Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?
Infinity neec to play how many?4-5 models? W40k x-times more, its just natural it will cost more, thats why are this two games incomparable.
And just btw, I like Inf. models, but they are smaler and metal, what is cheaper to produce compared to GW models, whats is another reason why they are cheaper.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

 Byte wrote:
Ho-hmmm. This post... again.

*YAWN*

Followed by this one.

Again.

There is a reason that point keeps being made.... Games Workshop games are more expensive to enter than any of their competitors.

So, ho-hmmm away... and sooner or later GW will ho-hmmm away as well... most likely sooner, at the rate that they are pricing themselves out of the market.

Because, you see, ho-hmmm does not actually address the problem, now does it?

It is a response that translates to 'I have no actual answer, so I will ridicule the post in the hopes that it goes away'.

The Auld Grump - ho-hmmm.

I'm sure GW could give to gaks about we think about their business practices. This is all conjecture and nothing more than wish listing. No thanks, knock yourself out.

1. It's not up to me to "address" the problem.
2. It's not up to me to have an "answer".
3. Nor would it matter if I did.

Pat

 Quarterdime wrote:
Did you miss me saying Games Workshop is slightly cheaper than Warmachine? And my admission that the biggest drawback to the aforementioned ideal was that yes, you do need an army to play, and that it is expected to be painted to a standard?

Except it's not slightly cheaper than Warmachine. They average out once you hit the higher points in Warmachine, but at the low end Warmachine is hands down cheaper than GW. I've done the price comparisons several times (force to force, not price per model which is what people usually mean when they say that Warmachine isn't cheaper) and every single time I get a NORMAL SIZED FORCE for Warmachine at the same time I get an ENTRY LEVEL ARMY from GW. For the price of the rules and a Codex for 40k I can get a 25-point Warmachine army (depending on what I buy of course), which is the equivalent (roughly) of a 1,000 point 40k army.

It is not in any way, shape or form cheaper if you actually look at what matters instead of looking only at price per individual model or price per box.

I still think the pricing of individual models really isn't relevant. Every system is going to have models that are cheaper or more expensive, and it's more a matter of taste anyways -- different aesthetics, plastic vs. resin vs. metal, etc. Getting what you want justifies the cost.

What's relevant is the cost/value ratio of the rules and the startup cost. The 40k rulebook costs as much as the 2 player battle box for Warmachine. That's exactly why I didn't bother buying 8th edition and instead decided to try WM. Additionally, the constant complete and utter lack of balance in 40k made we want to start looking for alternatives, and I consider that a quality issue with codices. Charging me $50 for a codex that gets blown out of the water by another codex every time is asinine, and I was done with it.

 Naberiel wrote:
Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?
Infinity neec to play how many?4-5 models? W40k x-times more, its just natural it will cost more, thats why are this two games incomparable.
And just btw, I like Inf. models, but they are smaler and metal, what is cheaper to produce compared to GW models, whats is another reason why they are cheaper.

And yet model for model Infinity is still cheaper.

Clearly you know nothing about infinity because 10 is standard, anything less than 8 in a normal game is way too small and you can get 16 or so easily enough with the more horde-y faction(s), but that's not the point I want to focus on. Infinity models, even the line troops, are metal and beautifully sculpted. Each is essentially a character model, and a GW character model is still twice the price on average and unarguably inferior materials.

 Naberiel wrote:
Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?
Infinity neec to play how many?4-5 models? W40k x-times more, its just natural it will cost more, thats why are this two games incomparable.
And just btw, I like Inf. models, but they are smaler and metal, what is cheaper to produce compared to GW models, whats is another reason why they are cheaper.

Infinity isn't a valid comparison to 40k at all for these reasons. It's not the same type of game. Warmachine, at least in part, is much closer to 40k. So is Bolt Action (also much cheaper). But Infinity's cost can't be a valid comparison because it's a small game, there's no way 40k could compete with it so it's already skewed out the box. But comparing Infinity doesn't really work, because nobody wants 40k to go to just 10 or so models per side (well not as the prime game anyways, as an addon sure why not).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 slowthar wrote:
I still think the pricing of individual models really isn't relevant. Every system is going to have models that are cheaper or more expensive, and it's more a matter of taste anyways -- different aesthetics, plastic vs. resin vs. metal, etc. Getting what you want justifies the cost.

What's relevant is the cost/value ratio of the rules and the startup cost. The 40k rulebook costs as much as the 2 player battle box for Warmachine. That's exactly why I didn't bother buying 8th edition and instead decided to try WM. Additionally, the constant complete and utter lack of balance in 40k made we want to start looking for alternatives, and I consider that a quality issue with codices. Charging me $50 for a codex that gets blown out of the water by another codex every time is asinine, and I was done with it.

Exactly. Price per model is NOT relevant at all, yet it keeps being brought up ("Look this unit of 10 guys for Warmachine is $85! GW sells 10 guys for $40! GW is cheaper!!!"), especially since when you compare plastic to plastic (the aforementioned $85 box is METAL) it's roughly the same at best, and then you get the typical "But the plastic quality sucks" or "But I don't get extra bits sprues" kind of arguments that ignore the fact nobody is talking aesthetics. You get a lot more for your money ("value") from Warmachine than you do 40k because a unit is typically self-contained; you buy one box of a unit, and then you're done. You don't need to buy a second or third box of that same unit except in rare skew lists.

I've done a comparison several times, most recent being the other day as I really was looking at getting back into 40k, and once I hit the $300 mark or so for barely a minimal force (and that's including the fact I have a Codex and Rulebook already from a previous attempt) i said feth it shelved the idea yet again (Time #4 now). There's also the fact that in 40k there is a "basic force" and a "good" force. You can buy a lot of certain units and get a playable army, but it might lose every game because the units you picked are bad. So there's more than just picking units to make a 1,000 point or 1,500 point force, you also have to look at what actually works because the rules are such gak.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Byte wrote:
I'm sure GW could give to gaks about we think about their business practices. This is all conjecture and nothing more than wish listing. No thanks, knock yourself out.

1. It's not up to me to "address" the problem.
2. It's not up to me to have an "answer".
3. Nor would it matter if I did.

Pat

And the fact they don't care about what we think is the reason why they are declining in a market that is growing. They should be listening because ex customers who left you can provide valuable insight to things you are doing wrong, because they used to buy from you and now don't. That's Business 101.

Naberiel wrote:Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?
Infinity neec to play how many?4-5 models? W40k x-times more, its just natural it will cost more, thats why are this two games incomparable.

Perhaps you mean they can't be equated with one another, because you made a comparison in your post. You compared them and then talked about the differences, so they're obviously comparable.

The differences is what matters. It's why the comparison is useful.

To tie this back into the thread topic, this comparison is about both recruitment and competition. In GW's life cycle, they're at a stage where the demographic that made them huge has largely moved on and now their scrambling to recruit replacements. Since, however, they are failing to do so fast enough, they want to get as much cash out of each customer as possible before they quit.

That's why everything is front loaded. Expensive rules, expensive starter, expensive army books. Everything you need up front, is jacked up in price so they can maximize the revenue they get from each customer early on in that customer's life with the company.

Unfortunately, this just increases the barrier to entry and makes recruitment harder. So the existing customer base and new people who happen to get in anyway will be asked to pay more to make up the difference. Which then increases the barrier to entry and so on in a feedback loop.

GW also tries to segment their market away from the larger gaming market. Which means that the value of their segmented market in terms of marketing exposure goes down with every person who leaves and is not replaced by a new person. There's less word of mouth, less foot traffic in stores, less people seeing white dwarf, less people being exposed to GW marketing. As a marketing channel, GW's segmented approach loses value with each lost customer. Their eco-system isn't expanding and thriving, it's sick and wasting away.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Yes, that is the other point. Merely to purchase the 7th edition rules and 6th edition Tau codex would cost me £80, before adding any of the new unit models (Riptide, etc.) I don't like a lot of the 6th and 7th edition rules (Flyers, Lords of War and so on.)

From my viewpoint GW not only have a pricing problem to get new customers, they also will have difficulty in retaining old ones as new rules and codexes are issued.

QFT. They should release "The Rules" again for 7th edition. It would also help if they included "The rules" in every faction's starter box. It's the least they could do.

Sorry but Infinity (or Warmachine, or Malifaux or X-Wing) are PERFECTLY comparable in this case.

The structure of the game is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is they are competing for the customers dollars and other companies are taking a lot of the dollars that used to go to GW. It's like going into a restaurant that has a prime rib dish for $40 and a chicken dish for $20. Sure, beef and chicken aren't the same so I get the chicken. Guess what that also means, that I didn't get the beef. Just because one is a skirmish and one is a full battle game (or wants to be even though it is terrible at it), does not matter. Fact is, they are very similar in that they are both GAMES.

Both 40k and the others mentioned are the exact same games - ones that use little toy heroes moved around a tabletop shooting dice at each other. The number of models required by the game are irrelevant other than what it means in total cost. For what one army for GW costs now, one can have a full tournament force for TEN other game systems now. In the end, what matters is where people are spending their money and GW as a GAME is terrible in almost every way now to their competition (both in its very poor rules and game play and it's overall cost)

Perhaps the market has shifted and more people today are busier than ever before, so skirmish games with 10-20 models a side and 60-90 minutes of play fit the market demographic better than a full battle game does. Of course, GW doesn't know this because they do zero research.

 Naberiel wrote:
Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?
Infinity neec to play how many?4-5 models? W40k x-times more, its just natural it will cost more, thats why are this two games incomparable.
And just btw, I like Inf. models, but they are smaler and metal, what is cheaper to produce compared to GW models, whats is another reason why they are cheaper.

It's actually pretty simple answer.

People are talking about the BUY IN price. GW use to be at the same scale as the games that are being compared too. Also what pare about the INTRO BOXES are equal points against other armies?

While in the end, other gaming systems can be just as expensive as GW, the Buy In is so much cheaper.

Buy in for X-wing, $40. No codices needed. No EXTRA books needed. GW Buy in is $120. Great deal for what you get. BUT then you need to buy codices. Also you can't even use the minis in the box for a LEGAL army in a lot of cases. Now we have Sanctus Reach books that are over $100 to buy, EACH! Then when another company does have extra books for you to buy, they are under $50, not over, and hell not costing over $100.

Mini wise, you are paying the same as GW or slightly less in some cases, book wise, you are paying DOUBLE to play 40K than other games.

Please I answer that. I will even go over it again. To play 40K you need to pay DOUBLE in prices to buy books than other companies for no reason whats so ever.

Wayshuba: Infinity,Warmachine, Malifaux and X-Wing are PERFECTLY comparable, but not with W40k
I sadly dont understand your dish expalanation, maybe its just my orkish english

Davor: yeah there is no way to disagree GW buy in and mainly books are a lot expensive compared to other games, but thats goes again down to player, wana play all that fanci things? you have to pay.

Warmachine is certainly comparable to 40k, at least non-horde 40k armies, albeit without vehicles and flyers. You tend to have a Warjack or two, typically a squad or two (sometimes more) of 10 (usually) infantry, or some smallers squads of 4-6 infantry, maybe some larger-based 5-strong squads. That's fairly comparable to a Space Marine army, for example, minus vehicles. It obviously doesn't compare to something like an Ork or Tyranid horde, but even in 40k those are more expensive than average based on number of models, even if 40k had sane pricing they would be more expensive on volume alone.

In any event it's very easy to say 40k has no comparison and therefore stands alone, except it's not really no comparison. A 1,000 point 40k army is likely about as many models as an normal sized Warmachine army (give or take depending on what you field), but still costs probably double even at that level, and 1k points is supposed to be the entry-level points value for a new player. Therefore, 40k has less value because it's a similar type of game and costs twice as much for a smaller force; why would I spend $300 on the bare basics for 40k when I can spend $300 and get a good sized Warmachine army and play more games with that?

 Naberiel wrote:
Wayshuba: Infinity,Warmachine, Malifaux and X-Wing are PERFECTLY comparable, but not with W40k

If you're going to disagree with something, its generally best if you explain why, not just say no.

Infinity and 40k are both wargames. Number of models on the table is irrelevant as they're both competing for the same customer base.

40k isn't a special snowflake that can't be compared to anything. Its thinking like that that put GW in its current situation where more and more of the pie is being eaten up by other games.

Wargames are wargames are wargames. Drawing arbitrary lines in the sand because of model count does not make a strong argument. You might as well argue that X-wing isn't comparable because the models are pre-painted.

Warhammer and Infinity are competing for the same gamers' money, so they need to be discussed together.

By that vein they also compete with other gaming hobbies a person might have.

GW's big scale battles are geared to those who want 40-100 models on the table

Infinity's smaller skirmish game is geared to those that want far less.

Sure, they have some overlap and most likely have overlap in the kind of gamers they attract, but once you start blurring the lines between the two types of games why stop here?

And yes, X-wing isn't 100% comparable because it's pre-painted because part of the demographic of GW/Infinity must be the type that likes to paint and wouldn't spent their money on X-wing because of it.

A miniatures wargame is comparable to another miniatures wargame by virtue of the two being miniatures wargames.

Claiming 40k can't be compared to Infinity would be akin to claiming Monopoly and Risk can't be compared because one is a war oriented board game and Monopoly is a business oriented board game.

The games are obviously different, and while people will prefer different themes, model count and price point, the simple fact is that 40k exists within a larger market than 'Just 40k' or 'GW products only'.

 Shandara wrote:
By that vein they also compete with other gaming hobbies a person might have.

GW's big scale battles are geared to those who want 40-100 models on the table

Infinity's smaller skirmish game is geared to those that want far less.

Sure, they have some overlap and most likely have overlap in the kind of gamers they attract, but once you start blurring the lines between the two types of games why stop here?

And yes, X-wing isn't 100% comparable because it's pre-painted because part of the demographic of GW/Infinity must be the type that likes to paint and wouldn't spent their money on X-wing because of it.

Example: The other week I had to decide what I wanted to buy. Did I want a box of Reciprocators for my Convergence army, a TAG for my Nomad army or get the starter box for X-Wing. (I went with the TAGs) But it shows how different games are indeed in the same market and competing against each other.

Even on a completely superficial comparison, 40k, Malifaux, Infinity and Warmachine are more closely related to each other and comparable than any are to X-Wing.

Those are the same scale, contain humanoid models as the mainstay, both are not pre-painted. They share those with each other and not with X-Wing.

While 40k was always bigger than Infinity, it wasn't that much bigger when it started and it only has had been bloated recently in its lifespan.

Warmachine is even closer in numbers to 40k is, and I would gather similar to 2nd edition 40k in how large an army is, which is significantly larger than an X-Wing one and would look more similar to a 40k army.

In terms of model count, X-Wing I would guess averages half the model count of Infinity.

40k is much more directly comparable to Warmachine than Warmachine is to X-Wing, even in the space of miniatures games.

 Naberiel wrote:
Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?

They're both
wargames...
in a sci-fi setting...
that use 28mm...
unpainted minis...
with a skirmish rule system...
provided by the same company as the minis.

One has more sides on the dice, one has more skulls on the minis.

 Naberiel wrote:
Just... how can someone compare W40k and Infinity?
Infinity neec to play how many?4-5 models? W40k x-times more, its just natural it will cost more, thats why are this two games incomparable.
And just btw, I like Inf. models, but they are smaler and metal, what is cheaper to produce compared to GW models, whats is another reason why they are cheaper.

If you make an army for Fantasy or 40K using non-GW models it ends up much cheaper.

I always facepalm when I see the arguments in this thread being brought up over and over. Same gak, different day. People who want to piss on GW always bring up that despite the figures often being more expensive, Warmahordes costs less to start up.

Guess what, guys? Despite the rules being better and the game having less of an overall startup cost, you're still getting ripped off on the model prices. Just like 40k. Compare like to like in terms of models - take the materials into account as well.

When people bring up Historicals and the far, far lower price, it's always the same argument - that "historical players" buy thousands of figures, so arguments of scale abound as to why the historical figures are way cheaper than either the 40k or Warmahordes figures. News flash - histotrical games like Bolt Action or Saga (and quite a few more) don't require all that many models, and those same models (including the vehicles) cost a gakload less than either of your 40k or Warmahordes (or Infinity, et al) models.

And for the record, I own a healthy (unhealthy?) amount of all of the above. I know what I speak of. And it's people defending GW's high prices and others trying to defend PP's own high prices with "but startup cost is reasons!"

Startup cost IS a major reason. The issue isn't that GW is "ripping people off" it's that it costs a lot to START. I have no problem spending money on a unit for my Khador army. If have non problem spending money on a 40k unit. But I do have a problem when the money that would buy me a normal sized Warmachine army buys me like 750 points (entry level) for 40k on top of at least one $50 book to use it and $80 for the rules of the game.

 Azazelx wrote:
I always facepalm when I see the arguments in this thread being brought up over and over. Same gak, different day. People who want to piss on GW always bring up that despite the figures often being more expensive, Warmahordes costs less to start up.

Guess what, guys? Despite the rules being better and the game having less of an overall startup cost, you're still getting ripped off on the model prices. Just like 40k. Compare like to like in terms of models - take the materials into account as well.

When people bring up Historicals and the far, far lower price, it's always the same argument - that "historical players" buy thousands of figures, so arguments of scale abound as to why the historical figures are way cheaper than either the 40k or Warmahordes figures. News flash - histotrical games like Bolt Action or Saga (and quite a few more) don't require all that many models, and those same models (including the vehicles) cost a gakload less than either of your 40k or Warmahordes (or Infinity, et al) models.

And for the record, I own a healthy (unhealthy?) amount of all of the above. I know what I speak of. And it's people defending GW's high prices and others trying to defend PP's own high prices with "but startup cost is reasons!"

Bah. Bah, I say!

While I state, aloud and for the record, that the startup costs of WARMACHINE is lower than any GW game, I do not play it..

And I agree - the prices of WARMACHINE models are too high.

The few models that I have are for RPG purposes.

My game of choice these days is Kings of War - using figures that are, for the most part, very inexpensive, or that I have owned for decades. (Some of the miniatures are older than my girlfriend.... And she is in her thirties.)

Mantic miniatures are cheap, and easy to paint - my girlfriend has pretty much taken control of my Dwarf army.

Perry historicals work just fine for Kings of War, and the game does not have the huge battles common to historicals. (Though it can handle them quite well - it is in small scale skirmish battles that the game loses its shine.) My Kingdoms of Men army is about 75% Perry, and the rest old Empire models from GW.

My undead are from all over - but I really like the Mantic undead, and the price is decent.

I still play Mordheim - and, again, Perry historicals work just fine. I do not need new models for any of the warbands - I have plenty of old plastics.

Deadzone... Deadzone is weird... the armies can get smaller as the campaign continues. And a single boxed set can be the entirety of your force for quite some time. But possibly the lowest startup cost of any of the games discussed. (I am playing Enforcers and Plague... and have yet to go beyond the forces included in the two player box.)

As for Bolt Action... carry on - good game, good price, and they are starting to carry WWI stuff.

The Auld Grump

 Azazelx wrote:
I always facepalm when I see the arguments in this thread being brought up over and over. Same gak, different day. People who want to piss on GW always bring up that despite the figures often being more expensive, Warmahordes costs less to start up.

Guess what, guys? Despite the rules being better and the game having less of an overall startup cost, you're still getting ripped off on the model prices. Just like 40k. Compare like to like in terms of models - take the materials into account as well.

When people bring up Historicals and the far, far lower price, it's always the same argument - that "historical players" buy thousands of figures, so arguments of scale abound as to why the historical figures are way cheaper than either the 40k or Warmahordes figures. News flash - histotrical games like Bolt Action or Saga (and quite a few more) don't require all that many models, and those same models (including the vehicles) cost a gakload less than either of your 40k or Warmahordes (or Infinity, et al) models.

And for the record, I own a healthy (unhealthy?) amount of all of the above. I know what I speak of. And it's people defending GW's high prices and others trying to defend PP's own high prices with "but startup cost is reasons!"

Start up costs is a huge factor in attracting new customers. Seeing as how GW is shedding veterans faster than it's gaining them, start up costs IS a huge factor. Besides, WM is still cheaper to get a finished army. (Not to mention much cheaper and optional rule books.) It's cheaper to start and cheaper over all. I know of what I speak.

Ok some people say you cannot compare 40k to other game company's products. so your honor let me rephrase that.

100$ spend on other similar games like 40k give me more game than 40K does.

In a closed system competition is a bit of a zero sum game - if Bob has $100 a month to spend, and used to spend $50 on GW, $25 on Reaper, and $25 on WARMACHINE, but now 25 is spending $50 on Reaper, $25 on Mantic, and $25 on GW then both GW and WARMACHINE are losing a portion of that money while Reaper and Mantic are getting a bigger slice of the pie.

Unless the pie gets bigger then every dollar that Bob spends on one company is not going to be spent on another.
And, for the record - people do compare apples to oranges - they fill the same fruit shaped niche.

The Auld Grump

Chess and Paintball:

-are both wargames
-in both you compete against other player
-both are playable indoor and outdoor


would you compare they prices? I dont think so coz they are just too diferent, arent they?

Yea 100€ in Infinity give me more than 100 in W40k, yeah book are insane and yeah GWs politics are stupid, but that change nothing. I just cant wram my squid brain around this comparsion.

Stop playing the fool.
Infinity and 40k are comparable. Chess and paintball only to a very very small degree.

People want to play a tabletop wargame. 40k is one, x-wing is one, Infinity is one. Neither Chess nor Paintball are ones.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Unless the pie gets bigger then every dollar that Bob spends on one company is not going to be spent on another.

And then of course there is the situation GW is in where their slice is getting smaller while the pie is getting bigger.

 Naberiel wrote:
Chess and Paintball:

-are both wargames
-in both you compete against other player
-both are playable indoor and outdoor


would you compare they prices? I dont think so coz they are just too diferent, arent they?

Yea 100€ in Infinity give me more than 100 in W40k, yeah book are insane and yeah GWs politics are stupid, but that change nothing. I just cant wram my squid brain around this comparsion.

Infinity and 40k are both table top miniature wargames. The only difference between them is model count. How is that hard to understand?