The arguments go back and forth, here and elsewhere on the web.

Apologists v Haters, price hikes, GW's latest direction or PP's newest idea, the discussions often include this or something similar...

'But the opinions of a few forum users' or 'the small minority of gamers who frequent forums', etc etc.

Given the fairly small amount of players of wargames in the greater population, given the international communities that forums provide for people to be in communication with likeminded folks, given word of mouth, given the vast lurker vs poster ratio, given the leaks and the attraction of obtaining news and rumour before the employees do...

Can this argument be valid? I'd suggest that given the small number of people that play the games and the likelihood of the player/consumer type also being fairly computer and internet literate, far more are using the forums, if only for browsing and getting their news, than that oft touted defence allows for.

The forum user tends to be move focused on the overall product line. They are the "hardcore" players, while the non-users can be considered the "casual" players.

Even saying that, what is said on the forums isn't a minority if it constantly shows up. People on the forums talk to others, and others talk to them. Information is traded.

You can't argue what shows up on the forums is the minority, not everyone will speak up after all if there is a problem or something they don't like. They may grumble, but most don't go on a crusade about it.

Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

There are a few people at my local gW that regularly grumble about prices, while they're being rung up for another $200 in models.

I know a bunch of players in person. Im from a non Europe /United States of (North) America /Oceania country. All people i know that play the game, frequent foruns and blogs.

Not all of them post their oppinions.

Due to the small scale of the hobby, i find it pretty hard to believe that there is hoobists who dont make casual use of foruns.

GW have 30.000 likes in face book... how much members the "big" foruns have?

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

There are a few people at my local gW that regularly grumble about prices, while they're being rung up for another $200 in models.

Thank you for your considered input to this discussion.

Welcome to ignore.

The number of GW customers appears to be decreasing.

GW needs to do something to increase the number of customers.

The forum crowd provides feedback to GW.

The non-forum crowd doesn't provide feedback to GW.

Fringe or not, for a company to ignore customer feedback is silly.

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

QFT. I know babies that don't cry as much as some people on here. As with life its the 10 people in the crowd that puff up their chests and cry bloody murder that get all the attention and become 'what everyone thinks'.

biccat wrote:The number of GW customers appears to be decreasing.

GW needs to do something to increase the number of customers.

The forum crowd provides feedback to GW.

The non-forum crowd doesn't provide feedback to GW.

Fringe or not, for a company to ignore customer feedback is silly.

And yet, the attitude of the company seems to allude to antagonism towards forums and the internet in general. I have been told by a couple of GW employees I know that the high ups have forbidden employees from commenting on forums or contributing to them and that senior management regards the forums as openly hostile and rather than seek to understand why or win over or gain any improvement from that feedback, they choose instead to turn their back and ignore them in the hopes they will go away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Luco wrote:

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

QFT. I know babies that don't cry as much as some people on here. As with life its the 10 people in the crowd that puff up their chests and cry bloody murder that get all the attention and become 'what everyone thinks'.

This is pointless flamebait and if I were a more cynical bastard, I might imagine you're seeking to derail the thread.

Who gets heard on forums was not the subject of this thread, whether or not they are only used by a minority is what I asked of the floor.

Improve your reading comprehension and wind your neck in.

biccat wrote:

GW needs to do something to increase the number of customers.

Releasing Dawn of war and the Space Marine game is managing that pretty well.


The overall problem is as a company, they can't just listen to one guy with a blog post, or that one guy who posts all the time on a forum. True, he may know what he's talking about, but you can't just go to a company meeting and say "Dis one guy sayz wez needz ta lower ourz pricez you gitz!"

juraigamer wrote:

biccat wrote:GW needs to do something to increase the number of customers.

Releasing Dawn of war and the Space Marine game is managing that pretty well.

Really? Has GW seen a sales spike in miniatures after these games, or are the stories merely anecdotal?

juraigamer wrote:The overall problem is as a company, they can't just listen to one guy with a blog post, or that one guy who posts all the time on a forum. True, he may know what he's talking about, but you can't just go to a company meeting and say "Dis one guy sayz wez needz ta lower ourz pricez you gitz!"

No, but they can watch for general trends. If a lot of people are complaining about finecast quality, you might want to start doing some quality control at the distribution centers. If a lot of people start posting questions about how rule X works, you might want to include it in your next FAQ.

And if someone writes a very insightful and persuasive blog post about GW's prices, you shouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:And yet, the attitude of the company seems to allude to antagonism towards forums and the internet in general.

We'll see how well this strategy works for them.

If only there were some other company that uses the internet well that we could compare them to...

Please give a thought to courtesy in your posts. Calling people with different opinions whiny babies is not productive posting and may very well get your account suspended as a violation of Rule Number One. I'll also say, as a simple observation, that labeling others crybabies doesn't make the namecaller seem any more "adult" than his targets.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Luco wrote:

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

QFT. I know babies that don't cry as much as some people on here. As with life its the 10 people in the crowd that puff up their chests and cry bloody murder that get all the attention and become 'what everyone thinks'.

This is pointless flamebait and if I were a more cynical bastard, I might imagine you're seeking to derail the thread.

Who gets heard on forums was not the subject of this thread, whether or not they are only used by a minority is what I asked of the floor.

Improve your reading comprehension and wind your neck in.

I'm sorry my metaphor offends you. I've never tried to derail a thread and am not starting now.

Manchu wrote:Please give a thought to courtesy in your posts. Calling people with different opinions whiny babies is not productive posting and may very well get your account suspended as a violation of Rule Number One. I'll also say, as a simple observation, that labeling others crybabies doesn't make the namecaller seem any more "adult" than his targets.

But as always, getting offended by an opinion that digresses from yours is expected and encouraged.

Edit: It also kind of proves my point. So carry on!

Luco wrote:
QFT. I know babies that don't cry as much as some people on here. As with life its the 10 people in the crowd that puff up their chests and cry bloody murder that get all the attention and become 'what everyone thinks'.

This is pointless flamebait and if I were a more cynical bastard, I might imagine you're seeking to derail the thread.

Who gets heard on forums was not the subject of this thread, whether or not they are only used by a minority is what I asked of the floor.

Improve your reading comprehension and wind your neck in.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
'But the opinions of a few forum users' or 'the small minority of gamers who frequent forums', etc etc.

I think this can be held as a valid argument, but only if we compare it to the war-gaming community at large.

Compared to the wargaming community as a whole, those who actively post of forums represent a small sub-set of the gaming community (I know many gamers who do not visit forums, except to read the rumourmills)

Take for instance the following 2 examples.

The GW sales embargo:
If we were to take this forum's opinion on the subject, and present it to GW as customer feedback, they would have been presented with a very negative opinion of the subject. However IRL, the wargaming community seemed largely ambivalent to the subject, so long as their own supply of plastic crack remained uninterrupted (for instance, many on the forums swore never to buy GW products again, but many real-world people I knew just carried on as normal).

The Grey Knights Codex:
On release we were inundated with threads complaining about cheese, imbalance, poor fluff, complaints, moans and grizzling galore about the new GKs, which should have been seen as negative feedback by GW and they should have been considered a failure, however, according to the most concrete of feedback (i.e. money in wallets) GKs were a resounding success.


That is of course not to say that they should ignore our ranting, but active and opinion forming/supporting posters are a minority in the gaming community, perhaps if GW did serious market research (like asking us to fill out a little questionnaire when anyone made a purchase in-store) the opinions of forum users would actually filter through to the people that should see it. But this is GW, who at present answer only to shareholders, and so (as we've seen from current decisions) must be appeased, regardless of the opinions of a small crowd of scattered individuals who happen to have a mutual discussion space.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't be heard, but we are a quiet voice in a much bigger crowd...



Within the forum structure itself, the number of those that form or support an opinion are an even smaller group again. To say that 'a small number of forum posters' represent the opinion of a forum at large is completely senseless. You cannot judge the opinion of a forum by it's most discussed topic (especially considering the likelyhood of trolling and flaming). Again referring to the GK example, we had many posts having a good old grumble, but many more so discussing lists, models, tactics etc in a much more positive light. It just happens to be that the loudest voices tend to be taken as the opinion of a forum as a whole, and only by asking every user their opinion could we ever derive the correct overall opinion. Of course, this means that a forum is 'assigned' an opinion by outsiders, if not because the forum believes something, but more because the loudest voices come at the top of the list on google...



So looking at it from an observers perspective, the 'small number' of forum posters are just those that shout the most, and those who choose to remain at a more tolerable volume tend to get forgotten, despite the quiet masses being painted with the same basecoat, highlight & wash. So while we are a small minority, the representation of that minority is created by an even smaller one...

Cottonjaw wrote:

I think you're looking for flamebait MGS. He wasn't specifying you, or anyone else, merely that some people in the Dakkamunity are definitely "complainers" rather than "criticizers" and they are particularly loud about it (figuratively, of course). Amongst the supposed "Vocal Minority" there is definitely a "Particularly vocal few".

All that aside, I think the forums as a whole represent extremes on both ends of the spectrum. I think the forum posters, in general, represent a vocal minority on both extremes of any of the latest "politics" of wargaming. Aside from that, dakka has a massive population of 100-200 post-per-year users that mainly just read along and check out what's new / eye candy in the P&M sections, these people more than likely run the gamut from new hobbyists, hardened price hike hating veterans and hardcore fanboys alike.

All in all I think forums are only utilized by a minority of persons. Since becoming more active on dakka I've often asked people "Oh hey are you on dakka?" or reference a thread on dakkadakka, and you know what? Only 1 or 2 of my friends even has an account for a forum (both happen to be dakkanauts) and neither of them is very active.

Doing a little more than looking in my opinion. But I'm a dirty fanboy.

People are aware of the forum locally. Few have accounts, it's mostly an occasional topic of what that dregs of the hobby are up to.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The arguments go back and forth, here and elsewhere on the web.

Apologists v Haters, price hikes, GW's latest direction or PP's newest idea, the discussions often include this or something similar...

'But the opinions of a few forum users' or 'the small minority of gamers who frequent forums', etc etc.

Given the fairly small amount of players of wargames in the greater population, given the international communities that forums provide for people to be in communication with likeminded folks, given word of mouth, given the vast lurker vs poster ratio, given the leaks and the attraction of obtaining news and rumour before the employees do...

Can this argument be valid? I'd suggest that given the small number of people that play the games and the likelihood of the player/consumer type also being fairly computer and internet literate, far more are using the forums, if only for browsing and getting their news, than that oft touted defence allows for.

To be fair how can we tell how many of the 50,000 or so registered members are getting something out of their DakkaDakka or other electronic experience? How can we determine use?

We cannot know everyones opinion as the majority do not or will not post their 'opinions' so it is left to the minority to voice theirs. It may also be the case that the 'silent majority' do spread the word they hear from the forums into the wider world, but we have no way for knowing for sure.

Maybe the silent majority find their questions asked and answered by the more vocal minority? The minority unofficially speak for the majority?

Mr. Burning wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The arguments go back and forth, here and elsewhere on the web.

Apologists v Haters, price hikes, GW's latest direction or PP's newest idea, the discussions often include this or something similar...

'But the opinions of a few forum users' or 'the small minority of gamers who frequent forums', etc etc.

Given the fairly small amount of players of wargames in the greater population, given the international communities that forums provide for people to be in communication with likeminded folks, given word of mouth, given the vast lurker vs poster ratio, given the leaks and the attraction of obtaining news and rumour before the employees do...

Can this argument be valid? I'd suggest that given the small number of people that play the games and the likelihood of the player/consumer type also being fairly computer and internet literate, far more are using the forums, if only for browsing and getting their news, than that oft touted defence allows for.

To be fair how can we tell how many of the 50,000 or so registered members are getting something out of their DakkaDakka or other electronic experience? How can we determine use?

We cannot know everyones opinion as the majority do not or will not post their 'opinions' so it is left to the minority to voice theirs. It may also be the case that the 'silent majority' do spread the word they hear from the forums into the wider world, but we have no way for knowing for sure.

Maybe the silent majority find their questions asked and answered by the more vocal minority? The minority unofficially speak for the majority?

If that minority truly did speak for the majority, wouldn't their (the minority) dream of a dead GW already have come to pass?

(and there wouldn't be a Dakka or half of the other sites anymore and even fewer people would be in the miniature game hobby. But, they won't get that point until they get what they want.)

I can tell Mr Burning, based on the stats and analytics we perform.

In answer to your question, MGS, I estimate that dakka alone reaches up to 1/4 of all wargamers on the planet. The registered to guest ratio is huge, but I dont have the figures to hand right now. Either way, I would estimate people who actually post on forums to be somewhere in the 1-3% of wargamers region, and that includes people who post once every few months as well as frequent posters.

So about 0.0025-0.0075% of worldwide wargamers post on forums, but their opinions are heard by around 25% (more so in English speaking countries, and even more so by secondary word of mouth).

Worglock is not wrong either in that a few dozen people drive a lot of the more negative conversations. That's not to say they are wrong or whining, just that the total number of people who drive the more anti-gw discussions is very small in the grand scheme of things.

legoburner wrote:

Worglock is not wrong either in that a few dozen people drive a lot of the more negative conversations. That's not to say they are wrong or whining, just that the total number of people who drive the more anti-gw discussions is very small in the grand scheme of things.

Will I get in trouble if I turn that into "the best of the worst of semi-out of context signatures"?

I've never met anyone else who was a GW games player in real life that is aware of of this site nor any other non-official GW focused site that wasn't someone's personal blog/gallery.

Certainly, that isn't a very large number of people (hundredish), but that is my experience.

Tabletop Wargaming in my view is a community. A small community but still a community(when taking the general populace into consideration it's small). In my experience word of mouth is HUGE when it comes to communities. Which is why I find it amusing that GW would forbid employees to post on forums or interact with the internet community. If anything you WANT the internet community on your side. People are much more likely to follow the negative opinions on a company than the positive opinions. It seems to be human nature to do so. It doesn't help that GW is the biggest fish in the sea or the "corporate" gaming company. Everyone seems to think it's cool to hate the big guy and support the little guy.

If you ask me how Fringe we are, I would say we aren't fringe at all. I believe that our small community reflects a lot of the feelings that the majority of GW gamers have. This is due to the diverse community here on Dakka. Members from around the globe post here and I would say that the majority feel the same way on the recent changes with GW. There will always be people who buy GW products but I believe those numbers are dwindling. Many of those numbers are coming from the Vet GW players.

All that being said I am not buying GW products myself anymore. I have more than enough models to play Warhammer 40k and I gave up on Warhammer Fantasy some time ago. I still play 40k, but I use what I have or trade for anything I consider worthwhile. I have been dipping my toes into other games and I like what I see so far. GW really hasn't offered much for me over the past few years other than codex creep and price increases.

This is all my opinion though. I could be wrong.

I think that the "feedback" given by DakkaDakka is mostly meaningless in the grand scheme of things. While a very large portion of wargamers visit forums, a much smaller portion ever post. Now, subtract from that the crowd that only really looks at the P&M forums or only sticks to topics discussing Tactics, Rules, Background, etc. You're left with a relatively small group of people who are voicing their opinions.

I'm sure GW is aware of the various online forums and reads them occasionally. We've seen them take a much more serious approach to the FAQs, and they've been addressing the very issues that result in endless debates here.

But, for things like prices, I'm sure they've put much more thought into it than any of us have. They aren't just arbitrarily increasing prices. They're increasing prices with the full knowledge that it will hurt sales, but they believe the increased prices will make up for that and they'll see profits go up. No amount of complaining or threatening to boycott will change that.

As for Finecast, I honestly suspect they're just having a few production issues getting it up and running. I'm sure QA is all over it and things will improve with time.

Leigen_Zero wrote:
The Grey Knights Codex:
On release we were inundated with threads complaining about cheese, imbalance, poor fluff, complaints, moans and grizzling galore about the new GKs, which should have been seen as negative feedback by GW, however, considering the vast quantities of sales of the GK codex and kits, I sincerely doubt that GW had a quick browse of Dakka, then promptly muttered 'we have failed...' before taking the cyanide pills secreted in their dice tins. According to the most concrete of feedback (i.e. money in wallets) GKs were a resounding success.

The other part of the problem is that people will relentlessly complain and flip out over anything. The latest codex is always the MOST overpowered cheezy thing on earth, even when it's not, and Mat Ward is always the WORST writer on earth and deserves to be FIRED!!!1 even when he's not, and doesn't.

I feel, and this might just be the Internet effect, but I feel like there is this attitude in the forums that everything has to be hyperbolic and blown out of proportion. The only things I can think of that have even felt like legitimate bitches to make were the Failcast lauch and the Austrailia debacle. And the first was largely mitigated due to accepting returns, and from what I can tell, quality control HAS improved.

I do have to say I agree with Cotton as far as feeling as though you were looking to be overly sensitive about the responses received, MGS.

Grakmar wrote:
As for Finecast, I honestly suspect they're just having a few production issues getting it up and running. I'm sure QA is all over it and things will improve with time.

I agree on Finecast. GW does produce the best plastics out there, and in time the Finecast models will be at the quality of the plastics.

daedalus wrote:

Leigen_Zero wrote:
The Grey Knights Codex:
On release we were inundated with threads complaining about cheese, imbalance, poor fluff, complaints, moans and grizzling galore about the new GKs, which should have been seen as negative feedback by GW, however, considering the vast quantities of sales of the GK codex and kits, I sincerely doubt that GW had a quick browse of Dakka, then promptly muttered 'we have failed...' before taking the cyanide pills secreted in their dice tins. According to the most concrete of feedback (i.e. money in wallets) GKs were a resounding success.

The other part of the problem is that people will relentlessly complain and flip out over anything. The latest codex is always the MOST overpowered cheezy thing on earth, even when it's not, and Mat Ward is always the WORST writer on earth and deserves to be FIRED!!!1 even when he's not, and doesn't.

Well. Mat Ward may still need to be fired unless he makes Chaos Space Marines awesome.

Since I posted in a thread earlier about us being the minority I best justify myself!

The posters on here are the majority of tournament players. They know each other, they've played against each other and they have a similar understanding of the hobby and the company. Such an understanding can often produce a misunderstanding when it comes to the overall picture; "Everyone I speak to is aware and in agreement" but outside of the 'scene' how many still step foot in a GW store?

If I were to 'rank' GW sales I'd list them accordingly:

- 10-14 year old kids (How many times on eBay have I read "Unwanted Christmas present, he now wants space wolves; contents partly assembled)
- Casual gamer
- Tournament player
- Collector/Painter

Now how many of them would frequent a forum? Or more to the point how many 12 year old kids actually care about the sales embargo?

As for the point about gossip doing the rounds? I'm sure it does but let's be frank, we've had no pictures or depth of knowledge on Dakka and anything they hear of 'fantasy naval game' they could have gleamed from picking up a WD.

Should GW listen to the forums? Yes, of course they should. Can they? Well that's difficult, I hardly see anything constructively posted that a company can look at objectively and not write off as the rantings and flame wars.

I also hate this idea of "Apologists v Haters". Yes there are those who take a very narrow minded view but I'd love to think there are many of us whom are in neither camp. Do I like GW's product, background, game and miniatures? For the most part yes. Do I like the company's strategy and pricing? No. Can I understand some of the decisions? Yes, although there are those like any company that baffle me.

Worglock wrote:

Manchu wrote:Please give a thought to courtesy in your posts. Calling people with different opinions whiny babies is not productive posting and may very well get your account suspended as a violation of Rule Number One. I'll also say, as a simple observation, that labeling others crybabies doesn't make the namecaller seem any more "adult" than his targets.

But as always, getting offended by an opinion that digresses from yours is expected and encouraged.

Between this post and your continued trolling of this thread, I don't think you sufficiently understand our rules here. Please take some time to review them more closely.

From a statistical stand point you can not say if the internet community is a good sample size, as you don't know the total number of gamers either in a certain country or the world as a whole.

Manchu wrote:

Worglock wrote:

Manchu wrote:Please give a thought to courtesy in your posts. Calling people with different opinions whiny babies is not productive posting and may very well get your account suspended as a violation of Rule Number One. I'll also say, as a simple observation, that labeling others crybabies doesn't make the namecaller seem any more "adult" than his targets.

But as always, getting offended by an opinion that digresses from yours is expected and encouraged.

Between this post and your continued trolling of this thread, I don't think you sufficiently understand our rules here. Please take some time to review them more closely.

I don't think Worglock has been "trolling" this thread at all. Actually, he's one of the few to actually answer the OP's question. He has not used any harsh language, has not called anyone names, and has stayed on topic.

I think maybe everyone needs to take a step back, not get so emotionally invested in their threads, and review the rules themselves.

jbunny wrote:From a statistical stand point you can not say if the internet community is a good sample size, as you don't know the total number of gamers either in a certain country or the world as a whole.

Wouldn't you be able to get that from GW yearly sales figures, and what they consider an average customer spend?

I haven't looked but I would have thought that info is floating around.

@whitedragon: Well, if you don't mind your opinions being called "whining" and your community being called "the dregs of the hobby," that's fine -- to clarify for others so they know what the rules actually are -- but it's still trolling.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:

jbunny wrote:From a statistical stand point you can not say if the internet community is a good sample size, as you don't know the total number of gamers either in a certain country or the world as a whole.

Wouldn't you be able to get that from GW yearly sales figures, and what they consider an average customer spend?

I haven't looked but I would have thought that info is floating around.

Possible. But then you get into what is a "Customer?" The best you would get would be an educated guess, which might not be that bad.

Luco wrote:
I'm sorry my metaphor offends you. I've never tried to derail a thread and am not starting now.

Apology accepted, I'm glad that you were not actually accusing people who criticise a company's actions of being crybabies or chest puffing, because that's hardly a good opening post in a discussion, it makes you sound as incendiary as worglock and just as likely to end up being labelled and subsequently ignored.

Cottonjaw wrote:

I think you're looking for flamebait MGS. He wasn't specifying you, or anyone else, merely that some people in the Dakkamunity are definitely "complainers" rather than "criticizers" and they are particularly loud about it (figuratively, of course). Amongst the supposed "Vocal Minority" there is definitely a "Particularly vocal few".

No Cotton, flamebait does not need to be directed at me, just dropped into the thread and it drags the thread down, that's why I put the other guy on ignore, because he is so utterly caustic and unable to respond maturely in anything I've read from him. It's not personal offence, just tired of these passive aggressive broadsides devolving the discussion.

legoburner wrote:
In answer to your question, MGS, I estimate that dakka alone reaches up to 1/4 of all wargamers on the planet. The registered to guest ratio is huge, but I dont have the figures to hand right now. Either way, I would estimate people who actually post on forums to be somewhere in the 1-3% of wargamers region, and that includes people who post once every few months as well as frequent posters.

So about 0.0025-0.0075% of worldwide wargamers post on forums, but their opinions are heard by around 25% (more so in English speaking countries, and even more so by secondary word of mouth).

Many thanks Lego, this is the sort of thing I'm looking for. It does put pay to the idea of a 'tiny minority' using the net and the forums in particular. I do also agree that the most vitriolic on both 'sides' of the GW divide are very small minorities, but such is always the case in polarisation and you just need to look at lobbying in most Western democracies to see how small vocal groups can have power disproportionate to their size.


Now apologies disty, but I'm going to take on several of the points you've raised.

disty wrote:
The posters on here are the majority of tournament players. They know each other, they've played against each other and they have a similar understanding of the hobby and the company. Such an understanding can often produce a misunderstanding when it comes to the overall picture; "Everyone I speak to is aware and in agreement" but outside of the 'scene' how many still step foot in a GW store?

From what I understand, early days Dakka was very tourny based, a small social club, that is not the case any more, it's the largest forum on the internet of it's kind. Take a look at how large the gallery is now, Dakka has become a very broad church. The only unifying factors on dakka are an interest in toy soldiers and using the forum.

disty wrote:
Now how many of them would frequent a forum? Or more to the point how many 12 year old kids actually care about the sales embargo?

I would suggest a very high number of 12+ yrs people are highly internet savvy now. I think dakka has sharper teeth than many forums and that puts off many of the youngest from posting, but, as shown by Lego, many more frequent read than post.

disty wrote:
As for the point about gossip doing the rounds? I'm sure it does but let's be frank, we've had no pictures or depth of knowledge on Dakka and anything they hear of 'fantasy naval game' they could have gleamed from picking up a WD.

Until one of the 'reputable sources' posts. Here and other sites like Warseer are often the scene for leaked images or news, consider the ogre images or the space hulk 'secret' that everyone knew months in advance.

disty wrote:
Should GW listen to the forums? Yes, of course they should. Can they? Well that's difficult, I hardly see anything constructively posted that a company can look at objectively and not write off as the rantings and flame wars.

Gleaning from complaints to conduct root cause analysis and bring about process improvement is not impossible. It would also seem good business sense.

I'm the only one of my group of 7 that comes to DakkaDakka, but anything I see in News & Rumors that would pertain to one of their armies I pass on.

When I see price increase rumors, I pass that one. Finecast releases, 3rd party stuff, or interesting models or terrain that they might like.

Good and bad, my gaming group is aware of it. But we're 7 gamers out of ____ in the world. How "normal" are we?

Dunno, really. But if you have a group of gamers that hang out at their FLGS or GW store, you can bet that one of them go to Dakka or some other forum/blog (Warseer, HeresyOnline, Bolter&Chainsword, BoLS, BoK) and has been exposed to some of the same news and rumors as us. Now, that whole gaming group is aware of the current rumors.

So, to answer MGS' question, I think that while the forum-goers are a tiny subset of the gaming community, there are still plenty of non-forum-goers who are aware of price increases, grumblings about finecast, or other issues. Dismissing the ability that these places have on spreading information to the gaming community isn't wise.

The 'fringe' as GW sees it are people that focus on anything besides buying models.
They are vehemently not a game company, but they do read forums like this one. They just do not care so much about the gaming aspect, and there is precious little constructive feedback on the models that I see. Gaming is a means to an end--they do not want to tie (most of) their models into someone elses rules, even if those rules are infinitely better.

Not sure if that really relates, but I generally agree with MeanGreenStompa otherwise.

Editing to add to a divergence:
I have met a surprising number of folks who read DakkaDakka, a surprising few who post, and a very rare minority of those post often.

I would tend to think that GW's most loyal fanboys would also, amongst themselves at least, also be its most caustic critics. When I browse sites dedicated to PP, for example, I do not see the same worshipful attitude that I come across pretty often here on Dakka. Instead, I find complaints about high prices, lame/error-ridden sculpts, ineffective communication with customers, etc. I hope that GW does, at some level, pay attention to these kinds of boards because the complaints (or some percentage of them) do come from people who are very much fans. As to the breakdown of the vocal minority on fora versus everyone else in the hobby -- whenever I hear the hobbyshop crowd talk about GW, it's usually the same tone and volume of complaints (not to mention subject matter) that I read on Dakka -- and yes most of those guys are not necessarily Dakkanauts. It seems to me that the vocal minority being talked about are GW's perennial customers: mostly adults, mostly been buynig for over five years (or much longer), mostly willing and even eager to keep doing so. The minority isn't people on the internet fora -- the minoirty is "real" hobbyists more generally. I suspect we simply aren't where the money is: that status is likely enjoyed by one-time buyers, maybe (likely?) parents getting younger adolescents kits that will never be assembled, painted, or make it into a game. Now, those kids will hardly have complaints one way or the other much less join a web forum much less become regular, active members of a web forum. So while the vocal crowd may be a minority, I think it's still a pretty important one.

If I was GW, I wouldn't care a whole lot what forums were saying. I'd be more interested in the atmosphere of the hobby centers and how steadily shipments were leaving the wherehouses.

The internet gives everyone a voice and they usually use it to complain.

My experiences have been similar to Kronks, where most of the people who I've played with tend not to pay a lot of attention to forums. In fact, I've gotten a couple of people to join Dakka, primarily on the grounds that it is easier to coordinate games using it.

Granted, that is anecdotal evidience, but it does suggest that the forum population is not a plurality of the wargaming community, atleast in certain groups and areas.

You know, if GW were to put $100 bills, or your countries equivalent in every single kit and in every codex, there's going to be someone complaining about it being wrinkled or folded wrong, I guarantee it. I say that if you really love the hobby, ignore the problems, or play another game, that simple. No, I didn't care for the grey knights codex, no, I don't care for finecast, but I'm not going to hate GW for it, or matt ward.

remilia_scarlet wrote:You know, if GW were to put $100 bills, or your countries equivalent in every single kit and in every codex, there's going to be someone complaining about it being wrinkled or folded wrong, I guarantee it. I say that if you really love the hobby, ignore the problems, or play another game, that simple. No, I didn't care for the grey knights codex, no, I don't care for finecast, but I'm not going to hate GW for it, or matt ward.

And here is why people post negatively.

Not to pick on you, it's just the last one in the thread, but this response right here shows multiple reasons why the whining continues.

1) Is an condescending response to a concern, which means that anybody that's posted prior to it feels offended/victimized/made into an enemy.

2) It shows an inflexiblity of thinking that is sure to trigger nasty flame wars. Saying "like it or leave it" is not exactly the door to compromise.

3) It shows a lack of critical thought, which is more or less exactly what many people accuse the "haters" of.

As long as people keep posting like that, people will post bile, because it creates drama.

OTOH, being able to dislike something instead of hating it, and sometimes everything associated with it, is healthy. A lot of criticism go way, way overboard. As long as that's the case, the defense will be likely to go just as overboard.

Manchu wrote:OTOH, being able to dislike something instead of hating it, and sometimes everything associated with it, is healthy. A lot of criticism go way, way overboard. As long as that's the case, the defense will be likely to go just as overboard.

Being able to seperate an emotional feeling (hatred) from a value judgment (this is bad) is the core of good criticism. I posted the following in another thread, and I think it's relevant here:

Attention is the new currencty. It's not my idea, I read it somewhere. Essentially the idea is that in modern society, the only thing that is limited is time, hence attention. It was phrased in the context of jobs creation, and how focusing on production misses the point that we produce plenty.

I think in the context of Dakka we all have only a few resources to trade amongst ourselves. We have knowledge, to be sure, but we're here to exchange attention, acknowledgement, recognition... in short, time.

Part of the problem is that we rarely comment positively on a post. I know I seldom do, and I think aside from "+1" and the like, there's little acknowledgment for posting positively and constructively. Posting flame bait, hyperbole, or just rants... that gets the juices flowing.

What this means is that when a person wants a reaction, they know they can get one by making over the top ciriticisms. Some people will intelligently and calmly take their point apart, but somebody will almost always reply emotionally, leading to what is really craved by all us: attention.

I think that interpretation misses a lot of the interaction that goes on here. It certainly doesn't accurately account my experience outside of my duties as a moderator. Maybe this is more revealing about your own experience rather than something that can be generalized to everyone else's? The criticism is sometimes about commiseration but it's only rarely flat-out attention whoring, which we try to shut down.

There seem to be alot of tangents to this issue, but as to the OP's general questions of how "fringe" are the forums and how well they represent wargamers as a whole I would make the following observation.

About two thirds of my friends who is a gamer is active on at least one online forum. Not being 40k players, most are more active on forums other than dakka, but they are involved. Also, most other gamers I meet are present on some forum as well.

In general, the gaming views expressed at Dakka seem pretty in-line with the range of views held by wargamers. Perhaps a bit more vociferous in their presentation, but that's just the way the internet is.

So while the internet does encourage extremes a bit, I don't think Dakka qulalifies as "fringe".

Manchu wrote:I think that interpretation misses a lot of the interaction that goes on here. It certainly doesn't accurately account my experience outside of my duties as a moderator. Maybe this is more revealing about your own experience rather than something that can be generalized to everyone else's? The criticism is sometimes about commiseration but it's only rarely flat-out attention whoring, which we try to shut down.

It could be, but the reason people post, as opposed to lurk, is to share their ideas. Not every post is a "light yourself on fire, do a dance" form of attention seeking, but people in general, I think, post for feedback, response, or acknowledgement. It's not all negative, either in content of posting or in terms of ethics of posting.

I'm using attention in a fairly broad sense, maybe that's why you're not seeing it.

To ask the reverse: why do you think people post on dakka? Not read it, but actually post?

I guess it's just a matter of perception. I mean, if somebody disagrees with my opinion, then go for it. My only thing is I have a pet peeve about painting and the lack of being an issue. 40k, despite the PR, is not srs bzns.

Ah, I was referring to the following from your self-quotation:

Posting flame bait, hyperbole, or just rants... that gets the juices flowing.

If you actually mean "interaction" rather than "seeking attention," which are pretty different, then I just agree with you. People post on a forum to have discussions about things that interest them with like-minded people. That's one reason why I'd agree with MGS and, it appears, Eilif that we're not very fringe at all.

Manchu wrote:Ah, I was referring to the following from your self-quotation:

Posting flame bait, hyperbole, or just rants... that gets the juices flowing.

If you actually mean "interaction" rather than "seeking attention," which are pretty different, then I just agree with you. People post on a forum to have discussions about things that interest them with like-minded people. That's one reason why I'd agree with MGS and, it appears, Eilif that we're not very fringe at all.

How can you really interact with a person that isn't paying attention to you?

You can seek out attention of others without being what is colloquially known as "attention whoring." You don't tell a joke to a group of friends without wanting their approval and laughter.

Any actual discussion, as in, an exchange of comments or ideas or statements, is attention. It's good attention, but still attention.

Don't overgeneralize. Busting into a room and screaming fire is not the same thing as getting together for conversation over coffee.

Manchu wrote:Don't overgeneralize. Busting into a room and screaming fire is not the same thing as getting together for conversation over coffee.

It's a matter of degree, not of kind.

You can change "attention" to interaction if you're hung up on nomenclature, but people like to be noticed. "Attention whoring" isn't bad because attention is a bad thing (just like doing something for money isn't a bad thing), but because whoring is a bad thing (because some things shouldn't be done for money.)

We, as a community, find certain behavior so odious that we frown on them as mechanisms for gaining the attention of others, but that doesn't mean that even the most mild post isn't an attempt to seek the attention of others. In different ways and to different degrees, but they all fulfill the need for human acknowledgement and interaction.

It's no different from comparing a home cooked meal to fast food: very different in how good they are for you, but both fill a need.

Manchu wrote:Don't overgeneralize. Busting into a room and screaming fire is not the same thing as getting together for conversation over coffee.

Well, that explains why everyone was so confused the last time I had people over for coffee.

@Polonius: But you quoted yourself talking about flamebaiting, hyperbole, and rants as the order of the day, as (explicitly) opposed to "positive" contribution:

Polonius wrote:Part of the problem is that we rarely comment positively on a post. I know I seldom do ...

Attention in the sense that you are receptive to my attempt to communicate is significantly different from the attention-seeking you were talking about originally. It's so significant, in fact, that our rules distinguish between them. And it isn't a matter of degree: the attention seeking you seemed to be talking about (flamebaiting, hyperbole, and rants) is not an invitation to dialog. Spectacle invites comment rather than interaction. I think you're confusing the issue because this medium involves all the responses remaining in place, lined up one after another, as if they must be a discussion. Of course, that's not necessarily so.

How "fringe" are we?
I would say that forum users in general are less fringe, within the wargaming community, than Tea partiers are within the voting public community.

This comparison is not as invalid as you may think.

The more or less "official numbers" given by Legoburner estimate 1-3 % of the wargaming community post on forums like this one.
The latest estimate for the "Tea Party" community is less than 1 million out of the population of just over 300 million. Even if you subtract an estimated 1/3 of the current population as being below "Voting age" you still have less than 1% of the population appearing as "Tea partiers".
Which puts the numbers into perspective.
The tea party folks just get their message heard by a greater audience due to better relations with the press.

To answer the OP, I've visited a number of hobby shops in my time, both GW's and independents. And in just about every one (I like to spread the creed of Dakka) people have already been here. Dakka and Warseer are both far better known and browsed then most people would guess in the hobbying world.

The vast majority of players I know in real-life read the forums infrequently and post less. I am very much in the minority in that regard.

well looking at the numbers, Dakka has 48,000ish registered users, while im online now it has about 9,000 of them online, they're both very good numbers of people, however because like in most communities alot of those people dont actually have the same opinion of things the amount of people that are actually complaining are a much lower number, possibly down to a number that larger companies just aren't that bothered by.

however if the full 9,000 online at the moment or even half the 48,000 registered all rose up with a single voice of complaint i think then we would find forums like this would be alot less fringe and have quite alot more push with the bigger companies. A large company never listens to the single voice in the crowd, however if the crowd is a single voice then thats another story.

Manchu wrote:@Polonius: But you quoted yourself talking about flamebaiting, hyperbole, and rants as the order of the day, as (explicitly) opposed to "positive" contribution:

Polonius wrote:Part of the problem is that we rarely comment positively on a post. I know I seldom do ...

Yes, because negative attention seeking behavior works! Flamebaiting gets responses, it's why people do it.

Attention in the sense that you are receptive to my attempt to communicate is significantly different from the attention-seeking you were talking about originally. It's so significant, in fact, that our rules distinguish between them. And it isn't a matter of degree: the attention seeking you seemed to be talking about (flamebaiting, hyperbole, and rants) is not an invitation to dialog. Spectacle invites comment rather than interaction. I think you're confusing the issue because this medium involves all the responses remaining in place, lined up one after another, as if they must be a discussion. Of course, that's not necessarily so.

I'm confused by your confusion.

I say that people post positively for attention just like people post negatively, and that's an overgeneralization.

I say that people post negatively for interaction and acknowldgement just like people post positivley, and apparently it's not an inviation to dialogue.

I'm going to try once more to break this down.

People interact with others, in every form from manifestos to flashing, to seek affirmation that they are a person in a community. That they have some value, even if it's just existence. People post on dakka for a lot of different reasons, but nearly all posts are rooted in a desire to be heard, to be noticed, to be acknoweldged as part of the commuinty. (that's not always true, as some posts are genuinely exchanges of information, either offers or requests).

You can call it whatever you like: attention, building a reputation, attracting a following, developing friendships, whatever. The point is that even in an antagonistic role, a person feels part of the community.

So, yes, negative posting behavior is different, but it's rooted in the same need to interact as positive posting. Not all interaction is a high minded dialog. If I flamebait, and somebody bites and flames back... that's still interaction. If I post a WIP blog, and somebody comments, that's still attention.

To limit terms like "interaction" so that they can't include scorn or comment is select a fairly arbitrary defintion. Any time one human acts in a way that shows that he's aware of, or responding to, another, is a form of interaction.

In a niche hobby, like wargaming, everybody is in the minority because it's a boutique hobby; you cannot find it, play it, or participate in it unless you intentionally leave the mainstream to do so.

Ultimately, in the 'apologist vs hater' dichotomy it's going to boil down to a handful of individuals that viscerally disagree over what is usually a difference in value-based perspective. Value-based perception is not something that individuals are easily swayed from. That's why criticism threads can so easily devolve into hate/whine threads--especially when you toss in the anonymity, relative social equality and lack of peer sanctions, and heuristic reasoning common to internet forum-posting.

However, I think that the broad-brush themes and tone that forums replicate over time should be valuable to boutique companies like the wargames miniatures companies. Times change, preferences change, and there probably isn't a more easily accessible bellwether than the online communities (high referability, free, instant, anonymous access) ((and, conversely, the downsides are small sampling populations, lack of cohesiveness, and low replicability)).

Look at the chaos codex, for example. By the creator's own admission (on some post off in the blogosphere) it's very vanilla. There's not very many options... for anything. And the community generally hated it, even though its power level was quite high in a primarily footslogging 4th edition/early 5th edition environment. Now look at the more recent codices; SM, IG, SW, DE, BA, GK and even to some extent the more maligned Nids. Most of these are regarded as very powerful codices. All of these... save Nids to the same extent... are filled with special characters or diverse upgrade options to create unique models that affect or alter army organization or abilities. Clearly the trend is away from systemic streamlining (as we saw in Chaos, Dark Angels) and toward diversification and differentiation. I can't help but think that player disgruntlement was heard, in that respect.

Judging by this thread, we should have Shakespeare done in a few days.

Anyway, On Topic: I feel that the Online Gamers are either whiney or hardcore. Once online, they begin to fall into a few catagories: Casual, Hardcore, Apologist, Hater, and Who gives a damn, it's a stupid game.

And yes, we are the Minority.

The "hater" and "fanboi" phenomenons are meaningless because they are thrown about so casually and often, and often as a retort when the person using them to label others has nothing valid/intelligent to add to rhe discussion at hand.

As soon as you dissent from the common viewpoint or offer a negative review/opinion of something a bunch of internet cool guys fall all over themselves ot be the first to yell "hater" or post a clever meme, etc.

Same goes for those that spew "fanboi/fanboy" a anyone who defends something that they do not.

We are all guilty of it at times, but I think it has gotten out of hand for the most part, is an abvious form of trolling and should be dealt with by the mods.

Regardless, it is sort of equally sad/amusing that nerd culture is so eager to subdivde itself and argue within it's own ranks...

Polonius wrote:I say that people post positively for attention just like people post negatively, and that's an overgeneralization.

No, you conflated flame baiting and discussion by claiming they're both just attempts to get attention. This is glossing over the contrast of particular differences that are most meaningful to the analysis for the sake of comparing obvious, unhelpful, general similarities -- i.e., overgeneralization.

I say that people post negatively for interaction and acknowldgement just like people post positivley, and apparently it's not an inviation to dialogue.

If by negative posting you still mean, as you said originally, flame baiting, hyperbole and rants then negative posting is indeed not an invitation to dialog. This is exactly the sense that I mean about your overgeneralization: when you post something to elicit a reaction it is not the same thing as posting in response. Could it really be that you don't acknowledge a difference between reaction and response in this sense? I don't think so. Reading through the rest of your post, you basically concede the point -- and then, puzzlingly insist that using a term to refer to something particularly is arbitrary. I'll agree as long as you aren't saying that "arbitrary" is somehow the opposite of "useful." The distinction that needs to be captured is between the one-sideness or insincerity of flamebaiting/trolling on the one hand (the product of which you claim is the currency of Dakka) and the actual exchange of ideas and fellowship (which I claim is its raison d'etre).

And to everyone who keeps saying "On topic ..." this little exchange has been entirely on-topic. The point of it, as far as I am concerned, is to show that this community is not fringe for the very reason that people don't use Dakka simply to seek attention in the way that Polonius is describing but rather to interact with people who have similar interests. The result of that interaction includes complaints about the subject of the interaction -- no surprise! And, as I also posted before, this is not different from what you encounter in-store with other gamers whether or not they participate in online fora.

Also, Chowder, pay attention to this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CT GAMER wrote:The "hater" and "fanboi" phenomenons are meaningless because they are thrown about so casually and often, and often as a retort when the person using them to label others has nothing valid/intelligent to add to rhe discussion at hand.

I agree: those terms are meant to summarize (and therefore conclude) conversations before they can even happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CT GAMER wrote:Regardless, it is sort of equally sad/amusing that nerd culture is so eager to subdivde itself and argue within it's own ranks...

But that is itself a fundamental characteristic of nerd culture. Nerd is a negative term and rightly so. We shouldn't take pleasure in oneupmanship but we do -- about trivial things, like who knows more about the fluff or who can beat who in a game with vague, inconsistent rules. When you note that divisions in nerd culture are sad, I think you are simultaneously noting that nerd culture itself is sad. Look up the TV Tropes entry for "WRONG," for example. This is related to my discussion with Polonius here. Nerds delight inshouting WRONG at each other -- without even listening. It's very much like your analysis of the fanboi/haters terms: cutting people off before you ever even begin to hear them out. That's a nerdy thing to do.

In the end, it's wargamers and other nerds who are the fringe rather than the wargamers who post online. And a lot of people have said that GW aren't making their real money off of wargamers.

Well, i'm glad I wasted time trying to explain my point only to have you cherry pick two sentences to rebut.

Of course there's a difference between positive and negative posting. They're, you know, positive and negative. Just like eating a healthy meal is notably different from eating junk food. That doesn't mean they don't share a common root desire, meaning hunger.

Nearly all negative behaviors stem from a healthy desire that gets warped. Why would posting be any different?

Well, I did reply to the rest of your post (not quoting it doesn't mean I didn't reply ...) but I wanted to correct your mischaracterization of my arguments and therefore wanted them in the post for reference. :/

Moving on: you're still at the same problem -- to use your own analogy, if the discussion is about eating healthy then it does not profit us to treat big macs the same way as salads just because we all get hungry. The issue isn't "attention" in its broadest sense. And when you use "attention" in reference to trolling you are talking about something different from the "attention" you give and receive in a conversation. Of course, this only applies if you want the word "attention" to be a meaningful term.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:The arguments go back and forth, here and elsewhere on the web.

Apologists v Haters, price hikes, GW's latest direction or PP's newest idea, the discussions often include this or something similar...

'But the opinions of a few forum users' or 'the small minority of gamers who frequent forums', etc etc.

Given the fairly small amount of players of wargames in the greater population, given the international communities that forums provide for people to be in communication with likeminded folks, given word of mouth, given the vast lurker vs poster ratio, given the leaks and the attraction of obtaining news and rumour before the employees do...

Can this argument be valid? I'd suggest that given the small number of people that play the games and the likelihood of the player/consumer type also being fairly computer and internet literate, far more are using the forums, if only for browsing and getting their news, than that oft touted defence allows for.

The old saying goes...

If you like something, you'll tell your friend, If you hate something, you'll tell 5.

This is no different. And aside from Wargakk telling us to the contrary, we are talking about some players of thier games.

Once a long time ago, I loved this game, then to find out as the time continued... the corperate BS continued. As a consumer, I spent more money on it then some small countries domestic production, yet now at the point where I am now? After the crap that they have pulled over the past 2 + years? I could care less about them.

I'm still mad that I was treated like a shill and contiue to be treated so, but now I'm going to a whole new level of P.O. when I see them still continue and act like everything they do is happy happy joy joy.
Had they came outright and said- hey, we didn't intend for finecrap to suck as bad as it did, heres what were going to do about it.... I could understand that. They made themself appeal to me as a gamer, and a valued customer. There are other examples as to how they piss themselves, yet at every turn it is the same. "GW can do no wrong...." to be followed by the likes of people claiming that if you don't agree that being shafted is a good thing, your whining. That they even have the corperate shill attitude that they have? Pure arrogence.

As a gamer, believe it or not, I paid for my games. Mommy and Daddy don't wipe my behind, or buy anything for me. THIS stuff supposedly "Costs" to the tune of 100.00's of dollars, pounds, or whatever your using for money.
I buy it, and if I don't like it- I'll say something about it. THATS called the free market. Seeing as I bought it- I can have any opinion i want to about it, no matter if someone elsehas a different one or not.

Thats too bad if you don't like it. If people have an issue, the best thing they can do is to say something about it to whoever they want to. One friend or five,

These days? Everyone has a computer.

Gamers arn't stupid, they talk about thier experiences, and collectivly, we can see how other people in other parts of our city, states, countries, or the world think about the same discussion.
Just because GW doesn't like the opinions, doesn't make them any less valued, because at the end of the day- not everything is alright in the Cidital or on the Forgeworlds.

As to fringe? A few years ago, I would have said yes- people on the internet are more likely cavemen grognards that are pining for the days of yesteryear, when gaming meant rolling dice and pushing tin...

NOW? No. everyone has a computer, and if your a like minded gamer, your going to talk about your experiences and post how your doing in your area. Good or Bad.
Is there a bit of hyperbole, crying over stuff, and some relentless trolling now and again? Of course,It is the internet, you have to be able to seperate the chaff and the wheat.

Does it mean that people across the world who play games don't tell how they are doing, how thier gaming is going and thier opinions are about this or that?
No. Everyone who can put some words into a sentence has the option.....

If they want to "Whine", thats tough. They can whine till their hearts content. It doesn't make thier views any less valid.

Thats just how communication works.

Manchu, I wasn't referencing that the thread was off topic, but that the first part of my post was.

Manchu wrote:Well, I did reply to the rest of your post (not quoting it doesn't mean I didn't reply ...) but I wanted to correct your mischaracterization of my arguments and therefore wanted them in the post for reference. :/

Moving on: you're still at the same problem -- to use your own analogy, if the discussion is about eating healthy then it does not profit us to treat big macs the same way as salads just because we all get hungry. The issue isn't "attention" in its broadest sense. And when you use "attention" in reference to trolling you are talking about something different from the "attention" you give and receive in a conversation. Of course, this only applies if you want the word "attention" to be a meaningful term.

Well, what term would you want to use then? I'll admit, I'm not being horribly precise in my language. I also feel that while I'm trying to explain something to you, you are far more interesting in taking down what you think I'm saying than trying to understand what it is that I am.

How does attention stop being a meaningful term if it can be used for a broad range of actions? To go back to food, if we're talking about healthy eating than yes, you seperate the good from the bad. In a discussion about quality posting, you seperate the good from the bad, which I have never objected to.

If, however, you are trying to ask why people eat junk food, or post negatively... than isn't exploring the relationship between that and why they post positively useful? People eat because they're hungry, they post because they want interaction. People eat junk because they make bad choices, demand instant gratification, can't afford to buy or know how to select healthy food, or simply want the easiest and quickest food possible. I think the analogy to posting makes sense: just like making a healthy meal takes time, effort, skill, and resources, so does writing a quality post. Posting negatively is quick, provides instant gratification, requires little skill or effort, and provides responses or reactions quickly and easily.

The reason this is important is because it holds, at it's heart, the way communities filter out negative behavior: we reward quality posts with what they want (attention), and deny negative posts what they want (same thing).

... you are far more interesting in taking down what you think I'm saying than trying to understand what it is that I am.

Maybe so, but not for a lack of sincerity!

So I'm glad you caught that bit about the discussion being about "quality" posting. I'm not talking about Dashofpepper's infamous diatribes against noise-to-signal ratio here but rather just posts that aren't what you mentioned -- flame baiting, hyperbole, and rants. This tangent began because I was objecting to that explanation of Dakka. If that's the case, then I would say that Dakka is fringe and repeat Worglock's point that if all the moaning was truly representative (in the sense that Worglock was characterizing Dakka as the "dregs of the hobby") then why hasn't GW already gone out of business? It's a rather good point, really, if you believe that people only post on Dakka to get attention in the sense of flame baiting, hyperbole, and rants.

I am much more amenable to the phrase you just used "people post because the want interaction" rather than your earlier statement "when a person wants a reaction, they know they can get one by making over the top ciriticisms." I'm not saying we don't see the latter; merely that it does not characterize this community and, therefore, the community is not really a fringe of wargamers (or even nerds) more generally.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chowderhead wrote:Manchu, I wasn't referencing that the thread was off topic, but that the first part of my post was.

I was referring to the Shakespeare quip.

I wouldnt say that forum posters are a "small sample"

But thanks to (more) anonymity, there is much less restraint compared to real life encounters

It would be funny to take a post blatantly bashing GW, and then screaming it line for line in front of a GW employee

I wasn't also really discussing Dakka posters as a group, but people in general. Just saying that there's a reason people do the stuff they do, regardless of where they are.

I tend to concur with Polonius. Good posts and bad posts are ways to interact and to garner reactions from others. Good posts tend to require more work, time and effort. Flames and other negative posts are often easy, lazy and fast. Therefore there's a behavioral incentive towards junk posting, which we as a community want to counteract if we can.

That's not what I disagree with: I disagree that the junk posting is what characterizes DakkaDakka -- and, furthermore (i.e., not a response to Polonius particularly), that this is evidence that Dakka is not fringe.

I am onboard with that. I do think that there's a lot more positive interaction and good fun content than gets credited. Outside the modeling forums, really long threads tend to be ones with a lot of arguing and drama, so I think that junk gets a bit more attention than it really warrants.

What if the positive interactions is what makes Dakka fringe?

No, I see this same "positive" (remember, as I pointe dout, this is low threshold positive) in-store. The point is about motivation, like you were saying: people don't go to the stores to flame bait, exaggerate, and rant in these sense I've been talking about and I don't see (the overwhelming majority of) people coming to Dakka for that reason, either. Did you have something other than that in mind?

That was just a throw away joke. Meaning, we're not on the fringe because everybody here is a negative nelly, but we're actually on the fringe of gamers because we have productive conversations...

I'll use a real world example:

All the people in my group have Dakka accounts. One of those people posts frequently (me), one of those people posts infrequently (eh steve), and the rest maybe have a look every now and again. So that's really only two of us doing any posting. We're all aware of Dakka and all look to it occasionally, but only two of us post.

So I'd say it's wrong to categorise us as a 'minor' or small group - I'd say a hell of a lot of wargame players are online, but I'd say that most of them are lurkers online rather than active participants.

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

There are a few people at my local gW that regularly grumble about prices, while they're being rung up for another $200 in models.

I need to make some sort of Worglock Post Generator. It would save you from having to type out the same trollish nonsense in every thread you frequent, and give you more time to completely miss the point on the OP's post.

Jesus... and people say I'm repetitive.

I think if the 1-3% figure for a 'sample' is even remotely accurate, then GW really should take notice and I don't think we 'dakkalites' are a 'fringe, whacked out community'.

Polls done here in the US have a MUCH smaller sample base with a typical margin of error of 4%.

If the 25% 'lurker' figure is even hyper inflated by a factor of 4, GW should be playing very close attention to what is said on forums like dakka.

Entire political schemes and major portions of advertising economies are based on a sample way far smaller than the numbers being thrown out here. Way, way far smaller.

Dakkalites are a niche 'fringe'? Hardly.

Pretty much everyone I've met in the hobby over the past five years has been online, either posting or lurking. That included all of my opponents at the past two 40K Doubles at Warhammer World I attended, several other folks I met those weekends, five people I know in the village who play, and two GW store staff.

I'd say Forums have many more eyes at the very least looking toward them, than folks give credit for.

I mean, very few folks I know now, including, my shop staff (some of them ladies into the fifties) and customers I chat to, aren't on the Net. So odds are if you play GW and have net access you'll do some looking around at some point.

So aye, posting net users, I'd agree limited numbers over all the forums maybe 5-10%, those watching the many forums out there, Dakka, Warseer, Heresy, B&C etc, I'd put it at around 50% myself.

GW are bat gak crazy to be ignoring that avenue of potential income, and the good/badwill it can cause.

I'm sure that Lego could produce the relevant usage stats to back it up, but I would think it is fair to say that usage of Dakka has jumped exponentially in the last few years, both in terms of active users who post and in terms of people who just lurk as guests to read.

From my own point of view, I found Dakka after doing a Google search for an old Epic model I was curious about. If you type anything GW/Wargaming related into Google, chances are a Dakka hit will pop up first. So people don't really have to have knowledge about Dakka, or even prior knowledge of internet fora; all they need to have is access to a computer and a rudimentary understanding of a search engine. Of course, this has to coincide with a desire to search online for something wargaming related - that is where the bottleneck is, I believe. I think it may not have occurred to a lot of people that they could search for a rules query or a painting guide or whatever. When they do and Dakka pops up, it really is the proverbial lightbulb moment.

Of course, internet usage is rising rapidly too; I would suggest that the majority of households either have or have access to a PC and the internet, which would explain some of the reasons why Dakka usage is growing so quickly.

So as a roundabout answer, yes, we are a fringe of a wider community but a fringe that is rapidly growing and does exert an influence. As mentioned earlier, for every reader here, Dakka could potentially be reaching many more through simple word of mouth and influencing people's opinions.

GW's main issue IMO is that they think the community exists in a vacuum - while this may have been true 10 or 20 years ago when wide ranging communication was much more restrictive, these days the flow of information makes the wargaming community much more global than it hitherto has been. And it's an audience that GW ignore at their peril - it's a n audience that will only continue to grow. Whether you like GW or not and whether you agree with their business practices or not, it simply cannot be healthy for any company to play the ostrich, stick their head in the sand and ignore a large tranche of their consumer base. Arguably, we are already seeing the outriders with the trend in GW sales figures; it remains to be seen if they heed the warning.

The big question: Are space marines for casuals?

Your avatar is the Scatman. Obscure...


Anyway, as to what Filbert said, I'd like to add something to one of his points because it's something I've brought up before:

GW's main issue IMO is that they think the community exists in a vacuum...

And this is because GW likes to pretend that their 'Hobby' exists in a vacuum (and I stress 'pretend', because even I don't think they're stupid enough to really believe it). They want their to be GW and no one else, and they treat their business as if it were the only one around. This is why they don't go to trade shows, see no reason to preview things, and so on - all stuff I've been over at length in other threads.

Therefore their reaction to their community, especially the online community, follows suit, as you just said Filbert. Heads in the sand, it is isolated and in a vacuum.

H.B.M.C. wrote:And this is because GW likes to pretend that their 'Hobby' exists in a vacuum (and I stress 'pretend', because even I don't think they're stupid enough to really believe it). They want their to be GW and no one else, and they treat their business as if it were the only one around. This is why they don't go to trade shows, see no reason to preview things, and so on - all stuff I've been over at length in other threads.

Therefore their reaction to their community, especially the online community, follows suit, as you just said Filbert. Heads in the sand, it is isolated and in a vacuum.

Trust me, and I'm not trying to offend stupid people, but gw really is that stupid.

I believe that most wargamers are tech savvy (the high proportion of wargamers with "added-value" girth points to that ) and as such at the very least peruse forums. The whole phrase 'netlist' being part of the wargaming vernacular would point to this being true.

Anyway if you regard your market as a niche and then a segment of your small market as fringe , and fringe somehow means they should be ignored, and a large amount of your 'fringe' seem to be vets, and you seem to be treating repeat customers with contempt, well then you seem to be doing things the wrong way.

I occasionally look at PP and Infinity forums and strangely don't see much bile spouted on them. Perhaps the symptoms have something to do with the disease?

Bullockist wrote:I occasionally look at PP and Infinity forums and strangely don't see much bile spouted on them. Perhaps the symptoms have something to do with the disease?

As far as PP goes, their issues are far different than from gw issues.

Tighter rules to begin with. PP does have production issues (More on the supply side than quality, though their are some quality issues). They are also more draconian on their own boards.

However, taken as a whole, you are correct on the symptom/disease analogy.

I play both. I was going to drop 40k and concentrate more on warmahordes. I have decided I am pretty content with my collection in both games, atm.

Yeah, if anybody remembers the old "Eye of Terror" that was the GW boards... you couldn't say anything less than mildly enthusiastic about GW products.

It makes sense... why allow people to whine and moan on the forums you're paying for?

Polonius wrote:Yeah, if anybody remembers the old "Eye of Terror" that was the GW boards... you couldn't say anything less than mildly enthusiastic about GW products.

It makes sense... why allow people to whine and moan on the forums you're paying for?

True. GW can simply bury their heads for free on dakka.

What are people thinking?

The Dwarf Wolf wrote:I know a bunch of players in person. Im from a non Europe /United States of (North) America /Oceania country. All people i know that play the game, frequent foruns and blogs.

Not all of them post their oppinions.

Due to the small scale of the hobby, i find it pretty hard to believe that there is hoobists who dont make casual use of foruns.

GW have 30.000 likes in face book... how much members the "big" foruns have?

I am not a hoobist!

While MGS's question is a valid one, I really just don't care if I represent the majority of other gamers or not.

I buy, paint, and play for my personal enjoyment. I don't do these things to be part of a popular crowd (If I did, I'd need my head examined I think).

So every argument I make regarding "what GW should do" should be understood to be "what GW should do (to keep me as a customer)".

But given how FLGSs I know which used to be staunchly GW-only are now suddenly selling a variety of miniatures from a variety of companies, I'm fairly confident that I'm not a demographic of one.

JOHIRA wrote:While MGS's question is a valid one, I really just don't care if I represent the majority of other gamers or not.

I buy, paint, and play for my personal enjoyment. I don't do these things to be part of a popular crowd (If I did, I'd need my head examined I think).

So every argument I make regarding "what GW should do" should be understood to be "what GW should do (to keep me as a customer)".

But given how FLGSs I know which used to be staunchly GW-only are now suddenly selling a variety of miniatures from a variety of companies, I'm fairly confident that I'm not a demographic of one.

This is the point though. GW can't control the message, and it is all there in stark raving technicolor for them to read. You as a consumer, ( not customer) are open to say whatever you want. And GW can do nothing but either, A. Ignore it, or B. indirectly do something about it to the positive or negative.

Then they get to see in a broad stroke brush that the effects are either positive or negative. They can do what they want with the results, because when the players come together, they come to a generalized discussion with no holds barred feedback that can't be controled in the vaccum that is GW's propaganda machine.

Most organizations HATE that sort of a thing.

Because...

So then by that effect, you as... the "Customer" hold sway over them. What is it going to say when you pick up "Weapon X", which was made to the tune of 1-30,000 pounds, denare, jellybabies, or whatever GW is using to pay thier designers, YOU as a player says simply- "IT SUCKS, use two of Weapon Y to get the same result for a cheaper price". Then has a discussion about the "Weapons X, and Weapon Y in stark raving clearity for all to get in on.

A few new players see this on line, and then you start seeing this become a general opinion. The resulting lower sales of "Weapon X" then effect the bottom line when they paid more to make a crap unit then it was worth.

They can ignore that sort of feedback if they want to. They will do it at thier own peril.

Indirectly- it then boils back to "What should GW do, for me as a customer." the "Me" in this case then becomes the general audience of players who are actually taking the time to play with, discuss, and inevitably buy "Weapons X, Y, and Z..."

therby making you a demographic.

Bullockist wrote:
I occasionally look at PP and Infinity forums and strangely don't see much bile spouted on them. Perhaps the symptoms have something to do with the disease?

Let me first say that I don't know the first thing about the PP community.

I think the 40k community is an angrier place than the Infinity community because of competitive 40k. People seem to see 40k generalship as a viable measuring stick for intelligence (see Stelek's tagline - "Army Lists, Tactics, and Commentary for the Thinking Player"), and thus get emotionally bound up in winning or losing. Furthermore, they've figured out that 40k's balance makes list building an important part of winning or losing, so people aggressively optimize their collections for tournament performance. I think this leads to a lot of unhappiness, because, if you spend your money unwisely, you're doomed to tabletop mediocrity and derision ("I hate when people cry just because I bring a decent list") until you spend more money on the right units to get yourself into the game. Games Workshop doesn't help the problem by forcing you to pay a periodic tax to stay competitive with new codices. 40k is the most popular of the tabletop games, so of course the dashofpeppers and Steleks of the world are going to play 40k, because what have you achieved if you're a big fish in a small pond?

Contrast with Infinity, where the community seems to have a gentleman's agreement (or case of mass denial, depending on how you look at it) that powergaming is impossible, and that if you follow a few guidelines and buy whatever models you like, you can win. I think they have a bit of a point - they're papering over some balance issues, but I do think, just from playing a few games with my self with paper markers (don't judge me!) that Infinity is a more randomized game than 40k - there's a dimension of rock/papers/scissors to 40k that gets randomized away much more often in Infinity, and also that exploiting terrain matters more compared to list building than in 40k.

Still, I think it's the legions of people who want to win, win, win, so they can talk to people the way Stelek talks to people that make the 40k community an angrier place.

I think you give way to much credit to stelek

Ooooh Haters, it seems like every new codex has gotten a lot of hate!

imweasel wrote:I think you give way to much credit to stelek

I just picked him as an example of somebody who thinks he's smarter than the rest of the 40k community because of how good he thinks he is at 40k. I didn't say one way or another if I think he's right in either case :p

hehe

How fringe are forum users? My only real experience is from Oslo, Copenhagen and my minor forays into international tourneys, where the people I see in the shop, club and tournaments are the same people posting on the forums. Since nobody have made any real studies of this, my anecdotal evidence is as usueless as anybody else's. However, considering the incredible penetration the internet has into popular culture these days, among younger people and children especially, I regard it as highly unlikely that the forums are entirely populated by strange basement dwellers with no connection to "the real world" and only read by those. Any commercial entitiy ignores discussion about its products at its own peril. By contrast, taking internet opinions too seriously can also be a bad idea.

Bullockist wrote:
I occasionally look at PP and Infinity forums and strangely don't see much bile spouted on them. Perhaps the symptoms have something to do with the disease?

There have popped up a few fairly aggressive posters on the PP forum over the years as well, but in general, the tone is less aggressive than it can get here. The same applies to most of the company-run forums: I lurk or post on Infinity's forum, Wyrd's forum and Spartan's forum and overall, the tone is more polite. There are several reasons for this, I think. First, size. Apart from PP's forum, the others are fairly small, something that encourages a more even tone: people know one another. Second, moderation. PP's forums are quite heavily moderated and smaller forums often "moderate" themselves even if the mods are not very active. Third, game exclusivity. Dakka and Warseer cater to many different systems, but the general sections are often read by everyone. This sometimes leads to friction-by-intention, as morons use terms like "Warmafail" or "Dicehammer" with the sole intention of driving the temperature up. There is some slamming of other games (typically GW's systems) on all the forums I mentioned above, but it is seldom picked up on (CT Gamer excepted )and thus dies down quickly without causing much heat. People who post on exclusive forums have likely bought into the game the forums discuss; anyone overly critical of them are likely to be dismissed as trolls immediately.

Blaming a competitive attiitude is a dead end, I think. There are tons of obnoxious and/or loudmouthed and/or easily offended and/or condecending, "casual" players out there - rather than identifying with their perceived skill at gaming, they tend to strongly identify with the systems they play, its background or have some sort of crusade going against what they perceive as the misguided competitive gamers...or any number of other small pet peeves. Several of them have "gaming careers" stretching back decades and forum presences that date back to the first gaming forums on the web.

A couple of things.

Not all my friends are politically up to date as I am. So, when voting season comes around, they turn to me for advice. Politically, I'm rather fringe, but hold more sway due to being someone that can put some of the issues in perspective. This is also true of my wargaming hobby. I have friends that ask me what's the game looking like, and what would they need to get back in.

Secondly, I haven't seen a mention of podcasts or youtube channels. Both are very likely informed by some of the forums. Their listeners are then given an audio form of forum opinion. Everyday, the fringe is moving a bit closer to the mainstream.

I know of about 40-50 active danish gamers (play weekly and in bi-annual/annual tournaments). I might not know them all by name , but I know them by face.

I only notice about 3-5 active danish posters on this forum.

Steelmage99 wrote:
I only notice about 3-5 active danish posters on this forum.

And how many of them are active posters on Powerfist.dk or any of the other international forums in some shape or form? "Forum Users" do not exclusively mean this particular forum.

I would be very wary of logging on to a site called powerfist.dk, just saying.

Believe you me, many a poor danish lad has been scarred by adding .com instead of .dk over the years and encountering some creative soul's webpage that catered to an all-male audience not normally associated with miniatures gaming. Thank the internet gods, the .com name these days directs to a power tool company.

Every WHFB tournament player I know in Queensland knows of dakka, some post here, more lurk.

But Oz is extremely well served by WargamerAU which is awsomesauce for tournaments.

At my ex-local GW when I would say that I was a moderator on dakka to one of the blow ins at the store, most actually knew me by my postings.

I think that you need a certain amount of time available to dedicate to posting on dakka/internet forums.
Something many people don't have... also there is a plethora of websites available so it is a very disjointed internet 'community'.

The assertion that if someone is not posting on Dakka they are a silent majority happy with GW is very presumptive.

My worthless piece of anecdotal evidence suggests that the target market of pre pubescent boys and their parents are savvy enough to know that prices are crazy even if they never read what is posted on Dakka.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

There are a few people at my local gW that regularly grumble about prices, while they're being rung up for another $200 in models.

Thank you for your considered input to this discussion.

Welcome to ignore.

I think you answer lies within your response. In general people are annoyed by some of the things you mentioned in your OP, however when someone wants to rant about a specific annoyance they have felt.... Well this is valid forum to do so. More moderately minded people rarely jump into a GW bashing session. More likely other annoyed individuals just hop in and fuel the fire.

In my mind the price hikes are a minor inconvenience but considering the rate at which GW is now publishing new material I think they are expected.

As to your question about being the minority. Yes, we absolutely are. In general I'd say less than 10% of regular customers are completely miffed about the current state of affairs.

Your figure of 10% is based on which survey please?

CageUF wrote:As to your question about being the minority. Yes, we absolutely are. In general I'd say less than 10% of regular customers are completely miffed about the current state of affairs.

Since we're now making up statistics, what percentage do you feel represents the folks that have left the game entirely for some other system?

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Your figure of 10% is based on which survey please?

Survey no... General observance certainly.

Table top gamers make up a very small portion of the population, I think that is a given. The average tabletop player spends somewhere between $100-$1000 a year (again an assumption, but I think a fairly reasonable one). In 2005 GW had ~215,000,000 in sales. So that equates to somewhere between 215,000-2,150,000 players world wide. Dakka is one of the top forums for this niche market and has a total of number of user ID's in the range of 7500-15000 based on the Intro section. Even if Dakka only has 1/10th of the market when it comes to GW forum users that still makes us in the sever minority.

So yes... I'd say less than %10

~1,000,000 Tabletop gamers worldwide
~10,000 Dakka users
= ~1% of tabletop gamers use Dakka
= ~10% use like forums

Many of those "users" are infrequent at best and very very few have more than a few hundred posts.

I should note there where 14'000 folks on Dakka a week or so back and the site has 47K registered users, even taking away spammers and those who have left the hobby etc, I'd say you are looking at 20K users.

Warseer, Heresy, B&C all have memberships into the ten thousand plus mark, (Warseer has 77K) not everyone has an account on each. I know plenty who wouldn't go to one or another site for various reasons.

The figure is certainly much higher than 10K online.


edit - Hell there are eight and a half thousand on between Dakka and Warseer alone right now, on a wet and dull (no news going on) Monday evening Uk/afternoon US.

sourclams wrote:

CageUF wrote:As to your question about being the minority. Yes, we absolutely are. In general I'd say less than 10% of regular customers are completely miffed about the current state of affairs.

Since we're now making up statistics, what percentage do you feel represents the folks that have left the game entirely for some other system?

Left 40k? or left all GW?

I've seen many divert new purchases to other systems, I've even seen more than a handful switch to fantasy (I cannot understand this one...) but out of our normal players I can only think of 1 who has sold off his armies because of his distaste of what is happening with GW policy. So 1/50 = ~2%.

Given a population size of 1,000,000 with a 95% confidence level and a 50 person sample size, the answer would fall between 0%-8% of the population.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I should note there where 14'000 folks on Dakka a week or so back and the site has 47K registered users, even taking away spammers and those who have left the hobby etc, I'd say you are looking at 20K users.

Warseer, Heresy, B&C all have memberships into the ten thousand plus mark, (Warseer has 77K) not everyone has an account on each. I know plenty who wouldn't go to one or another site for various reasons.

The figure is certainly much higher than 10K online.


edit - Hell there are eight and a half thousand on between Dakka and Warseer alone right now, on a wet and dull (no news going on) Monday evening Uk/afternoon US.

Okay, this gives quite a bit more info. How many gamers world wide do you think there are?

I noticed the "Most users ever online was 14,706 on 2011/07/31 13:27:29" which I was looking for earlier but the best I could do at the time was the number of introductions (Then doubled).


So lets call it 300,000 Unique players among the major websites (for arguments sake this 300,000 makes up 95% of tabletop forums). Assuming only 1,000,000 players... that still only puts is in the minority.

I'd guess the real number of actual players well exceeds 1,000,000... but that only skews the numbers against us.

Sadly the only active study I know was based on tabletop RPG's by Wizards in 1998 and 2004.

Neither would be much help, but it penciled them in at about 2.5million and of that total 19% noted as they'd played minature games.

juraigamer wrote:

Releasing Dawn of war and the Space Marine game is managing that pretty well.

Neither of which help their core product bring customers. Its LOTR all over again- it'll bring in revenue as unit sales drop again in their main line.

But it is still supposition that non forum member gamers are totally happy gamers.

You also need to factor in responses based on demographics.

Just because, for the sake of argument, 10% of gamers are miffed with GW, that does not automatically invalidate their disatisfaction. Nor indeed voicing their disquiet on a wargaming forum.

I could make some educated guesses based on traffic patterns and I know the stats for some smaller companies and various stores but cannot share specifics.

All in all, I'd reckon there to be somewhere around 1.5 million people who have purchased GW stuff worldwide within the last 2 years, including books.

These guesses are based on a few numbers, and I'm doing a rough calculation in my head. There is a huge error margin so I wouldnt base anything too substantial off it.

Overall I am not sure about declining popularity. The best monitor for 40k popularity is probably the popularity of bolter and chainsword, as it is consistent in design and efforts, and deals with a standard range that is strongly linked to games workshop. Their post rate and signup rate has been fairly consistent for 4 years now. Dakka's traffic has shot up over the last few years, but we've been adding new features. Many other sites have seen reduced traffic but they have either had technical problems, no new features or are losing users for other reasons. Overall, I'd say that popularity is most likely fairly consistent, but that is not to say that spend per player is the same or moving in a positive direction.

I'm not sure if I understand the thread... or what is meant by fringe (minority? a separate entity?)...

If we are a portion of a portion of a whole, then I think we're fringe.

djphranq wrote:I'm not sure if I understand the thread... or what is meant by fringe (minority? a separate entity?)...

If we are a portion of a portion of a whole, then I think we're fringe.

Exactly. This site represents pretty much the radical haters of the community. If they weren't a very vocal minority segment of the minority of the hobby, they would already have their stated goal.

A dead GW and a ghost town of a hobby.

I'd suggest the P&M board and various other discussion across the site, would disagree with your position Worgock.

Seems a big jump from a vocal few, to the whole site are now radical haters of GW.

carmachu wrote:

juraigamer wrote:

Releasing Dawn of war and the Space Marine game is managing that pretty well.

Neither of which help their core product bring customers. Its LOTR all over again- it'll bring in revenue as unit sales drop again in their main line.

I'm not sure I agree with this premise. Several of the new players at my FLGS got interested in tabletop 40k specifically because of DoW or DoW II. I imagine this will repeat itself with space marine.

CageUF wrote:

carmachu wrote:

juraigamer wrote:

Releasing Dawn of war and the Space Marine game is managing that pretty well.

Neither of which help their core product bring customers. Its LOTR all over again- it'll bring in revenue as unit sales drop again in their main line.

I'm not sure I agree with this premise. Several of the new players at my FLGS got interested in tabletop 40k specifically because of DoW or DoW II. I imagine this will repeat itself with space marine.

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. A few people that have played 40k video games may have joined, but the greater amount has not.

Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:I'd suggest the P&M board and various other discussion across the site, would disagree with your position Worgock.

Seems a big jump from a vocal few, to the whole site are now radical haters of GW.

I'd say forums like Dakka Dakka give the more radical of our brethren a means to express their views, and they do so vehemently. That is not to suggest that we as a whole share this view point, rather that they express their views often and loudly which potentially distorts the true medium of the community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

infinite_array wrote:

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. A few people that have played 40k video games may have joined, but the greater amount has not.

I'm not really sure what your point is? Have the majority of DoW/DoW II/Space Marine players joined in at the FLGS, absolutely not.

Was my statement anecdotal, sure. Does that mean it is inaccurate or indicate an incorrect correlation? I'd argue no, but that is the joy of an anecdotal statement. Regardless it is an absolute fact that gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases. While these players represent the minority of gamers, it is getting people interested.

CageUF Wrote:

Regardless it is an absolute fact that gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases. While these players represent the minority of gamers, it is getting people interested.

I understand where you are coming from however if you got hard data that shows a sufficient amount of people making that choice to back your comment up I would like to see it and I think GW would too. It would be a positive spin for the corporation.

NeutronPoison wrote:

imweasel wrote:I think you give way to much credit to stelek

I just picked him as an example of somebody who thinks he's smarter than the rest of the 40k community because of how good he thinks he is at 40k. I didn't say one way or another if I think he's right in either case :p

rep'd

It's amusing to see forum haters describe the forum they're
hating on as a vocal minority.

Divide by zero?

Regardless it is an absolute fact that gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases.

It is an "absolute fact" that I am always correct and GW put cocaine in Finecast resin.

Well it was mooted that the introduction of Finecast was a rush job.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

Regardless it is an absolute fact that gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases.

It is an "absolute fact" that I am always correct and GW put cocaine in Finecast resin.

Well it was mooted that the introduction of Finecast was a rush job.

I do not think that word means what you think it means, good sir. But you now gain +1 against trolls!

Am not understanding what suffering +1 against trolls actually means. Apologies for not understanding netspeak.

My understanding of the word "absolute" in this context is that the statement is undeniable, incontrovertable and totally true, without error and with no room for doubt of it's veracity. A definitive fact.

Sorry for being a sceptic. But if you claim something as being absolute, I wanna see some evidence please. Or because the claim is made on the internet I am supposed to assume it must be true? Is that how it works?

CageUF wrote:So 1/50 = ~2%.
Given a population size of 1,000,000 with a 95% confidence level and a 50 person sample size, the answer would fall between 0%-8% of the population.

You do realize that those statistics are based on more or less made up numbers and a non-randomized sample size, right? Making it pretty much the same statement as your initial post on numbers?

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

My understanding of the word "absolute" in this context is that the statement is undeniable, incontrovertable and totally true, without error and with no room for doubt of it's veracity. A definitive fact.

Sorry for being a sceptic. But if you claim something as being absolute, I wanna see some evidence please. Or because the claim is made on the internet I am supposed to assume it must be true? Is that how it works?

Being skeptical of broad declarations on the net is wise but I'm surprised that you contest that "gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases". The only thing this says is multiple people joined tabletop gaming because of their experience with console/pc games. I wasn't claiming this was the main drawing factor for all/most/or even many new players, but that it is A cause.

I think it foolish to argue that there isn't some cross-over from video games to tabletop gaming. For what it is worth, every new player that I have run into that has come to tabletop gaming through this route has been 18 or under.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:

CageUF wrote:So 1/50 = ~2%.
Given a population size of 1,000,000 with a 95% confidence level and a 50 person sample size, the answer would fall between 0%-8% of the population.

You do realize that those statistics are based on more or less made up numbers and a non-randomized sample size, right? Making it pretty much the same statement as your initial post on numbers?

Okay where to start...

1.) You are right, I ran the numbers with a 99% confidence level, not 95%.
2.) Whether the true population is 1,000,000 or 5,000,000 doesn't matter considering the sample size and the fact that 98% of the sample group performed in the same way.
3.) Sample size doesn't need to be random, matter of fact a nice bit of statistics is determining how many people are needed to give a desired accuracy.
4.) What you apparently fail to realize is that the chance of error drops significantly when a sample reacts almost entirely in the same way.
5.) If you wanted to know how large of a sample size was needed given any distribution of answers. Well, for a population of 5 million with a margin of error of 5% and a 99% confidence level... Its 666 ( funny enough) for 1 million its 665.

CageUF wrote:
3.) Sample size doesn't need to be random, matter of fact a nice bit of statistics is determining how many people are needed to give a desired accuracy.
4.) What you apparently fail to realize is that the chance of error drops significantly when a sample reacts almost entirely in the same way.
5.) If you wanted to know how large of a sample size was needed given any distribution of answers. Well, for a population of 5 million with a margin of error of 5% and a 99% confidence level... Its 666 ( funny enough) for 1 million its 665.

I am quite aware on how confidence and tolerance levels are calculated. I use it in my work a lot, albeit not on living subjects.

But! Let's use my own sample instead then, since it does not need to be random. I have my entire gaming circle on an email list for information on events, and can thus be entirely precice, since I know all these guys. I'll just take the first 50 on the list. Out of those 50:

1. 6 do not, as far as I know, use forums actively on a weekly basis. But 5 of them have 1-3 #post accounts on a few forums and browse regularily (this is how they keep informed on events, tournaments and releases), and the last lets her boyfriend keep her updated from forums. The remaining 44 have accounts on at least one forum, many have several.
2. 12 of them have quit at least one GW game in the last two years - I have no firm idea whether that is out of disgust with recent events or just because their new-found Wyrd/Spartan/PP/Corvus Belli-infatuation have eaten up their time. 4 of those have quit GW gaming altogether, explicitly because of WHFB 8th edition.
3. 10 of them, not including the above, are selling off large parts of their GW collections. The same caveat applies here as with the first 4 in the paragraph above - my impression is that they are diversifying their gaming.

49 out of 50 read forums. Thus, almost the entire sample reacts in the same way, just as in your own sample. The entire sample visits their FLGS in some ways and two of them are GW employees. About half the sample has had some sort of reaction to recent events or earlier events in GW-land.

[spot the subtle barb in the text]

I would much rather see a post that confirms my preconceived opinion based on imaginary facts than your actual data with so-called "real" numbers, sir!

malfred wrote:It's amusing to see forum haters describe the forum they're
hating on as a vocal minority.

Divide by zero?

Not nearly as much as the resident GW Hate Squad hating on GW for years and years, and the only thing they have to show for it is, well, a new GW army that they bought from their friendly local GW store, and friendly GW store prices.

Worglock wrote:

malfred wrote:It's amusing to see forum haters describe the forum they're
hating on as a vocal minority.

Divide by zero?

Not nearly as much as the resident GW Hate Squad hating on GW for years and years, and the only thing they have to show for it is, well, a new GW army that they bought from their friendly local GW store, and friendly GW store prices.

Wait, you mean you're referring to someone specific?

malfred wrote:

Worglock wrote:

malfred wrote:It's amusing to see forum haters describe the forum they're
hating on as a vocal minority.

Divide by zero?

Not nearly as much as the resident GW Hate Squad hating on GW for years and years, and the only thing they have to show for it is, well, a new GW army that they bought from their friendly local GW store, and friendly GW store prices.

Wait, you mean you're referring to someone specific?

Were you?

Adam LongWalker wrote:CageUF Wrote:

Regardless it is an absolute fact that gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases. While these players represent the minority of gamers, it is getting people interested.

I understand where you are coming from however if you got hard data that shows a sufficient amount of people making that choice to back your comment up I would like to see it and I think GW would too. It would be a positive spin for the corporation.

Here's a bit of hard data:
Out of about 1300 dakka visitors, 8% claim they got into GW from DoW or another 40k game.
See: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/246739.page

Kaptajn Congoboy wrote:

CageUF wrote:
Sample size doesn't need to be random

But! Let's use my own sample instead then, since it does not need to be random. I have my entire gaming circle on an email list for information on events, and can thus be entirely precice, since I know all these guys. I'll just take the first 50 on the list. Out of those 50:

1. 6 do not, as far as I know, use forums actively on a weekly basis. But 5 of them have 1-3 #post accounts on a few forums and browse regularily (this is how they keep informed on events, tournaments and releases), and the last lets her boyfriend keep her updated from forums. The remaining 44 have accounts on at least one forum, many have several.
2. 12 of them have quit at least one GW game in the last two years - I have no firm idea whether that is out of disgust with recent events or just because their new-found Wyrd/Spartan/PP/Corvus Belli-infatuation have eaten up their time. 4 of those have quit GW gaming altogether, explicitly because of WHFB 8th edition.
3. 10 of them, not including the above, are selling off large parts of their GW collections. The same caveat applies here as with the first 4 in the paragraph above - my impression is that they are diversifying their gaming.

49 out of 50 read forums. Thus, almost the entire sample reacts in the same way, just as in your own sample. The entire sample visits their FLGS in some ways and two of them are GW employees. About half the sample has had some sort of reaction to recent events or earlier events in GW-land.
[spot the subtle barb in the text]

The sample needs to represent the whole... and the sample being random is VERY important, not sample size.

In the same way my numbers are skewed by wholly containing players that visit 3 LGS, yours are skewed by the fact that they are on an email list for GW events and may or may not be from 1 store (you didn't indicate).

But your information does indicate a few things.

1.) Not everyone that browses the forums post on a regular basis (your numbers are ~1/10).
2.) A significant number of players are choosing other products (for any number of reasons).
3.) ~4/50 have quit GW all together for one reason or another.

That lines up fairly well with what I think should be the case. The major difference between our two samples, is mine is made up mostly of 40k players and very few fantasy players, all of which are spread over 3 stores. Yours seems to have a reasonable number of fantasy players and is made up of those people active enough in the hobby as to warrant being on an email list.

Worglock wrote:

malfred wrote:It's amusing to see forum haters describe the forum they're
hating on as a vocal minority.

Divide by zero?

Not nearly as much as the resident GW Hate Squad hating on GW for years and years, and the only thing they have to show for it is, well, a new GW army that they bought from their friendly local GW store, and friendly GW store prices.

Do you really think you're going to win? You can continue to call out the various posters and ultimately either burn out or get banned. But do you really think for one minute you can change anybody's mind? Those of us at Dakka with ill will towards GW are not going to change because of you. We will eventually either move on to other games, quit altogether, or forgive GW. You don't really figure into the equation.

Your tilting at windmills.

Crimson Devil wrote:

Worglock wrote:

malfred wrote:It's amusing to see forum haters describe the forum they're
hating on as a vocal minority.

Divide by zero?

Not nearly as much as the resident GW Hate Squad hating on GW for years and years, and the only thing they have to show for it is, well, a new GW army that they bought from their friendly local GW store, and friendly GW store prices.

Do you really think you're going to win? You can continue to call out the various posters and ultimately either burn out or get banned. But do you really think for one minute you can change anybody's mind? Those of us at Dakka with ill will towards GW are not going to change because of you. We will eventually either move on to other games, quit altogether, or forgive GW. You don't really figure into the equation.

Your tilting at windmills.

I "won" long before I ever cared to post on this forum. This site is currently a diversion for me when I'm bored at work or (like now) sitting at home eating a meal in between sessions of house or model work. The fact that you see some internet forum as something that someone can "win" at just adds to my amusement.

I could turn your statement around on you. Do you think you're going to "win"? GW is going to continue to do what they do and "your" (not you in particular, you as a group) venting of spleen is going to matter because you're either not buying from them, thus you really don't matter, or you're still buying from them, thus you're a hypocrite and really don't matter.

Do I think GW has done everything perfectly? No. Do I see a point in venting spleen all over the internet about it? No.

You either have fun with this hobby or you don't. If you don't, why are still around it when all it does is make you mad? Do you enjoy being mad all the time? (looking for serious answers)

Worglock wrote:You either have fun with this hobby or you don't. If you don't, why are still around it when all it does is make you mad? Do you enjoy being mad all the time? (looking for serious answers)

I and most of the other 'hardcorez' gamer crowd at my LGS converted to PP and other indy game systems... for a number of reasons that everyone is probably already familiar with.

Not having vet gamers seems to make it a LOT harder to recruit newer players into the 'GW' hobby. The player pool is much smaller, hardly any of the gaming tables are occupied with GW games, and the gaming circle that does exist becomes more difficult to break into as they stop coming to the game store and simply play at home to save on travel.

'Ard Boyz prelims are where GW's shortcomings in my area is most evident. In past years we would have 20+ entrants in the prelims, easy. This year there were 7 at our store and 3 at the other store across town. This even includes a few 'non-competitive' vets that haven't played in past years due to the level of competition coming out of the woodwork to see if they can get an easy win and prize support.

legoburner wrote:

Adam LongWalker wrote:CageUF Wrote:

Regardless it is an absolute fact that gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases. While these players represent the minority of gamers, it is getting people interested.

I understand where you are coming from however if you got hard data that shows a sufficient amount of people making that choice to back your comment up I would like to see it and I think GW would too. It would be a positive spin for the corporation.

Here's a bit of hard data:
Out of about 1300 dakka visitors, 8% claim they got into GW from DoW or another 40k game.
See: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/246739.page

Thank you for this bit of information Lego Burner. I was hoping more information coming from a marketing research firm, such as the NPD group to be used as an example that perhaps the person that I previously put in quotes would have given to substantiate his broad based comments.

I can personally see why GW and its licensing scheme and current policy is the way it is if 8% is the approximate return rate for people playing video going to game table. I was hoping for a higher % number actually.

SourClams Wrote:

I and most of the other 'hardcorez' gamer crowd at my LGS converted to PP and other indy game systems... for a number of reasons that everyone is probably already familiar with.

Not having vet gamers seems to make it a LOT harder to recruit newer players into the 'GW' hobby. The player pool is much smaller, hardly any of the gaming tables are occupied with GW games, and the gaming circle that does exist becomes more difficult to break into as they stop coming to the game store and simply play at home to save on travel.

'Ard Boyz prelims are where GW's shortcomings in my area is most evident. In past years we would have 20+ entrants in the prelims, easy. This year there were 7 at our store and 3 at the other store across town. This even includes a few 'non-competitive' vets that haven't played in past years due to the level of competition coming out of the woodwork to see if they can get an easy win and prize support.

I do concur with this comment as I have seen this effect starting to happen in my region.

Next, are we Dakka Users the fringe? I do not believe so. I have been viewing hundreds of blog sites. Some of people in these sites are banging their chests, throwing out gak of information on why this list is better than that list or this blooger on another blogging site is a total feth.

That is the fringe, Those bloggers with the lunatic egos, that has control of their sites. Which brings the hobby into the stereotypical light.

And I hate that because there is so much more to the hobby than the so called stereotypical "fat, sweaty, unwashed, foul breathed gamer with the social graces of a chia pet" who must win at all cost because that is all of a life that he has.

And yes there are good blogging sites concerning the hobby that I enjoy.

In Dakka there are moderators. GOOD moderators that helps keep this site to be the premier site that it is. Next there are the people. Incredibly talented people that share there skills and ideas to others on this site. And with any large site you are going to fine the few that are on the lunatic fringe. They are duly noted by others and their ramblings are taken with a grain of salt.

Which is why Dakka IMHO continues to expand in a positive manner.

Worglock wrote:

I "won" long before I ever cared to post on this forum. This site is currently a diversion for me when I'm bored at work or (like now) sitting at home eating a meal in between sessions of house or model work. The fact that you see some internet forum as something that someone can "win" at just adds to my amusement.

I don't think you understood what I wrote. I was referring the the argument, not the forum. And I'm glad you're enjoying the grief your causing for the short time you'll be here.

I could turn your statement around on you. Do you think you're going to "win"? GW is going to continue to do what they do and "your" (not you in particular, you as a group) venting of spleen is going to matter because you're either not buying from them, thus you really don't matter, or you're still buying from them, thus you're a hypocrite and really don't matter.

Actually we do matter. The money we spend on non-GW games hurts them by strengthening their competitors. At my LGS 40k and Fantasty are on life support. But a pick up game of FoW or Warmachine is easy. Battle Front and Privateer Press are big fans of Games Workshop's current marketing plan.

We are angry because we care what happens. I've played GW games for over a decade and it saddens and sickens me to see them behave this way. When I don't care anymore, then I won't matter to GW.

Do I think GW has done everything perfectly? No. Do I see a point in venting spleen all over the internet about it? No.

The Internet is for two things; Porn and pointless rage.

You either have fun with this hobby or you don't. If you don't, why are still around it when all it does is make you mad? Do you enjoy being mad all the time? (looking for serious answers)

GW is not the hobby.

I think we are only fringe *If not much more* as the forum itself. If we however gather the opinions/thoughts of the wargamers we play with.

Then were a dozen to each -one- man we have. We've gone from a fringe to a faction all of our own. Also, we are often the first to hear of new announcements/rumors etc.

Luco wrote:

Worglock wrote:Considering that most of the whining is done on this site by 2 - 3 dozen people are most. You're not a "minority" you're an "endangered species".

QFT. I know babies that don't cry as much as some people on here. As with life its the 10 people in the crowd that puff up their chests and cry bloody murder that get all the attention and become 'what everyone thinks'.

isnt that the literal definition of "TFG"?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Adam LongWalker wrote:

legoburner wrote:Here's a bit of hard data:
Out of about 1300 dakka visitors, 8% claim they got into GW from DoW or another 40k game.
See: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/246739.page

Thank you for this bit of information Lego Burner. I was hoping more information coming from a marketing research firm, such as the NPD group to be used as an example that perhaps the person that I previously put in quotes would have given to substantiate his broad based comments.

I can personally see why GW and its licensing scheme and current policy is the way it is if 8% is the approximate return rate for people playing video going to game table. I was hoping for a higher % number actually.

that percentage will increase as 40k based games become more diverse, with the new introduction of "space marine" i would expect that number to jump significantly. for the longest time the only 40k games were fairly bland RTS's, most people i know strongly dislike that genre, and while the tabletop is a TBS a rpg/3ps would grab a much larger percent of the population

Being skeptical of broad declarations on the net is wise but I'm surprised that you contest that "gamers have been driven to tabletop gaming by console/pc releases". The only thing this says is multiple people joined tabletop gaming because of their experience with console/pc games. I wasn't claiming this was the main drawing factor for all/most/or even many new players, but that it is A cause.

I think it foolish to argue that there isn't some cross-over from video games to tabletop gaming. For what it is worth, every new player that I have run into that has come to tabletop gaming through this route has been 18 or under.

I would contest that gamers have been "driven" to tabletop gaming. They may have been influenced to try wargaming having played DoW or whatever it is, but driven?
Really, is it "absolute fact" that there was such an overwhelming desire that they must play at all costs? or did they just get the bus on the scenic route? or maybe just walk?
Driven? nah

Of course there is a crossover. But I see kids who play computer games that get interested in tabletop games because they see other kids playing tabletop games and think the models look cool not because of console gaming. Some kids that think GW are yanking their chain when they go on the computers to check out the wares. Then there are those that don't care about the cost since it all comes from mommy and daddy and money grows on trees.

We all have anecdotes to trade but it doesn't really amount to much and hyperbole doesn't make the case any more persuassive.

Edited by Manchu

Guys please remember that it is not necessary to respond to everything that irritates you on the internet. Flaming is just as much against the rules as flamebaiting. Also, the mere fact of flaming does not actually prove that there was flamebaiting. If something you read here annoys you, report it and forget it. The old adage about "not feeding the trolls" applies -- just because you think someone is a troll doesn't mean they actually are one but if you really think they are, please do not feed.

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:I would contest that gamers have been "driven" to tabletop gaming. They may have been influenced to try wargaming having played DoW or whatever it is, but driven?
Really, is it "absolute fact" that there was such an overwhelming desire that they must play at all costs? or did they just get the bus on the scenic route? or maybe just walk?
Driven? nah

Yeah I agree with this. It takes a completely different mentality to play tabletop games vs PC/Console.

I got into GW through the Eisenhorn Omnibus, which interested me enough to go and buy the Dawn of War series, and from there I realized that a tabletop game existed--but I already had a very strong pen&paper "nerd gamer" background.

Tabletop games require a BIG outlay in time and logistics--finding a gamestore, driving times once a week, dealing with an actual physical person/gaming circle as opposed to faceless online societies, and delayed gratification (it takes hours to simply get models to the point of being able to play... and there's no going back and changing your 'customizability' settings without starting over from scratch.

Those who play tabletop games often also play PC/console games. It's easy to go from a more intensive outlay (tabletop gaming, wine collecting, car racing) to a less intensive, sometimes even one-off outlay (PC/console gaming, clubbing, go-karting). It's a lot harder to go the other way around. As a young father, I can easily go and fire up Space Marine when the kid is taking a nap or when I can pawn her off onto Mom for an hour. I can't do that with tabletop gaming... it takes a specialized location and schedule coordination with other people, and can't be turned on and off as life requires.

Saying that gamers will be 'driven' from PC/Console gaming to tabletop gaming on the strength of the IP seems more than a little overzealous and backwards.

Without minimizing the excellent point about playing tabletop being worlds different than PC RTS gaming, DoW did introduce the background to a lot of people. I daresay that it was more successful in that regard than BL -- but I have no government-sponsored statistical surveys to back that up.

A side note on the computer to tabletop talk, I remember picking up a copy of PC Gamer a while back and it had a Space Marine on the cover, it had DoW2 inside, previews of Space Marine, previews of the forthcoming 40k mmo and brief mention of WAR. Games Workshop owned IP taking up a sizeable chunk of it. Computer games have a far wider audience than tabletop and it's a fairly safe bet that whilst that one issue of the magazine won't cause a slew of converts, it spreads the message and makes the IP more recognisable to the general public.

Some folks learning more and coming over to tabletop seems a likely side effect as well as increasing the value of the IP.

I think that DoW probably introduced GW IP to *gamers*. I would guess that the overall gaming pool probably stayed the same/has followed its normal trendline, but that a tiny percentage of gamers already inclined towards tabletop gaming (like myself) were willing to jump in. Basic market share growth.

In that sense, I absolutely agree that the DoW franchise has been good for the GW hobby and tabletop gaming in general, but I think we're also at a point of diminishing returns on the benefits of greater IP exposure through more PC/console game titles.

More PC/console games is great... more almost always is... but if what you enjoy about Space Marine is the visceral joy of watching Captain Titus chainsword his way through 100 Boyz, then is that really going to 'drive' you to assemble mono-pose Captain Titus in 20mm scale to watch him drown horribly in a squad of 12 Boyz? I'm gonna go with 'no'.

Edit:

And there's also the issue with GW game titles that failed horribly. WAR was/is a bomb. In no way did WAR end up as a Warcraft-killer, or even a good game. Same thing with the Mark of Chaos fantasy-RTS series. These games sucked hard and, I think it's safe to say, did little to generate interest in anything.