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.

I don't mean to start an argument here, but why is it that 40k is more popular than fantasy?

Before you answer, lets set aside the stereotypes:

40k players are not all kids (though most are under the age of 30)
fantasy players are not all old men (I'm 18, but most are right around 25-35 age)
40k players don't have a pure competitive attitude
And fantasy players aren't arrogant or snobbish


Now
Why is it that the sci fi variant is played by so many more people (and is omnipresent in so much media) compared to the fantasy variant?

Let me know your thoughts
thanks
Austin

Why is Coca Cola Classic so much more popular than Sprite?

The setting, simple as that. It is Warhammer Fantasy + Sci Fi, dialed up to 11.

Fantasy involves having to shove big blocks of infantry across barren tables filled with one or two rocks. The tactics are interesting but its not as exciting as 40k. In 40k you get to move smaller blobs of infantry, tanks, planes and huge walkers in a much more populated board.

I think another factor is that many people are overexposed to fantasy settings while whatever 40k is is something newish. Besides, who would want a block of state troops when you could have a Baneblade?

Part of it is that 40K is a much more distinctive setting.

But it's also got Space Marines. Fantasy doesn't have anything that so perfectly plays to the strengths of GW's type of miniature wargaming.

Couple things:

1) I think it's mostly in North America that 40k is more popular; I think I recall reading that Fantasy was more popular in Europe, which might be due to that area's longstanding historical miniatures history.

2) Fantasy isn't quite as exciting, and is bland by comparison because fantasy tropes have been done to death by various sources, and a lot of WHFB is cliche or stereotypes anyways (german humans, french humans, stereotypical drunk dwarfs). On the other hand 40k gives you a lot more customization - for example if you have an Empire army in WHFB, there's a set number of provinces, so it's that or go with a mercenary/Border Prince army; compare that to 40k where you can make your own SM Chapter or IG Regiment or Craftworld or whatever and can do almost literally everything from scratch.

WayneTheGame wrote:
Couple things:

1) I think it's mostly in North America that 40k is more popular; I think I recall reading that Fantasy was more popular in Europe, which might be due to that area's longstanding historical miniatures history.

2) Fantasy isn't quite as exciting, and is bland by comparison because fantasy tropes have been done to death by various sources, and a lot of WHFB is cliche or stereotypes anyways (german humans, french humans, stereotypical drunk dwarfs). On the other hand 40k gives you a lot more customization - for example if you have an Empire army in WHFB, there's a set number of provinces, so it's that or go with a mercenary/Border Prince army; compare that to 40k where you can make your own SM Chapter or IG Regiment or Craftworld or whatever and can do almost literally everything from scratch.

this. I think its because the 40k is a unique, sci-fy, gothic horror universe that is incredibly unique. The amount of people in the world who recognize the term space marines is huge, and the amount of people who know about the fantasy counterpart is small because 40k is so unique and has defined so many other lores like starcraft and star wars

For me the reason was 2nd Edition 40K was retailed at £40 where as the fantasy boxed set at the time (bretonnia & lizard men) was sold at £50.

I went with my parents to my local hobby store and told them I didn't mind which one they bought me for christmas. Guess they went for the cheaper one.

I grew up with 40k and Necromunda as a result, but I devoured every fantasy article in White Dwarf all the same. I bought Fantasy minatures along the way, but never had anything close to a force until I bought Battle For Skull Pass years later (at university). Still, I tried playing a few games with my brother using the set and it didn't seem as fun.

The minatures are great, but fighting in fields holds no fun for me.

I love playing Warhammer Quest on my iPad. I really hope they give it a rerelease like they did with Space Hulk. I would 100% but that, and it would give me a chance to blow the dust of all my warhammer minis.

I just started playing WFB. Its a super cool game but no where near as dynamic as 40K. Movement is really static and kind of boring. To me that's what I dislike the most about WFB. Also terrain is sparse because of how movement works. That's is a downside to me.
From the 40k guys I know about a third of them like WFB more. Its just harder to get a game for them.

 changerofways wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:
Couple things:

1) I think it's mostly in North America that 40k is more popular; I think I recall reading that Fantasy was more popular in Europe, which might be due to that area's longstanding historical miniatures history.

2) Fantasy isn't quite as exciting, and is bland by comparison because fantasy tropes have been done to death by various sources, and a lot of WHFB is cliche or stereotypes anyways (german humans, french humans, stereotypical drunk dwarfs). On the other hand 40k gives you a lot more customization - for example if you have an Empire army in WHFB, there's a set number of provinces, so it's that or go with a mercenary/Border Prince army; compare that to 40k where you can make your own SM Chapter or IG Regiment or Craftworld or whatever and can do almost literally everything from scratch.

this. I think its because the 40k is a unique, sci-fy, gothic horror universe that is incredibly unique. The amount of people in the world who recognize the term space marines is huge, and the amount of people who know about the fantasy counterpart is small because 40k is so unique and has defined so many other lores like starcraft and star wars

40k didn't define star wars in any way, shape, or form. Unless George Lucas could see the future.

 aapch45 wrote:
I don't mean to start an argument here, but why is it that 40k is more popular than fantasy?

I don't mean to start an argument, but let's have an argument!

Before you answer, lets set aside the stereotypes:

40k players are not all kids (though most are under the age of 30)
fantasy players are not all old men (I'm 18, but most are right around 25-35 age)
40k players don't have a pure competitive attitude
And fantasy players aren't arrogant or snobbish

Before you answer, set aside your sweeping generalisations!

Here are my sweeping generalisations. They are the only sweeping generalisations that are allowed.

3 reasons that Fantasy wasn't picked up in our area:

1.) Cost of playing - Initial buy in is high, even moreso than 40k
2.) Block movement is VERY uninspiring to most
3.) The idea that whole blocks of infantry are basically wound markers for the 1-2 people that matter in a squad (also partially a problem in 40k, but not as grand of an issue).

The reason for 40k's relative popularity is the result of purposeful policies by GW.

40k, as mentioned, is usually cheaper to start. 40k has had a few great video games made from it, including the long-running DoW 1 series, while WHFB has had just a couple of stinkers over the years. 40k has gotten most of the newer, better models, while WHFB is stuck with older plastics and more finecasts of old, worse models. 40k has a lot more literature of the black library devoted to it - just the Horus Heresy series probably has more books in it than all of the stuff they wrote for WHFB. WHFB has had, what, two army books come out in the past few months, while 40k has been going absolutely gangbusters with new codices, new rules expansions, and supplements galore.

GW has just been paying a lot more attention to 40k these last 10 years or so, and it shows. Especially to people just starting out.

Pfffttt another one of these.......

Who really knows why it is more or less popular? Fantasy is equally as popular as 40k in my area but in some places 40K is more popular and in others Fantasy is. I play both and both are equally as fun but I kind of like Fantasy better.

If you live in an area that 40k is the most popular it is because people like the sci-fi genre better and the models and the ruleset better. That isn't to say that it is any better or worse than Fantasy though, some people just prefer that over the other.

It's the setting, mainly.

I like the idea of the WH Fantasy world, and I often incorporate elements of it into other D&D-like games, but the setting of 40K really stands out on its own, which is ironic, considering that its a pastiche of a thousand other sources.

But, really, Fantasy's world of "it's D&D, but dirty" just doesn't hold a candle to "it's GrimDark. Deal with it." of 40K.

I've been playing games in and out of game stores for nearly 20 years. I've seen game stores that sell Fantasy and 40k, along with Yugio, Hero Clix, Star Wars CCG, Magic the Gathering, and Pokemon.

In those nearly 20 years, I've seen all of the above played at least once or twice, often in big tournaments.

Never once have I seen 2 people play Warhammer Fantasy in a game store. Not a singe time.

I have no idea why. The models look cool, just like 40k IMHO. I'm not crazy about the setting (or learning another fething game), so I've never been tempted to pick it up. I just haven't met anyone that plays it (and admits to it). Weird anomaly, I guess.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Fantasy involves having to shove big blocks of infantry across barren tables filled with one or two rocks. The tactics are interesting but its not as exciting as 40k. In 40k you get to move smaller blobs of infantry, tanks, planes and huge walkers in a much more populated board.

I think another factor is that many people are overexposed to fantasy settings while whatever 40k is is something newish. Besides, who would want a block of state troops when you could have a Baneblade?

This +1

As an avid player of both games I can tell you that the initial cost of a WFB army is HUGE compared to a relatively small amount of marines.

The tactics are not quite as in depth as 40k and ,like it has been said before, there is not allot of variety.

Although the shinning jewel IMHO of WFB is working the magic phase. Games are won and lost very easily if you have a GREAT or horrible magic phase.

I would say its simply because WHFB has more competition than 40k.

KoW , AoA , are arguably better rule sets.
And lots of companies make fantasy minatures .

So those wanting fantasy battle games can get them without having to buy WHFB.(And so are not known to 40k players/GW .)

However, 40k is the only game of fantasy in space battle game with 28mm minatures.And most common fiction nowadays tends to be sci fi.

osirisx69 wrote:
[quote=TheCustomLime 585172 6639310 db8c639d8469883ae1ddc9b3164737bd.jpg

The tactics are not quite as in depth as 40k and ,like it has been said before, there is not allot of variety.

Although the shinning jewel IMHO of WFB is working the magic phase. Games are won and lost very easily if you have a GREAT or horrible magic phase.

Have you played 40k? Everyone can see 360degrees, there is no flank, or setting up a charge, or tactical moving... What tactics are you talking about?

Every game of 40k I have ever played (31 games in the last 3 years) this is what happens: move forward. Move forward. Shoot. Shoot. Charge. Somebody wins. Its usually the guy who brings the uber list.

Fantasy requires you to paint many more grunts to have a playable army than 40k does. It's also got a broader variety of viable army builds and it's a little more complicated to actually play.

 aapch45 wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
[quote=TheCustomLime 585172 6639310 db8c639d8469883ae1ddc9b3164737bd.jpg

The tactics are not quite as in depth as 40k and ,like it has been said before, there is not allot of variety.

Although the shinning jewel IMHO of WFB is working the magic phase. Games are won and lost very easily if you have a GREAT or horrible magic phase.

Have you played 40k? Everyone can see 360degrees, there is no flank, or setting up a charge, or tactical moving... What tactics are you talking about?

Every game of 40k I have ever played (31 games in the last 3 years) this is what happens: move forward. Move forward. Shoot. Shoot. Charge. Somebody wins. Its usually the guy who brings the uber list.

Well since you feel the need to address me specifically (even though other people have said exactly what I said) I will answer your questions.

I have played 40k and fantasy since the 2nd 40k and 3rd edition fantasy. I understand you are so limited in YOUR meta games that all you do is move and shoot but in my games I use terrain movement and LOS to achieve better tactical advantage then my opponent. I make sure my weak models are protected by cover, I make sure my CC models get across the field, and I make sure my objective holding guys tank up.

In fantasy you have a lot less tactics to worry about. You need to make sure you are in LOS, you need to make sure you don't get flank charged or double charged. If you have bows you shoot them, heck even the terrain is simpler in fantasy woods mean next to nothing and there really is no cover to speak of.

Hope this helps you!

Fantasy used to be more popular around my area, then 40k, now both are dying.

It's kind of hard to say why, because most reasons you make for 40k being more popular don't account for the fact Fantasy was once more popular (at least around these parts). I think a large part of it is just 40k being pushed more. Back when I started the Fantasy and 40k sections in the local GW were similar size, if not Fantasy being larger. Over the years, the Fantasy section shrunk.

I personally think Fantasy is a better game. 40k is more about list building, Fantasy is won or lost on the table more in the list building stage. That said, I really haven't played much 8th edition, the random movement and push toward larger units made me pretty much completely lose interest.

40k has a more unique setting, and Fantasy is much more expensive. That is why 40k is more popular, even though Fantasy is a better game.

 changerofways wrote:


this. I think its because the 40k is a unique, sci-fy, gothic horror universe that is incredibly unique. The amount of people in the world who recognize the term space marines is huge, and the amount of people who know about the fantasy counterpart is small because 40k is so unique and has defined so many other lores like starcraft and star wars

Considering huge amounts of the 40k lore was taken from other sources (lovecraft, heinlein, judge dredd, dune, Tolkien etc) I find it hard to accept the comment that it is incredibly unique. It's a fairly typical fantasy setting. If anything, 40k itself evolved out if warhammer fantasy, they just decided to redress it as the 'but in spaaace' version.

As to 'defining Star Wars', that is a joke, right? Even Starcraft is a stretch.

osirisx69 wrote:

 aapch45 wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:
[quote=TheCustomLime 585172 6639310 db8c639d8469883ae1ddc9b3164737bd.jpg

The tactics are not quite as in depth as 40k and ,like it has been said before, there is not allot of variety.

Although the shinning jewel IMHO of WFB is working the magic phase. Games are won and lost very easily if you have a GREAT or horrible magic phase.

Have you played 40k? Everyone can see 360degrees, there is no flank, or setting up a charge, or tactical moving... What tactics are you talking about?

Every game of 40k I have ever played (31 games in the last 3 years) this is what happens: move forward. Move forward. Shoot. Shoot. Charge. Somebody wins. Its usually the guy who brings the uber list.

Well since you feel the need to address me specifically (even though other people have said exactly what I said) I will answer your questions.

I have played 40k and fantasy since the 2nd 40k and 3rd edition fantasy. I understand you are so limited in YOUR meta games that all you do is move and shoot but in my games I use terrain movement and LOS to achieve better tactical advantage then my opponent. I make sure my weak models are protected by cover, I make sure my CC models get across the field, and I make sure my objective holding guys tank up.

In fantasy you have a lot less tactics to worry about. You need to make sure you are in LOS, you need to make sure you don't get flank charged or double charged. If you have bows you shoot them, heck even the terrain is simpler in fantasy woods mean next to nothing and there really is no cover to speak of.

Hope this helps you!

I wasn't trying to attack you in particular, just that line of thinking. Sorry if it came off as an attack.

I still don't see it. In my games (admittedly less than your experience) fantasy takes more planning ahead, and lining everything up.

For me, it was the horrible experience of block movement that made me switch from WFB to 40k.

I play both, but I only play Fantasy because I can use historical figures and it was dirt cheap to pick up. I like it, but I feel its incredibly similar to 40k. It was so easy to learn. But I prefer 40k simply because you dont have to base your army around heroes. I hate that in fantasy.

I prefer a game where the focus is on a bunch of ordinary men (or ordinary insert race here). Not some jacked up banner holding mega sword smashing ninja fighter that mysteriously routs and kills whole units of 20 men.

I also find a lot of the movement to be bland. I feel like my shooty units stay still and the rest either waits or aims at the enemy and moves forward. Despite how much better the game is with LoS blocking terrain (just like 40k) nobody wants terrain on there so its easier to move. Which I find a pain as terrain makes everything a bit better in that game.

I dont like how the battles are fought either. Shooting is so weak that it hardly damages the enemy most of the time. Cannon are better against single targets over large groups of enemies. Cavalry charge a wall of pikes no problem and well yea this bit is subjective I guess.

I prefer 40k, but enjoy them both. Both have flaws but I think fantasy is not all that many claim it to be. Juts a 40k with less armour and characters that are mega buff and you have to take them or lose not because the game is broken but because it is the game.

Really you need to wonder why?


Guns, BIG FREAKING GUNs, Tanks,BIG FREAKING TANKs nuff said.

Because Tolkein is tired and overplayed.

Tyranids, no tyranids in fantasy

(And I'm not saying that because they are my favorite army )

But on a more serious note, I think the fluff and army variety of 40K is more interesting.

In addition the more spread out units of 40K (whereas Fantasy is more large blocks of troops as units) seem more appealing to those looking to get into the hobby