Apologize if this is a double post, didn't see it up yet.

Lots of insights into how and why GW does some of the things it does.

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/ppwzq/iama_former_games_workshop_employee_ama/

Include text in quote for the work blocked?

I can never read reddits format. It's meandering and difficult to follow.

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

ShumaGorath wrote:I can never read reddits format. It's meandering and difficult to follow.

Click the little [-] before every string of conversations and you can collapse trees.

Mr Hyena wrote:

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

That makes no sense, though. There's a difference between leaks and official news.

VladtheEmailer wrote:The cost of entry is part of the panache of the whole thing.

I understand your point, but I also understand the company's point: they don't want everyone to be playing.

They want it to be a prestige game. And, quite frankly, take a look at the new plastics. It IS a prestige game.

Ugh. Really? Who the hell are they trying to keep out? It's not as if wargaming only attracts the model citizens. See the 'GW horror stories' thread for proof. What a load of gak.

infinite_array wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

That makes no sense, though. There's a difference between leaks and official news.

This isn't new, at all. With "The Two Towers", GW supposedly caught huge amounts of flak for the fact that someone showed off scans from the rulebook showing the Elves at Helm's Deep, and the Uruk-Hai Berserkers(both of which were not in the actual novel). Then there was also--again, supposedly, an issue when the Army of the Dead models got previewed before the movie released.

Someone in the Redditt post made a good point. Smaug is going to be a key part of the movie, and we don't know how/what they're going to show him as. People have an expectation of him looking a certain way, but exactly how he looks will be part of the surprise of the movie.

I wouldn't put too much bases on it. It's just a guy who worked at the store level and it's an AMA on reddit.. meaning unless it gets confirmation, might just be someone trolling.

Mr Hyena wrote:

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

It's nice to see how they're so keen to stop leaks about a movie whose book was published SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO.

Hes a bit more than store level, given some of the stuff hes said.

Mr Hyena wrote:

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

New Line Cinema, and other movie producers, are notorious for keeping their future products secret and not showing sneak peeks to fans until only about a week or so before actual release. After all, if people don't know about it, they're more likely to buy the product when it actually is released.

They also charge Asians, Australians and continental Europeans outrageously high rates to see their movies.

Some or all of the above might not be true.

Kanluwen wrote:
This isn't new, at all. With "The Two Towers", GW supposedly caught huge amounts of flak for the fact that someone showed off scans from the rulebook showing the Elves at Helm's Deep, and the Uruk-Hai Berserkers(both of which were not in the actual novel). Then there was also--again, supposedly, an issue when the Army of the Dead models got previewed before the movie released.

Someone in the Redditt post made a good point. Smaug is going to be a key part of the movie, and we don't know how/what they're going to show him as. People have an expectation of him looking a certain way, but exactly how he looks will be part of the surprise of the movie.

I do agree with you on the leaks on items associated with LoTR, The Hobbit, and New Line Cinemas.

But why would any of that - why should any of that - also have a bearing on how GW treats it's own lines of products. They've stopped previews of anything 40k or Fantasy related as well, with the whole 'announce it a week before release' strategy.

That's a very interesting take on GW insights and such. But after losing money year after year you'd think that they'd come up with a new gameplan. Either that or they're okay with losing the money that they are, or not really losing money. Then again Vlad could be way way off. But his explanations seem plausible at least.

Mr Hyena wrote:

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

No, that's pretty silly. Games Workshop, like any other game company, will have a strategy about communicating products in development. While NLC might have input on how they communicate Lord of the Rings, GW make and chose their own policy for most other stuff. GW do what they do because its' what THEY believe works best.

Agree that the format is awful for getting any useful info out of it, and what 'useful info' there is in there is limited...

Also, as much as Smaug should look like this:



I can't stop picturing him like this:



for obvious reasons...!

Swara wrote:I wouldn't put too much bases on it. It's just a guy who worked at the store level and it's an AMA on reddit.. meaning unless it gets confirmation, might just be someone trolling.

Actually, it was both a guy who worked in corporate sales and the famous "Dirty Steve."

Stoffer wrote:No, that's pretty silly. Games Workshop, like any other game company, will have a strategy about communicating products in development. While NLC might have input on how they communicate Lord of the Rings, GW make and chose their own policy for most other stuff. GW do what they do because its' what THEY believe works best.

From what I've heard, NLC was so angry about the previous leaks that they required GW to take a very restrictive policy in order to prove that they could successfully keep things under wraps.

I hope GW doesn't leak the plot of the Hobbit!!

That makes sense. They proved that by denying the 6th ed codex. True or not it makes no difference. They'd never denyed anything before. They're contractually obligated to be watertight, company wide

Fetterkey wrote:

Swara wrote:I wouldn't put too much bases on it. It's just a guy who worked at the store level and it's an AMA on reddit.. meaning unless it gets confirmation, might just be someone trolling.

Actually, it was both a guy who worked in corporate sales and the famous "Dirty Steve."

Stoffer wrote:No, that's pretty silly. Games Workshop, like any other game company, will have a strategy about communicating products in development. While NLC might have input on how they communicate Lord of the Rings, GW make and chose their own policy for most other stuff. GW do what they do because its' what THEY believe works best.

From what I've heard, NLC was so angry about the previous leaks that they required GW to take a very restrictive policy in order to prove that they could successfully keep things under wraps.

NLC may certainly have a say in how LOTR is marketed, but they don't determine GWs communication strategy across the board. The way they do business is pretty streamlined across products and that's how GW have chosen to do business, not NLC. They could easily do 40k in development blogs weekly, while keeping tight wraps on LOTR. They don't though, because they have a strategy they apply across the board because they believe it is the best course of action. NLC are not the cause of this, it simply doesn't make sense, especially considering how small a share LOTR are of GWs portfolio.

Mmmm... register with Reddit so I can ask about the 'SoB release' in WD.... or not register with Reddit....


*sigh* Fine...


To Reddit!

xttz wrote:It's nice to see how they're so keen to stop leaks about a movie whose book was published SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO.

Kirasu wrote:I hope GW doesn't leak the plot of the Hobbit!!

They aren't worried about plot leaks, but art leaks. Some of the aesthetic elements of the film are still under wraps, such Smaug, the Necromancer, ect ect.

Kirasu wrote:I hope GW doesn't leak the plot of the Hobbit!!

Well they are filming the White Council (Gandalf, Saruman, Lady Galadriel) I assume they'll be driving out the "necromancer" (Sauron) out of his tower in Mirkwood. That might be cool. LotR might be a small part of GW right now but it could take up 50% of casuals when the Hobbit hits. Personally I'm more stoked for 40k this year and earmarking the big box for Xmas.

Well, on a serious note I've also heard that the IT department at GW has been instructed to clamp down on all emails being sent.. Apparently there was a lot of anger over the leaked book so all emails must be filtered before being sent out

Ahtman wrote:

Kirasu wrote:I hope GW doesn't leak the plot of the Hobbit!!

They aren't worried about plot leaks, but art leaks. Some of the aesthetic elements of the film are still under wraps, such Smaug, the Necromancer, ect ect.

I'm pretty sure the part about leaking the plot of an 80-year-old book was a joke.

Absolutionis wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Kirasu wrote:I hope GW doesn't leak the plot of the Hobbit!!

They aren't worried about plot leaks, but art leaks. Some of the aesthetic elements of the film are still under wraps, such Smaug, the Necromancer, ect ect.

I'm pretty sure the part about leaking the plot of an 80-year-old book was a joke.

I would think so, but it keeps popping up, and this is the internet after all. Better safe than sorry.

The company LOVES and listens to the online community; up there above, you'll see that I mentioned the return of Blood Bowl, which was driven by the online folks and the retailers. It was a disaster for the company (which, by the way, is what everyone internally predicted) but they did it anyway. Without the fans, there's no industry, right?

There was a Blood Bowl re-release? There was a Blood Bowl re-release that was a disaster?

Plus I don’t believe for a second that the problem with a BB release was the notion that everyone ‘had it already’ so it didn’t sell. Granted, GW has proven themselves to quite incapable of promoting their own products, but isn’t the idea to get new players?

For Gorka Morka coming with enough stuff that you’d never need to buy anything else, I can see that being party true but I doubt that anyone did it that way. And I reckon you could make the same argument about Necromunda as well. You don’t need anything more than those two lots of plastic gangs, after all.

And as for the ‘Goblin Index’... insane...

infinite_array wrote:

VladtheEmailer wrote:The cost of entry is part of the panache of the whole thing.

I understand your point, but I also understand the company's point: they don't want everyone to be playing.

They want it to be a prestige game. And, quite frankly, take a look at the new plastics. It IS a prestige game.

Ugh. Really? Who the hell are they trying to keep out? It's not as if wargaming only attracts the model citizens. See the 'GW horror stories' thread for proof. What a load of gak.

The whole "prestige game" angle really makes no sense to me.

Someone help me out, whats the line of thinking here?

How can a rather niche game be a prestige game? (its very niche in my country, at least)

VladtheEmailer wrote:I don't know anything about Matt Ward. Sorry!

Clearly.

Not very educational. Seems a nice chappy though.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

The company LOVES and listens to the online community; up there above, you'll see that I mentioned the return of Blood Bowl, which was driven by the online folks and the retailers. It was a disaster for the company (which, by the way, is what everyone internally predicted) but they did it anyway. Without the fans, there's no industry, right?

There was a Blood Bowl re-release? There was a Blood Bowl re-release that was a disaster?

Plus I don’t believe for a second that the problem with a BB release was the notion that everyone ‘had it already’ so it didn’t sell. Granted, GW has proven themselves to quite incapable of promoting their own products, but isn’t the idea to get new players?

I think he's referring to when they released the updated Griff Oberwald, Zug, and the two "new" Human and Elf teams.

Obsidian Raven wrote:

infinite_array wrote:

VladtheEmailer wrote:The cost of entry is part of the panache of the whole thing.

I understand your point, but I also understand the company's point: they don't want everyone to be playing.

They want it to be a prestige game. And, quite frankly, take a look at the new plastics. It IS a prestige game.

Ugh. Really? Who the hell are they trying to keep out? It's not as if wargaming only attracts the model citizens. See the 'GW horror stories' thread for proof. What a load of gak.

The whole "prestige game" angle really makes no sense to me.

Someone help me out, whats the line of thinking here?

How can a rather niche game be a prestige game? (its very niche in my country, at least)

It isn't in reality a prestige game, they just want it to feel like it is by making it more and more expensive. If they make the hurdle to play the game money they feel it will make the game seem more exotic and hard to obtain, giving the consumer a sense of exclusivity. I suppose it is the opposite of the idea that people don't appreciate something that is free, therefore the opposite must be true. If a thing is to expensive you'll feel a sense of accomplishment just in obtaining it, as well as feel those around you are just as accomplished. It doesn't make sense unless you really want it to, and it made a bit more sense when there wasn't as much competition I suppose. I always thought that Warmachine and Flames of War would have made companies more competitively priced but it seems like they are just going up in price to match GW, so I guess there must be something to it.

ShumaGorath wrote:I can never read reddits format. It's meandering and difficult to follow.

I find it's easier to read once the post has been up for a few hours, the good stuff tends to rise towards the top. What I find hard to read is checking it, and then going back to see if anything new is up.

spireland wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:I can never read reddits format. It's meandering and difficult to follow.

I find it's easier to read once the post has been up for a few hours, the good stuff tends to rise towards the top. What I find hard to read is checking it, and then going back to see if anything new is up.

You can also click on someone's name and follow their newest posts, then click the 'context' link to see what they're responding to.


I hope he hasn't finished responding...

Why is it so hard to believe that NLC would have that much influence over GW?

I mean, yeah, when Fellowship was released, Privateer Press was in its infancy, so it's not like there was much in the way of competition for GW when NLC decided that they wanted a tabletop miniatures game as part of their merchandising.

But now, GW has made a huge capital investment in LotR production and Privateer Press and other up-and-coming game/mini companies are putting pressure on GW. Consequently, it's all the more important for them to keep the LotR license. And since it's not like it's GW's 'verse, it doesn't really matter to NLC who makes the game, as long as it makes them money and keeps to NLC's standards. NLC has the leverage in this relationship now. And if they were pissed about GW leaking pics in the past (particularly of things that weren't originally in the books, but are in the movies), then you can bet they'd require GW to tighten up for release of the Hobbit movies (particularly considering the movies will include things like driving Sauron from Mirkwood). Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if it was GW who offered to tighten promotion down on all of their lines as a show of trust to NLC. Or maybe this is a punitive action on the part of NLC because of what happened before.

Regardless, GW is making a bunch of money thanks to NLC licensing the LotR/Hobbit property to them, and they obviously want to keep making that money. It shouldn't be surprising that they'd be willing to make procedural changes for all of their business based on a relationship like this.

And as far as comparing GW to Microsoft, I think that's pretty ridiculous. You're talking orders of magnitude difference in the scales of the companies. Expecting GW to run anything like Microsoft is pretty naive.

Remember that this is a non-necessary inelastic commodity. There is no earthly reason that you need to buy more Bloodthirsters. But they're cool, and you want more, right?
The cost of entry is part of the panache of the whole thing.
I understand your point, but I also understand the company's point: they don't want everyone to be playing.
They want it to be a prestige game. And, quite frankly, take a look at the new plastics. It IS a prestige game.
I am not shilling for their business model (I got out a long time ago), but I do think it's the right thing to do for their profit margin, which lets them pay the best artists around. I dig that.

Someone's been drinking the kool-aid!

revarien 2 points 1 hour ago

For the love of all that is holy in gaming: Why oh why did they WD update Sisters of Battle like they did, and not give us SoB players a proper release?! I really must know! Thank you!

VladTheEmailer 1 point 12 minutes ago

For the lulz?

No, I honestly don't know the why behind that one. Sorry!

:(

Kanluwen wrote:I think he's referring to when they released the updated Griff Oberwald, Zug, and the two "new" Human and Elf teams.

To no fanfare and no promotion.

Hmm... I wonder what was to blame... must be the players who owned teams already. Yeah. Only logical explanation.

Well I have always thought about that is the reason why they made models so expensive it was because how much we value them.

I think I Have never heard something so bleh in my life.

But it is good to see people answering our questions.

Though one I think should be raised who makes the decision to raise prices on plastic as well.

Death By Monkeys wrote:Why is it so hard to believe that NLC would have that much influence over GW?

I mean, yeah, when Fellowship was released, Privateer Press was in its infancy, so it's not like there was much in the way of competition for GW when NLC decided that they wanted a tabletop miniatures game as part of their merchandising.

But now, GW has made a huge capital investment in LotR production and Privateer Press and other up-and-coming game/mini companies are putting pressure on GW. Consequently, it's all the more important for them to keep the LotR license. And since it's not like it's GW's 'verse, it doesn't really matter to NLC who makes the game, as long as it makes them money and keeps to NLC's standards. NLC has the leverage in this relationship now. And if they were pissed about GW leaking pics in the past (particularly of things that weren't originally in the books, but are in the movies), then you can bet they'd require GW to tighten up for release of the Hobbit movies (particularly considering the movies will include things like driving Sauron from Mirkwood). Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if it was GW who offered to tighten promotion down on all of their lines as a show of trust to NLC. Or maybe this is a punitive action on the part of NLC because of what happened before.

Regardless, GW is making a bunch of money thanks to NLC licensing the LotR/Hobbit property to them, and they obviously want to keep making that money. It shouldn't be surprising that they'd be willing to make procedural changes for all of their business based on a relationship like this.

And as far as comparing GW to Microsoft, I think that's pretty ridiculous. You're talking orders of magnitude difference in the scales of the companies. Expecting GW to run anything like Microsoft is pretty naive.

Two reasons:

LOTR is still a very small part of the portfolio, small investment or not. It would be insane to let such a small part of your business dictate what you do in unrelated brands.

There is no indication of this, apart from someone in a GW shop (who, by all standards doesn't necessarily have this knowledge). If there was some drastic 180 in communication strategy when they re-launched LOTR? Sure. But there wasn't, this is how GW does business, it's how they've done business for a long time and and this claim just doesn't seem co-herent with how GW act as a whole.

The company LOVES and listens to the online community

Stopped reading right there.

Stoffer wrote:LOTR is still a very small part of the portfolio, small investment or not. It would be insane to let such a small part of your business dictate what you do in unrelated brands.

Can you say definitively that it is a small part of their portfolio? Looking through their financial statements, I don't see any breakdown by game line. It's obviously a large enough portion of their portfolio that they're willing to make it one of their core games. I've heard fairly contradictory anecdotal evidence of LOTR's popularity, so I'm not so willing to believe that it is such a small part of their portfolio. I mean, how does it compare to Black Library or what were the Specialist games?

Stoffer wrote:There is no indication of this, apart from someone in a GW shop (who, by all standards doesn't necessarily have this knowledge). If there was some drastic 180 in communication strategy when they re-launched LOTR? Sure. But there wasn't, this is how GW does business, it's how they've done business for a long time and and this claim just doesn't seem co-herent with how GW act as a whole.

Actually, the rumors of the clamp-down on promotion being linked to NLC extend back quite a ways before this. As far as the timing goes, we don't really have a good look into the production timeline inside GW, so it may not have made sense. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying in the last part of that - there was a pretty drastic change in GW's communication strategy - remember not too long ago when GW said, "Yeah, we're not going to provide information on stuff until it's released."? Yeah, that's new. It's not how they've always done business. What's consistent is GW being inconsistent about how they do business. What's consistent is GW not really listening to their consumer base.

Interesting read, but some of the views are probably out of date given both employee's have not been with the company for almost half a decade. Agree that some of it comes off as having drunk the Kool-Aid, but still some interesting points. Surprised with the failure of Blood Bowl and why they gambled with a totally new game like Dreadfleet instead of re-releasing one of the previous games.

As for NLC dictating information releases, I can see them forcing it on all their lines. Ultra paranoia that someone leaks a new plastic dragon for Fantasy and turns out to be Smaug. And Smaug is suppose to the big "wow" factor for the Hobbit movies. Was a very interesting interview with Del Toro last year in the New Yorker. While he was working on the Hobbit, he wanted to make Smaug a very non-traditional dragon. The studio heads hated it and was one of the bigger points of friction between him and the studio. I suspect Smaug now is going to be very vanilla in his design. Wonderfully animated, but still nothing that makes you rethink what a dragon should look like.

For those interested in the Del Toro article, it is here:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/07/110207fa_fact_zalewski?currentPage=1

Death By Monkeys wrote:

Stoffer wrote:LOTR is still a very small part of the portfolio, small investment or not. It would be insane to let such a small part of your business dictate what you do in unrelated brands.

Can you say definitively that it is a small part of their portfolio? Looking through their financial statements, I don't see any breakdown by game line. It's obviously a large enough portion of their portfolio that they're willing to make it one of their core games. I've heard fairly contradictory anecdotal evidence of LOTR's popularity, so I'm not so willing to believe that it is such a small part of their portfolio. I mean, how does it compare to Black Library or what were the Specialist games?

Stoffer wrote:There is no indication of this, apart from someone in a GW shop (who, by all standards doesn't necessarily have this knowledge). If there was some drastic 180 in communication strategy when they re-launched LOTR? Sure. But there wasn't, this is how GW does business, it's how they've done business for a long time and and this claim just doesn't seem co-herent with how GW act as a whole.

Actually, the rumors of the clamp-down on promotion being linked to NLC extend back quite a ways before this. As far as the timing goes, we don't really have a good look into the production timeline inside GW, so it may not have made sense. I'm not sure I understand what you're saying in the last part of that - there was a pretty drastic change in GW's communication strategy - remember not too long ago when GW said, "Yeah, we're not going to provide information on stuff until it's released."? Yeah, that's new. It's not how they've always done business. What's consistent is GW being inconsistent about how they do business. What's consistent is GW not really listening to their consumer base.

The simple way of telling how important a product is can be done by looking at how large a part of their business is dedicated to the product. I've yet to see a store where LOTR take up even a third or 40k or Warhammer. If this is really one of their biggest products, why don't they treat it that way then?

Is it a product that's getting a lot of hype and community backing? Probably not. It's more likely a product that they're hoping to leverage because of the Hobbit coming out, but not something they'll put as much attention into as 40k or Fantasy.

I guess I've missed the open development GW you talk about, do you have any developer blogs etc you could link me to?

Fafnir wrote:

The company LOVES and listens to the online community

Stopped reading right there.

Ditto.

I'm guessing this guy is a "former" employee due to his inability to grasp reality...

He actually said that he is a former employee.

So is Dirty Steve.

If you feel the need to comment on another poster, you might be better-served to hit the yellow triangle. -Mannahnin

Stoffer wrote:The simple way of telling how important a product is can be done by looking at how large a part of their business is dedicated to the product. I've yet to see a store where LOTR take up even a third or 40k or Warhammer. If this is really one of their biggest products, why don't they treat it that way then?

Is it a product that's getting a lot of hype and community backing? Probably not. It's more likely a product that they're hoping to leverage because of the Hobbit coming out, but not something they'll put as much attention into as 40k or Fantasy.

I can certainly agree that that's the way it is in most non-GW stores, but all the GW retail stores I've been to have solid parts of their shelf space devoted to LotR. And just look at how much space they're willing to devote to White Dwarf for LotR. Again, I haven't seen any numbers on this, so I don't know how big or small it is, but if it's big enough for them to pimp all the time in WD, then it's big enough for them to change other things in the company for it. GW is certainly hyping it. As far as community backing goes, well, all I see of that is anecdotal evidence again.

Stoffer wrote:I guess I've missed the open development GW you talk about, do you have any developer blogs etc you could link me to?

I never said anything about open development at GW. I said that they've pretty much always ignored input from the community. What is new is the way they've clamped down on promoting products before the release date. Prior to this fall, at least we got a 6-month preview window. Now that is gone. That's all I was saying.

This idea that the game is supposed to be exclusive is pretty silly. How are you supposed to turn a profit if you exclude a bunch of potential customers?

Oh right, by charging obscene prices for so so products.

If I wanted to talk to a former Redshirt, I would talk to Rimmy.

Fafnir wrote:

The company LOVES and listens to the online community

Stopped reading right there.

And so you missed a lot of pretty interesting perspective because you didn't hear what you wanted to hear. Granted, this fellow has not worked for GW the past few years, which he was open about and was quite obvious from what he admitted to knowing and not knowing.

The fact is, you didn't get the answer you wanted, so you stopped listening to an employee who has genuine insight into how the company operates. GW is pretty tight-lipped, and I personally find info like this pretty interesting. I don't expect all my questions to be answered as I expect they will, or hold to pre-conceived notion of how it operates its business. I think there are a lot of people like you who think they know GW pretty well, and are probably pretty far off the mark. When they hear something that doesn't fit that pre-conceived notion, they stop listening.

I think this ties into the fact that people want GW to be something it is not. Whether that be a company that runs a games with a really tight ruleset for competitive play, or a company that is active in communicating with it's fanbase, Like it or not, that's not how GW is, and expecting them to change to fit your view, or my view, of what I want them to be isn't going to happen. I just find it ironic that you won't even read the entire thread of a GW employee explaining some aspects of the company, but you apparently expect GW to sift through all the online forums and listen to every opinion that is given on their business and how they operate it.

H.B.M.C. wrote:It’s ok Kan. You can stand down. Your defence contract doesn’t require you to protect former employees.

Well it did state in that he was a former employee in the title of this thread, and in the title of the Reddit thread. It's not exactly white-knighting to point out something so obvious that someone clearly missed.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:I think he's referring to when they released the updated Griff Oberwald, Zug, and the two "new" Human and Elf teams.

To no fanfare and no promotion.

Hmm... I wonder what was to blame... must be the players who owned teams already. Yeah. Only logical explanation.

If it sold well enough to run as a main game they wouldn't of dropped it in the first place. A full rerelease likely wouldn't see more than a momentary upsurge of sales and that's only in the event that they resculpted everything. It's not a hot commodity and they probably mistook a diehard vocal internet minority for a more sizeable and useful playerbase.

If they supported blood bowl through forge world in the exact same fashion that forgeworld pushed things like Aeronautica Imperialis then it could serve as a small buffer to their bottom line. Hell, they could of released a small boxed version of it with four teams instead of Dreadfleet and it probably would of sold like hotcakes. It'll never be the game that it's old stalwarts want it to be though. Those days are gone.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CT GAMER wrote:

Fafnir wrote:

The company LOVES and listens to the online community

Stopped reading right there.

Ditto.

I'm guessing this guy is a "former" employee due to his inability to grasp reality...

People on this forum are pretty hardcore about their GW hating. No modern company is oblivious to the opinions of it's customer base. Not even GW. If it was it wouldn't be in business still.

Remember that this is a non-necessary inelastic commodity. There is no earthly reason that you need to buy more Bloodthirsters. But they're cool, and you want more, right?
The cost of entry is part of the panache of the whole thing.
I understand your point, but I also understand the company's point: they don't want everyone to be playing.
They want it to be a prestige game. And, quite frankly, take a look at the new plastics. It IS a prestige game.
I am not shilling for their business model (I got out a long time ago), but I do think it's the right thing to do for their profit margin, which lets them pay the best artists around. I dig that.

Around the world, thousands of economists committed suicide. I'm only here because my window wouldn't open...

I just find it sad that British Economics/Business policies are a huge joke in my Economy classes. This like this don't help change my mind. So the plan is to make it a prestige game so they can justify raised prices. Instead of expanding, advertising and actively trying to bring in new players in which would provide more competition against competing war games like WarMachines. And people wonder why I don't collect another army besides Tau, because I'm not buying into this crap. Spending anymore money than is necessary allows GW to make these policies and ideas to work.

Ahtman wrote:

Obsidian Raven wrote:

infinite_array wrote:

VladtheEmailer wrote:The cost of entry is part of the panache of the whole thing.

I understand your point, but I also understand the company's point: they don't want everyone to be playing.

They want it to be a prestige game. And, quite frankly, take a look at the new plastics. It IS a prestige game.

Ugh. Really? Who the hell are they trying to keep out? It's not as if wargaming only attracts the model citizens. See the 'GW horror stories' thread for proof. What a load of gak.

The whole "prestige game" angle really makes no sense to me.

Someone help me out, whats the line of thinking here?

How can a rather niche game be a prestige game? (its very niche in my country, at least)

It isn't in reality a prestige game, they just want it to feel like it is by making it more and more expensive. If they make the hurdle to play the game money they feel it will make the game seem more exotic and hard to obtain, giving the consumer a sense of exclusivity. I suppose it is the opposite of the idea that people don't appreciate something that is free, therefore the opposite must be true. If a thing is to expensive you'll feel a sense of accomplishment just in obtaining it, as well as feel those around you are just as accomplished. It doesn't make sense unless you really want it to, and it made a bit more sense when there wasn't as much competition I suppose. I always thought that Warmachine and Flames of War would have made companies more competitively priced but it seems like they are just going up in price to match GW, so I guess there must be something to it.

In marketing their is this wired thing that can happen. You don't want you product to be too cheap! If it is, people will think it's of inferior quailtiy to other products. You see this in the electronics industry with computer accessories and cables. It's how Monster Cables exist as a company. Because their cables are exactly like everyone else sept twice the price.

I think because the guy was employed by GW some time ago there has been some confusion. I am pretty sure the blood bowl relaunch he is referring to happened ~2002 and had some decent WD coverage, think it even had an AAR in one issue.


Good read btw, thanks for the share.

LotR did make GW a ton of money the first time around, even of most of us hardcore WHFB & 40k players weren't that into it.

It is absolutely accurate that New Line was extremely angry due to a leak from GW of a surprise image from The Two Towers, and IMO it is absolutely plausible that their current tightness on rumors is related to a desire or requirement to placate and/or demonstrate tighter security to New Line so they don't risk the rights to The Hobbit.

What Two Towers image leaked?

The berserker/bomb carrier, to my recollection.

Really? That's it? Not something like Gollum?

Gollum was in FotR and wasn't a surprise/secret. The bit with (what was possibly a) bomb was purely "off-camera" in the books and the whole sequence was new for the film.

Gollum was not seen in FotR (only glimpsed), and was not part of the FotR game. I remember the first GW Gollum mini. It was a Two Towers release. The picture was Sam, Frodo and a big black 'censored' over the Gollum model, because it was a secret (at the time).

Hmm. Maybe so. The bit I remember hearing about was an image of the berserker/bomb carrier (and/or a mini for him) leaking.

Mannahnin wrote:Hmm. Maybe so. The bit I remember hearing about was an image of the berserker/bomb carrier (and/or a mini for him) leaking.

The Berserkers, as I recall, were only part of it. Haldir and the Lothlorien Elves from Helm's Deep were the other part.

From what I recall, even The Two Towers video games didn't show the Helm's Deep parts because of the presence of the Elves.

Makes sense. Two surprises which weren't in the books, both dramatic parts of the big set-piece battle in that movie.

Man, if they released a Blood Bowl box set, Space Hulk\Dreadfleet style, I would buy it, even if it were $100.

Also, perhaps with rules that were less like playing an excel spreadsheet.

So, on-topic, it would be cool if someone posted the useful bits of that chat here. Not that Reddit is blocked, so much as I refuse to wade into it's horribad interface.

The most interesting part of that to me was the confirmation in one of the comments that the lead designer is most responsible for everything and that New line Cinema is behind the massive crackdown on information,

That was pretty interesting to say the least, wasn't expecting that kind of info

Assuming any of its true.

I once got a swag of rumours and information regarding GW from an 'ex-staffer' and so far all of its turned out to be baloney.

I really couldn't get a good read of what was being discussed due to the format which was poor and hard to follow but when he stated that 'listens to the online community' I just deleted the tab, the guy was ether lying through his teeth or talking out of his arse.

There is no excuse for GW's actions.

Its a pretty boring AMA. Hes one of those super positive people that never say a bad thing ever.

Thees89 got a lot of these, but I'm going to chime in on number 4.

Basically, the number one question we would get asked is "When is x coming out?" I mean, it was like a hundred to one the most common question we'd hear from both retailers and gamers. People always wanted to know what was coming out next. And that's reasonable!

Games Workshop's policy is not to release information farther than one month out, for a valid business reason: the company doesn't want you saving your money until next month, they want you to spend it NOW.

AND next month.

At some point some information was leaking out about releases that were more than a year away (I can't remember the name of the website), and the studio was understandably upset about it. If, for example, you were an IG player, and knew that next year the new IG plastics were coming out, there's not a lot of incentive for you to buy the current metals, especially because you KNOW you're going to get the new stuff.

This logic may not make sense, and I'm not defending or promoting it; I'm just explaining some of the thinking behind the scenes.

Hmm. That's pretty dumb and kinda scummy. I would feel bad.

Facinating...

In case it hasn't already been mentioned, neither of these guys have worked at GW for 5+ years so you can't put much stock in what they are saying. That 5 years has them missing out on all of 5th edition 40k and the massive changes there, the release of 8th Fantasy, the huge boom in royalties from computer games and the sweeping changes to games development and company policies (cost cutting etc).

I agree with those who didn't find the conversation very illuminating. On most of the big, juicy questions where I wanted to see some candid, straight-shooting answers he opted for cheery positivity and "I don't really know, but in my opinion..."

Also, a couple of times other people jumped in to answer important questions, but they just gave near-verbatim copies of the same sort of reasoning we've seen in discussion threads on places like Dakka and Warseer... no real insider info, or express confirmation of why policy X exists or why decision Y was made.

The one interesting thing I took from it was the claim that 40K and WFB sales are basically on par with each other.

He says Space Marines make up 12% of total GW sales and 40k/Fantasy are roughly the same popularity level. Found those two things the most interesting.

Harriticus wrote:He says Space Marines make up 12% of total GW sales and 40k/Fantasy are roughly the same popularity level. Found those two things the most interesting.

Generic vanilla marines or all imperial marines? Sales or revenue?

I actually found the article very interesting (a little one sided but interesting).

The keeping future releases underwraps is totally understandable when you think about it. If GW announced a new version of 40k was being released in (say) July, how many copies of the current rule book/AOBR would they sell between now and then? Very little. So they keep the details quiet and people buy the rules and game as normal and six months worth of sales are not affected. Same applies for anything in the pipeline. Would you buy a codex if you knew it was being replaced in six months?

The business model for GW works especially the "Goblin unit" of pricing. If people play the games to win they are going to pay extra for a more competitive unit. It's just a fact. I read a post about a non-battlesuit army for Tau would be too uncompetitive. So guess what, Battlesuits are more expensive than fire warriors. Players will pay to have the suits to be competitive rather than building a cheaper uncompetitive army. I'm happy to be proved wrong on that but if you want the best unit in the vampire counts army you better be prepared to shell out some serious money on those blood knights.

My only issue with the GW business model is the lack of advertising. They could bring in a lot of new players if they spent some money. I'm guessing the majority of people found out about the hobby is through a friend (I know I did). Although I think LOTR may have brought some players in. The only marketing is the White Dwarf magazine which is also very clever. We basically allow GW to make a profit on its advertising because that is what the magazine is. Even the battle reports and strategy articles focus on new releases and highlight that you NEED the more expensive releases to make your army competitive.

Just my two cents.

ShumaGorath wrote:Generic vanilla marines or all imperial marines? Sales or revenue?

All imperial. Here is quote:

VladtheEmailer wrote: It's true that space marines make up roughly 12% of sales, and all of the other races make up roughly 2% each, but that's lumping Ultramarines, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, etc. all in one big bunch.
40k and Fantasy actually split right down the middle in terms of actual sales. Popularity, as you say, may tend towards 40k in your area, but overall, both are really equally popular, according to the actual sales figures.
The "best" players are the ones who run armies they are proud of. A LOT of math goes into the playtesting (as flawed as it may prove), and I helped a bit with that (having a degree in math, I was asked a couple of times for insight into how much something might be worth; this was mostly informal, of course, as I didn't work in the design studio, but my point is that they thought about it).
I've seen people win with every single race, so I can't advocate one over the other.
Except, of course, High Elves, which are clearly superior to Dark Angels.

Powerguy wrote:In case it hasn't already been mentioned, neither of these guys have worked at GW for 5+ years so you can't put much stock in what they are saying. That 5 years has them missing out on all of 5th edition 40k and the massive changes there, the release of 8th Fantasy, the huge boom in royalties from computer games and the sweeping changes to games development and company policies (cost cutting etc).

I would put more stock in what he says, working with 5 year old info, than I would in anything asserted by the armchair CEOs on internet discussion boards. They were also at the company for over a decade, and I'm sure they are much more knowledgeable on company operations than anyone here can claim to be.

I was pretty bothered by the, for lack of a more delicate term, snobbishness they had towards playing the game. Basically, if you don't name every model in your army, paint individual heraldry, and play every game as a narrative then you're doing it wrong.

I was really bothered by the well-worn "GW's a miniatures company, not a games company" combined with his assertion that the pricing for the public was directly tied to a model's in-game performance.

There's a lot of contradictions in this guy's view of how GW works; I kinda hope he's just an elaborate troll or wasn't that high in the food chain.

Cadaver wrote:

Powerguy wrote:In case it hasn't already been mentioned, neither of these guys have worked at GW for 5+ years so you can't put much stock in what they are saying. That 5 years has them missing out on all of 5th edition 40k and the massive changes there, the release of 8th Fantasy, the huge boom in royalties from computer games and the sweeping changes to games development and company policies (cost cutting etc).

I would put more stock in what he says, working with 5 year old info, than I would in anything asserted by the armchair CEOs on internet discussion boards. They were also at the company for over a decade, and I'm sure they are much more knowledgeable on company operations than anyone here can claim to be.

Tbh that goes without saying, anyone who listens to a CEOs address rather than looking at the actual numbers to work out what's going on is an idiot. My point was that on the operational side of things some stuff might still be relevant, but anything numbers related is incredibly unreliable. GW has changed quite a bit in the last 5 years both in terms of rules development and business policies so even the day to way stuff could be different (we know they have cleaned house once which undoubtedly saw some things change). Just as an example, given the massive boom from 5th edition 40k over the last 4 years and the way that 8th Fantasy has failed pretty hard there is no way I can believe that 40k and Fantasy sales are roughly equal, things would have been leaning towards 40k even before 8th arrived. Of course we can't say definitely otherwise, but missing the most successful era of 40k and probably the least successful launch of a Fantasy edition can't be good for you data.

Seems just the basic stuff we've been told before. Miniatures not games. FUN FUN FUN tournaments are bad! Blah blah blah.
Goblin Index is hated but good to have some proof.

One thing I must ask though. Who is Dirty Steve?

VikingScott wrote:Seems just the basic stuff we've been told before. Miniatures not games. FUN FUN FUN tournaments are bad! Blah blah blah.
Goblin Index is hated but good to have some proof.

One thing I must ask though. Who is Dirty Steve?

Dirty Steve used to run a column in WD. People would ask him questions and advice and he'd answer.

Mewens wrote:I was really bothered by the well-worn "GW's a miniatures company, not a games company" combined with his assertion that the pricing for the public was directly tied to a model's in-game performance.

There's a lot of contradictions in this guy's view of how GW works; I kinda hope he's just an elaborate troll or wasn't that high in the food chain.

That's their company philosophy; you can accept it, or not, but don't expect it to change.

That's not what he said. He said it was tied to their point value, not in game performance. Those two may overlap, but he didn't specifically say it was based on model performance, he said it was based on unit price.

He's definitely no troll, though.

Powerguy wrote:
Tbh that goes without saying, anyone who listens to a CEOs address rather than looking at the actual numbers to work out what's going on is an idiot. My point was that on the operational side of things some stuff might still be relevant, but anything numbers related is incredibly unreliable. GW has changed quite a bit in the last 5 years both in terms of rules development and business policies so even the day to way stuff could be different (we know they have cleaned house once which undoubtedly saw some things change). Just as an example, given the massive boom from 5th edition 40k over the last 4 years and the way that 8th Fantasy has failed pretty hard there is no way I can believe that 40k and Fantasy sales are roughly equal, things would have been leaning towards 40k even before 8th arrived. Of course we can't say definitely otherwise, but missing the most successful era of 40k and probably the least successful launch of a Fantasy edition can't be good for you data.

We can speculate, but we don't know for sure. Local and even regional figures aren't a reflection of the entire consumer base, so we just can't say with any certainly what global sales figures look like, because we don;t have that info. We have anecdotal evidence and conjecture. My point is, he knows, or did know this info very well being in trade sales. I hold his knowledge of the company in higher regard than people on this forum, many of whom seem to have a vested interest in wanting GW to fail, or at the very least a strong desire to believe GW are doing poorly, because of whatever grudges they hold.

Brother SRM wrote:
Dirty Steve used to run a column in WD. People would ask him questions and advice and he'd answer.

He was also the US Staff Photographer. Most of the images from WD when I was growing up were taken by him. His answers column was awesome back in the day. Even if their info isn't the most current, it's extremely cool for me personally to hear about their experiences in the company, especially about the old days that I am pretty nostalgic for.

I've read through all of that mess and really there is nothing new to me that I already knew about. Really I was hoping for something new and refreshing about the corporation.

At times you get far better information on this site on what is going on with the hobby than what is floating around the ebbs and flows of the interwebs.

Good Job Dakka.

Silver_skates wrote:I actually found the article very interesting (a little one sided but interesting).

The keeping future releases underwraps is totally understandable when you think about it. If GW announced a new version of 40k was being released in (say) July, how many copies of the current rule book/AOBR would they sell between now and then? Very little. So they keep the details quiet and people buy the rules and game as normal and six months worth of sales are not affected. Same applies for anything in the pipeline. Would you buy a codex if you knew it was being replaced in six months?

Nope. And maybe, if they announced things ahead of time i'd do what happened with PP when 2nd ed Warmahordes came out: I would get excited about the new edition, play games with the Beta Test rules, discuss things with my local game group, and buy new models secure in the fact that nothing I had that was useful was changing. Or, like GW, I could hear a RUMOR that 6th ed MIGHT be coming out within the year, and buy NOTHING because I'm too worried that the new army I'd rather buy will be totally obsolete. Why would I do this? Because I am a gamer and I spend time on this little known place called THE INTERNET where people share rumors about games.

The business model for GW works especially the "Goblin unit" of pricing. If people play the games to win they are going to pay extra for a more competitive unit. It's just a fact. I read a post about a non-battlesuit army for Tau would be too uncompetitive. So guess what, Battlesuits are more expensive than fire warriors. Players will pay to have the suits to be competitive rather than building a cheaper uncompetitive army. I'm happy to be proved wrong on that but if you want the best unit in the vampire counts army you better be prepared to shell out some serious money on those blood knights.

*snip*

Just my two cents.

So... that explains Draigo-wing how? If that were the case, GK Termies should cost $100 a box too. And I NEVER found Bloodknights so potent that they should be $100 on the effectiveness scale. In fact, in my VC armies all I ever needed were boxes of skellies. Many, many units of skellies. Each box was EASILY as effective (if not more so) in the 7e meta than BK were. And after the changes to 8e, should not all cavalry have DECREASED in price? The "Dollar/Euro/Peso/Rupee cost= game effectiveness" thing has been mentioned often, and is just as often contradicted. All by "insiders." The only thing these types of AMAs tell me is that no one really knows what is going on at GW. Likely, sadly, least of all GW.

Razorbacks would also be more expensive than whirlwinds.
Flayed ones would be less expensive than necron warriors.
Plague marines would be more expensive than thousand suns.
Vulkan Hestan would be 40 dollars.
Tankbustas would be free.
Hive guard would cost more than lictors.
Assault terminators would cost more than regular ones.

Etc, etc, etc.

ShumaGorath wrote:Razorbacks would also be more expensive than whirlwinds.
Flayed ones would be less expensive than necron warriors.
Plague marines would be more expensive than thousand suns.
Vulkan Hestan would be 40 dollars.
Tankbustas would be free.
Hive guard would cost more than lictors.
Assault terminators would cost more than regular ones.

Etc, etc, etc.

The actual pricing is based more on how many of X you may need. That is sort of how it factors out. I'm probably only going to need a box or two of Terminators in my army. That's $50 each. Meanwhile, the tactical squad has just as much (if not more) plastic in the box, but only costs $37. That's justified to GW by the fact that I'm going to need two to three boxes of tactical Marines in my army while I only need one or two of Terminators.

Metal/Finecast models are priced in bizarro land where up is white and Sunday is Tuesday; some of it makes sense and some of it doesn't.

I’ll have to agree that the article was interesting but wasn’t in depth enough and the opinions were somewhat biased (they tended to gloss over topics they didn’t like). All in all it was a bit of a wasted opportunity IMO.

In regards to the “goblin index”, I reckon this theory was more relevant 5-10 years ago as the pricing is less structured than it used to be. The “bizarro land” pricing index, as mention by Brother SRM, seems to be more of the norm these days and is not solely limited to finecast. I dare say the only prices that partially make sense and fit within the “goblin index” are standard troop boxes like tac marines and standard elites boxes like terminators. It’s non standard things that appear to be priced quite randomly.

Since the majority of economic policies these days seem to come from bizarro land, it makes sense that GW would follow suit.

Really, GW isn't run all that well, their pricing is based entirely on how much you need in the army/points value/arbitrary bananas, and they're so tight-lipped that they scare the customers who don't have a vast disposable income into not buying anything at all for several months at a time if a rumor comes out that maybe in a few months we'll see a new Edition or codex or whatever. Those that have a significant disposable income couldn't care less and will buy whatever because they can.

As for this Q&A, it is illuminating. The guy seems to love GW, but to me it seems that he's following the "well, I had fun/have fun with GW and their products, so why bad-mouth it?" train of thought. Really, I would like someone a bit more objective about GW, but hey. I'm not complaining.

Brother SRM wrote:
Dirty Steve used to run a column in WD. People would ask him questions and advice and he'd answer.

He was also the US Staff Photographer. Most of the images from WD when I was growing up were taken by him. His answers column was awesome back in the day. Even if their info isn't the most current, it's extremely cool for me personally to hear about their experiences in the company, especially about the old days that I am pretty nostalgic for.

Manchu wrote:

VladtheEmailer wrote:I don't know anything about Matt Ward. Sorry!

Clearly.

Not very educational. Seems a nice chappy though.

That actually convinced me that the guy is legit. A troll would have made up all kinds of juicy stuff about what's hot & trendy right now, ie. Matt Ward. Fakes always tell people what they want to hear.

I can't believe people can accept the line that secrecy is used to stop list sales of products going out of production. Or that these two describe it as reasonable, they seem a bit on the kool-aid throughout as though GW can do no wrong.

Yes it stops GW losing money in the months before a rerelease but that's all it is there to do, look after their assets and not their customers. It's plain dishonest and the equivalent of planned obsolescence to sell you something knowing you'll need a new edition in a matter of months. And these rulebooks aren't cheap. It's dishonest, even Wizards of the Coast have made a press release that D&D is having a 5th edition in the planning stages, but GW will sell you stuff with a denial and a smile today knowing that the next edition is probably already in stages of finalisation and only 6 months away from the shelves.

I really didn't get much out of these postings. Their insight, while interesting, is a bit dated. GW is not the same company it was 5+ years ago.

xttz wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

You can thank new line cinema for this. Since GW got the license agreement for the hobbit only because they agreed to crack down on their information leeks.

This is interesting. So its New Line Cinema's fault?

It's nice to see how they're so keen to stop leaks about a movie whose book was published SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS AGO.

That everyone and their brother knows the story already makes it MORE important to contain leaks, not less so. What will make casual fans want to see the movie when they already know exactly what happens is HOW they do Smaug, HOW they do the battle of the five armies, HOW they do the riddle game. The more information you leak, the less potential viewers need to actually see the movie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I started reading this "interview" and decided I would rather eat a shotgun shell. Luckily, trying to read that awful format temporarily lobotomized me and I couldn't figure out how to do it.

God DAMN that was awful...

Howard A Treesong wrote:I can't believe people can accept the line that secrecy is used to stop list sales of products going out of production. Or that these two describe it as reasonable, they seem a bit on the kool-aid throughout as though GW can do no wrong.

Yes it stops GW losing money in the months before a rerelease but that's all it is there to do, look after their assets and not their customers. It's plain dishonest and the equivalent of planned obsolescence to sell you something knowing you'll need a new edition in a matter of months. And these rulebooks aren't cheap. It's dishonest, even Wizards of the Coast have made a press release that D&D is having a 5th edition in the planning stages, but GW will sell you stuff with a denial and a smile today knowing that the next edition is probably already in stages of finalisation and only 6 months away from the shelves.

Or they could do what battle front does, when a new Version comes out if you have a hardback book, you bring it into a retailer who stamps it or puts a sticker on it and you get a free mini-rule book like AOBR or Battle for Macragge, except it's a full rulebook just mini-sized.

HA what planet am I on GW give something away

Thees89 got a lot of these, but I'm going to chime in on number 4.

Basically, the number one question we would get asked is "When is x coming out?" I mean, it was like a hundred to one the most common question we'd hear from both retailers and gamers. People always wanted to know what was coming out next. And that's reasonable!

Games Workshop's policy is not to release information farther than one month out, for a valid business reason: the company doesn't want you saving your money until next month, they want you to spend it NOW.

AND next month.

It is just this sort of thinking that loses business. I have seen it, and I am fairly certain that other wargamers have as well. I saw an unscrupulous GW employee sell a customer an IG Guard codex a few months before the new codex was due out. Shortly after the new dex came out the guy dropped the game. Another win for GW.

If GW is planning a new product that supersedes an older one, then they could do what most other major companies do and discount the soon to be obsolete item. Selling customers the old item will just make them mad.

Also, building an army is usually something that takes time and planning. To buy suboptimal units (in terms of sculpt or gameplay) simply because they are available is detrimental to most peoples' enjoyment of the game. If a particular unit is coming out then it is GWs best interest to inform its customers of that so that far ahead of time so that they can get items that best fit their army.

If GW is tired of not being able to sell certain units then they should make more balanced games and codicies.