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 all know 40k least GW goes under has a decent shot of being around in 2035. Warmachine/Hordes and Privateer Press seem to be a lock as well.

Other games like Battletech survived since the 80s through various companies. Other games like Battlefleet Gothic died, and looks like LotR/The Hobbit will die too. The Mongoose games like Babylon 5 always seem to die as that company seems to always do badly.

With so many miniature games popping up, which games do you think will survive the TEST of time? Be around for your kids to play with your toys. No one wants to build up a collection of armies and have them become unsupported and dropped in 5 years.

-Kings of War
-Halo Wars
-Firestorm Armada
-Robotech
-Dyspotian Wars
-Maulifax
-Flames of War
-Bolt Action
-DUST
-AT-43
-X-Wing
-Dropzone Commander
-Infinity
-Star Wars Armada
-Star Trek attack wing
-Age of Sigmar

I think all the licensed games like Star Wars/Star Trek/LotR will always die after the hype is gone because it is not their own IP. The success of 40k/Warmachine/Infinity is partly based on the company creating their own world and their own IP. Invest in licensed IP games at your own risk - they may not be around in 6 years.

Which games are good to invest in for the long run? Thoughts?

DorianGray wrote:
-Age of Sigmar

I'm sorry, but this is hilarious. This game will not last long.

Just a point - Infinity already has. It's 10 years old, 1st edition was released in 2005.

I know it doesn't reach your 20 years, but Warmachine is 12 years old and you didn't list it.

DorianGray wrote:
..., which games do you think will survive the TEST of time? Be around for your kids to play with your toys.

Whichever of them that I have rulebooks and miniatures for, since I never get rid of anything.



Being unsupported is not the same as unplayable.

I agree infinity is probably going to stand the TEST OF TIME.

It seems 40k, Warmachine/Hordes, and Infinity are the big three excluding niche oddities like Battletech, Star Fleet Battles, and relics from the 80s/90s.

By 20 years I meant the game will still be going 20 years from today so in 2035.

As for age of sigmar, BOLS gave it a thumbs up and said sales are going strong 1 month in. Who knows?

DorianGray wrote:
By 20 years I meant the game will still be going 20 years from today so in 2035.

This is impossible to predict. The reason GW is still around is they got lucky on a license and rode that gravy train into the ground. It's over and cracks are showing. I doubt that is going to come up again for anyone else.

DorianGray wrote:
As for age of sigmar, BOLS gave it a thumbs up and said sales are going strong 1 month in. Who knows?

I'm sure the same could have been said for Lord of the Rings, or even a lot of specialist games. 1 month is nothing. Lord of the Rings had significant legs and still died.

Retailers are reporting way above average/expected Age of Sigmar sales. GW has also reported increased 40k sales. Generally speaking the only people who think AoS is going to fail are those that feel GW gave them the shaft by discontinuing WHFB, never mind that for the most part these are the same people that didnt buy WHFB products or play WHFB games back when it was still WHFB.

In any case, Id put my money on Warmahordes, Flames of War and Bolt Action. X-Wing and Armada have a good chance as well assuming Disney keeps working its magic with the IP. Infinity and Malifaux could go either way, they are growing in popularity but Im not sure they have the right stuff to have that kind of longetivity. The rest of it Id say are all just a flash in the pan, but a lot of it depends on what the businesses behind them do with their products.

Why so convinced 40k will be around in 20 years?

As for 'around' or 'supported', I think games such De Bellis Antiquitatis will still be around, it's been around 25 years already, but I doubt it will be 'supported' in the sense of WRG making new materials and editions. DBA is essentially finished and complete in 3rd edition. From now on, WRG only need to reprint it when copies run out, or even just list it on a print on demand service.

10 years ago people would have said that WHFB would be around in 10 years time. Of course it's already dead, because GW haven't updated the army books and the models are going OOP.

The support materials are out of date making the game difficult to play even if you keep your rules and what figures you have.

I mean supported. New editions new units books etc

Hopefully all of those games except AoS, but I also hope to see Pike & shot alongside Hail Caesare still going in 20 odd yers time

LOL at the AoS hate. GW is shaking their heads.

DorianGray wrote:
I mean supported. New editions new units books etc

Why? When it's finished why not just leave it at that?

You only need a new edition or unit books if things change, and if it's good enough it doesn't need changed.

Even if finished it'll need reboots every 5-8 years to keep it on people's radar. Like Battletech.

How many people other then 50-80 year olds still play Avalon Hill boardgames that came out in the 70s today? Or those old historical mini games?

A product line can never be "done" it must keep changing to keep people's interest. Otherwise it dies.

Plenty do. Like said, DBA/DBM have been regarded as finished for a decade already and are still the industry standard for ancients.

No-one plays Monopoly any more. It hasn't been updated since 1935.

Not to mention chess.

DorianGray wrote:
I mean supported. New editions new units books etc

Whens the next edition of chess out? I'm not buying a new copy until its revised.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Retailers are reporting way above average/expected Age of Sigmar sales. GW has also reported increased 40k sales. Generally speaking the only people who think AoS is going to fail are those that feel GW gave them the shaft by discontinuing WHFB, never mind that for the most part these are the same people that didnt buy WHFB products or play WHFB games back when it was still WHFB.

Maybe it's just in the UK, but people are really not buying AoS.

Also, WHFB made up 15% of GW's yearly revenue. I think they just want to die as a company or something.

DorianGray wrote:
LOL at the AoS hate. GW is shaking their heads.

And every wargamer is laughing at them.

GW:

 -Loki- wrote:

DorianGray wrote:
By 20 years I meant the game will still be going 20 years from today so in 2035.

This is impossible to predict. The reason GW is still around is they got lucky on a license and rode that gravy train into the ground. It's over and cracks are showing. I doubt that is going to come up again for anyone else.

DorianGray wrote:
As for age of sigmar, BOLS gave it a thumbs up and said sales are going strong 1 month in. Who knows?

I'm sure the same could have been said for Lord of the Rings, or even a lot of specialist games. 1 month is nothing. Lord of the Rings had significant legs and still died.

Specialist games never had long term support how do you expect it to last?

Lotr had promise but as I was told the rules new line insist upon became extremely difficult to keep. GW made masses from the part work and the advertising from that. But after the duration was done it was dropped. Gw thought they could keep the sales up they simply couldn't.

They neglected their first product and have bought out AoS to replace and fine primary sales are fine but it's New Toy Syndrome.
I can't honestly see it lasting, not because of how stupid it is but because they have made a fair few of the fantasy players out there angry.
Maybe you guys at GW had done what people wanted like I dunno release new Brets or Chaos Dwarfs or Cathay or expand the world via dogs of war or Mordhiem 2.0 but no it's baby out with the bathwater time.

So AoS won't last it just doesn't have the durability.

RexInvictus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Retailers are reporting way above average/expected Age of Sigmar sales. GW has also reported increased 40k sales. Generally speaking the only people who think AoS is going to fail are those that feel GW gave them the shaft by discontinuing WHFB, never mind that for the most part these are the same people that didnt buy WHFB products or play WHFB games back when it was still WHFB.

Maybe it's just in the UK, but people are really not buying AoS.

Also, WHFB made up 15% of GW's yearly revenue. I think they just want to die as a company or something.
]

What if I told you that revenue and profit are two different things, and its possible to draw revenue from something while having a negative profit (that is to say, losing money) from it?

If you have the rules, and they work, and if you have a collection of miniatures that's at least large enough to support two sides in a game, why does a ruleset need to stand the test of time? You can pull it out whenever you like, say to someone, "Want to have a game?", and then play.

Maybe fantasy would have made a profit of they had given people what they wanted. Instead of what Kirby thinks they want . Maybe just maybe this abomination wouldn't have happened. GW becoming public was the worst thing to happen to its games.

I can see Halo having a chance. Microsoft seem happy about churrning a new game out every 2 years. Plus a TV series being worked on. I can easily see people still being interested in 20 years.

Star wars stuff has a good chance as its star wars.

I hope Flames of war is still about as its one of my favorate games and has been my biggest spending since AoS came out.
They are moving to plastics which will take time and they still have a lot of the early war stuff to redo plus things like Korea and expanding in WW1

Wyrd, infinity and possibly kow/ mantic if they get the square problems they have with their figures.

I'd like to hope that freebooter fate will stay but that's me being biased.

chaos0xomega wrote:

What if I told you that revenue and profit are two different things, and its possible to draw revenue from something while having a negative profit (that is to say, losing money) from it?

What if I told you that, according to GW, NONE of their lines are making profit?

What if I told you that mismanagement is the cause of GW's problems and not Warhammer Fantasy?

RexInvictus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

What if I told you that revenue and profit are two different things, and its possible to draw revenue from something while having a negative profit (that is to say, losing money) from it?

What if I told you that, according to GW, NONE of their lines are making profit?

What if I told you that mismanagement is the cause of GW's problems and not Warhammer Fantasy?

This guy gets it.

Heh, and where does Star Fleet Battles come in?

Really a niche game... but it has been going for a long, long time.... (Older than D&D, let alone Warhammer....)

The Auld Grump - the best game of Star Fleet Battles that I ever played had both the Federation and the Klingons winning - each of their victory conditions had nothing to do with the other's....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

migooo wrote:

RexInvictus wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

What if I told you that revenue and profit are two different things, and its possible to draw revenue from something while having a negative profit (that is to say, losing money) from it?

What if I told you that, according to GW, NONE of their lines are making profit?

What if I told you that mismanagement is the cause of GW's problems and not Warhammer Fantasy?

This guy gets it.

Step 1. Do no market research.
Step 2. Never admit to making a mistake.
Step 3. Drop the game instead of repairing the problems.....

Locally... AoS is not doing well, at all, at all.

The Auld Grump

Infinity, definitely.
AOS doesn't have the depth to keep people interested and has nothing new to offer.

GW declaread a significant profit in their last annual report. At least some of their lines are profitable.

This question depends heavily on what we mean by "be around."

I'd give the following criteria:
1) the game exists in the same broad game universe
2) rules and models are available for sale, even if not from the same manufacturers
3) The game is distributed through retail channels beyond the owners webstore.

Very few games have lasted 20 years by that definition. WFB did, 40k did. Epic and Bloodbowl very technically did, I think. WM/H, FoW, and Infinity are over halfway there.

For the future? I think the best odds have to be with 40k and WM/H. I feel okay eliminating nearly all licensed properties, as when they run out of stuff from the universe, they tend to collapse. (Star Fleet Battles has the world's most bizarre license, and is essentially a different universe than Star Trek). I'd also eliminate most games that are historical, or can rely on a really broad range of models, which includes Bolt Action, Kings of War, etc. They've got a decent chance of carving out some space if they really develop their own look, but if any army can switch rulesets easily, people will go to whatever rules are good/popular.