It seems like a lot of stores had been closing in NY when I was younger. With that being said I moved to the DC area about 10 years ago and have found more people playing here. Now it may be because of the population change but it seems like even when you take populations into account there are still a great or number of players down here. So I originally thought 40k was becoming less and less popular because of all the store closings in NY but after being down here I don't know anymore.

So what do you guys think?

Does the increase in model price make fans turn heir backs? Are people getting tired of it? Fans growing out of it? Or is it the opposite, and more people are playing because of the rise of video games and the movie along with more books being put on the shelves?

There's not a whole lot going for the game that would attract more people than it'd lose normally. On top of that, the prices have only gone up, the rules more complicated and confused, and GW does very little to advertise and promote. The new video game licences help, but I'm not sure it'd make that big of a difference when we've already had several quite popular games a few years back that didn't dramatically shift the landscape. Plus, there's all the new competition, especially games like X-Wing that is cheaper and easier to get into.

I think you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that 40k is growing. The financials tend to show that revenue is stagnating, which combined with price increases indicates the player base is roughly the same or shrinking.

As a universe, 40k is very popular and probably more widely known than ever by dint of being decades old and with lots of videogame visibility.

However, as a tabletop wargame and hobby as GW defines it, in my experience, 40k is shrinking. New players are increasingly rare and vets are dropping out more frequently than ever. Prices are insane, and adjusted for inflation, the game is dramatically more expensive to get into than it was 10 years ago. Likewise the rules are just such total garbage that actually playing the game is just an unpleasant hassle unless youre playing with close gaming pals of very similar mindsets. Furthermore, the background material and art is increasingly less interesting and unique, the quality of the writing has collapsed dramatically while the art and a lot of model stylings are losing a lot of that cartoony 80's heavy metal vibe that defined 40k and is more and more resembling stuff out of League of Legends or WoW, GW's stuff is losing its uniqie feel in a lot of ways. Fewer and fewer people are getting into the tabletop hobby in my experience and fewer are staying in.

 Blacksails wrote:
There's not a whole lot going for the game that would attract more people than it'd lose normally. On top of that, the prices have only gone up, the rules more complicated and confused, and GW does very little to advertise and promote. The new video game licences help, but I'm not sure it'd make that big of a difference when we've already had several quite popular games a few years back that didn't dramatically shift the landscape. Plus, there's all the new competition, especially games like X-Wing that is cheaper and easier to get into.

I think you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that 40k is growing. The financials tend to show that revenue is stagnating, which combined with price increases indicates the player base is roughly the same or shrinking.

Pretty much this and whilst I can only speak for my smallish Games Club which has gone from pretty much pure 40k (with a splash of WFB and Historics), to WMH. X-Wing, assorted board games (with a splash of historics) in the space of about five years.

I think price is part of it but I know the quick turnover from 6th to 7th was also a factor.

Price and bad rules have driven people elsewhere.

Poor treatment of flgs has made them stock less or no GW profits.

I would honestly say gaining, i see more and more new people coming in to stores every week.

Honestly the reason for that is all the other fandom have been nuked, and ruined and 40k is turning into a bastion of bad assery. IE Marvel and DC are all but completely destroyed, Star wars got all its EU cut, which was brutal, granted its slowly coming back. LotR has tapered off.

40k as relativly remained unchanged for some 30 years, so.

Gaining.

40k has a lot of warts, but the only place 40k sucks is on forums like this one.

With the new management I would say they are starting a growing trend. It was on the decline at the start of 7th. But with 7.5 books and the various get started packs, people are starting to play in my area more. It isn't at the levels we had at the middle of 6th ed, but people are coming back.

The things I've noticed that hurt the most was the introduction of super heavies/giant creatures and str D being pushed into standard games. That has been the biggest issue as that killed a lot of excitement in the game.

Honestly, getting all the books up to 7.5 standards will help a lot. All our CSM, guard, nid, BA players have all left as they are grossly out matched all the time.

Gaining just because my group has gotten 2 more people. (Although losing one)

Gaining cos DOW3 has been doing rounds across the internet recently. Does that translate into more actual hobbyists? Well we can't determine that.

Either way, DOW3 is looking like processed garbage so far

G.A

I think 40K has always had a pretty high turn-over rate. Keep in mind in the early 2000's the GW retail philosophy in the United States was to achieve an initial $200-300 purchase (normally parents buying stuff for a child) and continuing players were considered secondary.

The universe is still attractive and Space Marines will continue to capture the imagination of young boys who pick up a box randomly in a game store.

The game itself (rules, etc.) is not that good and will continue to gain and lose players. There are some old fans like myself who've been aiming squarely at playing 2nd edition so while I can say I'm about to become a 40K player again - I'm giving very little, if anything to Games Workshop as a customer - buying everything used on ebay from the 90's etc.

I would imagine they maintain a pretty reasonable turnover of players and likely have a decent influx of new players (even if they invest $100-150 and never play the game again).

I approach this from a slightly differe angle.
I first started playing 40k when I was in primary school so probably about 9 years old and left the hobby at maybe 14.
I originally started with 40k due to the depth and mainly the darkness of the entire universe. I had to leave it behind however due to being unable to keep up with armies created by older players at my local store who had much more buying power and the fact that, as all kids do, my interests evolved and i tried new things.
I have recently come ba to 40k though in my mid 20s and find that my love for the fluff hasnt abated in the slightest although since i last played in 3rd edition its nowhere near the grimdark it once was. Havi spoken to many peopl now my story seems to be a commo one. Many people seem to be being drawn back to the game after a hiatus. I get the impression though that the turnover of new players is much quicker than it once was and the children that leave do so at a much more accelerated rate, pote down to GW pricing.
In the UK at least speaking to people away from the stores I find that 40k and warhammer is very recognisable and people seem to just know what it is even if they have never played a game or even set foot inside a GW the know friends, or older brother mainly, who they remember having a collection.
On top of that the number of books, console and pc games etc linked to the 40k universe has definitely spread a knowledge of the game but the accessibility of these things, especially computer games, puts people off playing on the tabletop when they see the rulebook and codeses. I know a number of people who have played and enjoyed things like dawn of war and space marine and then shown a real interest in the tabletop stuff until they reali theres a load of reading they need to do to learn to play. I actually had someone say "why bother when i only have to buy the game once and i dont need to read all that " when I said he should come down one evening to our 40k night.

Pr3Mu5 wrote:

On top of that the number of books, console and pc games etc linked to the 40k universe has definitely spread a knowledge of the game but the accessibility of these things, especially computer games, puts people off playing on the tabletop when they see the rulebook and codeses. I know a number of people who have played and enjoyed things like dawn of war and space marine and then shown a real interest in the tabletop stuff until they reali theres a load of reading they need to do to learn to play. I actually had someone say "why bother when i only have to buy the game once and i dont need to read all that " when I said he should come down one evening to our 40k night.

Speaking as a gamer, I find it typical of most "casual" gamers (which is about 80% of gamers these days) to eschew other media or dismiss it without a second glance. Even within their own preferred media they're like this; I had to beg someone to just try XCOM Enemy Within because he "hated strategy games". I knew he would like it, and he did. Also rings true cos XCOM is a turn based strategy title.

Yes it seems like trying to appeal to younger gamers through video games with the 40k licence doesn't work very well, however it most certainly kindles interest in the older audience who have more disposable income and who are more... social...

G.A

I've been playing since 2001, and when I started there was like 4 people who played, now it's pretty commonplace for gamers. I'd say over time it has definitely grown and I always try to get new people to play and most love it.

Been in and out of 40K, but the hobby certainly seems to have been shrinking.

My FLGS started up an Escalation league last year that brought together some old vets and new blood (22 total), but I know 10 of the players didn't even finish the league because they got disgusted with the game, and at *least* 6 who have dropped out since finishing the league. The hardcore, players who'd been playing for several editions already remained, but all of the new bloods have moved on to something else and have sold off their 40K armies. Most either migrated to X-Wing, a few went to WarmaHordes and a few are playing Guild Ball.

In my area there is a steady growth in the 40k base in the past year or two. Our events are getting bigger and more frequent and the FLGS manager gets heavy sells on every new release.

 Blacksails wrote:
I think you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that 40k is growing. The financials tend to show that revenue is stagnating, which combined with price increases indicates the player base is roughly the same or shrinking.

This sums it up pretty well. The game might be growing in some specific places but the trend overall is downward.

Losing.
The player base here has shrinked over time. More and more players moved to other games like WMH, bolt action, and X-Wing. We organized local tourneys until the 7th ed came out. Then players became less and less interested. The last two of our monthly apoc games were cancelled. Thats bad news.

It'll vary from place to place. It's growing in Brazil.

I think GW is WINNING because for every 1 person to rage quit, 2 more GW fanboys pop up like roaches.

How else can you explain how GW is even in business. These poor Fanboys are brain washed to buy expensive kits to support their flgs as if it is their burden. Thats alright with me, but they have also been brain washed to support the local GW store.

Some are so brain washed they buy FW.

GW going out of business is a complete lie as long as we have these sacrificial fam boys to throw money at GW to use as toilet paper.

Grief wrote:
I think GW is WINNING because for every 1 person to rage quit, 2 more GW fanboys pop up like roaches.

GW's financial numbers do not support this claim.

How else can you explain how GW is even in business.

The fact that they started with a huge customer base and near-total control of the market, which means it will take them a while to finally die even if they lose revenue and market share every year.

Every year their financials are poor yet they still make profit off of Fan boys.

There fanbase are people who quit for many many years and come back.

For ever new person who finds interest in buying and playing an army did so because an old friend used to play. When this newbie goes and tells his old friend he wants to play wh40k, the guy that quit goes down to gis basement or his attic and blows the dust off his box labeled, "last years cheese army"

Now you have 2 fan boys buying from GW the next day...

I think 40k is losing fans.

Anecdotally speaking, there's less 40k players around my local area now than there has been, though it's probably picked up a bit in the past couple of years it's still well down if you look at an average over several years. Other games are becoming more popular and 40k less so.

Less anecdotally, revenue is stagnant and prices are rising so people are buying less. Of course it could mean that there are the same or more people but they manage to spend less per person, but I actually think the opposite is true. It seems to me that a lot of the remaining 40k fans are big spenders, the sort of super fans who buy enough to account for 3 or 4 "average" fans.

So I actually think (and of course this is just a guess) it's even worse than the financials suggest as far as player base is concerned.

I think more an more veteran or poeple pissed by their pricing and behavor off let it down. What's more, smaller games like Infinity, BA, and lots of others, are little by little gaining ground.

Grief wrote:
Every year their financials are poor yet they still make profit off of Fan boys.

Yes, and they make LESS profit every year. Not going bankrupt is not the same as not losing customers.

For ever new person who finds interest in buying and playing an army did so because an old friend used to play. When this newbie goes and tells his old friend he wants to play wh40k, the guy that quit goes down to gis basement or his attic and blows the dust off his box labeled, "last years cheese army"

Now you have 2 fan boys buying from GW the next day...

Except we know that it doesn't work that way. GW's prices are increasing while revenue is constant or decreasing. This means that sales volume must be decreasing. If I have $100 in revenue selling boxes at $1 each the first year and then $90 in revenue selling boxes at $2 each the next year I must have sold fewer boxes the second year. It's just basic math.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:
I think you'd be hard pressed to make an argument that 40k is growing. The financials tend to show that revenue is stagnating, which combined with price increases indicates the player base is roughly the same or shrinking.

This sums it up pretty well. The game might be growing in some specific places but the trend overall is downward.

If we consider this in the realms of people who actually play the tabletop (and SGs) then for sure. But in terms of fans of the franchise I believe it has never been bigger; I would go out on a limb and say most people who quit playing the game probably still hold their interests in the lore (if they had that to begin with) and may even hold onto their collections too, such as myself.

G.A

Most here are going from there local area which is a terrible indicator.

Fact is sales are down by 14% and that alone isn't explained by AoS because before it was even out sales had dropped 5%.

Icv2 numbers show 40k has lost its top spot in north America.

Go anywhere on the net you'll find a poor view of 40k and GW in general.

And GW themselves have said they are a post growth company they can't get new customers.

Number of kits they sell keep shrinking. While part of that is obviously FB hard to claim that's also NOT the case in 40k. So either they are losing fans or existing fans are buying less kits than before...

Gaining more fans, but not on the tabletop. Most of the 40k fans who are new play the rpg's or the video games. Only a small percentage take up the modelling or are introduced that way.

I think the case that the worldwide playerbase is shrinking has been fairly well made with the people already talking about financials.

Locally my anecdotals support that, the playerbase in my area might have stabilized but in the last 2-5 years it declined dramatically.

I know our biggest online retailer down here had said GW products had dropped from 50% of their revenue to only 10-15%, and this is the same retailer who reported Dystopian Wars 2.0 was outselling 7th ed 40k 7 to 1.

I'm of the belief that GW is basically in full blown milk mode. They realize their customer base is shrinking. They realize 3d printing technology is rapidly improving & becoming more accessible. They realize more & more competition is emerging each & every year. So GW's solution? For each customer it loses, increase cost of models & have the remaining players pick up the cost. Its similar to what many scummy video game companies do. Commonly referred to as "whale hunting". Essentially they do not care if they lose 99% of their playerbase as long as they retain that 1% of players that fork over insane amounts of cash.

That isn't to say that 40k isn't popular. I think that it is probably one of the most well known/iconic settings out there. While I am still very much a fan/love the setting, I have basically stopped making purchases entirely & will likely continue to do so until either GW shifts gears dramatically or another company purchases the rights to the 40k franchise so we can get some life back into the hobby.

Their sales might be down, but their stock still seems strong. If their stock dropped to 200 I would be concerned.


You could also compare tournament numbers to see the general increase decline. How many players have events like NOVA, BAO, or Adepticon had over the past 10 years. Those numbers will give you a much better guide over everyone's anecdotal evidence.

Losing almost half from few years ago doesn't count as "going strong" in my books.

Fans, or customers?
Lots of people love the 40k universe and background, but will not play the game for whatever reason.
So, losing players, but gaining fans.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Their sales might be down, but their stock still seems strong. If their stock dropped to 200 I would be concerned.

Stock price says very little when it comes to a company like GW. It can fall extremely fast depending on what the big investment funds feel like. GW's share price history is basically gradual climb -> massive fall -> gradual climb -> massive fall -> gradual climb -> medium fall -> sideways.

You could also compare tournament numbers to see the general increase decline. How many players have events like NOVA, BAO, or Adepticon had over the past 10 years. Those numbers will give you a much better guide over everyone's anecdotal evidence.

I don't think they'd be a good guide at all. Tournament players represent such a tiny section of gamers, they're a niche within a niche that can shrink and grow within the larger community without necessarily having a large effect on the overall player base. Forum discussions often come down to discussions about tournaments, but in reality it's sweet feth all gamers who actually go to them.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I don't think they'd be a good guide at all. Tournament players represent such a tiny section of gamers, they're a niche within a niche that can shrink and grow within the larger community without necessarily having a large effect on the overall player base.

I disagree. The ratio of tournament players is more likely to remain a constant. That represents the kind of people that want to get into competitive playing -- which will not fluctuate. If your constant percentage of competitive people are the same, it's a fine measuring stick.

Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

The top players who fly to different countries to play events is a very small niche, but if a 40k player lives in the greater Chicago area, they are likely to attend Adepticon.

 labmouse42 wrote:
If your constant percentage of competitive people are the same, it's a fine measuring stick.

That's a big assumption.

Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

I'm not familiar with that particular poll.

I'd suggest any online survey is always going to favour tournament players more than real life. In real life, most wargamers I know don't frequent forums and would never even know such a survey exists. I'd suggest the personality of people who are inclined to post on internet forums and thus more likely to discover and then bother to answer any online polls are more likely to have overlap with the people who are likely to attend tournaments.

There is no unbiased polling method. If you go in to a game store and ask people, you are asking the subset of gamers who hang around stores and are ignoring the segment who either buys online or just buys from the store but doesn't hang around. If you ask online, you are asking the subset of gamers who bother to check online forums regularly. And either way you're only going to capture the people who are bothered to answer a poll, a lot of people aren't going to bother answering a poll even if they know it exists. Asking at point of sale is probably the best bet, but you're still going to miss out on the people who just want to buy their stuff and not hang around to answer your poll.

It's like telephone polls, it's a particular mindset of people who are actually willing to answer a telephone poll so your chances of getting a good cross section of the community is questionable.

I think for a lot of people, 40K is stagnant at the moment.
(Not) End Times and 8th ed I think will be the tipping point for most people (either way).

GW also desperately needs 8th ed to offer a cheap route into playing the game for potential new players.

Losing compared to what it's had 10 years ago, but not as bad as I've seen people say it is. My LGS friday night is still huge.

I recently just started getting back into 40K after a two year hiatus.

I live in the Los Angeles area, and in that two years I've seen my favorite store, and the only one within reasonable driving distance, close down completely, as well as a major store that used to host big events and apoc games downsize into the typical "one manager" store with only one or two small tables.

All that seems to left around here are hobby stores that rarely host 40K because the interest in it seems to have slowed down.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Their sales might be down, but their stock still seems strong. If their stock dropped to 200 I would be concerned.


You could also compare tournament numbers to see the general increase decline. How many players have events like NOVA, BAO, or Adepticon had over the past 10 years. Those numbers will give you a much better guide over everyone's anecdotal evidence.

I would avoid using these events as a barometer. These tend to generally attract the most die hard and hardcore people, the kind that often have vast collections they can draw from and will switch from army to army based on what has the best rules, or alternatively may be the only event locals may attend in a year. I know when I was in San Diego, for a time Kingdom Con was really the only 40k event to do all year so it got a huge turnout because there wasnt much of anything else for the year. Their reflectiveness of the larger market is going to be minimized as a result.

Likewise, only Adepticon was even around 10 years ago, the BAO and Nova date back only four or five IIRC.

 labmouse42 wrote:
Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

Poll done...Where? Forum? Not a good indicator. People visiting forums are already much more likely to be competive players than those playing at their home garage or whatever which is majority of players.

tneva82 wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:
Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

Poll done...Where? Forum? Not a good indicator. People visiting forums are already much more likely to be competive players than those playing at their home garage or whatever which is majority of players.

Exactly. We have a pool of maybe 25 players at my store, and I only know of a few that visit Dakka, BoLs, etc.

This info might help somehow.

https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=warhammer%2040k%2C%20%2Fm%2F012ywp%2C%20%2Fm%2F081yd&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B4

Interesting how wargaming plateaued while 40k and GW slowly declined.

tneva82 wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:
Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

Poll done...Where? Forum? Not a good indicator. People visiting forums are already much more likely to be competive players than those playing at their home garage or whatever which is majority of players.

Google State of The War polling. Over 1000 people responded and gave their input. It was a great polling piece of data.

The trouble with this kind of question is that the majority of people who answer are simply the ones who play 40k. However, if you take a trip around the Painting & Modelling Forum or the Showcase Forum, you'll find a great chunk of people who simply enjoy painting the models and have no interest in going down to a local club and playing the game (Such as myself). Similarly, how many people out there have no interest in the models, but simply enjoy reading the books and playing the game - we never hear about them because they don't come down to a local store or may never want to go on a forum and talk about it.. My point is 'How do you define a 40k fan?' It's not as easy as saying 'Oh, my flgs lost 5 fans and gained 3 so the whole 40k fanbase is going down. Similarly, pointing out their stock is nigh on useless as well. Stock changes all the time and not all of it is dependent on the companies decisions.

If I was to hazard a guess, it's stagnant. Prices put off more established players, but the vast majority of people, with children, cars, mortgages and general life getting in the way, may only buy a couple of kits a year. The slice of the fanbase that buys so many kits a year it hurts to buy more is likely only a small portion of the overall fanbase compared to the 'slow and steady wins the race' portion. Which is not to say GW hasn't been greedy or made bad marketing decisions in the past few years, but they probably rely more on a steady flow of kits being bought here and there than the one plastic crack addict that goes out and buys a whole army in one go. But hey, that's just my take on it.

 Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote:
This info might help somehow.

https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=warhammer%2040k%2C%20%2Fm%2F012ywp%2C%20%2Fm%2F081yd&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B4

Interesting how wargaming plateaued while 40k and GW slowly declined.

That's an excellent tool. Thank you for sharing it.
It does appear that internet interest in 40k declined in 2012 and has plateaued since then.

Edit : You can also search for the game Warhammer 40k, not the search term. I'm not sure how Google makes the difference here, but I would expect it provides a better summary.
https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F0mbr2&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B4

 labmouse42 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:
Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

Poll done...Where? Forum? Not a good indicator. People visiting forums are already much more likely to be competive players than those playing at their home garage or whatever which is majority of players.

Google State of The War polling. Over 1000 people responded and gave their input. It was a great polling piece of data.

1000 people but were they more likely to be tournament goers to begin with? Non tournament players are less likely to visit forums and generally are less visible. So unless the pollers were going to basements of those players they were unlikely to give input...Which skews the result toward more tournament players than there actually is.

 labmouse42 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 labmouse42 wrote:
Tournament players are not as much of a niche as you might think. Look at the State of War polling done earlier this year. 52% of people polled said they played in a competitive 40k event and enjoyed it. 61% said that the ITC and organizations like it add value to the game. 26% of players play in ITC events and 38% more are interested in playing in them.

Poll done...Where? Forum? Not a good indicator. People visiting forums are already much more likely to be competive players than those playing at their home garage or whatever which is majority of players.

Google State of The War polling. Over 1000 people responded and gave their input. It was a great polling piece of data.

It means less than you think. dont mistake the online and event-based 'visibility' and the hardcore/competitive types for numbers. Hard core players are 'loud', their 'volume is not proportional to their numbers and no, they're not necessarily numerous, Data like can very easily be skewed as often is self selecting. A small percentage of players go online. Typically the more hardcore followers. This small percentage is then over represented in surveys like this. Having 1000 tournament players talking about stuff means little when, for example there could be fifty thousand players out there that don't go online and don't respond to these polls.

Tournaments are fun. They're a great way to go out and get a maximum number of games in a small slice of time - perfect for people with jobs and family who need to maximise the quality of their gaming time. But not every one goes. Or can go. Whether it's all the time or only some of the time. And being fair, a lot more players than you realise either don't go online, merely lurk, or just go to painting and modelling and don't actively get involved here. There is a larger (and often thriving) 'basement' culture in 40k, which is a lot larger than a lot of people give credit for, and it doesn't tend to be anywhere near as visible as the louder tournament players. Often the basement culture is one thst isn't focused on chasing the meta, with people playing with the aame armies from ten years ago, with maybe a kit or two new every year.

tneva82 wrote:
1000 people but were they more likely to be tournament goers to begin with? Non tournament players are less likely to visit forums and generally are less visible. So unless the pollers were going to basements of those players they were unlikely to give input...Which skews the result toward more tournament players than there actually is.

Did you actually look at the poll? It was spread over facebook and twitter. Are you going to say now that only tournament players use those social media outlets as well?

Honestly, it seems like you just have a negative attitude about GW and are trying to poop on everything in this thread. If it makes you feel better, it 40k interest via google searches has dropped since 2004 and plateaued in 2012. That's a pretty strong indication that it shrunk dramatically.

This is anecdotal, but in my neck of the woods there are a lot of new players around. I'm one of them. I started collecting in March, playing in May.

I've tried to get some of my friends to join in with varying levels of success. I will say there are two major points that keep people from wanting to play.

1) Cost. It's very expensive. There are a lot of threads about this so I won't go on about it.

2) The perception that 40k players are all rules lawyers, and nobody plays for fun. I have to be honest, I haven't been playing very long and I've seen both sides of this already. The first event I went to I thought a guy was going to start a fist fight when somebody rolled for Look Out, Sir! incorrectly. At the same event one of my opponents was giving me real tips on how to play. So, its hard to say whether or not the perception matches reality. At the very least I think there might be some truth behind it.

Deadnight wrote:
A small percentage of players go online.

Why do you believe this? Given that most people today use google, it seems odd that 40k players would not use google to research the game they are playing. Do you suspect it is because of the age group of the average 40k player?

 labmouse42 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
1000 people but were they more likely to be tournament goers to begin with? Non tournament players are less likely to visit forums and generally are less visible. So unless the pollers were going to basements of those players they were unlikely to give input...Which skews the result toward more tournament players than there actually is.

Did you actually look at the poll? It was spread over facebook and twitter. Are you going to say now that only tournament players use those social media outlets as well?

the number of players engaging on such outlets is relatively small to be honest, and people that attend large events are the ones usually most into the game and all its media outlets. Most 40k players may check out things from time to time but dont heavily engage in them. Same for most other hobbies and interests, people may be into something, but it doesnt mean theyre all super engaged with the online community.

For instance, I almost never go to forums about videogames or fencing, despite being very into these things. I love Game of Thrones, but pretty much never venture into forums or discussion sites about it. I'm a big fan of the Civilization series of games but you wont find me on their forums discussing the latesy update.

Of the other people I play 40k with, I'm about the only one that engages on forums and the like. Other people may browse BoLS once in a while or may "like" a cool pic they see on Facebook, but thats about it for most of them.

labmouse42 wrote:Did you actually look at the poll? It was spread over facebook and twitter. Are you going to say now that only tournament players use those social media outlets as well?

Again, it doesn't mean as much as you think. You'd be surprised. For example, I don't use Twitter, and don't use Facebook for wargames, other than to see who of my local mates is going to the store on Saturday. I think I used a trading group once to get rid of some stuff, but I can't claim that I follow any kind of gaming stuff at all on Facebook. When you realise these are self-selecting polls that are really only 'visible' to a particular portion of the community, which will skew it's results, and even then, participation is voluntary, which will skew it more. It's useful for sure, but there are a lot of things to bear in mind that colours and qualifies the data - in other words, you can't just take it at face value.

labmouse42 wrote:Why do you believe this? Given that most people today use google, it seems odd that 40k players would not use google to research the game they are playing. Do you suspect it is because of the age group of the average 40k player?

Pretty much ten years of gaming. I've always been the guy who followed the forums. And I was always the rarity. Pretty much everyone else never bothered, and in all the places I've been to, this has never been any different -those who post online have been severely outnumbered by those who don't. Most people just don't really care. Or those who simply just go and do their own thing, irrespective of the greater community. Heck, even looking at the posters here on dakka, if you read between the lines, despite there being hundreds of thousands of members over the years you can probably boil it down to where you have a few hundred 'active' posters, often transient (of whom the really serious ones number in the dozens-oft en in threads it's the same half dozen people going round in circles) for whom the forums are a big part of their hobby engagement.

Why do you believe the opposite, by the way? Using Google, and Being 'active' on online communities to the extent that you take part in online polls are quite separate things. Bear that in mind.

'Researching the game' very much implies the hardcore elements of gamers in the first place. Your perception bias is showing here when you feel this is the 'obvious' approach for people to take. For a lot of people that is a level of 'investment' that is a step too far. Most people just don't take it that seriously. And again, there is basic research (get your answer/shopping list, and on your way), and there is being an active member online.

Age group is a thing. Definitely. The older you get the less you want to be involved. Two of my best mates are in their fifties. Neither go o. Forums. One is a hardcore Xbox gamer. Great guy. I want to grow old like him. Talk about online gaming, he is all for it. Talk about forums, and no interest whatsoever.
Even more so than 'age' is your activity level and how deeply you want to embrace the hobby and 'stay the course'. I played 40k in third ed, for example. I am probably one of very few people posting here today who has been continually involved in the hobby since then. Most people posting here would have started in fifth. Most people leave after one or two editions. They either leave or go dormant. The 'seriousness' to which people engage is another thing. To a lot of people, forums just aren't all that important in the greater scheme of things. Especially in the grass leagues and 'garage' community, the srs business approach of the forums is irrelevant to how they/we play.

Just by looking at the turnout at warhammer world day to day, you can see the amount of people there is roughly half of what it used to be. When I last went regularly, like I do again now, 12 years ago it used to be rammed and you quite literally had to fight for tables.

Now it looks rather empty by comparison.

Very true Deadnight. I am not sure about others basement groups, but anything GW has dropped out of ours. I am the last person holding on with my Age of Sigmar stuff. All 40k has been sold off in ours for Malifaux, Guild Ball, Warmachine and X-Wing.

I do have to admit, with any of those game systems, I don't get the regret I used to get with buying GW stuff. I don't mind spending my money on those games and am excited about my new purchases.

Edit: Also, it is sad going to the 40k days at my local store. The store I used to go to before it closed down a few years ago had a great group. Now, I at most see one or two games of 40k being played at the store I go to. And the other store in the area is all about Warmachine/Hordes.

Locally, we have all moved on to WM/H. I'm trying to get together a guildball game, but to no avail.

Most of our GW stuff comes from Necromunda and Mordheim nowadays, which is still amazing if you house rule some stuff. Some of the best mini games I've ever played.

But 40k? We do once a month to keep our heads in, though we've given up on fantasy. I use them for RP games now, or necromunda/mordheim. I made a vermin tide style game in mordheim recently that went quite well, made it more co-op with some pvp involved.

 labmouse42 wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
1000 people but were they more likely to be tournament goers to begin with? Non tournament players are less likely to visit forums and generally are less visible. So unless the pollers were going to basements of those players they were unlikely to give input...Which skews the result toward more tournament players than there actually is.

Did you actually look at the poll? It was spread over facebook and twitter. Are you going to say now that only tournament players use those social media outlets as well?

Honestly, it seems like you just have a negative attitude about GW and are trying to poop on everything in this thread. If it makes you feel better, it 40k interest via google searches has dropped since 2004 and plateaued in 2012. That's a pretty strong indication that it shrunk dramatically.

Tournament players are more likely to visit those facebook and twitter pages and answer yes. Whatever hobby only small portion is really interested in following forums, facebook pages etc and actively take part of it. Most simply don't care to spend their time on it. They have other ways to spend it. What would they gain by reading poll and answering it? That time they can spend instead with family, playing game, doing home work etc.

Most players are just playing with their friends at garage. That's been the case for decades. As much as it might rub ego of tournament players tournament players aren't majority. They are tiny minority.

I personally agree with the fact that competitive players are more visible. The casual player who's got a game once a month or less rarely spend lot of time on forums, especially. But the second kind of player which is wide spread is the painter: I do think that most people related to 40K are only painters and if any players, barely tried it once or twice.

But those two types have always been as seeable. Those who just paint can afford a box every three months, because of the time they get them painted (most do have a family and work, don't they), those who play competitve are often, sorry for them, fanboys and hardcore gamers. These two community won't really change.

The difference makes from the casual player, the garage general. Those find it either too expensive, either everyone's dropped around them so they can't actually play anymore. That leads to decreasements of the real player base in my opinion.

The revenue argument is a good one however it doesn't tell us an accurate picture. GW never publishes its results by breakdown of 40k vs aos vs forgeworld vs BL vs licensing.

It is appropriate to draw the conclusion that GW as a company is struggling to re-establish itself however the BL books have done a significant amount to drive new fans towards the hobby.

In direct answer to the OP I believe that 40k is growing but AOS is shrinking compared to its WFB days.

Financial reports give a good insight but they are skewed historically in favour of the old LOR money. The last 3 financial reports are the most telling. But we are literally a week away from the publication of their 2015/2016 annual report due 26th July where they have already announced the following,

'Over the year, sales have been largely the same as the prior year across all channels'

I think its a fair argument that 40k is marginally growing while AOS is marginally or massively shrinking

 Nithaniel wrote:
The revenue argument is a good one however it doesn't tell us an accurate picture. GW never publishes its results by breakdown of 40k vs aos vs forgeworld vs BL vs licensing.

Licenses are spread out. Licenses saved their ass. Core profit sunk but license profit increased by same amount more or less. Total war warhammer was good source of income. Rather ironically

I don't know all the facts and figures so can only go with what I see. My local GW (the only one now as the other two shut down!!) hardly ever has anybody in it, Saturdays and Sundays GW's used to be full, lots of kids with the odd adult or begrudging parent. And Bank Holidays were usually insane.
These days it's a sad place, with a single GW employee with the store opened only a few days a week.

It's no secret total war saved their butts this year, licensing is what's propping them up that's why there's so many bad games on the app store.

Deadnight wrote:
Why do you believe the opposite, by the way? Using Google, and Being 'active' on online communities to the extent that you take part in online polls are quite separate things. Bear that in mind.

We both have antecedal evidence. Mine comes from my own experiences and my friends. When playing WoW, I read posts on how to play my class. Professionally, I'm engaged in industry online organizations. Most of my friends are the same way -- even those that are not 'hardcore'.

Deadnight wrote:
Age group is a thing. Definitely. The older you get the less you want to be involved. Two of my best mates are in their fifties. Neither go o. Forums. One is a hardcore Xbox gamer. Great guy. I want to grow old like him. Talk about online gaming, he is all for it. Talk about forums, and no interest whatsoever.

I think part of that is a generation gap. Someone who is 55 did not grow up with the internet. The only online forums for the majority of their life were BBS systems -- which only an extreme minority of people utilized. I am currently 42, and see myself doing exactly what I do today in another 8 years.

Thanks for the discussion, it's good to have differentiating opinions on topics and learn from each other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

hobojebus wrote:
It's no secret total war saved their butts this year, licensing is what's propping them up that's why there's so many bad games on the app store.

We are also seeing a trend for people to prefer playing online games over physical games. Magic the Gathering's card market has been stable but the online market has been increasing. The fact that the sales have been stable, yet population has been increasing while inflation is occurring means the card market has virtually been shrinking.

While I don't think 40k will completely go away for many years to come, GW will earn more from their IP through online games and sales as time passes.

Locally, our group has been steadily growing for the past three years.

Is there any actual data on this? If not, the thread is pointless. Google trends results are the closest thing, but they're certainly not comprehensive.

 Griddlelol wrote:
Is there any actual data on this? If not, the thread is pointless. Google trends results are the closest thing, but they're certainly not comprehensive.

Financials are a reasonable indicator. If 40k were gaining fans, stands to reason their revenue would increase. What we've seen is stagnant to decreasing revenues (depending on year and length you look at) coupled with increased pricing, which would indicate a shrinking fan base, or a stagnant one at best.

Their licensing for video games has increased, so we might see an influx with non shovel ware games like BFG: Armada and Warhammer Total War. Hard to tell.

 Griddlelol wrote:
Is there any actual data on this? If not, the thread is pointless. Google trends results are the closest thing, but they're certainly not comprehensive.

as noted, we have GW's financials over the years. Adjusted for inflation they peaked about 2004 and have been on something of a slow and consistent slide since then, while also dramatically increasing prices over that same time period. Simple math tells us that if they're charging way more and making less, they're moving less product, which is hard to then portray as anything but a shrinking customer base.

That said, they remain profitable, but largey through nonrepeatable cost cutting measures, so the revenue decline will make itself known at some point. Thats likely the driving factor behind the massive changes to 40k and fantasy of late.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Griddlelol wrote:
Is there any actual data on this? If not, the thread is pointless. Google trends results are the closest thing, but they're certainly not comprehensive.

as noted, we have GW's financials over the years. Adjusted for inflation they peaked about 2004 and have been on something of a slow and consistent slide since then, while also dramatically increasing prices over that same time period. Simple math tells us that if they're charging way more and making less, they're moving less product, which is hard to then portray as anything but a shrinking customer base.

That said, they remain profitable, but largey through nonrepeatable cost cutting measures, so the revenue decline will make itself known at some point. Thats likely the driving factor behind the massive changes to 40k and fantasy of late.

Older trading reports are weighted heavily towards the massive income GW received from Lord of the rings. This was launched in 2001 by GW and was officially retired to specialist games section supported only by FW in 2015. GW have never differentiated in their annual reports between the sources of revenue so older reports are totally unreliable for assessing 40k performance by sales. I also believe that endtimes made a small bubble in their income stream but by various reports this dropped off massively when AoS was released in 2015. The most accurate guess at 40k performance will be the upcoming results which will exclude Endtimes bubble money and should focus on AoS and 7th edition codex cycling. In their trading update they have announced that sales through all channels remained the same so I take this to mean that 40k is selling the same. In the last two trading years there hasn't been any significant cost increases.

But I think if revenue is stable compared to last tax year then we can assume that 40k is growing while AoS is shrinking. What we do know is that GW has never EVER posted a loss (to my knowledge) even through big cost cutting methods. They are still achieving revenues of over £120m and posting operating profits of over £16m with very healthy dividends per share.

Even if you extrapolate previous decline trends they will be a profitable company for over a decade to come.

No 40k sales are down aswell we know that in north America it's dropped significantly.

Profits have been propped up only by them letting anyone use the IP, royalties could very well be bringing in more money than model sales if they've declined to the same extent they have the last three years i.e. 4-5% annually.

What's more they can't close shops they are locked in to 10 year leases, can't fire more staff, they've cut to the bone and have nothing more to cut.

Honestly, I think the traditional Wargaming hobby in general is in decline.

I'd chalk it up to:

* Digital entertainment
* High cost of entry
* Collectable card games
* Lack of patience

I visit many FLGS'es in the tri-state area in the US when I am on the road for work and I rarely see young kids walking in and snapping up merch like I used to back in the old day. Most of the customers, nearly anytime of day, are older adult men like myself.

I usually only see the young-kids jump in to grab a pack of MTG cards or smaller stuff here or there.

Perhaps the days of running to the FLGS and picking up a few space marines with your hard-earned allowance are past?

I know a lot of posts are talking about crazy GW prices but let's be honest, the entire hobby is expensive. I would know.. I also collect Heavy Gear Blitz and Infinity lol

Duymon wrote:
Honestly, I think the traditional Wargaming hobby in general is in decline.

I'd chalk it up to:

* Digital entertainment
* High cost of entry
* Collectable card games
* Lack of patience

I visit many FLGS'es in the tri-state area in the US when I am on the road for work and I rarely see young kids walking in and snapping up merch like I used to back in the old day. Most of the customers, nearly anytime of day, are older adult men like myself.

I usually only see the young-kids jump in to grab a pack of MTG cards or smaller stuff here or there.

Perhaps the days of running to the FLGS and picking up a few space marines with your hard-earned allowance are past?

I know a lot of posts are talking about crazy GW prices but let's be honest, the entire hobby is expensive. I would know.. I also collect Heavy Gear Blitz and Infinity lol

I'm pretty sure sales across wargaming in general are up, from memory the ICv2 numbers have been consistently growing for years. Though I could believe it's from nerds in their 20's and 30's who now have more money to spend rather than fresh blood.

I don't think wargaming is in decline so much as the model is shifting. Sales are going from FLGS o online retailers, physical products are going to digital enties and the use of entities such as Kickstarter is shifting market share from cyclopean companies to a (diluted) host of independants.

I foesee for much of the future we'll see digital wargames supplant physical tabletop games - the convience of set-up/tear-down, prep work (assembling, collecting, building), model animations, storage concerns and simply arranging a game with someone are far, far easier with digital tabletops and will only get better as time goes on.

And though I love my plastic models, I don't think a shift to digital gaming is a bad thing.

Duymon wrote:


I know a lot of posts are talking about crazy GW prices but let's be honest, the entire hobby is expensive. I would know.. I also collect Heavy Gear Blitz and Infinity lol

Heavy Gear and Infinity models however are still metal, and a typical game will have 6-15 models, 20 in an absolute horde, most around 8-12, not the the multiple dozens a 40k game will.

Duymon wrote:
Honestly, I think the traditional Wargaming hobby in general is in decline.

Then again plenty of other companies are growing sales steadily...Only one declining is GW.

I don't know. There are more people at AdeptiCon every year. I see more HH and 40k tournaments being run and posted.

Seems to be a good time right now, but maybe it's all long time players.

Wargaming is growing you can't blame GWs decline on that.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Duymon wrote:


I know a lot of posts are talking about crazy GW prices but let's be honest, the entire hobby is expensive. I would know.. I also collect Heavy Gear Blitz and Infinity lol

Heavy Gear and Infinity models however are still metal, and a typical game will have 6-15 models, 20 in an absolute horde, most around 8-12, not the the multiple dozens a 40k game will.

Yeah but Infinity is the kinda game where you see a new box released with some cool new models in it, then a new blister is released and again, hey that's a cool model. And before you know it you're waist deep in a new faction so you figure you gotta round out that faction. Pretty soon you've bought into 4 new armies

Declining in my area.

We have non- tabletop fans rising up though.

tneva82 wrote:

Duymon wrote:
Honestly, I think the traditional Wargaming hobby in general is in decline.

Then again plenty of other companies are growing sales steadily...Only one declining is GW.

They're minnows compared to a whale.

Corvus belli, for example makers of infinity have about thirty people working for them. Gw have something like sixteen hundred. most wargames manufacturers are tiny operators with Staff counts in the dozens, if that. Heck, most have to rely on what amounts to charity - essentially volunteer based quality control - to test their games.

Minnows can still grow, survive and even thrive in a shrinking Eco system where the whales are starting to starve. It doesn't necessarily indicate the overall health or 'growth' of that Eco system.

Icv2 has reported double digit growth for several years now consecutively.

Kickstarter has seen a big increase in spending on gaming related projects.

Only GW has shown any signs of stagnation, as can be seen from their financials and this very poll.

Deadnight wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Duymon wrote:
Honestly, I think the traditional Wargaming hobby in general is in decline.

Then again plenty of other companies are growing sales steadily...Only one declining is GW.

They're minnows compared to a whale.

Corvus belli, for example makers of infinity have about thirty people working for them. Gw have something like sixteen hundred. most wargames manufacturers are tiny operators with Staff counts in the dozens, if that. Heck, most have to rely on what amounts to charity - essentially volunteer based quality control - to test their games.

Minnows can still grow, survive and even thrive in a shrinking Eco system where the whales are starting to starve. It doesn't necessarily indicate the overall health or 'growth' of that Eco system.

And with all that extra staff they still make worse rules and fluff.

Deadnight wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Duymon wrote:
Honestly, I think the traditional Wargaming hobby in general is in decline.

Then again plenty of other companies are growing sales steadily...Only one declining is GW.

They're minnows compared to a whale.

Corvus belli, for example makers of infinity have about thirty people working for them. Gw have something like sixteen hundred. most wargames manufacturers are tiny operators with Staff counts in the dozens, if that. Heck, most have to rely on what amounts to charity - essentially volunteer based quality control - to test their games.

Minnows can still grow, survive and even thrive in a shrinking Eco system where the whales are starting to starve. It doesn't necessarily indicate the overall health or 'growth' of that Eco system.

I think your analogy is a little off, GW are no longer the giant they used to be. Those other companies have all been growing while GW has been shrinking for the last few years. GW once dominated the top two spots on Icv2's non collectible miniatures game chart, now 40k has fallen to 2nd and WHFB fell off the list entierly a couple of years back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

hobojebus wrote:
And with all that extra staff they still make worse rules and fluff.

I'd make the (totally subjective) argument they make worse models and art too these days.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Icv2 has reported double digit growth for several years now consecutively.

Kickstarter has seen a big increase in spending on gaming related projects.

Only GW has shown any signs of stagnation, as can be seen from their financials and this very poll.

It's always hard to tell if a fanbase is growing or simply spending more money though.

I'm not saying this is definitely the case, but I could definitely believe based off the local demographic that the wargaming community is an ageing one that is transitioning from mostly school and college aged kids to adults with jobs that have more money to spend.

It does seem like, locally, the wargaming community has grown up with me. I started as a kid and as I've gotten older it seems there's less kids hanging around the local stores and the bias has shifted more to the 20-40yo bracket. Indeed I stopped by a gaming store the other day during peak hour and noticed a significant number of people in the store were the same people I was interacting with 10, 15, 20 years ago. 2 of the guys at the painting table were people who had previously worked at GW stores.

Deadnight wrote:
Gw have something like sixteen hundred.

Is that counting just the employees working on design and manufacturing, or does it include the dead weight of GW's retail chain?

Its hard to guess. I can see stores that are barren and go 'huh nobody plays' but then you gotta think about all the people that have gaming tables set up in their own home and play with friends in the comfort of their living room.

But then again I hardly see any Malifaux/Infinity/warmahordes either. The other week I saw some people playing Mordheim which was interesting. Game stores usually tend to be a mish-mash of random board and card games I find.

Whatever game you play though, the slightest bit of TFG can drive off new players faster than the Flash. I've seen it a few times sadly.

I don't think GW will ever crash and burn (edit: in the immediate future, not literally). If they have to scale back a bit I think we'd be fine with that (if they have some price drops lol). The Start Collecting boxes, battle for vedros and the new AoS easy to assemble kits show that someone working at GW is interested in new players/cheaper entry.

 Don Savik wrote:
I don't think GW will ever crash and burn (edit: in the immediate future, not literally).

True. They will be bought when their price drops to suitable level though. Question is then what will new owners do with the IP.

It's going in waves. There were a lot of people 5 years ago who played 40k here. Than 90% left with 6-th edition. And now there are a lot of new casual players and even some wanabe competitive ones. A bit more than before.

People left in 6 cause they didn't like the rules and prices. They played a few games, found out that they need to completely revamp their armies, checked out the prices, found out there aren't many passable recasts around and just left.

Now there are a lot of decent recasts and people who have played dow, dow2 and stuff - all want to try tabletop out after hearing how massive and epic it is/used to be. They get some stuff second hand, buy recasts and go for it. They like casual games, start buying more stuff, even sometimes get the original product. They get more and more competitive and buy more and more stuff.

Than there are start collecting sets. Still not cheap but affordable even for russian players. Finally, some direct profit to GW as a lot of people got them. And it's a good thing.

So, i'd say it's stable atm. A few more people than there used to be in 5-th.

Thing is buying those recasts does nothing for GW, so people might be playing but they are torrenting the rules and buying models from Russia and China instead of GW.

That's still a loss for GW.

If they dropped their prices they may get that money but right now I really can't blame people for taking the more affordable option.

What I'm really hoping for is this:

Now that Warcraft the movie has come out, there will be a lot more interest in these style of fantasy movies as it will make a bajillionty monies.

What has more lore and possible characters to make spin offs than Warcraft?

Warhammer 40k.

If proper big budget W40K movies come out imagine how much the popularity of the game will skyrocket?

In NA it was a bomb. A huge gigantic bomb. Around the globe it has millions of fans for the series.

40k is this teeny tiny little fry where getting 300 people to show up to an ITC tournament is considered a landmark tournament and one of the largest around.

Edit
40k need a huge AAA video game and a decade for that huge mega hit to soar to have any hope of being turned into a movie. The AAA video game needs to be huuuge seller. Nearing Star Wars EA levels of obscene. Or the Blizzard franchises. Basically it has to be one hell of a big and popular video game series. With 95% of the 40k games coming out as drek and Battlefleet Gohtic (video game) being mediocre it's going to be tough. DoW 3 doesn't look like it will be the best of the series and it's only an RTS the smallest genre of fans in video game land. What you need is like a Skyrim or Witcher level rpg in the 40k universe. Or an fps at that tier of quality and popularity. Even if its singleplayer. Then you need to make that iron strike 3 times in a row (good luck in fickle video game land). EA is now more evil than GW and that was even with Kirby at the reigns.

Basically there is no hope in hell.

Klowny wrote:
What I'm really hoping for is this:

Now that Warcraft the movie has come out, there will be a lot more interest in these style of fantasy movies as it will make a bajillionty monies.

What has more lore and possible characters to make spin offs than Warcraft?

Warhammer 40k.

If proper big budget W40K movies come out imagine how much the popularity of the game will skyrocket?

Movies based on games usually get a fair bit of money from die hard fans, but for the generic viewer, they're awful films. There is just as much as risk to permanently put off potential buyers. Not to mention that companies don't usually like big budgets because you can lose a lot of money (Ratchet and Clank failed to profit, Warcraft failed to profit, Prince of Persia just about made even, no telling how Assassin's Creed will do). Sometimes, it can work out but don't be surprised if it has a negative effect.

The attractive part of any game is forging your own path through the story. Which is why the best way to increase player fanbase (aside from a balanced ruleset and affordability) is to play games around interested people so they can see exactly what it entails.

Actually Warcraft was a smashing success. Just here in NA it was a flop. So we're getting that sequel. Even though I think the movie was boring. Not he worst of the year like some make it out to be though. That goes to Batman v. Superman.

Well they seem to love pumping out anything "nerdy" these days. Superhero movies galore with sequel after sequel.

This is just a personal anecdote but after watching the Warcraft movie I now have a second massive time investment of a hobby I have started up again :p


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Plus even if it does flop, how cool would it be seeing a big budget Hollywood W40K movie on the big screen?

It lost around $15m. Not as bad as other films have, but a loss is still a loss. It's only because of China that the sequel is happening.

BvS...let's not go there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Klowny wrote:
Well they seem to love pumping out anything "nerdy" these days. Superhero movies galore with sequel after sequel.

This is just a personal anecdote but after watching the Warcraft movie I now have a second massive time investment of a hobby I have started up again :p


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Plus even if it does flop, how cool would it be seeing a big budget Hollywood W40K movie on the big screen?

Superhero's and Fantasy films have been good at generating cash for some time, although it might be getting a bit repetitive due to Marvel vs DC and stuff.

Anyway, back on topic before the thread is derailed, a 40k film might be cool for generating interest. Not sure how I feel about it though, if the main marine army is UM.

I would imagine that the first few movies would be completely C:SM and its variants, with the dirty xenos the whipping boys. Give it a few sequels and we could see the depth and variety of the world come out. Fingers crossed anyway

Nope that is the absolute wrong way to make a 40k movie. As an outsider I have no idea what the hell any of this is.

As odd as it sounds people can't relate to Space Marines or Chaos Marines or the Emperor some mythical figure. What your ordinary person can relate to is themselves. An ordinary human.

The first 40k movie should be very subtle and set the tone of the universe from the perspective of a typical 40k citizen or maybe an Inquisitors new acolyte like the 40k Dark heresy rpg.

We could see the depravity and hopelessness of the universe and understand how terrifying it is from the perspective of an ordinary or near ordinary man. I would be hesitant to show a loyalist marine in this movie. maybe only spoken of in the background of the film as people pray for their angels of death to save them.

I would have perhaps have one CSM as the primary antagonist from the alpha legion and a typical chaos infestation cult. It would show how terrifying this horrifying space marine is already with his training, armor, and bio enhancements. Then i would show the full effects of his warp powers and mutations. An unstoppable killing machine to your common man.

At the end they would need to defeat this cult at a high cost and our protagonist would survive likely the only survivor of his family and city hab block. Maybe this movie and his actions are what make the Inquisitor take interest in him and set up a sequel.

Either way keep it small. Keep it faithful. And have a very personable actor and human role. As the trilogy expands we can see his eyes open to even more new horrors in the universe as he takes on more responsibility and rising through the Inquisitorial ranks.

Also I did study film making and was going to make movies. I also am a writer so I know good stories.

If this is a hit you have a 40k cinematic universe. You could go anywhere from here. The marvel cinematic universe works because it respects a film has to be good first and pandering to its sequels way down at the bottom of a long list of things to do better. They also started small with Iron Man.

Dude that's actually really good! I've always chuckled at how intensely terrifying not being a future-super-warrior would be in the grimdark, constantly afraid of being killed in extremely painful ways.

Good point

hobojebus wrote:
Thing is buying those recasts does nothing for GW, so people might be playing but they are torrenting the rules and buying models from Russia and China instead of GW.

That's still a loss for GW.

If they dropped their prices they may get that money but right now I really can't blame people for taking the more affordable option.

They still get this 10-15% from gw. Without recasts they'd get 0%

Azreal13 wrote:
Icv2 has reported double digit growth for several years now consecutively.

Kickstarter has seen a big increase in spending on gaming related projects.

Only GW has shown any signs of stagnation, as can be seen from their financials and this very poll.

True az. But ICV2 data has to be qualified though – it refers to US and Canada, it refers to specific (independent) retailers, and as far as I’m aware it doesn’t break down the numbers and it covers a lot of geekdom – card games, board games, role-playing games, war games etc. It's useful, but its limitations must be taken into account, and can't be taken for gospel. a growth in the whole industry does not necessarily translate to a growth in wargames(which is what I was responding to), and (anecdotally of course), from my friends in the industry, the big pushers for retailers (ie the best margins) and a lot of the recent growth has been boxed/board games. Apparently, the margins for wargames are extremely small. Geek-chic is getting ‘kewl’ these days.

Kickstarter is quite an interesting phenomenon, but does it represent ‘new’ people, or the same people, just spending more money?

jonolikespie wrote:
I think your analogy is a little off, GW are no longer the giant they used to be. Those other companies have all been growing while GW has been shrinking for the last few years. GW once dominated the top two spots on Icv2's non collectible miniatures game chart, now 40k has fallen to 2nd and WHFB fell off the list entierly a couple of years back.

Actually, GW shrinking reinforces my point (remember, I originally piped in on the topic of the player base shrinking). And the growth of other companies does not necessarily counter it. My point was in reference to whether wargames are in decline, and if the playerbase is shrinking. Remember, the headline of ‘GW in decline, other wargames companies growing, therefore overall growth!!’ might make pleasant reading to those with the specific agenda of hating on GW all of the time but the simple truth is that it is not as straight forward as it seems at first glance. Second place to star wars is more due to star wars being star wars than anything else. Plus being a fun, easy to get into game doesn't hurt.

Icv2 data is useful, but it is nothing more than a ‘finger in the air’ when it comes to weather forecasts. And my analogy is fine. Granted, GW used to be the 800lb gorilla in the room. They’re still the 600lb gorilla in the room. They’ve had a rough time recently. But they seem to be shaping up a bit better – they’re making healthier ‘noises’ recently. And while the monkeys that surrounded it are bigger, the question must be asked if it is because the monkeys stole the gorilla’s food? The second thing to bear in mind is that GW are not aiming to sell ‘lots of stuff’ to ‘lots of people’. They’re not trying to position themselves as the ‘company of the masses’. They’re selling to the high end. They’re aiming to sell less for more to a smaller, more controlled and ‘in-tune’ player base. That’s not necessarily a ‘decline’ so much as a shift in focus. And they probably don’t really care about anyone that stomps off in a huff as a result of this change in focus or gets left behind (they’re quite ruthless like that!)– so long as their margins are fine, they’re happy. If you’re not buying, you’re not a customer, and they’re no longer interested in you. And despite this, some people still are interested – as mentioned, there are still the high end ‘whales’ which is precisely where GW wants to be.

The other wargaming companies might have been growing (and some have been doing quite well for themselves) but with the probable exception of Privateer Press they’re all small fry. And even PP hit the wall in numbers with Mk2 (they basically did most of their hoovering up of players back in the ‘summer of discontent’ in 2011/12), hence their change in direction with Mk3 with more of a push to grab some section of the ‘casual’ market rather than just focus on the hyper-competitive one. The huge growth of GW’s competitors must be qualified. They’re still minnows. Often with tiny, or relatively small player bases. Don’t think for a moment that I am biased against these other companies. I am a big fan of Corvus Belli for example – despite their flaws and hiccups, I really like what they do. They had hugely impressive growth last year (iirc 75-ish percent), but they are a tiny operator compared to GW. 30 staff compared to 1600. GW’s player base dwarfs that of Corvus Belli (heck, GW’s staff probably dwarfs CB’s, or other companies’ player base! Yes, a deliberate exaggeration, but i don’t think I’d be far off, relatively speaking.) , and the question must also be asked if the growth of the smaller companies is ‘new’ players, or if it is merely cannibalising players from GW-that is not industry growth. CB’s growth is a drop in the bucket for GW. Whilst there is certainly some of the former (and a lot of it is X-wing, but I wonder how many of them initially ‘stepped in’ because star wars, and how many will step over into other miniature games. That to me represents real growth) I suspect there is a lot more of the latter than people realise, and a completely different picture emerges when you consider this – like I said, minnows can still survive, grow and thrive in an eco-system that is shrinking. It doesn’t necessarily give an accurate picture of the size, shape or overall health of that ecosystem.

Edit: I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. I just think more questions need to be asked, and I don't think that the reality is quite simple.

Peregrine wrote:
Is that counting just the employees working on design and manufacturing, or does it include the dead weight of GW's retail chain?

Both. Its in their annual reports. AFAIK, the design studio is still over a hundred people. In any case, does it really matter? The point was to illustrate the difference in scale/size between both GW and some of the other companies in the industry. Whilst people love pointing to the big tabloid headlines of GW ‘failing while other companies grow hugely’ as some kind of proof of the wargames industry growing, when you read the text behind the headline, dig a bit deeper into the story, and look at the actual numbers behind the percentages, you realise that its not necessarily that simple - the numbers tell a completely different story. Huge growth (for example, Corvus Belli’s hugely impressive 75% growth last year – and like I said, im a big fan of them) must be viewed in the correct context - it is nothing more than a drop in the bucket for GW (I’d actually love to see the sales numbers for the ‘failure’ of AOS and compare them to the ‘success’ of Infinity N3 and have a side by side comparison. I think it would be an interesting read). And it must be questioned whether it is sustainable long-term or if they would follow the same trends as GW. It ‘proves’ a lot less than people think. GW is big enough to operate a global retail chain, most other companies involved in this industry would struggle to put together the manpower to operate a corner store. Heck, most have to ask for what amounts to charity – volunteers not being paid - to do the quality control (ie playtesting) on their product. GW turn over more cash in a week that most of these companies do in a year. That is not to discredit them either, let’s be entirely clear on that. But direct comparisons between whales and minnows need to be viewed in the right context.

hobojebus wrote:
And with all that extra staff they still make worse rules and fluff.

jonolikespie wrote:
I'd make the (totally subjective) argument they make worse models and art too these days
[

Guys, I know you both (hobo in particular) love to constantly harp on with that same old tune and put all of the hate on GW in every thread, and turn it up to 11 every day, all of the time, whatever they do, whatever the reason, regardless of its relevance to the discussion at hand, circumstances and anything else and twist everything with the sole aim of reinforcing a particular negative viewpoint and agenda (hobo, I still remember your hysterics about how gw were 'out of touch" with kids for using Christian mythology in their aesthetics 'because kids are atheist') , but I really have to ask what this is actually adding to the conversation beyond the fact that you have to jump on the soap box, yell the rebel yell, rabble rouse, and have a go at them whenever you inhale oxygen. After a certain point, it's just hating for the sake of hating. Come on. We're all better than that.

Sometimes, it’s just not necessary, needed or even wanted all of the time. Sometimes I think people get far too close to their hobby. Step back. Don't be Icarus flying so close to the sun.

 Gamgee wrote:
Actually Warcraft was a smashing success. Just here in NA it was a flop. So we're getting that sequel.

Budget.....$160 million
Box office .......$432.2 million

That qualifies as a success, and is why we will see a sequel.

Klowny wrote:
Well they seem to love pumping out anything "nerdy" these days. Superhero movies galore with sequel after sequel.

It's because they make money. Even Batman vs Superman made 500 million USD. It seems that we, as a people, love superhero movies.

And in contrast the ultramarines movie cost about £9mil to make and the company that made it has since dissolved. It was a good effort but it wasn't a good movie.

 Nithaniel wrote:
And in contrast the ultramarines movie cost about £9mil to make and the company that made it has since dissolved. It was a good effort but it wasn't a good movie.

Understatement of the day, it was shockingly bad I nearly wet myself when that chicken demon turned up, I literally fell off the bed in a fit of laughter.

Klowny wrote:
Dude that's actually really good! I've always chuckled at how intensely terrifying not being a future-super-warrior would be in the grimdark, constantly afraid of being killed in extremely painful ways.

Good point

Thank you.

The OP's question is likely dependent on regional demographics, but here in AK, I know for a fact that the hobby is growing. As a member of a local facebook group that just hit 200 members, many of them new to 40k and brought in by friends, I can safely say that 40k's popularity is growing in our state. I won't speculate on the reasons why that is, but it certainly is the case here.

It's growing here as well. Oddly enough of all the reports of Star Wars Armada communities sprouting up the game fails to catch on here and is floundering. X-Wing is going strong almost as popular as 40k and then we also have a small Dust Tactics crew.

40k is still the king though.

My poor armada fleet is useless since only a few people buy the models at our store. It is getting jammed pack every night between 40k tables and the other half the store rpg nights.

As to why? I'm astonished. I think its how remote our city is even by Canadian standards. Nothing to do.