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.

Its a bit of a "cry baby" statement though can't you at least agree kanluwen?

I'd agree if there weren't companies that would jump all over the chance, but what does it matter?

People will take the comments however they will. They'll read into GW's evil overlording policies, etc etc.

BeefyG wrote:Its a bit of a "cry baby" statement though can't you at least agree kanluwen?

That's one way to look at it.

Alternatively, you could look at it as the Specialist guys doing what they can for the game with the resources they've been given. If they don't have the budget to add new models to the range, they've at least tried to give you the option of creating those characters yourself. If you simply go out and buy models from other ranges rather than converting GW miniatures for the job, they gain nothing from this... they're just providing free advertising for a competitor.

They're giving you a free rulebook, and trying to improve the game by updating it and adding new options. If you repay that by buying miniatures from a competing company instead, frankly I think they're justified in being a little cranky about it.

insaniak wrote:

Alternatively, you could look at it as the Specialist guys doing what they can for the game with the resources they've been given. If they don't have the budget to add new models to the range, they've at least tried to give you the option of creating those characters yourself. If you simply go out and buy models from other ranges rather than converting GW miniatures for the job, they gain nothing from this... they're just providing free advertising for a competitor.

Nope, they are giving good advertising to their own game bloodbowl... So you think its somewhat logic to cripple your own game options because...err... some fans buy elsewere? By that logic they should shut down all games they develop.

insaniak wrote:

They're giving you a free rulebook, and trying to improve the game by updating it and adding new options. If you repay that by buying miniatures from a competing company instead, frankly I think they're justified in being a little cranky about it.

- people repayed, payed, repayed and keept paying for over a decade of inconditional suport on a abandoned game.. if someone is due to repay something is GW not the fans that keept it going at their expenses.

Cranky? Yes people should be VERY cranky... not only GW abandoned Specialist games ( great for those that invested in the systems and for the flags like mine that still has mordheim stock that cant shift) but GW atacked the few stubborn passionated by BB fan sites.... etc I will not run down things again man, its crystal clear.

Kanluwen wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Ok, this is heading into the realm of just plain fethed up.

http://www.tabletopgamingnews.com/2009/11/17/31483

So, we'll punish the fans if we hear them talking about using substitute figures??? WTF?

Except that's not what they're stating.

They'll punish the fans if they hear about other COMPANIES marketing figures exclusively as stand-ins for ones GW doesn't make.

Eh... not exactly. They also say that if they hear the fans talking about a model as a possible alt mini (in forums or whatnot, I guess) same result.

I wonder when they're going to start sending goons to hobby shops to break our legs for using Pig Iron heads on IG troopers.

NAVARRO wrote:So you think its somewhat logic to cripple your own game options because...err... some fans buy elsewere?

They're not crippling their own options. They're threatening to remove certain proposed new content, because they gain nothing from publishing it if people are just going to shop elsewhere.

- people repayed, payed, repayed and keept paying for over a decade of inconditional suport on a abandoned game.. if someone is due to repay something is GW not the fans that keept it going at their expenses.

This touches on something that has always confused me a little... Why is it that a game has to be receiving ongoing support for people to play it?

GW didn't have to release a new version of the rules. The fact that they are doing so, and doing so in a manner that allows people to get it for free is a bonus, not something that you should consider yourself entitled to because you bought the last version of the game.



Seriously, I'm not saying that I think that removing the star players is a great idea. Personally, I'm all for people using whatever miniatures in their games that they see fit to use. But I can certainly see the logic behind it.

Wrong again.

They don't want the COMPANIES marketing figures as stand-ins for the ones they do not make.

But, the actual person who sent in the tip to TTGN said that he didn't want people talking about it due to they might cause issues or encourage third parties that read the forums like Chapterhouse.

Kanluwen wrote:Wrong again.

They don't want the COMPANIES marketing figures as stand-ins for the ones they do not make.

But, the actual person who sent in the tip to TTGN said that he didn't want people talking about it due to they might cause issues or encourage third parties that read the forums like Chapterhouse.

Or get GW sued for violating the Sherman Anti-trust act. (whether it would stick or not, this smells of abusing one's dominant position in the market.)

LOLWUT?

This is as simple as protecting their investment in the recent Blood Bowl game, and protecting their own Blood Bowl sales. Heck, for all we know we'll even see a Blood Bowl rerelease within the next few years.

Hey, let the GW haters have their time in the sun Kan.

In the meantime I'm going to paint up the Tyranids I have in preparation for the new codex and minis.

Cya.

insaniak wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:So you think its somewhat logic to cripple your own game options because...err... some fans buy elsewere?

They're not crippling their own options. They're threatening to remove certain proposed new content, because they gain nothing from publishing it if people are just going to shop elsewhere.

How do you establish "they dont gain anything" and that "people will buy elsewere"? Really mate is this stance I dont understand... If you create a game there will always be people who play it diferently and if your game is a hit competition will try to emulate it... thats a given fact in gaming of all sorts... should that demote you from creating your game and support it?
Its much like looking at things in the "defeated position" prespective. Cant understand how these conclusions are made.

insaniak wrote:

- people repayed, payed, repayed and keept paying for over a decade of inconditional suport on a abandoned game.. if someone is due to repay something is GW not the fans that keept it going at their expenses.

This touches on something that has always confused me a little... Why is it that a game has to be receiving ongoing support for people to play it?

GW didn't have to release a new version of the rules. The fact that they are doing so, and doing so in a manner that allows people to get it for free is a bonus, not something that you should consider yourself entitled to because you bought the last version of the game.



Seriously, I'm not saying that I think that removing the star players is a great idea. Personally, I'm all for people using whatever miniatures in their games that they see fit to use. But I can certainly see the logic behind it.

First question is rethorical? If not I think like anything in human evolution needs to be improved, updated, better versions etc thats why you have windows V2734364 and videogames updated constantly, computers, cars, clothes pretty much anything will evolve to keep people interested and have wider & constant exposure to targets...
BB people can play any version they want true... but dont you think that new versions will bring more attention to it and as consequence atract new gamers?

If I buy a video game I want servers to be up and running as much as i buy BB game I espect some kind of support at GW stores with leagues tournaments... I still can play offline and also BB at home but thats only enjoying part of the wider potential of the game... do you find this illogical or confusing?

Rackham released games and canned them also guess what consequences they had, these kind of games that require money and customer labour investments do need a wider window of support in order to stay alive IMO.

Kanluwen wrote:Wrong again.

They don't want the COMPANIES marketing figures as stand-ins for the ones they do not make.

But, the actual person who sent in the tip to TTGN said that he didn't want people talking about it due to they might cause issues or encourage third parties that read the forums like Chapterhouse.

I am trying not to be offended by that remark, but for some reason I am.

To suggest that in some way Chapterhouse is a parasite, well if giving hobbyist the means to accesorize and providing them with original bits and stuff that GW never makes, well I guess CHS will have to live with that stigma.

Its a good thing that CHS isn't in existance to make GW happy, but to provide for the gamers.

What exactly is wrong with third parties making miniatures? Isnt that what free enterprise is about, competitors keep other competitors prices in check and prevent harmful monopolies.

Then you're not thinking hard enough, Navarro.

The point Insaniak was making is that why should Games Workshop leave up a set of rules which include characters that they don't have models for--but everyone "knows" that suchandsuch third party company makes the EXACT character model with their EXACT rules for the EXACT price that GW would charge.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nvillacci wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Wrong again.

They don't want the COMPANIES marketing figures as stand-ins for the ones they do not make.

But, the actual person who sent in the tip to TTGN said that he didn't want people talking about it due to they might cause issues or encourage third parties that read the forums like Chapterhouse.

I am trying not to be offended by that remark, but for some reason I am.

To suggest that in some way Chapterhouse is a parasite, well if giving hobbyist the means to accesorize and providing them with original bits and stuff that GW never makes, well I guess CHS will have to live with that stigma.

Its a good thing that CHS isn't in existance to make GW happy, but to provide for the gamers.

What exactly is wrong with third parties making miniatures? Isnt that what free enterprise is about, competitors keep other competitors prices in check and prevent harmful monopolies.

Except Chapterhouse IS a parasitical entity.
And as for "original bits and stuff that GW never makes"...
Salamander icon bitz, Space Wolf icon bitz, etc are available via Forge World.
Which is a subbranch of what Company again...?

And CHS isn't in existence to provide for the gamers.
It's to make money by filling a niche that Forge World and GW don't consistently exploit.

And as for the "issue"...
There's no problem with third parties making miniatures...for their own games.
Free enterprise isn't about making money off of someone else's idea by leeching off a few minor slots that they don't have filled in.

Fateweaver wrote:Hey, let the GW haters have their time in the sun Kan.

.

Oh FFS can people please just DROP IT? Its like the most pointless argument ever, repeated to its 10000000th time.. URRR HATERZ.

Just leave people have peacefull and enjoyable chats.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:Then you're not thinking hard enough, Navarro.

The point Insaniak was making is that why should Games Workshop leave up a set of rules which include characters that they don't have models for--but everyone "knows" that suchandsuch third party company makes the EXACT character model with their EXACT rules for the EXACT price that GW would charge.


.

Dont have models? Have you checked GW range of products?... how many will not buy elsewere and buy instead some GW warhammer fantasy range dwarf regiment box and some GW GS blister and GW sculpting tool and GW brushes to just make that character? Really I'm probably not thinking at all because i cant find sense in a GW game that INSPIRES people to buy more GW stuff, being reduced/revised because competition makes some models.
This is somewhat a poor way to promote your games and products...

nvillacci wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Wrong again.

They don't want the COMPANIES marketing figures as stand-ins for the ones they do not make.

But, the actual person who sent in the tip to TTGN said that he didn't want people talking about it due to they might cause issues or encourage third parties that read the forums like Chapterhouse.

nvillacci wrote:
I am trying not to be offended by that remark, but for some reason I am.

To suggest that in some way Chapterhouse is a parasite, well if giving hobbyist the means to accesorize and providing them with original bits and stuff that GW never makes, well I guess CHS will have to live with that stigma.

Its a good thing that CHS isn't in existance to make GW happy, but to provide for the gamers.

What exactly is wrong with third parties making miniatures? Isnt that what free enterprise is about, competitors keep other competitors prices in check and prevent harmful monopolies.

Except Chapterhouse IS a parasitical entity.
And as for "original bits and stuff that GW never makes"...
Salamander icon bitz, Space Wolf icon bitz, etc are available via Forge World.
Which is a subbranch of what Company again...?

And CHS isn't in existence to provide for the gamers.
It's to make money by filling a niche that Forge World and GW don't consistently exploit.

And as for the "issue"...
There's no problem with third parties making miniatures...for their own games.
Free enterprise isn't about making money off of someone else's idea by leeching off a few minor slots that they don't have filled in.

So I guess, battlefoam and armybuilder and vallejo are parasitic as well, not to mention all the other 3rd party mini companies that have bits that fit on GW models.

I guess after-market car part companies and companies that make oil filters and customization kits are parasitic as well... I think they will get over your label, as will CHS and the other 3rd-party companies.

Last I checked there is NOTHING wrong with making more options that ARE different from another companies bits for a game. I have a degree in Business, and I seem to remember that is a huge part of free-enterprise, how about you?

It is funny how there are always a few people who are determine to uphold GWs monopoly for them regardless of the fact that GW is more then capable of doing so themselves if it was necessary or more importantly legally able.

NAVARRO wrote: how many will not buy elsewere and buy instead some GW warhammer fantasy range dwarf regiment box and some GW GS blister and GW sculpting tool and GW brushes to just make that character?

I'm sure that some will. I'm equally sure that whoever decided that removing the characters from the game was an appropriate response realises that some players will.

What they need to consider is how that balances out against the number of people who will just buy the ready-to-go miniature from company 'X' instead. If they feel that a larger proportion of players are going to do that, then they're better off just not including that option in the book.

This reduces the number of models that people are going to look elsewhere for, because it returns them to a position where everything required is available straight from GW.


Again, not saying that I agree that it's the best course of action.

Kanluwen wrote:LOLWUT?

This is as simple as protecting their investment in the recent Blood Bowl game, and protecting their own Blood Bowl sales. Heck, for all we know we'll even see a Blood Bowl rerelease within the next few years.

The problem is that they have specifically targeted it to try and reduce competition rather then release their own competing product. You may recall something called Standard Oil?

nvillacci wrote:So I guess, battlefoam and armybuilder and vallejo are parasitic as well, not to mention all the other 3rd party mini companies that have bits that fit on GW models.

I guess after-market car part companies and companies that make oil filters and customization kits are parasitic as well... I think they will get over your label, as will CHS and the other 3rd-party companies.

If you're making a product that is specifically designed to complement and/or owes its existence to another company's product, then yes, your business is by definition parasitic. Without that first company making what they do, your product wouldn't have a market.

That doesn't automatically make it a bad thing.

It is funny how there are always a few people who are determine to uphold GWs monopoly for them regardless of the fact that GW is more then capable of doing so themselves if it was necessary or more importantly legally able.

GW don't have a monopoly on anything. Being the only company that makes wargaming miniatures would give them a monopoly. Being the only company that makes Warhammer 40K does not.

BaronIveagh wrote:Or get GW sued for violating the Sherman Anti-trust act. (whether it would stick or not, this smells of abusing one's dominant position in the market.)

Maybe the GWUS arm could be sued, but I fail to see how else the US can enforce an AMERICAN law upon a BRITISH company.

Platuan4th wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Or get GW sued for violating the Sherman Anti-trust act. (whether it would stick or not, this smells of abusing one's dominant position in the market.)

Maybe the GWUS arm could be sued, but I fail to see how else the US can enforce an AMERICAN law upon a BRITISH company.

However, since GW does business in the US, yes, they can be brought to trial for violating US laws, the same way that if a British citizen were to do something in the US that is illegal here but legal there, they would be arrested. Further, I believe it also violates British anti-monopoly laws, as well, though I'm uncertain on this point.

Deciding to release or not release part of one's OWN product does by no means violate anti-monopoly laws.

Please stop posting that stuff like it is actually valid. It will only confuse people.

TBD wrote:Deciding to release or not release part of one's OWN product does by no means violate anti-monopoly laws.

Please stop posting that stuff like it is actually valid. It will only confuse people.

Releasing one's own product or not does not. The problem is that they've supposedly stated that they will deliberately make their product incompatible with another companies to prevent competition. If they were to then go ahead and do so, said competitors would have a valid case against them. It may or may not hold water in court, depending on how much GW can convince the judge that their ownership of the IP gives them rights, etc.

Microsoft v Sun Microsystems, I believe is the case you may wish to look into.

Platuan4th wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:Or get GW sued for violating the Sherman Anti-trust act. (whether it would stick or not, this smells of abusing one's dominant position in the market.)

Maybe the GWUS arm could be sued, but I fail to see how else the US can enforce an AMERICAN law upon a BRITISH company.

Probably the same way a certain BRITISH company wants to enforce BRITISH IP laws on third countries I guess.

And about the parasitic relationships, the availability of a Nobrand workstation for a Sony laptop is bad for some posters in this thread because from time to time Sony releases a Sony workstation? Guys you need to go to a marketing detox clinic and start thinking about how to spend your money by yourselves again.

M.

BaronIveagh wrote:

TBD wrote:Deciding to release or not release part of one's OWN product does by no means violate anti-monopoly laws.

Please stop posting that stuff like it is actually valid. It will only confuse people.

Releasing one's own product or not does not. The problem is that they've supposedly stated that they will deliberately make their product incompatible with another companies to prevent competition. If they were to then go ahead and do so, said competitors would have a valid case against them. It may or may not hold water in court, depending on how much GW can convince the judge that their ownership of the IP gives them rights, etc.

Microsoft v Sun Microsystems, I believe is the case you may wish to look into.

This is completely different.

Microsoft and Sun had a contract that Sun claimed Microsoft had broken. If I remember correctly the dispute was about Microsoft's right to extend the JAVA language (Sun said they couldn't and Microsoft said the contract didjn't cover that part), and about an interface that was not supported while Sun claimed it was part of the contract as well.

So first and most importantly there was a contract involved, which is kind of crucial to such a case.

Seriously, do not make this seem like this is something it is not. I understand that some people really really want GW to be in the wrong on this one, but they very very likely are not.

Still yet to see one of those 3rd Party 'Star Players' marketed as an actual GW model, or GW star-player substitute.

insaniak wrote:

They're giving you a free rulebook, and trying to improve the game by updating it and adding new options. If you repay that by buying miniatures from a competing company instead, frankly I think they're justified in being a little cranky about it.

Sorry but I need to clear this up for people, GW have done F#(@ all in terms of giving. The BBRC (Bloodbowl Rules Council) with Jervis Johnson sitting at the head of it saying yay or nay...have put thousands of hours into developing the game into what it is today. GW have simply enjoyed the benefits of people willing to give to the gamers. They have only produced a couple of bloodbowl miniatures in the last couple of years (that didn't need to be recreated! as others desperately need to be done) by someone just showing off to GW what he can do. Other people have tried to offer their excellent services in terms of amazing bloodbowl sculpts only to be turned down. People have tried to buy the license to do something meaningful with the game only to be (effectively) turned down.

Its important that people understand where the upset posts are coming from (really) and its good to keep the upset people on track. Yes GW have responded to the immediate backlash about TBB, but they have had an absolute PR fail in regards to keeping their player base on side and informed. All of the initial problems could have been solved with a simple statement saying "Bloodbowl copyright is coming to its 10 year cycle so we will be enforcing IP over the next month". Instead they have generated a ton of fear, angst and general ill will in the community.

The latest efforts in terms of the addendum for LRB6 (threatening the ruleset) are an outright insult to the gaming community and devalues the BBRC's work to the point of disregard. If i'd been involved in that I would have punched someone by now, so its lucky I'm not.

People need to voice their fears and concerns and the people shouting over the top of them about "40K being awesome...I still <3 you GW no matter what you do" are not really helping. I appreciate insaniak and other mods much more reasonable posts, especially the ones where they argue from a reasonable perspective, cheers.

You're right it is all my perspective but a lot of people on here haven't really given any perspective to speak of and jump all over people all day without first acknowledging the other gamers concerns.

TBD wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:

TBD wrote:Deciding to release or not release part of one's OWN product does by no means violate anti-monopoly laws.

Please stop posting that stuff like it is actually valid. It will only confuse people.

Releasing one's own product or not does not. The problem is that they've supposedly stated that they will deliberately make their product incompatible with another companies to prevent competition. If they were to then go ahead and do so, said competitors would have a valid case against them. It may or may not hold water in court, depending on how much GW can convince the judge that their ownership of the IP gives them rights, etc.

Microsoft v Sun Microsystems, I believe is the case you may wish to look into.

This is completely different.

Microsoft and Sun had a contract that Sun claimed Microsoft had broken. If I remember correctly the dispute was about Microsoft's right to extend the JAVA language (Sun said they couldn't and Microsoft said the contract didjn't cover that part), and about an interface that was not supported while Sun claimed it was part of the contract as well.

So first and most importantly there was a contract involved, which is kind of crucial to such a case.

Seriously, do not make this seem like this is something it is not. I understand that some people really really want GW to be in the wrong on this one, but they very very likely are not.

It would appear there is egg on my tie. I was thinking United States v Microsoft and wrote Sun Microsystems for some reason. Perhaps the fact that a Sun case led to the US v Microsoft case. Which, interestingly enough, was the one settled when Microsoft was required to hand over it's IP in the form of it's application programming interfaces to third parties as part of the settlement. Originally Microsoft had been ordered broken up, but successfully appealed that. The appellate court however did not overturn the findings of fact in the case, that Microsoft had indeed committed the crimes in question.

BeefyG wrote:

insaniak wrote:

They're giving you a free rulebook, and trying to improve the game by updating it and adding new options. If you repay that by buying miniatures from a competing company instead, frankly I think they're justified in being a little cranky about it.

...GW have done F#(@ all in terms of giving. ...

editted for brevity.
+1 Beefy. GW hasn't done anything since releasing BB and Deathzone in, what, '95, '96?
The rest has been fans.

Howard A Treesong wrote:GW seem to want to crush all coverage of their product outside their control. How things change. When they got rid of their own forums they suggested that people find other fan sites around the web to join. Now they seem to have decided they don't like their customers seeing a hobby outside their control so want to do what they can to get rid of it all. They really have to be one of the most paranoid and aggressively posessive companies in the entire hobby.

hobby= anything in the world

skrulnik wrote:
+1 Beefy. GW hasn't done anything since releasing BB and Deathzone in, what, '95, '96?
The rest has been fans.

Which makes me think of something else. GW have always, ever since the first issue of WD back in the 1970's considered every idea submitted to them as their own IP, even if they didn't originate it. It's there in their Legal blurb. Now I have always wondered if that was actually legal, or just a bluff that's never been called. As I understand it, for a contract to be legal consideration (i.e. goods, money, value etc.) has to pass in both directions. Yet GW do not actually pass any consideration back to the authors for much of the stuff they treat as "their IP" (such as the text of the BB LRB which has been edited and compiled by vounteer fans rather than GW staff for years now). So if one of the authors or the editor was to say "stuff you GW" and take the content they wrote/compiled and publish it anyway (with GW's registered trademarks's expunged of course) would GW have a leg to stand on as they never gave those volunteers any money for doing the work, and so never actually owned it in the first place.

I'm not a lawyer and only did a small amount of contract law many years back as part of my degree, but it seems like there's a case to be answered. Certainly it would be worth looking further into!