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.

This has just been one of those ideas that bothers me from time to time.

As a fan of the hobby I have jumped on the bandwagon of many of the "big new thing" games that have come down the pike in the past 15 years. Many of these games have been IMHO far better designed than 40k but only a handfull have survived and none have come close to reaching the level of sucess world wide that 40k has. Why?

Many very intelligent and creative people have poured thier hearts and souls, and millions of investor dollars into game after game only to fail. Warmachine is perhaps the only game to stand the test of time with reasonable success but even it has only a fraction of the sales of 40k despite the amazing work done by the Privateer Press team over the past 5 years.

I have wondered this time and time again, and yet once again I find myself eagerly looking forward to the next edition of 40k, painting a new tau army, and meeting with old friends to play my a game I thought I had put behind me years ago.

So I ask the dakkaites? Is 40k invincible? If not what does a game need to have to take its crown away?

I've contemplated starting Warmachine or Hordes quite a bit.

The fact of the matter is that the only Hobby shop I know of locally that I can drive to pretty reasonably on a Friday/Weekend is a GW Store. All the people I know play 40k or Fantasy.

If there was a decent WM or Hordes section around that I could get to reliably, I'd possibly start the game. Other than that, it's GW for me.

I was going more for a theoretical new game, what would it need to have to truly compete against 40k.

As an example, to me it would need, at least 6 factions, 2 of them alien, plastic tank sized vehicle kits, plastic basic infantry, good hard sci fi fluf and quality rules.

If a game like that came out with good support then I would definitely give it a shot. Only thing that keeps me from going whole hogg into at-43 is No Tanks, and not enough factions.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:I've contemplated starting Warmachine or Hordes quite a bit.

The fact of the matter is that the only Hobby shop I know of locally that I can drive to pretty reasonably on a Friday/Weekend is a GW Store. All the people I know play 40k or Fantasy.

If there was a decent WM or Hordes section around that I could get to reliably, I'd possibly start the game. Other than that, it's GW for me.

Ditto that. FOW too.

Opponent availability is certainly a key issue-sadly my FOW Germans rarely get used put me off from starting other systems (SST/WAB).

I would also point out that with some increasing exceptions for Warmachine/Hordes, most retailers seem to focus their product support (leagues/campaigns/special events/tournaments/etc.) on moving GW product. Without in-store support it can be hard to build an audience for a product. While open gaming for a system is nice, having something more structured can do wonders in terms of building up a gaming community and holding players' interest.

So for a new minis game to have a legitimate shot at competing with gw it woud almost have to roll out like a ccg, with heavy marketing, pre built tournament support with prize support and a national ranking system and enough models and factions out of the gate to allow competitive play?

Sounds like only a Wizkids or WOTC could even try something that big, but with the track records of minis games, why would they bother when they can just keep pumping out pre paints.

sad

They'll pretty much have to recreate the WotC phenomenon with their own brand of games, wouldn't they?

Personally, I think nobody can overtake GW without GW imploding. GW has several things in common with Microsoft.

both companies dominate their respective market and have for more than 10 years

both companies have competition that offers an arguably better customer experience

both companies rely on stuffing the distribution channel with their products

both companies rely on relatively large profit margins for their core products and more or less establish the market price for similar products

both companies have developed an 'ecosystem' that is hostile to using competitor's products within their own universe

both companies rely on established users' previous purchases to serve as a barrier to entry for competition

All of these things pose very big barriers to entry for new competitors, but I believe the last item is the most important.

While 'the best' miniatures or rules set is a subjective thing, it is fairly easy to find opponents for GW games. My GW minis aren't easily used in other IP-based systems due to their unique design. Additionally, the resources available to GW can't be matched by another contemporary minis company. Hasbro has no problem dropping a game if it isn't profitable, and smaller companies just don't have the money to generate the sheer amount of materials GW does. Pressman tried to do everything with the Mutant Chronicles universe (RPG, card game, minis game, movie, books etc) back in the 90s, but just didn't get the traction needed to keep up with GW. I doubt you'll see anything that ambitious from PP or another company.

Until those items are overcome I don't see GW falling from dominance any time soon.

If you start a shop that sell burger and fries, even if you come up with the best berger ever, you will have to compete with already establish burger selling places. Some burger place have been around for a while now...

Just my 2 cents...

As stated before, the bigest thing stopping other games from getting big is people to play with. These games are expensive and if you are going to pour money into them, you want to make sure you can actualy play. I could spend all the money in the world on the greatest new mini game, but its not going to be much fun if I can't find other people to play against. GW is very established and anywhere you go where mini games are played, you can find 40k and fantasy players without too much difficulty. That can't be said for many other games.

The other side of the coin is that people have spent a huge amount of time and money into the armies that they currently have so they are less willing to put them aide in favor of something else entirely new where they will have to start from scratch.

So really in order to compete, the game would have to attract a lot of players early on and maintain their interest and support of the game. That is the key. Now, how to do that is another question entirely. One possible idea would be a game that didn't have a specific defined model line. One where you could still use all your models from 40k, fantasy, warmachine, etc. I'm not sure how that could be worked out, but I know I'd be much more inclined to try out something that didn't invalidate my current army.

For a game / company to come along and "beat" GW, I feel it would need:

1) A lot of different armies
2) Awesome models/miniatures
3) A rich background not only from books and fluff but video games, movies or whatever to support #2
4) Availability in every store and store employees/owners enthusiastic about it enough to make their customers wanna buy it
5) A whole crapload of players all over the world. So many people in fact that you can just walk into almost any game store with an army and find people who will want to play.

The GW/Microsoft analogy is a good one. Unless they go belly up, chances are they will always be on top. No matter how many internet nerds hate it and tell everyone else not to buy it, they will aways be nothing but a vocal minority. There will always be great alternatives, such as WM/Hordes, but they don't have the decades of experience, etc, that GW has. 15 years from now if the hobby and their games are still going strong then maybe their games will be as big a GW's stuff is now, but if GW continues to also stick with it and improve over the years, GW will most likely still be on top.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

One possible idea would be a game that didn't have a specific defined model line. One where you could still use all your models from 40k, fantasy, warmachine, etc. I'm not sure how that could be worked out, but I know I'd be much more inclined to try out something that didn't invalidate my current army.

Thats an interesting idea, lets say a company came out with a mini game that had factions with some units that could be proxied for using gw minis, and then actually encouraged you to use those minis in organized tourney play. If you made those units maybe the second best units for the facton, good enough to compete but not dominate then you could pick up the new game, use for eldar falcons instead of blahblahneese killytanks and still be allowed to compete in organized play.

If they followed the ccg model and provided organized play with signifigant prize support like an ard boyz tourney right out of the gate that you could use gw, and say hoards minis to play in,

Id try it, maybe. Much less risk, and much easier to find opponents since you just say,

hey lets try nuke nation 9000, you can use your marines and i can use my tau see if we like it.

thats kind of genius.

There's another issue though. Is the entire industry viable in the long term? I think thats iffy at best.

jfrazell wrote:There's another issue though. Is the entire industry viable in the long term? I think thats iffy at best.

True, there is a lot of competition for your recreational dollar, but the Geek Elite seems to be a recurring cultural phenomenon with each generation. Im 39 yet Im into a game that has a fan base that is 50% teenagers.

Only a small fraction of those teens go on to join the ranks of the Geeknorati but we all seem to end up with pretty descent jobs, wifes who want us out of the house on the weekends, and the desire to blow up each others little soldiers.

Video games competition seems to actually feed the geek culture and promote gaming due to the desire to hang out with people who have simillar interests to you, so I dont see video gaming killing the hobby.

Of course a serious economic down turn could simply make disposable income too precious to spend on hobbies, and that is inevitable. I read that entertainment is the one thing that tends to weather a depression but I dont know that niche hobbies like ours would benifit from that.

bigtmac68 wrote:

One possible idea would be a game that didn't have a specific defined model line. One where you could still use all your models from 40k, fantasy, warmachine, etc. I'm not sure how that could be worked out, but I know I'd be much more inclined to try out something that didn't invalidate my current army.

Thats an interesting idea, lets say a company came out with a mini game that had factions with some units that could be proxied for using gw minis, and then actually encouraged you to use those minis in organized tourney play. If you made those units maybe the second best units for the facton, good enough to compete but not dominate then you could pick up the new game, use for eldar falcons instead of blahblahneese killytanks and still be allowed to compete in organized play.

If they followed the ccg model and provided organized play with signifigant prize support like an ard boyz tourney right out of the gate that you could use gw, and say hoards minis to play in,

Id try it, maybe. Much less risk, and much easier to find opponents since you just say,

hey lets try nuke nation 9000, you can use your marines and i can use my tau see if we like it.

thats kind of genius.

Any official tourney by a company who encouraged outside mineature lines such as gw would find itself assaulted with so many lawsuits it would crumble under them. Seriously if wargame 3000 was released tomorrow, with mostly just rules, a few models, and encouraged you to find other cool sources of "models" to play there new rules/games they would be hit with so much litigation there childrens children would still be paying off the losses.

I think the number one thing a game can do to dethrone GW is come up with reasonable pricing for nice looking models, and have decent rules to follow up. People are already fed up with things like chaos terminators going from metal to plastic...but still costing 50 bucks?? GW has one huge achilese heel, best described in this picture:

http://llbbl.com/data/RPG-motivational/target271.html

When Microsoft made the XBox they made a massive R&D investment, and the onus was the multi-billion dollar gaming industry, bigger than hollywood.

The wargaming miniatures industry just isn't that lucrative, and 40k is well established on the marketplace. 40k has ...

1) Space Marines
2) Tanks
3) The Imperial Guard
4) Aliens
5) Weird Stuff
6) Primarchs, everybody loves Primarchs
7) Everybody and their brother has played it at one time or another
8) Space Wolves and the Inquisition, altho noone REALLY cares about the Inquisition

40k is just fun.

That new ruleset idea is a good one. Presumably after a while the company would start releasing their own miniatures which would lead to an eventual draconian control over their copyright and GW minis would become the new Armorcast, all but forgotten were it not for occasional eBay auctions and dusty boxes on the bottom shelves of gaming stores.

Assuming the company found a way to make any money in the first place. I'm sure GW would like nothing more than selling thier minis to an expanded customer base before buying out the competition .

Note that it's quite possible GW could go bankrupt someday, those british labourers don't come cheap.

This is an interesting question. The simple answer is that no-one is going to make a game that "beats" GW because their success is not based on 40K and WHFB anyway. However, it is possible for GW to "lose".

Looking at GW now they are a company that publishes 2 systems, plus some odds and sods of specialist games and the tail end of LoTR, none of which is making much money.

Looking at history, the rise of GW was not based on the Warhammer games, it was founded in the RPG explosion of the late 70s, followed by expansion with a wide range of other games many of which were not rooted in the WH background. (It was this success that let them build their retail chain which is a big factor in gathering support from the Group 1 players I'll describe below.)

So one reason why people can't beat WH with a new game is that GW didn't win with WH, they won with a wide variety of games.

Notice that since GW have abandoned all these other games, their financials have started looking a bit poor. LoTR hid it for a few years, but was only successful because of the movies. And they are starting to publish or republish games like Talisman, which may indicate they see their weakness.


Another argument is that GW's customers segment broadly into two groups.

Group 1, the largest, consists of schoolboys and students who play WH for a few years then drop wargaming. These players get into it easily because their friends, cousins and older brothers are into it, and GW makes it easy to get into through its retail chain.

Group 2 is the veterans, who may continue playing WH all their lives. Most of them also play a variety of other tabletop games. WH remains popular because of the network effect -- it is possible to get a pick-up game nearly anywhere you might go.

In effect, GW have not beaten the other games in the veteran market. There are probably a lot more veteran players who play Ancients than play WHFB, for instance. However, historical gaming is not capable of being dominated by a single company, because there is no unique IP involved. So the players are spread among a much greater variety of rules systems, and GW with its singular IP based product seems to dominate.


Following these arguments, I judge it is not possible to "beat" 40K with a single game.

I don't think it IS possible. GW is too established; you can't compete with a string of dedicated retail stores. Building the infrastructure required to compete would be too much of an investment for anyone other than a major company muscling in on the market.

So, unless Micrsosoft or Sony start making miniature games, I think GW's safe.

While I agree that GW grew with a variety of games, it is primarily their intellectual property that serves as a foundation for those games. Games like Man o' War, Battle for Armageddon, WFRP, and Firewarrior are all kinds of different games, but they all are based on GW's two universes. One doesn't see much Dark Future material from GW. None of those games really lasted long. Only the behemoths of 40K and WFB survive, probably because they are the only means of selling lots of minis to a wide audience.

Their large IP resources allow GW to experiment with a variety of game formats such as CCGs, RPGs, and video games and still make money despite their 'bread and butter' coming from 40K and WFB. I honestly started 40K in 1989 for their background. I had been playing 15 and 25 historicals in high school, but the 40K universe really drew me in. Now it is something I rarely discuss because it has been pretty static (boring) the past 10 years or so.

On the IP issue, I dont think GW would have a case if a company simply produced a game that had say 50% of its units, in 50% of its factions that were generically simillar to common GW models and then instituted the policy that " minatures from any manufacurer may be used in our tournaments providing the reasonably resemble the type of model being replaced"

then your army that has powerd armored infantry and tracked tanks could be proxied for with space marine infantry and marine and/or guard tanks.

your army with battlesuits and hovertanks could be proxied for with a combination of tau and eldar vehilces and units.

this only works if your own models are as good as or better than the GW equivalents, your models are a bit cheaper ( say 10% ), you have other units in those factions that are better than the gw proxi units that have excelelnt modlels in your range.

for instance the anime inspired army has suits and hovertanks, but also has full on 9" tall mecha. You could play them proxying your tau for the suits and hovertanks, but damn you really want to include that mecha in your tourney army. Now your mecha doesnt match your proxied force so you buy the Wargame 3000 suits and hovertanks.

You never mention the GW product in your advertising, but you make it clear that any minis are allowed.

I see no violation of IP here. If making simmilar styles of forces was a violation of IP, then jsut about every mini game that has ever come out could be sued by GW for being simmilar to one faction or another.

As to the types of games idea, I think what GW did was create a new market with the sucess of thier games. PP has tapped into that in a smaller way and they will continue to be sucessful and maybe its just a time thing.

Unfortunately for me, they dont have tanks

I guess the PP model of start slow with a great game and a nice playable amount of forces for four interesting factions out of the gate is the way to go. If only someone could follow that model with plastic kits and full sized vehicles

Dal'yth Dude wrote:I honestly started 40K in 1989 for their background. I had been playing 15 and 25 historicals in high school, but the 40K universe really drew me in. Now it is something I rarely discuss because it has been pretty static (boring) the past 10 years or so.

I'd put that down as GW's Achilles heel more than anything else, but it would seem quite challenging for a new company to be able to take advantage of it.

PP seems to have done a great job creating a living breathing backgrounds that continues to evolve with the game. I dont know how much of thier sucess is based on that, and how much is just the fact that they have cool rules and cool figs.

Dal'yth Dude wrote:While I agree that GW grew with a variety of games, it is primarily their intellectual property that serves as a foundation for those games. Games like Man o' War, Battle for Armageddon, WFRP, and Firewarrior are all kinds of different games, but they all are based on GW's two universes. One doesn't see much Dark Future material from GW. None of those games really lasted long. Only the behemoths of 40K and WFB survive, probably because they are the only means of selling lots of minis to a wide audience.

...

You are right on the selling minis point.

I am an older gamer (age 45) and remember when GW was a single store in Dalling Road, Hammersmith. Long before WHFB was ever thought of. 40K was published in 1987 and over the next few years they started to put out other games based on the same background, like Adeptus Titanicus and Space Hulk. However they also had a good mix of non-40K based games like the 2000 AD series, Talisman and licensed titles like RuneQuest. These weren't all dropped until the mid-90s. The same for the Citadel miniatures production. At the start it was generic RPG figures and licensed figures (they did an excellent series of Traveller 15mm figures, for instance.)

It took nearly 20 years of wide based game selling and publishing to build up the basis for the WH GW Empire. Now they seem to be on a downward trend.

More people playing.

I think that's about it.

All good answers, and it pretty much covers the field.

When PP first released Warmachine, it didn't even have a rule book, just the quickstart rules. BUT, they released a boxed set for each faction, with enough models that you could get right into it.
To me, THAT was a big draw. The store where I gamed, had one box of each faction. I pointed out the new stuff to my mates, and the next thing I knew, three boxes were snarfed up. I was left with Cygnar. The very next weekend we had our first game in the store, and the owner was inundated with requests for product. Would the interest have been as great if we had to sub other models? Probably not.

One thing that no one seems to have hit on is GW's current policy of trying to strongarm independant shops to push their product. Being on good terms with a couple of shop owners, I have heard about sales reps telling the owners to "give less floor space" to competitive games as well as requiring shops to order merchandise over and above what they need. One shop owner wanted to order 5 defilers to replace those he sold. He reported that he had to order other items as well, even though he was already overstocked with those items.



As others said, anyone can write a rules set (good, bad or indifferent) , but the real selling point is minis for many people.

To beat 40K in the long run:

1. Marketing strategy. On TV, in the big box stores, and in the public mind. I remember seeing magic card commercials and ygioh on the backs of Archies. Not everyone reads your trade magazine, if you are a GW HQ type reading this thread.

2. Ease of entry. Make it so it's not an elite, and time consuming entry point. Intro sets should be accessible with a level of challenge/variety without being overwhelming. Skull pass is good for this, Operation Damocles not so much apparently.

3. Out of the box play. You should never need to buy three books to play, if possible. Include basic army lists with the game. AT 43 seems good for this.

4. Some level of customization possible but not required.

5. Stuff that a grown man or a 12 year old wouldn't feel dumb holding. New confrontation may be an example of failure here.

6. A playable game with few contradictions/ updated as quickly as possible when errors are found. LOTR is a great example.

The only possibly way is to beat the GW is to build some sort of wacky time machine and start a minitures range before them, start a nuclear war as soon as you have made your first sale. and then you beat the GW before it starts ps I don't recomend this result because it may lead my death and to a significant loss of life!!!!!

Uh, yeah. Right.

I think most people have posted cogently on this:

1. Good background
2. Good, well supported rules
3. Elegant design of book/rules (i.e. pretty books)
4. Great figures
5. Great relations with stores (support)

Many very intelligent and creative people have poured thier hearts and souls, and millions of investor dollars into game after game only to fail. Warmachine is perhaps the only game to stand the test of time with reasonable success but even it has only a fraction of the sales of 40k despite the amazing work done by the Privateer Press team over the past 5 years.

For me alot of it comes down to
.time
.money
.space
.game play/groups

Classic battletech which we still play in our group has been around just as long as 40K and has a better (as in more clear and concise) rules set. its the other main game we play aside from 40K

Are there lots of great games out there?
Most definately, but each game system appeals to different players.
I for one am an avid babylon 5 fan and i owned everything there was to have for B5 wars. then the rights got sold and they made an entirely new version of the game(a call to arms) with all new rules, gameplay and another stack of books.

Its well done and all but i hardly have anybody in my area that plays it(the biggest factor) and i have no desire to basically re-buy the entire game(the money/space issue).

warmachine-i personally hate most of the minis and i detest the inflexable nature of the game play. if i want to play chess i will play chess.


GW is like the microsoft of miniture wargaming. you can go anywhere and find somebody who plays it, and that right there is the biggest draw and reason for its succes, for what is the fun of wargaming if you have the most beautifully painted and effective armies and there is nobody to game with?

How about a 'pro circuit' ?

Type tourney system out of the gate. I know that kind of thing has been very succesful at helping to market certain card games. Since there is allready a dedicated tournament community for the wargaming hobby, would having a tourney circuit with say a 50k grand prize at the end be enough to make you try a game.

Obviously if the game blows nothing will help but if it followed the was a solid game with balanced tactical game play ( and had good plastic vehicle and infantry kits in the initial release ) that might be enough to at least prompt the hard core group within your average store to give it a shot.

Giving prize support out ( not just medals and certificates, but real prizes ) to any flgs willing to sponsor your game and positively incentivising stores to stock more product ( as opposed to trying to strong arm stores like the VOID sales team did )

Course this is probably more of a dream scenario for me than something any mini company is ever likley to do, still cool to wish for.