Manchu wrote:NAVARRO wrote:I'm going to be honest with you... You look like your still enchanted with GW as the only one, as such, why not stick with it? Seems pointless to force yourself into something your not really ready to do.
I'm disappointed that you're replying without really following the thread closely. First, as I've stated multiple times, I'm not personally disenchanted with
GW. I'm interested in new franchises for their own sake. The idea that
PP's lines or any others could simply replace
GW is ludicrous to me. But many people post as if that's the answer to
GW's business practices. Second, the criteria I listed fit the discussion as it developed on page 1: i.e., the three parameters were rules, models, and fluff. You can't rate generic rules for models or generic minis for rules and fluff. I think we can't include
OOP stuff, either, as getting into a discontinued game as a new player hoping to get your friends into it is, well, unlikely at best.
How can you be interested in rating new fresh options if your only stuck with the
GW Biz model? Thats why I say your criteria/taste is someway hostage of
GW and that you seem not trully commited in finding new things under a new fresh prespective... Thats why I say your porbably not ready to look into this seriously.
GW was probably the first to implement the "do it all and sell all " but before them and also after them theres a interesting scope of options that you can explore that dont follow this model.
Its like you want to rate/find alternatives based on what you already like and dont want to change... and in the process discard all that doesnt follow
GW model.
Theres cool games, cool minis and cool fluff, sometimes all is blended in one banner, other times these companies establish partnerships and even if they only produce one thing, lets say rules other companies partner up with that system and produce minis... its all part of the wargamming scene and
IMO you cannot get to a good wider result if you auto exclude a world of options just because its not how
GW did it.
See my point?
Automatically Appended Next Post: 4M2A wrote:But that's the problem Manchu your trying to rate games by Gw criteria. Obviously nothing is going to equal it. However what GW does isn't the only way.
Exactly how I tried to post in my arcaic english, thanks