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.
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
Brennonjw wrote: I've noticed that the game is far from dying as, recently as I mentioned before, GW is making moves in the right direction: actual FAQs (however wimpy, progress is progress),
Wait, what?
By what possible measure is releasing no faqs a good thing?
They did quite recently, actually. They suck though, and they didn't update the dates, so you wouldn't really know.
I literally just looked on their site and all the FAQs are for Jan 2015 at the latest.
Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Would you be happy if I told all positive people to spew their misplaced praise for GW elsewhere?
Grumblewartz wrote: I agree that they have it pretty rough, but worthless is still an overstatement and the fact that people don't recognize it as hyperbole is part of the bigger problem. I am not trying to insult you in anyway, and I am not saying you are wrong.
That's one hell of a contradiction right there.
You are, by definition, telling Martel that he's wrong. If he's not wrong, then 'worthless' isn't hyperbole or an overstatement - it's an accurate assessment of BA.
_ghost_ wrote: Suggesting sombody rigt out that he should forgett 40k at all seems always like a insult against said newbie. then instead of providing this guy the nessecary informationn in a objective way he gets the underlying message " you are to stupid to decide for your own! let me help you with this"
Not at all. The fact that said newbie is on a forum, asking questions, means he is looking for advice. It seems far more dishonest to try and pretend that everything is great - almost like you're trying to trick newbies into making bad investments.
That newbie has a right to know if his army will get its ass handed to it in virtually every game, regardless of how well he plays. He has a right to know that he'll receive no help whatsoever from GW, because they don't even consider 40k a game - just a load of models that they inexplicably provide rules for. They have a right to know that the rules in those £50 rulebooks and £30 codices are worse than the rules many other tabletop games give away for free.
If the newbie doesn't care about the game being a mess (or if that appeals to him), then he won't care about that stuff. If he's only interested in models or fluff, then he might not give a damn which army is best. And, as with any advice, he is free to ignore it. But, it is far better that he hears the full story before he makes a significant investment in the game. Honestly, unless you work for GW's marketing department, why sugar-coat the sorry state of the game?
Iron_Captain wrote: Advice should only be given when asked for, otherwise it is incredibly rude.
That's all well and good, until you start applying it to people who don't ask for advice because they don't know what to ask. If you've never played a wargame before, then you probably won't know that not all units are equal, that some armies are more expensive than others, that some armies are better than others, that GW couldn't give a crap about the rules etc. And, the guy running the store sure as hell isn't going to tell him.
Well, I think a lot of people would rather it nosedived to the point where GW sells their IP to someone else - someone who might actually give a damn about the game and sell models and rules for reasonable prices.
wuestenfux wrote: Have a look at the Warhammer app. Here you find new stuff every day, from Black Library, to Warhammer Digital, to Apps & Games. This shows that GW is working hard to increase sales at all levels.
If only there was something they could do to find out what their customers actually wanted. Some sort of research, say, perhaps into their market.
The point is that you don't need psykers of expensive paper pushers who hand out surveys, when you have actual sales data that shows the responses of your costumers to all the changes you make.
Do you have any proof that this data is in any way comprehensive, or that they're using it at all? Or, are you just making it up because you can't bear the idea that GW is run by idiots?
I mean, despite numerous cost-cutting methods and significant price-hikes across the board, their revenue has been declining for years. That really doesn't sound like the mark of a company that's in touch with what its customers want.
oldzoggy wrote: I don't have the data for GW since I don't work there. But I have worked in some other companies and seen the data and plans of their competitors and isn't just used it is one of those things they build their strategy around.
I am basing my assumption on the principle of occams razor.
There are 2 competing hypotheses here:
-GW uses their sales data just like all their competitors.
-GW is the exception and doesn't use their sales data at all.
We have no reason to assume the more unlikely hypothesis until evidence is shown.
Does GW constantly bragging that they don't do market research count as evidence?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
oldzoggy wrote: It isn't about what makes you happy, you might not even be their primary target group. It is about what makes the biggest sales and profits
...
So, GW is losing revenue because they are focussing on whatever makes the most revenue?
I'm seeing a flaw in this argument.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/12/22 14:03:17
Seems a touch rude to ignore someone simply for disagreeing with you.
The user in question has been, for years, mostly been looking for trouble in the forums and interaction with him in general leads to nothing more than bickering. Therefore it's pretty useless to engage in any way.
Wait... I'm having a vision...
I see...
...I see a kettle... and...
yes... and a pot...
...both are ebony in colour....
wait... the pot is saying something..
...he seems to be telling the kettle what colour he is...
...now the vision is fading.
What a strange image. I wonder what it could mean?
Melissia wrote: No. The only thing fun about historical games is defying history, rather than reliving it, and most of the utter garbage that qualify as "historical games" out there don't let you. Fantasy and sci-fi are where it's at. At least they encourage creativity instead of stagnation
What about an alternate-history game?. Something with Soviet Superscience, Ghostapo and, of course, Jetpack-Hitler.
I find it ironic that you talk about communities adapting themselves to the 21st century, whilst GW's policies on marketing and technology seem to be stuck fast in the 80s.
Yeah, I was being snippy because it's tiring having everything twisted back to how much GW sucks regardless of context. Same as my comment it may not have been intentional, but still.
No more tiring than hearing people praise every failing of GW and 40k.
Azreal13 wrote: I'm sorry, maybe it's Britishness, but there's absolutely no way I'd invite someone I'd only had contact with online into my home without prior real world experience.
"Sorry, old boy, but you know how it is. I mean, I'm hardly going to invite in someone I haven't been properly introduced to, am I? What!"
It's everything to do with not wanting weirdos knowing where I live, or spending hours stuck with someone who doesn't have the necessary social skills to realise they need to just go home already, or just flat out ending up with someone who I don't like trying to be my best friend because they've been round my house.
Or end up stuck for hours with someone who apparently has no concept of personal hygiene. Or someone who's a petty thief.
Do you shout out to everyone who is walking to a cliff edge? 
