff like rulebooks, supplements, novels, games etc are really really good.

Define "good" because I dont think our definitions are the same. I understand that you love the game, but you dont see any problems with the rules?

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
40k is an amazing game, has brilliant quality of models, rulebooks and all the other stuff like rulebooks, supplements, novels, games etc are really really good.

Define "good" because I dont think our definitions are the same. I understand that you love the game, but you dont see any problems with the rules?

There is that one thing where GW tells you to make up your own rules. Maybe he's really good at making up his own rules, so in extension the GW rules are really good.

I think the most important single thing for any game is the enthusiasm of the players. Because GW is so big they can keep up a steady rate of new stuff coming out for 40K that is enough to keep people interested.
The models are usually good, occasionally brilliant. The background fluff is probably the best in the business, and this is enough to survive a game system that is past it's sell-by date, and littered with problems.
Dust Tactics for example, is a far better game in my opinion, but GW runs rings round Dust Studio when it comes to generating, and maintaining the all important player enthusiasm.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
40k is an amazing game, has brilliant quality of models, rulebooks and all the other stuff like rulebooks, supplements, novels, games etc are really really good.

Define "good" because I dont think our definitions are the same. I understand that you love the game, but you dont see any problems with the rules?

"Good" is pretty subjective in this case. The rules might be terrible for competitive games/tournaments, but they work great for casual games. I thoroughly enjoy a relaxed 1500 pt. game with friends, the miniatures, lore and rules make it all fun for me. So I would also say 40K is "good".

 clamclaw wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:

 Slaphead wrote:
40k is an amazing game, has brilliant quality of models, rulebooks and all the other stuff like rulebooks, supplements, novels, games etc are really really good.

Define "good" because I dont think our definitions are the same. I understand that you love the game, but you dont see any problems with the rules?

"Good" is pretty subjective in this case. The rules might be terrible for competitive games/tournaments, but they work great for casual games. I thoroughly enjoy a relaxed 1500 pt. game with friends, the miniatures, lore and rules make it all fun for me. So I would also say 40K is "good".

No, they aren't. The rules are horrible for casual players. The rules favor one army over another just cause. The man who likes Eldar Jetbikes are going to dominate other players because Phil Kelly has graced them with low points and lots of firepower. The bloated and at times ambiguous rule set are going to make things hard for casuals too (Maybe not necessarily your group) as players a good chunk of their game time just trying to work how the rules function. A tight, balanced rules set benefits everyone. I never understood why people think that bad rules are great for narrative/casual games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Slaphead wrote:
40k is an amazing game, has brilliant quality of models, rulebooks and all the other stuff like rulebooks, supplements, novels, games etc are really, really good.

I absolutely love everything about it. I'm sure the reason why it and GW haven't died is that despite some people complaining, the majority like me absolutely love it all. More people feel the need to complain about things and give negative reviews, whereas people that like things are less inclined to make the effort to shout about how much they enjoy it.

For me, 40k gets better and better and the amount of people still playing it speaks for itself.

Out of curiosity, have you played many other table top games?

Yeah, I would definitely agree with TheCustomLime in that games of 40k work well with friends because you're all just there to have fun and its not as much of a competition (losing probably results in a light ribbing). With any game where you're actually trying to play a structured game against someone with whom you don't have a pre-established relationship, the imbalance can create some issues.

Although to that regard, I don't know why people who are in friend gaming groups feel the need to keep up with what rules GW are pumping out. You are sure investing a lot of money in something that really isn't improving very much, so do people see it as a high priced subscription then? I just imagine if I were in a group, we'd make an agreement about what edition we like the most and play that and stay away from wasting money on product that is not improving, only changing.

Even with friends, the power curve is borderline insane. Unless your Eldar player purposely gimps himself or plays like a complete scrub he'll trounce most other people, and that's assuming someone uses the best units. Pit Eldar against let's say Dark Angels or non-Nurgle Chaos and how well will they fare even if the Eldar player doesn't take Jetbikes?

For me that's the biggest problem. The rules are awful from a casual standpoint because if I like Jetbikes and play fluffy Saim-Hann, I'll demolish anyone I play against and come off like a WAAC jackass because GW made Eldar powerful just because, but if I was a fluffy Dark Angels player I'd get screwed and lose constantly because DA are weak. They're awful from a narrative standpoint because random warlord traits and psychic powers, along with power being all over the place means that you can't have narrative battles or campaigns without modifying the core rules. They're awful from a gampeplay standpoint because there's a bloat of special rules and hundreds of dollars in additional books that increase the scale and scope of the game while not adding much of anything.

The rules are bad because Fluff Player A and Fluff Player B can have armies on opposite ends of the power curve for no discernible reason and as a result be unfairly punished either with a weak army or an overly strong army, without really any way of knowing if they're new players who decide to pick up 40k. That doesn't affect the competitive powergamer nearly as much as it affects the guy who picked up Dark Angels because he likes the look of them, loves the fluff and wants to play and then finds out he always loses. It affects the guy who picks up Eldar because having a swarm of guys on jetbikes is awesome, and steamrolls his opponents because Eldar are better.

What you have is the functional equivalent of getting two children and letting them play a game where they are asked to pick their favorite color and there's a prize associated with it. One kid says red is his favorite color, and he gets a slice of cake. The other kid says blue is his favorite color, and he gets a plate of brussel sprouts. Why? Because reasons.

 Toofast wrote:
so stop using straw man arguments like that.

I must not be getting reported that much because I have yet to receive a single PM or ban from the forum in all the time I've spent posting on here. Report away, it isn't going to magically fix GWs business model or make your position any more defensible.

It was a question, not a strawman argument. The part where I even state it is a question should clarify that for you. Telling you to stop acting unpolitely, which is against the forum rules, has nothing to do with my position either. Nice bridgebuilding anyway.

Lastly, I wonder if you even have a clue about my actual position.

They survive by momentum and the fact that there will always be more 13-15 year olds who inject fresh money before getting burned out in a few years. Enough players have enough armies that they keep at it every new edition and codex change, even if they don't enjoy it, sunk cost style.

If 40k was released fresh today it would fail on the cost of entry alone.

Also can we move away from the ridiculous idea that 40k is a "beer & pretzels" game or "casual"? So easy to pick up and play after finding a 6'x4' table, building/buying enough terrain to fill it, spending ~$200 on rules and codexes, then a further $500 (assuming $200-$250 per starter army), painting everything, then finding 2-4 hours to setup and play the game!
Jeez! Yahtzee is beer & pretzels. X-Wing is arguably beer & pretzels. 40k is NOTHING BUT.

 bosky wrote:
They survive by momentum and the fact that there will always be more 13-15 year olds who inject fresh money before getting burned out in a few years. Enough players have enough armies that they keep at it every new edition and codex change, even if they don't enjoy it, sunk cost style.

If 40k was released fresh today it would fail on the cost of entry alone.

Also can we move away from the ridiculous idea that 40k is a "beer & pretzels" game or "casual"? So easy to pick up and play after finding a 6'x4' table, building/buying enough terrain to fill it, spending ~$200 on rules and codexes, then a further $500 (assuming $200-$250 per starter army), painting everything, then finding 2-4 hours to setup and play the game!
Jeez! Yahtzee is beer & pretzels. X-Wing is arguably beer & pretzels. 40k is NOTHING BUT.

It's a beer and pretzels game in the sense that you can drink beer and eat pretzels while playing it

But that's also basically EVERY board/tabletop game.

Beer and Pretzels refers to the tone of the game. As in it's supposed to be played casually, as a hobby.

As opposed to the more serious wargames that existed at the time that were historical, and had more involved rules. In fact, they never sold terrain when that term was coined. They told you how to make terrain out of whatever you could find.