Switch Theme:

Has GW lost the ability/talent/innovation to create new games?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I personally think ShadeSpire and the previous Skirmish is that reboot already. Cursed city, wandering warbands and shards of a rare magic material pretty much fit the bill.

Likely they'll make a box set to combine the properties and have the appeal of two games in one box as well as a draw into AoS itself.

Big hopes on my end they do that anyway.

   
Made in fr
Dakka Veteran






 auticus wrote:
Appreciate the update sir.

I did miss There and Back Again. The question is... is it worth picking up with the new ruleset coming...


Yes it is. As I said, the core mechanics of the game are not being changed. The only things that are being touched are magic and heroic strikes, which have needed tweaking for a while now. And the other thing is profiles such as the Balrog which have also needed updating for years. Nothing they're releasing will invalidate previous rules or models. You should join Great British Hobbit League on Facebook Aut. Adam Troke and all the Middle Earth team post there regularly and talk about the game and such.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Sorcerer of Chaos




Sweet I'll look into that.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







 TheAuldGrump wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
Spoiler:
 TheAuldGrump wrote:
motski wrote:
 TheAuldGrump wrote:

One of the things left out by the 'white knights' and the 'black knights', both, is that AoS has, apparently, undergone a lot of change since that initial release - with the White Knights defending the current AoS and try to downplay the initial release, while the Black Knights (fear my wrath!) taking the stance that the initial release is reason enough to hate the game, and feel no urge to spend the money to fix a game that they (and I) loathe.

The White Knights may well be better informed on the current version of the game - but the Black Knights have good reason to ignore AoS, based on the initial release.


Endlessly bashing AoS won't make Kings of War any more popular than it is, TheAuldGrump.

If KoW was such a GREEEEEAT wargame anyway, then why would you need to be such a white knight for it? Can't it just stand or fall on it's own merits without you needing to attack its competition any chance you get?

You've been trying hard for two and a half years now and the KoW subsection of this forum is still a barren wasteland. Time to move on and find something else to obsess about.
I enjoy KoW - and I really did not enjoy AoS.

It is really that simple - I don't like AoS.

And very little that I have read or been told about AoS has done much to change that.

My local area has virtually no AoS, and a small but thriving KoW community. (The word local is important - I will not pretend that my area is the norm.)

Both together are smaller than WHFB was when it was a healthy and thriving game. In the early 2000s, there were forty some odd Warhammer players, most of whom had both a 40K army and a Fantasy army.

There may be as many as thirty KoW players - but most of their armies are repurposed from WHFB. (It may be worth mentioning that nearly all are either members of the SCA or former members.)

I like KoW more than I did WHFB - but WHFB did a better job of building a community than either KoW or AoS.

My ideal is not that KoW replace AoS - it is that GW brings out (or back) a better version of fantasy. GW has the market to do a better game than AoS, that will reach a better market share than either AoS or Kow.

I am not arguing that KoW should take over - I am arguing that AoS is not as healthy for the market as the game that it replaced, and that GW needs to kill it and replace it with something better.

That something better may not be rank and file game, like I enjoy - but it is not AoS, either.

GW used to be very good at building a community.

The Auld Grump


Not as rare a locality as you may think, Same thing here, while KoW is still a minor player, AoS is extinct, with me and one other holdout still sometime playing it. Its not a very good game, but its ok for small action while waiting for a better game or have more time.
I honestly never expect KoW to match WHFB at the peak of its popularity.

Hell, I don't expect AoS and KoW combined to reach that level of popularity.

I also honestly think that GW should have promoted AoS as a separate game from the Rank and File Warhammer - there was room for both games.

Though I also realize that WHFB was already dying when somebody had the 'brilliant' idea of AoS - it is quite possible that WHFB was not salvageable, much as I might wish that it were. (And I still hope that Specialist Games does a 'Legacy' game for WHFB.)

The Auld Grump

*EDIT* I might as well admit that I have enjoyed the heck out of both games of Lost Patrol that I have managed to play since the new version came out - it is still a good game, and the fog of war mechanic still works just fine.


This is something I have contemplated in the past: Whether classic WHFB could be saved from itself. Numerous changes throughout the editions ultimately led to a game that for most intents and purposes could have been on life support. Subtle things, be it Ranks being 4-wide in 6th, 5-wide in 7th, and 10-wide for Hordes in 8th resulted in a higher barrier to entry, especially since said infantry were usually glorified wound counters for static CR. Meanwhile, wonky cannon rules (alongside with 8th adding TLOS) and "6s autowound" made Monsters increasingly irrelevant, around the same time GW kept pushing out (admittedly lovely) monster kits. And of course, most codexes got chopped to 8 or so Magic Items, and Special Characters pointed to unplayability.

To this day, I wonder if the game could have been saved.
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Sorcerer of Chaos




6s autowound to me is necessary. Otherwise you just listbuild to make your opponent's list not be able to hurt yours.

Which was garbage and not fun at all (remember we're talking about a game)

The cannon rules were indeed bad. Laser guided.

The spells were ridiculous. So many peoples' main strategy was to six dice the #6 spell for the win.

Steadfast had good intentions. Because 7th edition was a checkerboard of tiny cavalry units... steadfast brought back infantry.

But the gaming populace being the gaming populace run in extremes and took steadfast to places it shouldnt' have been taken with the 50 or 60 model mega death star facing off against the opponents 50 or 60 model mega death star, slapping bellies in the middle of the table until one failed a break check.

Those are the reasons why I didn't like 8th...
   
Made in us
Haughty Harad Serpent Rider





Richmond, VA

To answer the OP: no.

Even though your post was a huge logical fallacy ("I have a preconceived conclusion and will choose to ignore evidence that already exists."), it made me stop and think.

I've been playing geedub games since the early 90's. Space Hulk 1st and 40k 2nd were my first games (and of course Heroquest and Battlemasters before that).

This period of GW, the last few years, is the best I've ever experienced, by far. Thank you, James Hewitt and Adam Troke and everyone else with the passion and brilliance at New-GW!

Not only are their recent games _fantastic_, but that old blood that has all left GW is also producing _fantastic_ games. I'm spoiled for choice!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/29 17:53:31


"...and special thanks to Judgedoug!" - Alessio Cavatore "Now you've gone too far Doug! ... Too far... " - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Hear hear!


To this day, I wonder if the game could have been saved.

It probably could have but it would've had to start at 6th edition before Kirby let the fantasy monopoly slip through his fingers as he clutched onto the 40k Grail.

I see it as basically like yelling at Napoleon for losing Waterloo, a hundred easily seen mistakes in hindsight made by a genius at his height of power but whose mind was being effected by a grave illness.

And just like yelling at him there's no point now.


This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/29 19:44:35


 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






Not just hindsight, in this case - lots of people could see what Kirby's policies were doing to the company,

Kirby did okay when the company was doing okay - it was when things started going wrong that he made things worse.

First he focused on the game that was making the most money - sidelining Fantasy in favor of 40K.

Then, when things continued to slip, he focused on cutting costs and increasing profit per item over increasing sales.

It basically comes down to Kirby having no idea of how to bring the sales back, and focusing on what he did know.

A short range strategy for a long term problem.

Right now, I am wishing that Paizo would do an official miniatures based mass combat game that was compatible with Pathfinder - I am using KoW for that, but the systems do not have a lot in common.

The current Paizo mass combat rules (From Ultimate Campaign and before that in the Kingmaker Adventure Path) are abstract - they work, and pretty well, but sometimes I like having three hundred zombies on the table....

The Auld Grump - I am waffling about whether to run Kingmaker for the kids game... some of the kids seem to have no problem at all with mass combat, others do not seem that interested.

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in gb
Focused Fire Warrior




Eastern Fringe

I think the old world could have been saved. If it had been up to me, I would have kept the world that was and ran a campaign to shake everything up, retconned a few things added a bit more high-fantasy to the mix and relaunched it as the first edition of WARHAMMER Realm Gate Wars.

Introduce the idea of realm gates appearing around the world opening and closing at random allowing for armies to fight each other and for it to make sense.

I would have focused on players creating smaller warbands>patrols>armies and then introduced movement trays to allow for models to be ranked up to gain bonuses and to be able to scale the game.

Explored the kingdoms of Ind and Cathay, rebooted Mordhiem...argh, just thinking about it makes me sad.

The first rule of unarmed combat is: don’t be unarmed. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Omadon's Realm

I would suggest that laying the blame for the faults of the games and miniatures and rules at the feet of Kirby lacks merrett... I am certain someone with more connection to the IP and how it was being implemented, micro managed or otherwise would be the more likely source of a sizable amount of that.

Did anyone else senior leave around the same time as Kirby stepped down, perhaps suddenly finding themselves without the old king's protection for their 'interesting' management style and now facing a new king who knew they were a menace and needed removing.



 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I would suggest that laying the blame for the faults of the games and miniatures and rules at the feet of Kirby lacks merrett... I am certain someone with more connection to the IP and how it was being implemented, micro managed or otherwise would be the more likely source of a sizable amount of that.

Did anyone else senior leave around the same time as Kirby stepped down, perhaps suddenly finding themselves without the old king's protection for their 'interesting' management style and now facing a new king who knew they were a menace and needed removing.
Heh - I kind of consider Merret to be one of Kirby's failed policies....

For the sake of Gogamagog, put somebody that knows how IP works in charge of IP! (Insert as many exclamation points as you are comfortable with)

Right now, GW is still in a recovery phase - which is going much better, financially, than I ever dreamed possible.

Going to be a while before they are ready to try 'innovation'.

The Auld Grump - Merret was the Zack Snyder for the GW IPs....

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in us
Skilled SDF-1 Pin-Point Barrier Jockey





Mississippi

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I would suggest that laying the blame for the faults of the games and miniatures and rules at the feet of Kirby lacks merrett... I am certain someone with more connection to the IP and how it was being implemented, micro managed or otherwise would be the more likely source of a sizable amount of that.

Did anyone else senior leave around the same time as Kirby stepped down, perhaps suddenly finding themselves without the old king's protection for their 'interesting' management style and now facing a new king who knew they were a menace and needed removing.
Heh - I kind of consider Merret to be one of Kirby's failed policies....

For the sake of Gogamagog, put somebody that knows how IP works in charge of IP! (Insert as many exclamation points as you are comfortable with)

Right now, GW is still in a recovery phase - which is going much better, financially, than I ever dreamed possible.

Going to be a while before they are ready to try 'innovation'.

The Auld Grump - Merret was the Zack Snyder for the GW IPs....


I think I would more associate Merrit with Uwe Boll than Snyder, myself.

Kirby was certainly in "circle the wagons" mode when the company needed to more open and trading. Outwardly, Roundtree has brought a friendlier face and some improvements (multiple entry levels to 40K, some bundling with the Start Collecting boexes), but this Titanic of a company has still got a lot of manuevering and sailing to do before it is clear of the iceburg it's been floundering on for around 8 years.

It never ends well 
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Prowler






 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I would suggest that laying the blame for the faults of the games and miniatures and rules at the feet of Kirby lacks merrett... I am certain someone with more connection to the IP and how it was being implemented, micro managed or otherwise would be the more likely source of a sizable amount of that.

Did anyone else senior leave around the same time as Kirby stepped down, perhaps suddenly finding themselves without the old king's protection for their 'interesting' management style and now facing a new king who knew they were a menace and needed removing.


That would be Alan "Great News" Merrett. He was in charge of IP and the final say of all GW lore. He left about 6 months after Roundtree took over.

Mentioned this in another thread, but Jervis did say it was management direction to make AoS' rules fit onto four A4 sheets. The rules guys were being given direction on how to produce rules to a certain extent.
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






 Stormonu wrote:
 TheAuldGrump wrote:
 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I would suggest that laying the blame for the faults of the games and miniatures and rules at the feet of Kirby lacks merrett... I am certain someone with more connection to the IP and how it was being implemented, micro managed or otherwise would be the more likely source of a sizable amount of that.

Did anyone else senior leave around the same time as Kirby stepped down, perhaps suddenly finding themselves without the old king's protection for their 'interesting' management style and now facing a new king who knew they were a menace and needed removing.
Heh - I kind of consider Merret to be one of Kirby's failed policies....

For the sake of Gogamagog, put somebody that knows how IP works in charge of IP! (Insert as many exclamation points as you are comfortable with)

Right now, GW is still in a recovery phase - which is going much better, financially, than I ever dreamed possible.

Going to be a while before they are ready to try 'innovation'.

The Auld Grump - Merret was the Zack Snyder for the GW IPs....


I think I would more associate Merrit with Uwe Boll than Snyder, myself.

Kirby was certainly in "circle the wagons" mode when the company needed to more open and trading. Outwardly, Roundtree has brought a friendlier face and some improvements (multiple entry levels to 40K, some bundling with the Start Collecting boexes), but this Titanic of a company has still got a lot of manuevering and sailing to do before it is clear of the iceburg it's been floundering on for around 8 years.
I went with Zack Snyder rather than Uwe Bolle because Snyder takes a valuable property (DC superheroes - including the two biggest characters in the industry) and turns it into an unprofitable mess.

Uwe Bolle makes bad movies based on mediocre property - but they do make a profit.

I agree 100% on the Circle the Wagons or Fortress Mentality on Kirby - he was out of his depth, and had no idea as to how to reach the shore.

I suspect that he had hopes that somebody would buy GW for the IP, but it did not happen.

Not malice - he had just reached the hard edge of his competence.

The Auld Grump

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in au
Destructive Daemon Prince





Melbourne .au

 TheAuldGrump wrote:

One of the things left out by the 'white knights' and the 'black knights', both, is that AoS has, apparently, undergone a lot of change since that initial release - with the White Knights defending the current AoS and try to downplay the initial release, while the Black Knights (fear my wrath!) taking the stance that the initial release is reason enough to hate the game, and feel no urge to spend the money to fix a game that they (and I) loathe.


Regardless of the kind of knight I am here, I certainly don't think the initial release of AoS is something to downplay. It was a clusterfeth of a car crash, and handled in the worst possible way. The only good things about it were the actual rules mechanics (in general) and the models. Not sure how any of us is "fixing the game" by spending money? What?



The White Knights may well be better informed on the current version of the game - but the Black Knights have good reason to ignore AoS, based on the initial release.


That's the thing, isn't it? The "black knights" don't actually ignore AoS. They piss and moan and spit venom rather than moving on to another game - even this far on. Hence my "bitter ex" comment. Like, no-one's asking you to like AoS in the slightest - just move the feth on and ignore it now. I got my personal venting done within a couple of months and then moved on. To Kings of War primarily, but also picked up Lion/Dragon Rampant, downloaded 9th Age, etc, but mostly was happy with KoW and "used" the WHFB background rather than Mantica. When I tried AoS as a skirmish game following the General's Handbook release, my games were still set in The Old World and my Dwarves were still Dwarves, not Dvergr or Dispossessed or whatever.



GW could have avoided a lot of crap, just by actually testing the rules before releasing them into the wild as is.


Which is what they've attempted to do with 40k 8th. It's far from perfect, but it's incredibly far from the dumpster fire that was 6th/7th. It's, you know, playable again.



Right now I am holding off on getting the new Necromunda - not because I don't want it, but because I have things I want to buy from Black Friday sales. But I am hearing... not so great things on editing, right now - so I may hold off for the second printing.
The Auld Grump - still planning to get the game, mind - even if the rules are not up to snuff, Necromunda minis are something I want.


Entirely fair enough. I got 2 copies for the models and scenery and tiles. I already have the original game, so if the rules are ...not up to snuff for my own games, I'll revert to the originals or even the Yaktribe set.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 thekingofkings wrote:

The biggest problem I have (as a current player of AoS) is they really did not fix anything. The core of the game is bad, the little tweeks around the edges from the ghbs havent done anything to address that. I know my group initially tried it based on the GW guy saying it was "skirmish" and cheaper to get into with smaller armies and less expensive. I found that to be mostly untrue, the new models are just as expensive and you usually need just as many. I will give it credit where I think it deserves it, but I wont hesitate to criticize it where I feel it deserves it as well. The game had been hyped up far beyond its meager capabilities.


Serious question - no snark. If you and your group don't like the game, why are you playing it instead of one of the many other available quality skirmish rulesets out there that allow you to use your existing models without the need to buy anything that you don't want to buy on its own aesthetic/price merits?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Peregrine wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
Nothing in that was ad hominem, much less blatant. It was addressing why people argue so passionately, in which case motives are very important.


No, it was an ad hominem. It went beyond mere "explanation" into the same old attempt to label certain people "haters" and therefore dismiss everything they have to say. Rather than addressing the substance of the criticism on its own merits, regardless of who is saying it, they went straight for insulting the people making the criticism and trying to de-legitimize their opinion.


Sorry matey. You don't get to ascribe my motives, and your attempts to discredit my comments don't work.


So why do you appear to continue to hate AoS with such a passion this many years on rather than simply moving on and ignoring it as a product that you have no interest in?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 silent25 wrote:

Just to point out on the AoS rules, Jervis Johnson mentioned in a HeelanHammer podcast interview (Christmas Special), the hardest part with creating the rules was being told they had to fit on four A4 sheets. It sounded like a number of your issues were dictated to the rules team by management, aka Kirby and Merret.


This is accurate. I've seen the same comments in a number of places. It's why there are so many rules as part of each unit entry. Then again, after seeing how well (not) GW handled USRs in the decline from 3rd-7th bespoke unit rules is probably a better fit for them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 thekingofkings wrote:

I hope necromunda goes well, but if they do a mordheim reboot, I am hoping its not in the "mortal realms" as I have found that setting extremely uninteresting. One of the kicks in the teeth about AoS is that it not only nuked a system, but a setting as well.


Mate - just ignore the AoS setting if you don't like it. Works for me. Most AoS units can easily be shoehorned into TOW factions anyway or retconned into the Old World background pretty easily in the same way that GW did for decades, and even Sigmarine models can be written in using the same logic as a "Sigmar's Holiest Devoted Warriors" faction.

Of course, Mordheim was set in the past, so do do the above as I'd personally play it, it'd have to be set in the "modern" Old World. So have a newer Warpstone Nuclear accident in another Empire City.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/12/10 00:13:25


   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






 Azazelx wrote:
Which is what they've attempted to do with 40k 8th. It's far from perfect, but it's incredibly far from the dumpster fire that was 6th/7th. It's, you know, playable again.
Sadly, a full edition after I gave up on the game, and sold off my Dark Angels.

But most of the things I am hearing about the new edition have been very positive - - mostly from folks that preferred 2nd edition. (My own sweet spot was 3rd - which was more of a wargame than other editions.)

It is getting played again.

I am not one of the folks that is playing the new edition, so I cannot speak to 'Innovation' or its lack - but, really, the important thing is people putting their toy soldiers on the table, and rolling dice.

Rountree is doing something right.

The Auld Grump

Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.

The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
 
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block





Jacksonville, FL.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
First and foremost, I don't play GW games anymore. Historics is more my thing these days, but I still keep one eye on GW developments.

And as people know, the new Necromunda is with us. And it looks fantastic.

And the re-launch of Space Hulk a few years back, brought a tear to my eye. The miniatures and tiles were amongst the best I've ever seen.

And Blood Bowl looks pretty damn good. And if they do Mordheim, I've no doubt that will look good as well. And play good.

I used to play these games when they first came out, and the gameplay is superb.

BUT, and it's a big but...

These are remakes. And no matter how wonderful they are, they're remakes.

Where are the game designers and the talent to give us new games like Bloodbowl, Space Hulk, and Necromunda. For all its faults, GW used to be pretty good at trying something new in the 1980s and 1990s.

They can't keep doing remakes forever, and maybe there is a new game I've overlooked?

What's dakka's view on this?


The question is more of can they support it. The reason why their Specialist line died, in my opinion for what its worth, is they stopped supporting the lines. So if the these new versions of games can see the same support as what GW puts into AOS or 40k, then maybe they can consider creating new IP.

Shiny! 
   
 
Forum Index » Dakka Discussions
Go to: