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.

We know nothing about how much GW actually sells 40k relative to fantasy. Does the report at least add Fantasy and 40k sales in by using the ratio other stores sell relative to one another (plus other ranges like hobby supplies and the Hobbit) and multiply those by the total North American sales to approximate what they're missing?

I'm not sure if most people posting/reading this know but the ICV2 lists are determined by informal polls of independent games stores. They contact a store, ask them their top five sellers in the category (without any actual sales $$ numbers exchanged), and simply add up the results. It's the best data we have on the overall gaming industry but it's certainly not perfect and it only represents indy FLGS as a homogenized group. YMMV regarding your local store and the prevalence of games in your local area.

PP's Iron KIngdoms RPG hits 5th spot in the RPG category.

PP getting some decent cross over and brand building.

If the ICV2 is done by informal polls, the GW derived data would be meaningless because they do not sell and therefore cannot rank any other games except their own three.

 warboss wrote:
I'm not sure if most people posting/reading this know but the ICV2 lists are determined by informal polls of independent games stores. They contact a store, ask them their top five sellers in the category (without any actual sales $$ numbers exchanged), and simply add up the results. It's the best data we have on the overall gaming industry but it's certainly not perfect and it only represents indy FLGS as a homogenized group. YMMV regarding your local store and the prevalence of games in your local area.

You didn't actually read the thread, did you?

Platuan wrote:Actually, it's collected from sales data from stores, manufacturers, and distributors. The "interview" includes them sending in hard data from their computers. You can e-mail ICv2 yourself and ask them if you want.

It's ALSO important to remember, that this is pulled from NA and isn't representative of the world as a whole.

Granted this will be just the FLGSs that respond but depending upon th N-size involved, it might be statistically relevant.

Good news though that the 'hobby market' was up 20% last year (with the market effectively doubling since 2008), regardless of which way you look at it.

I'm not surprised by x-wing's success. It's a shining example of reasonable value, superb game design and an appealing, well known fictional universe. I don't think being prepainted or requiring minimal scenery (and thus easy to get into) is as much a factor as the others.

The worst thing about it is how hard it is to get stuff for it, and that's a direct result of its popularity.

I agree that the indie store numbers are a decent indicatior without the GW store numbers. At least in most indie stores I've visited, GW products have the largest presence.

We certainly see that GW is facing even stiffer competition, and probably not doing all the correct moves to counter it. How WHFB is doing is really the key: GW has a superb position to market it next to 40k, it's a well known title on it's own, yet it has fallen behind the smaller manufacturers. Also, a thing to note is that both X-Wing and ST:AW are basically similar to what GW used to offer with their SG's.

I'd love to see the following ranks, too. What would be the games hanging around with WHFB? FoW, KoW and Dreadball? Anyone got the info?

winterdyne wrote:
I'm not surprised by x-wing's success. It's a shining example of reasonable value, superb game design and an appealing, well known fictional universe. I don't think being prepainted or requiring minimal scenery (and thus easy to get into) is as much a factor as the others.

The worst thing about it is how hard it is to get stuff for it, and that's a direct result of its popularity.

While I don't play it (but see quite a large crowd at my local FLGS who do), the common thing I hear is that ALL the ships in the game are useful. Pretty much you can build the force you want and have a good game.

I find it funny that it is the exact OPPOSITE of the current GW meta. Why would a comment like that above be even said so much if it wasn't GW (specifically 40k) they were comparing it too?

 plastictrees wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
So according to this list, WHFB finally slipped off the list, huh? I was hoping KoW might have been the one to replace it, but ST:AW is a fun game too.

Mantic might be able to do this next year, if they start making good quality plastics like the undead again. The last time they tried to release a KoW army, half of it was rubbish (Men at Arms, Nuns, cathorses).

I don't think KoW will ever touch this list. I really doubt that KoW is pulling in new players that never touched a fantasy game before, I'm sure they are pulling in a bunch of former WHFB players. WHFB is still a more likely entry point in NA and it's never been a blockbuster seller here.

Much as I would love to disagree... I really can't.

I know one (1) player that had Kings of War as her introduction to fantasy wargaming - and I was the one that introduced her.

I came in from... *deep breath* Chainmail/Battlesystem/Warhammer Fantasy Battle/Fantasy Wargaming/Fantasy Warlord/Sword Dream (playtest - it never saw print)/Fantasy Warrior/Chronopia/Down Styphon! (and I want to say two or three others that have been forgotten).

The Auld Grump

 Platuan4th wrote:

Powerguy wrote:

It also seems weird that they classify Warmachine and Hordes as different systems for this, they are basically the same system and I suspect that they would jump above X-Wing if they were combined.

Warmachines and Hordes are separate product lines. Rules have nothing to do with how sales are classified.

Considering this is supposed to be a list of the Top Tabletop games I think its pretty fair to expect that its going to be grouped by ... well the games. Warmachines and Hordes are not completely different games in the same way that 40k and Fantasy are, the difference is more like Tau vs Orks (very different armies which can sometimes ignore certain game mechanics but are still playing by the same core rules) and they aren't breaking up the 40k numbers by army (although that would also be interesting info). At the very least it would be nice to see their combined ranking even if they do insist on keeping them separated.

Powerguy wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

Powerguy wrote:

It also seems weird that they classify Warmachine and Hordes as different systems for this, they are basically the same system and I suspect that they would jump above X-Wing if they were combined.

Warmachines and Hordes are separate product lines. Rules have nothing to do with how sales are classified.

Considering this is supposed to be a list of the Top Tabletop games I think its pretty fair to expect that its going to be grouped by ... well the games. Warmachines and Hordes are not completely different games in the same way that 40k and Fantasy are, the difference is more like Tau vs Orks (very different armies which can sometimes ignore certain game mechanics but are still playing by the same core rules) and they aren't breaking up the 40k numbers by army (although that would also be interesting info). At the very least it would be nice to see their combined ranking even if they do insist on keeping them separated.

I disagree. Warmachine and Hordes are like 40k and WHFB; the difference here is that PP intentionally designed the game system in such a way that they are cross-compatible which GW never did (not good or bad, they just didn't do it.) You can play Warmachine and never see or use a Hordes unit and the same is true the other way around as well. One system could survive quite well without the other.

Powerguy wrote:
Considering this is supposed to be a list of the Top Tabletop games I think its pretty fair to expect that its going to be grouped by ... well the games. Warmachines and Hordes are not completely different games in the same way that 40k and Fantasy are, the difference is more like Tau vs Orks (very different armies which can sometimes ignore certain game mechanics but are still playing by the same core rules) and they aren't breaking up the 40k numbers by army (although that would also be interesting info). At the very least it would be nice to see their combined ranking even if they do insist on keeping them separated.

Do Warmachine and Hordes use the same rule book? Have all the exact same rules? They are distinct product lines, and therefore, distinct products.

As Agnosto said, just because they can be played together doesn't make them not seperate lines.

The Trade sales or Indy sales are the lion share of $ in NA for GW. Pretty sure the NA trade sales team is the most profitable team in all of GW for that matter. SO the numbers would only improve if you added the GW retail chain. Its great news that the numbers are up that much of a %. Even with GW's drop their % of that growth volume probably still over shadows most of those on the list if not even a few combined. With stores in many countries and produced in like 6 languages the industry Juggernaut that is GW is under no threat from anyone but themselves. Their wins are big when a product we got to have comes out and their losses are equally as big when Dread fleet comes out. BUT Growth is growth and that is a good thing if they use that money to make better and more stuff for us to buy regardless of the company!

There was a question about the sales of 40K to Fantasy. A few years ago at a meeting (when I worked for the company) Tom Kirby stated that if someone would have told him that a single army (Space Marines) from the "little brother" game (40K) of Fantasy would have outsold the entire history of the Fantasy line he would have not believed it. I am pretty sure this would have been 2 years ago. So at that time and probably several years before that Space Marines, on their own in @20- 25 years,outsold the entire sales history of WHFB as a whole. Think of how many models and editions of WHFB that is and how much money that is! Now add the rest of the 40K universe into the mix. That is not to say That WHFB has not had a resurgence in the last few years, but I doubt if those statements of Tom's are solid that it has come back that much. 40k has got to be the undisputed king of GW, and of table top games. Even with out "full" data I am sure it would still top any list.

I have yet to try the X-wing game as I would more then likely buy way more than I need. OCD like that. I have seen a few games and it looks like a lot of fun.
Star Trek just is not my Bag so no dice there.
Did Warmachine the first 2 years it was out but just did not care for it and just Cant see anything I like about Hoards.
Ah well i have so much money tied up in My GW crap I will probably never do much else.
I do like bolt action...but I am digressing.........

agnosto wrote:

Powerguy wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

Powerguy wrote:

It also seems weird that they classify Warmachine and Hordes as different systems for this, they are basically the same system and I suspect that they would jump above X-Wing if they were combined.

Warmachines and Hordes are separate product lines. Rules have nothing to do with how sales are classified.

Considering this is supposed to be a list of the Top Tabletop games I think its pretty fair to expect that its going to be grouped by ... well the games. Warmachines and Hordes are not completely different games in the same way that 40k and Fantasy are, the difference is more like Tau vs Orks (very different armies which can sometimes ignore certain game mechanics but are still playing by the same core rules) and they aren't breaking up the 40k numbers by army (although that would also be interesting info). At the very least it would be nice to see their combined ranking even if they do insist on keeping them separated.

I disagree. Warmachine and Hordes are like 40k and WHFB; the difference here is that PP intentionally designed the game system in such a way that they are cross-compatible which GW never did (not good or bad, they just didn't do it.) You can play Warmachine and never see or use a Hordes unit and the same is true the other way around as well. One system could survive quite well without the other.

gunslingerpro wrote:

Powerguy wrote:
Considering this is supposed to be a list of the Top Tabletop games I think its pretty fair to expect that its going to be grouped by ... well the games. Warmachines and Hordes are not completely different games in the same way that 40k and Fantasy are, the difference is more like Tau vs Orks (very different armies which can sometimes ignore certain game mechanics but are still playing by the same core rules) and they aren't breaking up the 40k numbers by army (although that would also be interesting info). At the very least it would be nice to see their combined ranking even if they do insist on keeping them separated.

Do Warmachine and Hordes use the same rule book? Have all the exact same rules? They are distinct product lines, and therefore, distinct products.

As Agnosto said, just because they can be played together doesn't make them not seperate lines.

More than can be played together the base assumption is they will be played together. How often do you see a combined 40k/fantasy tournament ? Now compare that to steamroller where the baseline is they will be played in the same tournament. The only difference is Focus/Fury and its easy to just consider that faction specific rules that some factions share. Kinda like how the different space marine armies share certain abilities.

decker_cky wrote:
The point is that Fantasy is probably actually top 5 still, since it's the only non #1 system that's has a big chunk (how big you an argue, but it's doubtlessly a large chunk) of it's sales hidden behind the GW curtain.

I highly doubt GW is selling enough Fantasy to put it back in the top 5 if they were added in.

Even in dedicated GW stores, Fantasy armies are an endangered species. Only the Lord of the Rings players are rarer than they are, and if what people have told me about my area is true, not by much.

I would think the list above is a good indicator, and it's perfectly reasonable that Fantasy has dropped out of the top 5. In both the stores I frequent, Fantasy stock is regarded more as dead weight than as actual product that moves. Most people who play with the fantasy models seem to just use Mantic's rules now.

 agnosto wrote:
Another interesting tidbit is that hobby games were up 20% in 2013 which contrasts with GW's reported shrinkage....

Yes... but that is ALL hobby games by ICv2 definition, led front and centre by Magic the Gathering, as well as the surprise hit of 2013 (several times more so than X-Wing), the My Little Pony CCG!!!

Not sure if that is a good guideline that is for the "sub-niche" of miniature games with miniatures you have to assemble and (mostly) paint.

The hobby game market grew 20% in 2013, according to a new report in ICv2’s Internal Correspondence #84, an increase over the 15% growth rate in 2012. Games have now been growing for a half decade; 2013 was the fifth consecutive growth year, with the average growth rate over that period nearly 15% per year.

The hobby game market has nearly doubled since 2008, according to the report.

The increase in sales has provided profits that are being plowed back into the industry at the retail level, with growth in retail square footage, expansion of play space, and investment in better play experiences.

Collectible games and board games were driving the growth through the holiday season, with sales on market leader Magic: The Gathering continuing to rise, and a hot new entrant, the My Little Pony CCG debuting at #4 in the hobby.

There was also a shake-up in the board games chart, with Iello’s King of Tokyo moving up to #3 for the Fall 2013 season, a big move in a category typically dominated by evergreens.

And Cards Against Humanity (see “Hit Game Sells 500,000 Copies”), described by one retailer as a “cultural phenomenon,” charted in the trade in the Card and Dice Game category despite the fact that its business model is based on direct sales to consumers via Amazon. Multiple stores told us that it was their #1 game for the holiday season.

Just want to post, and mention that my 2010 numbers for PP was wrong. Was looking through an old thread I had posted the PP revenue information in for the 2010 numbers and realize it wasn't $12 - $13M, it was $15M. Sean_OBrien also was stating this number as well in a thread last year predicting the fall of GW.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:

5 years ago or so, I had heard from a friend who worked with PP that they were doing $15 million in sales. They seemed to be stuck there for a good bit though, but with their increased production capacity - I wouldn't be too surprised if they had doubled or tripled that number by now.

The irony is that we were all expecting PP to be making ~$40-50M by now. That a game company that is supposedly taking over the miniature gaming market from GW isn't seeing increased sales is an indicator the entire table top miniature market is hurting right now. They aren't growing in a field that is supposedly growing 15 - 25% a year either.

 silent25 wrote:

The irony is that we were all expecting PP to be making ~$40-50M by now. That a game company that is supposedly taking over the miniature gaming market from GW isn't seeing increased sales is an indicator the entire table top miniature market is hurting right now. They aren't growing in a field that is supposedly growing 15 - 25% a year either.

The competition is getting stiffer, though - even if there's substantial growth in total sales, there's also plenty of different companies grabbing a share. My estimate is that PP's offerings have stagnated a bit, and growth is going towards newcomers - just take a look on all those Kickstarters we've had

It's not a bad situation, though, as it seems that a number of companies have reached a pretty stable position, and are in a good place to do continuing business.

 silent25 wrote:
They aren't growing in a field that is supposedly growing 15 - 25% a year either.

Again, the field that is growing is "hobby games", with "Collectible games and board games were driving the growth through the holiday season" and Magic The Gathering being by itself a sizable chunk of that particular larger market.

The miniature gaming side of things might not be partaking in that 20% or so. Growth. Of course, it might. It might even outperform it. But there are no numbers. The ICv2 numbers claim the growth comes mostly from collectible card games and board games though.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 silent25 wrote:
They aren't growing in a field that is supposedly growing 15 - 25% a year either.

Again, the field that is growing is "hobby games", with "Collectible games and board games were driving the growth through the holiday season" and Magic The Gathering being by itself a sizable chunk of that particular larger market.

The miniature gaming side of things might not be partaking in that 20% or so. Growth. Of course, it might. It might even outperform it. But there are no numbers. The ICv2 numbers claim the growth comes mostly from collectible card games and board games though.

Well, it is answering those self acclaimed experts that say, there is less money spend on hobby stuff than years ago, which is nonsense. That GW is getting less and less money of this, is not due to less customer money available but due to GW products being less attractive.

 Kroothawk wrote:

Well, it is answering those self acclaimed experts that say, there is less money spend on hobby stuff than years ago, which is nonsense. That GW is getting less and less money of this, is not due to less customer money available but due to GW products being less attractive.

Perhaps.

But citing ICv2's numbers to make that point would still be possibly misleading.

Scenario A - There is overall more money, but it is going to things like M:TG and the Little Pony CCG, while all miniature games are losing (GW, Privateer, Corvus Belli, Wyrd, etc..)

Scenario B - There is overall more money, and more money for miniature games (Privateer, Corvus Belly, Wyrd, etc..), only GW is bucking the trend with a decline.

Trying to refute those "self-acclaimed experts", people seem to be shooting towards Scenario B. The ICv2 numbers allow for both, with the ICv2 wording vaguely point towards Scenario A, though not conclusively so. At the very list, they say that most of the growth they (!) found appears (!) to come from collectible card games and board games.

The overwhelming success of pre-paints/collectibles like X-Wing (X-Wing + Attack Wing > Warmachine + Hordes, e.g. Privateer) also would suggest Scenario A isn't off.

There have been a couple of individual reports from companies that they are growing each year - I know Infinity has for a start by some margin (I think doubled over the past few years?), there were stats for a couple of other companies although sadly I forget which ones.

You're right - it's not hard and fast data, but it's the overall impression that you can build from numerous sources, of which ICv2, FLGS store owners and posters combine to create.

 Pacific wrote:
There have been a couple of individual reports from companies that they are growing each year - I know Infinity has for a start by some margin (I think doubled over the past few years?), there were stats for a couple of other companies although sadly I forget which ones.

Well, nothing like some reports from Corvus Belli, Privateer or Wyrd (ICv2's No. 5 for 3 years or so, before X-Wing) to add some substance to this mystery... got some links?

On the Warmachine/Hordes debate:

They have to be reported as different games because they are technically owned by two different groups. PP publishes them, and most of the ownership is the same, but it is not entirely the same group, so different legal entities.

I think the best analogy here would be 40k and Forgeworld. Definitely overlapping ownership and coordinated development, but different legal entities.

if Warmahordes was a single group, it would be interesting to see who makes #5. Fantasy, Infinity, someone else?

I'm surprised that Star Trek was doing so well, I've never seen much talk about it out and about. Usually, "but the minis are rubbish" ends the discussion. Though maybe boardgamer types care less about that sort of thing and buy into it more.

X-Wing, yeah, there's no doubt that that is huge at the moment since, from what I've seen, it essentially amounts to, "pretty much everything they made for X Wing has been sold."

 Pacific wrote:
There have been a couple of individual reports from companies that they are growing each year - I know Infinity has for a start by some margin (I think doubled over the past few years?), there were stats for a couple of other companies although sadly I forget which ones.

You're right - it's not hard and fast data, but it's the overall impression that you can build from numerous sources, of which ICv2, FLGS store owners and posters combine to create.

The two companies I know that were mentioned in previous chats was Infinity and Fantasy Flight. While FFG is in the miniature field with X-Wing, they are also in the board game market. Thus would be expected to be seeing good growth. Although the Infinity chart that shows 75% growth was pointed out as being units sold, not revenue. It's doesn't exactly correlate to an equal increase in revenue.

Also, since we seem to still be taking ICv2's numbers as hard gospel. Will repost Mikhalia's comments on it since he deals directly with ICv2:

A further comment: I see ICV2 mentioned a lot. Their data isn't anything more than anecdotal. Very much like the rumor roundups on Dakka. Much of their numbers are at best ranked data. They call up and ask someone in a game distribution warehouse to list "the top 5 miniature games" or "10 top selling boardgames". No sales data usually accompanies these numbers, and it may not even have been used in the decision making process. Just go ask 20 people in the game industry what they think and lump it together.

Distributors do not give out their numbers to anyone, its proprietary information. ICV2 takes non-numerical data and sort of reads the entrails to make up their charts. It's very fallible with GW, since so little GW product is distributed through the system where ICV2 tries to get it's numbers. They have no data on what GW sells through it's stores or websites, or what they sell to roughly 1200 FLGS just in NA.

So take ICV2 for what it is, and don't try to over analyze what they say too much.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Well, nothing like some reports from Corvus Belli, Privateer or Wyrd (ICv2's No. 5 for 3 years or so, before X-Wing) to add some substance to this mystery... got some links?

Oh, and the one self acclaimed expert claims that GW sells less because there is less money for all games, so refuting scenario A AND B.

Does 'interest' give any indicator to growth or potential or...something?

Dakka Dakka has had some impressive growth the last 5 years, and I'm sure Z's Blog has.

I know all that 'interest' might not translate directly to actual sales, but I'd think it can at least be seen as an overall positive thing for the 'wargaming' industry as a whole.

drazz wrote:
On the Warmachine/Hordes debate:

They have to be reported as different games because they are technically owned by two different groups. PP publishes them, and most of the ownership is the same, but it is not entirely the same group, so different legal entities.

I think the best analogy here would be 40k and Forgeworld. Definitely overlapping ownership and coordinated development, but different legal entities.

if Warmahordes was a single group, it would be interesting to see who makes #5. Fantasy, Infinity, someone else?

Sorry missed this in my last my last reply. What ownership differences are there between WM and Hordes? Is this like with Level 7 where it is copyrighted Matt Wilson and not PP?