Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 09:07:12


Post by: stonehorse


Short story first, been playing miniature games since The mid 80's, worked for GW briefly, helped run several games clubs, and introduced a lot of people into the tabletop gaming hobby. So I have been around a while.

A few decades ago, the choice and variety of games available seemed to explode, players were simply stuck for choice. Variety is a wonderful thing, as not everyone appreciates the same things. However it simply wasn't sustainable, slowly a lot of games and companies went under. GW at this time also contracted to support 3 games systems. WFB, 40K, and LotR.

With the arrival of things like Kickstarter we are seeing another explosion of game systems and companies emerging. With again players lost for choice, even GW is back into catering for a varied taste (WQ, WU, AoS, WC, BB, 40k, Apoc, Necromunda, AT, KT, and LotR).

I'd like to think that this trend is sustainable, however experience tells me otherwise. Is it more a case of when rather than if? Are we going to see another retraction of choice as companies go under as their games and miniatures find that the market is too saturated?

There is also the question of quality control, a lot of manufactures are producing at neck breaking speed, GW for example is every week... which can only be biting into their quality control and play testing. CMON while not as prolific, seem to have gone from a painting website to an up and coming established company with their fingers in a lot of pies.

TL/DR: the hobby seems to be in another 'golden age', however those don't tend to last, how long do you reckon it is before we see the decline?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 09:13:53


Post by: phillv85


I reckon we have a few years before we hit critical mass again. The market is far bigger now than it likely ever has been. That of course doesn’t mean it’s limitless though.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 09:15:59


Post by: Overread


GW can at least maintain their neckbreaking release rate because its supported by actual sales, they don't take out big loans/KS.

The problem a lot of KS companies hit is that they can overload their initial market with so many models it kills sales right after; in addition the massive marketing push they go through the KS with many can't repeat when they go commercial so it can seem like it "fizzles out". This is before we even get to issues with KS delivery times or companies that end up slaved to KS and keep having to do more KS to stay afloat.


I do agree it is another golden age and I think KS will keep it going for longer. The main issue is that out of this Golden age I don't think we'll get as many long term companies. Even now we are seeing a former giant of PP dwindle somewhat. Especially as GW firms itself up in the market once more.



I see the main issue is that most of the golden age is leaching off existing gamers. GW has seen this too and part of their approach has been a massive outreach program to get new gamers into the hobby and its great to see them doing it, but also sad that they are the only ones really pushing for that.

We'll have to see what survives and what dies; certainly this golden era will produce a LOT of great sculpts!


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 10:32:08


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


KS may see a drop off in time, if we see an uptick in projects not being delivered.

However, GW are, arguably, going to help the market remain diverse.

See, before they basically reduced their range down to 40k and Warhammer. Their Twin Tentpole games.

This meant there was a gap in the market the Biggest Fish wasn't filling, and hence we saw skirmish, naval and epic type stuff tackled by other companies.

GW has in the past few years bucked it's ideas up somewhat. They're going after all the niches once again. From 'we built this with competitive play in mind' Underworlds, to Adeptus Titanicus. Heck, even Apocalypse can be considered a new game, rather than merely a 40k expansion.

Overall, this isn't necessarily bad for the market or GW. With wider offerings, GW are more likely to pick up sales. And being the market leader, get people who otherwise wouldn't have started 40k or AoS into wargaming with miniatures in general. From there, said New Recruits (who GW can reach in a way others simply can't, due to their store network) are more likely to discover other, similar games.

So whilst GW are hogging the pie right now, there's still plenty more to come.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 12:02:35


Post by: Overread


One think we might see is a rise of more big whale companies that suck up sculpts and castings of smaller firms as a result of smaller firms that make it big with a KS but then fail to be able to turn that into a reliable healthy income to support a proper business off.

What would be really exciting is to see larger companies like that moving production out of China or at the very least ensuring higher quality control through overseas factories in general.

Such a thing would be great because one big worry of fast rise and fall companies is the loss of quality models and sculpts.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 12:05:46


Post by: auticus


What would be exciting would be for a game company to emerge that can produce both nice sculpts AND solid rules that focus on gameplay.

Kickstarters for the most part disappoint. They are often cash grabs with little to offer after the initial release and they are then mostly siingle player affairs since few if any locally will play beyond a pick up game or two.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 13:54:13


Post by: SickSix


I have wondered a lot lately about how many of these KS board games have a life after the initial fulfilment of backers purchases? I mean Dakka doesn't seem to be creating many new subforums to support the player bases if all these new games. Seems like they are all flash in the pan campaigns just to get some cool minis made.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 22:58:40


Post by: OrlandotheTechnicoloured


I don't think there is a huge crash coming for mini gaming (especially now GW has improved it's outlook), but that's not to say that a lot of the small fry are going to survive as businesses,

but then they never did, most start as ambitious projects from passionate gamers (or sculptors) attempt to make enough money to make another few sculpts, or print a rule book, then attempt to start to make regular releases to sell themselves, then the big jump to hit distribution (where you get less money per unit), attempt to grow even larger and allow the owner to go 'full time', and finally to survive an edition change

(and now we can add in KS at pretty much any point too with its own set of problems and opportunities_

although we may see a slow decline as physical games with stuff get less popular?

but I think boardgames are heading for a bubble bursting crunch, even without KS there are so many games coming out, so many people with huge collections of never played (or opened games)….. and an out of control boardgame collection is even bigger than a minis collection unless your making tables too

we're also seeing major mergers & acquisitions happening a lot with companies in boardgaming (funded by debt) which seem to be a risky, risky business


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/24 23:48:50


Post by: Bookwrack


 SickSix wrote:
I have wondered a lot lately about how many of these KS board games have a life after the initial fulfilment of backers purchases? I mean Dakka doesn't seem to be creating many new subforums to support the player bases if all these new games. Seems like they are all flash in the pan campaigns just to get some cool minis made.


That seems to be a basic problem with Kickstarted games - maintaining growth and enthusiasm after a successful release. It's an inherent problem with the system that successful projects can be a victim of their own success. They're got a product that has good initial interest, enough to fund the project, but the bulk of people who would buy into it already did during the KS, and afterwards they aren't able to pull in enough new people to keep things afloat.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 04:45:33


Post by: Ancestral Hamster


 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
but I think boardgames are heading for a bubble bursting crunch, even without KS there are so many games coming out, so many people with huge collections of never played (or opened games)….. and an out of control boardgame collection is even bigger than a minis collection unless your making tables too

Definitely. Boardgame publishers are facing diminishing returns as new product is coming out too quickly. It used to be they could expect that a new release would keep shelf space for a few months, enough for word of mouth to effect sales. Now the glut of games is pushing your release off the shelf in a month's time, so there is a limited window of opportunity.

There was an article on this by the owner of one of the smaller Eurogames companies, but I can't seem to find it. I'm pretty positive it was at Boardgame Geek as that's my go-to for boardgames (which I play more often than mini games).


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 09:45:01


Post by: Overread


Plus board games are typically a one buy deal unless you're a big franchise name like Monopoly or Munchkin. Plus I think they suffer in today's market like wargames, in terms of marketing; only for board games I'd say its even harder to market.

This is without considering that clubs/families/gamers might well only buy one board game per "group". A wargame or model game and everyone in the group playing has to buy into the models and most will buy into the books as well. Even a board game like Black Fortress for GW might well get bought several times as people want the models and can expand maps by combining sets.
Meanwhile your typical board game once you've got one set in the group you don't really need another.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 14:20:43


Post by: Easy E


95% of all businesses fail in 5 years. That is just a fact.

Game companies are no different.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 15:13:21


Post by: totalfailure


 Bookwrack wrote:
 SickSix wrote:
I have wondered a lot lately about how many of these KS board games have a life after the initial fulfilment of backers purchases? I mean Dakka doesn't seem to be creating many new subforums to support the player bases if all these new games. Seems like they are all flash in the pan campaigns just to get some cool minis made.


That seems to be a basic problem with Kickstarted games - maintaining growth and enthusiasm after a successful release. It's an inherent problem with the system that successful projects can be a victim of their own success. They're got a product that has good initial interest, enough to fund the project, but the bulk of people who would buy into it already did during the KS, and afterwards they aren't able to pull in enough new people to keep things afloat.


It seems the Kickstarter project that isn’t dead on arrival at retail is the exception these days, rather than the rule. Kickstarter lets stuff get published that might otherwise not be, but it frequently completely fills any demand for said product, too. So you have a big burst of energy, then the game sinks beneath the waves


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 15:34:55


Post by: Albino Squirrel


I don't know how long. But yes, even just GW seems to be releasing too much stuff too quickly and have too many game systems. I'm sure there are many people that are interested in something, for example Warcry, but still haven't finished their last Age of Sigmar army or Underworlds warband, and feel like they don't get enough chance to play those games as it is without adding a new one into the rotation. So they are competing with themselves. They are trying to combat this by making the games somewhat more disposeable or expandable. So even if someone only plays Underworlds, they can continue to sell them new stuff every few months to have the latest cards and rules changes, like new expansions of a collectible card game.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 15:42:52


Post by: Togusa


 stonehorse wrote:
Short story first, been playing miniature games since The mid 80's, worked for GW briefly, helped run several games clubs, and introduced a lot of people into the tabletop gaming hobby. So I have been around a while.

A few decades ago, the choice and variety of games available seemed to explode, players were simply stuck for choice. Variety is a wonderful thing, as not everyone appreciates the same things. However it simply wasn't sustainable, slowly a lot of games and companies went under. GW at this time also contracted to support 3 games systems. WFB, 40K, and LotR.

With the arrival of things like Kickstarter we are seeing another explosion of game systems and companies emerging. With again players lost for choice, even GW is back into catering for a varied taste (WQ, WU, AoS, WC, BB, 40k, Apoc, Necromunda, AT, KT, and LotR).

I'd like to think that this trend is sustainable, however experience tells me otherwise. Is it more a case of when rather than if? Are we going to see another retraction of choice as companies go under as their games and miniatures find that the market is too saturated?

There is also the question of quality control, a lot of manufactures are producing at neck breaking speed, GW for example is every week... which can only be biting into their quality control and play testing. CMON while not as prolific, seem to have gone from a painting website to an up and coming established company with their fingers in a lot of pies.

TL/DR: the hobby seems to be in another 'golden age', however those don't tend to last, how long do you reckon it is before we see the decline?


TBH I've finally hit my end. I haven't touched my models in over a month, have barely kept up with any of the news, and I don't see that changing in August.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 16:27:52


Post by: Nurglitch


There's something to be said for bubbles bursting, and perhaps a consolidation of markets. There's also a lot of, for lack of a better term, 'shovel-ware' out there in board games and games in general.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 16:45:32


Post by: totalfailure


It’s gotten to the point where being a good game is not a guarantee of success and attention in 2019 when piles of stuff come out every week. Sooner or later the conveyor belt of releases will have to have a breakdown, or at least hiccup, as gamers already can’t really keep up. How many people have piles of unplaced, or even unopened games these days? There isn’t time to even enjoy a game before 80000000000 more are clamoring for your attention. Many will disappear without getting it; just not enough time and money even for good games in 2019, let alone the mountains of cash in shovel-ware.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 16:50:20


Post by: Nurglitch


To my mind the good games are the ones that people play, and then want to play again, and introduce to their friends to play with them.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 17:34:27


Post by: Elbows


As long as most companies don't think they're going to become the next GW or FFG they should be fine. It's the "successful Kickstarter means we've made it!" mentality that catches out so many small companies. Seen so many companies fail to deliver or collapse shortly thereafter.

I think people need to make sure they're not quitting their day jobs to pursue a successful Kickstarted game, etc.

I think we feel like there's a huge gaming boom right now, but a lot of it is pretty smartly handled. I think technology has made producing games much easier, and on occasion, less risky. So we're flooded with options.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 17:56:15


Post by: Genoside07


Plus everyone can not buy everything.. Back in the day I collected Games Workshop, Magic Cards, D&D and Comics. Now No comics, no magic..some D&D and only Kill team stuff from GW.
A lot of people are the same... They realize they are over extending themselves to much and cut back...

I have always thought that Funkco Pops are the new version of Beany Babies.. but they keep chugging along.. but I don't know for how long before they drop off.

As for Kick-starters I am very selective now.. A Project in the past I might give it a try, I really scrutinize now after getting burned by Palladium game's Robotech Tactics..
Always thought Ninja Division was running the show and having very little to deal with Kevin Siembieda the gaming world's version of OJ.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 18:21:26


Post by: Sqorgar


 stonehorse wrote:

I'd like to think that this trend is sustainable, however experience tells me otherwise. Is it more a case of when rather than if? Are we going to see another retraction of choice as companies go under as their games and miniatures find that the market is too saturated?

I don't think the market is at all too saturated - what it is, is too myopic. That is, we've got a lot of choices for games, but it is a choice between a lot of the same types of game. The miniature field should be as broad as it is deep, but somehow, we're stuck with competitive matched play games almost exclusively. That field is completely saturated and can not support a huge number of players.

I think what we're looking at is a CCG or MMORPG situation where the current industry can only really support one, sometimes two core products and everything else dies. With CCGs, it is Magic the Gathering and Pokemon. Period. In MMOs, it is World of Warcraft. Both of these genres (CCGs and MMOs) require a sort of subscription service to keep players engaged over time, and players can not afford to subscribe to many of these services simultaneously. If you are chasing Magic the Gathering, you aren't going to be able to afford to do anything else because Magic is basically a full time job, requiring a full time salary.

However, the blind pack purchase CCG has died out, but "living card game" format of non-random buys is flourishing. It is still basically a subscription service, but it is much, much cheaper, allowing people to engage in multiple ones at the same time. FFG's LCG, Doomtown Reloaded, and even Warhammer Underworlds. Similarly, CCGs sort of had the deck building aspect codified into a different game genre, exemplified by games like Dominion or Thunderstone - but then extended beyond cards to even dice building, like Quarriors or Dice Masters. The collectible part of CCGs is no longer profitable for card games (and miniature games, like Mage Knight or Monsterpocalypse), but has come back in dice collecting games.

Basically, one thing was really popular, a bunch of people competed to be the best at that one thing, and one won out. No longer being able to compete with that one market leader, designers took the parts they liked the most and went in separate directions with it, ultimately diversifying the field. In the 90s, all CCGs looked the same. These days, that DNA is found in multiple genres filled with a wide variety of games. The industry consolidates, then diversifies.

There is also the question of quality control, a lot of manufactures are producing at neck breaking speed, GW for example is every week... which can only be biting into their quality control and play testing. CMON while not as prolific, seem to have gone from a painting website to an up and coming established company with their fingers in a lot of pies.

I think CMON will be one of the first casualties of the consolidation. They are completely dependent on one basic type of game sold through Kickstarters. Their last few kickstarters were Arcadia Quest IN SPACE! and Zombicide IN SPACE! They are running out of ideas and the games are becoming less and less appealing. The only reason they haven't crashed and burned so far is that the kickstarters take so long to actually fulfill that people can buy into three of them before the first flood of boxes they'll never open starts clogging their house's arteries. But a year from now, while people are standing on three roomfuls of boxes to games they never play, are they really going to buy into the hype for another kickstarter?

FFG has another problem. As much as I hate it, they know when to cut a product line and when to reboot a dead one. They have a very diverse portfolio of games, from board games, card games, dice game, and miniature games. The only problem is the Star Wars license has warped that sense, killing profitable series in favor of Star Wars games which are more profitable - as long as Star Wars is profitable. And with Disney basically killing the Star Wars IP more and more with every decision, I think FFG is going to be caught unawares when the either lose the SW license, or people suddenly get sick of it and stop buying it, making 80% of their current line up basically worthless - and FFG two years into design the next 5 Star Wars games and nothing else. FFG loses the Star Wars license and they are dead, overnight.

GW will slow down eventually - they can't just do a new edition every other year and spend 12 months releasing codices/battletomes for it. Diversifying with stuff like Warcry, Necromunda, Kill Team, Middle Earth, Adeptus Titanicus gives them places to go when 40k and AoS get close to buckling under their own weight. The only real problem is that GW is damn close to pricing itself out of the market. I feel like they are just pushing up against that upper limit for how much they can charge for things and get away with it (and occasionally crossing that line, like with Adeptus Titanicus).

TL/DR: the hobby seems to be in another 'golden age', however those don't tend to last, how long do you reckon it is before we see the decline?

I think the bubble is going to burst within the next few years - particularly for kickstarters and board games. It'll ultimately be a good thing that will make a more diverse and interesting industry, but the short term losses will be substantial.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 19:26:48


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


I’m not sure if we’ll lose many Big Names.

GW for certain look to be in rude health for now. Very little debt, fat to trim as and when.

But, I think it’s Wargames Foundry are just setting out on the ‘our own stores path’. That could be a danger if they’re borrowing to fund that expansion. If sales slump, and debt can’t be serviced? That’s what kills your company.

PP? Honestly not idea about their overall state. Again, if they’re not carrying debt? Probably survive.

Mantic etc? Those still (in my opinion, which is quite possibly wrong) up-and-coming? They may not be able to survive a drop off, depending on how it hits.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 19:29:18


Post by: Overread


I really hope PP gets on an upward swing soon - they've been hit hard by some of hteir own odd choices but also failings in plastic material choices which has cost them. Right now I think they are coasting on loyal fans, but they need to push forward and get tehir recruitment system going again - get more gamers in and get their name out there once more.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 19:32:23


Post by: Nurglitch


 Elbows wrote:
As long as most companies don't think they're going to become the next GW or FFG they should be fine. It's the "successful Kickstarter means we've made it!" mentality that catches out so many small companies. Seen so many companies fail to deliver or collapse shortly thereafter.

I think people need to make sure they're not quitting their day jobs to pursue a successful Kickstarted game, etc.

I think we feel like there's a huge gaming boom right now, but a lot of it is pretty smartly handled. I think technology has made producing games much easier, and on occasion, less risky. So we're flooded with options.

It's worth noting that not even GW was GW back when they started. I think part of what's going on these days is that consumers don't differentiate between publishers and expect the same level of quality and price across the board. It's not unreasonable, but trying to produce a AAA game on a A budget isn't a good idea.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 20:17:04


Post by: Sqorgar


 Overread wrote:
I really hope PP gets on an upward swing soon - they've been hit hard by some of hteir own odd choices but also failings in plastic material choices which has cost them. Right now I think they are coasting on loyal fans, but they need to push forward and get tehir recruitment system going again - get more gamers in and get their name out there once more.

I think PP will survive, but only if they are smart - they put all their eggs in the WMH basket, which wasn't. However, last I heard, Monsterpocalypse was doing pretty well (certainly better than any of PP's other attempts to move away from WMH), and they've got Riot Quest coming (I doubt that will be very successful, but it may make a profit from smaller expectations and a smaller audience). Their new Warcasters game is intriguing, if it can avoid the tournament attitude pitfalls that Mk2 fell to (and make a game that actually looks good on the table). I'm giving them 70/30 to survive, based mostly on the fact that Monsterpocalypse is a brilliant game.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/25 20:51:31


Post by: Togusa


 Overread wrote:
I really hope PP gets on an upward swing soon - they've been hit hard by some of hteir own odd choices but also failings in plastic material choices which has cost them. Right now I think they are coasting on loyal fans, but they need to push forward and get tehir recruitment system going again - get more gamers in and get their name out there once more.


I feel bad for the players, but I don't like the games.

From what I've seen it's just two people positioning their pieces and then racing to push the "I win" button first.

The models also are varying levels of cool, some look nice and look like they'd be fun to paint, others look terrible and have awful proportions. And unfortunately, all of them are in metal and that is a big turn off for me.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 08:54:33


Post by: Sunno


 Togusa wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I really hope PP gets on an upward swing soon - they've been hit hard by some of hteir own odd choices but also failings in plastic material choices which has cost them. Right now I think they are coasting on loyal fans, but they need to push forward and get tehir recruitment system going again - get more gamers in and get their name out there once more.


I feel bad for the players, but I don't like the games.

From what I've seen it's just two people positioning their pieces and then racing to push the "I win" button first.

The models also are varying levels of cool, some look nice and look like they'd be fun to paint, others look terrible and have awful proportions. And unfortunately, all of them are in metal and that is a big turn off for me.


As a self confessed WM/H fanboy I actually get where you coming from. And that is the fault of a section of our community that only play with a small selection of 2D Terrain. The game is more…. “technical” than anything GW produces. 1mm of placing matters, degrees of model facing matter its detailed at both the macro and micro level. It’s a fantastic game, great for casual and competitive play. But its not as much of a beer and pretzels as AOS or 40K. WM/H is designed to have a winner in each game. But Wm/H and Malifaux are the games for me and in my mind, far superior to GW games. IMO of course!

However we cannot deny that MK3 was a HUGE misstep for PP. I think they felt pressured by the new releases by GW and rushed out their product. In reality I think they should of just been honest with their player base and just said “look, a new version of the game is coming, hang in for 6 months and we will be with you”. Instead they rushed out a product that was not tested of balanced which, for a game that is about being technical and balanced, was a disaster. A year of so later after fixing they are about to release the Oblivion campaign/remix, which everyone is calling Mk3.5. Because, well, it is….. And its fantastic.

As for the models being all metal, you’re quite a bit behind the times with that. Pretty much all of PPs releases over the last few years have been plastic/resin which is nice. There are still metal models being produced but that’s more for solos etc which I don’t personally have a problem with. What I do have an issue with is the cost of some of the new kits.

Im still enjoying the game which is recovering quite well. But PP as a company has burned a lot of trust which it will have to rebuild. Im not that interested in Riotquest apart from a few models I will use in WM/H. Monstapoc is doing well im told. Im waiting politely to see what their new game is going to be like. I hope it is good. But I don’t understand how people thing that PP is on the brink of failing as a company.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 09:09:43


Post by: Overread


Honestly I think PP's issue was that they played into the whole "living rules set" too much for a physical game. They got to where they were by being simple - cards are in the box; model comes out of the box with the card and you play with the card.

Right now there's theme lists that lock you into certain builds with some armies being very restricted and others very free; meanwhile you've got regular updates for balance, but which invalidates the whole card based game of play unless you print them off yourself regularly.


Thing is whilst gamers cry out for faster updates the continual cycling of rules and the way PP presented it I think gave the impression they were trying to patch it like a PC game and I think that turned people away; they added hassle to the element of getting the core rules of the game.


Even though GW has loads of support material; getting the core of the game is simple. Rulebook + Battletome/Codex and you're good to go.



I do agree PP burned trust; they burned their own forums; burned their PG system and didn't try and replace it; they burned customers with poor plastic attempts early on. They can recover.


I think the failing issue is the worry that PP won't die, but it will move into that subset of games whereby you can't guarantee a game in "most local clubs". Ergo it joins the rest like Dropfleet/zone etc....And then loses its hold as games like Infinity etc.... overtake it.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 09:22:02


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Wondering if FFG's licenses might prove an issue?

Of course, none of us have any idea on what the agreement actually is, or how it's paid for (initial dollop of cash, then X%, who knows!), or how long it runs for (is it a fixed term deal, is it a rolling contract?).

But one thing I think we can say with reasonable confidence is that Licenses can be revoked or otherwise taken away.

If FFG lose Star Wars (no suggestion that's in the offing of course), that's a decent slice of their offerings, and their more popular ones at that, going bye-byes, as they simply won't be able to produce them.

All it takes is Disney thinking 'we can get a bit more for this', and that's X-Wing done for. Could even be it comes up for renegotiation during a nominal slump, and FFG not having the readies there and then to fund it.

All sorts of dangers when dealing with licensed products. After all, Kenner had a ridiculously supersweet, license to print money for very little cost license for the original Star Wars toys. All they had to do was produce a cheque (I think it was $50k?) each year, and the deal continued, with nothing more payable to Lucasfilm. One year, the cheque was late, and suddenly the whole deal could be renegotiated.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 15:02:48


Post by: Sqorgar


Sunno wrote:It’s a fantastic game, great for casual and competitive play.

I don't think there is a less casual play-friendly game than WMH. Maybe Russian Roulette...

However we cannot deny that MK3 was a HUGE misstep for PP.

MK2 was a HUGE misstep for PP. Everything that killed WMH started in MK2. MK3 just forced those issues sooner than later. But that's a different discussion for a different time.

Overread wrote:Right now there's theme lists that lock you into certain builds with some armies being very restricted and others very free; meanwhile you've got regular updates for balance, but which invalidates the whole card based game of play unless you print them off yourself regularly.
Every WMH player I know uses War Room for digital cards - especially since it is as important to know what your opponent's models' stats are as your own.

Thing is whilst gamers cry out for faster updates the continual cycling of rules and the way PP presented it I think gave the impression they were trying to patch it like a PC game and I think that turned people away; they added hassle to the element of getting the core rules of the game.
Well, it got to the point where at any one point, it was impossible for a person to know the state of the game. Minmaxing becomes impossible when the things you are minmaxing are constantly in flux. Something like CID would work wonderfully for a non-competitive game, which is ironic because a non-competitive game wouldn't need to constantly update the game.

I do agree PP burned trust; they burned their own forums; burned their PG system and didn't try and replace it; they burned customers with poor plastic attempts early on. They can recover.
Maybe, but the people they burned the hardest were new players. PP may be able to convince old players to come back and try the game, but it's going to take more than Oblivion to make a player who was curbstomped his first few games ever give the game a second look.

I think the failing issue is the worry that PP won't die, but it will move into that subset of games whereby you can't guarantee a game in "most local clubs". Ergo it joins the rest like Dropfleet/zone etc....And then loses its hold as games like Infinity etc.... overtake it.
I think that is already starting to happen, but I think WMH was so big that it will always have some sort of name recognition in the industry as one of the big boys. Less people will play it, but everybody will still recognize it. That gives it an opportunity to make a 40k 8th edition like reboot where they can maybe bring the game back from the brink - but they'll need to do something extra to get burned new players to play the game.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 16:33:57


Post by: meatybtz


I don't think of WMH as being hard or complex or difficult to pick up.
But with the constant moving goalposts you did make it harder for a new player to know the state of the game. But playing WMH with a static rules set works out pretty well.

I don't think it is a "new to wargamming" friendly game but going 8th edition will be as bad as 8th edition is.

After RTFMing and playing my first WMH game against an experienced player, I lost, but not by that much because I got the gist of the goals of the game before I put modes to table top.

Now I wasn't playing against a broken OP build so that probably helped.. but that's the same problem that GW games had in certain editions. There were plenty of curb-stomping going on by abusing rules in WHFB and basically getting a one turn win against a newbie.

If anything WMH needs to get back to its roots, stop the moving goal posts and ditch the "must have builds" with free gak. That's what broke 7th beyond repair was the GD formation bs with free this and free that and OMG buff this with this buff that.

Fundamentally the flow and game play style of WMH is superior to 8th. It's faster dice. It's faster movement. It's faster figuring out the fiddly details. It is supremely tactical. You actually need to use your head and yes.. screwing up a move should hurt.

In the adage of Online Games.. Get Gud N00b.

Oh and I LOVED Company of Iron. I wish they had expanded and supported it more. Before the new Kill Team.. it really scratched that itch.

As an addendum, one of the other issues with WMH was the growth of the must have HUGE MODEL. It was a distraction and then they got nerfed and that just pisses people off when they paid a good penny for the "superheavies" of the WMH universe. They technically belonged in an "apoc" type of sub-game for WMH.

Some of my favorite battles were with only two or so warjacks and the rest were just soldiers. This was fun on both the Hordes side (usually trollkin) and the Iron Kingdom's side, with Menoth being a personally fun to play the "just troopers" kind of battles with.

I think PP will do better to get back to roots, less changing gak all the time and trying to help newbs get into the game.

They would also do well to improve their Quality of the Starter Boxes. The starter box kits are usually awful. Missing detail, even when they have no other malformations. While their newer models are frikken bad-ass.

Expand the plastic, get away from the Poly-Resin. They've got some good sculpts now and switching slowly to plastic would better suit them going forward. Hell use China if you have to.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 17:54:14


Post by: Sqorgar


 meatybtz wrote:
I don't think of WMH as being hard or complex or difficult to pick up.
I don't want to make this another "let's gak on Warmachine" thread, but the basic mechanics of the game are easy enough. The difficulty is in how overpowering all the combos are, such that high level play is explicitly about setting up and denying combos - to the point where you basically have to be as good at playing your opponent's army as he is.

I don't think it is a "new to wargamming" friendly game but going 8th edition will be as bad as 8th edition is.
You may not be a fan, being a consummate hater of 8th edition, but there's no doubt that 8th has left 40k in a MUCH healthier place than 7th. It has a healthy influx of new players, old players have returned, and I think 40k is probably more popular now than it has been in decades.

Now I wasn't playing against a broken OP build so that probably helped..
Ya think?

In the adage of Online Games.. Get Gud N00b.
Boom. Headshot. You just killed 99% of your potential audience for the game by insulting them and leaving them for dead. This, more than anything else WMH did - not killing press gangers or the forums or releasing a new edition or anything - this is what killed WMH. New players do not become old players when they aren't having fun. The promise of fun to come, after you've lost twenty games and spent an absurd amount of time, effort, and money building the right army, is a tough sell to someone who tried it out because thought it looked neat.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/26 18:38:31


Post by: oni


Mantic has a poor business model. They have to jump from Kickstarter to Kickstarter to maintain capital to stay alive. They will eventually fail.

Privateer Press, while it's been a while since I've bothered to pay attention to them (I think that's the case with a lot of people); last I knew they were destroying themselves.
Their Press-Ganger initiative was a good thought, but sadly it failed because PP didn't vet the people properly.
Hard to say what lies in store for PP, but I believe it's safe to say that if they do fold they will not be missed, not for long anyway.
I hope PP sticks around. If only to keep their player base from coming to W40K.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/28 17:04:55


Post by: TwilightSparkles


Short answer is yes. Of the big companies only 3 are a safe bet ; GW, FFG and Warlord.

They can weather a downturn. FFG is most vulnerable of those 3 because outside the US they are reliant on FLGS/others to sell their product and they are totally reliant on foreign manufacturing.

Everyone else is a major release/failed KS, sudden downturn away from going under IMO. KS based companies in particular right now are typically over promising - the Jurassic Park one is already starting to see the metaphorical wheels come offf with the last update downgrading the core box and SG maps to card from neoprene, blaming print quality..... Paramount's public endorsement never appeared either.




Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 06:01:16


Post by: Laughing Man


FFG is pretty safe. They're a giant in the board game industry (they're owned by Asmodee), and have enough different licenses that losing one of them wouldn't hurt them terribly much. Wizkids licenses their rulesets as well, although their adaptations of X-Wing are definitely a lot less popular in part due to the pay to win model they went with for Star Trek. And sure, they don't sell their product themselves, but they don't really need to bother when you can get a copy of X-Wing in Target or Walmart.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 06:43:23


Post by: Sqorgar


 Laughing Man wrote:
FFG is pretty safe. They're a giant in the board game industry (they're owned by Asmodee), and have enough different licenses that losing one of them wouldn't hurt them terribly much. Wizkids licenses their rulesets as well, although their adaptations of X-Wing are definitely a lot less popular in part due to the pay to win model they went with for Star Trek. And sure, they don't sell their product themselves, but they don't really need to bother when you can get a copy of X-Wing in Target or Walmart.

You don’t think FFG, unexpectedly losing the Star Wars license, would be all that put out by it? Ask Decipher how well that went for them, or WEG. Or Sony Online Entertainment. The industry is filled with giants crippled or destroyed overnight by unexpectedly losing the Star Wars license.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 11:52:07


Post by: AndrewGPaul


I think FFG would survive as an Asmodee brand if the Star Wars licence went away, yes. As a company itself? possibly not, but the parent company may well keep it as a brand for less family-friendly games; Twilight Imperium, the Lovecraft games, the Genesis RPG line, etc. It depends how much they've sunk the company into supporting the two main miniatures games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I wonder how unexpected the loss of the Star Wars licence could be? Can Disney unilaterally cancel it, or is it locked in for a set term?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 12:28:49


Post by: balmong7


 AndrewGPaul wrote:

Also, I wonder how unexpected the loss of the Star Wars licence could be? Can Disney unilaterally cancel it, or is it locked in for a set term?


It's not usually Disney (or whoever the licensee is if we are talking in general) just pulling it away. But rather a company either assuming the contract will be renewed or sinking tons of resources into ensuring it will be renewed (like say, introducing clone wars stuff to the miniature games) only to have Disney say "Sorry you've had this contract long enough, the contract will not be renewed this year."

Whoops, guess all that planning we did for releases in 2020 and 2021 are getting scrapped. Time to scramble to release something new and deal with the inevitable backlash from fans that their favorite games are being shut down.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 12:33:32


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Worth noting Asmodee itself changed hands to a private equity group last year.

What does that bode for them? Hard to say. But they're not really noted for an interest in carrying flagging brands.

If, and that's a blimming big if FFG lose the Star Wars license, it could be the PEG decide to ditch or wind up FFG if it hits the bottom line enough.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 13:16:09


Post by: Genoside07


But drop offs happen is when customers loose interest in the product or already have a full shelf of the product.

I think that's what happens most of the time with drop offs.. Like zombicide or talisman they maxed out what they could possibly do with expansions,
then had to move it to a different genre to keep sales happening. But there is a point to where people just stop buying..
GW is lucky enough that they have an amazing designers and sculptures that make beautiful models. I never planned to buy another marine figure,
but the look of the "new' Primaris marines was enough for me to continue to buy..

With FFG, I wonder the same, what is next for them.. Disney is a corporate giant that doesn't care what happens to companies that work for them, Tomorrow
they could get a better deal with someone and FFG would be hurting with only left with a few in house flag ship products.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 15:26:44


Post by: Sqorgar


 AndrewGPaul wrote:
Also, I wonder how unexpected the loss of the Star Wars licence could be? Can Disney unilaterally cancel it, or is it locked in for a set term?
There's usually contracts that last for a certain amount of time and then different companies bid on the contract when it is up for renewal. West End Games and Decipher both lost the Star Wars license unexpectedly because this new upstart named Wizards of the West Coast used its Magic the Gathering Feth You money to outbid them. Neither were in the healthiest state at the time (Decipher had millions of dollars embezzled from it), so they could not outbid Wizards despite their literal futures depending on it. To my knowledge, both companies had several years of Star War products in development.

However, there can be other circumstances that cause trouble. For instance, Disney decided to stop making video games... like, three times. Granted, this only affected Disney-owned companies, but they had been buying up companies for a few years and then, on a whim, decided to just stop. The guys who made Disney Infinity, currently halfway done with the fourth game, woke up one day and their entire studio was being shut down. So, if Disney likes the work you do, they might just offer to buy your company - DON'T TAKE THE OFFER! Disney is extremely fickle, and when they decide to leave a market, anybody in that market doing business with them gets screwed too. Sometimes, Disney, like Microsoft, decides that they want to be in a particular market. They'll start developing products themselves and not renew licenses. So, you make a cool Star Wars board game. Disney decides to create (or more likely, purchase) a board game company. Now they want to make their own board games and sucks to be you.

Then you've got the current scenario where Disney bought Star Wars, turned it to absolute gak, and has been systematically destroying what was once a strong, sure product into a risk. Ask Hasbro how many of their Last Jedi toys they sold. And Disney is working hard to kill Marvel too. Was at the store yesterday and saw shelves of Captain Marvel toys on clearance. Thus far, FFG has managed to stay ahead of Disney's buffoonery by concentrating almost exclusively on the original trilogy (occasionally dipping into the Clone Wars). I think Star Wars Legion is going to be pretty hurt when they decide to make Resistance and First Order factions (it'll go over poorly and take releases away from factions people do want).

Long story short, I would consider both Star Wars and Disney (or, I guess, just Disney now) to be a poison pill and I would stay as far away from them as possible, no matter what. FFG really needs to diversify to be able to absorb the inevitable loss of license (or quality of license), but they are doing the exact opposite of that. They are killing game lines for the explicit purposes of replacing them with Star Wars versions.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 15:49:50


Post by: Laughing Man


 Sqorgar wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
FFG is pretty safe. They're a giant in the board game industry (they're owned by Asmodee), and have enough different licenses that losing one of them wouldn't hurt them terribly much. Wizkids licenses their rulesets as well, although their adaptations of X-Wing are definitely a lot less popular in part due to the pay to win model they went with for Star Trek. And sure, they don't sell their product themselves, but they don't really need to bother when you can get a copy of X-Wing in Target or Walmart.

You don’t think FFG, unexpectedly losing the Star Wars license, would be all that put out by it? Ask Decipher how well that went for them, or WEG. Or Sony Online Entertainment. The industry is filled with giants crippled or destroyed overnight by unexpectedly losing the Star Wars license.

Sure, it'd be painful, but outside of X-Wing and Destiny, Star Wars isn't really doing a lot for them. The LCG crashed and burned pretty hard, the RPG is middling at best, and they haven't done much in the way of board games with the property.

And honestly, we've seen how they'll do if they lose a flagship line already: They lost both the Netrunner and GW licences in the same year, and they were doing a LOT more with the latter thanks to classics like Fury of Dracula. They bounced back pretty well with the L5R license, and kept on chugging with their in house properties per usual (see: Keyforge making absolute bank). FFG is an absolute giant in the American board gaming scene, and their miniatures are a side business to that (albeit a pretty lucrative one in the case of X-Wing).


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 17:42:56


Post by: Ancestral Hamster


Don't forget FFG has the LotR license and Lovecraft. The LotR LCG is a steady seller (and would sell more if they'd actually print adequate amounts). Not sure how the new app-based boardgame is doing, although it did stir up a lot of excitement on Boardgame Geek initially.

Similarly, they have a lot of Lovecraft inspired games, and it seems the Arkham Horror LCG is doing well. Maybe not gangbusters, but strong sales with good demand currently. As they've being doing Lovecraft mythos material for so long, they have a huge library of in-house material they can use and which has already been paid for, thus keeping art costs down.

Losing the Star Wars license would hurt, but so long as they don't put all their eggs in one basket and keep their other lines of revenue productive, they should survive.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 17:55:58


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


One wonder if FFGs stock problems as mentioned above may endanger a License renewal?

I mean, we’re talking pure business here. Where sadly, morals and that don’t really come into it.

A given game might be selling well - but if a Licensee isn’t maximising your profits because it cannot maintain stock? How would that be seen?

This is an open question. I know eff all about such things.

They at least had (when I still had interest around three or four years ago) similar issues with X-Wing. Selling out of X is one thing. But if the potential sales were the inherently higher Y? How might that be viewed by the license issuer?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seriously I’m not ragging on FFG here! Just using them as a relevant example, rather than making an example of them. If that makes sense?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 18:32:05


Post by: totalfailure


As a general rule, the licensing is handled in advance. A number of units to be produced is agreed upon between the parties, and what the fees will be. This is almost always an upfront transaction as well. For example, you agree with the licensor that you're going to produce 10,000 limited edition life-size Jar Jar Binks poo statues. You agree to this and pay the fee upfront. If your statues sell out, you need another agreement; and if you can't sell 10,000 piles of Jar Jar poo, well that's too bad for you. Disney got paid already. This is pretty standard for licensing deals; licensor gets paid first, and it's up to you to move products. There are frequently other stipulations too; for example, Round2 has to abide by the style guide issued by Paramount/CBS when they make the box for a Star Trek model kit they're selling. That usually includes color schemes, fonts, etc.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 19:08:50


Post by: Turnip Jedi


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One wonder if FFGs stock problems as mentioned above may endanger a License renewal?

I mean, we’re talking pure business here. Where sadly, morals and that don’t really come into it.

A given game might be selling well - but if a Licensee isn’t maximising your profits because it cannot maintain stock? How would that be seen?

This is an open question. I know eff all about such things.

They at least had (when I still had interest around three or four years ago) similar issues with X-Wing. Selling out of X is one thing. But if the potential sales were the inherently higher Y? How might that be viewed by the license issuer?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seriously I’m not ragging on FFG here! Just using them as a relevant example, rather than making an example of them. If that makes sense?


Intertube scuttle at the time was that FFG paid an upfront fee based on units produced, which might explain the stock issues with early X-Wing as FFG were slightly (and understandably) cautious with production numbers, then the game exploded exacerbating the problem as I assume booking factory time etc was an issue, so as long as Lucasfilm / Disney got paid on time I suspect after that point barring actual brand damage they didnt really give a hoot


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 19:16:14


Post by: Stormonu


Let’s not forget that Wizkids was originally disbanded in the 00’s, and one of their properties - Star Trek Attack Wing - is currently on the downhill slope.

FFG has multiple well-known licenses, I think they are a safe bet for now, as long as they retain Star Wars. The loss of that license, as others have mentioned, could put them in a crunch but I think they have a divergent enough portfolio to survive.

I think the honeymoon with Roundtree at GW is coming to an end. I suspect we’ll start seeing a leveling off of interest in 8th. I also suspect that they’ll see a slight downturn when they pull out 9th, but I think they have enough spread between systems at the moment it won’t hurt them too terribly bad (their only recourse is to continue with 8th. Considering the current dearth of material available between indexes and Codexes, anything else they drop labeled 8th is just going to have a smaller and smaller audience).


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 19:55:22


Post by: Nurglitch


They can redo the Space Marine codex. It was the first, and possibly the weakest. There's a bunch of material that can be incorporated, and lots of kits that can be dropped.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 21:03:35


Post by: Stormonu


They could, but consider how popular the CSM redux codex went over - a good portion of people who buy a re-released codex for the same edition is only going to be a percentage of the last version - likely only picked up by someone starting the army the first time around or tournament players - maybe a few who picked up the new models that weren’t in the previous and don’t just want to use the box-specific rules.

For those previous owners, it would be asking a lot to pick up a whole new book for 5 or 6 new data sheets and points value that will just change with the next Chapter Approved.

And who’d want to buy a Codex that *Drops* options?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 21:39:25


Post by: Voss


 Stormonu wrote:
They could, but consider how popular the CSM redux codex went over - a good portion of people who buy a re-released codex for the same edition is only going to be a percentage of the last version - likely only picked up by someone starting the army the first time around or tournament players - maybe a few who picked up the new models that weren’t in the previous and don’t just want to use the box-specific rules.

For those previous owners, it would be asking a lot to pick up a whole new book for 5 or 6 new data sheets and points value that will just change with the next Chapter Approved.

And who’d want to buy a Codex that *Drops* options?

Apparently Age of Sigmar Free Cities players, since that was the army book announcement: 'Hey, new book, also were dropping some as yet unspecified models from the range! Please be excited!'


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 21:49:57


Post by: Overread


Voss wrote:
 Stormonu wrote:
They could, but consider how popular the CSM redux codex went over - a good portion of people who buy a re-released codex for the same edition is only going to be a percentage of the last version - likely only picked up by someone starting the army the first time around or tournament players - maybe a few who picked up the new models that weren’t in the previous and don’t just want to use the box-specific rules.

For those previous owners, it would be asking a lot to pick up a whole new book for 5 or 6 new data sheets and points value that will just change with the next Chapter Approved.

And who’d want to buy a Codex that *Drops* options?

Apparently Age of Sigmar Free Cities players, since that was the army book announcement: 'Hey, new book, also were dropping some as yet unspecified models from the range! Please be excited! New kits? What are those?'


Yes but in that case the excitement is that multiple armies that have not had a battletome since the Old World are going to get a tome for AoS. Ergo they are basically going from being "fan flavour only" into functional armies that can stand on the table against others in the same edition of the game. Sure they are losing models, but at the same time they are gaining functional armies which should "work" and rise up to the power level of the current game. So for many its actually getting to put their models on the table, even if they lose some of the options - which I think over time many have come settled with the idea that it will happen. That doesn't mean they like it just that they accept that it might well happen and are more steeled against it; yet also excited because getting a Tome today means a chance at new models in the future - ergo a continued life for their army.


Sure no one likes losing models from the game (though personally I was quite happy to see skaven slaves vanish); esp if they own lots of them and spent time over building and painting them up; but in the end we prefer functional armies over dead ones that see no support or are removed from the game outrigt.


Also the die-hard players who still want to use their old models can still use the legendary rules set to keep their models around; even if they are not tournament legal and might not be useable against every opponent.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 22:21:42


Post by: Voss


But the Free Cities had army lists. Its completely a loss of units, and a gain of maybe a page of rules.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/29 23:35:54


Post by: Overread


Voss wrote:
But the Free Cities had army lists. Its completely a loss of units, and a gain of maybe a page of rules.


Yes but any one of those armies could have gone the way of Bretonnia, Tome Kings or Greenskins - removed from sale.
Losing a few models is preferable to many to losing the whole army; esp since things like legacy army rules are likely to not always (if ever) get updates for future editions; get rebalancing updates in the handbooks and will fairly quickly vanish from the tournament scene. Which also has a knock on effect on the games played at many clubs.


Again no one likes losing model kits, we all hate it; but its preferable to have the army itself survive even if some parts are lost. At this stage we don't even know how many or which specific kits are being lost (further confused by any kits being reboxed being listed as "no longer for sale" on GW stores because of how their inventory system works). I'm sure if GW uses this to slash 50% of the models there'd be outcry, but otherwise most are hopeful. Plus removed models might well return in time or return in function but new designs.

Eg the bolt throwers for dark and high elves were lost; but could return to the game in the future; or the Aelves might get a "lightning laser bolt thrower" or some such where the old models can (rebased) easily stand in. Heck already a few use the old bolt throwers as "allied stormcast bolt throwers"


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/30 20:47:41


Post by: Easy E


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One wonder if FFGs stock problems as mentioned above may endanger a License renewal?

I mean, we’re talking pure business here. Where sadly, morals and that don’t really come into it.

A given game might be selling well - but if a Licensee isn’t maximising your profits because it cannot maintain stock? How would that be seen?



Honestly, selling out of stock is a good thing. That means you did not over-produce a product and are avoiding the waste of inventory, transport, over-production, etc. If you sell out and there is still demand, you are simply in a better position on the supply and demand equation.

Remember, amateurs talk about sales numbers, experts talk about profit margin. It is better to sell 1 item and make $1 of profit, than a 1,000 products and get 99 cents of profit.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/31 00:02:50


Post by: Ancestral Hamster


 Easy E wrote:
Honestly, selling out of stock is a good thing. That means you did not over-produce a product and are avoiding the waste of inventory, transport, over-production, etc. If you sell out and there is still demand, you are simply in a better position on the supply and demand equation.

Remember, amateurs talk about sales numbers, experts talk about profit margin. It is better to sell 1 item and make $1 of profit, than a 1,000 products and get 99 cents of profit.

Since it happens so often with the LotR LCG, I assume FFG has calculated the numbers carefully, and so do deliberately short print runs. Better to leave some customers hungry rather than sate them all and have a mountain of now unsalable product. (When I worked for the now defunct Borders bookchain, I noticed that we very often had excess stock on many, many different products that at least our store no longer had a market for as we'd sold copies to all the regulars who liked that author/series. Sure keep a copy or two to take advantage of word of mouth, but 3 dozen?!)


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/07/31 11:00:58


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


 Easy E wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One wonder if FFGs stock problems as mentioned above may endanger a License renewal?

I mean, we’re talking pure business here. Where sadly, morals and that don’t really come into it.

A given game might be selling well - but if a Licensee isn’t maximising your profits because it cannot maintain stock? How would that be seen?



Honestly, selling out of stock is a good thing. That means you did not over-produce a product and are avoiding the waste of inventory, transport, over-production, etc. If you sell out and there is still demand, you are simply in a better position on the supply and demand equation.

Remember, amateurs talk about sales numbers, experts talk about profit margin. It is better to sell 1 item and make $1 of profit, than a 1,000 products and get 99 cents of profit.



Indeed, but the risk here is that Disney look into the performance, and figure 'if you guys sorted out your supply train, we'd be making that $1 for each of three sales you've cost us'.

As I said, this is entirely speculative. I am not disparaging FFG, nor presenting myself as an expert


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We see the same thing with 'Must Have' toys each Christmas. The most infamous is probably actual punch ups over Cabbage Patch Kids (I've been aware of that since I can remember, but I think me remembering seeing it on TV first time around is a false memory!).

There, the company behind it were simply missing out on sales. Yes, limiting your stock can help drive demand, and greatly reduce the risk of being left with a warehouse full of unwanted fad tat a couple of months after.

But when you've got three or four people scrapping over a single item? I can see shareholders querying your overall stock control decisions.

This is also why GW are investing in a larger factory. They're literally at capacity, which is affecting availability. And much as we might not like to admit it, us Nerds can be quite flighty. If I get an idea in my head for an army, I'm one to order it there and then, funds allowing. But if I can't get bits of it? That idea (with me anyway, can't speak for anyone else) can wither and die by the time it all comes back into stock.

This is why I'm currently extending Looting to the FW Warlord Weapons for AT. In terms of the game's design, changing up weapons has a significant impact on your tactical options. Yet in the US, they've been sold out since, well, forever. That sucks for local gaming groups. And the eBay prices are predictably scalpy and silly.

In terms of X-Wing, the structure of the game means if you can't get Ship A, your preferred/number crunched/netlisty squadron is grounded. And if you can't compete against those lucky enough to have Ship A in their collection? That could put someone off the game entirely, especially if it's a common occurrence.

So short stock can be a bad thing, I'd say.

Again, I'm just speculating. I've no specialist knowledge nor experience here. As ever, very open to education and info


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And in terms of X-Wing specifically, I wouldn’t be surprised if a decent slice of the sales are down to people simply collecting some of the outright nicest and most reasonably priced Star Wars ships.

Whilst I’ve gone off the game, I still hold a genuine appreciation for the models. Because they are spanking gorgeous, and anyone who says otherwise is a liar.

For someone putting them on display, they take up relatively little room, are nicely scaled with each other (not you, Armada or Attack Wing. Sort the scale out, eh?), and very, very detailed.

To the point I’d be tempted to buy back in just to own the really, really good model representations of some of my favourite ship designs ever.

Take that license away? The X-Wing rules might well be decent (and they are in my opinion), but would a replacement product attract the same sales?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/01 16:45:21


Post by: Easy E


They could loose the license if someone is just outright willing to pay more for it..... perhaps as a competitive *denial of service* type strategy.

Think of GW maintaining the Lord of the Rings license while doing little with it for so long. They really do not want anyone else to have it though.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/01 17:13:05


Post by: AndrewGPaul


Even if that’s the case, I would think they couldn’t simply be “outbid” during the lifetime of the contract. Barring any potential cancellation clauses, a licence should know how long they’ve got.

Not making plans for an inability to renew is a different matter, I accept that.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/01 18:22:56


Post by: DarkBlack


Not my field. Why would we see a drop off that sees existing companies fail? Is it an external economic concern or something within the game industry?

I can see the industry getting over-saturated and companies getting left behind, closing the door on new attempts. Like in fantasy mass battle games, where games like Runewars are failing and The Other Side is not looking good (unless I missed something) and we'll see how Parabellum does. Ice and Fire seems to be doing well, but that might be the IP more than the game. Still to be seen how far it goes and if it sustains itself.

oni wrote:Mantic has a poor business model. They have to jump from Kickstarter to Kickstarter to maintain capital to stay alive. They will eventually fail.

They seem to be getting themselves more sustainable, hopefully they get there. I really like the company, how they approach game design and how they treat customers.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/01 19:16:22


Post by: Nurglitch


Mass fantasy games are kind of a trap. You're depending on a narrow but deep-pocketed market of fanatics, and a pre-existing IP (either a film license, which has its own pitfalls, or something built up out of a smaller game like Warhammer or The Other Side, the latter of which apparently showing how Malifaux doesn't scale as an army-building game).


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/01 19:33:35


Post by: Stormonu


I think a large portion of the board game/tabletop growth we had seen in the last 10 years or so had been driven in part by the economic slump; people want entertainment and board game & RPGs are relatively cheap - especially if you factor in buying one copy for 4 or so players (vs., say four separate copies of a video game, plus any console or game service fees)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
With the economy seeming to be in recovery, I suspect people are returning to post-slump actives or plain willing to spend more on their fun.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/01 22:27:14


Post by: Saturmorn Carvilli


 Stormonu wrote:
I think a large portion of the board game/tabletop growth we had seen in the last 10 years or so had been driven in part by the economic slump; people want entertainment and board game & RPGs are relatively cheap - especially if you factor in buying one copy for 4 or so players (vs., say four separate copies of a video game, plus any console or game service fees)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
With the economy seeming to be in recovery, I suspect people are returning to post-slump actives or plain willing to spend more on their fun.


That might be part of it, but I think a larger portion of the upswing in these games is a combination of doing an activity that is unplugged/in person social, has some nostalgia of board gaming when younger and the fact that there are indeed some rather clever games out there. Additionally, I think with the internet it is much easier to see what modern tabletop/board/card games are all about instead of just randomly coming across someone that just likes these games pre-Youtube. I also don't think it hurts matters that things considered nerd/geek aren't nearly as looked down upon as they used to be.

I never really played board games beyond the common and popular roll to move types that you can probably easily guess of the 80s. I started playing D&D in junior high and then again in college. While I would like to get involved with an rpg, I don't really want to commit that much time or effort especially for a D&D-esque fantasy rpg. I just randomly came across a board game video on Youtube which completely changed my understanding of what board games were today. Despite playing rpgs for a far number of years, I never really gave board games a consideration that they too had evolved well beyond Monopoly. For me, I went from board games to board games with miniatures (Mansions of Madness mostly) then moved to miniatures wargames as a way to try and re-capture some of my favorite parts of tabletop rpgs without the long term investment. Even now, I largely play miniatures games as an excuse to get out of the house and meet more people in social environment (as opposed to a work environment) as I am getting a bit too old for the bar scene. While I am not spending as much money even in the Games Workshop HHHobby compared to my bar tabs, that really isn't a consideration to why I enjoy it.

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has. That, and the usual cultural swings that just sort of happen in the same way that Westerns used to be super popular but aren't anymore.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/05 14:59:20


Post by: oni


GW is inflating their own bubble. It will eventually burst.

While I wouldn't anticipate GW going under, their release schedule is so rapid and unsustainable that they will eventually run out of steam. This will place an immense amount of pressure on the studio to come up with something / anything just to push product out the door. These 'things' will be poorly thought out money grabs that will damage their core products.

Look what's happening with their most iconic property, the Space Marines. The entire line of Space Marines is slowly being obsoleted because GW has no idea where to go or what to do with them to perpetuate Space Marines sales. So they come up with short sighted, hack ideas like the Primaris Marines that paint them into a corner. So poorly thought out that their most iconic property that has kept them in business for decades is now slowing being ruined and eroding away.

This practice, if continued, along with the ever decreasing life span of product will eventually lead to a loss in player base and lost sales.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/05 15:42:57


Post by: Sqorgar


 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has. That, and the usual cultural swings that just sort of happen in the same way that Westerns used to be super popular but aren't anymore.
I think going full social justice will do significant damage to the industry. I mean, it has taken down Star Wars and it has been ruining Marvel comics for years (with the MCU not far behind). When it can effectively destroy the most popular IPs in the world with decades and decades of good will, what can't it destroy?

When escapism becomes preachy, it stops being escapism. And all the growth and new opportunities the miniature and board game market currently have, all it will take is for one company to pretend that their toy soldiers are Important and the conversation stops being about how cool this new model is and becomes how Important this new model is. The values by which we judge the entire industry and its products will shift. Things that are cool, but not Important will be treated with suspicion, and companies will get by making things that are Important but not cool (or even good), and sooner or later, the Important thing stops generating money because there's something over there which is even more Important, and there's nothing cool (or good) left to care about. Heaven help us if Disney ever buys into this market (probably by buying Asmodee).

Calling it a "cultural swing" feels a bit like an understatement, though... That makes it sound like a fad. But a fad is something where interest burns brightly and burns out quickly (pogs!), while this is more of a reflection of how small and insignificant we feel in society. As long as society makes us feel bad, our need to glom onto Important things will always be there.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/06 04:06:42


Post by: DarkBlack


oni wrote:While I wouldn't anticipate GW going under, their release schedule is so rapid and unsustainable that they will eventually run out of steam. This will place an immense amount of pressure on the studio to come up with something / anything just to push product out the door. These 'things' will be poorly thought out money grabs that will damage their core products.

I feel like this describes GW releases already.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/06 14:45:32


Post by: Nurglitch


I don't think it's damaging the core products so much as loading up the vertical market at the expense of expanding the market. There's so much for people that are all-in, and a couple of extra things for people who might be interested. There's that repackaging of 4th edition's Space Marines and Orks, but there's very little light/inexpensive intro-gaming.

Mind you, contra Sqorgar, appealing to women and minorities instead of the usual white beardos does a fantastic job expanding the market for GW market. Just like with movies and comics it'll not only expand the audience, but maybe also give us something to enjoy beyond what's demanded by the pasty grognard in cargo shorts.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/06 23:40:01


Post by: Sqorgar


Nurglitch wrote:
Mind you, contra Sqorgar, appealing to women and minorities instead of the usual white beardos does a fantastic job expanding the market for GW market. Just like with movies and comics it'll not only expand the audience, but maybe also give us something to enjoy beyond what's demanded by the pasty grognard in cargo shorts.
You'll have to point out examples of what products you think have an expanded audience due to social justice, because all the ones I can think of - literally the biggest IPs and industries out there - have been irreparably damaged by it. And maybe calling people "white beardos" is the kind of self important bullgak that starts it.

Broadening your audience is not a terrible idea, but there's a wrong way to do it. I think people, in general, respond better to products that don't feel like they were designed by a marketing team and pounded into mediocrity by focus testing. Appealing to a larger audience in a cynical, manipulative way is not going to make anybody happy. You are just going to lose your loyal audience and you won't make up for it by getting a new, better audience. That audience will be anything buy loyal. They will be fickle as hell. How does the saying go? "If she'll cheat with you, she'll cheat on you"?

The most important thing - the absolute most important thing - is that you don't try to pass off broadening your audience as a morality play. You aren't doing Important things. Marketing to women and minorities is just marketing. You aren't applying for sainthood. And people who don't like your marketing aren't racists or misogynists. It's just marketing. It used to be that the first rule of marketing was "never send away a potential paying customer". Doing the exact opposite of that is just being bad at your job.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 01:30:40


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Unfortunately it seems like, at least in the short term, there's only an upside in appealing to the self-important social justice crowd. If you're making a movie, for example, if it ticks the right boxes with that audience, they will go see it, and even love it, even if it isn't all that good of a movie. So you can sell more tickets without having to make a really great movie, so you've almost got some guaranteed sales, reducing your risk. That can take a movie like Black Panther, which was a decent but kind of average Marvel movie, and make it seem like a great movie. Because people who just care about the actual movie liked it well enough, but people who care about what they think it means for society or whatever thinks it's the greatest thing ever.

On the other hand, it may not be a good long term strategy. If you go to far with it you alienate your core audience, and if you rely on it too heavily for your ticket sales then you focus more on the message than making a good movie. Then as soon as you make a misstep and do something that meets with disapproval from the "social justice" crowd, then they'll abandon you. And if you've lost your core fans already, then you don't have anybody left.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 03:37:01


Post by: Sqorgar


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Unfortunately it seems like, at least in the short term, there's only an upside in appealing to the self-important social justice crowd. If you're making a movie, for example, if it ticks the right boxes with that audience, they will go see it, and even love it, even if it isn't all that good of a movie. So you can sell more tickets without having to make a really great movie, so you've almost got some guaranteed sales, reducing your risk. That can take a movie like Black Panther, which was a decent but kind of average Marvel movie, and make it seem like a great movie. Because people who just care about the actual movie liked it well enough, but people who care about what they think it means for society or whatever thinks it's the greatest thing ever.
That can work for a single movie, but you can't sustain it for very long. You need to create a loyal customer, and just getting them in the seats won't do much if their reward is posting their ticket stub on Twitter rather than seeing, you know, a good movie. To be honest, I'm really curious what the numbers for Captain Marvel 2 will be.

On the other hand, it may not be a good long term strategy. If you go to far with it you alienate your core audience, and if you rely on it too heavily for your ticket sales then you focus more on the message than making a good movie. Then as soon as you make a misstep and do something that meets with disapproval from the "social justice" crowd, then they'll abandon you. And if you've lost your core fans already, then you don't have anybody left.
They were never your audience to begin with. They were the audience of your social justice, not your marketing, and you can't keep giving them that self important high. Seeing Captain Marvel - that amazing first step for women super heroes in the MCU - the first time is a high. Seeing the second one won't do gak.

But I don't care about that. I'm fine with companies that ruin their own products. It's frustrating, but it is ultimately their product and if they want to make terrible products then I can simply go find something else to pay attention to. Or make something myself. I'm not a slave to Marvel. The thing I have a problem with is this marketing that convinces people to call each other racist or sexist for disagreeing with it - with the MARKETING! How is it possible that I'm not allowed to simply think that GW's new Repentia designs are awful without someone suggesting that I secretly hate women? How is that now an unavoidable part of discussing any Sisters of Battle model?

Like, I think Black Panther is a terrible movie that only entertains you as long as you don't think real hard about it, but I've literally had comments like that removed from forums as "bigoted content". They threatened to ban me! I criticized the writing! And because the marketing convinced a bunch of idiots that Black Panther is somehow important (he's been in the comics for 60 years, and he wasn't important then either), I'm somehow a hateful bigot because I think a popcorn summer blockbuster sucks. That's not okay. Marvel encourages this behavior and I'm off Marvel now. They've lost a lifelong customer because of this crap, so I hope the people they replaced ex-customers like me with are buying as many comics as I did... *goes and checks sales number* Oh....


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 07:46:18


Post by: Elemental


Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has.


It's possible it might shift that way, but I think it's more likely that there is something that can't be replaced about sitting down with your friends around a table and looking away from a screen. IME, "the next generation" don't have any inherent bias against non-digital activities if you just make the effort to reach out and get them involved, rather than just going "kids these days, right?".


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 09:08:11


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Yup.

The appeal of wargames remains unchanged. Building things is satisfying. Winning is satisfying. Competing is challenging. Painting is satisfying.

There's basically a level of investment in terms of time and effort in this hobby that computers simply cannot replicate. And that's a near universal appeal.

I mean for me, my hobby is currently pretty much building the models. Because it's immensely satisfying. I get a real kick out of taking a bunch of plastic parts, and assembling them into a solid model. And GW in particular have done their best to remove frustration from that equation (consider their old metal and plastic kits, compared to the modern ones), making it even more enjoyable, as I don't spend time wiggling bits to fit, getting glue everywhere as a result, or having to fill gaps. (though those very things are of appeal to others, I'm only speaking for myself).

Much as I enjoy a tear up on GTA, or playing Punch Poverty on Batman? They just don't compare for me.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 09:08:53


Post by: balmong7


 Elemental wrote:
Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.

 Saturmorn Carvilli wrote:

If there is a bubble (which has been going fairly strong since like 2012), I don't think it will be money that bursts it. I think it will be the next generation not having the same nostalgic connection to non-electronic entertainment media that the current one has.


It's possible it might shift that way, but I think it's more likely that there is something that can't be replaced about sitting down with your friends around a table and looking away from a screen. IME, "the next generation" don't have any inherent bias against non-digital activities if you just make the effort to reach out and get them involved, rather than just going "kids these days, right?".


As a millennial who only recently got into the hobby. It wasn't me being "more interested in video games" that made me wait until adulthood to start wargaming. It was "lack of enough money to purchase an army". Buying one $60 game every couple months was much more palatable as a teenager with than saving up for months to try and drop $500 dollars on an army for a tabletop wargame that I had no guarantee I could find people to pay with. (none of my friends played. So if I got into it, I was getting into it solo.) My parents were also way more willing to buy a video game than hobby supplies and models because they saw the money sink it would be lol.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 11:12:04


Post by: ajax_xaja


I'm interested to see what people have to say about Asmodee/FFG now that the new Marvel Crisis Protocol IP has just launched.

For those unaware, there's a new skirmish miniatures game in ~40mm scale, that pits heroes and villains of Marvel against each other.

The reason I bring it up is because it's a combination of TWO things that many people claim are in a bubble about to pop:

Superheroes/MCU, and miniature collecting/gaming.

So far, the reception for the game has been phenomenal, but if this isn't the peak epitomization of a bubble bursting IP, I don't know what else is.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 11:18:50


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


To be fair, peeps have been saying the MCU bubble is about to pop since, well, Iron Man back in 2008


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 11:47:22


Post by: auticus


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
To be fair, peeps have been saying the MCU bubble is about to pop since, well, Iron Man back in 2008


I think its more people want to see the bubble pop, much like they wanted to see GW fail for 20 years.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 13:01:17


Post by: Nurglitch


I have been assured that GW died a long time ago and that Warhammer is a dead game...

I think it's like how certain people feel like including women and minorities is ruining everything, rather than enriching everyone. Some people aren't happy unless someone else is doing worse.

And it's kind of funny to see the pretzels they'll twist themselves into justify themselves in the face of reality. It's how we get bubbles in the first place.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 13:09:07


Post by: Sqorgar


Elemental wrote:Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.
I know you are just trying to insinuate that I'm a racist here, but I am against representation. I'm not against broadening the audience of something, but representation is an extremely unhealthy way to do it. It's like people identified a real problem, then came up with the worst possible solution to fix it.

Human beings have an amazing ability for empathy and are (successfully) asked to relate to talking cars, animals, aliens, the undead, robots, and even littler (American Beauty). My favorite tv show, which I've seen hundreds of episodes of, is a Korean variety show - I don't speak Korea and before watching this show, had very little knowledge or understanding of Korean culture. It was about as alien as something can get, and according to the beliefs behind "representation", I can't appreciate something that is alien to me.

The idea that you can only market something to a person through overt tokenism is, frankly, bizarre. It's cynical and betrays a fundamental lack of empathy and trust in your fellow man. There's an innate premise there that if they can't identify with people who look like you, then you can't identify with people who look like them. This means that attempts at representation are more about manipulating these people, not actually representing them. The other alternative is that you identify with them just fine, but don't believe they are capable of reciprocating. You have such a low opinion of their intelligence that you assume these dumb animals can only respond to shallow, surface level pandering. I'm not sure which is worse.

The way you broaden an audience is not through representation, but through a diversity of offering. If you only make superhero movies, then try making a horror movie or a romantic comedy too. If you just make a superhero movie, but this time the character is black, that will work once and your audience will not grow as a result.

ajax_xaja wrote:I'm interested to see what people have to say about Asmodee/FFG now that the new Marvel Crisis Protocol IP has just launched.

For those unaware, there's a new skirmish miniatures game in ~40mm scale, that pits heroes and villains of Marvel against each other.

The reason I bring it up is because it's a combination of TWO things that many people claim are in a bubble about to pop:

Superheroes/MCU, and miniature collecting/gaming.

So far, the reception for the game has been phenomenal, but if this isn't the peak epitomization of a bubble bursting IP, I don't know what else is.

There's two things at work here, with a more iffy third:

1) Marvel has an 80 year history filled with a lot of interesting characters and stories, and a lot of nerds (like myself) grew up reading Marvel comics and have a fondness for it. However, the vast majority of customers out there only know a handful of Marvel characters (not coincidentally, the ones in the movies) - there's already people who are going, "Who is Baron Zemo?". As the game progresses, it will naturally move further away from the popular, known Marvel properties and move into the more esoteric stuff, which will have a much smaller audience of people who will follow it.

Knight Models' DC Universe game has this problem, but it is mostly alleviated by the fact that the game is mostly played by the people who know the esoteric comic canon. I mean, most people don't know who the Court of Owls are - I think they've only been in the comic books. They aren't in any of the cartoons or movies (that I'm aware of). That's fine because Knight Models doesn't need to sell 40,000 models to make a profit. The DC property is not that expensive and resin models are cheaper to cast and easier to design. When they are targeting a broad audience, like with their two player starter set, they base it around The Dark Knight movie.

Asmodee has a different problem. Because of the MCU, the Marvel license is considerably more expensive. And they are using hard plastic models which require a huge investment of money upfront, with their models being made in China and shipped to the US. This not only makes their models more expensive to make, but they have to sell a lot more of them in order to see a return on their investment. They can shove someone like Baron Zemo into the starter set, but they won't be able to sell him by himself for $20. People might pay $40 for the Hulk (or even the Hulk-buster Iron Man suit), but will they pay $40 for The Abomination or Amadeus Cho Hulk? I know people that would pay $20 for a Taskmaster figure, but would a large enough part of the game's audience do it? Marvel sells unique characters, and people might buy a few hundred stormtroopers, but they won't buy even two Hulks.

Basically, I think there is an upper limit to how far a Marvel miniatures game can go and still be financially viable. As long as the MCU and comics remain viable, they can keep the hype up, and focus on different characters and give them a boost in popularity.

2) The MCU and Marvel comics will probably not remain viable for long. Marvel comics has sucked for years now and they've been circling the drain for some time. They overship their comics in an effort to seem like they are doing gangbusters, but even when they basically give the comics away for free, they sit on shelves unbought. At this point, the actual number of comic book stores has been exponentially shrinking by about 5%-10% each year, and at some point, it will reach a point where they can't sell enough individual comic books even if they made a successful one. It seems increasingly likely that Disney will kill the line in favor of the MCU.

Problem is, the MCU has over two dozen movies in it and people are kind of getting tired of it. Endgame created a perfect jump off point for casual fans where the characters and storylines they enjoyed all had closure. Phase 4 includes a lot of unrecognizable characters, takes storylines from unpopular runs in the comics, and saturates the market with a bunch of MCU movies and tv series that nobody asked for or is eager to see. That's not to say that these won't be good movies, but the MCU is getting to Assassin's Creed levels of oversaturation, and they just announced about 15 projects intended for an audience which has largely already said their goodbyes.

If Marvel Comics dies and the MCU enjoys a much more moderate success, what does this mean for the miniatures game? Well, it means that the critical mass of a casual audience will dry up, and they'll have to start targeting those esoteric Marvel characters to keep interest up in the game - hello $20 Taskmaster! - but will that be enough to keep Asmodee and its investors happy? Are they okay with a moderate success in a niche market?

3) I expect Disney to buy Asmodee one day. Asmodee is the largest and most successful board game publisher. They have a big part of a major growing market that Disney doesn't currently target, and Asmodee is for sale. Right now, Disney is happy to license stuff out, but it is possible that they decide that, like their new streaming service, it makes more sense to just buy into the market directly. If they do, I think they are more likely to buy Asmodee than compete with them - they can threaten to take their Star Wars and Marvel license away, causing investors to get scared, then buy up Asmodee for pennies on the dollar.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nurglitch wrote:

I think it's like how certain people feel like including women and minorities is ruining everything, rather than enriching everyone. Some people aren't happy unless someone else is doing worse.

Tell me again how calling people "white beardos" is enriching them?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 13:19:51


Post by: Ghool


'Asmodee is the largest and most successful board game publisher.'

I think you forgot about Hasbro dude. Perhaps they are the largest hobby game publisher but not the biggest fish in the pond.

Also, Asmodee was sold to another investment firm several months ago. While Asmodee might be a big publisher, they are far from the biggest.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 13:22:37


Post by: Albino Squirrel


I agree with all that as being issues with the potential long term success of the game. Already they are planning to release characters they know wouldn't actually sell on their own, so they have to bundle them with another more popular character. Fans of the comics are going to want all kinds of characters that just won't sell enough to the casual audience to make a return on the investment of creating the hard plastic miniatures.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 13:41:45


Post by: Nurglitch


 Sqorgar wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:

I think it's like how certain people feel like including women and minorities is ruining everything, rather than enriching everyone. Some people aren't happy unless someone else is doing worse.

Tell me again how calling people "white beardos" is enriching them?

Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 14:06:48


Post by: Sqorgar


Nurglitch wrote:
Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.
Don't be a jerk.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ghool wrote:
'Asmodee is the largest and most successful board game publisher.'

I think you forgot about Hasbro dude. Perhaps they are the largest hobby game publisher but not the biggest fish in the pond.
I didn't forget about Hasbro. I feel like, if Disney wanted to compete with Hasbro at that level, they would've done it decades ago. Instead, they'll compete with Wizards of the Coast, which Hasbro owns, since the more targeted hobby market is both starting to make some serious money and it will be easier for Disney to dominate in.

I do think that Disney won't compete against Wizards of the Coast unless they are willing to take on Hasbro, and it might be the main thing keeping them back. Big corporations like to divide the marketplace between them rather than step on each other's toes. But as long as they don't compete against Magic or DnD, Disney could prevent starting a turf war.

Also, Asmodee was sold to another investment firm several months ago. While Asmodee might be a big publisher, they are far from the biggest.

An investment firm will only keep Asmodee as long as it is making money. If Disney threatens to take away the Marvel and Star Wars license, Asmodee will be back on the market, cheap.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 14:50:24


Post by: Nurglitch


 Sqorgar wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:
Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.
Don't be a jerk.

It often helps to understand how others see you because then you can develop a sense of empathy for the Other, rather than throwing a tantrum about how all the women and darkies are ruining everything.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 15:00:05


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Honestly people aren't worth responding to when they're obviously just trolling by insulting people to try to get a reaction, rather than trying to contribute anything intelligent. Probably best to just ignore such people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sqorgar wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Unfortunately it seems like, at least in the short term, there's only an upside in appealing to the self-important social justice crowd. If you're making a movie, for example, if it ticks the right boxes with that audience, they will go see it, and even love it, even if it isn't all that good of a movie. So you can sell more tickets without having to make a really great movie, so you've almost got some guaranteed sales, reducing your risk. That can take a movie like Black Panther, which was a decent but kind of average Marvel movie, and make it seem like a great movie. Because people who just care about the actual movie liked it well enough, but people who care about what they think it means for society or whatever thinks it's the greatest thing ever.
That can work for a single movie, but you can't sustain it for very long. You need to create a loyal customer, and just getting them in the seats won't do much if their reward is posting their ticket stub on Twitter rather than seeing, you know, a good movie. To be honest, I'm really curious what the numbers for Captain Marvel 2 will be.

On the other hand, it may not be a good long term strategy. If you go to far with it you alienate your core audience, and if you rely on it too heavily for your ticket sales then you focus more on the message than making a good movie. Then as soon as you make a misstep and do something that meets with disapproval from the "social justice" crowd, then they'll abandon you. And if you've lost your core fans already, then you don't have anybody left.
They were never your audience to begin with. They were the audience of your social justice, not your marketing, and you can't keep giving them that self important high. Seeing Captain Marvel - that amazing first step for women super heroes in the MCU - the first time is a high. Seeing the second one won't do gak.

But I don't care about that. I'm fine with companies that ruin their own products. It's frustrating, but it is ultimately their product and if they want to make terrible products then I can simply go find something else to pay attention to. Or make something myself. I'm not a slave to Marvel. The thing I have a problem with is this marketing that convinces people to call each other racist or sexist for disagreeing with it - with the MARKETING! How is it possible that I'm not allowed to simply think that GW's new Repentia designs are awful without someone suggesting that I secretly hate women? How is that now an unavoidable part of discussing any Sisters of Battle model?

Like, I think Black Panther is a terrible movie that only entertains you as long as you don't think real hard about it, but I've literally had comments like that removed from forums as "bigoted content". They threatened to ban me! I criticized the writing! And because the marketing convinced a bunch of idiots that Black Panther is somehow important (he's been in the comics for 60 years, and he wasn't important then either), I'm somehow a hateful bigot because I think a popcorn summer blockbuster sucks. That's not okay. Marvel encourages this behavior and I'm off Marvel now. They've lost a lifelong customer because of this crap, so I hope the people they replaced ex-customers like me with are buying as many comics as I did... *goes and checks sales number* Oh....


just getting them in the seats won't do much if their reward is posting their ticket stub on Twitter rather than seeing, you know, a good movie

The part I bolded there I don't quite agree with. Because people who like the "message" or whatever of a movie can easily delude themselves into thinking it's good even if it isn't. So making the movie good doesn't matter. There are people who think Black Panther was Oscar worthy. But, like you say, that probably only works for the first movie. The second one would have to actually be good so that the non "social justice" people will go see it, or top the previous on in terms of the social justice message, so that those people will get what they want out of it. However, I still think there is no particular downside to throwing that crowd a little bone. It's only adding to your audience, because the people who just want to see a good movie will still see your movie if it's good. So if you make an okay movie like Black Panther, but then convince people that it's a very important movie because "diversity" or something, you can sell way more tickets than the movie would have sold on it's own merits.

But anyway, I should probably move away from the movie analogy as it will just go further off topic. But I haven't seen that kind of things in any miniature games. I get what you mean about being called names by the kind of "social justice" people for not liking things you're supposed to like, but hopefully that's mostly a thing with internet trolls. I haven't ever had that experience in person.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 15:59:46


Post by: stonehorse


 Sqorgar wrote:
Elemental wrote:Oh hey, more "not against representation BUT...." stuff.
I know you are just trying to insinuate that I'm a racist here, but I am against representation.


If I had a penny everytime I heard a racist say... 'I'm not racist, but... (Insert racist comment here)', I'd be quite rich. Being against representation is a bit of a dog whistle.

I'll just report you, block you, and hope this thread can get back to the topic subject.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 16:20:41


Post by: Nurglitch


More importantly, games need to appeal to more than just white beardos. I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.

Part of it is the price, and part of it is that accessibility as they're a café which means that you can have snacks and drinks while you play your boardgames, some of which play considerably faster than miniature games. Women in particular seem to be a majority of the clientele, and I'd imagine it's because they're not quite as marginalised in board games as they are in miniature gaming.

Which isn't to say there isn't a huge, long way to go because of the kind of 'white fragility' and 'male fragility' that sees expanding the appeal of a product as a betrayal of its core audience. But that we might see something of a Gouldian 'punctuated equilibrium' occur at the next economic downturn as companies trying to milk the same old moobs go belly-up, and companies with broader, more inclusive markets see less of a decline in income.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 17:21:29


Post by: Sqorgar


Nurglitch wrote:It often helps to understand how others see you because then you can develop a sense of empathy for the Other, rather than throwing a tantrum about how all the women and darkies are ruining everything.
I'm not going to take lessons on empathy from someone who calls other people "white beardos". Until you start treating the people who are already here with respect, I don't, for one second, buy your vacuous claims of empathy and virtue. You want to stop "othering"? Charity starts at home.

stonehorse wrote:If I had a penny everytime I heard a racist say... 'I'm not racist, but... (Insert racist comment here)', I'd be quite rich. Being against representation is a bit of a dog whistle.

I'll just report you, block you, and hope this thread can get back to the topic subject.
You're going to report me for having the wrong opinion on representation?

Nurglitch wrote:I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.
They make their money on snacks and drink. Your local GW makes money by selling games. GW wants customers that buy games, not cocktails.

When it comes down to it, the audience for GW's games is never going to be diverse. Not for stupid reasons like race or gender, but because of the time and money involved. It is strictly an upper-middle class hobby that requires an inordinate amount of time and money - that's why every GW player's story is "played as a teen, lost interested when I discovered girls or went to college, picked it up again as an adult". GW games tend to be teenagers and middle aged folks (if they have kids, their kids are older because toddlers and GW don't mix).

Do you honestly think that GW games are going to appeal to middle aged women? You think there's a lot of 40 year old women out there with a ton of disposable income, a lot of free time, and limited child care duties that really just want to spend four hours on a Saturday afternoon chucking a bunch of dice to see if a gang of Tyranids eviscerate some space marines? It's not going to happen, mate.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 17:35:08


Post by: Laughing Man



Do you honestly think that GW games are going to appeal to middle aged women? You think there's a lot of 40 year old women out there with a ton of disposable income, a lot of free time, and limited child care duties that really just want to spend four hours on a Saturday afternoon chucking a bunch of dice to see if a gang of Tyranids eviscerate some space marines? It's not going to happen, mate.

At least a third of my gaming community is women. The fact that you view women enjoying our hobby as impossible says far more about you than women.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 17:39:21


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


Nurglitch wrote:
More importantly, games need to appeal to more than just white beardos. I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.

Part of it is the price, and part of it is that accessibility as they're a café which means that you can have snacks and drinks while you play your boardgames, some of which play considerably faster than miniature games. Women in particular seem to be a majority of the clientele, and I'd imagine it's because they're not quite as marginalised in board games as they are in miniature gaming.

Which isn't to say there isn't a huge, long way to go because of the kind of 'white fragility' and 'male fragility' that sees expanding the appeal of a product as a betrayal of its core audience. But that we might see something of a Gouldian 'punctuated equilibrium' occur at the next economic downturn as companies trying to milk the same old moobs go belly-up, and companies with broader, more inclusive markets see less of a decline in income.


I'd be curious to know what the general demographic is in the Warhammer Citadel, considering that's a cafe. See if it really does make any considerable difference.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 17:50:36


Post by: Sqorgar


 Laughing Man wrote:

At least a third of my gaming community is women. The fact that you view women enjoying our hobby as impossible says far more about you than women.
Out of curiosity, how big is your gaming community? Is it three people? How many women are there? How old are they? Do they have kids? How often do they play? How involved are they when they play? Are they there with significant others or by their own accord? Your anecdote here has several possible ways it could go, but you haven't provided any details.

Regardless, the plural of "anecdote" is not "proof". Warhammer is an expensive and time consuming hobby that is generally not going to be compatible with certain lifestyles. Even if everyone in the world was Warhammer's core audience, only a fraction of a fraction of those people would bother to engage in it for any extended period of time. I find the premise that there's a bunch of middle aged women out there who would totally play Warhammer 40k if not for the Sisters of Battle being too sexy to be comical.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 17:57:02


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Sqorgar wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:

At least a third of my gaming community is women. The fact that you view women enjoying our hobby as impossible says far more about you than women.
Out of curiosity, how big is your gaming community? Is it three people? How many women are there? How old are they? Do they have kids? How often do they play? How involved are they when they play? Are they there with significant others or by their own accord? Your anecdote here has several possible ways it could go, but you haven't provided any details.

Regardless, the plural of "anecdote" is not "proof". Warhammer is an expensive and time consuming hobby that is generally not going to be compatible with certain lifestyles. Even if everyone in the world was Warhammer's core audience, only a fraction of a fraction of those people would bother to engage in it for any extended period of time. I find the premise that there's a bunch of middle aged women out there who would totally play Warhammer 40k if not for the Sisters of Battle being too sexy to be comical.


You only find it comical because it's not your experience. My gaming group of 30 (give or take) is about a 1/4 women. And that's mini games (not just GW) board games and a few card games. And the ages range from a couple of teens to late thirties i'd say.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 18:08:02


Post by: Nurglitch


 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:
More importantly, games need to appeal to more than just white beardos. I have the good fortune of having a high quality board game café in my home-town's downtown, and the clientele there is considerably more diverse than at the local GW.

Part of it is the price, and part of it is that accessibility as they're a café which means that you can have snacks and drinks while you play your boardgames, some of which play considerably faster than miniature games. Women in particular seem to be a majority of the clientele, and I'd imagine it's because they're not quite as marginalised in board games as they are in miniature gaming.

Which isn't to say there isn't a huge, long way to go because of the kind of 'white fragility' and 'male fragility' that sees expanding the appeal of a product as a betrayal of its core audience. But that we might see something of a Gouldian 'punctuated equilibrium' occur at the next economic downturn as companies trying to milk the same old moobs go belly-up, and companies with broader, more inclusive markets see less of a decline in income.


I'd be curious to know what the general demographic is in the Warhammer Citadel, considering that's a cafe. See if it really does make any considerable difference.

Given the quantity of cafes in the area I'd be inclined to think it has more to do with the games, and perhaps the volume of games. In the café you see groups of 2-6 people sitting around tables laughing and having fun. In the GW you get the monkish painting types occupying the painting area, and then the big gaming tables divvied up between two guys being rather serious. The café also has several walls worth of games organised based on their depths and time-commitment so it's easier to walk in, pull down a game, and pull up a chair. Not to say my local GW isn't fun or doesn't have women, but the café seems to have more of both. It would be interesting to see if we could control for location, service, and cost (although given the cost of boardgames these days, and how the café as a wall of copies you can purchase, that might be about even...). I've been introduced to the manager who set the café up, so I might ask him about it.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 18:22:42


Post by: Ghool


How did this go to speculation about a gaming industry drop-off to a discussion of racism, gender, and representation?

Back on topic, I think the board game Golden Age is ending. We will indeed see a decline, as the market is extremely saturated right now. I mean, I'm having a hard time justifying many game purchases these days, simply because I have more than my entire family knows what to do with.
At this point, most of my gaming money is spent on accessories for games, and less games themselves.

It almost feels like video games in the 80's.....


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 18:34:04


Post by: Sqorgar


 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

You only find it comical because it's not your experience. My gaming group of 30 (give or take) is about a 1/4 women. And that's mini games (not just GW) board games and a few card games. And the ages range from a couple of teens to late thirties i'd say.
You buried the lede there, didn't you? Board games and card games do not have the same requirement of money or time, now do they? In fact, usually, only one person owns the board game and everybody else just plays it, unlike a miniature game where everybody has their own models that they buy, assemble, and paint. It costs nothing to play somebody else's copy of Arkham Horror. A large board gaming group can split the cost of of a lot of board games, but every miniature gamer has to be fully invested in the game. If you play two miniature games, you are fully invested in two very expensive games.

I know tons of women who play board and card games - more than I know men who do, actually. But there's a wide gulf between playing Race For the Galaxy and Warhammer 40k. When you say there are 7 women in your gaming group, are they explicitly playing mini games? Are they buying/building/painting the miniatures themselves? Are they playing the game themselves, or are they sharing the hobby with their significant others, who might be the core driving force behind playing it? Like, my wife will play miniature games, but she plays the miniature games that I play, largely because she is sharing in my hobby rather than being an independent participant herself.

Now, you can make the argument that there is an audience for these types of female players. "Girlfriend games" are enough of a genre that you can turn these women into supplementary customers - but they'll drop the hobby if forced to become a primary. But there is money to be made there, though that is built on the premise that GW's customers are "white beardos" with "moobs" who can't get a girl. All the hub bub about boob plate and combat heels isn't about generating new women customers so much as it is about generating supplementary customers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ghool wrote:
How did this go to speculation about a gaming industry drop-off to a discussion of racism, gender, and representation?
Because that's what is most likely to cause an industry drop-off in the near future. I mean, it is one of the reasons Star Wars ain't doing so hot. And if Star Wars can be taken down, nothing is safe.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 18:40:06


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Sqorgar wrote:
 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

You only find it comical because it's not your experience. My gaming group of 30 (give or take) is about a 1/4 women. And that's mini games (not just GW) board games and a few card games. And the ages range from a couple of teens to late thirties i'd say.
You buried the lede there, didn't you? Board games and card games do not have the same requirement of money or time, now do they? In fact, usually, only one person owns the board game and everybody else just plays it, unlike a miniature game where everybody has their own models that they buy, assemble, and paint. It costs nothing to play somebody else's copy of Arkham Horror. A large board gaming group can split the cost of of a lot of board games, but every miniature gamer has to be fully invested in the game. If you play two miniature games, you are fully invested in two very expensive games.

I know tons of women who play board and card games - more than I know men who do, actually. But there's a wide gulf between playing Race For the Galaxy and Warhammer 40k. When you say there are 7 women in your gaming group, are they explicitly playing mini games? Are they buying/building/painting the miniatures themselves? Are they playing the game themselves, or are they sharing the hobby with their significant others, who might be the core driving force behind playing it? Like, my wife will play miniature games, but she plays the miniature games that I play, largely because she is sharing in my hobby rather than being an independent participant herself.

Now, you can make the argument that there is an audience for these types of female players. "Girlfriend games" are enough of a genre that you can turn these women into supplementary customers - but they'll drop the hobby if forced to become a primary. But there is money to be made there, though that is built on the premise that GW's customers are "white beardos" with "moobs" who can't get a girl. All the hub bub about boob plate and combat heels isn't about generating new women customers so much as it is about generating supplementary customers.


Not really. It was more to demonstrate that everyone enjoys various forms of table top, not just minis. But you glossed over that not only GW is played, but a few other manufacturers games. So there's branching out into other games as well as dealing with the financial side. Which really isn't a big issue for any working adult or teen for that matter. Girl friend games? Never heard of the term before and it's a crap one. People will play what they want with who they want, that's all that matters. And you're the only one who keeps going on about boob plate for some reason. Other than "outrage" on the internet, i've never even heard of it so much as commented on. And i have a big SoB army, if any of my group cared, they would have said so long ago.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 18:41:47


Post by: Albino Squirrel


 Ghool wrote:
How did this go to speculation about a gaming industry drop-off to a discussion of racism, gender, and representation?

Back on topic, I think the board game Golden Age is ending. We will indeed see a decline, as the market is extremely saturated right now. I mean, I'm having a hard time justifying many game purchases these days, simply because I have more than my entire family knows what to do with.
At this point, most of my gaming money is spent on accessories for games, and less games themselves.

It almost feels like video games in the 80's.....


That's my thinking as well. Though, admittedly, I spend much less time assembling, painting, and gaming than probably the average miniature gamer does. Or at least less than the primary customers do. I remember back in the previous golden age, I bought almost every GW game that came out and at least one army for it. But some of them I shouldn't have. I only ever played a few games of Battlefleet Gothic. I never even finished painting my Warmaster army. These days I but much less, but still have more than I have time to get to. And I've got to think that the people who are buying things the way I used to, must be getting to that point where they're just going to stop, because they've still got that last game they bought sitting there completely unplayed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I personally don't think that PC culture is likely to be something that causes a huge hit to the miniature gaming industry. It's really the oversaturation of different games, which in a way means there's a game for everyone, but also means there are more games than people have time to spend on them. Though individual companies might end up being hurt and alienating fans.

If nothing else, the historical gamers will keep miniature gaming alive. I doubt they are going to be influenced much by PC culture or need for "representation". They don't need to feel any pressure to put women in their Napoleonic armies to appeal more to women, or stop putting Confederate flags on their Confederate regiments to avoid offending anyone.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 19:24:39


Post by: Togusa


 Ghool wrote:
How did this go to speculation about a gaming industry drop-off to a discussion of racism, gender, and representation?

Back on topic, I think the board game Golden Age is ending. We will indeed see a decline, as the market is extremely saturated right now. I mean, I'm having a hard time justifying many game purchases these days, simply because I have more than my entire family knows what to do with.
At this point, most of my gaming money is spent on accessories for games, and less games themselves.

It almost feels like video games in the 80's.....


This is one of the things I am really liking about 5th Ed D&D right now. Most of the book releases have been Adventures, they'll last a long time and can be played with many different groups. But unlike 3rd and 3.5 they're not saturating the market with a book for each class, and each race, and so on and so on. The way UA is done now is brilliant and I'm really happy with the direction WoTC is taking the game.

40k, unfortunately is not doing this, this latest asinine Marine launch is terrible at cutting up the content, and with all most all the kits from shadowspear (Both sides) still being unreleased if just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. When I was looking through the game section of my local store the other day, it really did hit me that our hobbies just aren't really financially stable. I mean, consider a board game. Once I buy it, I don't need to buy it again. This means there are a finite market for a lot of these physical games, which is why you are starting to see AAA video game tactics showing up on the table top. (I.E. Breaking up the Marine codex into 6+ smaller faction codexes, releasing 12+ versions of lieutenants, only three of which you can actually buy by itself, and those three are locked behind chapter walls (so screw you non-codex chapter players!)

You know, I'd be willing to put money down that every single time GW does a major new release of primaris models, they'll sell a whole new round of codexes, 3-5 months after they put all the new models (with basic, barebones wargear) into a big box set.

They get your money for the box set (with stuff you really won't want, save for one unit that will be OP as hell)
They get your money for the new Codex
They get your money for any supplements
They will get your money for the full kits.

This isn't sustainable. GW has learned how to social media, everything else about the company is the same as it was 4 years ago.

Kingdom Death is another great example. The game is fun, very fun. But to be honest, owning it is a chore. There is just so much freaking stuff to buy and keep track of. I almost wonder if a miniature company with some role playing books wouldn't ultimately be better for the long term health of that game.

What a time to be alive.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 19:31:33


Post by: LunarSol


Personal feelings of oversaturation aren't a huge problem. Industry boons aren't caused by people buying more; they're caused by more people buying. Golden ages end when the market stops pulling in new customers. A good example is how X-Wing becoming the number 1 minis game didn't really hurt any of the others because most of X-Wing's playerbase were new to the industry and not overly reliant on existing players. Likewise, videogames haven't grown by getting fans of Mario or Megaman to buy more games each year, but by pulling in huge groups of people that used to think games weren't for them.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 19:41:01


Post by: Lorek


Sqorgar, I will go out and say that you do have a wrong opinion. There's no moral relativism here, you're being racist and sexist, and it's so blatant (as you try to couch your words as something else) that there will be no argument.

You're much better off on 8chan (which has been shut down, at least for now), or somewhere else similar.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 19:53:34


Post by: Togusa


 Lorek wrote:
Sqorgar, I will go out and say that you do have a wrong opinion. There's no moral relativism here, you're being racist and sexist, and it's so blatant (as you try to couch your words as something else) that there will be no argument.

You're much better off on 8chan (which has been shut down, at least for now), or somewhere else similar.


I hate to say it, but he's not 100% incorrect. Almost every female gamer I know, and all of my friends wives are more akin to casual gamers than they are to the "serious" types I see among the male population. Many of my female friends have told us on multiple occasions that they have fun with these hobbies because their BF/Husbands do, not because they are deeply invested in them.

There does seem to be some sort of gender split in gaming hobbies. Talking about it doesn't make one racist or sexist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sqorgar wrote:


When escapism becomes preachy, it stops being escapism.


I don't really fully agree with everything you've said, but his quote is spot on. It really should be highlighted.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:01:45


Post by: Albino Squirrel


I haven't seen anyone say anything racist or sexist. Saying that there aren't a lot of women miniature gamers is reality, not sexism. I think in this case, the Dakka mods have a wrong opinion. But hey, guess it's their site.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:03:56


Post by: Laughing Man


 Togusa wrote:
 Lorek wrote:
Sqorgar, I will go out and say that you do have a wrong opinion. There's no moral relativism here, you're being racist and sexist, and it's so blatant (as you try to couch your words as something else) that there will be no argument.

You're much better off on 8chan (which has been shut down, at least for now), or somewhere else similar.


I hate to say it, but he's not 100% incorrect. Almost every female gamer I know, and all of my friends wives are more akin to casual gamers than they are to the "serious" types I see among the male population. Many of my female friends have told us on multiple occasions that they have fun with these hobbies because their BF/Husbands do, not because they are deeply invested in them.

There does seem to be some sort of gender split in gaming hobbies. Talking about it doesn't make one racist or sexist.

There is absolutely a gender split in gaming hobbies. It's mostly because gaming has a pretty long history of sexism, be it objectification of women in games or more overt sexism and harassment at game stores and conventions. It's not because gaming magically only appeals to folks who have a penis.

Out of my female friends who play, some are casual players, some are tournament players, and some are world renowned painters. There's just as much variety among them as there is among male gamers.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:08:06


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Laughing Man, your assessment is ridiculously wrong. Women are generally less interested in tactical war games than men, and it's not because of sexism. Just look at historical gaming. There's literally zero objectification of women in those miniature and I've never heard of any harassment of women at any conventions, and it's been around much longer than fantasy and sci-fi gaming. Yet still mostly men play them. So how did the evil patriarchy keep women out of historical miniature gaming?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:15:42


Post by: infinite_array


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Laughing Man, your assessment is ridiculously wrong. Women are generally less interested in tactical war games than men, and it's not because of sexism. Just look at historical gaming. There's literally zero objectification of women in those miniature and I've never heard of any harassment of women at any conventions, and it's been around much longer than fantasy and sci-fi gaming. Yet still mostly men play them. So how did the evil patriarchy keep women out of historical miniature gaming?


Gender and national security gaming

Women and wargaming: the good, the bad, and the ugly


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:16:23


Post by: LunarSol


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Laughing Man, your assessment is ridiculously wrong. Women are generally less interested in tactical war games than men, and it's not because of sexism. Just look at historical gaming. There's literally zero objectification of women in those miniature and I've never heard of any harassment of women at any conventions, and it's been around much longer than fantasy and sci-fi gaming. Yet still mostly men play them. So how did the evil patriarchy keep women out of historical miniature gaming?


It's almost like women aren't particularly interested in something that actively recreates organizations that have barred or widely disapproved of their participation for generations...


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:17:05


Post by: Togusa


Nurglitch wrote:
 Sqorgar wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:
Sometimes it helps to understand how other people see you.
Don't be a jerk.

It often helps to understand how others see you because then you can develop a sense of empathy for the Other, rather than throwing a tantrum about how all the women and darkies are ruining everything.


I am a little late to the party, but so far I'm not seeing anything in Sqorgar's posts that says anything remotely like that.

Unless I'm just missing something this poster is discussing the act of adding these types of characters into media to pacify a segment of the population rather than for good story telling. Making Thor black, or Capatain Marvel a woman doesn't really do anything to tell a great story. I sort of think of it as skinning a character in fortenite rather than creating an engaging and interesting character, who happens to be "x, y, z."

Is anyone a Grey's Anatomy fan out there? Let me give you an example of a shoehorned black character for a show that sometimes stumbles all over-itself to win the progressive race game.

Dr. Miranda Bailey is a black surgeon of impeccable skill and determination. A show long runner, she's been a major character for all 15 seasons of the show and literally worked her way up from the bottom to become the chief of surgery of the hospital. An impressive character, except that she isn't. For the majority of the show she has been little more than a plot device to say "look! We have a black woman in a position of power, and she's so strong and beautiful." For 15 seasons they have consistently ignored massive sections of her backstory and character in order to push the agenda.

To simplify, the show portrays her as:

Black
Female
Strong

The Show constantly ignores:

She is quite brilliant
She is quite talented (in medicine)
She is a fan of Science Fiction and Fantasy (1 episode in 15 seasons even touches on this, and only for about 10 minutes)
She has great instincts for watching over the other surgeons
She has a great set of morality (rare for that show)
She has a personal code that really could make for a ton of interesting episodes.

Unfortunately, all we ever get to see of her is that she is black, female, and strong. If there were a character whos entire writing was White, Male and Strong, wouldn't we also react by pointing out the bad writing and poor characterization?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
 Lorek wrote:
Sqorgar, I will go out and say that you do have a wrong opinion. There's no moral relativism here, you're being racist and sexist, and it's so blatant (as you try to couch your words as something else) that there will be no argument.

You're much better off on 8chan (which has been shut down, at least for now), or somewhere else similar.


I hate to say it, but he's not 100% incorrect. Almost every female gamer I know, and all of my friends wives are more akin to casual gamers than they are to the "serious" types I see among the male population. Many of my female friends have told us on multiple occasions that they have fun with these hobbies because their BF/Husbands do, not because they are deeply invested in them.

There does seem to be some sort of gender split in gaming hobbies. Talking about it doesn't make one racist or sexist.

There is absolutely a gender split in gaming hobbies. It's mostly because gaming has a pretty long history of sexism, be it objectification of women in games or more overt sexism and harassment at game stores and conventions. It's not because gaming magically only appeals to folks who have a penis.

Out of my female friends who play, some are casual players, some are tournament players, and some are world renowned painters. There's just as much variety among them as there is among male gamers.


I'm not really sure I believe that.

Sexism ceartainly still exists in the hobbies and has since the beginning. But, is it really the reason why women do not flock to the hobby in droves? Or is it that they aren't interested in the slightest?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
I haven't seen anyone say anything racist or sexist. Saying that there aren't a lot of women miniature gamers is reality, not sexism. I think in this case, the Dakka mods have a wrong opinion. But hey, guess it's their site.


There is a lot of puckering when these topics come up. Just like with guns or other hot-button issues. I think people are just afraid to even discuss them due to the mobs out there that knee-jerk to call you a racist and ruin your life.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:29:34


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


I support the mods. Sqorgar's posts have exemplified the attitude that scared my wife out of wargaming when she briefly got involved with it. Fortunately, modern games have better representation and fewer creepy bits, so she is able to enjoy gaming at home or with friends she knows.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:32:29


Post by: Laughing Man


 Togusa wrote:
I'm not really sure I believe that.

Sexism ceartainly still exists in the hobbies and has since the beginning. But, is it really the reason why women do not flock to the hobby in droves? Or is it that they aren't interested in the slightest?

Given that something like 90% of the top tier painters that I know of are women (Lamb, Martin, Reimer, etc.), I think we can safely say that it's not "they aren't interested in the slightest," although "why don't they play with me" might be a pretty decent question. And again, locally my community of 30+ gamers is at least a third women. They're not wives who have been grudgingly dragged along to game night (although quite a few are certainly married to each other those relationships often stemmed from a shared interest in gaming in the first place), they're hobby enthusiasts just like any of the male gamers I hang out with. Sure, the plural of anecdote is not data, but the local gaming scene has made a determined effort to be inclusive, and it's paying off.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:36:07


Post by: Togusa


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I support the mods. Sqorgar's posts have exemplified the attitude that scared my wife out of wargaming when she briefly got involved with it. Fortunately, modern games have better representation and fewer creepy bits, so she is able to enjoy gaming at home or with friends she knows.


It's interesting how two different people can have such varying experiences.

I've noticed something about a lot of the women in my life, most of them are far more productive than I am.

I am friends with or know well 11 different women and 9 different men.

Of the 11 women, 8 of them have Post Graduate Degrees and very well paid important careers.
Of the remaining 3, all of them have at least a masters.

Of the men, 3 of them have PGDs, 1 has a Masters, and three have Bachelors degrees. 2 Didn't even graduate from HS.

When I talk about gaming with my Female friends, they almost always say that it is fun to play a game or two together, but they don't understand how I can make it something that takes up my majority time. I can tell from talking with them, that while they enjoy participating, they aren't on the same level that I am on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
I'm not really sure I believe that.

Sexism ceartainly still exists in the hobbies and has since the beginning. But, is it really the reason why women do not flock to the hobby in droves? Or is it that they aren't interested in the slightest?

Given that something like 90% of the top tier painters that I know of are women (Lamb, Martin, Reimer, etc.), I think we can safely say that it's not "they aren't interested in the slightest," although "why don't they play with me" might be a pretty decent question. And again, locally my community of 30+ gamers is at least a third women. They're not wives who have been grudgingly dragged along to game night (although quite a few are certainly married to each other those relationships often stemmed from a shared interest in gaming in the first place), they're hobby enthusiasts just like any of the male gamers I hang out with. Sure, the plural of anecdote is not data, but the local gaming scene has made a determined effort to be inclusive, and it's paying off.


That's good to see. I've been lucky to know that all the groups I've been in have been very accepting of others with no stipulations on what you are or look like.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:46:54


Post by: Oryza Sativa


Nurglitch wrote:
They can redo the Space Marine codex. It was the first, and possibly the weakest. There's a bunch of material that can be incorporated, and lots of kits that can be dropped.


Just coming into the thread now and reading it through, I wanted to point out that Nurglitch hit the nail on the head a little over a week ago as to what GW's next direction will be. I would expect to see further codex redos in the coming months, with the Sisters of Battle release slotted in there somewhere.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 20:58:54


Post by: LunarSol


 Togusa wrote:
Sexism ceartainly still exists in the hobbies and has since the beginning. But, is it really the reason why women do not flock to the hobby in droves? Or is it that they aren't interested in the slightest?


It's a chicken/egg situation and not one exclusive to women. We all develop interests but we're also constantly rejecting interests and a lot of that rejection comes from signals that tell us something isn't "for us". Gaming has spent decades selling itself as a boys club, so there are absolutely a couple generations of women that aren't interested or at the very least, are trained to resist those interests. The reverse is also true. I love to cook and bake, but my daughter has a fairy bakery show with a token skateboarding boy constantly telling me the activity isn't "for me" and honestly, if "making food" wasn't kind of critical to survival, I'm not sure I would have really given it a fair try for similar reasons. Sure, being inclusive might not win over a whole new audience, but not being exclusive at least gives people not conditioned against or willing to fight through it a chance to share in something we all enjoy.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 21:17:14


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Women and men are different. And that's okay. The fact that there are more men than women interested in miniature gaming, or any particular game, does not mean the industry or game is sexist.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 21:40:07


Post by: Azreal13


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Women and men are different. And that's okay. The fact that there are more men than women interested in miniature gaming, or any particular game, does not mean the industry or game is sexist.


This. ^

Some people seem to think equality is a statistical ideal, rather than about fairness.

It is ok if all the things are not strictly represented along socio economic, race or gender splits, all that is important is that if someone outside of the normal statistical breakdown is interested then those differences are not a hinderence to their participation. Equally, nobody who is a sucky opponent should get given any extra leeway because of their race or gender.

None of the women I know have ever exhibited any more than polite interest in gaming, at best. The painting side tends to garner a little more interest from those with an existing creative bent, but more often all I get is slightly amused indulgence. Not a one of them couldn't be a gamer if they'd the mind to, it is simply a case of a near complete lack of interest.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 22:16:43


Post by: Nurglitch


 Azreal13 wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Women and men are different. And that's okay. The fact that there are more men than women interested in miniature gaming, or any particular game, does not mean the industry or game is sexist.


This. ^

Some people seem to think equality is a statistical ideal, rather than about fairness.

It is ok if all the things are not strictly represented along socio economic, race or gender splits, all that is important is that if someone outside of the normal statistical breakdown is interested then those differences are not a hinderence to their participation. Equally, nobody who is a sucky opponent should get given any extra leeway because of their race or gender.

None of the women I know have ever exhibited any more than polite interest in gaming, at best. The painting side tends to garner a little more interest from those with an existing creative bent, but more often all I get is slightly amused indulgence. Not a one of them couldn't be a gamer if they'd the mind to, it is simply a case of a near complete lack of interest.

It's less about an ideal than an underserved market. There's no particular reason why there should be more men in hobby gaming than women. There's some decent arguments as to why it should be the other way around. As pointed out, some people see women in their lives with no interest in gaming or miniatures, and some do (and see why they might lose interest after encountering Sqorgar-like fans). Have you considered how many men you know that regard it with a similar bemusement that you're an adult man playing with toys? How many men that might enjoy it, but again either don't like the company, or have other interests? Observer bias is one of the reasons science uses things like the null hypothesis and data, rather than anecdotes.

The point being that the wider the market, the better. The drop-off comes when the so-called 'core audience' has been milked dry. I think we saw something like that during 7th edition, and GW responded effectively by broadening the appeal of their products. Similarly broadening the appeal of your products to the majority of Humanity seems like a good way of avoiding a drop-off rather than depending on the same old. It's also good from the perspective of the people that get to enjoy it, as Warhammer's longevity and availability is surely one of the contributors to its success.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 22:29:08


Post by: Azreal13


There's no particular reason why there should be more men in hobby gaming than women


That's where the whole argument falls over. There's absolutely good reasons why different things appeal to different people along all sorts of divisions.

One of the great things about capitalism is it's more or less purely democratic, if people aren't making things then there's probably a good reason. Given the whole premise of this thread is the anticipated drop off from what is considered by many to be just about the greatest time to be a gamer, if those things aren't being made now then the odds of it being because there's a huge untapped market of female gamers that's gone unnoticed are pretty small.

Are there members of minority groups who may be interested in gaming that haven't be caught in the net yet? Probably. Are they a statistically significantly higher percentage of those groups versus individuals who are smack bang in the middle of the core demographic? I'd be less certain.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 22:39:13


Post by: Overread


Honestly the whole men vs women thing is often way more complex than people realise. Many of the differences are real, but many times they are not the result of that simple difference in gender, but often a whole rafter of elements that add together. They can even be minor things that just add up to a barrier; and many barriers can be quite casual.


Consider how if we go back 20 or 30 years or so many video games were the domain of the geek and nerd. Your typical "Jock/sporty/coolkid/whatever" wouldn't be caught dead playing games.

And yet arcades were a thing and also today games are pretty much commonplace. In fact its almost getting to a point where if you don't game in some form its more abnormal than normal.





Also many times it can simply be that because a group is made up of a single division of society it appears less interesting to those of different divisions. There's more of a cultural/generational/gender divide and thus a bit more a social hump to get over.
Wargames might be the domain of guys more than gals, but that could in part simply be because many of the game groups are full of guys.

You can see the very same thing in other hobby interests. Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not (ps this is a UK view - I'm very sure that in the USA there are some regions where the gender balance is fully even or even the total reverse - which further proves my point that gender differences in hobbies/interests are often not limited to it just being about gender as such).


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 22:40:05


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:02:02


Post by: Laughing Man


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.

Fun fact: There's actually been a rather large influx in the knitting hobby in the last several years, thanks largely to discussions about toxic masculinity and misogyny. The response from the knitting community? The more the better. Knitting as a hobby isn't regarded as a women's hobby because women are better or at it, or because they keep men away. It's a women's hobby because men view it as such, and label other men interested in it as weak, feminine, or gay.

Meanwhile, the wargaming hobby remains vastly the domain of men because of gatekeeping like this, where any representation of women in major roles and not as sex objects is often seen as an attack on the hobby as a whole, and a betrayal of the core audience. It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest, or automatically writing them off as someone's girlfriend/seeking male attention.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:02:36


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.


I would suggest you have a look into knitting groups, you may be very surprised.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:03:46


Post by: LunarSol


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.


I think it would be great if someone started selling patterns for chainsword socks, but that's just me. I don't think there needs to be an arbiter. I think the question of who should be in the hobby is simply answered with "everyone".


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:04:59


Post by: Laughing Man


 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.


I would suggest you have a look into knitting groups, you may be very surprised.

I'm personally a big fan of the large amount of knitted banana hammocks I keep seeing.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:07:04


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Laughing Man wrote:
 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.


I would suggest you have a look into knitting groups, you may be very surprised.

I'm personally a big fan of the large amount of knitted banana hammocks I keep seeing.


I've been playing around with crochet recently actually. It's surprisingly theraputic.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:10:29


Post by: Azreal13


Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not


Except there is.

I'm the very poster child for this exact example.

Grew up in a horse riding family, both parents, even to the extent of them dabbling in training racehorses and my grandparents owning them.

I had three ponies between the ages of 4 and 8 or so.

Could not give less of a gak about horses and horse riding, even with the encouragement of my parents and actually having access to my own horse.

I had entirely more fun building forts out of the hay bales than I ever did riding.

Yet the legion of teenage girls my folks had queuing up to help out, not just with exercising but all the grunt work like mucking out and cleaning tack, was seemingly endless, if one aged out and went on to Uni or whatever, there was always a younger friend of one of the others chomping at the bit, pun intended.

I can testify that there was no prejudice on behalf of my folks, they only cared that whoever was helping was competent, treated the animals well and fit in with the other people, but they never once had a boy even show a hint of interest.

So while technically there's no barrier to either gender, there's clearly something in the wiring of the female brain that sparks something around horses that is much less common in male brains. Clearly it can happen, my dad is evidence of that, but it's far more infrequent.

I can only speculate as to whether it's nature or nurture that causes it, but my own experience over my entire lifetime tells me it's very real.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:10:56


Post by: Overread


 Laughing Man wrote:
The response from the knitting community? The more the better.


In my experience most hobby groups hold this view. It tends to be more online that I see more people pushing for exclusion, whilst in the real world most groups are darn happy to have more people and more variety of people joining in.


The groups that tend to be more "exclusive" or picky tend to be those that formed around a friendship group and thus most of the pushback is mostly focused on the fact that they only really want "their friends" as part of the group. Ergo exceptionally cliquey groups. This might be the group resisting new comers or could even be just one or two key people who run things.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:11:15


Post by: Laughing Man


One of my close friends does a lot of needlepoint. He's got a pattern he's been doing on and off for a few years for the original Zelda loading screen, poster sized.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:12:18


Post by: LunarSol


 Overread wrote:

Consider how if we go back 20 or 30 years or so many video games were the domain of the geek and nerd. Your typical "Jock/sporty/coolkid/whatever" wouldn't be caught dead playing games.

And yet arcades were a thing and also today games are pretty much commonplace. In fact its almost getting to a point where if you don't game in some form its more abnormal than normal.


There's some really cool/sad history on this, because in the 70's, your typical jock and cheerleader very much did play videogames. Pac Man fever wasn't some nerd secret like the Ballad of Bilbo Baggins after all; it was a cultural phenomena and a whole bunch of very "cool" people went to the arcade for their first date. Where the current idea of what a gamer is really got its roots after the crash, when Nintendo's only real chance to get the NES in stores that had given up on the industry was to sell it to SEARS as a "robot toy" which got filed in the boys section of the mythical Christmas catalog. Its really after that where you really see videogames heavily targeting boys and doubling down on that fanbase at the expensive of pretty much every other until the mobile market arrived.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:14:10


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Azreal13 wrote:
Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not


Except there is.

I'm the very poster child for this exact example.

Grew up in a horse riding family, both parents, even to the extent of them dabbling in training racehorses and my grandparents owning them.

I had three ponies between the ages of 4 and 8 or so.

Could not give less of a gak about horses and horse riding, even with the encouragement of my parents and actually having access to my own horse.

I had entirely more fun building forts out of the hay bales than I ever did riding.

Yet the legion of teenage girls my folks had queuing up to help out, not just with exercising but all the grunt work like mucking out and cleaning tack, was seemingly endless, if one aged out and went on to Uni or whatever, there was always a younger friend of one of the others chomping at the bit, pun intended.

I can testify that there was no prejudice on behalf of my folks, they only cared that whoever was helping was competent, treated the animals well and fit in with the other people, but they never once had a boy even show a hint of interest.

So while technically there's no barrier to either gender, there's clearly something in the wiring of the female brain that sparks something around horses that is much less common in male brains. Clearly it can happen, my dad is evidence of that, but it's far more infrequent.

I can only speculate as to whether it's nature or nurture that causes it, but my own experience over my entire lifetime tells me it's very real.


That sounds like nurture through and through. That's a screaming stereotype of girl must have pony.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:14:58


Post by: Overread


 Azreal13 wrote:
Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not


Except there is.

I'm the very poster child for this exact example.

Grew up in a horse riding family, both parents, even to the extent of them dabbling in training racehorses and my grandparents owning them.

I had three ponies between the ages of 4 and 8 or so.

Could not give less of a gak about horses and horse riding, even with the encouragement of my parents and actually having access to my own horse.

I had entirely more fun building forts out of the hay bales than I ever did riding.

Yet the legion of teenage girls my folks had queuing up to help out, not just with exercising but all the grunt work like mucking out and cleaning tack, was seemingly endless, if one aged out and went on to Uni or whatever, there was always a younger friend of one of the others chomping at the bit, pun intended.

I can testify that there was no prejudice on behalf of my folks, they only cared that whoever was helping was competent, treated the animals well and fit in with the other people, but they never once had a boy even show a hint of interest.

So while technically there's no barrier to either gender, there's clearly something in the wiring of the female brain that sparks something around horses that is much less common in male brains. Clearly it can happen, my dad is evidence of that, but it's far more infrequent.

I can only speculate as to whether it's nature or nurture that causes it, but my own experience over my entire lifetime tells me it's very real.


And yet if you go to horse racing almost all the jockey's are guys. At the competitive end the gender divide is far less; furthermore I noted that (like you) my viewpoint was UK based rather than another country. I'd wager if you heated out to areas of the USA the culture around it is possibly totally the opposite with a far heavier male influence and far fewer women. Even if that's within select circles. The UK "ponyclub" is certainly a "girls thing" at present yet I don't think it because women are born "wired for horses". I think its more a nurture thing coupled to the fact that if a social group already has an abundance of people within one grouping it can be harder for those outside of that grouping to feel relaxed in joining. You see the same thing with hobby groups full of people over the age of 50 finding it hard to get those of younger generations involved (of either gender). Yet a group of people with a far more broad age range would have far less issue.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:16:02


Post by: infinite_array


And to bring it back to historical wargaming, there's the centuries, millennia really, of horse owning and riding as a sign of prosperity and masculinity.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:19:04


Post by: Azreal13


 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Spoiler:
 Azreal13 wrote:
Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not


Except there is.

I'm the very poster child for this exact example.

Grew up in a horse riding family, both parents, even to the extent of them dabbling in training racehorses and my grandparents owning them.

I had three ponies between the ages of 4 and 8 or so.

Could not give less of a gak about horses and horse riding, even with the encouragement of my parents and actually having access to my own horse.

I had entirely more fun building forts out of the hay bales than I ever did riding.

Yet the legion of teenage girls my folks had queuing up to help out, not just with exercising but all the grunt work like mucking out and cleaning tack, was seemingly endless, if one aged out and went on to Uni or whatever, there was always a younger friend of one of the others chomping at the bit, pun intended.

I can testify that there was no prejudice on behalf of my folks, they only cared that whoever was helping was competent, treated the animals well and fit in with the other people, but they never once had a boy even show a hint of interest.

So while technically there's no barrier to either gender, there's clearly something in the wiring of the female brain that sparks something around horses that is much less common in male brains. Clearly it can happen, my dad is evidence of that, but it's far more infrequent.

I can only speculate as to whether it's nature or nurture that causes it, but my own experience over my entire lifetime tells me it's very real.


That sounds like nurture through and through. That's a screaming stereotype of girl must have pony.


That doesn't mean anything. Firstly, a stereotype only generally becomes one because it's based on a truth, and then one has to answer the question of where that truth came from.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:25:01


Post by: Overread


 Azreal13 wrote:
 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
Spoiler:
 Azreal13 wrote:
Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not


Except there is.

I'm the very poster child for this exact example.

Grew up in a horse riding family, both parents, even to the extent of them dabbling in training racehorses and my grandparents owning them.

I had three ponies between the ages of 4 and 8 or so.

Could not give less of a gak about horses and horse riding, even with the encouragement of my parents and actually having access to my own horse.

I had entirely more fun building forts out of the hay bales than I ever did riding.

Yet the legion of teenage girls my folks had queuing up to help out, not just with exercising but all the grunt work like mucking out and cleaning tack, was seemingly endless, if one aged out and went on to Uni or whatever, there was always a younger friend of one of the others chomping at the bit, pun intended.

I can testify that there was no prejudice on behalf of my folks, they only cared that whoever was helping was competent, treated the animals well and fit in with the other people, but they never once had a boy even show a hint of interest.

So while technically there's no barrier to either gender, there's clearly something in the wiring of the female brain that sparks something around horses that is much less common in male brains. Clearly it can happen, my dad is evidence of that, but it's far more infrequent.

I can only speculate as to whether it's nature or nurture that causes it, but my own experience over my entire lifetime tells me it's very real.


That sounds like nurture through and through. That's a screaming stereotype of girl must have pony.


That doesn't mean anything. Firstly, a stereotype only generally becomes one because it's based on a truth, and then one has to answer the question of where that truth came from.


We aren't disagreeing that, right now, in the UK the "ponyclub" scene isn't a girls thing; it very much is. What we are saying is that its a result of nurturing and social elements that has resulted in a gender divide rather than an inherent element of what is different between those genders at a genetic level. We can see proof in history where horse riding was very much a mans thing; we can see it in different countries where the gender divide is either non-existent or is totally the reverse. Even in the UK at different levels of the hobby and in different groupings you can see a different gender divide - from what I'm casually aware of the competitive end has the opposite problem in trying to encourage more women competitors (esp in racing).



Getting back to wargaming its trying to reinforce the point that its a "mans game" not because of any difference in genetics between men and women which makes it a mans game forever because of genetics; but because of social elements. Social elements are flexible and can change and be made/encouraged to change. This is a great thing because it means with the right attitude and approach the community can grow significantly by appealing to a new segment of society that is currently not as included. In this case focusing on the encouragement of more women into the hobby.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/07 23:59:35


Post by: Azreal13


No, in horse racing the issue is with finding women who are capable of competing, much like F1. There are a few, but even in these apparently enlightened times that number doesn't seem to be increasing notably. Unlike F1, I don't think one can look at a lack of interest at grass roots level as a potential reason for that, but I suspect the specific set of physical and mental attributes needed to be successful as a Grade 1 jockey are simply more comon in people born male.

The historical and cultural examples you're pointing to are largely where the gender divide was huge, and women didn't get to do anything, let alone possess the freedom of roaming the countryside on horseback, that was until men discovered other means of moving about and killing each other. Once horses become a hobby rather than a necessity, I'd wager they start to swing towards a largely female interest.

But to address the wargaming point, my issue is why bother? Why is it so important that we change attitudes that nobody outside of a few people on the internet seem to be inordinately bothered by?

Why does a segment of society that isn't generally interested in the whole affair need to have its attitude changed, irrespective of the mechanisms at work, so that it is interested?

It is very difficult to participate in a discussion like this and not feel the side advocating for a minority to be able to do something they could already do if they cared isn't arguing for some sort of opressed group so much as arguing to be seen arguing by some sort of hypothetical third party who actually simply isn't paying attention.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 00:32:04


Post by: Albino Squirrel


 Laughing Man wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.

Fun fact: There's actually been a rather large influx in the knitting hobby in the last several years, thanks largely to discussions about toxic masculinity and misogyny. The response from the knitting community? The more the better. Knitting as a hobby isn't regarded as a women's hobby because women are better or at it, or because they keep men away. It's a women's hobby because men view it as such, and label other men interested in it as weak, feminine, or gay.

Meanwhile, the wargaming hobby remains vastly the domain of men because of gatekeeping like this, where any representation of women in major roles and not as sex objects is often seen as an attack on the hobby as a whole, and a betrayal of the core audience. It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest, or automatically writing them off as someone's girlfriend/seeking male attention.


The only people doing gatekeeping here are people like you, who think they should get to decide who should be in the hobby. I think anyone who is interested in the hobby should be in it. You think the hobby should change in order to get the makeup of people that you have decided is correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think I get it, though. It is partly that the social justice people want to control the demographics of whatever the hobby is. But it is more that they need everyone else to believe in their fantasy that things are the way they are because of racism or sexism or whatever. They need people to believe that the hobby is full of men trying to keep women out. And they need people to believe it because that's how they justify, and even make a virtue of, them hating people who don't think like them. But hating people who don't like the same things as you isn't a virtue at all.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 00:46:46


Post by: Nurglitch


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Who made you the arbiter of who should be in the miniature gaming hobby? There aren't many men into knitting. Should that hobby change so that it appeals more to me if some random person decides that more men in knitting would make them feel better about themselves for some reason? No. It's enough that I could do it if I was interested. Nobody is stopping me except me.

Fun fact: There's actually been a rather large influx in the knitting hobby in the last several years, thanks largely to discussions about toxic masculinity and misogyny. The response from the knitting community? The more the better. Knitting as a hobby isn't regarded as a women's hobby because women are better or at it, or because they keep men away. It's a women's hobby because men view it as such, and label other men interested in it as weak, feminine, or gay.

Meanwhile, the wargaming hobby remains vastly the domain of men because of gatekeeping like this, where any representation of women in major roles and not as sex objects is often seen as an attack on the hobby as a whole, and a betrayal of the core audience. It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest, or automatically writing them off as someone's girlfriend/seeking male attention.


The only people doing gatekeeping here are people like you, who think they should get to decide who should be in the hobby. I think anyone who is interested in the hobby should be in it. You think the hobby should change in order to get the makeup of people that you have decided is correct.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think I get it, though. It is partly that the social justice people want to control the demographics of whatever the hobby is. But it is more that they need everyone else to believe in their fantasy that things are the way they are because of racism or sexism or whatever. They need people to believe that the hobby is full of men trying to keep women out. And they need people to believe it because that's how they justify, and even make a virtue of, them hating people who don't think like them. But hating people who don't like the same things as you isn't a virtue at all.

What do you regard as the benefit of this scheme? Why do these monstrous SJWs need to believe these outrageous lies?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 03:56:41


Post by: DarkBlack


Ghool wrote:How did this go to speculation about a gaming industry drop-off to a discussion of racism, gender, and representation?

It comes up because our culture and morals have progressed so that equality and inclusion are important to us. Things are changing for the better, even things that many of us didn't realise are a problem. We've been doing things that or our cultural norms exclude people from certain things, It is often difficult to see unless you are on the receiving end. Often we thought that's just how things are. Sometimes it actually is though, men and women are different and ethnicity often comes different values and cultures.
That's where argument comes in.
It's not entirely clear which things are due to nature and which are due to exclusion.

So we have two sides (that get involved in places like this) with concerns about real problems and assumptions about the other side. They often talk past each other because their premises are not compatible with a reasonable person disagreeing with them. This makes arguments on the topic descend into name calling and accusations of racism/sexism.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 05:59:39


Post by: frozenwastes


In GW's financials, they broke down their sales by channel and year over year the greatest growth was, by far, in independent trade accounts. Huge numbers of comic book and game stores and toy stores deciding to start selling GW. The actual growth through their retail and online channels was rather modest.

So when GW's growth is less in future years, it's probably not indicative of the beginning of the end, but that there are only so many easy accounts to get as a business-to-business sales person. You can search online and find all the game, comic, hobby and toy stores in a region and once you've succeeded in selling them on stocking GW, there's not much left to do. Now you're in the much, much harder work of either convincing stores that have already refused or convincing people to start a store selling your product.

The other thing to remember is that when an independent store buys GW product that is not yet necessarily in the hands of the customers. Much of it must go on a shelf first. Some times it can sit there. And a new stockist of GW product is going to spend a lot in the first quarter getting their paint racks and their shelves full of the most important items. So we should also expect to see GW's trade sales struggle to maintain growth as new accounts transition into just ordering new releases and the occasional special order.

If 6 months from now GW has a half year report that shows only a small amount of growth, we'll need to dig into the numbers and see if it's just the trade sales no longer growing as fast and if the direct and GW retail numbers are holding their more modest growth rates.

---

Now onto the representation issue. It's certainly possible to do being inclusive or representation poorly or greatly. What you should never do is approach your existing customers as if there is something wrong with them. That they're the problem and if we get this other group of customers, then things will be good. The real goal should be to get as many customers as possible without alienating them or pitting one group against another. Let's hope GW has the good sense not to racialize their communication with their customers by referring to the wrong sort as "white beardos" as Nurglitch has.

---

Another thing that will have an impact on the hobby is trade tensions. So much of KS games rely on cheap components made in China and a surprise tarriff could utterly obliterate a project. And if it's a company that is a perennial KS creator, a profitable project becoming a loser because of tariffs could end them. Hopefully the gaming industry can respond to these uncertainties by having printing, contract casting and even injection moulding happen in places more domestic to the KS creators and game companies in general. Hopefully more places like Renedra pop up. Though from what I understand, they are largely booked quite solidly with the historical miniatures market. On the RPG side of things though, I've started noticing companies printing their books in Canada, the US and Europe with Canadian printers & some Baltic printers popping up as the low cost options. I hope this trend continues and production of more and more things can be distributed more and more across the world rather than concentrated in one place with such poor human rights and environmental records.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 07:54:01


Post by: Not Online!!!




So you have a questionable dill weed, and an article that throws all other participants in the hobby into the same category, without numbers or anything to back that up.

Scuseme but that ain't quality journalism.

Additionally. Play the fething game, live and let live. If you have such a dill weed in your group throw him out.
There case solved. It is not the bloody companies issue to keep the community welocming, that is the communities job itself.
The company can help along with decent ruleset and boons for fresh starters but that 's it.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 08:47:06


Post by: Overread


 Azreal13 wrote:

But to address the wargaming point, my issue is why bother? Why is it so important that we change attitudes that nobody outside of a few people on the internet seem to be inordinately bothered by?

Why does a segment of society that isn't generally interested in the whole affair need to have its attitude changed, irrespective of the mechanisms at work, so that it is interested?

It is very difficult to participate in a discussion like this and not feel the side advocating for a minority to be able to do something they could already do if they cared isn't arguing for some sort of opressed group so much as arguing to be seen arguing by some sort of hypothetical third party who actually simply isn't paying attention.



Why aim to include more people? Because its better.
Increasing the demographic that engages with a hobby means an increase in membership; that means more sales for the parent companies which means more investment production for more product. It means more people at local clubs and a greater potential of a spread out skill level at those clubs, which means more chance of getting more games. An increased population means the potential to run bigger events; to establish more local clubs; to broaden and increase the size of the hobby. This means more games, more skill variation, new insights etc...

Honestly in the end it also comes down to the fact that those arguing for more people to take part are simply those enjoying a hobby who wish for more people to get involved with what they like. It's about breaking down barriers that aren't even really there and presenting people with the potential to be interested in something that they otherwise might not have considered. You're not forcing them to be included.


Lets look at football, go back 30 years and womens football wasn't really much of a thing. Schools tended to separate boys and girls and the girls went off to do rounders, netball, tennis and the boys went off to do cricket, rugby and football. Nothing stopped either group playing any of those games and in practice both groups played most of the games (though it was weighted against the girls who generally wouldn't play games like rugby, even if the boys played all 3 of the girls games at intermittent points). So many girls were not presented the idea of playing football, it wasn't shown to them as a pathway and it was in fact closed down the older they got. Today its changing and womens football is now becoming bigger and bigger; though its still a far cry from the main leagues.


Again its about breaking those casual social boundaries, about breaking impressions and tropes (many of which are not even real) and getting more people involved.



GW hasn't got to change its product*, the change is one for clubs and advertising as well as GW reaching out with licenced products into other markets to draw in people.

*which is a fear many people do raise when one considers inclusive natures. They argue that if GW were to include women then every army has to suddenly get women characters etc....


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 10:05:31


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 Overread wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:

But to address the wargaming point, my issue is why bother? Why is it so important that we change attitudes that nobody outside of a few people on the internet seem to be inordinately bothered by?

Why does a segment of society that isn't generally interested in the whole affair need to have its attitude changed, irrespective of the mechanisms at work, so that it is interested?

It is very difficult to participate in a discussion like this and not feel the side advocating for a minority to be able to do something they could already do if they cared isn't arguing for some sort of opressed group so much as arguing to be seen arguing by some sort of hypothetical third party who actually simply isn't paying attention.



Why aim to include more people? Because its better.
Increasing the demographic that engages with a hobby means an increase in membership; that means more sales for the parent companies which means more investment production for more product. It means more people at local clubs and a greater potential of a spread out skill level at those clubs, which means more chance of getting more games. An increased population means the potential to run bigger events; to establish more local clubs; to broaden and increase the size of the hobby. This means more games, more skill variation, new insights etc...

Honestly in the end it also comes down to the fact that those arguing for more people to take part are simply those enjoying a hobby who wish for more people to get involved with what they like. It's about breaking down barriers that aren't even really there and presenting people with the potential to be interested in something that they otherwise might not have considered. You're not forcing them to be included.


Lets look at football, go back 30 years and womens football wasn't really much of a thing. Schools tended to separate boys and girls and the girls went off to do rounders, netball, tennis and the boys went off to do cricket, rugby and football. Nothing stopped either group playing any of those games and in practice both groups played most of the games (though it was weighted against the girls who generally wouldn't play games like rugby, even if the boys played all 3 of the girls games at intermittent points). So many girls were not presented the idea of playing football, it wasn't shown to them as a pathway and it was in fact closed down the older they got. Today its changing and womens football is now becoming bigger and bigger; though its still a far cry from the main leagues.


Again its about breaking those casual social boundaries, about breaking impressions and tropes (many of which are not even real) and getting more people involved.



GW hasn't got to change its product*, the change is one for clubs and advertising as well as GW reaching out with licenced products into other markets to draw in people.

*which is a fear many people do raise when one considers inclusive natures. They argue that if GW were to include women then every army has to suddenly get women characters etc....


Well said and good comparison concerning the school sports. I do remember back in school myself a handful of the girls getting frustrated they weren't allowed to play rugby. Caused a lot of consternation with them at the time.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 10:32:26


Post by: Overread


 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:



Lets look at football, go back 30 years and womens football wasn't really much of a thing. Schools tended to separate boys and girls and the girls went off to do rounders, netball, tennis and the boys went off to do cricket, rugby and football. Nothing stopped either group playing any of those games and in practice both groups played most of the games (though it was weighted against the girls who generally wouldn't play games like rugby, even if the boys played all 3 of the girls games at intermittent points). So many girls were not presented the idea of playing football, it wasn't shown to them as a pathway and it was in fact closed down the older they got. Today its changing and womens football is now becoming bigger and bigger; though its still a far cry from the main leagues.


Well said and good comparison concerning the school sports. I do remember back in school myself a handful of the girls getting frustrated they weren't allowed to play rugby. Caused a lot of consternation with them at the time.


Aye and its a good example of one of the areas where there are still hard barriers - school rules and the like - which prevent people getting involved in something; but also in shutting down even the presentation of the game to them as something to consider playing. An oddity too because things like football only become gender segregated as kids get older, partly around the same time that inter-school competitive events start to become a thing and sports teachers get hooked on trying to win awards for the school. So its an example where a barrier appears quite randomly at a rough age bracket - a sport that once was for everyone suddenly becomes locked down to one gender.

Those kinds of barrier can be tough to break ,but they can also be easier in so much as at least the issue is more easily identified.


With wargames many of the barriers are not rules or regulations nor are they even social elements that reinforce directly (unless one includes after school activity groups which might weight something like miniature making toward the "boys" whilst something like knitting to the girls; but not every school has such programs or has wargaming on the activity list). So the barriers to entry can be harder to tackle because they are much more difficult to see and can often be based on impressions which are not even true.

Wargame clubs (that I've been too) have never had directly anti-inclusive people nor anti-inclusive rules. There isn't someone lording over the club and "banning girls" or any other social group. Instead you get subtle messages, such as the whole group being guys which becomes intimidating gals wanting to join in without anyone intending it to be so. Again this isn't a hard barrier, its a subtle thing that can discourage casually interested parties. The die-hard fan who REALLY wants to get involved already can, there's very little to stop them. However such people are always a rarity within hobby groups, the key is tapping into the casually interested market.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 11:00:58


Post by: frozenwastes


We also need to allow people to simply not be interested. It can't be that if a given person is not getting involved it must only be because of some barrier someone has put up. If we are not careful we would end up removing the autonomy of anyone who's not part of a majority by not allowing them to have their own preferences and reducing their non-participation to the barriers we imagine are the cause.

It's also okay to have primarily male spaces. I know when a friend of mine transitioned from female to male, participation in such spaces was one of the biggest helps in dealing with the depression that often goes along with gender dysphoria, even post transition. If that particular gaming group had been mixed gender it would not have had the same utility in providing the acceptance as one of the guys that he needed. He also found a similar experience at a monthly Men's Breakfast at a local church.

Either way, I don't think this will end up being a key issue in whether or not there's a drop off. I think that'll be an economic and cyclical issue rather than one related to inclusivity. A ton of people who were out of the hobby in their late 20s and early 30s have gotten back in and it's not clear that there's another group of them ready to follow. If the general growth of gaming, board games and geek culture that has resulted on the internet can be sustained then perhaps we'll see miniature wargaming only grow from here, but I suspect we'll see a leveling off period, if not a small decline.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 11:11:21


Post by: Overread


 frozenwastes wrote:
We also need to allow people to simply not be interested. It can't be that if a given person is not getting involved it must be because of some barrier someone has put up.

It's also okay to have primarily male spaces. I know when a friend of mine transitioned from female to male, participation in such spaces was one of the biggest helps in dealing with the depression that often goes along with gender dysphoria, even post transition. If that particular gaming group had been mixed gender it would not have had the same utility in providing the acceptance as one of the guys that he needed.


These are also very valid points.
I think in terms of "allowing people to be not interested" most of the drive to include more people isn't focused on forcing, but more about making things welcoming and also introducing people to new ideas and aiming to try and get them to spend more than a casual glance at it. Ergo you're not forcing people into it, just introducing them to the concept and getting them to perhaps play a small intro game or paint one model etc.... Ergo giving them a taste and also an experience alongside having an atmosphere that makes them feel welcome and want to be part of the group.


As for gender specific spaces and hobbies that's a complex issue but certainly very valid to consider. I think for wargames the issue is that historically its been a very male dominated hobby so its already a kind of "male space". I think there's a drive now to be more inclusive which might well result in that element reducing; however at the same time provided that the inclusive nature of most general clubs increases the active member base; then one can argue that the local interest could build to a point where it can locally support both a generalist all-comers group and also "male" and even "female" space groups.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 11:18:32


Post by: frozenwastes


The way in which we might disallow people to be not interested is if we define their non participate as being caused by barriers (real or imagined). If we do that, then we have taken away their agency in order to use them as props in a political debate. That's all I was getting at. I'm not talking about actually forcing anyone to like miniature gaming (good luck with that ).

It's also possible that more than one good faith position on the matter of inclusivity is correct. It's possible that people like what they like and that the nature of the hobby products can be barriers. If that's the case then the solution is simply to have variety and for everyone to accept that not everything is for them.

One way inclusivity or representation could end up contributing to a down turn would be if one side or another says "no" to that idea. That variety is not allowed. Only stuff that confirms to their vision is allowed. And if enough clout in terms of sales and lobbying the manufacturers to comply is brought to bear, then we could all lose out.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 11:46:27


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


It's as much visibility as inclusivity.

GW has always had female characters in the Black Library. Most of them far from the damsel in distress. Example? Lotarra Sarrin. Ulrika Magdova.

But, on the tabletop, pretty much a sausagefest.

The Hobby is of course more than the actual games you can play with the models. Many only collect/paint, and have little to no interest in rolling them bones at all.

Having a diverse range, showing lots of variety helps attract ever wider audiences. GW have always had the general variety down pat, thanks to a decent range of aesthetics. But if a young girl can see say, a female Stormcast? That has an appeal beyond a male Stormcast. Or so the theory goes, anyway.

And, if as certain sectors claim, including female sculpts puts them off the hobby as a whole? Not entirely sure they're the sort I'd want hanging around my shop in the first place.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 11:56:22


Post by: auticus


I'd be iinterested in an actual large case study on how many women were actually interested in wargaming.

I know its touted that they are not interested in wargaming because there are few female miniatures, but I know in my world that 99% of the women I've ever known are not interested in wargaming because wargaming and war are things in the male domain and do not interest them in the slightest.

Its kind of like women and heavy metal music. Also a sausage fest in most cases.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 12:01:26


Post by: Inquisitor Gideon


 auticus wrote:
I'd be iinterested in an actual large case study on how many women were actually interested in wargaming.

I know its touted that they are not interested in wargaming because there are few female miniatures, but I know in my world that 99% of the women I've ever known are not interested in wargaming because wargaming and war are things in the male domain and do not interest them in the slightest.

Its kind of like women and heavy metal music. Also a sausage fest in most cases.


Now that is incredibly untrue. I just got back from a Kamelot concert from Trondheim about 2 weeks ago with the other half and i'd guess at least 50-60% of the audience were women.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 12:10:45


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


LARP similarly has a high number of female participants.

Possibly because it's an inherently welcoming hobby, where everyone accepts it's all a bit ridiculous - but also fun.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 12:42:41


Post by: Nurglitch


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
LARP similarly has a high number of female participants.

Possibly because it's an inherently welcoming hobby, where everyone accepts it's all a bit ridiculous - but also fun.

There's that visibility thing again. Like I said about the difference between the board game café and the GW, one is filled with people laughing and having fun, and the other is quiet.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 12:49:53


Post by: Overread


I'd also argue that Larp groups tend to be more overt and outgoing with advertising their groups as well. A GW store doesn't really have a manger advertising or pushing their product outside of the footfall that walks in whilst many game clubs for wargames often don't do all that much. Heck many don't even run a good website or regular facebook page.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 13:07:05


Post by: Cronch


 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
 auticus wrote:
I'd be iinterested in an actual large case study on how many women were actually interested in wargaming.

I know its touted that they are not interested in wargaming because there are few female miniatures, but I know in my world that 99% of the women I've ever known are not interested in wargaming because wargaming and war are things in the male domain and do not interest them in the slightest.

Its kind of like women and heavy metal music. Also a sausage fest in most cases.


Now that is incredibly untrue. I just got back from a Kamelot concert from Trondheim about 2 weeks ago with the other half and i'd guess at least 50-60% of the audience were women.

I do have to wonder if it's cultural thing, as mostly it seems Americans are experiencing this sort of...divide. Obviously individual experiences are not a proof of anything, but I knew a small handful of girls interested in wargames, but many more who were into RPGs, LARP, reenactment (including the choppy-smashy bits) and of course metal.

Anyway, even if not a single woman would be enticed to play wargames by including lady models, I still think having lady models is a good idea, it breaks up the monotony of having 10x the same model on the tabletop. If it does bring in women to the hobby, all the better.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 13:18:09


Post by: Easy E


 Azreal13 wrote:
Take horse riding, many of the pony and riding clubs are full of women to the extent that a guy is rarer. And yet we know that there's no real gender divide on if people wish to ride or not


Except there is.

I'm the very poster child for this exact example.

Grew up in a horse riding family, both parents, even to the extent of them dabbling in training racehorses and my grandparents owning them.

I had three ponies between the ages of 4 and 8 or so.

Could not give less of a gak about horses and horse riding, even with the encouragement of my parents and actually having access to my own horse.

I had entirely more fun building forts out of the hay bales than I ever did riding.

Yet the legion of teenage girls my folks had queuing up to help out, not just with exercising but all the grunt work like mucking out and cleaning tack, was seemingly endless, if one aged out and went on to Uni or whatever, there was always a younger friend of one of the others chomping at the bit, pun intended.

I can testify that there was no prejudice on behalf of my folks, they only cared that whoever was helping was competent, treated the animals well and fit in with the other people, but they never once had a boy even show a hint of interest.

So while technically there's no barrier to either gender, there's clearly something in the wiring of the female brain that sparks something around horses that is much less common in male brains. Clearly it can happen, my dad is evidence of that, but it's far more infrequent.

I can only speculate as to whether it's nature or nurture that causes it, but my own experience over my entire lifetime tells me it's very real.


As someone who lives in a rural Western State of the United States, there is no gender gap in horse riding and ownership.

In fact, your discussion points bolsters the idea that most gender gaps in a hobby are built out of socio-economic and regional cultural differences than anything inherent to said hobbies.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 13:20:25


Post by: LunarSol


It's a hobby in which you are supposed to be building your own custom characters. It should be inclusive basically by definition.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 13:32:29


Post by: Albino Squirrel


I think it is smart of Games Workshop to include female characters in Warhammer Quest Blackstone Fortress and in the Shadespire warbands. If you're trying to introduce a female to one of those games for the first time, I think they are likely to be more interested and more engaged if they can play a female character. Especially if they are young. That probably matters less for larger scale games where you are controlling a whole army. And once you've played that kind of game a few times, the instinct to want to play a character that is like yourself probably fades away. So I imagine that male gamers, given a choice of Blackstone Fortress characters to play, plenty would choose the female eldar character. But someone new to gaming probably would be drawn more to a character of their own gender. That might be a small difference, but something that makes it easier for people to get engaged in the first place.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:19:22


Post by: Laughing Man


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
I think it is smart of Games Workshop to include female characters in Warhammer Quest Blackstone Fortress and in the Shadespire warbands. If you're trying to introduce a female to one of those games for the first time, I think they are likely to be more interested and more engaged if they can play a female character. Especially if they are young. That probably matters less for larger scale games where you are controlling a whole army. And once you've played that kind of game a few times, the instinct to want to play a character that is like yourself probably fades away. So I imagine that male gamers, given a choice of Blackstone Fortress characters to play, plenty would choose the female eldar character. But someone new to gaming probably would be drawn more to a character of their own gender. That might be a small difference, but something that makes it easier for people to get engaged in the first place.

And that's pretty much all anyone's asking for when they talk about inclusivity: Actually including women/minorities in positive roles in the game, instead of stuff like this. Black Library has usually done a pretty good job of this with the occasional stumble, but on the gaming side representation only started recently (the fantastic Severina Raine model, for instance), discounting the Sisters of Battle (a range ignored for so long it became a running gag) and T&A models like Vect's slave harem. It would also be nice if GW used some of their very talented women writers on the game side of things instead of just novels, but baby steps.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:28:53


Post by: Easy E


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
I think it is smart of Games Workshop to include female characters in Warhammer Quest Blackstone Fortress and in the Shadespire warbands. If you're trying to introduce a female to one of those games for the first time, I think they are likely to be more interested and more engaged if they can play a female character. Especially if they are young. That probably matters less for larger scale games where you are controlling a whole army. And once you've played that kind of game a few times, the instinct to want to play a character that is like yourself probably fades away. So I imagine that male gamers, given a choice of Blackstone Fortress characters to play, plenty would choose the female eldar character. But someone new to gaming probably would be drawn more to a character of their own gender. That might be a small difference, but something that makes it easier for people to get engaged in the first place.




This is true of my wife and daughter when we play games. They gravitate to female characters and armies first.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:42:59


Post by: Albino Squirrel


No, that's not all anyone's asking for. Some ridiculous people are asking other people to believe that "It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest".


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:43:28


Post by: Cronch


And once you've played that kind of game a few times, the instinct to want to play a character that is like yourself probably fades away

Considering how many people play humans only in 40k or indeed, any other game, and how vehemently some people defend the sanctity of male-only marines, I'd say it's not entirely true.
I do wish we had stats to show if the popular opinion that women play tyranids/sylvaneth more than anything holds any actual water, because it'd be proof that they do gravitate to armies that are not dudebros.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:48:53


Post by: Laughing Man


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
No, that's not all anyone's asking for. Some ridiculous people are asking other people to believe that "It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest".

Ah. Of course. And we're back to ignoring the women who are actually saying that the reason they try to get into gaming and stop is because of misogyny and harassment.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:50:01


Post by: LunarSol


 Easy E wrote:

This is true of my wife and daughter when we play games. They gravitate to female characters and armies first.


I'm a blonde farm boy who grew up in the middle of nowhere. For some reason I'm super fond of Star Wars.

This stuff is really easy to see in kids. They look to see their role in everything and if they don't see themselves, they assume its not for them. I run into this all the time with my daughter as well.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:55:54


Post by: Laughing Man


Seriously though. We had a massive thread here on Dakka when that news article broke in the first place. Predictably, it was mostly men jumping to the hobby's defense, saying that it couldn't possibly be true, or that if it were true then those broken stairs would have been immediately thrown out.

Nearly all of the comments from women simply talked about how pervasive the problem is, and how it happens to them all the goddamn time.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 15:59:59


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Lots of people are super fond of Star Wars.

I don't think it's really as prominent in movies or even playing whole armies. I'm sure most Sisters of Battle players were men. And surely people aren't playing Tyranids because they see themselves as a mindless alien insect. But for something where you're picking a few characters, I think it can make a big difference.

Of course, different armies are meant to appeal to different kinds of people to broaden the appeal of the game. Tau are very different in a lot of ways to any of the other armies, and someone could be very interested in Tau even if they didn't the aesthetic of most other armies. But adding army (or character) variety can certainly broaden appeal of the game in general, without losing customers that already like the game.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 16:05:26


Post by: Nurglitch


 Laughing Man wrote:
Seriously though. We had a massive thread here on Dakka when that news article broke in the first place. Predictably, it was mostly men jumping to the hobby's defense, saying that it couldn't possibly be true, or that if it were true then those broken stairs would have been immediately thrown out.

Nearly all of the comments from women simply talked about how pervasive the problem is, and how it happens to them all the goddamn time.

Also women talk about how men don't listen when they talk about how pervasive the problem is, and how it happens all the time. The men respond by saying of course they listen and haven't heard anything so it's not an actual problem, and go on ignoring women talking about the problem.

I've noticed a pattern though. Someone says: "You're sexist," and the response is never "Damn, I've been working on it, but I guess I have more work to do. Any suggestions?" It's always "I'm not sexist, but..."


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 16:27:27


Post by: LunarSol


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Lots of people are super fond of Star Wars.


And the number of girls dressed as Jedi that show up at my door each Halloween has increased dramatically starting in 2016.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 16:28:07


Post by: Togusa


Not Online!!! wrote:


So you have a questionable dill weed, and an article that throws all other participants in the hobby into the same category, without numbers or anything to back that up.

Scuseme but that ain't quality journalism.

Additionally. Play the fething game, live and let live. If you have such a dill weed in your group throw him out.
There case solved. It is not the bloody companies issue to keep the community welocming, that is the communities job itself.
The company can help along with decent ruleset and boons for fresh starters but that 's it.


BuT iT's WhItE MaLe TeRrOrIsM!

Yeah, that article was quite questionable.

I especially enjoyed the part where the accusations against "gamers" ended with her stating her belief that she was harassed by them. I guess a lot of people still haven't figured out how trolling works and that edgy internet feths are abound.

In the case of the rude customer, that person should have been booted from the store. If I'd been there I'd of planted my boot up his ass for acting that way.

Also, maybe don't go around telling a bunch of strangers your personal history, especially in regards to assault? That isn't going to end well at all.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 16:46:42


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Well, of course Vox isn't quality journalism. It isn't any kind of journalism. It makes sense that someone who bases their worldview on what they read on Vox is going to seem delusional to sane people.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 17:04:07


Post by: Togusa


 Laughing Man wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
No, that's not all anyone's asking for. Some ridiculous people are asking other people to believe that "It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest".

Ah. Of course. And we're back to ignoring the women who are actually saying that the reason they try to get into gaming and stop is because of misogyny and harassment.


I wouldn't ignore them, I would just ask why not be more aggressive and push your way in? That's what I do when I encounter a D-bag at a game store, I either engage and make fun of them until they leave or push my way past and ignore them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Well, of course Vox isn't quality journalism. It isn't any kind of journalism. It makes sense that someone who bases their worldview on what they read on Vox is going to seem delusional to sane people.


Oh I was referencing the original article that the Vox one links to. Also, when you go down that road of "x isn't a real source" you just open a can of worms that the person you're debating with will then use against your sources later.

I think it is better to examine the contents of said article and debate the facts as they are.

Unfortunately, in the young womans case it's her word against the store owner. How do we determine the truth here?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 17:35:47


Post by: Laughing Man


 Togusa wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
No, that's not all anyone's asking for. Some ridiculous people are asking other people to believe that "It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest".

Ah. Of course. And we're back to ignoring the women who are actually saying that the reason they try to get into gaming and stop is because of misogyny and harassment.


I wouldn't ignore them, I would just ask why not be more aggressive and push your way in? That's what I do when I encounter a D-bag at a game store, I either engage and make fun of them until they leave or push my way past and ignore them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Well, of course Vox isn't quality journalism. It isn't any kind of journalism. It makes sense that someone who bases their worldview on what they read on Vox is going to seem delusional to sane people.


Oh I was referencing the original article that the Vox one links to. Also, when you go down that road of "x isn't a real source" you just open a can of worms that the person you're debating with will then use against your sources later.

I think it is better to examine the contents of said article and debate the facts as they are.

Unfortunately, in the young womans case it's her word against the store owner. How do we determine the truth here?

Well, she won the largest sexual harrassment settlement ever at the time (for Manitoba), so that seems to lend some credence to her.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 17:44:13


Post by: Togusa


 Laughing Man wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
No, that's not all anyone's asking for. Some ridiculous people are asking other people to believe that "It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest".

Ah. Of course. And we're back to ignoring the women who are actually saying that the reason they try to get into gaming and stop is because of misogyny and harassment.


I wouldn't ignore them, I would just ask why not be more aggressive and push your way in? That's what I do when I encounter a D-bag at a game store, I either engage and make fun of them until they leave or push my way past and ignore them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Well, of course Vox isn't quality journalism. It isn't any kind of journalism. It makes sense that someone who bases their worldview on what they read on Vox is going to seem delusional to sane people.


Oh I was referencing the original article that the Vox one links to. Also, when you go down that road of "x isn't a real source" you just open a can of worms that the person you're debating with will then use against your sources later.

I think it is better to examine the contents of said article and debate the facts as they are.

Unfortunately, in the young womans case it's her word against the store owner. How do we determine the truth here?

Well, she won the largest sexual harrassment settlement ever at the time (for Manitoba), so that seems to lend some credence to her.


Does it though?

She asserts that there was a culture of harassment.
Her Boss says otherwise.

How much of the evidence that was supporting her can we as the public see? I did a quick search and couldn't find any of the hard presented evidence outside of testimony from her as a witness. Same for his side.

Need I remind you of cases where people get away with crimes they obviously committed? Courts can be wrong, they're not infallible.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 17:48:34


Post by: Laughing Man


Could it have been a frivolous lawsuit brought by someone just looking for money? Sure. Bill Cosby could have been unjustly framed. Is either terribly likely? Not really.

And disregarding the specific high profile case for a moment, Dakka has its own thread of horror stories. You don't even have to scroll down more than a few posts before you start getting into misogyny and worse.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 17:54:01


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Laughing Man wrote:
Could it have been a frivolous lawsuit brought by someone just looking for money? Sure. Bill Cosby could have been unjustly framed. Is either terribly likely? Not really.

And disregarding the specific high profile case for a moment, Dakka has its own thread of horror stories. You don't even have to scroll down more than a few posts before you start getting into misogyny and worse.


Erm what?
Mind pointing me to that?

NVM found the post i belive.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 18:09:32


Post by: Overread


 Laughing Man wrote:
Could it have been a frivolous lawsuit brought by someone just looking for money? Sure. Bill Cosby could have been unjustly framed. Is either terribly likely? Not really.

And disregarding the specific high profile case for a moment, Dakka has its own thread of horror stories. You don't even have to scroll down more than a few posts before you start getting into misogyny and worse.


Just remember that after a few pages it leaves hobby shops and becomes far more open and general - and the fact its from 2016 and isn't still even running suggests that these issues are rarer rather than common.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 18:51:33


Post by: Laughing Man


 Overread wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
Could it have been a frivolous lawsuit brought by someone just looking for money? Sure. Bill Cosby could have been unjustly framed. Is either terribly likely? Not really.

And disregarding the specific high profile case for a moment, Dakka has its own thread of horror stories. You don't even have to scroll down more than a few posts before you start getting into misogyny and worse.


Just remember that after a few pages it leaves hobby shops and becomes far more open and general - and the fact its from 2016 and isn't still even running suggests that these issues are rarer rather than common.

Oh things have certainly gotten better. It's not solved by any means, but a lot of good progress has been made by game companies, stores, and the community in addressing a lot of these sorts of issues. I would caution against using "Well the thread's dead, so that means it's over" as evidence, however. Individual threads die all the time, for a variety of reasons, and we've still got wonderful cringe repositories like r/RPGhorrorstories where we can hear about more of this stuff going on.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 19:09:16


Post by: Nurglitch


 Togusa wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Togusa wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
No, that's not all anyone's asking for. Some ridiculous people are asking other people to believe that "It's a male dominated hobby because of harrassment of women who express interest".

Ah. Of course. And we're back to ignoring the women who are actually saying that the reason they try to get into gaming and stop is because of misogyny and harassment.


I wouldn't ignore them, I would just ask why not be more aggressive and push your way in? That's what I do when I encounter a D-bag at a game store, I either engage and make fun of them until they leave or push my way past and ignore them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Well, of course Vox isn't quality journalism. It isn't any kind of journalism. It makes sense that someone who bases their worldview on what they read on Vox is going to seem delusional to sane people.


Oh I was referencing the original article that the Vox one links to. Also, when you go down that road of "x isn't a real source" you just open a can of worms that the person you're debating with will then use against your sources later.

I think it is better to examine the contents of said article and debate the facts as they are.

Unfortunately, in the young womans case it's her word against the store owner. How do we determine the truth here?

Well, she won the largest sexual harrassment settlement ever at the time (for Manitoba), so that seems to lend some credence to her.


Does it though?

She asserts that there was a culture of harassment.
Her Boss says otherwise.

How much of the evidence that was supporting her can we as the public see? I did a quick search and couldn't find any of the hard presented evidence outside of testimony from her as a witness. Same for his side.

Need I remind you of cases where people get away with crimes they obviously committed? Courts can be wrong, they're not infallible.

Courts aren't infallible. I recently got out of a parking ticket because of a clerical error, for example. They are, nonetheless, reliable, and now that the court has ruled it's a false equivalence to present the question of whether she faced harassment as an open question. The court ruled in her favour and you still can't bring yourself to believe her? Might I remind you that these courts tend to be occupied by judges that ask women if they couldn't have tried harder not to be raped? Not the defense lawyer, mind you, but the judge.

She asserts that there was a culture of harassment. Her boss says otherwise. The courts notorious for the sexism and hostility to women still sided with her after going to the trouble of a trial.

Let's go back to that culture of harassment. You meet a d-bag at the store and you push past him. Good for you. Now, meet a d-bag morning, noon, and night. Find them everywhere, your whole life, and have people tell you to be more considerate and understanding of all the d-bags you meet. Have them shrug and disbelieve that you meet d-bags because they haven't met them, or if they have you're just over-reacting. After all, you're told, boys will be boys and somehow that makes them entitled to be d-bags to you. Oh, and if you push past them suddenly everyone knows that you're the d-bag because you didn't politely roll over and giggle at the d-bag, or appreciate that someone might deign to give you 'attention.'

As a man you meet a d-bag at the store and whatever. As a woman you're worn down by d-bags over the course of years, if not decades, all the while having your complaints ignored, disbelieved, and criticized (after all, maybe you were the d-bag). Men are not worn down by this culture of harassment because they don't face a constant, endless, barrage of gak and then told they'd be prettier if they smiled more.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 19:21:09


Post by: Albino Squirrel


If literally everyone you meet seems like a "d-bag", but nobody else thinks they are... maybe it's you?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 19:27:47


Post by: Nurglitch


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
If literally everyone you meet seems like a "d-bag", but nobody else thinks they are... maybe it's you?

There you go. That's why things like sexism and racism are considered 'structural' or 'baked-in' because of stuff like that. Consider the logic of it: Meet a squirrel in the morning and you've met a squirrel. Meet squirrels all day and maybe you're the squirrel...? Does this logic not seem both flawed and prejudiced? It's flawed because of course you can meet a-holes all day while being kind, considerate, and attentive yourself. It's prejudiced because you're leaping to the judgment that it must be the plaintiff's fault, without any question of who they met and what happened. It's specious, yet nonetheless repeated endlessly for some reason.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:06:58


Post by: frozenwastes


It's repeated endlessly because the vast majority of human interaction on a daily basis is fine. So when someone not only presents an aberration from our largely functional society occurring but a repeated pattern of negative interactions that defy all statistics it makes sense to question what is really going on.

For example I suspect in many cases that a regularly victimized individual who has awful experiences with a variety of unrelated individuals has some characteristic that predatory types are looking for. Something perhaps even beneath the conscious level that makes them attractive to predatory types. Something that makes the donkey-cave think the individual won't speak up and will go along with their negative gak.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also on socially awkward males making bad passes on female gamers-- I actually think they should. If someone is socially awkward and comes across someone they are attracted to who happens to share an interest with them, they should express that. It sucks to be hit on when you're not interested and doubly so when it's done badly, but people should be free to do so. Yes, it can make things uncomfortable but if someone is socially awkward they should not be further shamed and isolated. There really is nothing inappropriate about hitting on someone during a social activity. It is not the work place and there's no power relationship being abused. And for the socially awkward it is probably one of the few places in their life they feel comfortable.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:14:13


Post by: Albino Squirrel


The guy who comes into the store who hasn't bathed in forever probably thinks everyone else in the store is a jerk for not wanting to play a game with him. They players who cheat or are sore losers probably think everyone else is a jerk for not wanting to play with them. I guess people are free to associate with who they want. Though, anecdotally, it does seem like miniature gaming and role playing tend to attract a disproportionately high percentage of people who have trouble interacting socially, or who tend to live a little bit in their own fantasy world.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:18:53


Post by: frozenwastes


Fo sure. It sort of makes sense that public gaming would be attended by social failures. If they had the social skills to assemble a gaming group themselves they wouldn't need the public venue/event.

For example I once played an opponent who wouldn't speak to me. He made gestures and pointed at things and I honestly assumed there was a hearing/speech issue. But then someone he knew came up and said hello and they had a short chat. The person just had crippling social anxiety and just couldn't talk with anyone until they had been around them a few times. It was super creepy/uncomfortable/rude at the time, but now I think good on him for making the effort.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:21:40


Post by: Overread


Nurglitch wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
If literally everyone you meet seems like a "d-bag", but nobody else thinks they are... maybe it's you?

There you go. That's why things like sexism and racism are considered 'structural' or 'baked-in' because of stuff like that. Consider the logic of it: Meet a squirrel in the morning and you've met a squirrel. Meet squirrels all day and maybe you're the squirrel...? Does this logic not seem both flawed and prejudiced? It's flawed because of course you can meet a-holes all day while being kind, considerate, and attentive yourself. It's prejudiced because you're leaping to the judgment that it must be the plaintiff's fault, without any question of who they met and what happened. It's specious, yet nonetheless repeated endlessly for some reason.


Whilst this is an international forum many of the people taking part come from nations that share similar culture concepts and ideals. Therefore when someone appears who is posting comments way outside of what most consider normal and when others from their own country (as noted on the profile flag) also state that its abnormal then the person's conclusions do come into question.

Perhaps the region they live in is significantly different from the majorities experiences; perhaps they live in a "rough area" or one with a higher proportion of cultures from different backgrounds and ideals. Or perhaps their impression and interpretation of the behaviours of others is flawed etc... Without more data is hard to say and such arguments/debates can often go in circles.


Age also comes into it, the impressions of a teenager are going to differ to those of a mature adult or a senior adult. What might be innocent banter within one generation might be interpreted very different by another generation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
The guy who comes into the store who hasn't bathed in forever probably thinks everyone else in the store is a jerk for not wanting to play a game with him. They players who cheat or are sore losers probably think everyone else is a jerk for not wanting to play with them. I guess people are free to associate with who they want. Though, anecdotally, it does seem like miniature gaming and role playing tend to attract a disproportionately high percentage of people who have trouble interacting socially, or who tend to live a little bit in their own fantasy world.


It's also important to note that people often behave within tolerances that the group allows for, even if marginally. Ergo that person who hasn't washed in forever is still tolerated at the group.

In addition sometimes people express themselves poorly or don't communicate the issue in the right way. Ergo they might not have told the guy he stinks or they might have worded it in such a way as to make the issue a conflicting one which can thus shift it into one of competing egos - now he's not washing not just because he doesn't care/understand why its important, but because its now a matter of pride and battling egos and not being "told what to do" etc... (yes sometimes ego based arguments can sound very childish and stupid to those on the outside).

I think we've all seen when there are people "silently excluded" who can often be totally oblivious as to why because its not communicated to them and changes in their attitude and behaviour are not openly encouraged by the group. And yes there is a difference between trying to force a person to change and encouraging a person to change. One can build negative connections and hostile associations whilst the other can not only encourage and support but even reinforce the behaviour in a positive way.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:39:58


Post by: frozenwastes


To make this on topic: has there really been a growth in socially awkward young men causing problems to any degree that might cause or contribute to a "down turn" in the hobby industry?

I doubt it. In fact it's probably the reverse as the more obsessive awkward types you have in your customer base, the more the company likely makes in revenue. When people are basically buying their social interaction by playing in public gaming (be it miniatures, magic cards or something else) they're probably pretty likely to open up their wallet.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:54:20


Post by: Not Online!!!


Honestly, i blame the somewhat anonimity of the web / distancedness coming with it.

It is a lot easier to call someone on fb etc a [insert term of preference ] Then in real live.

However the new ways of communication allow for better viewability and further reach.
That means bad behaviour gets easier and also more effective.
It's how this works.

And also due to rule number 1, the internet does not forget at the same time irl thinks now that it is more common.
Even though it is just a small group of "loud" Keyboard warriors and also potentially trolls.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:55:53


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Individual stores can definitely have very different environments and kinds of players, that's for sure. Doesn't necessarily reflect or affect the hobby as a whole. Though, remember in the 80's when there was that movie about the kind who played Dungeons and Dragons and went nuts thinking he was exploring dungeons and disappeared? Very loosely based on an actual disappearance, though I believe in reality it had nothing to do with him playing Dungeons and Dragons.

I don't know how much that affected sales of Dungeons and Dragons or any other games, though.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 20:56:57


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Individual stores can definitely have very different environments and kinds of players, that's for sure. Doesn't necessarily reflect or affect the hobby as a whole. Though, remember in the 80's when there was that movie about the kind who played Dungeons and Dragons and went nuts thinking he was exploring dungeons and disappeared? Very loosely based on an actual disappearance, though I believe in reality it had nothing to do with him playing Dungeons and Dragons.

I don't know how much that affected sales of Dungeons and Dragons or any other games, though.


Wasn't there also the one dude claiming D&D would turn you into satanists?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 21:09:00


Post by: Overread


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Individual stores can definitely have very different environments and kinds of players, that's for sure. Doesn't necessarily reflect or affect the hobby as a whole. Though, remember in the 80's when there was that movie about the kind who played Dungeons and Dragons and went nuts thinking he was exploring dungeons and disappeared? Very loosely based on an actual disappearance, though I believe in reality it had nothing to do with him playing Dungeons and Dragons.

I don't know how much that affected sales of Dungeons and Dragons or any other games, though.


Wasn't there also the one dude claiming D&D would turn you into satanists?


There was a whole wave of that which, from what I gather, mostly ran through the USA more than the UK. It was a spin off the era when Rock/metal would also contain messages from the devil and send you to Hell if you listened to it backwards etc...


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 21:12:17


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Overread wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Albino Squirrel wrote:
Individual stores can definitely have very different environments and kinds of players, that's for sure. Doesn't necessarily reflect or affect the hobby as a whole. Though, remember in the 80's when there was that movie about the kind who played Dungeons and Dragons and went nuts thinking he was exploring dungeons and disappeared? Very loosely based on an actual disappearance, though I believe in reality it had nothing to do with him playing Dungeons and Dragons.

I don't know how much that affected sales of Dungeons and Dragons or any other games, though.


Wasn't there also the one dude claiming D&D would turn you into satanists?


There was a whole wave of that which, from what I gather, mostly ran through the USA more than the UK. It was a spin off the era when Rock/metal would also contain messages from the devil and send you to Hell if you listened to it backwards etc...

Ahh yes that time.

Never really hit us, we were more concerned about the communists, and our neighbours, and with invading them, actively, and Burning down forrests and vineyards.

I believe ever since we nearly got starved out since WW1 we have been collectively paranoid.

Good times i tell you.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 21:18:33


Post by: Laughing Man


 Overread wrote:
I think we've all seen when there are people "silently excluded" who can often be totally oblivious as to why because its not communicated to them and changes in their attitude and behaviour are not openly encouraged by the group. And yes there is a difference between trying to force a person to change and encouraging a person to change. One can build negative connections and hostile associations whilst the other can not only encourage and support but even reinforce the behaviour in a positive way.

This is actually something that's a big problem a lot of the time, and leads to what's called the Broken Step or Missing Step Problem. The analogy is that your house has a missing step on the basement stair. Instead of fixing it, you all just go around it, and warn visitors that your stairs are missing a step. Until one day you don't warn a visitor, and someone twists their ankle walking down the stairs. Similarly, a lot of groups will simply deal with problem individuals by simply ignoring and avoiding them, rather than actually fixing the bad behavior. This leads to new members of the group who aren't in the know being abused by the problem individual. It's especially a problem in niche hobbies like ours, as a lot of us have social anxiety and feel very uncomfortable with confrontation. That doesn't change the fact that people get hurt when we choose to not to fix the stairs.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 21:41:05


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Laughing Man wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I think we've all seen when there are people "silently excluded" who can often be totally oblivious as to why because its not communicated to them and changes in their attitude and behaviour are not openly encouraged by the group. And yes there is a difference between trying to force a person to change and encouraging a person to change. One can build negative connections and hostile associations whilst the other can not only encourage and support but even reinforce the behaviour in a positive way.

This is actually something that's a big problem a lot of the time, and leads to what's called the Broken Step or Missing Step Problem. The analogy is that your house has a missing step on the basement stair. Instead of fixing it, you all just go around it, and warn visitors that your stairs are missing a step. Until one day you don't warn a visitor, and someone twists their ankle walking down the stairs. Similarly, a lot of groups will simply deal with problem individuals by simply ignoring and avoiding them, rather than actually fixing the bad behavior. This leads to new members of the group who aren't in the know being abused by the problem individual. It's especially a problem in niche hobbies like ours, as a lot of us have social anxiety and feel very uncomfortable with confrontation. That doesn't change the fact that people get hurt when we choose to not to fix the stairs.


I kinda agree, however, common sense and self reliance still apply.
F.e.instead of going full reeeee like the vox article "thing" which is not helping the issue at all, maybee Inform the local flg, group, community instead. This will be percived by most in the hobby as an attack instead and further entrench positions that don't need one.

Or alternatively confront the person. You can't really expect ( and I state that as someone that had issues with anxiety) that everything is and will be made cushy for you.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 21:55:34


Post by: Laughing Man


Not Online!!! wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I think we've all seen when there are people "silently excluded" who can often be totally oblivious as to why because its not communicated to them and changes in their attitude and behaviour are not openly encouraged by the group. And yes there is a difference between trying to force a person to change and encouraging a person to change. One can build negative connections and hostile associations whilst the other can not only encourage and support but even reinforce the behaviour in a positive way.

This is actually something that's a big problem a lot of the time, and leads to what's called the Broken Step or Missing Step Problem. The analogy is that your house has a missing step on the basement stair. Instead of fixing it, you all just go around it, and warn visitors that your stairs are missing a step. Until one day you don't warn a visitor, and someone twists their ankle walking down the stairs. Similarly, a lot of groups will simply deal with problem individuals by simply ignoring and avoiding them, rather than actually fixing the bad behavior. This leads to new members of the group who aren't in the know being abused by the problem individual. It's especially a problem in niche hobbies like ours, as a lot of us have social anxiety and feel very uncomfortable with confrontation. That doesn't change the fact that people get hurt when we choose to not to fix the stairs.


I kinda agree, however, common sense and self reliance still apply.
F.e.instead of going full reeeee like the vox article "thing" which is not helping the issue at all, maybee Inform the local flg, group, community instead. This will be percived by most in the hobby as an attack instead and further entrench positions that don't need one.

Or alternatively confront the person. You can't really expect ( and I state that as someone that had issues with anxiety) that everything is and will be made cushy for you.

Absolutely confront the person in question, and ideally make sure they're not allowed back to the event/venue/club/whatever. Merely informing folks that they're a problem, and then collectively not doing anything else, is what makes a person a Broken Stair in the first place: They're not a danger to the folks you've told, they're a danger to folks who miss the message and are still exposed to a known abuser.

As for the article (or the blog post that blew up into an article), I see it as a result of a woman's complaints not being taken seriously until she felt she had to take more drastic action: The blog post, the news articles, and the sexual harassment lawsuit.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 21:58:18


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Laughing Man wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
 Laughing Man wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I think we've all seen when there are people "silently excluded" who can often be totally oblivious as to why because its not communicated to them and changes in their attitude and behaviour are not openly encouraged by the group. And yes there is a difference between trying to force a person to change and encouraging a person to change. One can build negative connections and hostile associations whilst the other can not only encourage and support but even reinforce the behaviour in a positive way.

This is actually something that's a big problem a lot of the time, and leads to what's called the Broken Step or Missing Step Problem. The analogy is that your house has a missing step on the basement stair. Instead of fixing it, you all just go around it, and warn visitors that your stairs are missing a step. Until one day you don't warn a visitor, and someone twists their ankle walking down the stairs. Similarly, a lot of groups will simply deal with problem individuals by simply ignoring and avoiding them, rather than actually fixing the bad behavior. This leads to new members of the group who aren't in the know being abused by the problem individual. It's especially a problem in niche hobbies like ours, as a lot of us have social anxiety and feel very uncomfortable with confrontation. That doesn't change the fact that people get hurt when we choose to not to fix the stairs.


I kinda agree, however, common sense and self reliance still apply.
F.e.instead of going full reeeee like the vox article "thing" which is not helping the issue at all, maybee Inform the local flg, group, community instead. This will be percived by most in the hobby as an attack instead and further entrench positions that don't need one.

Or alternatively confront the person. You can't really expect ( and I state that as someone that had issues with anxiety) that everything is and will be made cushy for you.

Absolutely confront the person in question, and ideally make sure they're not allowed back to the event/venue/club/whatever. Merely informing folks that they're a problem, and then collectively not doing anything else, is what makes a person a Broken Stair in the first place: They're not a danger to the folks you've told, they're a danger to folks who miss the message and are still exposed to a known abuser.

As for the article (or the blog post that blew up into an article), I see it as a result of a woman's complaints not being taken seriously until she felt she had to take more drastic action: The blog post, the news articles, and the sexual harassment lawsuit.


And it is still vastly overblown, isn't it.
And also generalizing and insulting.
And rethorically a Tool that gets used to condemn whole groups of something, and I don't like that out of habit, infact i find it so disingenious that i regard her as equally questionable as the asshat she had to deal with.



Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 22:30:17


Post by: Ghool


Funny thing about that article and lawsuit. I did a bunch of research on her when it was happening...being a Canadian and all.
It turns out that she tried to pull the same shenanigans on the owner of Wyrd on their own forums.
She had a massive blog post about how she was harassed and treated likeess than human on their forums and so-on.
I can't remember the exact details, but as it turns out, it wasn't the first time she had made such claims.

I'd take that article and her testimony with a big grain of salt.

And I'm certainly not saying stuff like that doesn't happen. The character of the person making the accusations is unknown, as is the accused. It's best to remain open to all possibilities than believe a single article about a single case from a person of questionable character.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/08 22:41:19


Post by: Not Online!!!


 Ghool wrote:
Funny thing about that article and lawsuit. I did a bunch of research on her when it was happening...being a Canadian and all.
It turns out that she tried to pull the same shenanigans on the owner of Wyrd on their own forums.
She had a massive blog post about how she was harassed and treated likeess than human on their forums and so-on.
I can't remember the exact details, but as it turns out, it wasn't the first time she had made such claims.

I'd take that article and her testimony with a big grain of salt.

And I'm certainly not saying stuff like that doesn't happen. The character of the person making the accusations is unknown, as is the accused. It's best to remain open to all possibilities than believe a single article about a single case from a person of questionable character.


So beyond questionable rethorical behaviour to capitalize from the outrage we might have a blackmailer infront of us?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/09 00:23:45


Post by: Ghool


Based on what I read myself, she made claims against at least 2 other individuals, and one of them was the guy who runs or owns Wyrd. The other was at a video game convention from what I recall.
Their old forums were still accessible and I managed to find the posts where she had claimed she was harassed and mistreated by Wyrd'S owner. Every reply he had was civil and not at all hostile or insulting towards her. I can't even remember what the altercation was about. On her blog however, was a very different story, and I found her claims to either be exaggerated beyond belief or outright lies.

Now granted I'm just another random dude on the Internet as well. But I did extensive research into this particular case and found her evidence and testimonial to be lacking anything concrete.
I found her to be of extremely questionable character.

Make of that what you will.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/09 00:38:44


Post by: ingtaer


That case had an extensive hashing out here before;

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/686094.page

I dont think we need to do it again do we?


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/09 00:50:30


Post by: Ghool


 ingtaer wrote:
That case had an extensive hashing out here before;

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/686094.page

I dont think we need to do it again do we?


Thank you. I'd rather talk about the state of gaming instead. Which currently, is in a good place.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/09 02:23:28


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


I don't think we'll see another drop off so much as a settling. Right now the double whammy of Kickstarter and GW hitting rock bottom then coming back to Jesus has created a lot of chaos in the tabletop market and uncertainty for gamers.

We've seen a lot of small shooting stars flame out in recent years, but most of them have ended up bought out by other companies, their games living on after their deaths. On the other side, some companies have found success filling in a bunch of very small niches rather than co letting for the self-contained boardgame/wargame dollars. I feel that in the next five years, we might see the middle tier looking like Warlord, Mantic, CMON and Wayland, with a bunch of little Gangfights and Ganesha Games supplying fun little extras. GW will probably still be dominant, but I suspect they'll have to make a lot of their money from licensing and limited boardgame or 40k side game churn.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/09 02:48:33


Post by: frozenwastes


I also think the miniature show sales, mail order and club model popular in the UK I actually think there are two separate parallel industries and one could go through a down turn while the other thrives.

I think it's very possible that the hobby of purchasing hobby products could go through a down turn and larger KS projects don't fund as well, retail miniatures sales slow and the massive number of miniature focused board games rapidly contracts while the small makers, club play and home gaming holds or even increases. It's possible that with the internet the cottage industry and small manufacturer level will be less vulnerable any down turn as they are not subject to the thin margins being sliced thinner as both distribution and retail takes its cut.

For example, during the industry contraction period of 2006 to 2012 for RPGs, small press and indie publishing exploded while retail sales of big names struggled.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/12 19:44:14


Post by: Easy E


 frozenwastes wrote:
I also think the miniature show sales, mail order and club model popular in the UK I actually think there are two separate parallel industries and one could go through a down turn while the other thrives.

I think it's very possible that the hobby of purchasing hobby products could go through a down turn and larger KS projects don't fund as well, retail miniatures sales slow and the massive number of miniature focused board games rapidly contracts while the small makers, club play and home gaming holds or even increases. It's possible that with the internet the cottage industry and small manufacturer level will be less vulnerable any down turn as they are not subject to the thin margins being sliced thinner as both distribution and retail takes its cut.

For example, during the industry contraction period of 2006 to 2012 for RPGs, small press and indie publishing exploded while retail sales of big names struggled.


This is a very insightful post.

I have to admit, when Spartan collapsed about the same time as a couple of other decent size names, I thought the Golden Time was over. I expected it to pressage the great fall of mini-wargamers like the collapse of Lehman Brothers did for the stock market.

I am glad to admit I was wrong. However, once culture begins to turn away from all things nerdy, when nerd-culture has been sucked dry by market forces; then the dark times will come again.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/12 19:50:23


Post by: infinite_array


Really? I was expecting Spartan to collapse when they couldn't stop making new games without being able to support the ones they already had. And then they chased the Halo license right into failure.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/13 04:36:21


Post by: Valander


 infinite_array wrote:
Really? I was expecting Spartan to collapse when they couldn't stop making new games without being able to support the ones they already had. And then they chased the Halo license right into failure.
Agreed. If anything I was surprised it took Spartan that long to collapse. (No, I didn't want them to, I enjoyed their Firestorm stuff.) But they really did seem to be constantly chasing the next game as their "silver bullet winner" or something, and just didn't support their existing lines.

I think that's a risk we have right now in a few places; there are a lot of licensed products out there right now, with DC/Batman, the new Marvel minis game, A Song of Ice and Fire, Walking Dead, etc. I think these things are particularly at risk for a sudden drop off when the property isn't so hot anymore (some probably a little more resilient than others, such as Star Wars), and some of these smaller companies have put all their eggs in that basket. If those sales drop off, they probably won't be able to afford to keep the license, then they're toast. Some of the "semi-big" companies are doing this, it's not just new, small companies.

Also I think that comparison to the RPG industry is pretty accurate. "Boutique" shops for minis is a lot more possible now due to 3d printer technology, and cottage-industry sized game companies that pick a niche and serve it well probably will withstand whatever mass-market drop might happen better than some of the medium-bigger players (such as Mantic, Knight Models, and even Privateer Press at this point) would be able to take if it happens.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/14 20:37:50


Post by: Dynas


I highly doubt it.If anything Kickstarters spread awareness for miniature games.

D&D is being "promoted" with shows like Stranger Things and Riverdale, so the "satan worshiper" stigma is not like it was.

We have Eisenhorn show in the works which is likely to spur interest in the hobby. I expect a huge influx of players coming in once the show airs.

The thing 40k/AoS has that other games like Star Wars, ASoIaF, Batman, etc... is that 40k started as miniatures and worked into other markets like comics, books, games, etc... Minitatures is GW primary market. These other brands are just making miniature games to support their brands primary market. Ex: (star wars = movies, Batman = comics, ASoIaF = books/show).

Plus profitability is crazy high. The only thing that could possibly have a negative impact is the Brexit issue, but lets not get into that. GW will still be making Primaris Lieutenant for many more years, so no need to worry. Primaris Lieutenant Codex is slated for 2023 i think.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/14 20:42:59


Post by: Laughing Man


I wouldn't really call any of the licensed game manufacturers small. CMON has the GoT license, and Asmodee is doing Marvel and Star Wars. Mantic isn't huge, but has a solid enough base that losing Walking Dead shouldn't kill them. Knight is the only one that's all-in on their licensed games, with the Harry Potter and DC licenses.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/14 20:51:18


Post by: Overread


It's not so much that the companies are at risk of falling; but more that the licence holder might revoke the licence at any point; esp since most are big brand names so they will have signed short term contracts that are designed to be renewed regularly. Thus letting them back out and not renew if they want.

You see this a lot in computer games; look at all those Transformer and Lego franchise games that vanished overnight when the contracts came to their end and the studios didn't want to continue them. Sports games are the same, though many of them are locked into the idea of repeat products so a "new" game comes out the next year.

Even if everything is good politics within companies can end deals - it's always a big risk for any franchise based game system; because if you kick the franchise out the game will end.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/15 15:36:07


Post by: LunarSol


The good news is the tabletop industry isn't really profitable enough for anyone to go out of their way to try and get more out of it. Most companies want to make sure they're getting something out of it, but since no game is making money that has any real affect on their bottom line, the license isn't likely to get pulled as long as they get their cut.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 11:39:37


Post by: ingtaer


Thanks for getting the thread back on track guys, just a general reminder of the rules. Please be polite, please stick to the topic and please don't drag Pols into it.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 11:52:01


Post by: Overread


 LunarSol wrote:
The good news is the tabletop industry isn't really profitable enough for anyone to go out of their way to try and get more out of it. Most companies want to make sure they're getting something out of it, but since no game is making money that has any real affect on their bottom line, the license isn't likely to get pulled as long as they get their cut.


True, but at the same time a company having an internal product "refocus" could axe certain product lines. Eg Disney could sink a fortune into a new space film franchise and want that to dominate and not have SW around as strong, so they'd start retiring some older licences (or just not renewing them) but offering ones on the new product to encourage the market to shift. Ok so that is a bit of a stretch considering how powerful and long lasting Starwars is; but its always a big risk when your product relies upon a 3rd party.



As for the game market in general, for board and tabletop games I think the big issue is that its a market no one is really pushing in a big way. In fact I'd argue that GW is probably one of the few companies actually trying to reach out and grow the market size. Certainly in wargames and tabletop games most of the other firms are not trying as hard and mostly seem to rely upon existing market uptake. PP Was the only other one that tried and they've since retired their PG program and not replaced it. I'd say once you branch out more you've got Magic the Gathering who seem to be doing a good job maintaining and securing new gamers for their game and stealing a big chunk of the overall gamer pie. It's helped greatly that their whole business design is well made to funnel money into itself both at the company level and at the local retailer level; which gets local retailers very eager to promote it.

Though interestingly even Wizards I don't see pushing books, films, board games, etc.... Even their computer game uptake was much slower and they've not tried licencing out the lore and setting to other non-competing market games (though I'd argue their lore is far more fragmented and bitty than GW's).

Board games seem to be fairly if not totally dead in terms of advertising push; save for the odd monopoly special edition for a film or such every so often.


This is the big risk with the gamer market, whilst its got a generally younger audience than, say, mechanno, Hornby or such; its still got the issue of outreach and recruitment. Especially since its target market is being hit by a huge surge of additional distractions. From film-scale games like CoD and online games like League of Legends; through to social media being its own form of heavily pushed entertainment in its own right. There's many a person today who doesn't really have a hobby but they "facebook" a lot.



The problem can also be more local, a lot of local clubs don't advertise themselves all that well; they don't update a social media site; they don't advertise on local boards stores and such; they dont' reach out by running big introduction days etc...


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 12:02:14


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


 Laughing Man wrote:
I wouldn't really call any of the licensed game manufacturers small. CMON has the GoT license, and Asmodee is doing Marvel and Star Wars. Mantic isn't huge, but has a solid enough base that losing Walking Dead shouldn't kill them. Knight is the only one that's all-in on their licensed games, with the Harry Potter and DC licenses.


Depends how smart the company is I guess? I mean, if they've prepped for the license, it makes sense to also prep to lose the license - helps avoid them becoming overly reliant on it.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 12:08:54


Post by: Stevefamine


This seems to have went off the rails in terms of the main topic - now it's back where it's supposed to be.

It only goes up from here. Nerd culture and Miniatures popularity is on the rise and has been for the past ten or so years. I dislike GOT - but I enjoy that someone took the gamble to make a minis game out of it


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 12:13:18


Post by: Overread


 Stevefamine wrote:
This seems to have went off the rails in terms of the main topic - now it's back where it's supposed to be.

It only goes up from here. Nerd culture and Miniatures popularity is on the rise and has been for the past ten or so years. I dislike GOT - but I enjoy that someone took the gamble to make a minis game out of it


Aye but I suspect it might be like the Lord of the Rings bubble - that in once the series is gone the miniature firms will see a sharp drop off in casual customers. Though I don't think it will be as sharp a decline and problem as GW had with the Lord of the Rings line; its still a big risk for many franchises that once the media is gone the merchandise doesn't retain its high sales rate. Provided the companies are ready for that they can soak it and push through; if not then it can sink them.

Starwars and a very few others are robust enough to last even without new films, but in general that is the extreme exception


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 12:19:00


Post by: Stevefamine


@overread

So I quit played Gamesworkshop games from around 2013-2019 and went full into Dungeons and Dragons and other mini games.

I think its more saturation and more companies that can make a name for themselves instead of only GW/Only the big companies. Who knows honestly - but I have a good feeling about it. I know for a fact that D&D exploded in players


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 12:58:21


Post by: Dynas


 Stevefamine wrote:
@overread

So I quit played Gamesworkshop games from around 2013-2019 and went full into Dungeons and Dragons and other mini games.

I think its more saturation and more companies that can make a name for themselves instead of only GW/Only the big companies. Who knows honestly - but I have a good feeling about it. I know for a fact that D&D exploded in players


If GW were smart they would partner with D&D or Paizo and make miniatures of various Races/classes for the D&D crowd. I know some minis are useful as D&D, but there are a lot of race/class combinations that simply aren't there. This would be another way to get people into the stores. Hell, they could even sale just D&D core starter packs with your elf, dwarf, human, gnome, halfling, etc... basically the Lord of the Rings Fellowship set, but have different weapon options on the sprue so you can customize your hero a bit. Throw in some of those mini 5ml paint points that are in the cheap plastic pill pop lids, maybe all contrast paints and a brush, and boom, you got a quick easy way to grab a larger market base.

They could even market it as their warhammer quest so as not to step on any toes if they don't get the license, but make it very obvious it is meant for D&D.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 14:50:59


Post by: DarkBlack


Overread wrote:
 Stevefamine wrote:
This seems to have went off the rails in terms of the main topic - now it's back where it's supposed to be.

It only goes up from here. Nerd culture and Miniatures popularity is on the rise and has been for the past ten or so years. I dislike GOT - but I enjoy that someone took the gamble to make a minis game out of it


Aye but I suspect it might be like the Lord of the Rings bubble - that in once the series is gone the miniature firms will see a sharp drop off in casual customers. Though I don't think it will be as sharp a decline and problem as GW had with the Lord of the Rings line; its still a big risk for many franchises that once the media is gone the merchandise doesn't retain its high sales rate. Provided the companies are ready for that they can soak it and push through; if not then it can sink them.

Starwars and a very few others are robust enough to last even without new films, but in general that is the extreme exception

My concern too, also one of the reasons that I'm avoiding that game
Dynas wrote:If GW were smart they would partner with D&D or Paizo and make miniatures of various Races/classes for the D&D crowd. I know some minis are useful as D&D, but there are a lot of race/class combinations that simply aren't there. This would be another way to get people into the stores. Hell, they could even sale just D&D core starter packs with your elf, dwarf, human, gnome, halfling, etc... basically the Lord of the Rings Fellowship set, but have different weapon options on the sprue so you can customize your hero a bit. Throw in some of those mini 5ml paint points that are in the cheap plastic pill pop lids, maybe all contrast paints and a brush, and boom, you got a quick easy way to grab a larger market base.

They could even market it as their warhammer quest so as not to step on any toes if they don't get the license, but make it very obvious it is meant for D&D.

IIRC that's how GW started out. It's a market that's already served by Wizkids and Reaper though.
In my experience D&D players don't care or know enough about miniatures to want to pay the extra money for GW quality. To give you an idea: the standard of painting on D&D pages is below what we would consider tabletop at it's best. Mini's are really just a nice accessory in D&D.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 15:23:18


Post by: Azreal13


^This.

I follow some gaming orientated 3D printing FB groups, and the frequency that filament printed, rough as feth, models get posted that the printer is genuinely really happy with, the (rarely) painted models in the potato style and questions that any Wargamer would consider utterly elementary are posted is a little heartbreaking.


Are we about to see another drop off? @ 2019/08/16 15:42:51


Post by: Albino Squirrel


Yeah, D&D people aren't going to pay way more for miniatures they have to assemble and that have tons of details they aren't going to paint anyway.

I think if GW were smart, they'd slow down a little on the release of armies and new games, and do a few games that are more like the original Warhammer Quest, in that they could make use of a lot of the existing range of miniatures to expand the game. For the newer boxed games, they are either disposable in that you're meant to buy them mostly for the miniatures, play through them once and be done with them. Or they want you to buy very expensive expansions. But if you could "expand" warhammer quest silver tower buy purchasing a bunch of existing, say, goblin miniatures, they'd get a bunch of sales without the cost of creating new miniatures. And some number of people people would decide to start an army of goblins (or whatever) since they already bought a bunch of them to use as adversaries in Warhammer Quest. I know this because it's the only reason I started playing Warhammer Fantasy in the first place, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I get that there is a downside with that strategy. It doesn't generate as many sales to existing customers if they've already got all the goblins (or whatever) that they need. They probably didn't see a lot of miniatures sold for Kill Team because most existing players had enough stuff already to play. Presumably why the focus of WarCry is on new stuff that only exists in Warcry. But honestly, I know a lot of people started kill teams for factions they were kind of interested in but never started full armies of. And that may eventually lead to full armies of them. And I know some people who bought their first GW miniatures to start a kill team because it was an easier and less intimidating way to start than to jump into 40k.