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.

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.

 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…

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.

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?

 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.

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.

 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.

 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.

 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. .

 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.

Their shrewd business practices work, consumers will buy anyway.

 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!").

 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.

 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.

 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?

 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.

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).

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.

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

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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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.

 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?

Note that 100% of poll respondents agree that GW is a success.