Switch Theme:

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

True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 10:52:26


Post by: jeff white


This morning, as I edited a paper for a journal. I listened to a few popular Youtube channel videos. One concerned what the content creator considered is good and bad about 9th edition 40K. Scrolling through the comments, I came to this one, which I paste as a direct quote, here:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.

Simple poll: Do you feel that this statement is True, or False?

As a follow up, I wonder how much of this opinion has to do with 9th edition 40K. Maybe some have held this opinion for a longer time? Since when? Has your opinion changed in the past? Recently? What was the reason for this change of opinion? Anything specific?

Thank you in advance for contributing to this thread in a civil and constructive manner, respecting the fact that different people get different things from different things. The purpose of this poll is simply to survey the landscape of opinions here on Dakka. As usual, I will wait until poll results are obvious before voting, and volunteering my own experience, so as not to skew responses too heavily from the beginning...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 10:59:01


Post by: tauist


That's overthinking things IMO. I got into all of GWs games because of the miniatures first and foremost. Now, roughly 30 years later, I'm still in this for the miniatures, same as it ever was.

If the complaint is about 40K rules, its not exactly news that the game has had shoddy rules ever since the games got too big to fit into the original skirmish scale. By that logic yall would have quit playing around 4th - 5th edition.

This "GW succeeds in spite of itself" sounds to me like a jaded take from someone who lost interest in the hobby a long time ago and is only chugging along because of habit. YMMV as usual



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:00:59


Post by: El Torro


I put False, though I'm torn on this topic, I could probably be easily persuaded to change my vote.

I think GW, like most companies, does some things well and some things badly. People continue to buy their products because they have weighed up the pros and cons (either consciously or not) and decided that the good outweighs the bad.

Sure, GW has a captive audience, especially in the UK, where no competitor has the kind of reach that running your own retail chain brings. However to say that GW is still going strong today only because it wrote some good lore some decades ago is a big stretch.

Many of us (especially those who have been in the hobby a long time) complain about the rules for GW games. This is one of the things they don't do well. If GW didn't do other things well they would have folded a long time ago.

There are many companies with great products that survive because consumers want to buy that particular product, despite not managing every aspect of their business brilliantly. I would say that GW are one of those companies.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:03:23


Post by: Sim-Life


Yes, it's absolutely true and I think only a few people who lack any kind of self-awareness would deny this.

I don't think it's a 9th Ed phenomenon though because we all know GW wasn't in a great way just before 8th. 8th promised a lot but GW failed to capitalise on the good faith people returning had and people's opinion is starting to swing back to where it was prior. They're especially chancing their arm in terms of pricing which has been a very long time complaint but I'm seeing more and more people get priced out of the hobby.

I don't think it's JUST the setting though, there's a lot to be said about the ease of accessibility of Warhammer. It's the only minis game with dedicated shops and there are a lot of other ways to get into the hobby that don't involve a few shelves at an FLGS and passionate players running intro games. GW is a whale in a small pond basically. You don't see people playing Malifaux: The Video Game or posting Infinity memes outside of Infinity groups.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:19:53


Post by: Lord Damocles


 jeff white wrote:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.

Just on the background front, GW's more recent offerings have been incredibly reliant on nostalgia - things like:
- The Crimson Fists are having their last stand on Rynn's World again against Orks again. Oh wait, no, they're also having their last stand on Rynn's World again, but against Chaos.
- The Ultramarines are defending Damnos from the Necrons again, for the third time.
- The Orks are back at Glazer's Creek again.
- The Sisters of Battle are fighting Necrons on Sanctuary 101 again, for the third time.
- The Blood Angels are defending Baal against the Tyranids again.

So much of 40K now relies upon a past positive feeling for the setting. Do you remember this old character? This old artwork, which is now in model form? This old story? This old faction?
Meanwhile White Dwarf is literally telling it's readers that the past was actually rubbish (you're just blinded by your rose-tinted glasses!) and this is a golden age. This is the best edition ever. Etc. etc...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:20:09


Post by: Sgt. Cortez


It's wrong. We saw in 6th and 7th edition 40K as well as 8th edition Fantasy, 1st edition AoS and times of the Hobbit movies that it does matter what GW does. And in these cases people left in droves and other games made profit from that.
Since 8th edition 40K/2nd edition AoS/middleearth SBG GW reclaimed territory with a multitude of actions.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:31:38


Post by: a_typical_hero


Sgt. Cortez wrote:
It's wrong. We saw in 6th and 7th edition 40K as well as 8th edition Fantasy, 1st edition AoS and times of the Hobbit movies that it does matter what GW does. And in these cases people left in droves and other games made profit from that.
Since 8th edition 40K/2nd edition AoS/middleearth SBG GW reclaimed territory with a multitude of actions.
Agree. If the game is crossing a line, people stop playing and buying.

Now that line might be lower than for other games because of the setting and other factors. But GW is not able to get away with everything without repercussions in sales.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:36:25


Post by: Gert


This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.

I hate this quote and people need to stop using domestic abuse as a comparison for a TTWG.

With that out of the way, I would say a lot of it is to do with rose-tinted specs, which everyone is guilty of from time to time. Everything is always better in the past, except that's not always the case.
Is the current edition of 40k poorly balanced? In some places yes, in others no and it will absolutely vary depending on factors that are outwith the control of the game and the designers i.e. community and personal choice.
Is the current edition of 40k any worse than the previous edition? In my experience, not at all. Balance is an impossible task and again so many of the issues I've seen with most editions are down to outside influences. While power creep is a thing for some factions, not every new release is always better than the last one with it often being the outliers that people get the most annoyed about. There will always be powerful or broken combos because IMO it's not possible to create a system where that isn't the case. At the same time, I would blame the Internet for exaggerating a lot of the issues found and personally, I think that a lot of people are far too competitive when it comes to the game and I think competitive thinking has shaped 40k for some time now, both officially and unofficially.
As for the background, it's the specs again. There is this persisting narrative that all new 40k stuff is bad and all the old stuff was good when that's again not the case. A lot of it just comes down to people not liking change. Mystery and sandboxing is great but when too much of the setting is empty space it's not really a setting and I am a firm believer in sandboxes within reason, i.e. have enough space that people can do a lot of stuff but not so much space that there isn't any consistency or rationality.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 11:39:23


Post by: laam999


I think it's true, they're pushing prices up to a level where it's hard to justify, not only on new releases but older models too.

I love the lore, I love the models and the game is ace, but upping prices during the first lockdown when a lot of people worried for their jobs was just a callous move IMO.

I've only been buying books lately and almost all second hand, but I'll be honest I'll prob buy more once I'm back gaming more regularly.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 12:34:54


Post by: Geifer


Since the poll is strictly in answer to the following quote...

 jeff white wrote:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.


... my vote is false. The quoted post isn't wrong in highlighting the beneficial influence the successful and beloved world crafting had for GW. But the idea that this is literally the only thing keeping them in business decades later is ridiculous.

GW certainly has been able to engage in more exploitative behavior because they can leverage attachment to the setting to retain customers regardless, but it's hardly the only positive the company has going for it. Miniatures are of high quality, availability and supply of the products is good outside of deliberate limited releases, it's easier to find an opponent than it is for any other wargame, the constant stream of releases keeps GW on people's mind, even the marketing provides something on a daily basis to keep up interest.

The lore has a fairly large role in this since it extends pretty far, allowing for the creation of ancillary material like novels, video games, art and animations that are to a smaller or larger degree removed from the core business of GW, the miniatures. It's important to remember that while those additional revenue streams don't hurt, both the lore and the game exist to sell miniatures. None of these components stand alone, and so I find it hard to believe that one could stand out as the only thing that keeps customers buying without the other ones contributing to a large enough degree.

Which leads to this:

 jeff white wrote:
As a follow up, I wonder how much of this opinion has to do with 9th edition 40K. Maybe some have held this opinion for a longer time? Since when? Has your opinion changed in the past? Recently? What was the reason for this change of opinion? Anything specific?


Personally I don't care for the changes that 8th ed brought and 9th ed built upon, but the game does seem to have appeal with a large number of people. In spite of my own distaste for the current rules I can recognize that they actually fulfill what is their most crucial function to GW, engaging customers and getting them to buy product.

After the decline up until and including 7th ed GW succeeded in marketing 8th ed as a new version of the game that is beginner friendly, fun and easy to learn, and 9th ed as an improvement on that.

So while my opinion of the 40k rules hasn't changed, which is to say they were bad for a decade and haven't improved recently, I do believe the current style of game has appeal to some people. Which contributes to my assessment of the situation and my choice when I voted.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 13:21:54


Post by: AceXT


False, absolutely. GW has made plenty of poor decisions, but none of those have done significant harm to its core business, as its continued growth demonstrates. GW succeeds because of itself, and indeed managing the lore and continuing to extract value from it is part of its strategy.

What this quote does, however, is illustrate the mindset of a particular group of resentful grognards. If that person feels like they're in an abusive relationship with a game or IP, it's on the one hand a wildly inappropriate comparison, but on the other hand that's apparently how they feel, and I'm saddened that they're unable to achieve a healthy relationship to their hobbies.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 13:33:14


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I think GW's decisions have helped them survive in addition to the lore.

Whether you believe "New GW' (the end of 7th switcheroo to increased community engagement and rate of releases/FAQs) was a PR dupe or a genuine fix, it certainly had an effect.

For me? I tend to believe it was a dupe - 9th shows they're back to the same habits they were in earlier editions (r.i.p. Imperial Guard codex; we are at the 2nd longest time between releases in GW history).

The only thing that makes me hesitate in saying GW is back to old habits is COVID, which could also explain the stretched release cycle. *Shrug*


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 13:35:32


Post by: TedNugent


IP law itself is abusive. See the Mickey Mouse Act in the US. GW would be remiss if they were not guarding their IP, it's their primary value. If they lost their exclusive rights to the lore, they would be fubar.

They realize that their company only has value because of good ideas somebody had back in the 80s.

In my opinion, IP should go public domain in 20 years or less so that companies can't just rely on sitting on someone else's ideas. It's ridiculous. Walt Disney is dead and his estate as well as the Corporation is still milking his creations for everything they're worth. That, and buying up the rights for other decades old IPs. It's honestly pathetic and counterintuitive. There is no reason companies of that size should not have to innovate and do the same thing they did decades ago to stay competitive. It facilitates sloth, decadence and exploitation of someone else's work, while depriving the public space of so much more creativity.

We are seeing this in action with the animation purge. We had people doing what GW should have been doing, for free, and this lazy company gets to shut them down, corral them and steal their work. It's both unconscionable and unethical. Those suits had nothing to do with it, they just came in with an MBA and a knowledge of copyright law and business and ran with a good idea instead of creating something new or even facilitating a good business environment for new creations.

Copyright law is broken and corrupt, that's why all we get is trash and why they can get away with half-A effort.

It will never change. The only thing that will happen is that lobbyists will lobby lawmakers for more Mickey Mouse Acts to prop up bad actors.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 14:40:01


Post by: alextroy


GW does not abuse it customers. It puts out a product into the market at a price they feel is fair and customers buy it up faster than they can produce it. That is not the result of people sticking to an ancient IP while buying crap models to play a crap game.

The game may not be perfect, but lots of people are playing it. The models may not be perfect, but almost all releases get positive reviews. The price may be higher than you want to pay, but not high enough to keep GW from selling out of new releases.

That being said, GW isn't some benevolent god handing out rainbows and unicorns. They certainly do things with their bottom line in mind. But making you wait for model X if you don't want to purchase the latest two faction battle box is not customer abuse. You can complain about being priced out of the hobby, but what captive market doesn't have high prices. I'm sure we can all agree the prices of food at sporting events and movie theaters are ridiculously high, yet the lines are still there. GW is just doing what any other profitable business does and that is not a bad thing. If they didn't make a profit, they would go under and we wouldn't have a game.

Think about how many Star Trek and Star Wars games there has been over the years. Vastly more well known IPs and still GW with their modest in-house IP dominates the MWG market.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 15:38:02


Post by: JNAProductions


I voted no.

You can dislike GW's business practices, or prices, or rules, or... Well, the list can go on.

But they're not morons when it comes to business. They might not be good at rules, but they know what they're doing to make money.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 15:51:22


Post by: epronovost


I don't think this is true in the least. GW produces a lot of things that are very attractive. They have a massive range of beautiful miniature, their game, while not the most competitive out there, is very fun. The lore is great and the new lore isn't any worst than the old one. Their release schedule is quick so you don't need to wait almost decade for an update to your force. My only problem would be if they keep rotating the edition every 2 years instead of 4. 4 years is a good number for an edition. It lets you enjoy and explore the system before changing it.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 15:54:20


Post by: Blackie


False. They are successful because their miniatures are the best looking ones on the market. Simple.

When other companies' miniatures become better looking than GW ones for the majority, GW's success, and "monopoly", will fade away.

Simple. Quality of the games they sell does matter a bit but it's not the main factor for their success.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 16:07:21


Post by: Turnip Jedi


I'm going to go with, kind of, a bit...

I've long suspect GW has always been everything it gets accused of, the internet age has just stoked the echo chamber

What has changed is me, I've had been in since Rogue Trader but time and circumstances have slowly nudged me away

I think the first step was circa 94/95, one of the nerdherd brought back some MTG cards from Uni, intially the rules were a bit wooly but then somewhere around 5th (?) edition they got fixed to a degree that I'm of the view the Comp rules are one of the most solid bits of geek rules ever, yep WOTC may bodge the odd card or expansion but the game engine is solid and GW's "do it like Jervis" mindset became increasingly irksome

The second push was Warcraft, which I admittedly took far too seriously, but our Guilds maths whiz explained (in a second language no less) how to theorycraft, leading me back to doing mildly trixy sum regarding d6s, again exposing more of GWs ""good enough" dogma

Finally X-wing, 7th was about as unfun as it got, and was super casual by this point as the clubs TFG post was taken. pre-painted spaceships and an army that fitted in a lunch box, with reasonably solid rules (end of 1.0 bloat aside) caused the final walk away



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 16:12:59


Post by: VladimirHerzog


GW is running on inertia. Them being the biggest wargame means that pretty much no matter what they do, they'll stay the most easily accessible so potential new players will start with that game instead of ones that are better like Infinity/Malifaux/SW:Legions/etc.




True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 16:27:07


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Nah.

GW have undoubtedly been lucky at times. Like, really, really lucky. Or so it would seem.

For instance, the LOTR bubble burst a year or two before the global financial crash. Just as everyone else was panicking and resizing business and employee numbers? GW was just about stabilising, or at least on the road to recovery.

But at the same time, they’ve never been into borrowing money to expand, so they were insulated from banks getting shirty about lending, and entirely insulated from having to pay back loans when cash flow tightened.

They got in at the ground floor, reinventing fantasy and SciFi gaming. By dominating the market on the U.K. High Street, they did something no other company really has. And over time, they’ve worked to ensure that someone can walk into one of their stores, and find or order everything they need to take part in the hobby. Rules, models, paints, glues, brushes, tools, scenery, boards. The lot. Yes there are cheaper, but that’s not to say their stuff is inferior. The stores are manned by people already active in the hobby, with the skills to teach newcomers the basics, and the enthusiasm and product knowledge to make decent sales.

Just lately on the “maybe it was luck?” we’ve seen them resurrect Specialist Games, and even produce Limited Spend stuff like Underworlds. So when the pandemic hit, and people suddenly needed in-door hobbies? They had a wide and accessible range, stock issues not withstanding.

They’ve largely weathered the Digital Era because they’re traditional pastimes. Certainly when I last did a stint as a till monkey, parents were happy to pay for it precisely because “it’s not another bloody computer game”.

In stark contrast to what some claim or fervently wish? GW are absolutely not poorly run, stupid or incompetent. At all. They know their product. They know their customer. They know their business, and they’re making money hand over fist.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 16:54:55


Post by: Da Boss


I think there was a time at the end of the Kirby Era when GW were really in decline. But nowadays they're doing amazingly well and going from strength to strength.

From a personal perspective, some of the stuff they are doing doesn't appeal to me, but I don't confuse that with them not being wildly successful. After a long time being interested in wargaming, I've just developed particular tastes that might not be that widespread.

I think it's a mistake for long time fans like me to generalise our experiences to others who might be having a brilliant time with the game. Certainly, there's loads of positive buzz around, much more than in the dark old days.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 16:56:42


Post by: Sim-Life


 Blackie wrote:
False. They are successful because their miniatures are the best looking ones on the market. Simple.

When other companies' miniatures become better looking than GW ones for the majority, GW's success, and "monopoly", will fade away.

Simple. Quality of the games they sell does matter a bit but it's not the main factor for their success.


That's very subjective.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 17:24:49


Post by: Yarium


I wouldn't say it SUCCEEDS in spite of itself, but it does do better than it should given everything in spite of itself. Like, we survived 6th and 7th edition of the game, despite 7th having been the "we give up" edition. We only survived it because of 40k's universe and the love we have for it.

Right now, 40k isn't doing bad, but it could be doing BETTER if they didn't go backwards this past 6 months with a really reigned in FAQ and community presence.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 17:26:41


Post by: Kanluwen


 VladimirHerzog wrote:
GW is running on inertia. Them being the biggest wargame means that pretty much no matter what they do, they'll stay the most easily accessible so potential new players will start with that game instead of ones that are better like Infinity/Malifaux/SW:Legions/etc.



It's funny that you put "Infinity" in the same breath as Malifaux or SW: Legion.

Infinity has been running on inertia for at least three or four years now. They have a FAR more aggressive bend when it comes to "codex creep", just for whatever reason people seem to excuse it since you can "just proxy, bro!" things.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 17:27:38


Post by: JNAProductions


 Yarium wrote:
I wouldn't say it SUCCEEDS in spite of itself, but it does do better than it should given everything in spite of itself. Like, we survived 6th and 7th edition of the game, despite 7th having been the "we give up" edition. We only survived it because of 40k's universe and the love we have for it.

Right now, 40k isn't doing bad, but it could be doing BETTER if they didn't go backwards this past 6 months with a really reigned in FAQ and community presence.
Yeah, GW definitely has a big benefit from being the first big success, and has a lot of inertia and whatnot.

That doesn't mean they're a dumb business, just that they have an advantage that their competitors lack.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 17:31:48


Post by: VladimirHerzog


 Kanluwen wrote:

It's funny that you put "Infinity" in the same breath as Malifaux or SW: Legion.

Infinity has been running on inertia for at least three or four years now. They have a FAR more aggressive bend when it comes to "codex creep", just for whatever reason people seem to excuse it since you can "just proxy, bro!" things.


What? Infinity doesnt do codexes. All rules are released at the same time. And when the winrate of factions is between 45-55%, i'd say they have the balance down pretty well.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 17:50:40


Post by: Kanluwen


 VladimirHerzog wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

It's funny that you put "Infinity" in the same breath as Malifaux or SW: Legion.

Infinity has been running on inertia for at least three or four years now. They have a FAR more aggressive bend when it comes to "codex creep", just for whatever reason people seem to excuse it since you can "just proxy, bro!" things.


What? Infinity doesnt do codexes. All rules are released at the same time. And when the winrate of factions is between 45-55%, i'd say they have the balance down pretty well.

You'll note that I put quotes around "codex creep". Because I'm well aware that they don't do codices, but they do release new books(which is what the argument about "codex creep" is always about) with new rules and new Sectorials. Them having free rules doesn't change or excuse anything considering they don't backdate older factions that often or that well.

If you want to pretend that they don't do individual books and that new sectorials(because the bits about "winrate of factions" is basically a polite bit of fiction) don't have huge advantages over old ones? That's on you.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 17:54:18


Post by: ccs


 jeff white wrote:
This morning, as I edited a paper for a journal. I listened to a few popular Youtube channel videos. One concerned what the content creator considered is good and bad about 9th edition 40K. Scrolling through the comments, I came to this one, which I paste as a direct quote, here:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.


Ah, this crap again.

GW simply makes a product people want & they know how to market it.

As for any of you who think you're being abused by the eeevil toy company? There's plenty of options:
There's the door. You can walk away anytime you please. GW will never know. Or care. (As long as they make x $ in the end, it's all good)
You could discuss things with the people you play with & come up with some house rules.
Is co$t is the root of your issues? There's plenty of options that'll reduce that.

But if you're stupid enough to continue playing games you don't like, in ways you don't like, in environs you don't like? Well, that's a YOU problem.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 18:20:16


Post by: Cronch


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

In stark contrast to what some claim or fervently wish? GW are absolutely not poorly run, stupid or incompetent. At all. They know their product. They know their customer. They know their business, and they’re making money hand over fist.

This. They had to correct course after Kirby thinned out the whalestock a little too much, but overall, GW knows what it's doing. It's really hard to tank a corporation into the ground as long as it doesn't do something spectacularly stupid.

What people seem to be missing is that GW is not, and hasn't been since the second they went public, Your Friend. You're source of money to them, and if you allow yourself to be suckered into thinking you have some sort of emotional attachment to them, their marketing department already won.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 19:16:56


Post by: soviet13


I think there was a period several years ago where their business model revolved too heavily around making new sculpts of old ideas, yes.

But I think the nostalgia hits we've been getting lately (genestealer cults, the Blanche Castellan, the Gibbons Helbrecht) are borne out of genuine love for those old ideas rather than a sense of mining the old IP. When you hear people like Darren Latham talk (or look at his Instagram) you find a real hobbyist sense of enthusiasm for these old ideas. Things that the sculptors themselves grew up with but were abandoned over time or never quite done justice to are being dusted off and made new. I think it's great and there is enough new stuff as well that I look forward to every release and rarely am I not at least tempted to buy them.

(I started the hobby in 1988 btw)


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:02:26


Post by: GoldenHorde


ccs wrote:


GW simply makes a product people want & they know how to market it.


The glorious chairman would like to know how does that theory apply to stuff like Finecast?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:03:16


Post by: jeff white


ccs wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
This morning, as I edited a paper for a journal. I listened to a few popular Youtube channel videos. One concerned what the content creator considered is good and bad about 9th edition 40K. Scrolling through the comments, I came to this one, which I paste as a direct quote, here:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.


Ah, this crap again.

GW simply makes a product people want & they know how to market it.

As for any of you who think you're being abused by the eeevil toy company? There's plenty of options:
There's the door. You can walk away anytime you please. GW will never know. Or care. (As long as they make x $ in the end, it's all good)
You could discuss things with the people you play with & come up with some house rules.
Is co$t is the root of your issues? There's plenty of options that'll reduce that.

But if you're stupid enough to continue playing games you don't like, in ways you don't like, in environs you don't like? Well, that's a YOU problem.



Umm, maybe you failed to read the last bit of the original post, about please being constructive … actually, it seems that you failed to read the original quote or perhaps you did read it but failed to comprehend? Your comment here diverges a good deal from the point of the original quote. Maybe this is a YOU problem? Freeman would describe it as an attractor basin in your brain that forces the misinterpretation of such things, because what comes in falls into a ready made attractor in your brain… think of it as a prejudice, or as a hole in your head that sucks things into it that do not belong there.

Regardless, poll results as of now are currently pretty strongly in the True column…


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:08:27


Post by: Blackie


 Sim-Life wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
False. They are successful because their miniatures are the best looking ones on the market. Simple.

When other companies' miniatures become better looking than GW ones for the majority, GW's success, and "monopoly", will fade away.

Simple. Quality of the games they sell does matter a bit but it's not the main factor for their success.


That's very subjective.


Considering GW's miniatures the best looking ones of course is. But other games have become popular at some point then died or had a drastic drop of their popularity, as they became popular becuse players were fond of the game, not the miniatures. GW ones are always extremely popular, even when the game is universally considered "bad", or at least not a really good one. And even when the lore isn't particularly like by the community, see all the primaris stuff: terrible lore, tons of enthusiasts about the models. Or anything AoS related.

GW's miniatures sell a lot, many people just buy from GW (or 2nd hand GW models) even if they don't want to play with their games and even when GW destroys the lore. It doesn't happen with other companies, not in these numbers.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:11:50


Post by: Gert


 jeff white wrote:

Regardless, poll results as of now are currently pretty strongly in the True column…

59% out of 82 poll responses isn't a strong result. At best it's a very slim majority. Strong would be 70-80% out of 100-200 responses.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:17:29


Post by: Sunny Side Up


If GW succeeds in spite of itself, how has it been on the brink of collapse and bankruptcy before, only to pull back?

Also how has it more recently grown its business to a hundredfold of what it was during those "good old days", nostalgia to which allegedly drives it business?



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:26:37


Post by: GoldenHorde


Sunny Side Up wrote:
If GW succeeds in spite of itself, how has it been on the brink of collapse and bankruptcy before, only to pull back?

Also how has it more recently grown its business to a hundredfold of what it was during those "good old days", nostalgia to which allegedly drives it business?



One man stores. Retreat from high street.

Retreating from stupid things like finecast.

There's your answer.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:33:07


Post by: Cronch


Sunny Side Up wrote:
If GW succeeds in spite of itself, how has it been on the brink of collapse and bankruptcy before, only to pull back?

The answer is, it never has been. It wasn't making as much as it could've.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:47:08


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Indeed.

Bankruptcy, at least in the U.K. is broadly defined as being unable to meet one’s debts as and when they fall due.

There is of course considerably more complexity to it (for instance, if I get my gas, electric or water bill, and punt it on to the next payday, strictly speaking, I am bankrupt in that wording.

GW, if memory serves? Well since they hit the stock market, there have only been a couple, three at most, years where they didn’t make a profit. And even then the losses weren’t exactly disastrous.

And once again, that was when the LOTR bubble burst. Most curious thing about that overall situation? Even with that bubble gone, their sales were still higher than pre-LOTR. They had just grown cash complacent.

For any business where their borrowing is minimal to non-existent? It’s really, really, really hard to go Bankrupt.

See the 2008ish economic crash? It took out Big Names not because suddenly everyone was strapped for cash - but because they’d borrowed money to pay for expansion.

That included mergers, new stores, new ventures. As soon as the cash flow was slightly reduced? Those debts (sometimes into millions or billions) came with repayments and of course interest. That is what killed them. Otherwise, much like GW, they probably could’ve ridden it all out with a bit of belt tightening (including sadly redundancies for staff, closing non-profitable stores etc).

That is how you go bankrupt when people are otherwise buying your stuff.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 20:55:59


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Indeed.

Bankruptcy, at least in the U.K. is broadly defined as being unable to meet one’s debts as and when they fall due.

There is of course considerably more complexity to it (for instance, if I get my gas, electric or water bill, and punt it on to the next payday, strictly speaking, I am bankrupt in that wording.

GW, if memory serves? Well since they hit the stock market, there have only been a couple, three at most, years where they didn’t make a profit. And even then the losses weren’t exactly disastrous.

And once again, that was when the LOTR bubble burst. Most curious thing about that overall situation? Even with that bubble gone, their sales were still higher than pre-LOTR. They had just grown cash complacent.

For any business where their borrowing is minimal to non-existent? It’s really, really, really hard to go Bankrupt.

See the 2008ish economic crash? It took out Big Names not because suddenly everyone was strapped for cash - but because they’d borrowed money to pay for expansion.

That included mergers, new stores, new ventures. As soon as the cash flow was slightly reduced? Those debts (sometimes into millions or billions) came with repayments and of course interest. That is what killed them. Otherwise, much like GW, they probably could’ve ridden it all out with a bit of belt tightening (including sadly redundancies for staff, closing non-profitable stores etc).

That is how you go bankrupt when people are otherwise buying your stuff.


IIRC this is exactly why GW explicitly *don’t* use debt to finance expansion.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 21:07:35


Post by: Sunny Side Up


 GoldenHorde wrote:

One man stores. Retreat from high street.

Retreating from stupid things like finecast.

There's your answer.


Using old pewter-moulds with spincasting-resin is something they still do. They slightly improved the formula, and that is what shifted it from a 6 GBP a share company to a 140 GBP a share company, while all the other "negative" stuff they do has no repercussions due to ageing 80s kids nostalgia? That is the hypothesis?

Lol.

And if that were true, it would seem they identified the right little lever to push with brilliance accuracy then, succeeding through almost god-like precision-management, rather then in spite of themselves as the OP claims.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 21:44:34


Post by: The Red Hobbit


GW has the advantage of market share and intertia. It is hard to displace someone with lots of marketshare without a significant innovation while also maintaining the same value the market leader currently has. They also have enough intertia that people are already in their ecosystem and buying their products, likely have been for some time and many stores already carry it. With those two factors alone GW could face plant for the next 5 years and still be just fine.

I think GW makes many, many short term business decisions where I would consider them to be succeeded in spite of themselves. But I'm also someone who prefers companies who grow value (and profits) over longterm instead of gouging as hard and as fast as they can to get a good graph for the next quarterly report.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 21:46:50


Post by: GoldenHorde


Sunny Side Up wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

One man stores. Retreat from high street.

Retreating from stupid things like finecast.

There's your answer.


Using old pewter-moulds with spincasting-resin is something they still do. They slightly improved the formula, and that is what shifted it from a 6 GBP a share company to a 140 GBP a share company, while all the other "negative" stuff they do has no repercussions due to ageing 80s kids nostalgia? That is the hypothesis?

Lol.

And if that were true, it would seem they identified the right little lever to push with brilliance accuracy then, succeeding through almost god-like precision-management, rather then in spite of themselves as the OP claims.


No, I am saying GW has made slight course adjustments to prevent themselves falling off a cliff

Finecast is trash failed product and spin casting resin is stupid.
We know why GW attempted finecast. Increase margins $$$


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 22:14:00


Post by: Marshal Loss


GW have a dedicated global fanbase, a very strong brand/IP, an extremely effective advertising system, and they produce incredible models. Sometimes I think these factors do allow GW to succeed in spite of itself, and I think they're often not doing things as well as they could, but really, why would they do anything else? You can't view things in isolation because e.g. extortionately priced box benefits from decades of precedent which often allows it to succeed where an equivalent might not were it pushed by another entity. They do what they do because it continually works. They have no true competitors and fans want what GW are selling badly enough to put up with the FOMO and the bloat and the cost. If a new or smaller company tried to replicate their success, they'd fail.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 22:22:52


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


 jeff white wrote:
This morning, as I edited a paper for a journal. I listened to a few popular Youtube channel videos. One concerned what the content creator considered is good and bad about 9th edition 40K. Scrolling through the comments, I came to this one, which I paste as a direct quote, here:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.

Simple poll: Do you feel that this statement is True, or False?

As a follow up, I wonder how much of this opinion has to do with 9th edition 40K. Maybe some have held this opinion for a longer time? Since when? Has your opinion changed in the past? Recently? What was the reason for this change of opinion? Anything specific?

Thank you in advance for contributing to this thread in a civil and constructive manner, respecting the fact that different people get different things from different things. The purpose of this poll is simply to survey the landscape of opinions here on Dakka. As usual, I will wait until poll results are obvious before voting, and volunteering my own experience, so as not to skew responses too heavily from the beginning...


I'm going to say false, at least to the statement that 40k succeeds because a long time ago people wrote some kick ass lore.

First off, I'm not sold on the lore's kickass-ness relative to alternative fare. While 40k's lore is funny and fun, I'd be hard pressed to say its better than that of its equally long lived and highly developed peer Battletech, which basically was dead until recently, or the intrinsic value of historical, and even newer fare like DZC have pretty decent lore if it hasn't been as thoroughly developed.

In addition, 40k was dying at the end of 7th, and warmahordes was experiencing something of a Renaissance. 40k's lore hadn't changed in forever at the time, and has only become more divisive since then.

In my opinion, the reason 40k succeeded and Battletech was basically dead until a little while ago is because of mechanics. I love BT, but I have to admit that it is hideously slow playing and clunky, but 40k has on general been easy to play and fast to play, even with large numbers of models. 40k's low point, 7th was when its mechanics hit an all time low, and 8th revitalized it by largely addressing many of the issues.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/10 23:27:11


Post by: insaniak



I'm going with False.

Aside from the distasteful comparison to spousal abuse (which, frankly, shows an incredible lack of perspective, and/or empathy for actual victims of abuse) what that comment is is projection. It's someone saying 'I no longer like what the game has become, therefore it's clearly not what people want and GW are doing it wrong.'

It makes sense. After you've dedicated a large amount of time, money and effort into something, it can be hard to accept that it's changed into something that just isn't actually aimed at you any more. So people hang around complaining that it's not like it was back in their day, and waiting for it to get back on track... because, surely, if we all keep making enough noise about it, they'll realise that they've made a mistake and go back to giving us what we want, right?

Right...?

Except they have no reason to do that, because there are plenty of customers out there who are perfectly happy with their current direction, as evidenced by their sales figures. So those complaining would be better off not waiting, and just make the change they want to see themselves.

It took me an embarrassingly long time myself to realise that if I wasn't enjoying the current direction of 40K, there was nothing actually forcing me to keep up with it. Even ignoring the overabundance of other games out there these days, if there was a version of the game that you enjoyed more than the current one, those rulebooks still exist. (In my case, they're still sitting right there on the shelf). So rather than waiting for 40K to turn back into 2nd edition or 5th edition, I decided to just go back to playing 2nd edition. Rather than buying Primaris marines, I chose to stick with my existing armies, or buy anything else I needed 2nd hand. I get the version of the game I prefer, and those who like the current stuff can carry on enjoying themselves without my negativity added to the mix.

In summary - never assume that your personal opinion is the majority, particularly when all evidence points to the contrary. And it's a hobby. Hobbies are supposed to be enjoyable. If you're not enjoying it, you're doing something wrong, and would be better off changing that rather than insisting that the company making the wildly successful product you personally don't like should change what they're doing.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
We know why GW attempted finecast. Increase margins $$$

Yes, and no. They made the change to 'Fine'cast because tin prices were wildly volatile and IIRC had increased exponentially in a very short time, making large scale metal model production much more risky. And the common scuttlebutt at the time (which admittedly may not be true, just internet chatter) was that 'Fine'cast was rushed out because it leaked early and GW wanted to stay on top of the wave, despite it not actually being ready for release - they had the choice (allegedly) of pushing out a product and hoping for the best, or waiting to test it more completely and losing some of the momentum from the initial reveal. The skyrocketing tin prices forced their hand, and once they had made the change it would have likely been too expensive to change back.

For all its faults, 'Fine'cast as a concept, for what it was intended to do, was good. The end result was, IMO, a mistake brought on by hubris (Kirby's belief that GW's customers would buy whatever they chose to release) and a too-short development time. That doesn't invalidate every other bit of progress that GW have made. Every company makes mistakes, and they're often mistakes that in hindsight to the armchair critic seem obvious. See: New Coke.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 00:22:33


Post by: GoldenHorde


 insaniak wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
We know why GW attempted finecast. Increase margins $$$

Yes, and no. They made the change to 'Fine'cast because tin prices were wildly volatile and IIRC had increased exponentially in a very short time, making large scale metal model production much more risky. And the common scuttlebutt at the time (which admittedly may not be true, just internet chatter) was that 'Fine'cast was rushed out because it leaked early and GW wanted to stay on top of the wave, despite it not actually being ready for release - they had the choice (allegedly) of pushing out a product and hoping for the best, or waiting to test it more completely and losing some of the momentum from the initial reveal. The skyrocketing tin prices forced their hand, and once they had made the change it would have likely been too expensive to change back.

For all its faults, 'Fine'cast as a concept, for what it was intended to do, was good. The end result was, IMO, a mistake brought on by hubris (Kirby's belief that GW's customers would buy whatever they chose to release) and a too-short development time. That doesn't invalidate every other bit of progress that GW have made. Every company makes mistakes, and they're often mistakes that in hindsight to the armchair critic seem obvious. See: New Coke.


Give me a break.
Tin prices were not fluctuating, they were steadily rising. Which is fair enough reason to look away from white metal. Anyone could have predicted the bearish demand on tin due to the tech market.

The issue is what GW did and claimed was a flat out lie to consumers.
The reality is they just cheaped out by attempting to spin-cast resin.
What they did was avoid the investment of specifically re-molding for conventional resin. THEN they pretend as if their new product was the best of the best, which it was clearly not.

When your company claims it has the best material processes in the industry and it actually has the worst material process in the industry, you know something is very very wrong with the internal decisions and management of that company.

It wasn't rushed. It was a totally stupid idea in the first place.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 00:50:32


Post by: insaniak


 GoldenHorde wrote:

The reality is they just cheaped out by attempting to spin-cast resin.
What they did was avoid the investment of specifically re-molding for conventional resin. THEN they pretend as if their new product was the best of the best, which it was clearly not.

Opting for spin cast resin over conventional casting wouldn't have been significantly different so far as the cost of the moulds was concerned... they had to make new moulds either way. But casting their entire metal catalogue in resin the 'normal' way would have been prohibitively expensive in labour. Spin casting was supposed to give them the detail of resin with the practicality of spin casting. And when it worked, that's exactly what it did.

The issues were with the material being too soft, which likely comes back to insufficient testing and development time, and insufficient quality control to catch the miscasts and replace the moulds regularly.

When your company claims it has the best material processes in the industry and it actually has the worst material process in the industry, you know something is very very wrong with the internal decisions and management of that company.

Yup, that's that hubris I mentioned. I'd be curious to know how many people in the production process were fully aware that it was going to be a trainwreck but had to make the most of it because management had decided to go full steam ahead with it.

But, again, one mis-step, even such a seemingly big one, does not make every success an obvious fluke.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 01:07:59


Post by: Polonius


this is the sort of question that becomes a "no true scotsman" problem pretty fast, because what does "In spite of itself" even mean?

GW is competently run, and while they seem to be going back heavily to the well, they are continuing to expand their product line dramatically. they also bounced back from a disastrous launch of Age of Sigmar to make the game reasonably popular.

It's easy to look at GW and say that anybody could have that level of success with their starting position. that's very arguable, but is true of a bunch of companies. In some ways, yeah, GW is a restaurant in a good location, where it knows it'll do steady business as long as they stay solid. I just don't think that success in spite of itself.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 01:14:01


Post by: GoldenHorde


 insaniak wrote:
 GoldenHorde wrote:

The reality is they just cheaped out by attempting to spin-cast resin.
What they did was avoid the investment of specifically re-molding for conventional resin. THEN they pretend as if their new product was the best of the best, which it was clearly not.

Opting for spin cast resin over conventional casting wouldn't have been significantly different so far as the cost of the moulds was concerned... they had to make new moulds either way. But casting their entire metal catalogue in resin the 'normal' way would have been prohibitively expensive in labour. Spin casting was supposed to give them the detail of resin with the practicality of spin casting. And when it worked, that's exactly what it did.

The issues were with the material being too soft, which likely comes back to insufficient testing and development time, and insufficient quality control to catch the miscasts and replace the moulds regularly.

When your company claims it has the best material processes in the industry and it actually has the worst material process in the industry, you know something is very very wrong with the internal decisions and management of that company.

Yup, that's that hubris I mentioned. I'd be curious to know how many people in the production process were fully aware that it was going to be a trainwreck but had to make the most of it because management had decided to go full steam ahead with it.

But, again, one mis-step, even such a seemingly big one, does not make every success an obvious fluke.



We can nitpick the finer points of finecast until the cows come home, but the reality is, the direction of GW is that GW has shifted away from its use .

Failed product.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 01:20:22


Post by: insaniak


Sure, and I don't think you'll find anyone who disputes that. Although I don't think it was ever supposed to be a long-term solution, either. It was a stop-gap that allowed them to stop buying tin, while building up their infrastructure to a level where they could switch entirely to plastic production. It was a means to an end, rather than the end itself.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 01:36:32


Post by: Polonius


Are we sure finecast was a failure? It wasn't a success, but did it lose money?

Also, wasn't that like a decade ago?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 01:37:38


Post by: solkan


There's got to be a quote somewhere about "If you can manage to stay in business long enough, you'll hear everyone tell you how you should be running your business."



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 01:58:12


Post by: Voss


 insaniak wrote:
Sure, and I don't think you'll find anyone who disputes that. Although I don't think it was ever supposed to be a long-term solution, either. It was a stop-gap that allowed them to stop buying tin, while building up their infrastructure to a level where they could switch entirely to plastic production. It was a means to an end, rather than the end itself.



Its weird that they haven't finished doing either of those things (entirely plastic or entirely non-metal)


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 02:20:44


Post by: insaniak


 Polonius wrote:
Are we sure finecast was a failure? It wasn't a success, but did it lose money?

'Failure' can be judged on more than just whether or not it lost money. There's also the goodwill that you lose amongst your customer base by selling such a shoody product, and by promoting it all the while as the best thing ever. But even then, it's assuming that the goal of 'Fine'cast was actually sales-based, which I don't think it was. But all we have is the perception of the product based on anecdotal evidence.

The fact that they stopped producing it isn't really in itself an indicator of failure, otherwise we would also have to deem metal models a failure, which is clearly not true.

For me personally as a consumer it certainly was a failure... After the initial quality issues that were shown around online, I flat out refused to buy it. But whether or not it was actually a failure from GW's point of view is not really a call we have enough information to make.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 02:35:23


Post by: jaredb


Absolutely false. GW is also more than just 40k. The support they have for all their games is greater than ever in the past.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 02:45:57


Post by: Voss


 jaredb wrote:
Absolutely false. GW is also more than just 40k. The support they have for all their games is greater than ever in the past.


True (as presented by the OP, anyway), true and... uh, what?
GW doesn't support games at all!

Where's any variety of Warhammer Quest these days?
Necromunda is a random hash of mutually contradictory errors, sold over and over again.
Underworlds is planned obsolescence in its purest form
Apocalypse vanished into the ether.
Kill Team just swept the table of dozens of legacy products to start over with some nonsensically bizarre custom measuring devices.
LotR, Aeronautica and Titanicus don't even know if they're going to get new releases for months or even years, let alone support for stuff that's actually come out.
Blood Bowl's support model is 'Wooo, new edition!'
Warcry exists, and I guess it has a teaser or something, but apparently its either perfect, or its completely unsupported by FAQs or errata.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 03:01:52


Post by: Eldarain


I believe sunk cost fallacy has seen them through some of their dumber decisions and eras. It also insulates them from losing players as it makes trying new systems a more difficult decision for many.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 03:14:05


Post by: Polonius


 insaniak wrote:
For me personally as a consumer it certainly was a failure... After the initial quality issues that were shown around online, I flat out refused to buy it. But whether or not it was actually a failure from GW's point of view is not really a call we have enough information to make.


Yeah, I suppose it probably was a failure. It certainly gained a terrible reputation very quickly.

I think there's more than a little support that it was a galaxy brain, 4d chess move to stop selling anything but plastic. Of course, a decade plus later we can still buy a handful of metal models from GW...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 03:33:47


Post by: Gadzilla666


False. Sure, the lore is a big draw, but people will still walk away if gw stops doing what they like. There's an entire thread on Dakka right now about people taking "intermissions" from the game. So, obviously at some point gw did something wrong (in their opinion) that made them lose interest, and later did something right (again, in their opinion) that drew them back in. The fact that they can bring people back means that they at least occasionally do something right (in those people's opinions), so their success isn't "in spite of themselves", which would imply that they never get anything "right".


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 05:43:46


Post by: Sunny Side Up


 Gadzilla666 wrote:
False. Sure, the lore is a big draw, but people will still walk away if gw stops doing what they like. There's an entire thread on Dakka right now about people taking "intermissions" from the game. So, obviously at some point gw did something wrong (in their opinion) that made them lose interest, and later did something right (again, in their opinion) that drew them back in. The fact that they can bring people back means that they at least occasionally do something right (in those people's opinions), so their success isn't "in spite of themselves", which would imply that they never get anything "right".


Sure. This.

And the current GW customer base is many multiples larger of what it was in the 80s or 90s or even early 2000s or whatever is implied as the "golden age" the nostalgia draws from.

If GW would sustain itself primarily on those customers' loyalty "in spite of itself", it wouldn't and couldn't have ever significantly and rapidly expanded beyond that customer base.


In many ways, this discussion is simply another version of "GW doesn't / didn't do what I would've liked them to do, thus they are worse off as a business" or "they would perform (even) better as a business if they did exactly what I'd like them to do".




True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 06:02:50


Post by: BrianDavion


I don't think warhammer can be compared to a lot of the compeition. Warhammer, and 40k in specific is more then JUST the game, it's an entire IP, and that IP can really be a driver of things. if you stopped playing 40k you might still follow the universe, and even buy the odd mini ("OMG they put out a Mini of *insert fav char here* I'm gonna buy and paint it") the only compeitor who can really scratch the itch for a comprehensive universe in that same vein is proably Battletech


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 06:55:53


Post by: Just Tony


Absolutely true, and has been for at least the last decade.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 07:04:31


Post by: Sunny Side Up


LoTR failed, despite the IP
Warhammer Fantasy failed, despite the IP
X-Wing basically disappeared, despite the IP



Etc..

Sure, good IP that people enjoy helps. But it wont keep a game afloat by itself.


Also GW bootstrapped up AoS to be an incredibly successful miniatures game, probably in the Top 3 of all miniature games atm. And they launched the IP from essentially below-zero with people hating the idea (many to this day).

If anything, GW succeeds in spite of its often somewhat clunky IP.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 08:20:02


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


I wouldn’t say LOTR failed. Sure, when the films stopped coming it died a death in terms of sales - but GW absolutely walked away from that with more customers and far more money than they had before they released the games.

I was told at the time that it’s level of success was such that the cost of the license was covered half way through Fellowship, when GW expected that by Return of the King. Sadly I can’t prove that, nor can anyone except GW’s Bean Counters, so do take salt to taste. But I can say I was working for them at the time, and it really hit its stride with Two Towers, probably because the boxed set was superior.

I mean, Fellowship? Last Alliance vs Moria Goblins….no Fellowship. At all. Except in a rather pricey boxed set of metal models.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 08:53:17


Post by: AngryAngel80


I put True. It's made itself the game you can't leave behind if you want to always find people to play with, that alone can keep it churning forward under its own steam despite all the screw ups. Even as bad as it's gotten they still weren't in danger of going under during 7th, and with the train wreck of AoS initial roll out.

That however is the case for all things massive and lumbering. It's alive and thriving until it isn't. GW won't go out in a flash of negativity, it'll just be there, until it isn't and have a lingering death for its inevitable end. Perhaps living on as a shell for a long time on IP rights long after its given up the ghost.

No time line on that, just one clowns opinion of how it will break down.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 08:57:02


Post by: Cronch


LOTR was always a product with limited shelf life, like all movie license games, but I bet it still has more players worldwide than warmachine.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 09:01:57


Post by: AngryAngel80


Sunny Side Up wrote:
LoTR failed, despite the IP
Warhammer Fantasy failed, despite the IP
X-Wing basically disappeared, despite the IP



Etc..

Sure, good IP that people enjoy helps. But it wont keep a game afloat by itself.


Also GW bootstrapped up AoS to be an incredibly successful miniatures game, probably in the Top 3 of all miniature games atm. And they launched the IP from essentially below-zero with people hating the idea (many to this day).

If anything, GW succeeds in spite of its often somewhat clunky IP.




LotR I don't believe failed, it also wasn't a high focus for quite some time. It does have limited fan base appeal and no real room for growth, which is an issue for a game system.

Warhammer fantasy failed because it was outrageous what they expected people to buy, build, paint, deploy out there. The cost was through the roof and it felt bad, I think many enjoyed the IP but you can't buy what you can't buy.

X wing put a hurt on itself by tossing out the baby with the bath water in it's switch to 2nd edition. I can only speak for myself but was no way I was going to re buy my whole force again to get new things or buy hundreds of dollars worth of upgrade kits. So if they had a big fall off it would be because people don't like that mentality and felt burned.

None of those were because the IP wasn't strong and all about piss poor decision making from the companies in question.

I'd point out that they even released AoS as a total dud and had to back pedal and actually release a game system to make it gain any headway. They were surviving on GW name alone at that point. So you could argue it isn't just the IPs keeping it moving it's also the GW name that in many places just is table top mini gaming and the only game in town. That does wonders to keep it surging forward, momentum is an important thing in many aspects of life and this is no different for game companies.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 09:55:44


Post by: macluvin


I disagree. GW owns the 40K and fantasy equivalent universes. These are where most lay persons minds go immediately when they think tabletop war games, and that is simply something no other war game will have like GW has for decades. We saw GW survive nearly a decade of Rountree’s management, and 6th and 7th edition.

Furthermore, to say that GW is making bad decisions isn’t wrong, but it is disingenuous to the fact that they really learned how to use social media and market with something more engaging to the customer base, both old and new. This is tactical brilliance in the business world.

GW can probably survive another decade of Rountree right now if they had to, and they’ll survive at least another decade unless a competitor is both brilliant and super lucky, and GW falls back on 7th edition and end times levels of terrible mismanagement of their IP. I don’t think this trifecta is probable to occur.

I hate the current state of the game, and I may really dislike how GW chose to handle the game but to say they don’t know what they are doing with marketing and management is naive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides if GW messes up that bad Disney would probably just buy the IP up XD


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 10:12:40


Post by: Cronch


Why would disney ever buy the IP? It completely doesn't fit their profile and it may be recognizable, but it's so small in comparison.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 10:16:24


Post by: beast_gts


Cronch wrote:
Why would disney ever buy the IP? It completely doesn't fit their profile and it may be recognizable, but it's so small in comparison.
Wizards of the Coast / Hasbro would be a better fit.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 10:29:05


Post by: Sim-Life


macluvin wrote:

Furthermore, to say that GW is making bad decisions isn’t wrong, but it is disingenuous to the fact that they really learned how to use social media and market with something more engaging to the customer base, both old and new. This is tactical brilliance in the business world.


The bare minimum is still a huge improvement over nothing at all. I will admit the Regimental Standard was great, as was the occasional webcomics they put out (do they still do those?) but beyond that all they really did was turn White Dwarf ad-articles into Warhammer "Community" articles.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 10:32:28


Post by: techsoldaten


Hard False.

Would have answered differently during the Kirby era.

Companies don't grow to the size of GW without knowing their customer base, what they value, how they want to be sold to, and what they can sell their product for. Those things are different from what players think of as customers, what they want and what they'd like to pay.

Sure, most of what we see today is derivative of the work of visionaries reacting to the pro-corporate politics of the 80s and adapting the best works of science fiction to their own galactic setting. But the lore and corporate governance are completely separate.

I keep thinking of this time in a GW store when a mother came in with her teenage son. She had a lot of questions for the manager, and he brought her to a table to play a game of Assault on Black Reach. While her son was the one who wanted miniatures, it was the act of rolling dice that got her to part with her money.

There's a certain kind of genius in that. The son was the end user, but the Mom had to be sold on the product before parting with her cash. Her questions about price and appropriateness of the material were conquered by gambling (and letting her win.)

That doesn't happen by accident.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 10:43:46


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


There’s definitely skill in running an intro game. You need to be enthusiastic and cinematic, without going OTT.

It’s also something other wargame companies can’t really do. Sure, many FLGS see the sales potential in running them, and do so well. But when it’s not your own store, you’re relying on others to show your game off and in a good light. You can have great models, tight rules and a lighter than GW price, but if nobody is actively demoing your game? Your reach is shortened somewhat.

Now it’s no secret GW shop staff aren’t exactly well paid (can’t speak for today, nor for managers). But that investment is worth it, because when a sale is made off the back of an intro? That’s a new hobbyist. Someone you invite back for Beginner sessions. Someone you continue to support and promote the wider hobby to. Whether folk online agree or not, that adds value from a parental perspective.

And it’s some GW has done for if not from the get go, certainly all the time I’ve been involved in the hobby. Which is 32 years now. It’s a form of self promotion their contemporaries just don’t really have ready access to.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:02:41


Post by: Sgt. Cortez


Lotr didn't fail. At some point it was just finished and GW dropped support for several years which killed a big part of the fanbase. Warhammer and 40K are IPs build specifically to have an ongoing wargame where every faction can fight any other faction and the universe is a big sandbox. Lotr, despite being the stronger IP and having better story and rules than both, has its limits as a wargame. I mean they're doing great work with it again and I'd say ruleswize it's at its best spot right now and good thing the base rules didn't really change since 20years, but you see from the expansions there's not really a lot you can do, you can rerelase some old expansion, you can do the odd book about some very minor conflict in the background, but the big story has been told numerous times.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:04:50


Post by: Gert


Silmarillion expansion when?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:05:07


Post by: Sunny Side Up


 techsoldaten wrote:
Hard False.

Would have answered differently during the Kirby era.


Sure? If there's a hypothesis that GW is coasting on its IP, many (earlier) Kirby decisions, such as establishing Black Library, surely factor into it. He also took GW out of the red numbers post-LoTR-bubble-collapse.

Did he loose his marbles in his final couple of years? Seems like it. But early-Kirby was responsible for a lot of what the "everything-was-better-in-the-good-old-days"-crowd is pining for.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:19:06


Post by: a_typical_hero


For reference, what editions was Kirby responsible for?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:23:52


Post by: Gert


Kirby was General Manager/CEO(?) from 1986 to 2017.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:26:17


Post by: a_typical_hero


What? Really? I always had the impression that he took over somewhere in the middle of 5th and then gave us 6th and 7th.

But if he was with the company that early, he was indeed responsible for some of the best editions? 3rd-5th?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:28:27


Post by: Gert


1991 saw Kirby and Bryan Ansell buyout management of the company and then in 1994, it was floated on the LSE.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 11:28:34


Post by: Sunny Side Up


Yeah. In his very early days, was instrumental in the 1986 GW buy-out from Livingstone and Jackson for a couple of millions.

GW wasn't a publicly listed company in those days though, so his role obviously changed over the years and especially once the company went public.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 12:29:36


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Kirby turned GW into what it is today.

Boxed games to get you started? Kirby. Ever more plastic kits? Kirby.

As others said he went somewhat off the boil latterly, but he still turned it from Nerds In An Office to a dominant force in its industry.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 13:29:43


Post by: techsoldaten


Sunny Side Up wrote:
 techsoldaten wrote:
Hard False.

Would have answered differently during the Kirby era.


Sure? If there's a hypothesis that GW is coasting on its IP, many (earlier) Kirby decisions, such as establishing Black Library, surely factor into it. He also took GW out of the red numbers post-LoTR-bubble-collapse.

Did he loose his marbles in his final couple of years? Seems like it. But early-Kirby was responsible for a lot of what the "everything-was-better-in-the-good-old-days"-crowd is pining for.


The question is about whether GW succeeds in spite of itself.

Kirby was the right person for the job from when GW started to just after it went public. My take is that investor relations wasn't his strong suit, a lot of the weirdness we saw during his final years had to do with appeasing retirement funds looking for dividends. But he was invested in the lore, fluent in the creative process, and someone you might actually want to play a game with. He could keep the creative drive going during periods of uncertain financial performance and certainly captured the imaginations of people worldwide.

Roundtree is the person you want if you are trying to scale a business. He transformed GW into a printing press for cash and makes sure it's operating 24x7. I see a game with him going like this: he rolls up in a Porsche, the only models he has are from the Swedish Bikini Team, and he tells you he's leaving in 3 minutes for a party in Amsterdam. You're standing there with a pile of plastic army men, which he doesn't recognize as GW product. Before you can utter a word, he tells you to pause while he takes a call from the CEO of Nasdaq about a US listing and wanders off to engage in corporate banter. The models ask if you if you have any coke, and your response is they don't allow drinks at the tables. They leave, you win by forfeit and go home to watch Red Dwarf reruns from the 80s.

GW can reinvest in IP creation at any time, the world is full of talented and imaginative writers and they will line up to produce works set in the world of AoS / 40k. But understand, GW has no incentive to create new material, it would just dilute the value of fluff that's already working. That's not in the stars ATM and won't be for a long time, dividends are the order of the day.

Kirby is the guy to build up an IP practice and make it vital to customers. Roundtree is the guy to reign in operations and maximize profitability. The former could fall off any day, people's tastes are particular and can be subverted by other franchises. The latter is driven by investors who have a huge interest in their success and will push it in all sorts of ways. No one ever loses their taste for money.

So I don't believe there's an accident to GW's success.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 13:52:10


Post by: Mezmorki


What's "success" mean and who are we measuring it for?

The discussion here is interesting, but the OPs poll question really isn't specific enough.

From a business perspective, I'll posit this question: What other "geekdom" IP has it's one international deployment of retail stores to their sell their wares? Maybe one could argue that Star Wars does, but only through Disney stores and Disney's acquisition of the IP. But GW is literally in a league of their own as far as the hobby gaming market goes and they have been for 30 years.

The company has had its ups and downs financial, like all companies do, but they are still here and they are still a dominant force in the hobby sector. I think they are probably a quintessential success story from a hobby business perspective.

The OP's question, and specifically the "in spite of themselves" is perhaps asking if they could've been even 'more' successful. Who here can answer that from a company financial perspective without know even a fraction of details and constraints they were operating under.

Certainly mistakes have been made as a company - as all companies do. I'd like to think that if GW knew that a given decision was a mistake ahead of time they would've gone a different way, and in that regard we all success/fail in spite of ourselves when we look backwards. But that isn't how it goes when you're in the moment of making a decision.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 14:00:15


Post by: techsoldaten


 Mezmorki wrote:
What's "success" mean and who are we measuring it for?

Stock price.

And I say that with the understanding: as a public company, they would not exist if they did not optimize for investors. I don't think GW would be around today were it not for the decision to go public.

I have nothing but fondness for the days of pewter miniatures, social commentary and endless imagination. But we live in a world where good things don't happen to franchises without finance.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 15:11:33


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 Gert wrote:
Silmarillion expansion when?


The TV show is due in March of 2022, and might as well be called the "Game of Simarills" what with all the sex and violence the director said he is including.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 15:12:38


Post by: Sim-Life


 Gert wrote:
Silmarillion expansion when?


Never because no one will be able to remember who's who.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 15:36:14


Post by: Voss


beast_gts wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Why would disney ever buy the IP? It completely doesn't fit their profile and it may be recognizable, but it's so small in comparison.
Wizards of the Coast / Hasbro would be a better fit.


It actually wouldn't. Hasbro has very little interest in the IPs WotC already owns, aside from Magic (its one of their Prime Properties now, and outsells most of their 'grand legacy' boardgames). Everything else under the WotC umbrella is tolerated as long as it doesn't actually lose them money- they basically see D&D, for example, as a form of stress relief for the division that keeps the staff from being disgruntled, not a serious product. In the early 2000s, one of the lead developers for D&D tried to push it as a future Prime Property (which requires certain sales milestones in terms of units and profits), and failed badly. Not enough to kill the brand, but enough to convince the Hasbro execs that it wasn't worth focusing on anything other than Magic. Its worth noting that in the Annual report for the year 4th edition launched, they didn't even bother to mention D&D as a property they owned. And that wasn't unusual.

The 'Hasbro buys Warhammer' pipedream would likely go the same way. If they did do it, they'd sell it, but they'd cut the development and product budget to a small staff that puts out just a few releases a year.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 15:38:24


Post by: Sunny Side Up


 Mezmorki wrote:

The OP's question, and specifically the "in spite of themselves" is perhaps asking if they could've been even 'more' successful. Who here can answer that from a company financial perspective without know even a fraction of details and constraints they were operating under.

Certainly mistakes have been made as a company - as all companies do. I'd like to think that if GW knew that a given decision was a mistake ahead of time they would've gone a different way, and in that regard we all success/fail in spite of ourselves when we look backwards. But that isn't how it goes when you're in the moment of making a decision.


It's not.

If the question is whether GW with hindsight and a "flawless / perfect" decision-making record could be even more successful, it's meaningless. Because that would be true for absolutely 100% of all companies and businesses that exist or have ever existed. No business has ever existed that did not at one point make a bad call.

The OP's question is whether any success GW experienced (profits and stock market success, acquisition of new customers, however you define it) was purely accidental. The proverbial blind chicken or broken clock that occasionally scores by pure, situational luck.

And that is not true. While GW has made mistakes, they also made decisions that were smart, both for stakeholders and for customers.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 15:49:02


Post by: Gert


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The TV show is due in March of 2022, and might as well be called the "Game of Simarills" what with all the sex and violence the director said he is including.

Lord of the Rings is a violent setting though, can't comment on the sex stuff because I haven't nor do I intend to read the Silmarillion.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 15:55:55


Post by: Voss


 Gert wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The TV show is due in March of 2022, and might as well be called the "Game of Simarills" what with all the sex and violence the director said he is including.

Lord of the Rings is a violent setting though, can't comment on the sex stuff because I haven't nor do I intend to read the Silmarillion.


Tolkien didn't do sex. His characters 'begat.'
Sometimes the woman involved even appeared on the page, briefly.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 16:58:00


Post by: Wayniac


100% yes. If this was any other company their gakky rules would be laughed at. GW can get away with publishing garbage rules and people ignore it because "ooh shiny miniatures".


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 18:11:17


Post by: Daedalus81


 Sim-Life wrote:
Yes, it's absolutely true and I think only a few people who lack any kind of self-awareness would deny this.


There's always things to improve, but I just did a 6 round tournament and all of my games were a blast. I guess I didn't actually have fun?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 19:05:12


Post by: Racerguy180


beast_gts wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Why would disney ever buy the IP? It completely doesn't fit their profile and it may be recognizable, but it's so small in comparison.
Wizards of the Coast / Hasbro would be a better fit.



"Better fit" is laughable at best.

If that happens I'm not sure anyone would like the result.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 19:12:16


Post by: Deadnight


It's a broad church. Gw do enough, adapt enough and reinvent themselves enough to stay relevant and successful. They give people what they want at the end of the day. Hobby is yours.

They're a lot cleverer and than folks give credit for, for the most part - they've left plenty howlers through the gate but that's true for every company in the industry. They've done enough besides that to keep people invested and draw new people in.

Once or twice? Yeah, fine. Fluke. Broken clocks are right twice a day, and all that. 40 odd years of continued success though? That's no fluke. They know what sells. They know what works. They know what people want.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 19:29:33


Post by: a_typical_hero


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Sim-Life wrote:
Yes, it's absolutely true and I think only a few people who lack any kind of self-awareness would deny this.


There's always things to improve, but I just did a 6 round tournament and all of my games were a blast. I guess I didn't actually have fun?
Obviously you were having the wrong kind of fun and you don't realise that you were exploited during every single one of those games, duh. Sheepl these days... /s


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 19:43:14


Post by: Sim-Life


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Sim-Life wrote:
Yes, it's absolutely true and I think only a few people who lack any kind of self-awareness would deny this.


There's always things to improve, but I just did a 6 round tournament and all of my games were a blast. I guess I didn't actually have fun?


I'm not sure how you got that from what I said. Your sense of fun has nothing to do with GWs success. People have fun hitting cars with a crowbar, that doesn't make Ford successful.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 20:39:32


Post by: Galas


Does Apple succeed in spite of itself?


So many people here confuse "What I think about how the policies of a company affect me as a custommer" with "How economically viable is a company being driven by the people at charge" and, normally, both are mutually exclusive with oneanother.

It doesn't matter that GW screws you as a customer. Saying that they don't know what they are doing comes as inmature. "They did bad to me so they are bad!" nah fam. Thats not how the world and capitalism works.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 20:40:38


Post by: Draccan


If GW or any other company launched 40k today with these rules and this quality miniatures, this amount of cool artwork and backstory, BUT at the price level they do today, NO ONE would pay attention.

GW's success is based on a long-running fanbase that motivate each other and draw in a new crowd. But I question how long it will last.

Certainly it has lasted longer than I would have expected, but just look at the new Black Templar started with 13 models and thin, thin volume of rules at 200 USD or even worse, 1200 DKK.

Where do they go from here? One space marine in a box for 300 USD?

It's a joke. And I doubt it is sustainable. I think they have been riding the coattails of their box games and board games and IP to be honest. But I can't see many young people going to a store or even online store and look at a starter with 13 models at 200 USD and think, WOW I am grabbing that.

You can almost get a half decent resin printer soon for that price.

The one thing I am watching is Warhammer The Old World. Considering how they nickle and dime you in their other games, I think that will be an interesting case. I would probably get the rules if it looks good, but I have a hard time imagining it will be what people expect or priced anywhere decently. Esp. if they do a split with Forge World where a bunch of special stuff, characters etc. comes out of.

Then again, I predicted GW's demise before and they sure take a good long time about it, soooo


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 21:22:21


Post by: soviet13


Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Lotr didn't fail. At some point it was just finished and GW ... killed a big part of the fanbase.


Wait, what? This should have been a bigger scandal if true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deadnight wrote:
It's a broad church. Gw do enough, adapt enough and reinvent themselves enough to stay relevant and successful. They give people what they want at the end of the day. Hobby is yours.

They're a lot cleverer and than folks give credit for, for the most part - they've left plenty howlers through the gate but that's true for every company in the industry. They've done enough besides that to keep people invested and draw new people in.

Once or twice? Yeah, fine. Fluke. Broken clocks are right twice a day, and all that. 40 odd years of continued success though? That's no fluke. They know what sells. They know what works. They know what people want.



Yeah. I've been in this hobby since 1988 and online since 1995 or so, and I don't remember a time when people weren't prophesising GW's imminent collapse due to high prices or bad decisions. Meanwhile all of the companies said to have been 'the next big thing' nipping at their heels have instead dried up and withered away.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 21:31:11


Post by: BaronIveagh


While I'm sure some will argue that 'it's just a correction' and while I agree that GW stock was overvalued...

It's gone from $160 a share to $130 a share, almost annihilating an entire years gains since September 20th. That's not good, no matter how you slice it.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 21:33:46


Post by: Gert


 Draccan wrote:
GW's success is based on a long-running fanbase that motivate each other and draw in a new crowd. But I question how long it will last.

The "fanbase" didn't get me into the hobby, being a child and seeing cool SciFi stuff did, which GW does very well.

Certainly it has lasted longer than I would have expected, but just look at the new Black Templar started with 13 models and thin, thin volume of rules at 200 USD or even worse, 1200 DKK.

Where do they go from here? One space marine in a box for 300 USD?

It's a joke. And I doubt it is sustainable. I think they have been riding the coattails of their box games and board games and IP to be honest. But I can't see many young people going to a store or even online store and look at a starter with 13 models at 200 USD and think, WOW I am grabbing that.

There's hyperbole and then there's that. Also, the BT box isn't getting sold as a proper "starter" box like the starter boxes or Start Collecting/Combat Patrols are, it's literally a limited run product.

Then again, I predicted GW's demise before and they sure take a good long time about it, soooo

People have been "predicting" GW's demise since I started the hobby, why stop now when they're still wrong and will continue to be wrong unless certain events turn the UK into Mad Max land.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 21:36:23


Post by: soviet13


 Draccan wrote:
If GW or any other company launched 40k today with these rules and this quality miniatures, this amount of cool artwork and backstory, BUT at the price level they do today, NO ONE would pay attention.


But that's a good business model, no? Exploit the position you are actually in.

As much as GW's prices can be eye-watering at times, I would rather be gouged and have a stream of new models available than pay reasonable prices but watch the business collapse two years later.

 Draccan wrote:
GW's success is based on a long-running fanbase that motivate each other and draw in a new crowd. But I question how long it will last.

Certainly it has lasted longer than I would have expected, but just look at the new Black Templar started with 13 models and thin, thin volume of rules at 200 USD or even worse, 1200 DKK.

Where do they go from here? One space marine in a box for 300 USD?

It's a joke. And I doubt it is sustainable.


It has literally been sustainable for over 30 years.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 21:42:44


Post by: Daedalus81


 BaronIveagh wrote:
While I'm sure some will argue that 'it's just a correction' and while I agree that GW stock was overvalued...

It's gone from $160 a share to $130 a share, almost annihilating an entire years gains since September 20th. That's not good, no matter how you slice it.


That's because they announced a huge dividend cut as a result of shipping and supply costs. The stock market has little to do with how customers value products.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 22:17:58


Post by: Draccan


soviet13 wrote:
 Draccan wrote:
If GW or any other company launched 40k today with these rules and this quality miniatures, this amount of cool artwork and backstory, BUT at the price level they do today, NO ONE would pay attention.


But that's a good business model, no? Exploit the position you are actually in.

As much as GW's prices can be eye-watering at times, I would rather be gouged and have a stream of new models available than pay reasonable prices but watch the business collapse two years later.

 Draccan wrote:
GW's success is based on a long-running fanbase that motivate each other and draw in a new crowd. But I question how long it will last.

Certainly it has lasted longer than I would have expected, but just look at the new Black Templar started with 13 models and thin, thin volume of rules at 200 USD or even worse, 1200 DKK.

Where do they go from here? One space marine in a box for 300 USD?

It's a joke. And I doubt it is sustainable.


It has literally been sustainable for over 30 years.


About the business model. I gave a clear example with the Black Templars on why it isn't sustainable. Just because something worked a long time doesn't mean it will forever. You have to factor in, that their revenue is in large parts based on them raising prices beyond an inflation rate. The discrepancy will be too big one day. We are getting there.
The fact it has been sustainable for 30 years says little. Kodak lasted a pretty long time, but went bankrupt because they couldn't adapt to the times.

I think GW has to adapt to the 3d printing business or die. And they have to find a way out of price rises to cover the loss in revenue. Now it is 13 space marines in a box for 200. Like I said, where can they go from here? 1 model for 300?
What kept them afloat in my opinion is the currency situation before Brexit, the hardcore fans promoting it all over the web, blogs, painting videos, clubs etc., leasing the IP for big games, splash standalone box games and board games.

It's true, GW's obituary have been written too many times. And I am not saying they are going under tomorrow. But I think they have painted themselves up into a corner. They are nearing the end of the endless price hikes, they seem to have a hard time growing the core games fanbase and other financial realities might begin to really hit home...

You don't need to have a crystal ball to see that people can 3d print better and better and better, and quicker, with less and less technical obstacles. The amount of FB groups supporting 3d printing of even small niche games and 3d printing services offered... The bottom will eventually go out of the market - it's a matter of time..


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 22:30:38


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Twaddle, balderdash, poppycock and indeed factually inaccurate.

Go look at their published (and independently verified under U.K. law) year end financials.

Look at the past 5 or 6 years, and how much their sales have gone up.

Work that out as a percentage increase.

Then come back and claim “they’re only increasing income by increasing prices higher than inflation” with a straight face. Because you won’t be able to do it. On account it’s a claim not at all supported by the facts.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 22:32:09


Post by: CEO Kasen


"Abusive spouse" is absolutely the pair of words I'd use.

I had used them, in fact, at some point, because they encapsulate 40K in 2020 for me. I got back with them to see 9th, assured they had changed, and I let it smack me in the face for six months because of the times we'd had and stories we'd told with My Dudes back in 3rd-5th. Then I wised up, had a trial separation sometime on the tail end of the Marine release train, which became proper divorce papers around the time of the TTS debacle.

To further extend the unsavory analogy, I even had a rebound fling with Battletech for a month before settling on a more stable relationship with One Page Rules.

Except I still come around occasionally to complain about how much I hate my ex.

Now, I can already see someone calling comparing 40K tantamount to domestic violence hyperbolic, if it hasn't happened 12 times already in this thread, and... yes, it is. It is 100% hyperbolic. I mean absolutely no insensitivity to anyone who has suffered any form of actual spousal abuse. But it's still a descriptive analogy because... 40K is kind of an insidious thing. The problems seem obvious from the outside - the game's awful and bloated and slow, the models are overpriced, the books are day one DLC, GW's policies are increasingly ham-fisted, so why don't they just leave? - but the emotions involved are much more complicated. Between nostalgia, the lore and setting, the game's own self-feeding popularity, and the stories you've made for your Dudes within that setting over years, It's surprisingly hard to let go of even if you despise the game and what it's doing, and since I'm still here, even I obviously haven't 100% succeeded.

Creatively divorcing my ideas and Dudes from the 40K universe wasn't easy, but it had to be done at some point to escape.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 22:54:48


Post by: Draccan


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Twaddle, balderdash, poppycock and indeed factually inaccurate.

Go look at their published (and independently verified under U.K. law) year end financials.

Look at the past 5 or 6 years, and how much their sales have gone up.

Work that out as a percentage increase.

Then come back and claim “they’re only increasing income by increasing prices higher than inflation” with a straight face. Because you won’t be able to do it. On account it’s a claim not at all supported by the facts.


If you only read things half-assed, that people write and reply haphazardly, what's the point?

I never said they ONLY rose prices.. I specifically mentioned other areas as well, including successful box releases and selling their IP: And the currency market. It's clear people bought a lot more toys when they were in lockdown and/or working from home.

What I DID say - and no one can counter this; they have had prices rises as part of their strategy and they have continually raised prices above inflation, year by year and what I said was, where do they go from here? They are hitting a brick wall at some point. And it will - whatever you say - affect their business of core products. Their best hope is to diversify, but when you look at the report a lot of their income comes from third party retailers. And that can be a fickle thing to rely on in the future.

Do you honestly, and seriously believe GW can continue to raise prices above inflation? And where do you see they will grow their revenue? Do you believe the amount of 40k (and other GW games) players will go up or down in the next five years? (Can they grow the player base.) And how do you think technology will affect GW (3d printing) Those are the questions whose answers will determine where GW will be in 5 years.
I for one can't see a way for them to continue price hikes in a sensible way. I can't see them growing the player base over time. And currently they are not finding ways to combat 3d printing.

Bigger companies than GW has fallen. And there are new disruptors in the marketplace.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 23:14:58


Post by: Daedalus81


 Draccan wrote:

What I DID say - and no one can counter this; they have had prices rises as part of their strategy and they have continually raised prices above inflation, year by year and what I said was, where do they go from here?


They don't raise their prices every year. WHC now announces changes each time - we haven't had an increase yet this year. First was brushes and paints in 2018, start collecting in 2019, and an increase on existing kits in 2020.

Many kits do not go over inflation. Landraider was $60 is 2005 and with inflation it should be $96+ depending on the year it actually came out. Newer kits are a higher quality than the old ones and are going to have a higher price point.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/11 23:25:22


Post by: soviet13


 Draccan wrote:

What I DID say - and no one can counter this; they have had prices rises as part of their strategy and they have continually raised prices above inflation, year by year and what I said was, where do they go from here? They are hitting a brick wall at some point. And it will - whatever you say - affect their business of core products. Their best hope is to diversify, but when you look at the report a lot of their income comes from third party retailers. And that can be a fickle thing to rely on in the future.

Do you honestly, and seriously believe GW can continue to raise prices above inflation? And where do you see they will grow their revenue? Do you believe the amount of 40k (and other GW games) players will go up or down in the next five years? (Can they grow the player base.) And how do you think technology will affect GW (3d printing) Those are the questions whose answers will determine where GW will be in 5 years.
I for one can't see a way for them to continue price hikes in a sensible way. I can't see them growing the player base over time. And currently they are not finding ways to combat 3d printing.

Bigger companies than GW has fallen. And there are new disruptors in the marketplace.


The thing is that I've been reading variations of this post for nigh-on 20 years and the predicted fall has never come true. Yes, they've wobbled a couple of times, but they have also course corrected afterward.

I think GW are quite clever in testing the waters to see how far their pricing can go. When something works they keep doing it, when it doesn't they back away. We also see that they target different price points for different parts of the fanbase. Something like the Templars box is targeted at the hardcore fans who want the Blanche art book and need the new kits now now now, so they know they can charge a lot of money for a small amount of models and it will sell. But they also have various discount boxes available for those who are less fanatical or more price-sensitive.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 00:27:47


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Daedalus81 wrote:
They don't raise their prices every year.
They don't need to. They raise prices with individual releases. Compare the Battlewagon now to Battlewagon + upgrade sprue prior to them putting it in the same box (and look at how everyone was stunned at the price of the Kill Rig). Compare how prices have risen for single frame characters since their introduction. Look how large models come out at once price, and then a similar model comes out at a slightly higher price, and then another similar (yet, admittedly bulkier) model comes out a significantly higher price, followed by much thinner model at the same price rather than the same price as the last one rather than a price that matches the first of the four given they're roughly equivalent in size. And then something like this comes out, is more expensive than a Bloodthirster, and we assume it's KOS sized, but it's actually much smaller.

Or just compare Rhinos - Marine (Rhino sprues + Marine Accessory + Razorback), Chaos Rhino (Rhino sprues + Chaos accessory + spiky accessory) at a slightly higher price, and Sisters of Battle (Rhino sprues + Sisters accessory sprue) at a significantly higher price, despite having fewer sprues than the other two. I mean, the Castigator and the Predator are not the same kit, but they're also not that far apart from one another... except in price, where the newer on is 168% the cost.

So again, them not raising the prices every year is irrelevant when then raise them with individual releases.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 00:40:00


Post by: Polonius


Any critique of GW based on price runs into the very simple fact that people have been bemoaning GW's price increases for literal decades.

I agree that it's crazy expensive, and I don't know how anybody collects it, but they seem to find a market. For every person they price out of the hobby, they seem to find new people willing to start. It's just ridiculous to say that they are overcharging when prices are crazy high and they still can't completely meet demand.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 00:46:17


Post by: Daedalus81


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
They don't raise their prices every year.
They don't need to. They raise prices with individual releases. Compare the Battlewagon now to Battlewagon + upgrade sprue prior to them putting it in the same box (and look at how everyone was stunned at the price of the Kill Rig). Compare how prices have risen for single frame characters since their introduction. Look how large models come out at once price, and then a similar model comes out at a slightly higher price, and then another similar (yet, admittedly bulkier) model comes out a significantly higher price, followed by much thinner model at the same price rather than the same price as the last one rather than a price that matches the first of the four given they're roughly equivalent in size. And then something like this comes out, is more expensive than a Bloodthirster, and we assume it's KOS sized, but it's actually much smaller.

Or just compare Rhinos - Marine (Rhino sprues + Marine Accessory + Razorback), Chaos Rhino (Rhino sprues + Chaos accessory + spiky accessory) at a slightly higher price, and Sisters of Battle (Rhino sprues + Sisters accessory sprue) at a significantly higher price, despite having fewer sprues than the other two. I mean, the Castigator and the Predator are not the same kit, but they're also not that far apart from one another... except in price, where the newer on is 168% the cost.

So again, them not raising the prices every year is irrelevant when then raise them with individual releases.


Sure. They're going to use every opportunity to price at the new level. The battlewagon is probably the most ridiculous outcome for any kit in their history.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 01:03:31


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Polonius wrote:
Any critique of GW based on price runs into the very simple fact that people have been bemoaning GW's price increases for literal decades.
So, what, we call it a wash and never bring it up?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 01:38:06


Post by: Polonius


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
Any critique of GW based on price runs into the very simple fact that people have been bemoaning GW's price increases for literal decades.
So, what, we call it a wash and never bring it up?


I think you can bring it up whenever you want, I’m not the take police, but I’m not sure it’s relevant to a discussion about GWs success. Or, it’s actually incredibly relevant, because GW has increased sales despite price hikes, which shows they have a good sense of what the market will bare.

“Look how stupid GW is, they’re raising prices while growing the market!”


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 01:44:28


Post by: insaniak


Yeah, GW's high prices are certainly a valid topic of discussion... but what they're not, is a sign of impending doom.

I got into 40K in 1994. There was a price rise 6 months later that everyone decried as being the death of the game. The argument that they're sooner or later going to price themselves into oblivion feels weaker with every successive price rise that doesn't trigger the apocalypse that's been predicted as imminent for 30 years.

Like the claim that the rules are 'unplayable' it's one of those places where people often seem to mistake their own opinion for that of the majority of the player base.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 01:51:25


Post by: BrianDavion


Sunny Side Up wrote:
LoTR failed, despite the IP
Warhammer Fantasy failed, despite the IP
X-Wing basically disappeared, despite the IP




LOTR and X-wing are IP based but IMHO don't count. because the game isn't a "centerpiece by which the IP revoles around"

Warhammer (be it 40K AOS or fantasy battles) are, ultimately, ruled by the minis and table top war game. if you get into those IPs you're going to be strongly drawn towards the game. LOTR and X-wing do not have those, you can be huge fans of the franchise yet not even know those games exist


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 02:04:43


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Polonius wrote:
“Look how stupid GW is, they’re raising prices while growing the market!”
Well I never said that...

 insaniak wrote:
Like the claim that the rules are 'unplayable' it's one of those places where people often seem to mistake their own opinion for that of the majority of the player base.
Unplayable is just hyperbolic shorthand for "they write bad rules". And they do. They write terrible rules.






True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 02:39:08


Post by: privateer4hire


Wayniac wrote:
100% yes. If this was any other company their gakky rules would be laughed at. GW can get away with publishing garbage rules and people ignore it because "ooh shiny miniatures".


Some (a lot?), of us also have ignored substandard rules because we’d prefer to at least get some games in and often it’s play GW or play nothing.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 02:59:43


Post by: insaniak


 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Like the claim that the rules are 'unplayable' it's one of those places where people often seem to mistake their own opinion for that of the majority of the player base.
Unplayable is just hyperbolic shorthand for "they write bad rules". And they do. They write terrible rules.

Sure. But whether or not that is actually a problem is a matter of personal opinion, not a universal truth. Because, like the price rises, they've been writing terrible rules from the beginning, and yet people keep buying them, and playing the games, and enjoying it.

So the rules being terribly written isn't a sign that GW are doing something wrong. Just a sign that they're not writing rules for people who care about the rules being technically sound or well-written.





True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 03:02:06


Post by: Just Tony


 privateer4hire wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
100% yes. If this was any other company their gakky rules would be laughed at. GW can get away with publishing garbage rules and people ignore it because "ooh shiny miniatures".


Some (a lot?), of us also have ignored substandard rules because we’d prefer to at least get some games in and often it’s play GW or play nothing.



That is indeed part of it, but at the same token we've been playing dead editions of GW games at our local shop and have actually garnered interest from younger store patrons. Pinning the Stockholm Syndrome squarely on the Cult of Current only goes so far.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 03:04:34


Post by: Apple fox


 privateer4hire wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
100% yes. If this was any other company their gakky rules would be laughed at. GW can get away with publishing garbage rules and people ignore it because "ooh shiny miniatures".


Some (a lot?), of us also have ignored substandard rules because we’d prefer to at least get some games in and often it’s play GW or play nothing.


I think that’s the only reason 40k still gets players here, most players have army’s and a nostalgia for the setting.
And getting into new things is hard to find community.
But it’s quiet down a lot, seeing so few games again after the resurface for 9th.

The other is how many players turned up with there new 40k army’s for years after being told online they could get a game anywhere.
And no one wants to play 40k, fanboy power keep 40k alive and push other games down all that time.
Even things like age of sigmar, it’s all the 40k players who tear it down I find.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 03:06:25


Post by: insaniak


 privateer4hire wrote:
Some (a lot?), of us also have ignored substandard rules because we’d prefer to at least get some games in and often it’s play GW or play nothing.

I do think, though, that this is more often than not a case of everybody just assuming that nobody else will be interested in another game if they're already playing one. If you have another game you really want to play, maybe it just needs someone to take up the banner and encourage others to give it a go...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 03:17:06


Post by: tneva82


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
Any critique of GW based on price runs into the very simple fact that people have been bemoaning GW's price increases for literal decades.
So, what, we call it a wash and never bring it up?


You can bring it up.

It just invalidates your opinion as silly repeating one. Same arqument has been said for decades yet gw is still here doing more profit than ever.

So if you want some credibility for "gw is going to go bust" claim better avoid model cost as arqument.

Of course if you want to trash your own credibility feel free to do so.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 03:30:20


Post by: privateer4hire


 insaniak wrote:
 privateer4hire wrote:
Some (a lot?), of us also have ignored substandard rules because we’d prefer to at least get some games in and often it’s play GW or play nothing.

I do think, though, that this is more often than not a case of everybody just assuming that nobody else will be interested in another game if they're already playing one. If you have another game you really want to play, maybe it just needs someone to take up the banner and encourage others to give it a go...


I’ve done the game evangelist bit in half a dozen places over the past twenty something years. It’s a lot of work for not much return.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 03:54:14


Post by: H.B.M.C.


tneva82 wrote:
So if you want some credibility for "gw is going to go bust" claim better avoid model cost as arqument.
I... didn't say that either.

Any'a y'all actually gonna reply to something I said, rather than what you wished I said?

Gee suhs...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 04:36:22


Post by: privateer4hire


 Just Tony wrote:
 privateer4hire wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
100% yes. If this was any other company their gakky rules would be laughed at. GW can get away with publishing garbage rules and people ignore it because "ooh shiny miniatures".


Some (a lot?), of us also have ignored substandard rules because we’d prefer to at least get some games in and often it’s play GW or play nothing.



That is indeed part of it, but at the same token we've been playing dead editions of GW games at our local shop and have actually garnered interest from younger store patrons. Pinning the Stockholm Syndrome squarely on the Cult of Current only goes so far.


Gaming, like politics, is local. I've lucked into a group that will play off brand stuff so I am thankful.
Without them it would be GW or no gaming. Good for you that you've gotten interest in the non-current edition.

I didn't mention current in my original response to this thread but I think people will agree that it helps to play the new edition.
And also, you're playing a GW game even if it's older. It's still the same IP not Gates of Antares or Maelstrom's Edge or whatever not-GW world.
Nobody likely has to homebrew rules for their army since it's probably reflected in the army lists/codex for that edition.
And even if they do, the fact that it's got GW or Citadel stamped somewhere usually doesn't hurt.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 06:49:33


Post by: jeff white


 insaniak wrote:

I'm going with False.
Spoiler:

Aside from the distasteful comparison to spousal abuse (which, frankly, shows an incredible lack of perspective, and/or empathy for actual victims of abuse) what that comment is is projection. It's someone saying 'I no longer like what the game has become, therefore it's clearly not what people want and GW are doing it wrong.'

It makes sense. After you've dedicated a large amount of time, money and effort into something, it can be hard to accept that it's changed into something that just isn't actually aimed at you any more. So people hang around complaining that it's not like it was back in their day, and waiting for it to get back on track... because, surely, if we all keep making enough noise about it, they'll realise that they've made a mistake and go back to giving us what we want, right?

Right...?

Except they have no reason to do that, because there are plenty of customers out there who are perfectly happy with their current direction, as evidenced by their sales figures. So those complaining would be better off not waiting, and just make the change they want to see themselves.

It took me an embarrassingly long time myself to realise that if I wasn't enjoying the current direction of 40K, there was nothing actually forcing me to keep up with it. Even ignoring the overabundance of other games out there these days, if there was a version of the game that you enjoyed more than the current one, those rulebooks still exist. (In my case, they're still sitting right there on the shelf). So rather than waiting for 40K to turn back into 2nd edition or 5th edition, I decided to just go back to playing 2nd edition. Rather than buying Primaris marines, I chose to stick with my existing armies, or buy anything else I needed 2nd hand. I get the version of the game I prefer, and those who like the current stuff can carry on enjoying themselves without my negativity added to the mix.
Spoiler:

In summary - never assume that your personal opinion is the majority, particularly when all evidence points to the contrary. And it's a hobby. Hobbies are supposed to be enjoyable. If you're not enjoying it, you're doing something wrong, and would be better off changing that rather than insisting that the company making the wildly successful product you personally don't like should change what they're doing.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
We know why GW attempted finecast. Increase margins $$$

Yes, and no. They made the change to 'Fine'cast because tin prices were wildly volatile and IIRC had increased exponentially in a very short time, making large scale metal model production much more risky. And the common scuttlebutt at the time (which admittedly may not be true, just internet chatter) was that 'Fine'cast was rushed out because it leaked early and GW wanted to stay on top of the wave, despite it not actually being ready for release - they had the choice (allegedly) of pushing out a product and hoping for the best, or waiting to test it more completely and losing some of the momentum from the initial reveal. The skyrocketing tin prices forced their hand, and once they had made the change it would have likely been too expensive to change back.

For all its faults, 'Fine'cast as a concept, for what it was intended to do, was good. The end result was, IMO, a mistake brought on by hubris (Kirby's belief that GW's customers would buy whatever they chose to release) and a too-short development time. That doesn't invalidate every other bit of progress that GW have made. Every company makes mistakes, and they're often mistakes that in hindsight to the armchair critic seem obvious. See: New Coke.

You vote False, but I would consider this to be succeeding in spite of itself because of the value of things done a long time ago…


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
 jeff white wrote:

Regardless, poll results as of now are currently pretty strongly in the True column…

59% out of 82 poll responses isn't a strong result. At best it's a very slim majority. Strong would be 70-80% out of 100-200 responses.

Margins have slimmed, now 55 to 45% True. A significant margin, I would argue, for its falling square in the middle.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 07:18:01


Post by: insaniak


 jeff white wrote:

You vote False, but I would consider this to be succeeding in spite of itself because of the value of things done a long time ago…

Based on what?

There are some of us who persist/ed with the game longer than we should have because of the nostalgia or sunk cost or whatever other attachment, certainly... but that only means that GW are riding those past successes if that actually applies to a significant portion of their (actual, paying) customer base. And we don't have sufficient data to make that judgement.

It certainly doesn't seem to have hurt their bottom line when I stopped buying their stuff in mid 6th edition. Nor when people left in a huff after 7th edition came along and turned out to be 6th edition amped up to 11, or when 8th changed the game more drastically. Either there's an ever-shrinking pool of vets handing over exponentially increasing large wads of cash, or they're getting enough new blood to keep those profits going upwards.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 07:50:07


Post by: Deadnight


 insaniak wrote:
 jeff white wrote:

You vote False, but I would consider this to be succeeding in spite of itself because of the value of things done a long time ago…

Based on what?

There are some of us who persist/ed with the game longer than we should have because of the nostalgia or sunk cost or whatever other attachment, certainly... but that only means that GW are riding those past successes if that actually applies to a significant portion of their (actual, paying) customer base. And we don't have sufficient data to make that judgement.

It certainly doesn't seem to have hurt their bottom line when I stopped buying their stuff in mid 6th edition. Nor when people left in a huff after 7th edition came along and turned out to be 6th edition amped up to 11, or when 8th changed the game more drastically. Either there's an ever-shrinking pool of vets handing over exponentially increasing large wads of cash, or they're getting enough new blood to keep those profits going upwards.



It might have been truer in the late-kirby era, where there were indications that fewer and fewer people were spending more and more for less and less, but whether that was a shrinking core of vets or 'fewer' new starts is anyone's guess. For the most part, I doubt the majority of people buying today are the same people buying twenty, or more do years ago. I'm a very rare exception in that case. Hell, I've got models older than plenty of the current generation of players. :p


Everything since calth has been a commercial success pretty much, and they hit on the magic formula of lots of new starts, and re-engage the vets. It's something they didn't do in kirby's last few years, but he was basically just eyeing out on maxing his own personal retirement.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 08:37:54


Post by: Cronch


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Unplayable is just hyperbolic shorthand for "they write bad rules". And they do. They write terrible rules.

They write convoluted, poorly balanced rules. They're PERFECT rules for the kind of player that still sticks by 40k as a "competitive" game. The player that sees buying models as buying power and wants to win the game in the planning phase. The piles and piles of stratagems and auras are perfect for that.
The other kind of player is the same as always- fluffy person who plays with friends and literally doesn't care as long as they get to move models around and go pew pew.
Lastly the third kind of player is the one that no longer enjoys the game because it has moved on conceptually from being a primarily tabletop experience, and is only in it for the nostalgia or sunk cost. That player should probably move on for his sanity's sake.


As for financial results, that trashy Black Templar army box is sold out at all the local online stores, so clearly the pain point hasn't been reached yet.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 09:54:44


Post by: Tyel


I'd say GW's main advantage is incumbency which yes, is a result of things they did in the past, but isn't due to "kickass lore".

Arguably WHFB and 40k 3rd-7th ed were killed off because in the mid 2010s that incumbency seemed to be on the wane (dramatically in Fantasy's case) as compared with Warmahordes and then especially X-Wing. (And to a degree others - but that cluster on the fringe has arguably always been there). Speaking from experience, I'd say around 2016ish it was getting as easy to get a game of X-Wing as 40k.

But flash forward, and X-Wing seems essentially dead as a commercial exercise, while 40k is still going strong.

If everyone started playing Malifaux, Bolt Action or the ASOIAF miniatures game etc across all the FLGS in the world, and not 40k, GW would be in real trouble. But they don't. And it seems unlikely at this point they are going to start.

There's also the view that people could keep on playing 40k, but stop buying models from GW, just contact their friendly local 3d printer. But I feel taking that step requires being sufficiently far down the rabbit hole. If you have some friends playing 40k, the logical step is to buy a starter from GW. It isn't to get hold of some 3rd party models off the internet. Because you've never heard of said 3rd party.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 10:09:49


Post by: jeff white


 insaniak wrote:
 jeff white wrote:

You vote False, but I would consider this to be succeeding in spite of itself because of the value of things done a long time ago…

Based on what?
Spoiler:

There are some of us who persist/ed with the game longer than we should have because of the nostalgia or sunk cost or whatever other attachment, certainly... but that only means that GW are riding those past successes if that actually applies to a significant portion of their (actual, paying) customer base. And we don't have sufficient data to make that judgement.

It certainly doesn't seem to have hurt their bottom line when I stopped buying their stuff in mid 6th edition. Nor when people left in a huff after 7th edition came along and turned out to be 6th edition amped up to 11, or when 8th changed the game more drastically. Either there's an ever-shrinking pool of vets handing over exponentially increasing large wads of cash, or they're getting enough new blood to keep those profits going upwards.



Based on the fact that you (we, really) are still buying their miniatures today because of what some people made for the company 30 years ago.

This is not intended to be a controverial assessment - I mean, I am not being accusatory, I am only saying that - in my mind - this sort of activity, namely giving new money now to engage with old rules systems seems to satisfy the conditions of the quote from the original post... and so GW is succeeding in spite of current iterations of the game system, recent narrative divergences, and so on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote:
Spoiler:
I'd say GW's main advantage is incumbency which yes, is a result of things they did in the past, but isn't due to "kickass lore".

Arguably WHFB and 40k 3rd-7th ed were killed off because in the mid 2010s that incumbency seemed to be on the wane (dramatically in Fantasy's case) as compared with Warmahordes and then especially X-Wing. (And to a degree others - but that cluster on the fringe has arguably always been there).
Speaking from experience, I'd say around 2016ish it was getting as easy to get a game of X-Wing as 40k.

But flash forward, and X-Wing seems essentially dead as a commercial exercise, while 40k is still going strong.
Spoiler:

If everyone started playing Malifaux, Bolt Action or the ASOIAF miniatures game etc across all the FLGS in the world, and not 40k, GW would be in real trouble. But they don't. And it seems unlikely at this point they are going to start.

There's also the view that people could keep on playing 40k, but stop buying models from GW, just contact their friendly local 3d printer. But I feel taking that step requires being sufficiently far down the rabbit hole. If you have some friends playing 40k, the logical step is to buy a starter from GW. It isn't to get hold of some 3rd party models off the internet. Because you've never heard of said 3rd party.


I wonder how much of the loss of interest in the Star Wars universe had to do with Disney fracking the frack out of the Star Wars "lore" with their newer Rey-based movies, perhaps in much the same way that GW has split its fanbase with the introduction of (the heretic) Cawl and (his man-servant of heresy) Bob Girlyman?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 10:28:39


Post by: BrianDavion


 jeff white wrote:
 insaniak wrote:

I'm going with False.
Spoiler:

Aside from the distasteful comparison to spousal abuse (which, frankly, shows an incredible lack of perspective, and/or empathy for actual victims of abuse) what that comment is is projection. It's someone saying 'I no longer like what the game has become, therefore it's clearly not what people want and GW are doing it wrong.'

It makes sense. After you've dedicated a large amount of time, money and effort into something, it can be hard to accept that it's changed into something that just isn't actually aimed at you any more. So people hang around complaining that it's not like it was back in their day, and waiting for it to get back on track... because, surely, if we all keep making enough noise about it, they'll realise that they've made a mistake and go back to giving us what we want, right?

Right...?

Except they have no reason to do that, because there are plenty of customers out there who are perfectly happy with their current direction, as evidenced by their sales figures. So those complaining would be better off not waiting, and just make the change they want to see themselves.

It took me an embarrassingly long time myself to realise that if I wasn't enjoying the current direction of 40K, there was nothing actually forcing me to keep up with it. Even ignoring the overabundance of other games out there these days, if there was a version of the game that you enjoyed more than the current one, those rulebooks still exist. (In my case, they're still sitting right there on the shelf). So rather than waiting for 40K to turn back into 2nd edition or 5th edition, I decided to just go back to playing 2nd edition. Rather than buying Primaris marines, I chose to stick with my existing armies, or buy anything else I needed 2nd hand. I get the version of the game I prefer, and those who like the current stuff can carry on enjoying themselves without my negativity added to the mix.
Spoiler:

In summary - never assume that your personal opinion is the majority, particularly when all evidence points to the contrary. And it's a hobby. Hobbies are supposed to be enjoyable. If you're not enjoying it, you're doing something wrong, and would be better off changing that rather than insisting that the company making the wildly successful product you personally don't like should change what they're doing.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 GoldenHorde wrote:
We know why GW attempted finecast. Increase margins $$$

Yes, and no. They made the change to 'Fine'cast because tin prices were wildly volatile and IIRC had increased exponentially in a very short time, making large scale metal model production much more risky. And the common scuttlebutt at the time (which admittedly may not be true, just internet chatter) was that 'Fine'cast was rushed out because it leaked early and GW wanted to stay on top of the wave, despite it not actually being ready for release - they had the choice (allegedly) of pushing out a product and hoping for the best, or waiting to test it more completely and losing some of the momentum from the initial reveal. The skyrocketing tin prices forced their hand, and once they had made the change it would have likely been too expensive to change back.

For all its faults, 'Fine'cast as a concept, for what it was intended to do, was good. The end result was, IMO, a mistake brought on by hubris (Kirby's belief that GW's customers would buy whatever they chose to release) and a too-short development time. That doesn't invalidate every other bit of progress that GW have made. Every company makes mistakes, and they're often mistakes that in hindsight to the armchair critic seem obvious. See: New Coke.

You vote False, but I would consider this to be succeeding in spite of itself because of the value of things done a long time ago…


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
 jeff white wrote:

Regardless, poll results as of now are currently pretty strongly in the True column…

59% out of 82 poll responses isn't a strong result. At best it's a very slim majority. Strong would be 70-80% out of 100-200 responses.

Margins have slimmed, now 55 to 45% True. A significant margin, I would argue, for its falling square in the middle.


a ten percent margin isn't all that signfcigent, maybe you should take a statistics course... first off it's not a huuge differance statisticly, second of all any statician would look at these forums and say that the selection bias in a dakkadakka poll is pretty major. dude there's no fething science to a dakka dakka poll, it's just the opinions of a buncha old grognards who use an internet forum


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 10:33:41


Post by: Strg Alt


GW as an abusive spouse that insults you every day (price hikes), destroys your DVD collection (removal of WHFB) and to which you gladly crawl back to in order to kiss her feet (reintroduction of Old World) once again?

It always needs TWO persons involved for such a dynamic so GW is only to blame for 50%. Every consumer with a spine left for alternatives (in my case 9th Age) a long while ago.

About 40K:
GW seems to me like a single mother with multiple kids who I meet on a date. She insists that I pay for her brats (new editions with new codices) like a good simp would do in order to be able to spend quality time with her. But I just say "Nope" and continue to mind my own business (Oldhammer) which keeps both my sanity and wallet intact.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 10:51:02


Post by: BrianDavion


 Strg Alt wrote:
GW as an abusive spouse that insults you every day (price hikes), destroys your DVD collection (removal of WHFB) and to which you gladly crawl back to in order to kiss her feet (reintroduction of Old World) once again?

It always needs TWO persons involved for such a dynamic so GW is only to blame for 50%. Every consumer with a spine left for alternatives (in my case 9th Age) a long while ago.

About 40K:
GW seems to me like a single mother with multiple kids who I meet on a date. She insists that I pay for her brats (new editions with new codices) like a good simp would do in order to be able to spend quality time with her. But I just say "Nope" and continue to mind my own business (Oldhammer) which keeps both my sanity and wallet intact.


yet you still take every oppertunity to post on the 40k forums. continuing the "Beaten spouse" analogy, thats like the spouse who can't quit talking about their ex-spouse.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 10:57:55


Post by: insaniak


BrianDavion wrote:
...continuing the "Beaten spouse" analogy,...

Can we just, you know... not?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 11:04:41


Post by: Deadnight


 Strg Alt wrote:
GW as an abusive spouse that insults you every day (price hikes), destroys your DVD collection (removal of WHFB) and to which you gladly crawl back to in order to kiss her feet (reintroduction of Old World) once again?

It always needs TWO persons involved for such a dynamic so GW is only to blame for 50%. Every consumer with a spine left for alternatives (in my case 9th Age) a long while ago.



Insulting? Not really - if I don't like it I don't buy it. I've been called worse things by fellow gamers to be fair. I mean - spineless? Really? Because I happen to like primaris and the reimaginings of the specialist games? That's not 'spineless'.

Like what you like. Play 9th Age if it makes you happy. Wfb never did anything for me I'm.afraid
so its never a game I'm gonna miss. Honestly, I'm supportive though - in my mind, making the game 'your own' like that is one of the most productive ways of keeping your hobby healthy. Liking the other stuff isn't bad though - just remember that.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 11:07:04


Post by: Tyel


 jeff white wrote:
I wonder how much of the loss of interest in the Star Wars universe had to do with Disney fracking the frack out of the Star Wars "lore" with their newer Rey-based movies, perhaps in much the same way that GW has split its fanbase with the introduction of (the heretic) Cawl and (his man-servant of heresy) Bob Girlyman?


I'm not really sure the evidence stacks up.

If Disney failed, its that they comprehensively failed to expand Star Wars lore. I don't care about prequel ships. I'm not sure there's anything interesting in the sequels either.
So I'm stuck with X-Wings, Tie Fighters, the Millennium Falcon etc. Which unsurprisingly gets old if you play it enough. Which basically means the game has a shelf life. It can survive with new players coming in - but if the old players are bored and checking out, that usually dries up.

So yes, to upset you, part of GW's success is Primaris. It keeps the setting alive - and someone somewhere is buying those models.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 11:55:15


Post by: a_typical_hero


Guys, can we please stop with the abusive spouse analogy? No matter how hard you try, it will never make sense, just like your poor examples.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 12:11:26


Post by: Vatsetis


Its has certainly lead to very bad taste territory.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 12:17:58


Post by: Polonius


Yeah, I think Primaris were a brilliant bit of business. Space Marines have long been the cash cow for GW, but the range was fully plastic and already full of super niche new units like Centurions and Stalkers. Sure, they could update a few of the older kits like Scouts and Terminators, but they went big with a completely new line of dudes. It was also coupled with the biggest actual move forward with the lore in decades, and it's worked out really well for GW.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 12:22:27


Post by: Gert


 jeff white wrote:
Margins have slimmed, now 55 to 45% True. A significant margin, I would argue, for its falling square in the middle.

As others have said, 10% is not a significant margin. You have a minority opinion at best.

 jeff white wrote:
I wonder how much of the loss of interest in the Star Wars universe had to do with Disney fracking the frack out of the Star Wars "lore" with their newer Rey-based movies, perhaps in much the same way that GW has split its fanbase with the introduction of (the heretic) Cawl and (his man-servant of heresy) Bob Girlyman?

Very little considering that even before Mando, Star Wars was and is still one of the most popular franchises in the world. The sequels were still objectively popular, successful movies and overall I would say the general reception was good and the justified anger was due to the movies not really sticking to a plan rather than anything else (note I say justified because being mad that a woman or POC was made an important character is not justified).
I can't comment on X-Wing specifically but am I correct in understanding that the models come pre-painted? If so I think that could be a factor in people not taking it up as a hobby. People love their custom paint schemes after all.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 12:35:11


Post by: Skinnereal


 Gert wrote:
I can't comment on X-Wing specifically but am I correct in understanding that the models come pre-painted? If so I think that could be a factor in people not taking it up as a hobby. People love their custom paint schemes after all.
Yes, X-Wing models are pre-painted.
But, people also like iconic and canon schemes. Po's X-Wing was released as a model, as were lots of other individual paintjobs. People can re-paint their models, but that doesn't happen a lot.

Painting models and the 'grey-horde' are a big issue for some people. If they get annoyed that they are unable to paint well enough for their own tastes, or are the type to not want to see unpainted models on the other side of the table, this is for them.

There is a store in my city that still has an X-Wing games evening. It isn't dead as a game around here, but not far off.
Though, from the point of view of a FLGS (without gaming tables) I buy from, there is quite a lot of demand from home-gamers.


As for GW, they are moving the 40k story along a little bit, but seem to have lost any of the original meaning or tone of the background. After decades of retcons and re-writes, it doesn't feel like RT set out.
Maybe I'm just too old to 'get it' any more, but I'll still play 40k, Kill Team, AI, Necromunda, BSF, AoS, Underworlds, and Blood Bowl.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 14:00:18


Post by: jeff white


 Gert wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
Margins have slimmed, now 55 to 45% True. A significant margin, I would argue, for its falling square in the middle.

As others have said, 10% is not a significant margin. You have a minority opinion at best.
Spoiler:

 jeff white wrote:
I wonder how much of the loss of interest in the Star Wars universe had to do with Disney fracking the frack out of the Star Wars "lore" with their newer Rey-based movies, perhaps in much the same way that GW has split its fanbase with the introduction of (the heretic) Cawl and (his man-servant of heresy) Bob Girlyman?

Very little considering that even before Mando, Star Wars was and is still one of the most popular franchises in the world. The sequels were still objectively popular, successful movies and overall I would say the general reception was good and the justified anger was due to the movies not really sticking to a plan rather than anything else (note I say justified because being mad that a woman or POC was made an important character is not justified).
I can't comment on X-Wing specifically but am I correct in understanding that the models come pre-painted? If so I think that could be a factor in people not taking it up as a hobby. People love their custom paint schemes after all.


Dude, do you even read what is written, or do you just rip off what seems right given some prejudice so you cannot help yourself attacking?

I wrote that the results are significant for the fact that they show a split right down the middle. How can this POSSIBLY be a minority opinion, when it is an objective fracking fact?

Jeebus, ... just wow.

About the "abusive spouse" analogy, it was part of the originally quoted text from the Youtube comments. Asking people to stop saying things that make you feel bad is no way to come to terms with those feelings... some might say that sticking heads in sand is evidence of denial, but whatever. The fact is that the words and the image are out there and in common use. Maybe different people have different experiences. Should we forbid that these people express their experiences in the terms that they feel most effective? I say no, but I am not a fan of the cancel culture that is all the rage these days.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
a_typical_hero wrote:
Guys, can we please stop with the abusive spouse analogy? No matter how hard you try, it will never make sense, just like your poor examples.

Regarding that abusive spouse stuff, if it doesn't fit your experience, say so. Others seem to feel that it fits theirs... Is your intention to deny them the validity of their experiences, or simply to deny them their expression of these experiences?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tyel wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
I wonder how much of the loss of interest in the Star Wars universe had to do with Disney fracking the frack out of the Star Wars "lore" with their newer Rey-based movies, perhaps in much the same way that GW has split its fanbase with the introduction of (the heretic) Cawl and (his man-servant of heresy) Bob Girlyman?


I'm not really sure the evidence stacks up.

If Disney failed, its that they comprehensively failed to expand Star Wars lore. I don't care about prequel ships. I'm not sure there's anything interesting in the sequels either.
So I'm stuck with X-Wings, Tie Fighters, the Millennium Falcon etc. Which unsurprisingly gets old if you play it enough. Which basically means the game has a shelf life. It can survive with new players coming in - but if the old players are bored and checking out, that usually dries up.

So yes, to upset you, part of GW's success is Primaris. It keeps the setting alive - and someone somewhere is buying those models.


Thanks for this. Very informative for me, as I am not a Star Wars player...

That said, what makes you think that I am "upset" by the fact that some people are buying restartes? More heretics for me to cleanse with fire. Some of the models are even good... the jump dudes with the assault cannons are ridiculous, as well as most of the other tricksy numarines spawned by that heretic Cawl, but they all burn, too. What is to be upset about?

I get the feeling that some people bring hostility to these discussions, and then project this hostility on others who they presume to hold certain contrary positions, thereby denying the nuance of different positions and effectively putting discussants into these little boxes of prejudice, thereby burdening those others - in this case, me - with the task of getting out of these boxes in order to communicate with those prejudicial others clearly, at all. Uhff...

So, to this point I try. But, after things get hopeless, I suppose that this is what the ignore button is for...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 15:24:02


Post by: oni


Warmachine & Hordes = Failure!
Why? Because Privateer Press catered almost exclusively to the competitive players. Doing this narrowed the customer base, fostered an incredibly toxic community (the worst I've ever encountered) and created a barrier to entry which resulted in no new players entering the game. Rather then correct course, Privateer Press planted their feet and ultimately killed their game and their business.

There is a lesson to be learned from PP's mistakes. I hope GW payed attention because they're presently on the same course that killed Privateer Press. GW is not immune to that same fate. If new players are not continually entering the game, the game will inevitably die.

X-Wing = Failure!
X-Wing was never going to stand the test of time. It had too much stacked against it.
1. FFG is a gak company that whores licenses for only as long as it remains profitable with zero effort. The very moment FFG might need to put forth a little effort to keep a line profitable, it's full on abandon ship. They're notorious for doing this.
2. The Star Wars universe is finite and cannot be expanded upon except through official channels outside of FFG's purview. Once FFG ran out of content there was no where left to go, nothing left to do and so the game inevitably died. This issue was obvious from day one, but far too many people were all "ER ME GERD! STER WERS!" "TAKE MY MONEY!". FFG knew this, capitalized on it, then cut and run. Thanks for all the fish. It's what FFG does.

So for now, GW trudges on because fans of the IP have a deep investment in it (love, money, time, etc.), but do the wrong things, cater to the wrong people for too long and the consequences will be severe. There's a fan base albeit dwindling that still values what makes W40K great, they're still the ones keeping this machine going, but can only hang to hope for a finite amount of time. Hope that GW will recognize and rectify the issue that the people they've turned their ear to for design assistance are too heavily bias and have led GW astray. (i.e. the Inner Circle play-testers have hijacked the game and are actively trying to transform W40K into an E-sport. Mike Brandt = The New Matt Ward).



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 17:20:41


Post by: Strg Alt


BrianDavion wrote:
 Strg Alt wrote:
GW as an abusive spouse that insults you every day (price hikes), destroys your DVD collection (removal of WHFB) and to which you gladly crawl back to in order to kiss her feet (reintroduction of Old World) once again?

It always needs TWO persons involved for such a dynamic so GW is only to blame for 50%. Every consumer with a spine left for alternatives (in my case 9th Age) a long while ago.

About 40K:
GW seems to me like a single mother with multiple kids who I meet on a date. She insists that I pay for her brats (new editions with new codices) like a good simp would do in order to be able to spend quality time with her. But I just say "Nope" and continue to mind my own business (Oldhammer) which keeps both my sanity and wallet intact.


yet you still take every oppertunity to post on the 40k forums. continuing the "Beaten spouse" analogy, thats like the spouse who can't quit talking about their ex-spouse.


Triggered?

I can enjoy Oldhammer as much as I want without GW getting a single dime from me. Even on this forum. Mind-blown!

It's clear that GW's white knights don't like it but they need to learn that they don't have a monopoly on it just because they obediently waste their money on each new edition.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 17:32:52


Post by: Racerguy180


Polonius wrote:Yeah, I think Primaris were a brilliant bit of business. Space Marines have long been the cash cow for GW, but the range was fully plastic and already full of super niche new units like Centurions and Stalkers. Sure, they could update a few of the older kits like Scouts and Terminators, but they went big with a completely new line of dudes. It was also coupled with the biggest actual move forward with the lore in decades, and it's worked out really well for GW.


I stopped playing 40k when my Squats were...well squatted. 8th & Primaris brought me back. But it didn't take long(SM2.0) for me to recognize good ol' GW for what they are, OUT FOR MY $€£¥! Which they're kinda supposed to.

The models are excellent(albeit limited pose) but with some elbow grease and a bunch of tacticus armoured intercessors, you can have quite the variety of poses. Now that's cool for Primaris but when other ranges get the limited pose style of kit(looking at my snaggas) the exposed skin make for a harder proposition. Not impossible or even really difficult, just not nearly as easy as it used to be(in plastic).

But the game since 2.0 has been on a downward spiral of overly complicated super powerful combos & 9th has quadruple downed on that.
I still play it but we do open war deck, matched play pts(but no MP restrisctions)and fluffy(how ever powerful it may be). so I've been told that I don't really play 40k. if that's the case I'm glad I don't then.

As long as the models look good, I'll buy them.
As long as the lore is "good", I'll read it.
As long as the rules suck, I won't buy them.
When the above change for the worse I'll just continue as I was before I came back into the fold. Giving them absolutely $€£¥0!


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 17:52:12


Post by: Polonius


 oni wrote:
Warmachine & Hordes = Failure!
snip

X-Wing = Failure!


I think there are plenty of ancillary reasons for the failures of those two games, but I think they share a common one: games (all games, really) need to either find new customers or sell more stuff to existing customers. the extra stuff can either be new, or "revised" old stuff. D&D does both, but sells everybody a new edition every decade or so. Magic keeps churning out sets. Warhammer keeps adding units to armies while also updating old models.

GW is somewhat unique in that very little of it's product (at least in terms of miniatures) is obsolete, while also operating successfully while keeping the full range for sale. WMH and X-wing hit the limits of adding stuff for different reasons, WMH because the range just became overwhelming for retail channels to stock, and X-wing because there are only so many ship designs. X-wing attempted to cash in on a second edition which seemed to no go over super well, so it's stuck. WMH can and does add stuff, but even it's fan base thinks it needs pruning.

It's a really interesting phenomenon, because to keep a community engaged you need to sell them new stuff, which is easier for companies that primarily sell rules (like WOTC) vs. companies that primarily sell models.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 17:56:38


Post by: Racerguy180


 Polonius wrote:
 oni wrote:
Warmachine & Hordes = Failure!
snip

X-Wing = Failure!

GW is somewhat unique in that very little of it's product (at least in terms of miniatures) is obsolete, while also operating successfully while keeping the full range for sale.


I play with my RTB-01's so definitely not obsolete. Just wish my Chaplain w power sword still was a legit loadout.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 18:06:50


Post by: Daedalus81


 Polonius wrote:
It's a really interesting phenomenon, because to keep a community engaged you need to sell them new stuff, which is easier for companies that primarily sell rules (like WOTC) vs. companies that primarily sell models.


Yea that's been my concern for GW. When do they finally run out of ideas? Seems like they're flush with them, but the release schedule is so heavy that it made people think AT and AI were dead when they didn't get timely releases.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 18:12:45


Post by: Sim-Life


 oni wrote:
Warmachine & Hordes = Failure!
Why? Because Privateer Press catered almost exclusively to the competitive players. Doing this narrowed the customer base, fostered an incredibly toxic community (the worst I've ever encountered) and created a barrier to entry which resulted in no new players entering the game. Rather then correct course, Privateer Press planted their feet and ultimately killed their game and their business.

There is a lesson to be learned from PP's mistakes. I hope GW payed attention because they're presently on the same course that killed Privateer Press. GW is not immune to that same fate. If new players are not continually entering the game, the game will inevitably die.



That isn't even close to what happened. Privateer Press/WMH died because they made a series of very stupid mistakes at the worst possible time including but not limited to:
- hailing a new edition as having 5 years of playtesting then launching it with broken rules
- saying the broken rules are working as intended, insulting players when they told them it was dumb then backtracking on it
- claiming all the factions are totally balanced when they weren't even close
- having a whole faction (Skorne) be nearly unplayable
- forcing the use of theme lists which lead to
- uneven release of theme lists for factions
- theme lists were incredibly restrictive
- theme lists bascially became an exercise in getting as many free models as possible
- theme lists that wrote themselves
- public playtesting was a disorganised mess
- gutting the official forums
- ending the Press Ganger programme


And they did all this RIGHT as GW launched 8th Ed. Mk,3 is actually a solid game, it's just that theme lists dragged it down and everyone hates them, but they're sticking with it. This isn't even discussing the inflated prices PP charge for models and their awful distribution outside of America. Not to mention that the higher ups of the company were/are allegedly even more incompetent than GWs, except GW is publicly traded whereas the PP management have no one to appease, so they can keep making bad mistakes and blame someone/thing else.

Now Steamforged and Guild Ball? According to SFG themselves what you posted is what killed that game. Blaming the players for your game failing like they did is never a good look but I didn't play Guild Ball so I don't know enough about it to know if it's true or not.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 18:20:03


Post by: Strg Alt


Racerguy180 wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
 oni wrote:
Warmachine & Hordes = Failure!
snip

X-Wing = Failure!

GW is somewhat unique in that very little of it's product (at least in terms of miniatures) is obsolete, while also operating successfully while keeping the full range for sale.


I play with my RTB-01's so definitely not obsolete. Just wish my Chaplain w power sword still was a legit loadout.


I still have a Techmarine from RT without a servo arm but with a tool box.

Solution:
Upon opening the tool box a servo arm reaches out to be used. Like in those Sunday morning cartoons of "Inspector Gadget."


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 20:15:04


Post by: jeff white


Poll now 56% True, 44% False, and stable at that split.

Interesting result.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 20:22:54


Post by: dubman


well,

Warminiatures blog explains,


alot , for example everybody can name around 10 or more Skaven

soldier units,


but,


its not the point, for playing Warhammer , you need also your army


and somebody to fight this battle


also, i think - the tournament is not a role playing game thing


even, knowing alot of armies, for Warhammer fantasy


you still need, your army and - it fails in this point,





Automatically Appended Next Post:

its this one

warminiatures wordpress


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 20:55:35


Post by: Tyel


 Sim-Life wrote:

- forcing the use of theme lists which lead to
- uneven release of theme lists for factions
- theme lists were incredibly restrictive
- theme lists bascially became an exercise in getting as many free models as possible
- theme lists that wrote themselves


I think this regularly gets described by people online as "catering to the competitive players" - even if there isn't really anything competitive about it.
Its more like... the Dark Eldarification of people's collections backed with late 7th edition Formation Level Bonuses. You could just not have the bonuses, but then you were obviously screwed against someone who did.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 21:00:52


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


I note that the title question and the question in the comment are somewhat different.

The apparent Youtube comment you based the thread upon offered that the only reason "we" do not leave in droves is due to the lore. Since you asked in black and white terms this is a false statement. Lore is important but it is not the only reason and lore itself has evolved over time. Some of those lore changes have made people quite upset.

Is the thread about GW's business practices? Your somewhat leading thread title asks if "GW succeeds in spite of itself." Also false. GW makes mistakes - every entity does. They are also a successful business that has found ways to survive and thrive.

I believe that their success can be attributed to a number of factors within their control. They do indeed have engaging lore that they maintain and evolve. They have great models. They have good, accessible rules. They engage with the community. I have made some value judgements, but it seems from their sales that enough people like the lore, models and rules. I completely accept that these may not be everybody's cup of tea. The market is not a consensus activity.

They do indeed have the advantage of momentum - you can get a game in at pretty much any FLGS or gaming community. So I do agree in a way with the Youtube commenter that today's success can be drawn in part to the work done 30 years ago. GW has not, however, sat idly on their laurels (some might have preferred that). They have maintained that momentum, admittedly with varying success, since then. They have shown that they can "murder their darlings" when required. They have pivoted production (sometimes painfully) as well as games and lore. Look at the situation 2014 to 2016 compared to now. Could it fail in the future? Sure. They will need their agility and willingness to murder their darlings in the coming decades. Time will tell.

Again, an enterprise does not have to be perfect to be successful. Risk is part of the business. Ultimately gamers will make personal decisions whether to participate with their time and money. Those who enjoy collecting, painting and playing 40K do so for their very valid individual reasons. Those who stay away also do so for their very valid personal reasons. You can't please everybody all of the time.




True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 21:46:15


Post by: a_typical_hero


 jeff white wrote:
a_typical_hero wrote:
Guys, can we please stop with the abusive spouse analogy? No matter how hard you try, it will never make sense, just like your poor examples.

Regarding that abusive spouse stuff, if it doesn't fit your experience, say so. Others seem to feel that it fits theirs... Is your intention to deny them the validity of their experiences, or simply to deny them their expression of these experiences?
"You" not liking how a toy soldier company changes their game rules, expands their setting, releases models or rises their prices is not at all comparable with an abusive relationship and you have no fething clue what you are talking about is what I'm saying. You can call it an abusive relationship, you might feel like it, but that doesn't make it true. People who use this analogy to make their opinion sound more valid should inform themselves better, instead of repeating that crap over and over again in different threads.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 22:09:49


Post by: CEO Kasen


 insaniak wrote:

Can we just, you know... not?


It's really unfortunate that the given analogy is as pointed and eye-catching as it is, but it does shorthand the concept excellently, and the analogy is right in the OP, so of course people are going to keep bringing it up throughout the thread. I think the best way to get people off of it would be to suggest an alternative, but I can't immediately think of a less controversial analogy that pithily describes having a complex, seemingly irrational attachment to an entity that isn't treating one well.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 22:34:21


Post by: Polonius


 CEO Kasen wrote:
It's really unfortunate that the given analogy is as pointed and eye-catching as it is, but it does shorthand the concept excellently, and the analogy is right in the OP, so of course people are going to keep bringing it up throughout the thread. I think the best way to get people off of it would be to suggest an alternative, but I can't immediately think of a less controversial analogy that pithily describes having a complex, seemingly irrational attachment to an entity that isn't treating one well.


It's sort of like how saying "I got raped" is a pithy shorthand for losing a game badly, but sours really quickly if you have any experience with actual sexual assault.

GW and it's customers is not an abusive relationship. Customers are free to leave at any time, they don't live in fear, and GW doesn't demean or hurt customers. It makes products that some customers don't like for prices they find too high. That's not abuse, that's capitalisms.

If anything, I would say use the term "toxic relationship," because that's been watered down to the point of meaninglessness.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 22:46:15


Post by: Racerguy180


I would counter that some people feel like they can't leave(for whatever reason) so for them it does "feel" like.

Now I would also say "grow the feth up" to them but unfortunately it's nigh on impossible task.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 22:50:01


Post by: Polonius


Racerguy180 wrote:
I would counter that some people feel like they can't leave(for whatever reason) so for them it does "feel" like.

Now I would also say "grow the feth up" to them but unfortunately it's nigh on impossible task.


Then what they're describing is something more akin to compulsion or addiction, which again, not really, but we play fast and loose with psychological symptoms.

Not having the self control to not buy toys is not the same as living in fear of the person you should love the most.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 23:18:09


Post by: BrianDavion


Racerguy180 wrote:
I would counter that some people feel like they can't leave(for whatever reason) so for them it does "feel" like.

Now I would also say "grow the feth up" to them but unfortunately it's nigh on impossible task.


if you feel you can't leave a HOBBY you dislike then yeah "grow the feth up" is absolutely the right response. Because people with that emntality it's clear what their "End game" is, they'll sit there and play and bitch whine and mona and subtly (or overtly) suggest everyone else should play another game instead. but if no ones intreasted it's not gonna get better.

It's the gaming equivilant of saying you'll just keep shoving your dick into a pencil sharpener until you can find someone to have sex with. you could just NOT shove your dick into a pencil sharperner and I dunno... try tinder?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/12 23:33:47


Post by: soviet13


 Polonius wrote:
 CEO Kasen wrote:
It's really unfortunate that the given analogy is as pointed and eye-catching as it is, but it does shorthand the concept excellently, and the analogy is right in the OP, so of course people are going to keep bringing it up throughout the thread. I think the best way to get people off of it would be to suggest an alternative, but I can't immediately think of a less controversial analogy that pithily describes having a complex, seemingly irrational attachment to an entity that isn't treating one well.


It's sort of like how saying "I got raped" is a pithy shorthand for losing a game badly, but sours really quickly if you have any experience with actual sexual assault.

GW and it's customers is not an abusive relationship. Customers are free to leave at any time, they don't live in fear, and GW doesn't demean or hurt customers. It makes products that some customers don't like for prices they find too high. That's not abuse, that's capitalisms.

If anything, I would say use the term "toxic relationship," because that's been watered down to the point of meaninglessness.


Thank you. Yes, the analogy in the OP is extremely tasteless.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 01:19:54


Post by: BlaxicanX


Yes and no. My assertion would be that Games Workshop "failed forward" so to speak from arguably 5th edition through 7th (and 5th was my favorite edition), but from 8th onward they succeeded due to clever business decisions.

You can't really argue that they were being carried by too big to fail momentum when by all accounts they were in a financial death spiral by the end of 7th.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 01:23:19


Post by: CEO Kasen


 Polonius wrote:


GW and it's customers is not an abusive relationship. Customers are free to leave at any time, they don't live in fear, and GW doesn't demean or hurt customers. It makes products that some customers don't like for prices they find too high. That's not abuse, that's capitalisms.

If anything, I would say use the term "toxic relationship," because that's been watered down to the point of meaninglessness.


I agree even the original analogy is hyperbolic, but it resonated with me pretty ferociously. It's harder to give up emotional ties to 40K than it seems like it should be and giving it up for dead after over a (noncontiguous) decade of actual hobby engagement felt like ending a... Well, 'Toxic relationship.' That isn't too bad. I assume by 'meaninglessness' you mean 'noncontroversiality' rather than nonfunctionality for definitional purposes (e.g. "Mary Sue")

I think it's entirely plausible that GW is at least in part coasting on that attachment, because they sure aren't coasting on having a good, playable game.

Whether capitalism itself is abusive or not is a bit beyond the scope of this particular thread.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 01:28:42


Post by: BlaxicanX


 CEO Kasen wrote:
I think it's entirely plausible that GW is at least in part coasting on that attachment, because they sure aren't coasting on having a good, playable game.
I'm really curious how you could even begin to quantify this opinion though. It seems like some pretty massive cognitive dissonance to try to assert that the majority of GW customers continue to play and buy 40K because they're just addicted for "reasons" and not because... they think it's fun.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 02:56:32


Post by: Tyran


GW owes a lot of its success to both its IP and the sheer momentum it has.

But neither came out of nowhere, the IP has been continuesly growing with each rulebook, codex, novel, video-game, comic and animation.

Same with momentum, GW is the largest company in the market because they build a large and interconnected system of production, logistics, stores, marketing, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
GW isn't too big to fail, GW isn't a particularly large company, and it is minuscule compared to the true too big to fail monsters of the corporate world.

But it is too big to fail quickly, and that serves as a security net that allows GW to survive mistakes that would kill their competition.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 03:00:35


Post by: CEO Kasen


 BlaxicanX wrote:
 CEO Kasen wrote:
I think it's entirely plausible that GW is at least in part coasting on that attachment, because they sure aren't coasting on having a good, playable game.
I'm really curious how you could even begin to quantify this opinion though. It seems like some pretty massive cognitive dissonance to try to assert that the majority of GW customers continue to play and buy 40K because they're just addicted for "reasons" and not because... they think it's fun.


I'm not 100% sure you're attributing this stance to me - as it would not make sense to do so - but I wish to clarify that I claim no certainty in the percentage, or whether this is even the majority, hence my deliberate use of "At least in part" and "Entirely plausible." It is difficult to know these things for certain. Any major company likely has departments devoted to trying to figure these things out, they don't publish results so far as I'm aware, and even they don't have a perfect record. One disgruntled commenter on a board using a communications paradigm firmly in the 2000's will not a study make, nor will polling 250 of them for opinions.

I state with what little certainty I can plausibly have that I do think that 40K's popularity is self-feeding, and that they have some critical mass between a network of vast lore, media interactive and not, gaming culture, social structures and storefronts already devoted to the game keeps it afloat - and I state that because 9th edition is quite possibly the worst actual wargame I can remember ever attempting to play,* and were a game's success suddenly decided on how good the game was alone, it would tank overnight. The fact that my experiences were, with one exception, pretty awful does not make it impossible for people to have unironic fun with it, but for the sake of what shreds of faith I still have in humanity I cannot imagine that what GW is doing is the best possible approach for all involved.

*
Spoiler:
The statement is actually not hyperbole, but may be misleading without a few caveats:
A) The list of different tabletop wargames I've physically played in memory isn't incredibly long; Maybe a dozen and change, some of those decidedly not recently, and depending to some extent on what qualifies as a wargame;
B) I did some googling to see what wargames were widely considered worst - so, no, I didn't play the initial release of Age of Sigmar, nor 7th edition 40K, nor did I play any of the many awful historical wargames that clearly exist.
C) My memory can be unreliable and I'm sure there's a title drop that'll make me go "Oh yeah, at least 40k isn't Drop Squid Frontline 3rd Edition," or that nostalgia might be tinting other childhood games.
D) Price is a factor.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Tyran wrote:

GW isn't too big to fail, GW isn't a particularly large company, and it is minuscule compared to the true too big to fail monsters of the corporate world.

But it is too big to fail quickly, and that serves as a security net that allows GW to survive mistakes that would kill their competition.


This seems like the case. They could see sales dip, then they could restructure, get a new CEO, release a new edition, claim they've 'changed,' and turn things around again. They survived 7th, and I've heard horror stories about 7th; they'd have to release multiple poorly-received editions consecutively whilst being caught on camera clubbing endangered penguins in order to actually detonate.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 04:02:04


Post by: BlaxicanX


The stance I'm addressing is the implication that GWs popularity isn't related to the game being good and playable. The hedged bet "at least in part" is nice but ultimately irrelevant when you're making a very specific judgement on the quality of the game itself.

Either 40K is wildly popular because it is a product that the large majority of fans enjoy and find fun and engaging, or it is wildly popular for some a different reason.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 05:49:17


Post by: kodos


 CEO Kasen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

GW isn't too big to fail, GW isn't a particularly large company, and it is minuscule compared to the true too big to fail monsters of the corporate world.

But it is too big to fail quickly, and that serves as a security net that allows GW to survive mistakes that would kill their competition.


This seems like the case. They could see sales dip, then they could restructure, get a new CEO, release a new edition, claim they've 'changed,' and turn things around again. They survived 7th, and I've heard horror stories about 7th; they'd have to release multiple poorly-received editions consecutively whilst being caught on camera clubbing endangered penguins in order to actually detonate.


Put it in a different way, they are not too big to fail, but with different main games that are played by different communities and an Edition cycle that is long enough to react, they need to mess up more than 1 game and more than 1 big community to fail

GW struggled in the past, but never with all of their games at the same time because mistakes made with 1 game were not made again with the other although a similar marketing might have been planned (but also happend the other way as they got away with a mistake in 1 game, doing the same again in another game did not work out)

GW is a big company with the same problems that others have of one department not knowing what the other is going to do but the overal strategy being decided by the upper managment for all, no matter if it fits the game/community

So the only way GW can fail is the managment not getting when mistakes were made or get the wrong conclusions from their mistakes. With Edition cycles being shorter, also the time to react is and with getting more mainstream at the same time social media is getting big means much more coverage of bad decisions


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 06:32:54


Post by: jeff white


 BlaxicanX wrote:
The stance I'm addressing is the implication that GWs popularity isn't related to the game being good and playable. The hedged bet "at least in part" is nice but ultimately irrelevant when you're making a very specific judgement on the quality of the game itself.

Either 40K is wildly popular because it is a product that the large majority of fans enjoy and find fun and engaging, or it is wildly popular for some a different reason.

This is a false dilemma,
It would seem from results that a majority would hold the “for some different reason” which may also be “fun” but ultimately relies on (perhaps deeply emotional, hence the “toxic” “abusive” relationship language) attachments to interesting things created perhaps thirty or more years ago, and this reason is maintained in spite of recent movements perhaps including this edition of the rules and supporting print product cycle.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 06:52:40


Post by: BrianDavion


or it might just be it's wildly popular despite what the people on dakkadakka think. we are NOT a accurate sample.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 09:44:30


Post by: soviet13


Like me a lot of GW's customers are painters and modellers who don't play, but might still buy army books etc for the lore. The quality of the game itself is irrelevant to such customers. Saying 'these games are bad therefore the fanbase remains only out of inertia/compulsion' would seem to miss a lot of the reasons people are actually here.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 11:02:13


Post by: BertBert


GW sells miniatures first, that's their main product and appeal. Most of their customers are in it for the miniatures, the game is a secondary consideration both for the company and its customers.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 11:17:45


Post by: soviet13


Now if the game was better, and less cynical in its rapid replacement of books, would some of those people start playing? Yes. At least, I would be tempted. But the game can continue to be terrible forever and I will still buy plenty of models.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 11:18:28


Post by: Sim-Life


Tyel wrote:
 Sim-Life wrote:

- forcing the use of theme lists which lead to
- uneven release of theme lists for factions
- theme lists were incredibly restrictive
- theme lists bascially became an exercise in getting as many free models as possible
- theme lists that wrote themselves


I think this regularly gets described by people online as "catering to the competitive players" - even if there isn't really anything competitive about it.
Its more like... the Dark Eldarification of people's collections backed with late 7th edition Formation Level Bonuses. You could just not have the bonuses, but then you were obviously screwed against someone who did.


I don't think it catered to anyone honestly. The Irish Warmahordes scene was basically 100% competitive players and now you can count the players in the country on one hand.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 15:21:25


Post by: Not Online!!!


I am unsure, i think both elements of being to big to fail and yet still smart buissness apply.

40k has kinda lowered its stranglehold during 6th and 7th locally due to becoming worse as a game.

Otoh, it bounced back well with 8th and 9th but not completely.

However it is still the game. And that makes it kinda successfull despite its state in many cases.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 17:27:09


Post by: BlaxicanX


 jeff white wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
The stance I'm addressing is the implication that GWs popularity isn't related to the game being good and playable. The hedged bet "at least in part" is nice but ultimately irrelevant when you're making a very specific judgement on the quality of the game itself.

Either 40K is wildly popular because it is a product that the large majority of fans enjoy and find fun and engaging, or it is wildly popular for some a different reason.

This is a false dilemma,
It would seem from results that a majority would hold the “for some different reason” which may also be “fun” but ultimately relies on (perhaps deeply emotional, hence the “toxic” “abusive” relationship language) attachments to interesting things created perhaps thirty or more years ago, and this reason is maintained in spite of recent movements perhaps including this edition of the rules and supporting print product cycle.
A very easy theory to rule out, as the game has absolutely exploded with NEW players since 8th edition and AOS (which huge numbers of the old whfb vets hated). People who have been only playing the game for 3 or 4 years are not enticed by 3rd edition lore or sunk-cost fallacy.

You want to believe that the grizzled old vets are the lifeblood of this franchise, but you're wrong. 8th and 9th edition saw more new fans jump onboard then the four editions combined that predated them. 40K is currently more popular and mainstream than it has ever been at any other point in its history, that literally could not be possible if it's main customer base was addicted vets.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 19:31:09


Post by: Eldarsif


 jeff white wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
The stance I'm addressing is the implication that GWs popularity isn't related to the game being good and playable. The hedged bet "at least in part" is nice but ultimately irrelevant when you're making a very specific judgement on the quality of the game itself.

Either 40K is wildly popular because it is a product that the large majority of fans enjoy and find fun and engaging, or it is wildly popular for some a different reason.

This is a false dilemma,
It would seem from results that a majority would hold the “for some different reason” which may also be “fun” but ultimately relies on (perhaps deeply emotional, hence the “toxic” “abusive” relationship language) attachments to interesting things created perhaps thirty or more years ago, and this reason is maintained in spite of recent movements perhaps including this edition of the rules and supporting print product cycle.


You got the result of Dakkadakka users who bothered answering. Dakkadakka users do not represent the Warhammer ecosphere at large. I am probably the only person in my FLGS that semi-regularly go on Dakkadakka because I enjoy the endless whining and self-flagellation of people here; although as of late it is reaching toxic levels so I go here less. The rest of the playerbase is just enjoying the game. They are actually having fun which does appear to be an alien emotion on Dakka considering the threads.

But please, carry on.





True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 19:31:19


Post by: Turnip Jedi




Now Steamforged and Guild Ball? According to SFG themselves what you posted is what killed that game. Blaming the players for your game failing like they did is never a good look but I didn't play Guild Ball so I don't know enough about it to know if it's true or not.


Whilst theres an element of truth to that, it kind of gloss' over every mistake SFG made and how the loyal playerbase stuck with it despite stock shortages, delays and all sorts of other fork wittery developer side, then decide that chasing the already crowded RPG mini market because the money men said pretty much means I'm unlikely to ever consider giving them money


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 19:53:13


Post by: Racerguy180


Eldarsif wrote:

You got the result of Dakkadakka users who bothered answering. Dakkadakka users do not represent the Warhammer ecosphere at large. I am probably the only person in my FLGS that semi-regularly go on Dakkadakka because I enjoy the endless whining and self-flagellation of people here; although as of late it is reaching toxic levels so I go here less. The rest of the playerbase is just enjoying the game. They are actually having fun which does appear to be an alien emotion on Dakka considering the threads.

But please, carry on.




I am the only one @ my flgs as well.

One of the reasons I could give 2 gaks about how toxic it is here, is it's kinda funny. That entertainment keeps me here.

Whenever we are talking about the latest scuttlebutt on 40k, I generally quote(literally showing them the post) some of they're colourful posters here and the shock/hilarious looks are golden. Overly positive or horrendously Negative, dakka never let's us down.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 21:08:00


Post by: jeff white


 BlaxicanX wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
The stance I'm addressing is the implication that GWs popularity isn't related to the game being good and playable. The hedged bet "at least in part" is nice but ultimately irrelevant when you're making a very specific judgement on the quality of the game itself.

Either 40K is wildly popular because it is a product that the large majority of fans enjoy and find fun and engaging, or it is wildly popular for some a different reason.

This is a false dilemma,
It would seem from results that a majority would hold the “for some different reason” which may also be “fun” but ultimately relies on (perhaps deeply emotional, hence the “toxic” “abusive” relationship language) attachments to interesting things created perhaps thirty or more years ago, and this reason is maintained in spite of recent movements perhaps including this edition of the rules and supporting print product cycle.
A very easy theory to rule out, as the game has absolutely exploded with NEW players since 8th edition and AOS (which huge numbers of the old whfb vets hated). People who have been only playing the game for 3 or 4 years are not enticed by 3rd edition lore or sunk-cost fallacy.

You want to believe that the grizzled old vets are the lifeblood of this franchise, but you're wrong. 8th and 9th edition saw more new fans jump onboard then the four editions combined that predated them. 40K is currently more popular and mainstream than it has ever been at any other point in its history, that literally could not be possible if it's main customer base was addicted vets.

I cannot see how your post ‘rules out any theory’ as there is no theory. There was the use of a false dilemma. Period. Logical fact.

But, to humor you, where are your new player numbers coming from? You have sales figures I.e. who is spending what? Absolutely exploded… maybe. Do new players outnumber old? Spend more? Anyways, this is all beside the point. This was a simple poll. People offer opinions. There is no “right” answer, here.

Could 40k be more popular with GW succeeding in spite of itself? Sure. Maybe. What does your rant prove? “Literally”? Nothing, but that you are convinced of your opinion. Good for you. Thank you for contributing to this thread, in your own way.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Eldarsif wrote:
Spoiler:
 jeff white wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
The stance I'm addressing is the implication that GWs popularity isn't related to the game being good and playable. The hedged bet "at least in part" is nice but ultimately irrelevant when you're making a very specific judgement on the quality of the game itself.

Either 40K is wildly popular because it is a product that the large majority of fans enjoy and find fun and engaging, or it is wildly popular for some a different reason.

This is a false dilemma,
It would seem from results that a majority would hold the “for some different reason” which may also be “fun” but ultimately relies on (perhaps deeply emotional, hence the “toxic” “abusive” relationship language) attachments to interesting things created perhaps thirty or more years ago, and this reason is maintained in spite of recent movements perhaps including this edition of the rules and supporting print product cycle.


You got the result of Dakkadakka users who bothered answering. Dakkadakka users do not represent the Warhammer ecosphere at large. I am probably the only person in my FLGS that semi-regularly go on Dakkadakka because I enjoy the endless whining and self-flagellation of people here; although as of late it is reaching toxic levels so I go here less. The rest of the playerbase is just enjoying the game. They are actually having fun which does appear to be an alien emotion on Dakka considering the threads.

But please, carry on.

I didn’t realize that we needed your permission.

Who is whining here? Not the “vets” I think…

Did you even read the post above? What makes you think that oldhammer isn’t “fun” or that collecting models in spite of the game not being what someone wants in a game system is not “fun” or painting is not rewarding for that person who isn’t into 9th Ed?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Spoiler:
Eldarsif wrote:

You got the result of Dakkadakka users who bothered answering. Dakkadakka users do not represent the Warhammer ecosphere at large. I am probably the only person in my FLGS that semi-regularly go on Dakkadakka because I enjoy the endless whining and self-flagellation of people here; although as of late it is reaching toxic levels so I go here less. The rest of the playerbase is just enjoying the game. They are actually having fun which does appear to be an alien emotion on Dakka considering the threads.

But please, carry on.


I am the only one @ my flgs as well.

One of the reasons I could give 2 gaks about how toxic it is here, is it's kinda funny. That entertainment keeps me here.

Whenever we are talking about the latest scuttlebutt on 40k, I generally quote(literally showing them the post) some of they're colourful posters here and the shock/hilarious looks are golden. Overly positive or horrendously Negative, dakka never let's us down.

So, the “toxic” attitudes seem to be coming from one direction, and are projected onto others as if belonging to them when they do not. It is clear who is “toxic” in this thread, and this appears to be people who feel defensive because poll results are not self-confirming. Sad that civility fails so easily for some who perhaps identify a bit too strongly with “popular” opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Poll results now moving substantially toward True, currently 58% True to 42% False…


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 21:29:33


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


Jeff,

People can disagree with you. You did offer a theory that "a majority would hold for some different reason...which may also be fun but with ultimately relies on...attachments to interesting things created perhaps 30 years ago..." I think he refuted it, unless you just meant just the majority of the people who answered your poll as opposed to the wider 40K population. Your poll isn't really proving anything. A DakkaDakka poll and $1.85 are worth a medium coffee at Tim Hortons. People leave the game and people join. I am certain that the vast majority of the actual 40K gaming population joined much later than 30 years ago.

Yes, there are individuals who have an attachment to 40K from years ago that are not happy right now. You can't please everybody.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 21:35:03


Post by: jeff white


TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Jeff,

People can disagree with you. You did offer a theory that "a majority would hold for some different reason...which may also be fun but with ultimately relies on...attachments to interesting things created perhaps 30 years ago..." I think he refuted it, unless you just meant just the majority of the people who answered your poll as opposed to the wider 40K population. Your poll isn't really proving anything. A DakkaDakka poll and $1.85 are worth a medium coffee at Tim Hortons. People leave the game and people join. I am certain that the vast majority of the actual 40K gaming population joined much later than 30 years ago.

Yes, there are individuals who have an attachment to 40K from years ago that are not happy right now. You can't please everybody.

Again, there was no theory offered.

This poll is not supposed to prove anything.

I expect people to disagree, that being the point of a binary poll!

Jeebus,… does anyone study logic anymore? Is the idea of a false dilemma not taught in schools? I mean, there is no disagreement possible. It is logic. Basic critical reasoning.

But again, to humor you, can you show us numbers that suggest that the vast majority of the “gaming population” joined later than 30 yrs ago, that these same people didn’t join because of an attraction to something ultimately dependant on work done by a few people that long ago, and that this same cohort contributes more to gw success (however this is to be defined) than others who have been around that long? Then, can you please tell us all what the frack this has to do with the question of the actual poll?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 22:36:33


Post by: Stormonu


 jeff white wrote:
This morning, as I edited a paper for a journal. I listened to a few popular Youtube channel videos. One concerned what the content creator considered is good and bad about 9th edition 40K. Scrolling through the comments, I came to this one, which I paste as a direct quote, here:
This company succeeds because a long time ago some genuinely passionate people wrote some kickass lore. That is the only reason people don't leave this game in droves. Nowadays the company succeeds in spite of itself. We love the IP too much to leave and they are our abusive spouse.

Simple poll: Do you feel that this statement is True, or False?

As a follow up, I wonder how much of this opinion has to do with 9th edition 40K. Maybe some have held this opinion for a longer time? Since when? Has your opinion changed in the past? Recently? What was the reason for this change of opinion? Anything specific?

Thank you in advance for contributing to this thread in a civil and constructive manner, respecting the fact that different people get different things from different things. The purpose of this poll is simply to survey the landscape of opinions here on Dakka. As usual, I will wait until poll results are obvious before voting, and volunteering my own experience, so as not to skew responses too heavily from the beginning...


It certainly isn't true - the lore has been changed several times through the game's lifetime so far, and people still buy it.

I don't think any one thing has kept GW alive - the miniatures themselves are a huge attraction, the rules are the reason you buy more than one of the models, the lore and the stories breed interest.

I do believe the company has been predatory towards its customer base and succeeds in many areas where logically, it should be a burning dumpster fire.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/13 22:52:50


Post by: Eldarsif


So, the “toxic” attitudes seem to be coming from one direction, and are projected onto others as if belonging to them when they do not. It is clear who is “toxic” in this thread, and this appears to be people who feel defensive because poll results are not self-confirming. Sad that civility fails so easily for some who perhaps identify a bit too strongly with “popular” opinion.


Dude, you threw the first damn stone in the entire discussion with that god awful "spousal abuse" take and then you just kept piling on stones in the thread.

Again, you have my permission to continue. I want to see where this dig ends.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/14 05:47:23


Post by: BlaxicanX


 jeff white wrote:

People offer opinions. There is no “right” answer, here.[/b]
"40K is popular because vets are addicted to 40K and the game is coasting on nostalgia and the game is not popular due to being fun and engaging" is not a subjective opinion piece, it's a assertion.

And repeating that something is a false dilemma does not make it so. "40k is either popular because people enjoy it or it is popular for other reasons" is not a false dilemma.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/14 10:26:00


Post by: jeff white


 Eldarsif wrote:
So, the “toxic” attitudes seem to be coming from one direction, and are projected onto others as if belonging to them when they do not. It is clear who is “toxic” in this thread, and this appears to be people who feel defensive because poll results are not self-confirming. Sad that civility fails so easily for some who perhaps identify a bit too strongly with “popular” opinion.


Dude, you threw the first damn stone in the entire discussion with that god awful "spousal abuse" take and then you just kept piling on stones in the thread.

Again, you have my permission to continue. I want to see where this dig ends.


Umm, dude, that was not "my" "spousal abuse take"... it was from a comment to a popular Youtube video covering what the creator considers good and bad about 9th edition 40K.

Regardless, words are not 'stones'. You feel hurt, check yourself. The toxicity comes from this pain. It oozes... but thanks for sharing.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
 jeff white wrote:

People offer opinions. There is no “right” answer, here.[/b]
"40K is popular because vets are addicted to 40K and the game is coasting on nostalgia and the game is not popular due to being fun and engaging" is not a subjective opinion piece, it's a assertion.

And repeating that something is a false dilemma does not make it so. "40k is either popular because people enjoy it or it is popular for other reasons" is not a false dilemma.



Frankly, I cannot help you to think clearly. I can only ask that you look back at your original post, in which you lumped "fun" in with one side, and left it out of the other side, of your two possibilities. I countered that this was a false dilemma, because "fun" can indeed exist on both sides. Here, in this current post, you have recomposed your dilemma. Recalling the context of the original poll question, this recomposition seems to imply that enjoying 40K means enjoying 9th edition and current GW print products and so on, while other reasons (oldhammering, collecting, converting, painting) implies both not enjoying current edition rules and print products and so on, and not enjoying these other things, either... What this has to do with 'GW succeeding in spite of itself' is a bit unclear...

And this:
"40K is popular because vets are addicted to 40K and the game is coasting on nostalgia and the game is not popular due to being fun and engaging" is not a subjective opinion piece, it's a assertion.

does not belong to me, number one, and is certainly subjective, number two.

Regardless, thank you for sharing.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/14 23:08:45


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Eldarsif wrote:

Dude, you threw the first damn stone in the entire discussion with that god awful "spousal abuse" take and then you just kept piling on stones in the thread.

Again, you have my permission to continue. I want to see where this dig ends.


You do realize that is not even close to an original comparison in the 40k community at large, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Eldarsif wrote:

You got the result of Dakkadakka users who bothered answering. Dakkadakka users do not represent the Warhammer ecosphere at large. I am probably the only person in my FLGS that semi-regularly go on Dakkadakka because I enjoy the endless whining and self-flagellation of people here; although as of late it is reaching toxic levels so I go here less. The rest of the playerbase is just enjoying the game. They are actually having fun which does appear to be an alien emotion on Dakka considering the threads.

But please, carry on.


About 200 people isn't too bad a sample size for a gaming community. But I suspect that even if you got a much larger sample elsewhere, the result would be about the same. .


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/14 23:43:51


Post by: Daedalus81


 BaronIveagh wrote:
About 200 people isn't too bad a sample size for a gaming community. But I suspect that even if you got a much larger sample elsewhere, the result would be about the same. .


B&C is like a whole different world basically because it is more strictly moderated:

Keep it civil and inoffensive please. No matter your views on locations keep them to yourselves or other areas of the interweb. They are unwelcome here.


People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 04:49:04


Post by: Goose LeChance


Their shrewd business practices work, consumers will buy anyway.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 04:53:30


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Daedalus81 wrote:
People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.
Sorry, but I'm really fething sick of that attitude. It's the purest expression of toxicity in this community ("Everything at Dakka sucks!").


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 05:14:56


Post by: Racerguy180


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.
Sorry, but I'm really fething sick of that attitude. It's the purest expression of toxicity in this community ("Everything at Dakka sucks!").

Yeah, dakka may suck but it also doesn't at the same time.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 05:30:51


Post by: BlaxicanX


 jeff white wrote:

I can only ask that you look back at your original post, in which you lumped "fun" in with one side, and left it out of the other side, of your two possibilities.
Yes, as it was in response to the assertion that the game was not popular due it being good.

Recalling the context of the original poll question,
I haven't even looked at the poll. My post (which you chose to respond to) was addressing this argument:

 CEO Kasen wrote:
I think it's entirely plausible that GW is at least in part coasting on that attachment, because they sure aren't coasting on having a good, playable game.


If you don't want to defend that argument, fine, but then why are you talking to me?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
About 200 people isn't too bad a sample size for a gaming community.
It is absolutely atrocious sample size for a gaming community, especially when it doesn't factor in things like psychology (read: online communities tend to be echo chambers). The League of Legends subreddit for example is probably about 10 to 20 times larger than this board is, but Riot games has stated on more than one occasion that it is a vocal minority and basically useless as feedback for game design.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 06:20:01


Post by: CEO Kasen


 BlaxicanX wrote:


 CEO Kasen wrote:
I think it's entirely plausible that GW is at least in part coasting on that attachment, because they sure aren't coasting on having a good, playable game.


If you don't want to defend that argument, fine, but then why are you talking to me?


I'm sorry, what the hell are you talking about?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 09:22:04


Post by: Eldarsif


 BlaxicanX wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
About 200 people isn't too bad a sample size for a gaming community.
It is absolutely atrocious sample size for a gaming community, especially when it doesn't factor in things like psychology (read: online communities tend to be echo chambers). The League of Legends subreddit for example is probably about 10 to 20 times larger than this board is, but Riot games has stated on more than one occasion that it is a vocal minority and basically useless as feedback for game design.


Exactly.

Sample size 200 is atrocious when you think about the fact that a very limited age range of people actually go on old school forums like Dakkadakka. Forums are almost like a time capsule of people who grew up in the 80s and 90s with maybe a young whipper snapper that seems to accidentally sign up on here.

I think a lot of users overestimate Dakkadakka and their own importance in the Warhammer ecosphere when the Warhammer and wargaming community at large just doesn't think Dakkadakka is worth their time. There are better outlets to share your ideas and armies, and very few of them involve Dakkadakka. Facebook, instagram, reddit, and all kinds of things have superseded the old forum format. It's why Dakkadakka can often feel like a very homogenous echo chamber for a lot of negative talk about anything related to Warhammer. I think the tactics section is perhaps the most positive thing here and the one I actually do enjoy visiting still on its own merits.

I know people don't want to admit that Dakkadakka is a very negative place, but when you go onto other places you will see that a lot of negativity gets moderated out elsewhere. The AoS community on the TGA forum is a veritable paradise compared to Dakkadakka. Which is why I go to TGA to actually read up on informative and levelled discussions whereas Dakkadakka is more like enjoying a spicy episode of the Real Housewives. It's why I take bouts where I visit Dakkadakka as I can only handle a few episodes of Real Housewives at a time.

The sad thing is that this negativity - which people want to desperately deny - just makes the place unattractive for newcomers. You can claim that one is toxic for pointing out actual problems, but in the end it just reinforces the negative echo chamber and limits who actually bothers visiting this place.

...and that's a wrap for the season finale. See you all in about a month.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 09:58:46


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Yeah. Dakka has 129,671 registered accounts. This poll has 288 respondents.

The net result is ultimately meaningless.

If you go through it, you seem some odd assertions (such as “GW only take in more money because they raised their prices”) which are frankly baseless. We have free access to GW’s year end financials, and 6 month financials. Their recent growth has been frankly phenomenal, and simply does not match their price increases. Previous year’s take (so 2019-2020) was £269.7m, with profits of £90m. 2020-2021? Take was £353.2, profits of £155.7 at constant currency.

Some have, in the distant past, accused GW of cooking their books. Except, these reports in the U.K. are, by law, independently verified. So whilst there was always be a chance of some financial chicanery going on, it seems pretty low.

Do Price increases add to the takings? Absolutely they do. But they are far from being the sole factor, or even the main factor. You cannot increase your takings the way GW has solely on upping your prices - especially when they’ve largely shied away from “across the board” price rises, in favour of just making new releases a higher price point (that BT box is a joke price. Or at least I wish it was)

GW’s literal fortunes improved soon after AoS, and the reintroduction of Specialist Games. They diversified their offerings. Some games are cheaper than others (Warhammer Underworlds being a notably “cheap” alternative). They’ve absolutely nailed their terrain offerings for Necromunda, to the point where whilst I might need to spend £150 tops to get a gang, rules and what-nots, but I’ve spent considerably more on the Board Of My Dreams (which I really should crack on with assembling and painting…). They’ve expanded terrain, paints, tools etc. That’s all pennies in their pocket. And those pennies quickly add up.

For example? When I was a till monkey, we might get say, 200 transacting customers through the door in a given month. Not necessarily 200 unique people, but 200 transactions nonetheless. You can easily increase each sale with the simple question of “do you have all the paints you need?”. Nice, open question, no pressure selling, just a reminder. If that results in 200 extra paint pots being sold? At £3.70 each, that’s additional takings of £740. And that’s super doable. No, not every single one of those transaction will add a paint - but you’ll sell enough pots between them to even it out. Same with glue and brushes. Plastic glue is currently £4.50 a bottle, and something we all need eventually. If even half those 200 transactions pick some up? £450 more in the till. Same with brushes. Same with books. Same with modelling tools. Dice, measuring tapes, bells and doo-hickys, all sold in-store, all proceeds going to GW’s Back Pocket. That is sensible marketing. Many a mickle makin’ a muckle, as my Granny never actually said to me that I can recall. Not all of their competitors offer that “whole experience” product range.

With a wider range of price points, they’ve opened themselves up to different pocket depths. AoS, whilst far from a cheap game tends to use far fewer models than its predecessor’s latter days, which means certain previously cost intensive armies (Gobbos, Skaven) are now considerably less cost intensive, as no model is now a mere two points each, and no unit really requires a 50 or 60 strong headcount.

Their outreach has massively increased through not just Warhammer Community, but buddying up with the Scouts, School Clubs and Duke of Edinburgh.

Sadly, a lot of the negativity comes from folk who feel GW just shouldn’t be successful. That because they don’t enjoy a specific game or the wider hobby, nobody does. We often see people quite happy to spend their money as they see fit described as “whales” and other insulting or derogatory terms, for reasons best know to the poster.

Now, if you don’t like GW of their offerings? That’s entirely your business, and entirely fair. I respect the poster and their opinion there. But don’t hassle people for having an opposite opinion, or just invent stuff to argue your case (see above about the driving force behind GW’s recent growth).




True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 10:21:09


Post by: Arbitrator


Most people get into wargaming via 40k. By the time they even realise other systems might exist, they've probably spend hundreds if not thousands on their collection, as well as having learnt the rules, read the lore, etc.

They look at those other systems and they might prefer the models, the lore, the rules, etc, but they realise their local scene for them is maybe 4-5 people, or they hear/experience stories of how those other games got a following for a while, but then something happened - bad edition launch, stagnation, bankrupt, new 40k edition, etc - and they shy away.

They also realise no matter where they go, odds are there's a 40k/AoS community full of randoms they can walk into and get a game straight away. The same can't be said of other non-GW wargames.

It's a self-fulfilling prophecy where people don't want to play non-GW games (to a lesser degree 40k, as AoS isn't necessarily 'a thing' everywhere either) because they don't want to give up the massive 40k community, which in turn means nobody plays much else because they don't have communities as big as 40k.

Look at 8th edition as a perfect example. What did GW have to do in order to bring people back? A few starter sets (irrelevant to most people), friendly faces on social media, and a streamlined edition. Nevermind that 8th was 'balanced' for all of about thirty seconds, that didn't matter. What mattered was all their friends, who'd been eyeing GW up again desperate for an excuse to bring out their Space Marines were all flocking back to it, complete with the excuse "GW has changed, I can feel good about playing 40k again!" and they were strapped in for another half a decade at least. Can you ever imagine Warmahordes getting a second/third/forth/fifth chance like that? Or any wargame for that matter?

I never bought the "I stay for the lore!" thing despite how often it's parroted. How loud was the complaining - and still is - about OC Cawl and his 100,000,000 Bestist Most Elite Marines Ever pulled out from his rear end? How much flak do see about Primaris? Yet I'd bet 99% of those people have about 5000pts of Primaris models at this point. If the lore was that important to them that it's the reason they stick around, something tells me they'd not have bought them. Plus 40k's writing is generally accepted to be trash outside of a few Black Library authors but it's often the same people saying such things who're the first to cling on with "I'm only sticking around for the lore!" like it's a desperate excuse they tell themselves than actually believing it.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 10:41:14


Post by: The_Real_Chris


I think there is also a desire to save/stop others from getting into a game you are disillusioned with, combined with a desire to have people validate your own feelings. I will cheerfully ask like minded friends how has 40k gotten so bad (we are all 'old time' wargamers - though we are corrected by our GW manager friend in his eyes it has never changed much) as we bemoan the same things.

At the same time I am supplying a friends son with Space Marines because he is really excited by it all (bizarrely playing 8th edition with his friends as they never moved onto 9th and buying tactical marines - he could have told me before I got him reading how to play on wahpedia 9th) and I remember how much I loved getting into it all back in the day. Admittedly I told him to try kill team as well, but that's because I still have a heart

At my local club 40k goes from strength to strength, so there is certainly something that those that dislike the strategem/aura/high damage/high casualty/shorter distance game are a minority. We cheerfully play kill team, Epic and others on the fringes while those guys play GT style games quite happily.

Thankfully blood bowl starts next month as that is something we all agree on


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 11:22:17


Post by: Cronch


It's the same thing with MMOs, cause basically they have the same requirement-you want a large community to have lots of play options and people to share experience with, and unlike say, scale modelling where aircraft or tank modellers share a lot in common, wargames are, like MMOs, non-compatible. You can't port your marines into Warmachine, or infinity warband into 40k (you can, but they're basically proxies, no different to empty bases).

So by virtue of having a large base, you're most likely to get into the hobby of gaming via GW products and that produces instant nostalgia AND sense of "Investment" into the product. That's worth way more than any lore. People see cool tiny marines or elves and go "want!" and then they're THEIR tiny marine and now it's personal.
And then the same mechanism that keeps people playing WoW for decades, despite constant complaints of ActiBlizz ruining it- it's the one you're already engaged in, and the new releases make you remember the initial excitement for a moment.

It's also why people who were emotionally attached to Confrontation or Warzone keep funding those half-donkeyed revival attempts.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 14:32:34


Post by: Nurglitch


 BertBert wrote:
GW sells miniatures first, that's their main product and appeal. Most of their customers are in it for the miniatures, the game is a secondary consideration both for the company and its customers.

Agreed. On Twitter and FB and other social media streams it's very much a case of buying, converting, painting, and showing off miniatures. If anything the game is sort of an appendix to the real business of miniatures. Heck, I just put together a squad of Genestealers armed with Flesh Borers, Spinefists, a Devourer, a Deathspitter, and a Bonesword. Always wanted to, and since I don't play the game anymore I don't have to worry about whether it's optimal or even allowed. Enjoying the modelling part without the restrictions imposed by the game has me buying GW stuff again. And if I want to play a game, there's lots of cool board games out there.

As for Dakka, well, it's a hard habit to break. I wish I could quit you guys.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 16:34:40


Post by: Daedalus81


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.
Sorry, but I'm really fething sick of that attitude. It's the purest expression of toxicity in this community ("Everything at Dakka sucks!").


I am not attempting to say that everything at Dakka sucks. I'm saying that it's a super active forum, because disagreeable positions get posted more often. B&C is super chill, because they don't allow that, but at the same time their discussions are pretty shallow.

Me inferring that people ere ( including myself ) are insane was tongue in cheek.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 18:42:04


Post by: Sim-Life


 Nurglitch wrote:
 BertBert wrote:
GW sells miniatures first, that's their main product and appeal. Most of their customers are in it for the miniatures, the game is a secondary consideration both for the company and its customers.

Agreed. On Twitter and FB and other social media streams it's very much a case of buying, converting, painting, and showing off miniatures.


Well what do you expect? The content is relevant to the medium. No one is going to post battle reports via a tweet chain.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 18:49:00


Post by: Nurglitch


 Sim-Life wrote:
Well what do you expect? The content is relevant to the medium. No one is going to post battle reports via a tweet chain.

Typically people post links to battle reports via Twitch or Youtube.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 20:50:00


Post by: jeff white


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.
Sorry, but I'm really fething sick of that attitude. It's the purest expression of toxicity in this community ("Everything at Dakka sucks!").


I am not attempting to say that everything at Dakka sucks. I'm saying that it's a super active forum, because disagreeable positions get posted more often. B&C is super chill, because they don't allow that, but at the same time their discussions are pretty shallow.

Me inferring that people ere ( including myself ) are insane was tongue in cheek.


Daed, I read it that way, originally, and I appreciate HBMC’s concern, as one might expect that giving voice to such an attitude only may only add fuel to the trash fire, so to speak…
At the same time, I am enjoying this thread both for the differences that it draws out and for the (mostly peaceful) engagement of these different points of view that has resulted.
So sure, I see your point. And, I see HBMC’s point… maybe we all do. But I certainly see something special here on Dakka, often lacking not only from the Internet but society generally, that being a community of not so like minded people engaging in spirited discourse, often at odds with one another but enriched for that fact over time.
I know that this has been my experience… maybe that is evidence of some insanity, but I refuse to accept that it is evidence of so-called toxicity… indeed, quite the contrary.

I have been to BandC… meh. Boring. Dakka rulez.

And, though admittedly a small poll, one forum of varied opinions, now 58 to 42 True. Not that this is proof of anything. Of course it isn’t. Wasn’t supposed to prove anything. Of course different communities may result in different results… great! But see, proof was never the idea. Discourse, bringing different views into a common forum, together, engaging with one another… this was the idea! And I am honestly grateful for everyone who has taken the time to put their hearts and minds to keyboard and touchpad to contribute to this discourse. I have and am learning a lot both about the world of Warhammer beyond my window ledge and about myself. Thank you all for this, making this life richer for the effort.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/15 23:10:01


Post by: CEO Kasen


 Daedalus81 wrote:

Me inferring that people ere ( including myself ) are insane was tongue in cheek.


If it helps, you always struck me as one of the more sane people arguing generally pro-40K.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 02:05:43


Post by: Void__Dragon


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
About 200 people isn't too bad a sample size for a gaming community. But I suspect that even if you got a much larger sample elsewhere, the result would be about the same. .


B&C is like a whole different world basically because it is more strictly moderated:

Keep it civil and inoffensive please. No matter your views on locations keep them to yourselves or other areas of the interweb. They are unwelcome here.


People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.



I can barely imagine a forum more strictly moderated than Dakka. This place is a carebear board run by a moderator team desperate to create an environment where it is more important to be nice than right.

Incidentally, no GW does not succeed in spite of itself. The very idea is cope over the fact that the people perpetuating it don't enjoy 40k anymore and this bums them out. A game that only caters to lore nostalgia will at best die a slow death as the players who cared about lore from second or third edition just don't have the time to paint and play (and as such are less inclined to purchase new releases), stop playing because some edition change pushes them away, quite literally dies, or just stops purchasing for some other reason.

GW's growth isn't possible without acquiring new players who have a more open mind regarding whatever 40k content they consume and more time and disposable income to spend on new releases. GW is succeeding because of its decision, not in spite of them. You don't have to like anything GW is doing but you're fooling yourself if you believe GW's success is in spite of itself.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 02:25:40


Post by: BlaxicanX


 CEO Kasen wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:


 CEO Kasen wrote:
I think it's entirely plausible that GW is at least in part coasting on that attachment, because they sure aren't coasting on having a good, playable game.


If you don't want to defend that argument, fine, but then why are you talking to me?


I'm sorry, what the hell are you talking about?
What is confusing you?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 10:35:06


Post by: soviet13


Note that 100% of poll respondents agree that GW is a success.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 10:48:45


Post by: jeff white


soviet13 wrote:
Note that 100% of poll respondents agree that GW is a success.

Definitions may vary... financially, superficially, or in winning the hearts and minds of neckbeards, these might correspond with 'success' differently defined.
"Succeeding in spite of themselves' seems to imply that 'success' is defined superficially/financially, with the 'in spite of themselves' being failure in other regards.
Interesting point. Thank you for the clarity!


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 12:02:41


Post by: Sim-Life


soviet13 wrote:
Note that 100% of poll respondents agree that GW is a success.


You'd have to be super in denial to think GW isn't at it's best in years terms of stuff like stock value/profits/popularity.

Really, the best thing to do would be ask yourself, if tomorrow a small company like Wyrd or Osprey decided to follow GWs methods of business (inflated prices, dedicated stores, poor rules etc) would they succeed? I suspect we know the answer. I don't think it's fair to judge GW as being successful when compared to other minis companies because Warhammer and GW is such a massive enterprise that it dwarfs every other competitor in the industry, MAYBE Asomdee or Hasbro could be comparible? Warhammer is an entity unto itself.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 12:28:52


Post by: Stephen1974


GW in the late 90's early 00's was not doing well. They were pulling games, down sizing stores or closing them all together, but by the late 00's early 10's they had turned it around by really branching out in to other areas, books and computer games, which renewed interest in the games and now they are a massive success, expanding their business model and online presence to the point where they just built (building??) an additional warehouse to stock all the products they need.

They might have some obnoxious business practices but they are all about sales now, not about the players. They have a hugely successful IP that they can sell in multiple ways now and with books and computer games they can constantly release new stuff to buy. Books get churned out so fast its almost impossible to keep up for a casual reader.

So in part, they do succeed in spite of themselves. They can live off of their IP, but at the same time, they've recognised flawed or failing business pratices and replaced them with effective ones.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sim-Life wrote:


Really, the best thing to do would be ask yourself, if tomorrow a small company like Wyrd or Osprey decided to follow GWs methods of business (inflated prices, dedicated stores, poor rules etc) would they succeed? I suspect we know the answer.


No they wouldnt, but you're highlighting a part of GW that 20 years ago was failing for exactly those reasons. They had to expand in to new areas and get out of others to become the success they are today. Other companies cant really do that because they don't have that sort of IP.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 15:44:17


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


The world has also changed quite significantly since GW’s earlier days.

For a start, in the U.K.? GW are the reason we don’t really have FLGS in every town or area. GW got there first, so anyone trying the same is going up against the juggernaut of the industry.

I firmly dispute the prices are “inflated”. I mean, compared to which other range for their games? When I hear inflated prices, I think comparisons between say, high street petrol and fast food, compared to motorway service station petrol and fast food. The latter is the exact same stuff, but a good chunk more expensive. GW also offer stuff their competitors don’t via the in-store experience. That costs them, so it’s factored into everyone’s prices. I do of course appreciate not everyone has a local GW store, but my point stands. Nor do these other companies tend to own their own production facilities either.

As for bad rules? That’s just incredibly subjective. I don’t enjoy X-Wing, because their rules rely so much upon player skill, you need opponents to go easy on you when you’re starting out. Without that crucial factor, you’re just gonna get spanked. Infinity is overly detailed for my tastes, preventing it being accessible to me.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 16:51:38


Post by: Turnip Jedi


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


As for bad rules? That’s just incredibly subjective. I don’t enjoy X-Wing, because their rules rely so much upon player skill, you need opponents to go easy on you when you’re starting out. Without that crucial factor, you’re just gonna get spanked. Infinity is overly detailed for my tastes, preventing it being accessible to me.


Fair point Doc, like I mentioned back at the start of the thread I'm all about the theorycraft as a side effect of MTG and MMO's, 7th really was as bad as it got and the logic of anything has to be better led to me and daddy dubs parting ways (and Spaceships of course)

And yes other games can be hard to get into but I think one advantage of my small local group is we tend to pick up new games as a group so everyone starts broadly on the same level, Infinity sort got overlooked locally as its main advocate was a system jumper who'd give up once everybody dun git gooded without grasping those cycles tend to repeat


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 20:42:59


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Eldarsif wrote:


Sample size 200 is atrocious when you think about the fact that a very limited age range of people actually go on old school forums like Dakkadakka. Forums are almost like a time capsule of people who grew up in the 80s and 90s with maybe a young whipper snapper that seems to accidentally sign up on here.

I think a lot of users overestimate Dakkadakka and their own importance in the Warhammer ecosphere when the Warhammer and wargaming community at large just doesn't think Dakkadakka is worth their time.


And yet, more of 40k's writers and creators have accounts here than anyplace but twitter. I would suggest that Dakka's 'importance' might be greater than you think. Also, the same 'echo chamber' issue applies to any online community.

 Eldarsif wrote:


The sad thing is that this negativity - which people want to desperately deny - just makes the place unattractive for newcomers. You can claim that one is toxic for pointing out actual problems, but in the end it just reinforces the negative echo chamber and limits who actually bothers visiting this place.


Funny, the only one gaking on dakka here is you.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

It is absolutely atrocious sample size for a gaming community, especially when it doesn't factor in things like psychology (read: online communities tend to be echo chambers). The League of Legends subreddit for example is probably about 10 to 20 times larger than this board is, but Riot games has stated on more than one occasion that it is a vocal minority and basically useless as feedback for game design.


Let me amend that then, for a non-video game community (with less than 115 million players, we're so tiny!).

Oh, and, just, fyi, that's what every game company in existence says about their online player base, every time the players state they want something the company does not want to deliver on. Whether it's true or not. When CCP had 90% of it's active accounts vote on something, they were dismissed as a 'vocal minority'.


 Daedalus81 wrote:

B&C is like a whole different world basically because it is more strictly moderated:


A world currently begging for money to stay open?

 Daedalus81 wrote:

People come to Dakka for the fight. Sane people don't post here.


I should probably point out that the politics forum is closed, and the fight has gone elsewhere.



Also, I just have to note that while a lot of you gak on dakka, not one of you has actually demonstrated that you wouldn't get exactly the same result anywhere else. Maybe you should try proving your points instead of just attacking the community when they voice an opinion you don't like?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/16 23:19:24


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


 Turnip Jedi wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


As for bad rules? That’s just incredibly subjective. I don’t enjoy X-Wing, because their rules rely so much upon player skill, you need opponents to go easy on you when you’re starting out. Without that crucial factor, you’re just gonna get spanked. Infinity is overly detailed for my tastes, preventing it being accessible to me.


Fair point Doc, like I mentioned back at the start of the thread I'm all about the theorycraft as a side effect of MTG and MMO's, 7th really was as bad as it got and the logic of anything has to be better led to me and daddy dubs parting ways (and Spaceships of course)

And yes other games can be hard to get into but I think one advantage of my small local group is we tend to pick up new games as a group so everyone starts broadly on the same level, Infinity sort got overlooked locally as its main advocate was a system jumper who'd give up once everybody dun git gooded without grasping those cycles tend to repeat


I feel it basically boils down to what you’re looking for.

If you want a game where player skill is the decisive factor? GW is not, and has never been, what you’re looking for.

If you want a game with super intricate rules which take a week to read and months to learn the practical basis thereof? GW is not, and has never been, what you’re looking for.

Neither of those scenarios, on either side of the equation, are wrong or unreasonable. At all. Horses for Courses, Different Strokes for Different Folks etc.

But what does baffle me is people claiming GW are “failing” because said person enjoys another game, and GW don’t offer a direct analogous experience. Similarly, those who demand GW write their rules expressly for Big Wanger Competitive Play.

However. I am not a dick about such things. I’ve been involved with GW for literal decades. A good 75% of my life so far. I also have a complete suite of Rogue Trader era books. And owning said suite of books? Anyone who feels GW’s “oh god, put an Elastoplast here, here, and…erm…..here” approach is new is, I’m afraid, quite wrong.

Should they be better at it by now? Well. Possibly. But….having grown up with wonky shonky “sod it close enough” rules writing? This is old hat to me. To me, it’s almost an intrinsic part of said experience. I’ll tell you one thing it is though. Profitable. With a single WD article or a whole new Codex, what’s “good/passable/crap” can be changed for little cost to GW.

And make absolutely no mistake. GW are a business. In the business of making just as much money as they can. That’s not a sin. That’s just, well, good ol’ capitalism. It shouldn’t be news to anyone. And it’s hardly a basis for criticism.

If you don’t like how they go about it? Well. There are a few options. The two extremes are “hush now and accept this is how the world works” and “well just sell up and walk away”. In between there’s at least “just play the edition you enjoyed the most” and “why not simply house rule it?”. What gets on my wick ar those who hang around, seemingly for the sole purpose of reminding people just how much they don’t enjoy X, and therefore anyone who happens to enjoy X is be default mentally deficient.

Sorry. I whimbrled. Yeah. whimbrled


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 00:05:23


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And make absolutely no mistake. GW are a business. In the business of making just as much money as they can. That’s not a sin. That’s just, well, good ol’ capitalism. It shouldn’t be news to anyone. And it’s hardly a basis for criticism.


This is actually a bit of a grey area. While GW wanting to make money is not, in and of itself, a sin, some of their business practices are dubious at best, and *are* a basis for criticism.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 11:51:31


Post by: Sim-Life


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
 Turnip Jedi wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


As for bad rules? That’s just incredibly subjective. I don’t enjoy X-Wing, because their rules rely so much upon player skill, you need opponents to go easy on you when you’re starting out. Without that crucial factor, you’re just gonna get spanked. Infinity is overly detailed for my tastes, preventing it being accessible to me.


Fair point Doc, like I mentioned back at the start of the thread I'm all about the theorycraft as a side effect of MTG and MMO's, 7th really was as bad as it got and the logic of anything has to be better led to me and daddy dubs parting ways (and Spaceships of course)

And yes other games can be hard to get into but I think one advantage of my small local group is we tend to pick up new games as a group so everyone starts broadly on the same level, Infinity sort got overlooked locally as its main advocate was a system jumper who'd give up once everybody dun git gooded without grasping those cycles tend to repeat


I feel it basically boils down to what you’re looking for.

If you want a game where player skill is the decisive factor? GW is not, and has never been, what you’re looking for.

If you want a game with super intricate rules which take a week to read and months to learn the practical basis thereof? GW is not, and has never been, what you’re looking for.

Neither of those scenarios, on either side of the equation, are wrong or unreasonable. At all. Horses for Courses, Different Strokes for Different Folks etc.

But what does baffle me is people claiming GW are “failing” because said person enjoys another game, and GW don’t offer a direct analogous experience. Similarly, those who demand GW write their rules expressly for Big Wanger Competitive Play.

However. I am not a dick about such things. I’ve been involved with GW for literal decades. A good 75% of my life so far. I also have a complete suite of Rogue Trader era books. And owning said suite of books? Anyone who feels GW’s “oh god, put an Elastoplast here, here, and…erm…..here” approach is new is, I’m afraid, quite wrong.

Should they be better at it by now? Well. Possibly. But….having grown up with wonky shonky “sod it close enough” rules writing? This is old hat to me. To me, it’s almost an intrinsic part of said experience. I’ll tell you one thing it is though. Profitable. With a single WD article or a whole new Codex, what’s “good/passable/crap” can be changed for little cost to GW.

And make absolutely no mistake. GW are a business. In the business of making just as much money as they can. That’s not a sin. That’s just, well, good ol’ capitalism. It shouldn’t be news to anyone. And it’s hardly a basis for criticism.

If you don’t like how they go about it? Well. There are a few options. The two extremes are “hush now and accept this is how the world works” and “well just sell up and walk away”. In between there’s at least “just play the edition you enjoyed the most” and “why not simply house rule it?”. What gets on my wick ar those who hang around, seemingly for the sole purpose of reminding people just how much they don’t enjoy X, and therefore anyone who happens to enjoy X is be default mentally deficient.

Sorry. I whimbrled. Yeah. whimbrled


Please stop beating that genetic fallacy , it's got nothing left to give. What people want from GW is not what people expected from them 30 or 20 years ago. People expect more professional rules now than they used to. Look at any competitive video game, people will find broken stuff quickly and complain until its patched. GW doesn't have the luxury of being able to sit on there arse over broken stuff anymore because the internet enables them to implement changes quickly and for free. They just don't care enough to make the changes to the game that people are asking for.

Also people love Warhammer. If GW aren't meeting their needs as customers they're allowed to complain. If you want a hugbox theres a bunch of Facebook and Reddit groups you can join.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 12:02:04


Post by: Dudeface


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Eldarsif wrote:


Sample size 200 is atrocious when you think about the fact that a very limited age range of people actually go on old school forums like Dakkadakka. Forums are almost like a time capsule of people who grew up in the 80s and 90s with maybe a young whipper snapper that seems to accidentally sign up on here.

I think a lot of users overestimate Dakkadakka and their own importance in the Warhammer ecosphere when the Warhammer and wargaming community at large just doesn't think Dakkadakka is worth their time.


And yet, more of 40k's writers and creators have accounts here than anyplace but twitter. I would suggest that Dakka's 'importance' might be greater than you think. Also, the same 'echo chamber' issue applies to any online community.


That's a notable unsubstantiated claim, care to back it up?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 13:04:07


Post by: BaronIveagh


Dudeface wrote:

That's a notable unsubstantiated claim, care to back it up?


You've had at least two people who've had their real names in the credits of 40k products (when that was still a thing) post in this thread. As you'd know if you've been around Dakka long enough.

Edit: as further proof of my position on war-hammer polls, this recently came out:



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 13:30:42


Post by: TinyLegions


As little as six months ago, I would have said false, because there is no viable alternative for their miniatures. Then I started to look at what people are doing with resin printers in the past few months, and now I am in the true camp. IMHO they are running on inertia right now, and the 3D printers will kill them in a very short time if not already. IP will be the only thing that they have once the aggregate of their customer base gain access to 3D printers.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 13:41:54


Post by: Dudeface


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

That's a notable unsubstantiated claim, care to back it up?


You've had at least two people who've had their real names in the credits of 40k products (when that was still a thing) post in this thread. As you'd know if you've been around Dakka long enough.

Edit: as further proof of my position on war-hammer polls, this recently came out:

Spoiler:


Well, care to point out who those people are, even by their username as to not give a real identity if required? I don't think a sly wink and a "trust me" is enough to validate that statement.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 13:51:30


Post by: jeff white


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Spoiler:
 Turnip Jedi wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


As for bad rules? That’s just incredibly subjective. I don’t enjoy X-Wing, because their rules rely so much upon player skill, you need opponents to go easy on you when you’re starting out. Without that crucial factor, you’re just gonna get spanked. Infinity is overly detailed for my tastes, preventing it being accessible to me.


Fair point Doc, like I mentioned back at the start of the thread I'm all about the theorycraft as a side effect of MTG and MMO's, 7th really was as bad as it got and the logic of anything has to be better led to me and daddy dubs parting ways (and Spaceships of course)

And yes other games can be hard to get into but I think one advantage of my small local group is we tend to pick up new games as a group so everyone starts broadly on the same level, Infinity sort got overlooked locally as its main advocate was a system jumper who'd give up once everybody dun git gooded without grasping those cycles tend to repeat


I feel it basically boils down to what you’re looking for.

If you want a game where player skill is the decisive factor? GW is not, and has never been, what you’re looking for.

If you want a game with super intricate rules which take a week to read and months to learn the practical basis thereof? GW is not, and has never been, what you’re looking for.

Neither of those scenarios, on either side of the equation, are wrong or unreasonable. At all. Horses for Courses, Different Strokes for Different Folks etc.

But what does baffle me is people claiming GW are “failing” because said person enjoys another game, and GW don’t offer a direct analogous experience.
Spoiler:
Similarly, those who demand GW write their rules expressly for Big Wanger Competitive Play.

However. I am not a dick about such things. I’ve been involved with GW for literal decades. A good 75% of my life so far. I also have a complete suite of Rogue Trader era books. And owning said suite of books? Anyone who feels GW’s “oh god, put an Elastoplast here, here, and…erm…..here” approach is new is, I’m afraid, quite wrong.

Should they be better at it by now? Well. Possibly. But….having grown up with wonky shonky “sod it close enough” rules writing? This is old hat to me. To me, it’s almost an intrinsic part of said experience. I’ll tell you one thing it is though. Profitable. With a single WD article or a whole new Codex, what’s “good/passable/crap” can be changed for little cost to GW.

And make absolutely no mistake. GW are a business. In the business of making just as much money as they can. That’s not a sin. That’s just, well, good ol’ capitalism. It shouldn’t be news to anyone. And it’s hardly a basis for criticism.
Spoiler:

If you don’t like how they go about it? Well. There are a few options. The two extremes are “hush now and accept this is how the world works” and “well just sell up and walk away”. In between there’s at least “just play the edition you enjoyed the most” and “why not simply house rule it?”. What gets on my wick ar those who hang around, seemingly for the sole purpose of reminding people just how much they don’t enjoy X, and therefore anyone who happens to enjoy X is be default mentally deficient.

Sorry. I whimbrled. Yeah. whimbrled

There is a lot going on with this post but I highlight only these sentences, as I have not seen anyone saying this, but maybe I missed something.
No doubt GW is making money. Success may be another thing, though. I mean, Coca cola makes a lot of money, but isn't sucessful in making its customers healthy. For me, as an ethicist, that does not make it a success. On the contrary, I would argue that the company is a failure, and is indeed sinning. Is GW Coca cola? Not exactly... anyways, this is all tertiary. Point being here that I think that I saw no one holding the position that GW is a failure. I guess that people do opine that GW fails to do some things, e.g. compose coherent rules that last longer than one (prodict cycle) iteration of codices. But, that is not quite the same as saying the GW as a company that wants to make as much money as it can, bar all else, is a "failure" at that...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 14:10:04


Post by: BaronIveagh


Dudeface wrote:

Well, care to point out who those people are, even by their username as to not give a real identity if required? I don't think a sly wink and a "trust me" is enough to validate that statement.




Well, HBMC is one, and if you haven't figured out the other, you don't need to know.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 14:17:02


Post by: Dudeface


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Well, care to point out who those people are, even by their username as to not give a real identity if required? I don't think a sly wink and a "trust me" is enough to validate that statement.




Well, HBMC is one, and if you haven't figured out the other, you don't need to know.



I mean you could have opened with Mike Brandt who does still post here on occasion but seems reticent to engage with dakka overall.

I've never seen HBMC allude to being a GW writer or content producer before, but happy for you to correct me if you see this my dude.

In any event that still doesn't represent much of GW's current active creative body.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 15:03:36


Post by: BaronIveagh


Dudeface wrote:

I've never seen HBMC allude to being a GW writer or content producer before, but happy for you to correct me if you see this my dude.


HBMC worked on the 40k RPG (there's a whole thread here on Dakka about the FFG RPG)

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/441421.page

There are a few of us who worked on Battlefleet Gothic who still occasionally post here as well, but I suspect I'm the most frequent.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 15:08:13


Post by: Dudeface


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

I've never seen HBMC allude to being a GW writer or content producer before, but happy for you to correct me if you see this my dude.


HBMC worked on the 40k RPG (there's a whole thread here on Dakka about the FFG RPG)

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/441421.page

There are a few of us who worked on Battlefleet Gothic who still occasionally post here as well, but I suspect I'm the most frequent.


I mean, congratulations to you all, but your original assertion that dakka is important to GWs design studio and current core staff seems to still be a little removed from your own experiences and places in life now.

Again, you've both got great achievements in the case, but the company is 20 years on from back then, the only active core GW staffer I'm aware of on here is Mike. He seems to spend as much time, if not more, being fed up of wading through the trolling and gakposts than actually messaging anything.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 15:32:50


Post by: BlaxicanX


 BaronIveagh wrote:
And yet, more of 40k's writers and creators have accounts here than anyplace but twitter. I would suggest that Dakka's 'importance' might be greater than you think.
This is the definition of a non-sequitur- for all you know, they have accounts here because they liked the color scheme more than those of the other communities. In any case, out of the company that has had dozens of employees you're talking about what, like foir6 or five max? None of whom have done any actual game design for 40K in at least a decade?

Oh, and, just, fyi, that's what every game company in existence says about their online player base,
They do all say that, because it's true. Online communities are worthless trash for game feedback when it comes to anything that is not objective like bugs. Every instance in history of a game company listening to the whims of their online community and it paying off can be matched by a instance of a game company giving in to the demands of the online community and it backfiring massively. The average person who plays video games is a idiot and does not have the wider scope of information to make informed decisions that the game developers themselves possess.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:03:11


Post by: ZebioLizard2


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

I've never seen HBMC allude to being a GW writer or content producer before, but happy for you to correct me if you see this my dude.


HBMC worked on the 40k RPG (there's a whole thread here on Dakka about the FFG RPG)

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/441421.page

There are a few of us who worked on Battlefleet Gothic who still occasionally post here as well, but I suspect I'm the most frequent.
The 40k RPG is not GW. That's FFG.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:08:00


Post by: Sim-Life


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

I've never seen HBMC allude to being a GW writer or content producer before, but happy for you to correct me if you see this my dude.


HBMC worked on the 40k RPG (there's a whole thread here on Dakka about the FFG RPG)

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/441421.page

There are a few of us who worked on Battlefleet Gothic who still occasionally post here as well, but I suspect I'm the most frequent.
The 40k RPG is not GW. That's FFG.


The original point was that they had their names on "40k products", not that they worked for GW. Though technically working for FFG under a GW license is basically the same thing with how strictly GW controls the license.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:09:43


Post by: Stephen1974


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And make absolutely no mistake. GW are a business. In the business of making just as much money as they can. That’s not a sin. That’s just, well, good ol’ capitalism. It shouldn’t be news to anyone. And it’s hardly a basis for criticism.


This is actually a bit of a grey area. While GW wanting to make money is not, in and of itself, a sin, some of their business practices are dubious at best, and *are* a basis for criticism.


This.

Anyone remember the old warhammer battlemagic box set you needed to buy if you wanted to use magic the game? remember when that was phased out? about 2 days before the new rules were to be released, which made battle magic set completely redundant, I saw GW staff pushing those box sets on unsuspecting customers. I saw some grandparents looking to buy it as a present after being pushed towards it be GW staff and I had to step in and tell them in two day thats system goes out the window and it wont be any use any more. GW staff went ape and I told them they were an f'ing disgrace. Certain business practics are unacceptable and this is one of them.

You have other practices as well, like not putting prices on their expensive brushes. Someone picks one up thinking its a couple of quid like the brushes that DO have prices on them, get to the till, find out its twelve quid, and are too embarresed to put it back once its been rung up. F'ing disgrace.

I can tolerate system changes, rule changes, migration to bigger, more expensive models - at the end of the day its a choice you make, but ripping off customers - thats punch in the mouth time.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:11:08


Post by: ZebioLizard2


 Sim-Life wrote:
 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

I've never seen HBMC allude to being a GW writer or content producer before, but happy for you to correct me if you see this my dude.


HBMC worked on the 40k RPG (there's a whole thread here on Dakka about the FFG RPG)

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/441421.page

There are a few of us who worked on Battlefleet Gothic who still occasionally post here as well, but I suspect I'm the most frequent.
The 40k RPG is not GW. That's FFG.


The original point was that they had their names on "40k products", not that they worked for GW. Though technically working for FFG under a GW license is basically the same thing with how strictly GW controls the license.
On that first part yeah I thought it was mentioned for "GW writer" so I was rather confused by that allusion, as for the second.. No, no it is not. It would be the same as claiming anyone whose made a videogame for GW equals GW in some capacity.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:11:59


Post by: Sim-Life


Stephen1974 wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

And make absolutely no mistake. GW are a business. In the business of making just as much money as they can. That’s not a sin. That’s just, well, good ol’ capitalism. It shouldn’t be news to anyone. And it’s hardly a basis for criticism.


This is actually a bit of a grey area. While GW wanting to make money is not, in and of itself, a sin, some of their business practices are dubious at best, and *are* a basis for criticism.


This.

Anyone remember the old warhammer battlemagic box set you needed to buy if you wanted to use magic the game? remember when that was phased out? about 2 days before the new rules were to be released, which made battle magic set completely redundant, I saw GW staff pushing those box sets on unsuspecting customers. I saw some grandparents looking to buy it as a present after being pushed towards it be GW staff and I had to step in and tell them in two day thats system goes out the window and it wont be any use any more. GW staff went ape and I told them they were an f'ing disgrace. Certain business practics are unacceptable and this is one of them.

You have other practices as well, like not putting prices on their expensive brushes. Someone picks one up thinking its a couple of quid like the brushes that DO have prices on them, get to the till, find out its twelve quid, and are too embarresed to put it back once its been rung up. F'ing disgrace.

I can tolerate system changes, rule changes, migration to bigger, more expensive models - at the end of the day its a choice you make, but ripping off customers - thats punch in the mouth time.


I remember the ole "hand the customer a box then stand in front of where the box goes" trick. I thought they'd eased off on stuff like that these days though.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:25:31


Post by: BaronIveagh


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
No, no it is not. It would be the same as claiming anyone whose made a videogame for GW equals GW in some capacity.


His point was about how controlling GW is about the IP, that, yes, if you work for anything that GW licenses out, you WILL be micromanaged by GW on anything that touches lore these days. Though, don't worry, I've seen people claiming that Black Library and Forge World creators don't 'really' work for GW either.

Further, the FFG games were originally created by Black Industries, a GW subsidiary like BL.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:

I mean, congratulations to you all, but your original assertion that dakka is important to GWs design studio and current core staff seems to still be a little removed from your own experiences and places in life now.


GW goes through guys so fast these days that the idea of 'core staff' is laughable. Effectively you have interns writing the books, outside a few BL stalwarts.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:34:24


Post by: Gert


 Sim-Life wrote:
The original point was that they had their names on "40k products", not that they worked for GW. Though technically working for FFG under a GW license is basically the same thing with how strictly GW controls the license.

Actually, the original post was:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
And yet, more of 40k's writers and creators have accounts here than anyplace but twitter. I would suggest that Dakka's 'importance' might be greater than you think.

So, assuming the 40k RPG being discussed is Dark Heresy, that's a 40k product but not Warhammer 40k. Baron's post seemed to anyone without explicit knowledge that HBMC worked for FFG, that they were discussing 40k as a GW employee, not one of a company with the 40k license. Speaking of the license, GW polices any content made by not having it be considered "canon" as an unwritten rule.
We could include ADB and Gav Thorpe but when was the last time they posted on this forum? A year? 3 years? Is any post on the forum counted or should it be posts in discussion sections?
The claim that Dakka has more 40k writers and creators than any other platform barring Twitter is nonsense and there's been absolutely no effort made to support the claim, which coming from Baron is in no way shocking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
GW goes through guys so fast these days that the idea of 'core staff' is laughable. Effectively you have interns writing the books, outside a few BL stalwarts.

Something else you have no proof of.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:37:27


Post by: kodos


Selling people the Rulebook for the "current" Edition of Friday with the new one coming out on Saturday (so they are technically right as that was the current Edition by that time) is nothing new is still a thing

same with models that are pushed because they are basically useless or are going to be replaced soon to people who don't know


This also plays into the fact not telling people in advance if something new comes around. Someone starting 40k or AoS not knowing that all the books they buy know are obsolete in 1 month is not very costumer friendly


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:40:14


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Gert wrote:

Speaking of the license, GW polices any content made by not having it be considered "canon" as an unwritten rule.


FFG was actually an exception to that, since GW in the person of AM expressly stated that the FFG RPGs were canon. But, since you'll white knight GW on practically anything, bothering to engage you on this is pointless.

I notice that the people who bitched that the survey was no good are currently grasping at straws in an effort to 'prove' the inferiority Dakka without actually addressing the other survey I posted above.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
Every instance in history of a game company listening to the whims of their online community and it paying off can be matched by a instance of a game company giving in to the demands of the online community and it backfiring massively. The average person who plays video games is a idiot and does not have the wider scope of information to make informed decisions that the game developers themselves possess.


Conversely, I can show you an example of a game that was burned down by it's own players when the company ignored their demands for every one that kept going unbothered.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:46:04


Post by: Gert


 BaronIveagh wrote:

FFG was actually an exception to that, since GW in the person of AM expressly stated that the FFG RPGs were canon.

Firstly, who is AM?
Secondly, do you have proof of this? You're just making more statements that you haven't actually been able to back up. If this person said it was canon at the time, what makes it canon now when it's no longer sold? Are they still with the company?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 17:58:03


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Gert wrote:

Firstly, who is AM?


Alan Merritt. You know, the guy who was in charge of canon for warhammer and warhammer 40k?

 Gert wrote:

If this person said it was canon at the time, what makes it canon now when it's no longer sold?


It hasn't been contradicted, and GW has added references it to current codecies. But, since you're winding up to argue that nothing out of print is canon, I'll point out that it's not unknown for currently in use codecies to be out of print. Or, do you think that when the webstore stops selling it, it magically leaves canon? Boy, SoB must have really perplexed you before the new release.

And, you guys are still evading my point. Stop blowing smoke.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 18:09:48


Post by: Gert


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Alan Merritt. You know, the guy who was in charge of canon for warhammer and warhammer 40k?

Obviously I don't hence why I asked. Of course, the important part of this reply is the was. Merritt was in charge of canon. He is no longer with the company and his views are no longer relevant.

It hasn't been contradicted, and GW has added references it to current codecies.

There are parts of content written for licensed products like certain Xenos or the Blood Ravens that have been added to what is considered to be 40k canon, yes but it is not a blank cheque, and it is not accurate to say that everything found within the FFG RPG's is considered canon.

But, since you're winding up to argue that nothing out of print is canon, I'll point out that it's not unknown for currently in use codecies to be out of print. Or, do you think that when the webstore stops selling it, it magically leaves canon?

Out of stock and out of production are not the same thing.

And, you guys are still evading my point. Stop blowing smoke.

The point being what exactly? Dakka isn't all bad but it is by no means the premier place to discuss 40k and other TTWG.
I'm also not white-knighting for GW I'm just calling you out on your BS.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 18:23:12


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Gert wrote:

The point being what exactly?


That the survey above is a lot more typical of the views of the 40k fanbase than you're willing to admit.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 18:34:09


Post by: Dudeface


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Gert wrote:

The point being what exactly?


That the survey above is a lot more typical of the views of the 40k fanbase than you're willing to admit.


Well as a white knight shill branded person based on my opinions, I voted true.

GW have had some high and low points over the years, but as much success as they are having, I honestly think it's built on the backs of long time players and it's also smaller than it could be.

They've slipped out of main chain toy shops for the most part, the cost has moved away from what a child/teenager can drop on any form of regularity. They've whored the license out to too many shovelware game developers and maybe held too tightly to the controls of their IP, when perhaps less favourable deals with bigger names would have done more good.

Resounding success, no doubt, but I think they sold themselves short.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 18:42:01


Post by: soviet13


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Gert wrote:

The point being what exactly?


That the survey above is a lot more typical of the views of the 40k fanbase than you're willing to admit.


I think you are missing the point. The issue is not so much whether dakka is representative of other forums, as whether forums at all are representative of the wider customer base.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Firstly, who is AM?


Alan Merritt. You know, the guy who was in charge of canon for warhammer and warhammer 40k?


Never heard of him. Is he any relation to Alan Merrett?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 18:49:17


Post by: BlaxicanX


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Conversely, I can show you an example of a game that was burned down by it's own players when the company ignored their demands for every one that kept going unbothered.
Which would be a meaningless gesture because we arent talking about "the players", we are talking about the vocal minority that are online communities. To bring us back on focus: your assertion is that a random poll on dakkadakka is somehow worth a feth as a reflection of the playerbase as a whole. Your assertion is wrong.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 19:02:54


Post by: Gert


Dudeface wrote:
They've whored the license out to too many shovelware game developers and maybe held too tightly to the controls of their IP, when perhaps less favourable deals with bigger names would have done more good.

Resounding success, no doubt, but I think they sold themselves short.

For every Space Marine or Battlefleet Gothic, there's a Lost Crusade or Horus Heresy: Drop Assault. That being said not all mobile games are trash just the vast majority. It's a cursed chalice because, without the mobile games, I doubt there would be much push for good console/pc games although I think (as with most things Warhammer) the negativity spawned from the really bad stuff drowns out the really good stuff.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 19:12:01


Post by: Catulle


 Gert wrote:
The claim that Dakka has more 40k writers and creators than any other platform barring Twitter is nonsense and there's been absolutely no effort made to support the claim, which coming from Baron is in no way shocking.


Given that claim would include, er, Facebook...

*insert captainhaddock.jpg*


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 19:18:02


Post by: a_typical_hero


soviet13 wrote:
I think you are missing the point. The issue is not so much whether dakka is representative of other forums, as whether forums at all are representative of the wider customer base.
It isn't saying anything, I just like to mention it: From my local gaming club with about 20-30 active 40k and AoS players, I know of nobody else than me, who is actively posting on Dakka. The rest is consuming online ressources of course, but they don't engage in forums.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 19:18:26


Post by: Racerguy180


The new Orks Dakka game looks like fun and it's on the Switch so my nephews can play.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 19:41:26


Post by: BobtheInquisitor


GW is undeniably financially successful. However, I can’t think of another company in tabletop gaming that shows as much contempt for its customers in every facet of the customer experience…Maybe CMON. So, yes, GW succeeds in spite of itself.

Also, this poll is in a GW ai forum where ex-customers of GW are unlikely to see it, so I wouldn’t consider it representative of the TT community views overall, but rather of a smaller, more positive subset of gamers.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 19:48:28


Post by: Dudeface


 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
GW is undeniably financially successful. However, I can’t think of another company in tabletop gaming that shows as much contempt for its customers in every facet of the customer experience…Maybe CMON. So, yes, GW succeeds in spite of itself.

Also, this poll is in a GW ai forum where ex-customers of GW are unlikely to see it, so I wouldn’t consider it representative of the TT community views overall, but rather of a smaller, more positive subset of gamers.


If this is the positive subset, I'd hate to see the content of the less positive ones


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 20:02:12


Post by: macluvin


Polls on forums are about the best you can do in lieu of professional marketing research... even if biases like, the fact that more people actively playing the game or hobbling are more probable to interact with these forums, and thus may have some sort of tendency to like the game product and company. Also, there are biases that people seek conflict and are more probable to comment on things they have problems with.

The argument of the validity of the data is hardly worth arguing without any other data to compare it to. The trends are still useful to observe as well.

So either produce your own empirical evidence of the feelings of the community or stop arguing the validity of the data.

GW is successful because they like every other successful company are making decisions that benefit the company. Their decisions are very well informed. The fact that we hate it but keep going back for more only proves it more.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 20:33:12


Post by: jeff white


What is odd, to me, though maybe it shouldn’t be, is that after all of these pages, and especially the past few in which some posters had been active in discounting the value of the varied opinions here, ‘toxic Dakka’ and so on, poll results are moving slowly and steadily True… currently 59 to 41 percent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
macluvin wrote:
Polls on forums are about the best you can do in lieu of professional marketing research... even if biases like, the fact that more people actively playing the game or hobbling are more probable to interact with these forums, and thus may have some sort of tendency to like the game product and company. Also, there are biases that people seek conflict and are more probable to comment on things they have problems with.

The argument of the validity of the data is hardly worth arguing without any other data to compare it to. The trends are still useful to observe as well.

So either produce your own empirical evidence of the feelings of the community or stop arguing the validity of the data.

GW is successful because they like every other successful company are making decisions that benefit the company. Their decisions are very well informed. The fact that we hate it but keep going back for more only proves it more.

Yes, I think also that this thread and its poll results are valuable and interesting. Thanks for this.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 20:47:42


Post by: BaronIveagh


soviet13 wrote:

I think you are missing the point. The issue is not so much whether dakka is representative of other forums, as whether forums at all are representative of the wider customer base.


The survey I posted was supposedly from the customer satisfaction survey from China's Official Online Warhammer retailer, not a forum.

soviet13 wrote:

Never heard of him. Is he any relation to Alan Merrett?


Yes, yes, I misspelled his last name. I also used the past tense because I can't remember if he was still the head of IP development over at GW or had been replaced. It's been a while since I've even thought about him.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 20:48:56


Post by: Polonius


There's an old joke, I forget if it was from early Dakka or the 40k newsgroup, that summed up some of this epistemological quandary:

q: Why is everybody on here always complaining about GW?

a: Because the happy people are too busy playing the game!


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 20:50:27


Post by: BaronIveagh


 BlaxicanX wrote:
Which would be a meaningless gesture because we arent talking about "the players", we are talking about the vocal minority that are online communities. To bring us back on focus: your assertion is that a random poll on dakkadakka is somehow worth a feth as a reflection of the playerbase as a whole. Your assertion is wrong.


Not all Online Communities are actually a 'vocal minority'.

I've offered additional proof that I'm right. What have you offered again?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Polonius wrote:
There's an old joke, I forget if it was from early Dakka or the 40k newsgroup, that summed up some of this epistemological quandary:

q: Why is everybody on here always complaining about GW?

a: Because the happy people are too busy playing the game!


'Why does everyone complain about GW? Because everybody else has already quit. " was the version from over on Warseer. I vaguely remember that Brimmy banned me there for a week for repeating it as a limerick.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 20:59:50


Post by: Daedalus81


 BaronIveagh wrote:
Also, I just have to note that while a lot of you gak on dakka, not one of you has actually demonstrated that you wouldn't get exactly the same result anywhere else. Maybe you should try proving your points instead of just attacking the community when they voice an opinion you don't like?


Mmm.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
'Why does everyone complain about GW? Because everybody else has already quit. " was the version from over on Warseer. I vaguely remember that Brimmy banned me there for a week for repeating it as a limerick.




True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:01:30


Post by: Dudeface


 BaronIveagh wrote:
 BlaxicanX wrote:
Which would be a meaningless gesture because we arent talking about "the players", we are talking about the vocal minority that are online communities. To bring us back on focus: your assertion is that a random poll on dakkadakka is somehow worth a feth as a reflection of the playerbase as a whole. Your assertion is wrong.


Not all Online Communities are actually a 'vocal minority'.

I've offered additional proof that I'm right. What have you offered again?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Polonius wrote:
There's an old joke, I forget if it was from early Dakka or the 40k newsgroup, that summed up some of this epistemological quandary:

q: Why is everybody on here always complaining about GW?

a: Because the happy people are too busy playing the game!


'Why does everyone complain about GW? Because everybody else has already quit. " was the version from over on Warseer. I vaguely remember that Brimmy banned me there for a week for repeating it.


You offer survey results that for some reason include partially completed forms, from a source you note as "supposedly" relating to people's want to attend and purchase from 1 specific store. I don't buy from my local GW but it doesn't mean I don't think they're successful.

In the event that is *actual* data from the Chinese flagship store, which you can't validate, it just shows that the people voting don't want to go to or buy from an official GW. I don't think it has any bearing on this forum, poll or the success of the company.

Quick edit to tidy my thoughts up (I'm pretty tired): there's no frame of reference for who or what that poll was aimed at. As such it holds no real weight in any capacity, certainly not as an indicator of an "online community".


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:11:08


Post by: jeff white


Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly think that Baron just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:13:20


Post by: Dudeface


 jeff white wrote:
Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly thing that Baton just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


I buy games workshop products, I play warhammer. I have no intent of attending events held at my local GW nor buying from them directly however, does that mean GW is failing because I'd select no to all of those?

Again unless you can source those poll results and the parameters for who completed the poll, it's essentially worthless.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:13:37


Post by: jeff white


 Daedalus81 wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Also, I just have to note that while a lot of you gak on dakka, not one of you has actually demonstrated that you wouldn't get exactly the same result anywhere else. Maybe you should try proving your points instead of just attacking the community when they voice an opinion you don't like?


Mmm.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
'Why does everyone complain about GW? Because everybody else has already quit. " was the version from over on Warseer. I vaguely remember that Brimmy banned me there for a week for repeating it as a limerick.



Ok Daed, I don’t get it… what is this supposed to be telling us?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly thing that Baton just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


I buy games workshop products, I play warhammer. I have no intent of attending events held at my local GW nor buying from them directly however, does that mean GW is failing because I'd select no to all of those?

Again unless you can source those poll results and the parameters for who completed the poll, it's essentially worthless.


Ok, fair enough. Note that the original question is not about gw failing, but rather that it succeeds in spite of itself. Can gw count on similar success in China given the validity of Baron’s poll results? I mean, let’s just assume that they are what they are supposed to be… what might be different about that market, and can this tell us something about what we might expect, there? Can GW afford to depend on succeeding in spite of itself there, if that is indeed what is happening, ‘here’?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:20:11


Post by: BaronIveagh


Dudeface wrote:

You offer survey results that for some reason include partially completed forms, from a source you note as "supposedly" relating to people's want to attend and purchase from 1 specific store. I don't buy from my local GW but it doesn't mean I don't think they're successful.


I didn't collect them myself, and it's from China, so I consider it 'supposedly'. And, you can't actually 'attend' that store. Tiān Māo is a site like Amazon that makes up about 50% of China's online retail.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jeff white wrote:

Ok Daed, I don’t get it… what is this supposed to be telling us?


This makes two of us, since I'm not gaking on warseer, just relating the version of the same joke I had heard over there back in the day.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:35:39


Post by: Dudeface


 jeff white wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly thing that Baton just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


I buy games workshop products, I play warhammer. I have no intent of attending events held at my local GW nor buying from them directly however, does that mean GW is failing because I'd select no to all of those?

Again unless you can source those poll results and the parameters for who completed the poll, it's essentially worthless.


Ok, fair enough. Note that the original question is not about gw failing, but rather that it succeeds in spite of itself. Can gw count on similar success in China given the validity of Baron’s poll results? I mean, let’s just assume that they are what they are supposed to be… what might be different about that market, and can this tell us something about what we might expect, there? Can GW afford to depend on succeeding in spite of itself there, if that is indeed what is happening, ‘here’?


That's a better question and thank you for understanding my intent. As explained earlier it definitely succeeds in spite of itself in my eyes.

I'm not familiar enough with their Chinese presence to know how they're doing now, or what their plans are, but it's pretty uniformal for 3rd party retailers and FLGS to be the bulk of the sales for GW by and large. I'd imagine as with any niche largely socially eskewed product in a new environment, it'll take time to build up interest and a social base. So it's concerning to see those figures if relevant to anything, but I'm also not super surprised, again without knowing all the parameters and context it doesn't help much.

Their choice to eschew a lot of wider media giants to deliver their content in lieu of their own platform, combined with them being late to the game probably means rolling out a product into a new market for them is harder than it should be.

Again though, this relies on a "what if" on the data validity and context. But I think its time to hit the hay, I just hope by the next time I drop in it's not locked for inducing China-orientated political discourse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

You offer survey results that for some reason include partially completed forms, from a source you note as "supposedly" relating to people's want to attend and purchase from 1 specific store. I don't buy from my local GW but it doesn't mean I don't think they're successful.


I didn't collect them myself, and it's from China, so I consider it 'supposedly'. And, you can't actually 'attend' that store. Tiān Māo is a site like Amazon that makes up about 50% of China's online retail.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jeff white wrote:

Ok Daed, I don’t get it… what is this supposed to be telling us?


This makes two of us, since I'm not gaking on warseer, just relating the version of the same joke I had heard over there back in the day.


Historically I bought a whole 1 warhammer item off amazon, they're more expensive generally than most other 3rd party retailers. No idea if the same applies over there however.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:38:08


Post by: ZebioLizard2


"not one of you has actually demonstrated that you wouldn't get exactly the same result anywhere else"

While not speaking for him. You posted a result somewhere else and got banned for it seems to be what it was going for.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:40:14


Post by: Kanluwen


 jeff white wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Also, I just have to note that while a lot of you gak on dakka, not one of you has actually demonstrated that you wouldn't get exactly the same result anywhere else. Maybe you should try proving your points instead of just attacking the community when they voice an opinion you don't like?


Mmm.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
'Why does everyone complain about GW? Because everybody else has already quit. " was the version from over on Warseer. I vaguely remember that Brimmy banned me there for a week for repeating it as a limerick.



Ok Daed, I don’t get it… what is this supposed to be telling us?

Never mind. There's no really good way to phrase this that won't be viewed as a personal attack or skirting it.

Suffice to say, this online community isn't all that big. People get known for their posting habits.


Dudeface wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly thing that Baton just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


I buy games workshop products, I play warhammer. I have no intent of attending events held at my local GW nor buying from them directly however, does that mean GW is failing because I'd select no to all of those?

Again unless you can source those poll results and the parameters for who completed the poll, it's essentially worthless.


Ok, fair enough. Note that the original question is not about gw failing, but rather that it succeeds in spite of itself. Can gw count on similar success in China given the validity of Baron’s poll results? I mean, let’s just assume that they are what they are supposed to be… what might be different about that market, and can this tell us something about what we might expect, there? Can GW afford to depend on succeeding in spite of itself there, if that is indeed what is happening, ‘here’?

Baron's poll isn't likely valid though?

Spoiler:


Seriously. Do you believe for one iota of an instant that a corporation would allow for a poll to be run that has "sales etc i guess" in it?

And you do know that anyone can actually make surveys and the like, right?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 21:52:39


Post by: Sim-Life


 Kanluwen wrote:

Baron's poll isn't likely valid though?

Spoiler:


Seriously. Do you believe for one iota of an instant that a corporation would allow for a poll to be run that has "sales etc i guess" in it?


I've seen worse Chinese auto-translate copy-pastes. Just google "translation fails" to see a bunch of examples. Most of which are printed onto physical signs, let alone a website survey.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 22:07:04


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Kanluwen wrote:

Seriously. Do you believe for one iota of an instant that a corporation would allow for a poll to be run that has "sales etc i guess" in it?


Do you believe for one iota of an instant that this is a GW sanctioned translation?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 22:15:17


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Oh for heaven’s sake. I’m genuinely done with this thread.

GW are massively hundreds of millions of GBP successful, year on year. And that’s entirely flying in the face of a relative handful of upset internet posters.

Simply put, GW are astoundingly successful. That success doesn’t care what said relative handful of upset internet posters thinks.

It is what it is.

Perhaps you have good reason to be upset. I don’t care. Perhaps you’re just an oddboy with an inexplicable axe to grind.

GW’s success is entirely off their own back. To suggest otherwise is basically calling those of us who buy whatever we damn well please “a bit thick”. As if we’ve been somehow hoodwinked into having the sheer temerity to enjoy this hobby we’ve sunk thousands into.

You don’t like it? Genuinely fair enough. I’m not gonna be a Richard about it.

But how’s about you, in turn, don’t be a Richard to those who, fully willingly, gladly chuck money at those of us who do happen to enjoy it?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 22:51:32


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

GW’s success is entirely off their own back. To suggest otherwise is basically calling those of us who buy whatever we damn well please “a bit thick”. As if we’ve been somehow hoodwinked into having the sheer temerity to enjoy this hobby we’ve sunk thousands into.


Doc, that's a lovely rant you've got there, but pointing out that GW has been succeeding despite some really blockheaded decisions is hardly an attack on you, personally. Is it your fault that GW decided to jack their prices in China a reputed 26% recently? If so, then I could see it as an attack on you. In the mean time, stop flogging the drama llama.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 23:23:29


Post by: oni


It's not that GW is too big to fail, it's that they're too big to fail right now. Meaning that their current massive customer base and their current massive earnings afford them the ability to experiment, try new and different things and to a degree, screw up with little to no detriment. GW will need to see a continued downward trend in sales before they can realize they've done something wrong. Until that happens, it's going to be an unpredictable and at times uncomfortable ride.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/17 23:50:25


Post by: Catulle


 jeff white wrote:
Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly think that Baron just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


Is there any part of the methodology of that poll that excludes, say, people from out of country from voting? Since that criterion would seem kind of relevant to indicatin b the size of local take up vis a vis the size of the Chinese market as a proportion of the international one.

Naturally, none of that context was, nor will be, provided.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jeff white wrote:
Ok, fair enough. Note that the original question is not about gw failing, but rather that it succeeds in spite of itself. Can gw count on similar success in China given the validity of Baron’s poll results? I mean, let’s just assume that they are what they are supposed to be… what might be different about that market, and can this tell us something about what we might expect, there? Can GW afford to depend on succeeding in spite of itself there, if that is indeed what is happening, ‘here’?


No, Jeff.

The original question that *you* posed was true/false on *shifty domestic abuse analogy*

That the outcome tilts towards "yes, our consumer relationships are just like marriage" is/ought to be a *damning* indictment of our community here, and a potent indicator that we ought to be better.

It won't be taken that way, but...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 07:03:53


Post by: kodos


I have now heard from different sources that GW's China/Asia project is not doing well
mainly related to the recent and regular price changes from GW as the main target groups now feels priced out of the hobby and with no solid base community already being there, the games are dropped

 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Seriously. Do you believe for one iota of an instant that a corporation would allow for a poll to be run that has "sales etc i guess" in it?

Do you believe for one iota of an instant that this is a GW sanctioned translation?

I have seen worse translations from GW, some even made it that far to be become regular translations is those who learned englisch with GW books and stayed in the industry never bothered to check it but keep the wrong ones


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 19:54:08


Post by: BaronIveagh


Catulle wrote:

Is there any part of the methodology of that poll that excludes, say, people from out of country from voting?


As far as I can tell, Táobǎo will not ship outside of China, leading to things like 'buyandship' springing up, so while, not impossible, we'll call it 'unlikely'. I've read a few tutorials on how to do it, but given the tutorial was more than 17 steps, at least two of which I'll say are unlikely to be automated, and one of which costs money, I'll say that 'foreign influence' probably isn't happening in that poll in any serious capacity.

Further, hilariously considering that some people on other forums have tried to argue that Táobǎo's store is not GW, you have to be the Copyright holder or their legal representative to open a Táobǎo flagship store. And this is, apparently, actually checked.


Catulle wrote:

Since that criterion would seem kind of relevant to indicating the size of local take up vis a vis the size of the Chinese market as a proportion of the international one.

Naturally, none of that context was, nor will be, provided.


Glad I could help.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Catulle wrote:


No, Jeff.

The original question that *you* posed was true/false on *shifty domestic abuse analogy*

That the outcome tilts towards "yes, our consumer relationships are just like marriage" is/ought to be a *damning* indictment of our community here, and a potent indicator that we ought to be better.


And warhammer in general, since this puppy is god damn near universal across every single warhammer community I'm a member of. At least the ones that don't compare it to pimps and drug addiction. Gw's products have been known as 'plastic crack' for decades.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:01:38


Post by: jeff white


Catulle wrote:
Spoiler:
 jeff white wrote:
Umm,… dudeface, given that the poll results are valid concerning the official gw store in China, a rising market of well over a billion people with lots of extra young men with zero hopes of marrying, and without the thirty year background and anchor base of neck bearded hobbyists, it does seem to inform this thread, at least tangentially. I mean, it is certainly interesting to see those numbers, no? Do you really honestly think that Baron just made that up? Maybe drew the characters and fabricated the results just to make a point on this thread? I don’t believe that you really think that…

But then, what would count as having bearing on any of the above? For you?


Is there any part of the methodology of that poll that excludes, say, people from out of country from voting? Since that criterion would seem kind of relevant to indicatin b the size of local take up vis a vis the size of the Chinese market as a proportion of the international one.

Naturally, none of that context was, nor will be, provided.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 jeff white wrote:
Ok, fair enough. Note that the original question is not about gw failing, but rather that it succeeds in spite of itself. Can gw count on similar success in China given the validity of Baron’s poll results? I mean, let’s just assume that they are what they are supposed to be… what might be different about that market, and can this tell us something about what we might expect, there? Can GW afford to depend on succeeding in spite of itself there, if that is indeed what is happening, ‘here’?


No, Jeff.

The original question that *you* posed was true/false on *shifty domestic abuse analogy*

That the outcome tilts towards "yes, our consumer relationships are just like marriage" is/ought to be a *damning* indictment of our community here, and a potent indicator that we ought to be better.

It won't be taken that way, but...

Now, this is an abuse of double quotes. And I am at a loss as to what you really intend to communicate, with this…
For me, the poll was meant as a gauge of sentiment.
So far, the majority have voted True, that GW succeeds largely due to stuff made for them three decades ago.
And so far, people representing this POV have been civil, grounded, and patient.
Some of the minority have rejected these results, have responded in anger over the idea being broached at all, and have discounted the value of the poll and of the expressed opinions of this forum.
“Shifty”? Ok, you do you. It is clear which camp you represent.
So, poll successful. Opinions aired. True colors flown. Bravo. Thanks for sharing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 kodos wrote:
I have now heard from different sources that GW's China/Asia project is not doing well
mainly related to the recent and regular price changes from GW as the main target groups now feels priced out of the hobby and with no solid base community already being there, the games are dropped
Spoiler:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Seriously. Do you believe for one iota of an instant that a corporation would allow for a poll to be run that has "sales etc i guess" in it?

Do you believe for one iota of an instant that this is a GW sanctioned translation?

I have seen worse translations from GW, some even made it that far to be become regular translations is those who learned englisch with GW books and stayed in the industry never bothered to check it but keep the wrong ones

Good info, this… confirms suspicions. Thanks and exalted!


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:10:38


Post by: Tyran


China is a surprisingly hard market to get into. Different cultural values, different history, different economic situation, and a massive authoritarian government.
It isn't that surprising GW is struggling to get into the Chinese market, specially as GW plays a lot with western culture, which doesn't work well in China.

But on the other hand, that doesn't means much with how GW is doing in the western markets.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:15:31


Post by: jeff white


It might shed light on the context of the current poll question, however, as China does not have that thirty year enculturation on which to float.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:22:24


Post by: Tyran


Sure that also plays a part, but do you think that thirty year enculturation is something that just happens?

Growing the IP, expanding the IP, modifing the IP, protecting the IP, sharing (or refusing to share) the IP, reinventing the IP, etc. The very concept of enculturation denotes a gradual process, and GW has taken a very active role in that process to make sure they have a thirty year enculturation on which to float.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:35:20


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Tyran wrote:
Sure that also plays a part, but do you think that thirty year enculturation is something that just happens?

Growing the IP, expanding the IP, modifing the IP, protecting the IP, sharing (or refusing to share) the IP, reinventing the IP, etc. The very concept of enculturation denotes a gradual process, and GW has taken a very active role in that process to make sure they have a thirty year enculturation on which to float.


Well, between 2019 and 2020, 40k dropped one place in the Great Wargaming Survey. (this year's isn't out yet)



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:35:51


Post by: jeff white



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Tyran wrote:
Sure that also plays a part, but do you think that thirty year enculturation is something that just happens?

Growing the IP, expanding the IP, modifing the IP, protecting the IP, sharing (or refusing to share) the IP, reinventing the IP, etc. The very concept of enculturation denotes a gradual process, and GW has taken a very active role in that process to make sure they have a thirty year enculturation on which to float.


Umm… maybe. But, no, actually. I think that I disagree with this. Gw could have, imho, grown the community and increased its influence beyond sales and ip whoring. I mean look at Gotrek and Felix, clear rip offs from Fritz Lieber’s Fafrd and the Grey Mouser. Look at Carl Weathers from Predator, or a Lictor. How is this not riffing on common cultural heritage, ideas on which GW at best parasites? Gw could leverage these tropes, openly, confessing their inspiration, giving credit where due, and might have done similarly with Eastern tropes, catching the zeitgeist and all by tapping into the hearts and minds of the market but instead, as you say, it has fenced off its defensible area and will die on that hill, because, honestly, who really gives two feths when Fafrd and the Mouser were always better?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:37:07


Post by: Tyran


 BaronIveagh wrote:

Well, between 2019 and 2020, 40k dropped one place in the Great Wargaming Survey. (this year's isn't out yet)


And that's one year, that still leaves the other 29.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm not saying GW doesn't make mistakes, they definitely do them, and some are in fact very dumb mistakes. But you do not simply fall into dominating an entire market with lore written 30 years ago, the entertainment industry is full of great IP's that were written 30 years ago and that today are a shadow of their former glory if not outright dead.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 21:54:01


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Tyran wrote:

And that's one year, that still leaves the other 29.


They didn't separate GW products from everything else before that point.


 Tyran wrote:

I'm not saying GW doesn't make mistakes, they definitely do them, and some are in fact very dumb mistakes. But you do not simply fall into dominating an entire market with lore written 30 years ago, the entertainment industry is full of great IP's that were written 30 years ago and that today are a shadow of their former glory if not outright dead.


Two different industries. Further, as Wargames Magazine pointed out a year or two ago, the average age of wargamers appears to be going up. This means that many brands may, in fact, be coasting on nostalgia, not just GW, and that the hobby is facing a potential 'bubble' because of this.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 22:04:23


Post by: Tyran


 BaronIveagh wrote:

Two different industries. Further, as Wargames Magazine pointed out a year or two ago, the average age of wargamers appears to be going up. This means that many brands may, in fact, be coasting on nostalgia, not just GW, and that the hobby is facing a potential 'bubble' because of this.


Historical wargaming is definitely a bubble, it would be interesting if there is data to show if the same applies to GW*. Moreover, the way to avoid the creation of a bubble is through marketing, something in which GW has heavily invested in the recent years. Time will tell of course, but even if there is trouble, GW has shown to be a surprisingly resilient company.

And nothing of that actually has to do with the management of the IP.

*I wouldn't be surprised if 40k is a bubble, but AoS is pretty much the opposite of running on nostalgia,


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/18 23:47:49


Post by: soviet13


GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 07:23:56


Post by: Blackie


soviet13 wrote:
GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


Exactly. As long as the customers think GW miniatures are worthy of their money they'll keep buying those. GW games just need to be perceived as acceptable by the majority, as they're definitely not the primary factor of GW's success. Lore matters even less: primaris selling a lot is proof of that .


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 08:05:51


Post by: Sim-Life


 Blackie wrote:
soviet13 wrote:
GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


Exactly. As long as the customers think GW miniatures are worthy of their money they'll keep buying those. GW games just need to be perceived as acceptable by the majority, as they're definitely not the primary factor of GW's success. Lore matters even less: primaris selling a lot is proof of that .


If this were true why did GW struggle so badly during 7th (and don't pretend they weren't, closing stores and cutting them all to single employee operations is not a sign of a company doing well) and gain a resurgence after rebooting the game for 8th?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 08:18:04


Post by: Deadnight


Brcause it wasn't just 8th ed.

A lot of the improvements originated from Kirby being replaced by Roundtree. Kirby wasn't interested in any long term agenda in his last few years at the top.

Gw made a lot of positive moves since that time that brought people on board.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 08:35:07


Post by: Blackie


 Sim-Life wrote:


If this were true why did GW struggle so badly during 7th (and don't pretend they weren't, closing stores and cutting them all to single employee operations is not a sign of a company doing well) and gain a resurgence after rebooting the game for 8th?


IMHO it's always mostly down to the miniatures. That resurgence was caused by the launch of an entire new line of models for SM, not a new edition. Truescale marines is what a huge number of players demanded since years. That hype was enough to drive huge sales, regardless of the game mechanics.

Maybe the miniatures GW released during 6th and 7th weren't appreciated that much by the fan base. I think that the problem of WHFB 8th was also the miniatures, too many super big heroes or huge stuff like the odd empire chariot or the new cauldron of blood. Awful models, combined to a bland game that forced player to spam 50 man squads of infantries and suddenly fantasy was suffering. Do you really think that WHFB 8th edition was much worse than 7th or 6th, when the game was extremely popular?

Take 40k 8th edition, do you really think indexes 8th was much better than 7th? I played a faction that was probably the worst one in 7th and yet I'd take 7th over index 8th anytime considering how badly written were those indexes.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 09:37:28


Post by: Grimtuff


soviet13 wrote:
GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


Yes, but for how much longer. Blanche is already practically retired (or retired already) and Jes is 61 this year (or already is. Not sure when his birthday is, just know he was born in 1960). He won’t be around for much longer as he is fast approaching retirement age himself, then what happens?


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 10:05:32


Post by: Deadnight


 Grimtuff wrote:
soviet13 wrote:
GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


Yes, but for how much longer. Blanche is already practically retired (or retired already) and Jes is 61 this year (or already is. Not sure when his birthday is, just know he was born in 1960). He won’t be around for much longer as he is fast approaching retirement age himself, then what happens?


*shrug*

I don't see it as that big of a deal Grimtuff.

The torch will be passed. Someone else, or maybe a bunch of people takes over, inspired by what came before. It'll change, adapt and grow, like it always has. Art never stands still. 40ks art has a vast tapestry and incredible heritage to draw on. I've seen it so often in industry - 'when so-and-so goes, what happens?' And rather than being doomed, or everything collapsing when they do.go, other people step up, the roles and responsibilities are farmed out and things carry on.

40k, at the end of the day is more than just one or two people. No one is irreplaceable. 'You will not be missed' is just as true for them as it was for Andy Chambers or Rick Priestly or Pete Haines or hell, for us as players when we dive into the setting.

There's plenty talented artists and creative out there, many of whom have been weaned and inspired by their particular art. It won't be lost.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 12:51:58


Post by: Sim-Life


 Blackie wrote:
 Sim-Life wrote:


If this were true why did GW struggle so badly during 7th (and don't pretend they weren't, closing stores and cutting them all to single employee operations is not a sign of a company doing well) and gain a resurgence after rebooting the game for 8th?


IMHO it's always mostly down to the miniatures. That resurgence was caused by the launch of an entire new line of models for SM, not a new edition. Truescale marines is what a huge number of players demanded since years. That hype was enough to drive huge sales, regardless of the game mechanics.

Maybe the miniatures GW released during 6th and 7th weren't appreciated that much by the fan base. I think that the problem of WHFB 8th was also the miniatures, too many super big heroes or huge stuff like the odd empire chariot or the new cauldron of blood. Awful models, combined to a bland game that forced player to spam 50 man squads of infantries and suddenly fantasy was suffering. Do you really think that WHFB 8th edition was much worse than 7th or 6th, when the game was extremely popular?

Take 40k 8th edition, do you really think indexes 8th was much better than 7th? I played a faction that was probably the worst one in 7th and yet I'd take 7th over index 8th anytime considering how badly written were those indexes.


But why would people who left the game because it was bad buy an entirely new army just for the models if they weren't going to use them in game or had no intention of playing? If they were just in it for the models why would they have stopped buying models during 7th? Your line of reasoning doesn't make sense. It depends entirely on the idea that the primaris models alone is what brought so many people back.

Moreover 40k always dwarfed (harhar) WHFB in terms of sales, so we can probably discount any discussion on Fantasy and AoS took a few years to get off the ground so that's not really a reason either, neither contributed the boom that 8th Ed 40k resulted in. Besides which you contradict your own argument by saying WHFB died because the game was bad.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 12:55:16


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I think GW's improved in two major ways, though I also think they're slipping back into old habits now that the company's been saved:

1) Release Schedule (for FAQs, balance passes, and books themselves). Used to be a long wait between books. In 8th, this wasn't the case. In 9th? Well, it's been just about as long for some books as it had been in the past. I get that COVID screws things up, but that brings me to my second point:

2) (appearance of) Community Engagement: GW appeared to restructure how it engaged with customers, increasing the pace of articles on Warcom, actually giving previews of releases and allowing folks to review them, etc. etc. One of the other things they did was go to digital wargame books (they had them in the past, ofc, but I still have my Index: Imperium 2 ebook). They released .pdf datasheets, legendsed some stuff, etc.

Unfortunately, that seems to be slipping too. A short codex update, changing language and maybe adding obvious to-dos from 9th edition, could easily be done as a PDF. In my opinion, that's the route a company would take when it's ability to ship out a new codex is affected by COVID to the point of being YEARS off schedule.

So whilst I believe GW made some good changes, I think they're slipping back into old habits and that's spooky to me.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 13:18:13


Post by: Deadnight


 Sim-Life wrote:


But why would people who left the game because it was bad buy an entirely new army just for the models if they weren't going to use them in game or had no intention of playing? If they were just in it for the models why would they have stopped buying models during 7th? Your line of reasoning doesn't make sense. It depends entirely on the idea that the primaris models alone is what brought so many people back.


Why? As many reasons as there are people. One answer is They'd buy them because they want to build the models.

The line of reasoning does make sense sim. You make the same mistake as kirby (remember his doozy that the hobby was 'buying gw minis'?) of assuming 'being in it for the models' means 'buying whatever gw produces regardless of aesthetics or quality' and playing/painting it unquestionably. Primaris alone bringing people back is absolutely a fair point.

You also fail to factor motivations changing. Prople generally want different things at different points in their lives. Its perfectly reasonable to expect someone to come back to gw after 5 or 10 years and want to approach it dofferently than last time.Take me.I'm mid-30s.there was a time when I loved tourneys and chased that dragon and played for 'the game'. Somewhere along the line I lost interest in 'the game' side because I got fed up with how gw ran it. When gw made primaris, they were always what I wanted marines to be. And the various other improvements- better social media presence and community engagement, more interesting 'minor' games like shadespire, warcry, necromunda etc and better 'starter' value sets was icing on the cake. I have chaos, death guard, Raptors and minotaurs now.

Another thing to consider as a tangent to this is life experience. I know a lot of people who got back into going via 8th fully aware of gw's poor balance. Most of them that I know seem to also want to approach the game in a way that would infuriate the conpetitives here and play casually and don't chase them tourneys.

 Sim-Life wrote:

Moreover 40k always dwarfed (harhar) WHFB in terms of sales, so we can probably discount any discussion on Fantasy and AoS took a few years to get off the ground so that's not really a reason either, neither contributed the boom that 8th Ed 40k resulted in. Besides which you contradict your own argument by saying WHFB died because the game was bad.


Its unfair to 'probably discount' any discussion on wfb and aos. 8th ed was 2017. Aos launched in 2015. Its first year or two were slow, then gw changed tack and it took off. So Amy success they've had in the intervening years should also consider this.

In fairness, wfb wasn't selling. It was worthless at the time. Dead weight. The fact that they've built aos into a bit of a juggernaut since launch in 2015 ties into the success gw has had these last few years. Growth from 0 is growth.

It's unfair to ignore the other games. You need to look at the whole ecosystem, not just the apex predator. Gw's run of success has been built over a couple of years. It wasn't a 'jump to mega success overnight'. It wassnt just eighth. It was an accumulation of a lot of new releases and right moves. Necromunda, warcry, adeptus titanicus, blood bowl, shadespire, aos. Licended games. Black library. The heresy. Individually might not count for huge £££ but combined, it's definitely a thing. Shadespire was our go-to game for a year. We played the hell out of necromunda. I personally love warcry. More importantly it's gw stomping back into game spaces they'd retreated from, and crucially, gave up to the competition.

Its also the community engagement. Regimental standard on its own had me howling with laughter and engaged with the hobby better than warmachine did in its last few years. To the point where I had to explain to my non-gaming wife what I found so amusing.

Also - Couple of years ago I remember chat that betrayal at calth saved gw's finances that year. Technically a boxed game and nothing do do with 40k. Don't make the mistake of simply dismissing of hand the value of a good value kit.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 16:11:29


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 Tyran wrote:
China is a surprisingly hard market to get into. Different cultural values, different history, different economic situation, and a massive authoritarian government.
It isn't that surprising GW is struggling to get into the Chinese market, specially as GW plays a lot with western culture, which doesn't work well in China.

But on the other hand, that doesn't means much with how GW is doing in the western markets.


They also have to compete with a highly competitive model market that in terms of quality, options and design far outstrips GW (though they are clearly learning fast).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deadnight wrote:
More importantly it's gw stomping back into game spaces they'd retreated from, and crucially, gave up to the competition.


This was something the new management majored on, they realised by creating those segments in the past and abandoning them they had in effect created markets for competitors to occupy and get a secure funding stream to operate from. They were small but in this market segment there is a history of game companies surging to prominence or being business that can be brought up and amalgamated into something threatening.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 23:13:04


Post by: Insectum7


Deadnight wrote:
 Grimtuff wrote:
soviet13 wrote:
GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


Yes, but for how much longer. Blanche is already practically retired (or retired already) and Jes is 61 this year (or already is. Not sure when his birthday is, just know he was born in 1960). He won’t be around for much longer as he is fast approaching retirement age himself, then what happens?


*shrug*

I don't see it as that big of a deal Grimtuff.

The torch will be passed. Someone else, or maybe a bunch of people takes over, inspired by what came before. It'll change, adapt and grow, like it always has. Art never stands still. 40ks art has a vast tapestry and incredible heritage to draw on. I've seen it so often in industry - 'when so-and-so goes, what happens?' And rather than being doomed, or everything collapsing when they do.go, other people step up, the roles and responsibilities are farmed out and things carry on.
Yes . . . But sometimes the people "carrying on" can be gak replacements.


40k, at the end of the day is more than just one or two people. No one is irreplaceable. 'You will not be missed' is just as true for them as it was for Andy Chambers or Rick Priestly or Pete Haines or hell, for us as players when we dive into the setting.
I miss Andy Chambers. I felt that codexes/rules under his direction/authorship were hollistically solid and his sense of tone was excellent.



True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/19 23:47:44


Post by: BaronIveagh


 Insectum7 wrote:
I miss Andy Chambers. I felt that codexes/rules under his direction/authorship were hollistically solid and his sense of tone was excellent.


Same. I liked his generally clear vision of what, exactly, he wanted, even if sometimes there were unforseen rules interactions.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/20 00:34:54


Post by: Just Tony


Deadnight wrote:
No one is irreplaceable. 'You will not be missed' is just as true for them as it was for Andy Chambers or Rick Priestly or Pete Haines or hell, for us as players when we dive into the setting.


Given how badly the Chaos players are STILL whining about the loss of Codex 3.5 I'd say calling him replaceable may be borderline incorrect.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/20 00:51:10


Post by: macluvin


 Just Tony wrote:
Deadnight wrote:
No one is irreplaceable. 'You will not be missed' is just as true for them as it was for Andy Chambers or Rick Priestly or Pete Haines or hell, for us as players when we dive into the setting.


Given how badly the Chaos players are STILL whining about the loss of Codex 3.5 I'd say calling him replaceable may be borderline incorrect.


To be fair I would have gotten over it if they simply scrapped the entire 3.5 codex instead of crossing the word “chaos” off and writing “loyalist” on top of it XD at this point I would be ecstatic if they gave me back bike lords and sorcerers...


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/20 01:04:52


Post by: Daedalus81


 Just Tony wrote:
Deadnight wrote:
No one is irreplaceable. 'You will not be missed' is just as true for them as it was for Andy Chambers or Rick Priestly or Pete Haines or hell, for us as players when we dive into the setting.


Given how badly the Chaos players are STILL whining about the loss of Codex 3.5 I'd say calling him replaceable may be borderline incorrect.


Given how GW is doing rules for codexes right now I'd expect the CSM codex to be really similar in setup to 3.5 and then some - minus the daemons.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/20 01:08:40


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Just Tony wrote:
Given how badly the Chaos players are STILL whining about the loss of Codex 3.5 I'd say calling him replaceable may be borderline incorrect.
Pete Haines was as much a part of the problem as he was the solution, given that he gave his army super rules and gave 1KSons "2 wounds" (which, contrary to what they may have said, did not have a lot going for them).

Hell we invented a special character for him - Lord Hainous - for an enemy leader.


True or False? GW succeeds in spite of itself... @ 2021/10/20 01:19:36


Post by: Voss


Deadnight wrote:
 Grimtuff wrote:
soviet13 wrote:
GW is primarily a miniatures company; the strength of their IP is largely in their visuals. The two main architects of that imagery - John Blanche and Jes Goodwin - still work there, and still drive the imagery that comes out. The IP GW continues to build on is IP that they themselves created.


Yes, but for how much longer. Blanche is already practically retired (or retired already) and Jes is 61 this year (or already is. Not sure when his birthday is, just know he was born in 1960). He won’t be around for much longer as he is fast approaching retirement age himself, then what happens?


*shrug*

I don't see it as that big of a deal Grimtuff.

The torch will be passed. Someone else, or maybe a bunch of people takes over, inspired by what came before. It'll change, adapt and grow, like it always has. Art never stands still. 40ks art has a vast tapestry and incredible heritage to draw on. I've seen it so often in industry - 'when so-and-so goes, what happens?' And rather than being doomed, or everything collapsing when they do.go, other people step up, the roles and responsibilities are farmed out and things carry on.

40k, at the end of the day is more than just one or two people. No one is irreplaceable. 'You will not be missed' is just as true for them as it was for Andy Chambers or Rick Priestly or Pete Haines or hell, for us as players when we dive into the setting.

There's plenty talented artists and creative out there, many of whom have been weaned and inspired by their particular art. It won't be lost.

Very much don't agree. Artists and creative types aren't easily replaceable. It isn't (always) a matter of quality, either. Most have their own visions and even if they are working from the same base materials and concepts, they'll produce different results.
Sometimes that's for the better (Wizards did an amazing job a bring D&D back from the ashes TSR left behind, then proceeded to set it on fire themselves, then recover with what's really a completely different product and audience), sometimes its utterly terrible (Catalyst has burned Shadowrun down to the ground, and offended most of the good contractors that FASA used to work with). And honestly that's with an easier industry with a significantly lower customer buy in (starting point is a couple books for a group) and a starting point of really terrible art and visuals (bad line drawings of ugly succubi and weird monsters is my memory of the earliest D&D monster manuals).

Pick any given show or movie reboot. Sometimes they recapture the magic, sometimes they create entirely new magic, sometimes they leave the property with a sucking chest wound.