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.

Yeah but GW wouldn't have to fund the movie, and chances are they wouldn't considering they didn't want to fund the Ultramarines movie. It would be the studio who would fund the movie and GW would just sell them the license...for a size able fee I'm sure.

I heard a few years back that GW has been approached by Hollywood multiple times and they turn them down every time because the first question the producers ask is "how can we put a love story in it". GW's thinking is "it's Grimdark it doesn't have nor need a love story".

I think it also says a lot about the audience. Sure, many 40k people would see it, but it doesn't have the same broad appeal that a lot of science fiction films have. The fact that something like the Horus Heresy would require an astronomical budget doesn't help either.

Inquisitor Jex wrote:
I got into the TT by first playing Dawn of War actually; I picked Imperial Guard afer playing Winter Assault.

I play the RPGs alot, mostly Dark Heresy, I found them quite well made as well, a nice touch to add colour to the non battlefield universe.

Space Marine was ok visually, but the gameplay was lackbuster...a straight up railroaded melee fest, not much my thing really...

As for movie-games,I did play Final Liberation, a game back when cutscenes were made by actors à la Command &Conquer..I also watched that Inquisitor short movie on yotube, it was intertaining..didn't saw that Ultramarine movie, it looked too...meh to me- plus I lean toward the Guard more than the robotic Marines

Holy crap it's out now? The Lord Inquisitor?

Only the trailer. The full movie isn't due for another year or so, and even then it's only aiming to be 10 minutes long. The creator, Erasmus, had an interview at the end of a recent Independent Characters podcast: http://theindependentcharacters.com/blog/?p=3146

 Psienesis wrote:
James Cameron spent more money making Avatar than Games Workshop has made, in total, in 25 years of business.

lmao oh..well that makes sense..

well they could grow a pair to lend out their fluff to an outside source and see what can be done...

 Mr. DK wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
James Cameron spent more money making Avatar than Games Workshop has made, in total, in 25 years of business.

lmao oh..well that makes sense..

well they could grow a pair to lend out their fluff to an outside source and see what can be done...

That's a bit of an overestimate on Psienesis' part. It'd take about a year and a half or more of GW's consecutive profits to fund a triple A blockbuster movie. And I mean every last dollar of it. So no spending it on anything else.

Now if GW bothered to advertise...

 Kain wrote:

 Mr. DK wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
James Cameron spent more money making Avatar than Games Workshop has made, in total, in 25 years of business.

lmao oh..well that makes sense..

well they could grow a pair to lend out their fluff to an outside source and see what can be done...

That's a bit of an overestimate on Psienesis' part. It'd take about a year and a half or more of GW's consecutive profits to fund a triple A blockbuster movie. And I mean every last dollar of it. So no spending it on anything else.

Now if GW bothered to advertise...

GW wouldn't fund their own film. I'm pretty sure the Tolkein estate didn't stump up for the Lord of the Rings.

A blockbuster GW movie would need several things -

*A plot that is understandable to people who know nothing about the universe. The horus heresy could work - "Empire in space, emperor's son goes ape-gak", or even an original story. Anything, so long as it could be conveyed in a minute-ish long trailer to people who've never seen it

*Less dakka. In the grimdark of the 40k, there is only war... but that would be a pretty boring film.

*Female charectors. If it were set in the "civilian" 40k, this wouldn't be a problem. If it were set in the military, it might be, which is why I think it wouldn't be.

*A willingness to piss over the fluff as and when they felt like it. Nothing is guaranteed to make a film flop more than something that stays true to its background material. Screw the nerds, they're not where the big bucks are - as long as very basic tenets are there, I'm happy. If you want to give space marines lasguns and make eldar benevelent, so be it. Just make sure the damn thing has narrative.

*Peter Jackson as directer. 'nuff said.

I still love the opening cutscene for the first DOW, in my opinion one of the best 40K clips of all time.

I think if they made a big movie, the Heresy is actually one of the worst possible settings. We all like it because it's the backstory; the way LOTR nerds love the Silmarillion. But we like it because it adds depth to what we already know. A "population-at-large" audience knows nothing of 40K, so I think it'd be best to introduce them to it they way the rest of us were: Armageddon, Macragge, Cadia, etc. It should be set in the 41st millennium. Just think about if the first movie of the Matrix trilogy was the Animatrix...or The Phantom Menace was the first Star Wars movie.

Hated any movies made...love Dawn of War...Dawn of War 2 was OK, but a mixed bag for me. Loved the Extermination expansion with the ability to play through the campaign as all the different races until it became clear that it was all the same missions over and over with only minor changes. So the first one I played was great and each success one got more and more dull. :\ Still love playing the original Dawn of War. Just enjoy those quick battles against the computer when I am bored. Not as big on the other 40k related games. Not sure of the point of a 40k MMO. They did a WFB MMO which kind of keeled over and died. Don't really care if they do, though. Never worried too much about people judging my hobby based on aspects of it that I don't take part in.

One game I am looking forward to is actually on the WFB side as the Total War crew is supposed to be working on a WFB version of the game. Love that series and would like to see Warhammer ported over.

Skriker

 Skriker wrote:
One game I am looking forward to is actually on the WFB side as the Total War crew is supposed to be working on a WFB version of the game. Love that series and would like to see Warhammer ported over.

Same here! That and a good Imperial Guard FPS and I'll be happy.

I would have voted for: "Ive purchased most of them, and they have mostly let me down. now im skeptical, but if they finally got it right i would be there in a heartbeat"

The problem is, imho: That gw is very good at appropriating and creating cool mythology, but they suck hard at (1) creating rules that allow for balanced competition and (2) maintaining a positive inclusive community. And at the end of the day, those two things are what makes a computer game (or any game) successful.

That's not even going to the full-returd aspect of their digital decision making, using dow2 as their most recent game that i purchased (and the first expansion cause im a dumb naive sucker):

The matchmaking was atrocious: regularly setting teams of strangers against preformed clans, inaccurate stats, inaccurate rankings, no onboard mic system, no lobby rooms...basically the bottom of the barrel. The forums (although obviously unofficial cause GW doesnt do social media) were even more rife with dissent and vitriol than the tabletop ones, due to the fact that every single person who played had access to a computer and internet.

The game just looked bad for the time: The released preview for Dow2 had units and features that never appeared in the game even though the preview was using the games engine. This was the same engine as CoH, which looked VASTLY better in every aspect even though it was released years before.
(I know there is a great youtube video out there comparing things like structure damage, wingding destruction, pathing, taking cover in terrain, etc).

Not to mention there were no stats on the units. Let that sink in. NO. Stats. On. The. Units. As in, no internet database where i can learn the mechanics of the game like, How much damage can my unit can take before i lose a trooper?, or How much damage does my unit do per swing? You could find the components to the stats, like this is my units weapon skill and toughness and armor type, or this is my units BS and upgrade options and they are in cover, but then they are combined in some algorithm that no one knows during the actual game mechanics. So it was like saying, "you have this number and this number and this number, place them in a hat and TA-DA: you lose. Or win. It really just depends on which patch we're on, but you'll never know till you try."

There's more, but im border-lining on ranting as it is, and that's not my intent.

TL; DR: I really liked warhammer online, and until it got abandoned i think that was not only GW's best bet in to the digital world but also a hell of a game that played right into GW's strengths. I guess mainly because mmorpgs dont HAVE to balance pvp as much as pve. And that's easy, the players always win.