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.

http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPhone/Chainsaw+Warrior/news.asp?c=52529

All the way back in 1987, Games Workshop released a pretty unique boardgame called Chainsaw Warrior. It was special, because it pitted players against the clock - rather than other gamers.

Why the history lesson? Well, because Bristol-based developer Auroch Digital (of Endgame: Syria fame) will bring Chainsaw Warrior to the iPhone and iPad, as well as Android-powered devices, later this year.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, Chainsaw Warrior is a solo game. You take on the role of the eponymous hero as you attempt to save New York from destruction at the hands of dark forces from another reality.

Your aim is to work your way through hordes of zombies and mutants, locate the source of the evil, and wipe it off the face of the planet.

Bloody business

"It's a game I played as a kid and loved," Tomas Rawlings, Auroch Digital's design and production director, said. "I see it as the precursor of first-person shooters when video games technology could not really do the first-person or the shooting."

"For me this is not only a great game, but a classic of boardgame design - a solo shooter that really challenges the player."

Look out for Chainsaw Warrior at the end of summer. It'll be available to download for iPhone, iPad, and any Android devices you have lying around.

Wow. I like the way these are going!

There used to be a Web browser based version of it at one time, really liked that.

Good stuff, I wonder what else on their back catalogue might make it gameward

The most obvious would be Curse of the Mummy's Tomb or Blood Royale (although I think FFG may have the licence for that) in terms of actually having gameplay gameplay

but Wikipedia give a list of other stuff (some of which I don't even remember

Battlecars
Calamity
Dark Future (similar to Car Wars)
Doom of the Eldar
Gobbo's Banquet
Hungry Troll and the Gobbos
Oi! Dat's My Leg!
Squelch!
Super Power
Trolls in the Pantry
Valley of the Four Winds
Warlock

So is GW's entire licensing strategy now "watch Steam/iStore, copy whatever they do"? Oh, what's that you say Marketing Monkey #6, they're putting out an OTT 80's nostalgia trip standalone expansion for Far Cry 3? Quick, plunder our archives for anything even remotely similar and find me some crumbum mobile-only shovelware developer, stat!

 Yodhrin wrote:
So is GW's entire licensing strategy now "watch Steam/iStore, copy whatever they do"? Oh, what's that you say Marketing Monkey #6, they're putting out an OTT 80's nostalgia trip standalone expansion for Far Cry 3? Quick, plunder our archives for anything even remotely similar and find me some crumbum mobile-only shovelware developer, stat!

Well given the Guardian just call the Warhammer Quest app game one of the best adventure app games on the market, I think GW is showing so far they are choosing good companies. Even the reception for both Warhammer Quest and Talisman games have been positive on this board. Given Marketing Monkey #6 has convinced GW to have two other licensees handed over to companies people described as shovelware developers and turn out good product, I think he is doing a good job.

GW is actually going to release something for Android? Wow.
I'll be looking forward to it. While I never played the boardgame, I did play the online version years ago.

Endgame: Syria fame

Is that a thing? Like an addon to Tom Clancy's Endgame?

Do IPs like this really help a game? I had never heard of this, personally... and it seems most folks who have might be somewhat past their gaming days, no offense y'all

 Yodhrin wrote:
So is GW's entire licensing strategy now "watch Steam/iStore, copy whatever they do"? Oh, what's that you say Marketing Monkey #6, they're putting out an OTT 80's nostalgia trip standalone expansion for Far Cry 3? Quick, plunder our archives for anything even remotely similar and find me some crumbum mobile-only shovelware developer, stat!

No, their strategy is, "how can we expand our IPs to other areas of media to create new revenue streams while not utilizing Kickstarter?"

Pretty standard stuff, really.

Yeah, all of this game licensing is just a way for GW to make a bit more money without GW having to do any of the work themselves.

Good, wholesome family fun, I see.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Yeah, all of this game licensing is just a way for GW to make a bit more money without GW having to do any of the work themselves.

And this is a problem because.....

 cincydooley wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
So is GW's entire licensing strategy now "watch Steam/iStore, copy whatever they do"? Oh, what's that you say Marketing Monkey #6, they're putting out an OTT 80's nostalgia trip standalone expansion for Far Cry 3? Quick, plunder our archives for anything even remotely similar and find me some crumbum mobile-only shovelware developer, stat!

No, their strategy is, "how can we expand our IPs to other areas of media to create new revenue streams while not utilizing Kickstarter?"

Pretty standard stuff, really.

Some companies are capable of recognising the fact that expanding your IP in certain ways can damage its value in the long-term. GW put a lot of resources into trying to make 40K into a AAA gaming IP, chucking every other boardgame, wargame concept, and intro system they've ever designed at the wall to see if any of them stick won't help them strengthen their main IP, it'll lead to them becoming known as the Zynga of wargaming. Like most of their other recent business decisions, that may well service their bottom line well enough in the short-term, but it's extremely questionable if they can keep it up beyond Kirby's retirement.

And considering the monstrous success other companies have been having on Kickstarter, utilising it might be the smartest business decision GW could make at this point(which is of course why they won't, that and their corporate culture is so egotistical and sycophantic they likely see crowd funding as beneath them); Kickstart Sisters of Battle(or any neglected/"unprofitable" line/game), for example, and what happens? Either they get a whole new range of the latest plastics for their flagship game to sell in stores(and pay for the newer slide-core tooled moulding tech they want so much with not a penny out of pocket), building a huge amount of goodwill with a broad range of gamers; or they get a completely definitive get out of jail free card whenever anyone, anywhere, tries to complain about them axing stuff they claim wasn't popular enough.

As for the "such&such was good so neener neener" comment below the quoted one; nobody says shovelware games can't be fun, of course they are, or they'd make no money and nobody would be able to make money developing them. They're still cheap, throwaway shovelware regardless; crikey, the whole Wii platform was built on shovelware and marketing and it was hugely popular. So are cheap plastic toys churned out by the million in factories in the developing world, but you don't see people leaping forth to defend cheap plastic crap that someone plays with for a few days and then chucks in a cupboard and ignores as quality merchandise, nor arguing that a company trying to position itself as a luxury brand(which is, as inadvisable as some thing it to be, what GW is attempting) isn't damaging their own goals by slapping their brand all over it.

How does this damage the IP value of their core systems? It isn't even in the same universe, etc.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Yeah, all of this game licensing is just a way for GW to make a bit more money without GW having to do any of the work themselves.

And this is a problem because.....

They should be using their own money so that people complain about money being taken away from sisters/squats.

I actually like this trend.

I'm far too cynical to be happy about this.

I just don't understand the complaints. I really don't.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm far too cynical to be happy about this.

/hugs

It's okay. We still love you.

Heh heh heh. Expect more of this in the near future.

Adam.

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
Heh heh heh. Expect more of this in the near future.

Adam.

I'm personally waiting for the Dark Future game to come out with playable Col. Elvis Presley

silent25 wrote:

 Adam LongWalker wrote:
Heh heh heh. Expect more of this in the near future.

Adam.

I'm personally waiting for the Dark Future game to come out with playable Col. Elvis Presley

hahahahaha...
i still have all those Dark Future novels...
what a great setting that was, and awesome covers, too...

@RiTides: i remember Chainsaw Warrior...
i've also got a few grey hairs...
still living hard and playing rough, though...

cheers
jah

Can Car Wars be too far behind?

God I hope so,I loved Autoduel on my C-64

 BryllCream wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Yeah, all of this game licensing is just a way for GW to make a bit more money without GW having to do any of the work themselves.

And this is a problem because.....

They should be using their own money so that people complain about money being taken away from sisters/squats.

The problem is more along the lines of what has happened with other IPs when it comes to video game licensing. You'll have one company make a really great game, but then others will make crappy games, and, eventually, many people will remember the crappy games more than the good one (or, even worse, they'll assume most games will end up being crappy rather than good). In this case, the IP is the Games Workshop Brand™.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eisenhorn wrote:
Can Car Wars be too far behind?

Car Wars was by Steve Jackson Games, and they do have plans for future development of it (the boardgame version, at least).

[EDIT]

 RiTides wrote:
Do IPs like this really help a game? I had never heard of this, personally... and it seems most folks who have might be somewhat past their gaming days, no offense y'all

While the Chainsaw Warrior IP itself may not bring in many potential buyers, the Games Workshop™ brand on it will. Hence my concern that GW may end up simply diluting their brand by spreading their IPs among all these different developers.

 RiTides wrote:
Do IPs like this really help a game? I had never heard of this, personally... and it seems most folks who have might be somewhat past their gaming days, no offense y'all

You young whipersnappers! Get off mah lawn!

Very right about Car Wars that was Jackson.
I hope they make that a PC game.
GW made Battlecars which was based on a Mad Max setting.

 pretre wrote:
How does this damage the IP value of their core systems? It isn't even in the same universe, etc.

My company, Super Workshop, has an IP called Awesomehammer 20,000. As my company has existed for a long time, and been through several iterations over the years, I also have a back catalogue of a couple of dozen smaller IPs, most of questionable quality, value, and appeal other than as a nostalgia trip for a likely fairly small market. Despite this, I want new ways to shore up my bottom line, since I have almost run out of cuts I can make to staff levels, store opening hours, and secondary or tertiary services, and need to ensure I maintain investor confidence in my leadership so I can coast to retirement in a few years and make off with the family silver before the whole edifice crumbles. So, I begin partering up with shovelware app game developers and churning out tablet and smartphone games based on said questionably appealing IPs - I do this a lot, and I keep doing it until I run out of old IPs.

Then I try to go back and put out a full-on AAA game based on my main IP, and what do I find? I find that to a lot of people, my brand identity is "that company who's name is on all those shovelware apps I had on my phone that I played twice and deleted - meh".

Tell me, if Zynga were to announce it was making a AAA RPG for PC and consoles, what would your reaction be?

My reaction would be "When did Zynga license their IPs to anyone?".

Simplest reason, IMO, that we are seeing this support is so that GW can point to it in the aftermath of the CH case as "still being supported".

 Yodhrin wrote:

 pretre wrote:
How does this damage the IP value of their core systems? It isn't even in the same universe, etc.

My company, Super Workshop, has an IP called Awesomehammer 20,000. As my company has existed for a long time, and been through several iterations over the years, I also have a back catalogue of a couple of dozen smaller IPs, most of questionable quality, value, and appeal other than as a nostalgia trip for a likely fairly small market. Despite this, I want new ways to shore up my bottom line, since I have almost run out of cuts I can make to staff levels, store opening hours, and secondary or tertiary services, and need to ensure I maintain investor confidence in my leadership so I can coast to retirement in a few years and make off with the family silver before the whole edifice crumbles. So, I begin partering up with shovelware app game developers and churning out tablet and smartphone games based on said questionably appealing IPs - I do this a lot, and I keep doing it until I run out of old IPs.

Then I try to go back and put out a full-on AAA game based on my main IP, and what do I find? I find that to a lot of people, my brand identity is "that company who's name is on all those shovelware apps I had on my phone that I played twice and deleted - meh".

Tell me, if Zynga were to announce it was making a AAA RPG for PC and consoles, what would your reaction be?

You know, your claims might have some credence if they'd have produced any "shovel ware" yet. They haven't. Both Talisman and Wathammer Quest are really great looking iterations of their games that have been well received.

But you're right. That space hulk version they're doing certainly looks shovely.